London Bombings: Who did it?

[InfoWarrior]

http://www.prisonplanet.com/Pictures/Jul05/080705IsraeliNN_large.jpg

Scotland Yard had intelligence warnings of possible bombings, and warned an Israeli Embassy, which forwarded the warning to Netanyahu. But, there's a problem here. For hours, it was reported that the bombings were caused by a power surge. If Scotland Yard had advanced intelligence warnings of possible bombings, then why would it be assumed that it was a power surge for hours?

The G8 went on television only hours before the bombings. Despite the G8 summit and the protesters it brought, MI5 lowered the terror threat just before the bombings, conveniently lowering security on the London underground.

The mastermind of the London Bombings, Haroon Rashid Aswat, was reported in Britain as the man who had been in phone contact with all of the alleged bombers. In the US, he has been reported as an agent for MI6. Watch the shocking story, that shows how British Intell controlled the mastermind of the bombings: http://www.infowars.net/Pages/Aug05/020805Aswat.html

So, what really happened? Well, we know the CCTV image of the bombers is fake. There are anomalies in it which prove that, such as a rail bar going through someone's arm, rail bars that don't connect properly, people with half legs, people with blurred faces, clown shoes, and square noses/eyes. It was a fake image. So, aside from the question of why they released a fake image and passed it off as real, the question also hangs: Is there any hard evidence of bombers? The confession is fake, as it misrepresented the Qu'ran, and was made by a server in Texas, which was hosted by Everyone's Internet, run by Roy Marsh, who is in contact with Sharon Bush. Both confession videos make no mention of the 7/7 plot. There is no eyewitnesses to bombers except for the bus, in which someone witnesses someone completely different than the accused bomber, who has a 'small bag', and not a rucksack. The bombers didn't match the MO of bombers.

This is a likely scenario. The bombers were executed the day of the bombings and the bombs which went off were sophisticated military explosives were set under the floorboards of the trains, during maintenance. There were no suicide bombings, only bombings. The body parts and identification were then planted on the scenes, which is evident from the fact that identification documents identifying Khan were found at three of the four bomb sites.

From Cambridge Evening News, Bruce Lait, an eyewitness who was closest to the bomb on one of the Tube trains states:

"When I woke up and looked around I saw darkness, smoke and wreckage. It took a while to realise where I was and what was going on... " He and Crystal were helped out of the carriage. As they made their way out, a policeman pointed out where the bomb had been.

"The policeman said 'mind that hole, that's where the bomb was'. The metal was pushed upwards as if the bomb was underneath the train. They seem to think the bomb was left in a bag, but I don't remember anybody being where the bomb was, or any bag," he said.

Lait doesn't recall a bomber, and even says that the bomb looks to have been under the train, because the metal was pushed upwards. This would be a key smoking gun. Why would the metal point upwards? The Lait account is truly a crucial piece of this puzzle.

From USA Today:

"Her feet were badly injured (the hospital doesn't think she will lose her feet), and she has a bad cut on her arm."

Emily Benton and others had their most serious injuries at the lower levels. Her feet were badly injured. These injuries, of course, would indicate that the bombs exploded while low. Christophe Chaboud, head of the French Anti-Terrorism Co-ordination Unit, saw this and stated (Le Monde):

He added that the victims' wounds suggested that the explosives, which were " not heavy but powerful", had been placed on the ground, perhaps underneath seats.

He wants to keep inside the box with the thinking that they were under the seats. He understands, based on the injuries, that the bombs blew up while positioned on the ground, which is evident from injuries, but from Bruce Lait's account, I think it is a better theory that the bombs were under the floorboards. This would explain the injuries, and the metal pushed upwards.

Chaboud revealed something else (Star Tribune):

French, British politics pervade bombing inquiry

In the wake of the July 7 terrorist attacks in London, Scotland Yard brought together law enforcement and intelligence officials from two dozen European countries and the United States, sharing crucial intelligence and pleading for help in tracking the bombers.

But the continentwide kumbaya was shattered when Christophe Chaboud, France's new anti-terrorism coordinator, broke the cardinal rule of the club: He leaked.

In an interview with Le Monde, Chaboud announced to the world that he knew "the nature of the explosives" used in the London bombings. It "appears to be military, which is very worrisome," he said, adding: "...How did they get them? Either by trafficking, for example, in the Balkans, or they had someone on the inside who enabled them to get them out of a military base."

Terror drills were being run at the same time as the London Bombings by Visor Consultant. These drills involved simultaneous attacks on the London Underground, in the exact same stations as the attacks happened in. This is similar to 9/11, when war games were being run by the air force at the same time as the attacks. The day after Hinckley shot Reagan, a presidential succession exercise called 'Nine Lives' was scheduled. During the OKC bombing, there were indications that the ATF was running a bombing exercise. Drills similar to the actual attack running at the same time is one of hallmarks of a covert operation. Before Columbine, Crisis Management Drills were carried out by Jeffco involving 'worst case scenarios'. Listen to the video, where Peter Power admits the drills: http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2005/110705bombingexercises.htm

So, who is Peter Power? The background of the man running these drills is an important part. Power was a senior member of Scotland Yard, in the anti-terrorism branch. Whenever a suspicious attack happens, Power is on television about it. An example is the rocket attack on the MI6 building. Another one is the BBC bombing. He has been the anti-terror representative for the media.

Knowing this, it is strange that he was the one running exercises on 7/7. Even stranger is the connections he has. He is connected to Giuliani, who was mayor of NYC at the time of 9/11, and in an amazing, remarkable 'coincidence', was in London the day of the bombings, not at all far from the blasts, in the same hotel as Netanyahu, who received advanced warning of the attacks.

How is he connected? Well, he was on the Advisory Board to the Canadian Centre for Emergency Preparedness (CCEP) at the same time as Richard Sheirer, the senior vice president of Giuliani & Partners. So, now we have the whole Giuliani tie-in here. Giuliani, who was in London that day, is linked to Peter Power, who was running drills on 7/7, through Richard Sheirer. This can identify them all as probable perpetrators. The way to find perps is to follow one connection, which leads to another. So, let's follow this connection for a second. Richard Sheirer played a key role in overseeing rescue operations on 9/11, at the time Giuliani was mayor. Sheirer was honored with the rank of Commander of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire (CBE), for his services to British/American relations. Now you can see how he's kind of tied into the 7/7 case, getting CBE for BRITISH/AMERICAN RELATIONS, and being linked to the terror drill boss on 7/7, and the man who just happened to be in London that day (Giuliani). So, when did he receive his CBE? October 2002. Now is when it gets deeper. That same year, Sheirer had attended an FCC media security meeting with Rupert Murdoch. So, now we have a possible connection of Rupert Murdoch, who attended a meeting with perp Sheirer the same year he got his CBE. Here's where Murdoch's connection to the case becomes quite clear: Only a month after Sheirer got his CBE, Richard Sheirer honored Peter Lowy, the CEO of Westfield Corporation. Westfield Corporation purchased the WTC only weeks before it's destruction. And remember, already two people in the case have deep connections to 9/11 (Sheirer and Giuliani). So, now we have a web of perps: Power, Sheirer, Murdoch, and Lowy.

Of course, the perps aren't stupid. They knew that to pull it off properly, they needed to set a misdirection trap for investigators. That is why Scotland Yard chose to warn an Israeli Embassy in advance. It brought everyone to the cliche conspiracy guy "THE JEWS DID IT" speculation. It was intentional. In reality, Scotland Yard warned the Israeli Embassy, so it was the London police which had advanced knowledge, not Israel. (Same thing with the 9/11 deal. Messages were sent to an Israeli instant messaging company in the Towers telling employees to leave. Why was this the only firm given advanced warnings? Because it was Israeli, of course, and that would bring everyone to the "Zionist Conspiracy" stuff.) Israel is a scapegoat for the real perps.

I think the London Bombings were a psyop that evolved from 9/11. Much of the techniques were similar. It was also very similar to the Madrid Bombings. It later became public that all of the Madrid bombers had been in contact with the police before the bombings, and that the bombings happened 911 days after 9/11. (Probably deliberately done to get investigators speculating about "Masonics" and "Satanic Numerology" and all that discrediting stuff.)

[Dark7]

the real question is who did your mom? and why?

[InfoWarrior]

the real question is who did your mom? and why?

Some kilobytes of data had to die for that.

[Liquid Swordsman]

I like this info guy :cool:

[Wisher]

Terrorists.

[InfoWarrior]

Terrorists.

I would appreciate to see some hard evidence of that. In fact, if you look at the evidence, it becomes apparent that there is no actual proof of terrorist bombers. In fact, stronger evidence points in the direction of an inside job. The so-called bombers weren't even on the trains. That's where the evidence has led me. The official train ride of the bombers (The 7:40 one) turned out to be impossible. Now, if you look at the CCTV footage, and really analyze it (Take special note of the crudely faked guard rails.) you'll find many anomalies.

http://www.martinfrost.ws/htmlfiles/london_bombers1.jpg

You'd need to be quite gullible to accept this as an authentic image. There's a guard rail going through someone's arm. The guy in the back doesn't even have a full leg.

We don't have any credible eyewitness testimony indicating the involvement of bombers either. In fact, we have testimony telling us otherwise (Bruce Lait).

[Wisher]

Okay. I still think it was terrorists. You asked who did it, i responded with the answer:terrorists.

[InfoWarrior]

Okay. I still think it was terrorists. You asked who did it, i responded with the answer:terrorists.

I know, but I'd appreciate it if you read my argument presented in my OP, thanks. Cause, the guy who was the mastermind behind the alleged bombers was actually an MI6 operative. It also a very valid question why Scotland Yard would put out the story that the blasts were caused by a power surge for hours, when they had warnings of bombings that day. It reeks of an inside job, in my opinion, but I respect yours.

Just read this collection of articles: http://www.prisonplanet.com/archives/london/index.htm

You may find something that might change your mind. Have an open mind. I was kind of opposed to the idea of the government pulling off terrorist attacks/shootings when I first started researching. 9/11 kind of changed my view on that, cause I became overwhelmed with all the evidence I had seen (And yes, I've read the Popular Mechanics 'debunking' article. I've also written a point-by-point rebuttal to that same article. And no, I do not base my opinions off of the film, "Loose Change". That's one of the questions I am frequently asked. LC is right in their conclusion, but wrong on a lot of the details. There was also a lot of good evidence they forgot to add in. I liked their interview with key eyewitness William Rodriguez, though.)

[Dark7]

it was thoes darn camel spiders... ugly ugly things.

[Liquid Swordsman]

This guy knows his stuff

well, that's what I'm getting out of this without actually reading more than 10 words of his posts

[rabbi]

Here's a question for ya, InfoWarrior... Do you always write this much?

[bloodreign]

http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d34/realistromeo/bomerman.jpg

[meat.eater]

Conspiracy theories are subject to avoidance and ridicule because the word 'conspiracy' comes from the word 'conspire' which literally means to plot together something in malice. So you're basically admitting that your stupid thoughts about what kind of stupid things really happen are basically evil. Probably more evil than the terrorism itself.

I dont welcome evil things. Just like I didnt welcome 9/11. And dont give me the whole "I'm fighting this fight for you--so you can prevail over our government with me" load of steam, because you arent fighting anything. You're just posting your outlandish opinions on some forum and trying to recruit other naive people. And being annoying.

Also, besides from the whole "stupid, evil thoughts" thing, conspiracy theories (notice the word "theory," too. gasp) are just plain wrong. When you personally see a plane explode and witness how it destroys things, we'll talk. Until then, you're a young, naive drone in the pathetic class of people who want their opinions to matter so much that they make them up. But in reality, they still simply dont matter.

Now go put on a funny hat, light yourself on fire, and chant "Reincarnate Oswald! Reincarnate McVeigh!" while I throw things at you.

[Match Strike]

This guy knows his stuff

well, that's what I'm getting out of this without actually reading more than 10 words of his posts

Critical thinking, interwebs style.

[Realist]

Conspiracy theories are subject to avoidance and ridicule because the word 'conspiracy' comes from the word 'conspire' which literally means to plot together something in malice. So you're basically admitting that your stupid thoughts about what kind of stupid things really happen are basically evil.

Conspiracy theories are theories about conspiracies. You're thinking of conspiratorial theories.

[uniquinous]

i blame realist.

just sayin.

obvious suspect

[meat.eater]

Oh bollucks. You're right.

But I dont feel like changing my argument. So we're in a bit of a pickle.

[Realist]

i blame realist.

just sayin.

obvious suspect

yeah

[bloodreign]

Scientists use "theory" to explain the unexplainable to prove the unprovable or better yet to find what is not yet concreetly beheld.. There are sufficient grounds to Theorize that the U.S government was behind 9/11, far too many anomalies to take word for word the governments OFFICIAL story.

As far as i'm concerned isn't it amazing that 19 hijackers were sucessful in hijacking 4 planes hitting 3 targets in no fly zones, would not the very core of US military defense not have missiles to shoot down the fast aproaching plane?... Then the whole WTC complex is destroyed, buildings 1-7 in a matter of hours, all on the niffty date of 9-11. 911? no NINE ELEVEN.
Sear that into your psychy.


Look the military is adept at creating coups, overethrowing governments, controling media, look at the news blackout of the pre-emtive strike on lebanon by israel! no major news reports about it till some times later.
Face it the world you live in is run by criminals.. from fidel,chavo,bush,hitler,stalin, boris yeltsin.

[Realist]

Scientists use "theory" to explain the unexplainable to prove the unprovable or better yet to find what is not yet concreetly beheld.. There are sufficient grounds to Theorize that the U.S government was behind 9/11, far too many anomalies to take word for word the governments OFFICIAL story.

As far as i'm concerned isn't it amazing that 19 hijackers were sucessful in hijacking 4 planes hitting 3 targets in no fly zones, would not the very core of US military defense not have missiles to shoot down the fast aproaching plane?... Then the whole WTC complex is destroyed, buildings 1-7 in a matter of hours, all on the niffty date of 9-11. 911? no NINE ELEVEN.
Sear that into your psychy.


Look the military is adept at creating coups, overethrowing governments, controling media, look at the news blackout of the pre-emtive strike on lebanon by israel! no major news reports about it till some times later.
Face it the world you live in is run by criminals.. from fidel,chavo,bush,hitler,stalin, boris yeltsin.

I liked your last post on this thread better. More fitting to your abilities, I think.

[Elentari]

The guy in the back doesn't even have a full leg.

It was the cripple! (http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=af07)

[Lord Sesshomaru]

I hate cripples!
I hate Ele and her stupid posting!
I hate London!
I hate British bombers and I hate trains to!
I hate conspiracies!
I hate the number 23
Theories suck to!

Enough hating Ele?

[meat.eater]

Scientists use "theory" to explain the unexplainable to prove the unprovable or better yet to find what is not yet concreetly beheld.. There are sufficient grounds to Theorize that the U.S government was behind 9/11, far too many anomalies to take word for word the governments OFFICIAL story.

As far as i'm concerned isn't it amazing that 19 hijackers were sucessful in hijacking 4 planes hitting 3 targets in no fly zones, would not the very core of US military defense not have missiles to shoot down the fast aproaching plane?... Then the whole WTC complex is destroyed, buildings 1-7 in a matter of hours, all on the niffty date of 9-11. 911? no NINE ELEVEN.
Sear that into your psychy.


Look the military is adept at creating coups, overethrowing governments, controling media, look at the news blackout of the pre-emtive strike on lebanon by israel! no major news reports about it till some times later.
Face it the world you live in is run by criminals.. from fidel,chavo,bush,hitler,stalin, boris yeltsin.

Neat. Now I challenge you to think on your own.

[RaX]

That whole first post was a conspiricy. In your " fake image" I cant seem to find this impaling guard rail, and your "amputy" has a full leg :s

So the fact that Osma's buddies took reesponsibility for it means that they are lying?

*Waits for the UFO: they have landed* thread....

[Scorpionz]

http://quasar.physik.unibas.ch/~aste/zeppelin2.jpg

[Learz]

EHM.
If you understand that, nothing more need be said. If you don't understand that, don't ask.

[Kyir]

Some kilobytes of data had to die for that.

Commie.

[Wizzy`]

the transformers did it..

[InfoWarrior]

A lot of people responded while I was gone, I see. I can respond to all of these arguments. Those who actually took the time to post something intelligent, thanks.

Here's a question for ya, InfoWarrior... Do you always write this much?

It depends on the situation. If I'm posting an argument on a certain opinion, then yes.

Conspiracy theories are subject to avoidance and ridicule because the word 'conspiracy' comes from the word 'conspire' which literally means to plot together something in malice. So you're basically admitting that your stupid thoughts about what kind of stupid things really happen are basically evil. Probably more evil than the terrorism itself.


No, a conspiracy theory is better known as a theory of a possible/probable conspiracy. Yes, I know we can drag on a long-winded argument about what 'Conspiracy Theories' should mean, but that's a waste. Let's address the issues. And 'stupid thoughts'? I wouldn't be posting this if I didn't have evidence to back it up.

I dont welcome evil things. Just like I didnt welcome 9/11. And dont give me the whole "I'm fighting this fight for you--so you can prevail over our government with me" load of steam, because you arent fighting anything. You're just posting your outlandish opinions on some forum and trying to recruit other naive people. And being annoying.

I never claimed I was fighting anything. I'm just trying to make someone who takes the time to read my argument aware of the proof which is contrary to the official story of the London bombings, and which implicates criminal elements of the British government and intelligence. If the bombs were under the floorboards, as eyewitness testimony indicates, then it had to be an inside job. If the bomb was a military explosive, as one French anti-terror cop 'leaked', then it was an inside job. You just need to look at this with an open mind. Don't just throw around stuff like 'your being annoying' and 'anyone who could possibly believe you must be naive', because being naive, in my opinion, is ignoring serious discrepancies in the official stories of everything and branding anyone who doesn't ignore them as a tin-foil hat conspiracy theorist.

Also, besides from the whole "stupid, evil thoughts" thing, conspiracy theories (notice the word "theory," too. gasp) are just plain wrong. When you personally see a plane explode and witness how it destroys things, we'll talk. Until then, you're a young, naive drone in the pathetic class of people who want their opinions to matter so much that they make them up. But in reality, they still simply dont matter.

'Making opinions up'. If you don't 'make your opinion', then am I to believe someone else is making it for you? Are you just taking opinions from another source, as that remark indicates? If so, I'd say you are the naive drone. First of all, who brought planes into the discussion? This post has little, if anything, to do with the attacks of 9/11. Who said I believe planes can't destroy something? What I don't believe is that a plane crashing on the highest floors of the WTC could possibly inflict damage to the lobby and basement floors so fast.

Now go put on a funny hat, light yourself on fire, and chant "Reincarnate Oswald! Reincarnate McVeigh!" while I throw things at you.

I shouldn't even respond to that. I'll only to respond to that with the fact that JFK's assassination has already been accepted as a conspiracy. The HSCA concluded that it probably was, and a CIA agent who was in Watergate (E. Howard Hunt) confessed to being involved.

Also, if you believe 4000 lbs of ANFO can take out the Murrah building, then I'd suggest talking to Sam Gross and former USAF general Benton K. Partin. They will tell you otherwise, and they know more about explosives than the FBI agents who said that it was only the truck bomb. Also, did you know that the media confirmed on the day that second and third bombs had been taken out of the Murrah building? Unexploded? How would McVeigh get these bombs in the building? Who warned the BATF not to come in that morning? When you can give serious answers to these questions, we'll talk.

That whole first post was a conspiricy. In your " fake image" I cant seem to find this impaling guard rail, and your "amputy" has a full leg :s

Well, just check it again. Thanks for your question. I'll tell you where to look. The man behind the man with a white bag has a railing bar going through part of him. If you can't find it after that, I'll just circle that part with MS paint.

So the fact that Osma's buddies took reesponsibility for it means that they are lying?

They never confessed to it. Are you referring to the fake Al Qaeda confession which was found on the internet, posted on a server from Houston, Texas? It came out that the confession was fake. It misrepresented a verse in the Qu'ran. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8496293/) It was posted by a site hosted by Everyone’s Internet, founded by Roy Marsh in 1998. Roy Marsh counts Sharon Bush among his friends.

*Waits for the UFO: they have landed* thread....

It's pretty stupid to compare this argument to UFOlogy, seeing as it has nothing to do with it.

[bloodreign]

Neat. Now I challenge you to think on your own.

Thinking on my own is not the issue here, you are just being blunt,rude, and ignorant in an attempt to deflect the fact that you can't or are unwilling to come to terms with the truth behind 9/11.

Years ago as a youngun i used to read Poular Mechanics,Time magazine,Foriegn newspapers i am well informed and very keen.
The U.S government/military are all in on this to maintain their global Supremacy, as soon as the towers fell, 6 years ago i KNEW what was to happen next.

It was war with Afghanistan,Iraq, and now Iran.....all using false pretexts as reason to invade. Afghanistan (OSAMA) Iraq (SADAM-WMD'S) Iran (NUKE POTENTIAL) All moves were in an effort to HALT India's growth as the next super power to butt heads with America.

Trust me, the Indo-pak oil pipeline, the growing economic bonds between Iran and India.. The US knew it was going to be squeezed out of this lucrative market, so it had to infiltrate in order to survive.
I could go on about the future, but i will leave you standing in the dark.

[meat.eater]

I have a class shortly, so I dont have time to respond to Info (ironic), yet, but it will come soon enough. I do have time to respond to bloodreign.

Thinking on my own is not the issue here, you are just being blunt,rude, and ignorant in an attempt to deflect the fact that you can't or are unwilling to come to terms with the truth behind 9/11.

Years ago as a youngun i used to read Poular Mechanics,Time magazine,Foriegn newspapers i am well informed and very keen.
The U.S government/military are all in on this to maintain their global Supremacy, as soon as the towers fell, 6 years ago i KNEW what was to happen next.

It was war with Afghanistan,Iraq, and now Iran.....all using false pretexts as reason to invade. Afghanistan (OSAMA) Iraq (SADAM-WMD'S) Iran (NUKE POTENTIAL) All moves were in an effort to HALT India's growth as the next super power to butt heads with America.

Trust me, the Indo-pak oil pipeline, the growing economic bonds between Iran and India.. The US knew it was going to be squeezed out of this lucrative market, so it had to infiltrate in order to survive.
I could go on about the future, but i will leave you standing in the dark.

Ignorant means lacking knowledge. I never claimed to have any knowledge, at least any more than anyone else has. I just said I thought the fact that you are making up (or, in your case, believing what someone else has made up) knowledge is ridiculous. So the only thing ignorant here is the fact that you just called me ignorant. Other than that, yes, I was rude and blunt.

Yes, we all know the USA likes to maintain it's supremacy. I dont really think that's a bad thing, and I sure as hell dont see how bombing its own buildings does that. And if you think reading Popular Mechanics makes you more apt to have your opinions be correct, you'd be wrong. You're just more apt to have your opinions be biased.

-Osama isnt false to Afganistan. Thats where the Taliban is.
-Did you just say Saddam was false to Iraq? I'm pretty sure he was like.. a big mean ol' dictator there, wasnt he? Correct me if I'm wrong. And, dont get me started on the WMD conversation, because if we had found some (we did find lenty of chemical weapons though, convenient how you forget that), you'd be in complete agreement with the "pretext." Considering we were funding them for weapons research, I dont think speculation into WMD's was very outlandish of a theory.
-We havent invaded Iran yet, let's not talk about it.

If "dark" is "not desiring to create theories as to how our own government are lying bastards so I can think I'm right and that I matter, but simply living my life without cynicism and fear," then I'll be happy to stay here. Thanks.

And no, I'm not going to trust you about the pipeline or anything remotely related to middle eastern economies... considering you have had nothing to do with either of them.

The only thing you need to remember, kiddo, is that they're called conspiracy theories for a reason. Dont make yourself look like an even bigger asshole in comparison to the rest of the world by turning them into conspiracy facts. Please dont ever say "the truth behind 9/11" again.

[InfoWarrior]

Popular Mechanics has been completely debunked many times. Hopefully 'debunkers' aren't going to refer anyone to that article again. It has disgraced itself with untruth upon untruth. Get the facts.

We need to look at things like these because it is important to understand how things are really being run and how the game is being played. Like, The London Bombings. The man who masterminded the bombings in London was an MI6 asset, and Scotland Yard had intell warnings of bombings that day, but still assumed the explosions were caused by a power surge. The bombs were military, and this fact was covered up. The bombs were under the trains, according to eyewitnesses. Drills were going on the exact same time, which dealt with the exact same scenario. The bus was specially redirected before being bombed. The CCTV image released was an undeniable fake (There was a half leg. Anyone can see that. One man had a rail going through him. There were a dozen anomalies in that picture.). All the CCTV cameras on the bus were off. It had all the earmarks of a black op. It happened the day after a pullout of UK forces from Iraq was announced, so the pullout was completely forgotten.

Then we have a psyop like 9/11. Many people were warned not to fly. The man who wired 100,000 dollars to Mohammed Atta is an ISI agent who was having breakfast with Porter Goss on the morning of 9/11, in Washington. The eyewitnesses saw low level explosions in the WTC. Building 7's collapse was covered up. Steel was found at the basements of the towers which was higher temperatures than jet fuel could cause. Eyewitnesses saw the Pentagon plane 'pull up' before 'hitting', then reported a 'secondary' plane 'flying over the Pentagon'. One eyewitness in Shanksville described a missile hitting there. There was a complete cover-up of information about the 9/11 plot. 9/11 served as a key point for changing the world. It was the dawn of the New World Order control grid.

The OKC bombing is next. We have local news reporting that unexploded bombs are being carried out of the Murrah building. It comes public that the ATF were warned not to come in that day. McVeigh was seen with a number of other men. His doctor was involved with MKULTRA. The media said the motive involved what happened in Waco even before they had any idea who the suspect was. Anti-terrorism bills that destroyed the constitution and bill of rights were passed thanks to the bombing, and anyone who disagreed with the government was classified as a McVeigh type character.

The Columbine Massacre is another. Hundreds of eyewitnesses say that there were more shooters than Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold. Some of these other shooters are members of the Trench Coat Mafia, while others were masked men who were not students. It was never explained how they were able to get over 90 bombs into Columbine, and how they were able to create a hi-tech military bomb which was found. Eric Harris lived in Plattsburgh Air Force Base for nearly 4 years before moving to Littleton, where he, according to one of his friends, was repeatedly drugged in bizarre mind/consciousness manipulation projects. His father had been involved with covert AF intelligence projects for nearly two decades. In the 1950s, the Pentagon ordered that the nation have an intercontinental missile factory built in Littleton Colorado. The base was used for the construction of unmanned satellites and rockets, and classified military projects. The factory was owned by Lockheed Martin, a defense contractor which was heavily concentrated in Paducah, Kentucky, at the time Michael Carneal went on his rampage in a school there (Carneal later said that it was like a dream, then he woke up). Young people who have criminal records are usually the patsies used in mind control operations. Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold were arrested in 1998 for breaking into a van.

[InfoWarrior]

Yes, we all know the USA likes to maintain it's supremacy. I dont really think that's a bad thing, and I sure as hell dont see how bombing its own buildings does that. And if you think reading Popular Mechanics makes you more apt to have your opinions be correct, you'd be wrong. You're just more apt to have your opinions be biased.

It was done for a political gain. And, we know they bombed those same buildings in 1993. Phone records of FBI conversations proved that the FBI built the bomb which went off in the WTC.

If "dark" is "not desiring to create theories as to how our own government are lying bastards so I can think I'm right and that I matter, but simply living my life without cynicism and fear," then I'll be happy to stay here. Thanks.

So, you don't think they lie? Well, 9/11 proved that they lied. They lied about JFK, they lied about RFK, they lied about the WMDs, they lied about Columbine, they lied about OKC, they lied about everything. Anyone who trusts them is gullible.


The only thing you need to remember, kiddo, is that they're called conspiracy theories for a reason. Dont make yourself look like an even bigger asshole in comparison to the rest of the world by turning them into conspiracy facts.

Ah, how naive. If a fact is a fact, its a fact. If it backs up a certain conspiracy theory, and its a fact, that doesn't change the fact that its a fact.

[Realist]

According to infowarrior no non-conspiracy crime is ever committed. What I want to know is, WTF don't the middle-easterners want to fly planes into our buildings? We mess around enough around their lands we certainly deserve it!

[uniquinous]

lol good point

this is quite amusing, eh? so many "facts".

ok here are my questions:
The CCTV image released was an undeniable fake Can you please link to this image?

It was done for a political gain. And, we know they bombed those same buildings in 1993. Phone records of FBI conversations proved that the FBI built the bomb which went off in the WTC.Can you please link to these records?

[bloodreign]

Yes, we all know the USA likes to maintain it's supremacy. I dont really think that's a bad thing, and I sure as hell dont see how bombing its own buildings does that.

I present to you this scenario. (rewind time pre 9-11)

Lets say the United States invaded Afghanistan, early 2002 without the 9-11 incident ever happening.

Do you think they would get away with it? would it fly?

Absolutely not.

1) They would not have the aproval of the American public at large and face possible anarchy.
2) The international community would distance itself or fight against America for this bold insurgence. Worse yet they would copy America's actions and go on a free for all, invading countries that they deemed valuable.
3)They would not have the required troop numbers to maintain control over the OIL rich lands they have taken over.

The attacks of September 11th conveniently provided them with a motive to go into OIL RICH LANDS.

Not only did the American public get behind the president, but they sent their young in droves to fight.
And the international community stood by the wayside believing that the USA had a right to find Osama Bin Laden and bring him to justice.


I would like you to ask yourself, why have they not found Bin Laden?
He (although trained by the cia)is but 1 man.
Is he better than the American military? with all their Military satelites?
Is he so crafty that he can elude a whole army?

And what of SADAM? he did not have WMD'S, and the chemical weapons he possesed POSED NO THREAT TO AMERICA!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1X-I-38lrU think, they did and do not have a delivery system cappable of hitting American shores. hint... NIETHER DOES IRAN! So why does America have it's greedy eyes on Iran all of the sudden? "OIL"


And to keep it on subject infowarrior, the british government was impresseed by what America did and said "well done chap" and thought....maybe we could do the same?


Hogwash smogwash.



But i do believe there are terrorist groups that commit horrific acts around the world and
I keep an open mind on the subject of 9/11.

I leave you with 1 final thought.
Why did the government release 5 frames of a video capturing a "plane"? hitting the PENTAGON? realy..... malls and walmarts have better video surveilance than the PENTAGON! fo real. their video of that impact should have a language selection, a scene selector, bonus features, bloopers,dolby surround, and wide screen capability.
All we have is 5 measly frames? give me a break
And don't give me that .. matter of national security B.s

Learn to recognize game, or you will get played.

[Dark7]

http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/8046/orlynv9.jpg

[Dark7]

Conspiracy theories have long been a subject avoidance and ridicule..Until 9/11. People began to see how much was wrong with the official tale, and the evidence led to a horrifying conclusion. Now, the public is now questioning not just 9/11, but the London bombings, OKC bombing, and the Columbine/V.Tech massacres. It is now being questioned whether these were carefully planned 'psyops' for a dark political agenda. <- info's sig

Im sorry, but wtf is this horrible conclusion that people have come to? and that picture looks like a plane coulda done that. Idk wings snapped off from hitting the fucking builing perhaps?

[Realist]

This thread reminds me of the xkcd about youtube.

The whole give kids the internet thing might not be working out so well. Back in my day kids did wholesome activities, like mug people, not become political activists.

[meat.eater]

I present to you this scenario. (rewind time pre 9-11)

Lets say the United States invaded Afghanistan, early 2002 without the 9-11 incident ever happening.

Do you think they would get away with it? would it fly?

Absolutely not.

Newsflash, kid. We've been "invading" Afghanistan long before 9/11. Clinton issued surveillance and covert missions to bomb the Taliban in the 90's. Convenient that you looked over that. 9/11 created a realization that that middle eastern area may start wanting to attack places now. So, we went to the place where we assumed (because we provided means to achieve) weapons could be.

Look, I'm not going to argue with how the government handled the invasion of Iraq because I believe they did it poorly. Does that mean I assume they bombed themselves? No. I think it takes a pretty sick mind to jump to that conclusion.

1) They would not have the aproval of the American public at large and face possible anarchy.
2) The international community would distance itself or fight against America for this bold insurgence. Worse yet they would copy America's actions and go on a free for all, invading countries that they deemed valuable.
3)They would not have the required troop numbers to maintain control over the OIL rich lands they have taken over.

Look, buddy, I can admit you know how to tell me exactly what you've been told by extremist conspiracy retards, but that just brings me back to the "think for yourself" comment.

1-"Possible anarchy" doesnt exist. Unless the entire world thought like you (God save us), most people's first gut reaction isnt "OVERTHROW THE GOVERNMENT." Learn what anarchy is. Society's dont wake up one day and decide to be an anarchy.
2-You just made a giant, unbacked, completely irrelevant assumption. Congratulations. You remind me of a conspiracy theorist. Oh, wait..
3-I dont even understand your point. It sounds like you tried to fit an argument about oil and an argument about troop numbers into one argument, so you could prove you "know what you're talking about" or something, that ended up having no relevance to your hypothetical situation. Then again, your hypothetical situation wasnt very hypothetical and ended up having no relevance to anything, so I guess that fits the pattern, too.

The attacks of September 11th conveniently provided them with a motive to go into OIL RICH LANDS.

I like to think of it as a positive externality. :)
Prove to me it isnt.

Not only did the American public get behind the president, but they sent their young in droves to fight.
And the international community stood by the wayside believing that the USA had a right to find Osama Bin Laden and bring him to justice.

Sweet, you incorporated the "young soldiers" argument too. So you're trying to make it full circle on everything anyone has ever criticized about the war or 9/11. Which is about right considering you've been unable to back any of your points further after I've challenged them, you just bring up new ones that more people told you. I'll say it again: Think on your own. Its a fantastic feature of humanity.

But, I'll bite. No draft, no problem. Willing soldiers are doing their duty. Yeah, thats such a crime. The only difference is that people disagree with the basis behind the war. But people have always done that--it doesnt discredit the work that soldiers should be doing.

And stop speaking for the international community. They can speak for themselves.

I would like you to ask yourself, why have they not found Bin Laden?
He (although trained by the cia)is but 1 man.
Is he better than the American military? with all their Military satelites?
Is he so crafty that he can elude a whole army?

Why didnt we just kill Hitler, y'know? You do it. But wait, we're completely getting off topic from the original argument of 9/11 conspiracy. I hypothesize it's because you dont have enough to say to back anything you've claimed so far.

And what of SADAM? he did not have WMD'S, and the chemical weapons he possesed POSED NO THREAT TO AMERICA!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1X-I-38lrU think, they did and do not have a delivery system cappable of hitting American shores. hint... NIETHER DOES IRAN! So why does America have it's greedy eyes on Iran all of the sudden? "OIL"

Well sure weapons dont pose threat to the "superior" Americans! We have the best military! We are untouchable, blah blah blah! But suddenly, when it's realized that someone may want to or actually has the balls to attack us.. we begin to think "who actually has the means to attack us?"

We did not know they did not have WMD's before the start of the war (and subsequently didnt know what means of "delivery systems" they had, of course).

But, as I said, I dont want to get into a discussion as to the pretense of the War in Iraq, because, like I said, I dont completely agree with it. I'm just more confident in finding a solution outside of "GOVERNMENTS ARE EVIL AND KILL THEIR OWN PEOPLE!"

And shush up about oil. We all understand that you know there's oil in Iraq. Neat. Now instead of being all vague and doubtful, prove to me we went to Iraq for the purpose of oil.

And to keep it on subject infowarrior, the british government was impresseed by what America did and said "well done chap" and thought....maybe we could do the same?

You have a terrible habit with this "speaking for other country's" thing. In fact, you have a terrible habit with this "speaking for other people" in general, thing.

But i do believe there are terrorist groups that commit horrific acts around the world and
I keep an open mind on the subject of 9/11.

Its good to hear you have an open mind several hours after you posted "you dont know the truth about 9/11." I'm glad my influence is so expedient.

I leave you with 1 final thought.
Why did the government release 5 frames of a video capturing a "plane"? hitting the PENTAGON? realy..... malls and walmarts have better video surveilance than the PENTAGON! fo real. their video of that impact should have a language selection, a scene selector, bonus features, bloopers,dolby surround, and wide screen capability.
All we have is 5 measly frames? give me a break
And don't give me that .. matter of national security B.s

Learn to recognize game, or you will get played.

Yeah, low quality surveillance camera's are all fundamentally equipped to record video of images traveling upwards of 100 mph. Totally. Good argument. I fly my plane through Wallmart every day, just to see myself completely flying by.

I think you're forgetting that video is actually a stream of pictures. And when something goes faster than what the pictures can record, you end up only getting about 5 frames.

Anyways, I'm sure the PENTAGON (you seem to like to capitalize that word, so I will too) now has some pretty nifty surveillance, but they didnt. So yeah, you should totally base your conspiracy off the fact that the Pentagon didnt have cameras with the capacity to fully record a speeding jet flying toward a building--because that's an every-day hazard that everyone should be prepared for, that they totally should have seen coming and therefore upgraded their cameras! :rolleyes:

Or wait, are you implying that YOU knew before 9/11 that a plane would hit the Pentagon and therefore claim that the Pentagon should have had better cameras?! OMG! Maybe this is all because of you!

Learn to recognize logic, or you'll get... idk... insulted?

[meat.eater]

And the only thing I really have to say to InfoWarrior is that every bit of "fact" he has just listed (all stuff I have heard) was spoon fed to him by some other person who decided he wanted attention. You claim the media feeds us lies or not-full-truths... but all of your information was fed to you in the exact same manner.

I just prefer not to jump to the conclusion that our government is evil and killing it's own people. My bad.

You know nothing outside what you have been told.
When you conduct an experiment with the worlds largest skyscraper being hit by a plane and compare the results, we'll talk.
When you travel back in time and see the "eyewitness" (its amazing how money can make someone magically be an eyewitness) witnessing the attacks, we'll talk.
When you are on the phone with Mohammed Atta and show me it's recording, we'll talk.

Until then, you have no validity.

[TDP_Serp_TDP]

Lo guys, well I’m new here and just wanted to say this...: do you really think that the military of USA is really going to show the proper video footage of terror attacks?.. Do you really think that they care about the average public citizen? They can do what they want, basically, we have a bunch of dumbasses in charge of the most advanced armies (i’m referring to Britain now as well)... now i do not support the war on terrorism the us and Britain are engaging into, but, say you guys are right about the 9/11 and all those other tragidies..That still means nothing. Ok it’s terrible and we can prey that nothing like this happens again, but it most likely. Will. Its time to face it folks, we have a ruthless and quite possibly violent minded man leading the "free world" against "evil", and though bush gave the order to attack ect.. You must still remember, bush is being told the facts too by someone as well. Which brings all this conspiracy stuff to a new level... also id like to note that, between Britain and America, we have bombs that can launch into a building, explode, but keep the walls standing while killing all life in the building, we have some of the most sophisticated technology in the entire planet, but we cannot find one man in robes with a turban hiding in a cave or something in a desert country?. we can look into space and discover new planets and new solar systems and stuff like that, we can launch weapons to the other side of earth, but we cannot find one man?!?.. ill leave it with that, so keep up the good posts guys, love all of your views on this, and gimme some feedback on my opinions please :).

Edit: while your talkin about the taliban and such, it was the American and Brittish goverments and Military who gave and funded the Afghanistan and iraq's weapons in, now im not sure of the exact years date, but it was around the 80's i tihnk, ill look it up later. Anyhow, we gave them weaps, they gave us oil and such materials, then after a few years, we go to war on them because of "knowen terrorists in the country". Another thing to add is that some beleive we started to fight them when they (afghans or h/e its spelt) began to sell their oil to other countires, not just us. So the question i ask to the public at large, whither American or British, is this war on terror based on Justice?, is it for oil and other materials for the nations? is it for more power?... what ever your veiw and opinions are, let others know, and speak to others with diffrent views, then think about which, in your opinion, is the truth.
Cyall in the arena
~Serp

[RaX]

Well let us assume that the USA government did cause all that crap, all I can say is, sorry for you xD Never really liked America and this just proves why. Ill stick to my third world country thank you :) Atleast we dont have a government that is blowing us up for oil.

South Africa > America

[Dark7]

everyone says that 9/11 was for oil or some shit. but really WHERE THE F*** IS THE OIL?

[Jeffery]

everyone says that 9/11 was for oil or some shit. but really WHERE THE F*** IS THE OIL?
You do realise that every oil company is reporting record proffits in the tens of billions of dollars PER QUARTER, right?

The physical quanitity of oil is unimportant. The price per barrel that companies are getting is more important.

[Dark7]

its 97$ per barrel. shit went up

[TDP_Serp_TDP]

well seeing as the armies were deployed to "fight terrorism" and not get oil, i dont think theyd publicly anounce that theyr takeing it :P lol

[Dark7]

if u guys really think US gov had a hand in 9/11 why the f*** would they pick the wtc? Why not a less importand building, then go invade iraq?

[menace]

TC, tl;dr. You remind me of Girshwin.

[bloodreign]

Anyways, I'm sure the PENTAGON (you seem to like to capitalize that word, so I will too) now has some pretty nifty surveillance, but they didnt.

Pentagon, the very HUB of military defense it literaly housed thousands of people in it a day, it should have had PREMIUM SECURITY.
After all would they not think someone would carry out such an attack?
---CAR BOMB---PLANE ATTACK-----MISSILE ATTACK?-----
Just why were they re-enforcing the outer exterior of the building if they did not surmise this happening?

Would they not have surface to air missile systems to protect the millitary heart of america?

We all saw close views from civilian cameras of the second plane hitting the towers, with the audio of the planes engines roaring just before it hit te towers....so why was nothin released like that at the pentagon?

Realy now.......:rolleyes:

[rabbi]

Nothing was realeased about the Pentagon b cuz ..well the only reason they got the second Tower being hit is b cuz after the first Tower was hit news camers and reporters were all over the seen ready to give word an this extraordinary....and thats when the second Tower was hit... i was sitting in my ninth grade class room watching about the first tower...and then out of NO WHERE the other Tower was hit. we were all like WTF!!!!!!!!
So back to the Pentagon... I believe no one seen it coming, just like the first Tower "accidentally" was hit... That was a sad day for EVERYONE who was watching and involved in some way with those terrorist attacks... my dad had a friend that worked in the World Trade Centre...building 2. He was friends with him since like grade 7... my dad was devestated :( I also knew the guy, although not that well but we've had bbq's and stuff together. That day was a sad day, not just for America but for all surrounding Countries :(

[Realist]

There is no way you were in 9th grade in 2001....

[Cavour]

This thread reminds me of the xkcd about youtube.

The whole give kids the internet thing might not be working out so well. Back in my day kids did wholesome activities, like mug people, not become political activists.

It was a soundstage on Mars.

[Kyir]

Nothing was realeased about the Pentagon b cuz ..well the only reason they got the second Tower being hit is b cuz after the first Tower was hit news camers and reporters were all over the seen ready to give word an this extraordinary....and thats when the second Tower was hit... i was sitting in my ninth grade class room watching about the first tower...and then out of NO WHERE the other Tower was hit. we were all like WTF!!!!!!!!
So back to the Pentagon... I believe no one seen it coming, just like the first Tower "accidentally" was hit... That was a sad day for EVERYONE who was watching and involved in some way with those terrorist attacks... my dad had a friend that worked in the World Trade Centre...building 2. He was friends with him since like grade 7... my dad was devestated :( I also knew the guy, although not that well but we've had bbq's and stuff together. That day was a sad day, not just for America but for all surrounding Countries :(

...

I'd say something witty, but that'd require understanding what you said.

[Learz]

Due to the Saudi Arabian deal, the dollar is linked to oil.
Spiking the cost of oil means printing more money, which reduces America's debt to other countries.
Economics+politics+greed=Earth.

[meat.eater]

Pentagon, the very HUB of military defense it literaly housed thousands of people in it a day, it should have had PREMIUM SECURITY.
After all would they not think someone would carry out such an attack?
---CAR BOMB---PLANE ATTACK-----MISSILE ATTACK?-----
Just why were they re-enforcing the outer exterior of the building if they did not surmise this happening?

Would they not have surface to air missile systems to protect the millitary heart of america?

We all saw close views from civilian cameras of the second plane hitting the towers, with the audio of the planes engines roaring just before it hit te towers....so why was nothin released like that at the pentagon?

Realy now.......:rolleyes:

Once again, did you predict a plane crashing into the Pentagon? Because you would probably be the only living American person who did.

But once again you've ignored all counterarguments. And if you really want to base an entire conspiracy over the quality of external security cameras, I truly pity you. You can say "you're dumb for not having better cameras" all day long, and I would probably agree with you to some extent, but you cant base your conspiracy over a frustration with computer equipment. That's just silly. So you can get mad at the Pentagon for perhaps having less than adequate defense for a plane strike (once again, that doesnt even enter the realm of thought for anybody until after 9/11), whether that's in cameras or "missile defense" (you really believe that they should just plant anti-air missiles around the pentagon?) but that's no proof of conspiracy.

Civilians arent just let onto Pentagon property (especially not to randomly film one bright, sunny morning). And we have exactly zero footage of the first plane hitting the towers, because nobody predicted it. So why would we of the Pentagon?

As for the argument of "re-surfacing the Pentagon..." first of all, how do you know that? Second of all, even if they did... you realize you're arguing that they resurfaced (which they are constantly doing to the pentagon--which I'm sure Loose Change (which would appear to be your only source) failed to mention) just to smash it to smithereens? Ok.... How does that make sense?

[Jeffery]

if u guys really think US gov had a hand in 9/11 why the f*** would they pick the wtc? Why not a less importand building, then go invade iraq?
My personal beliefs have nothing to do with this.

But why attack WTC's?? Because it is large enough, and important enough, to galvanize the American public opinion, and allow the administration freedom to act as rarely seen in the US government.
The same reason is behind why the terrorists targeted it in reality. They knew hitting a target that large is not something the American people could easily ignore. They wanted to grab the attention of not only the US government, but the people themselves. And blowing up somebodies house or a bridge would simply not have the reaction they wanted.

And perhaps they are smarter than we give them credit for, and knew Bush and his gang would invade countries like Iraq. The invasion of which actually made the world a safer place for terrorists to exist in. With countries fighting countries, they get ignored enough to do what they want.

[uniquinous]

South Africa > AmericaYeah you have fun with your AIDS. :rolleyes: :p

seriously tho, if this was a conspiracy to really help the american economy and get lots of rich oil, why the noob would they attack the world trade center? Big building? Sure. Economic capital of the free world? Stabbing self in foot.

I have yet to see the images and phone recordings that were mentioned - is there a problem with the alledged enormous amount of "evidence"?

[Dark7]

My personal beliefs have nothing to do with this.

But why attack WTC's?? Because it is large enough, and important enough, to galvanize the American public opinion, and allow the administration freedom to act as rarely seen in the US government.
The same reason is behind why the terrorists targeted it in reality. They knew hitting a target that large is not something the American people could easily ignore. They wanted to grab the attention of not only the US government, but the people themselves. And blowing up somebodies house or a bridge would simply not have the reaction they wanted.

And perhaps they are smarter than we give them credit for, and knew Bush and his gang would invade countries like Iraq. The invasion of which actually made the world a safer place for terrorists to exist in. With countries fighting countries, they get ignored enough to do what they want.

you make some valid points, but i still think they could have thought of something the would have effed up our country less and still invade iraq. Also i dont see how their profiting since price of oil per barrel is at an all time high.

[Jeffery]

you make some valid points, but i still think they could have thought of something the would have effed up our country less and still invade iraq. Also i dont see how their profiting since price of oil per barrel is at an all time high.
The point of that was that THEY DIDN'T do it. The government had nothing to do with 9/11 beyond being too stupid to have picked up the signs something was happening, and too stubborn to share information its different agencies did have with each other.

And the profit is simple. Who do you think is SELLING the oil at that price. Thats right, the oil companies.
Consider it like this. You have a lemonaid stand. It costs you 10 cents to make a glass of lemonaid. You sell it for 25 cents. You make a 15 cent profit.
Now say you sell it at 96 cents a glass. Your costs have not increased. Your sale price has. You now make 86 cents a glass of lemonaid.

Oil was $20 a barrel before. It is now ~$96 a barrel. At no true increaxe in production costs to the main oil companies.

[InfoWarrior]

According to infowarrior no non-conspiracy crime is ever committed. What I want to know is, WTF don't the middle-easterners want to fly planes into our buildings? We mess around enough around their lands we certainly deserve it!

You're misrepresenting my argument. Did I list all crimes in existence as black ops? No, I did not. Here's the problem. Sure, the middle easterners might want to attack, I'm not arguing with you there. It's the discrepancies with the actual attack that lead me to believe it to be an inside job.

this is quite amusing, eh? so many "facts".

I don't find these facts amusing. I find them quite unsettling, myself.

Can you please link to this image?

It's in this post. First or second page. Fifth or fourth reply.

Can you please link to these records?

Here's the audio of the conversation:

http://nwo.media.xs2.net/tape/emad%20salem.mp3

And here's a transcript (Of the point of interest):

FBI Special Agent John Anticev: But, uh, basically nothing has changed. I'm just telling you for my own sake that nothing, that this isn't a salary, that it's—you know. But you got paid regularly for good information. I mean the expenses were a little bit out of the ordinary and it was really questioned. Don't tell Nancy I told you this. [Nancy Floyd is another FBI Special Agent who worked with Emad A. Salem in his informant capacity.]

FBI undercover agent Emad A. Salem: Well, I have to tell her of course.

Anticev: Well then, if you have to, you have to.

Salem: Yeah, I mean because the lady was being honest and I was being honest and everything was submitted with a receipt and now it's questionable.

Anticev: It's not questionable, it's like a little out of the ordinary.

Salem: Okay. Alright. I don't think it was. If that's what you think guys, fine, but I don't think that because we was start already building the bomb which is went off in the World Trade Center. It was built by supervising supervision from the Bureau and the D.A. and we was all informed about it and we know that the bomb start to be built. By who? By your confidential informant. What a wonderful, great case!

Im sorry, but wtf is this horrible conclusion that people have come to? and that picture looks like a plane coulda done that. Idk wings snapped off from hitting the fucking builing perhaps?

The issue is not why the wings didn't pierce the Pentagon (Though, if they snapped off, they should be lying on the lawn). The issue is now the fact that six eyewitnesses interviewed by Citizens Investigation Team have all said that the plane flew on the north side of the CITGO gas station, making it physically impossible for it to have hit some of the damaged light poles and cause the damage to the Pentagon which is illustrated in the ASCE's Pentagon: Building Performance Report. Also, at least two eyewitnesses remember the plane 'pulling up' before hitting the Pentagon. The hole is in the ground floor, so if these eyewitnesses are correct, then the hole is in the wrong place. Another current issue is why a remarkable number of USAToday reporters were driving within 1/4 mile of each other, just around the time of impact, in Arlington, near the Pentagon, all conveniently witnessing the attack (And if they were all driving together at that time, they were all late too).

[Jeffery]

You do realise the bomb the refer to in that conversation was the 1993 bombing of the WTC. right?

And there are also 'witnesses' that swear it was a tomahawk missile, and not a plane at all. And yet the engine parts, and yes, even wing parts were collected and assembled during the investigation.

Plane wings do not "break off" in a crash like this. They break into pieces. Which is what happened/.

[Kyir]

I don't find these facts amusing. I find them quite unsettling, myself.


I would find them that way too.

If they were true.

[Lonely Tylenol]

Hi, InfoWarrior,

Can your next conspiracy thread be about the Lewinsky scandal?

That would be hilarious.

Tylenol

[InfoWarrior]

Newsflash, kid. We've been "invading" Afghanistan long before 9/11. Clinton issued surveillance and covert missions to bomb the Taliban in the 90's. Convenient that you looked over that. 9/11 created a realization that that middle eastern area may start wanting to attack places now. So, we went to the place where we assumed (because we provided means to achieve) weapons could be.

Look, I'm not going to argue with how the government handled the invasion of Iraq because I believe they did it poorly. Does that mean I assume they bombed themselves? No. I think it takes a pretty sick mind to jump to that conclusion.

The motives were quite clear. No one is concluding that they did it just because they had the motive. It's because of evidence indicating their guilt.

Here's a list of motives compiled by Killtown:

MOTIVES

207.

1997 - CFR & Trilateral Comm member Zbigniew Brzezinski publishes a book urging the US to control the world's natural resources to maintain global domination despite public's uneasiness about US projecting external power and cautions it will become more difficult to get consensus on foreign policy with an increasingly diverse US society unless public perceives a massive direct external threat. (Brzezinski: 'Grand Chessboard') Sept 14 - Council on Foreign Relation member Gary Hart says 9/11 attacks is chance for Bush to carry out a "new world order." (CFR)
208.

Sept 10 - Donald Rumsfeld announces Pentagon has lost track of $2.3 trillion (CBS, DoD), attacks came near end of fiscal year & important budget information was located in the damaged area (Arlington County), large number of fatalities at Pentagon were civilian accountants, bookkeepers and budget analysts. (Pitt Post-Gazette)
209.

Oct '01 - Only 1 1/2 months after 9/11, the 342 page USA PATRIOT ACT is signed into law. (White House)
210.

Oct '01 - Hundreds of gold bars that was stored under WTC 4 are discovered in a delivery tunnel under WTC 5 that was being transported on the morning of 9/11 by a 10-wheel truck that was crushed along with several other cars by debris, yet no bodies were recovered. (NY Daily News, Times Online)
211.

WTC leaseholder Larry Silverstein seeks $7.2 billion in insurance, double his coverage, claiming the attacks count as two separate events. (Insurance Journal) June '02 - Silverstein receives $861 million settlement for WTC 7, debt on it is only $383 million (Insurance Journal), May '04 - Silverstein awarded single payout of $3.5 billion for WTC (CNN), Dec '04 - Silverstein wins extra $1.1 billion from court ruling saying attacks constituted 'two separate events'. (USA Today) The new WTC is projected to cost between $9-12 billion with $5 billion coming from government sources. (MSNBC, NYSCPA)
212.

Bush administration has taken away multiple rights of the people since 9/11. (Newsday) U.S. ranks 17th in press freedoms largely due to 9/11. (CNS)
213.

Nov '02 - Dept of Homeland Security is created to lead the fight against domestic terrorism. (CBS)
214.

Poll Cites GOP Gains Since 9/11 (Washington Post), Gov't terrorist warnings boost Bush's approval ratings. (Cornell U) '9/11 effect' won Bush votes on Democratic turf near Ground Zero. (New York Post)
215.

Military budget increase:

*

Sept '00 - PNAC calls to increase US defense budget, but says won't happen absent a catastrophic event like a "new Pearl Harbor." (ABC, PNAC)
*

Sept 5, '01 - Rumsfeld asks Senate to approve new '02 defense budget which has largest spending increase since the mid 80's. (DoD)
*

FY 2002 budget request is a $37.8 billion, or 11.5% increase from '01 request. (DoD)
*

FY 2003 budget request is a $40.1 billion, or 10.9% increase from '02 request. (DoD)

Afghanistan, opium, pipeline

216.

July '01 - US plans to invade Afghanistan by Oct '01 (BBC, Guardian), Sept 4 - White House approves plan to invade Afghanistan (CBS, USA Today), Sept 10 - Plan awaits Bush's approval (MSNBC), Oct '01 - US invades Afghanistan. (DoD) War in Afghanistan would have been politically impossible pre-9/11. (USA Today)
217.

July '00 - Taliban bans cultivation of opium poppies in Afghanistan (BBC), Mar '05, Afghanistan opium production surges. (USA Today)
218.

Afghanistan has huge strategic importance for the west as a corridor to the untapped fuel reserves in central Asia. (Guardian)

*

1997 - Taleban are in Texas for talks with Unocal about an Afghan pipeline. (BBC)
*

Feb '98, Unocal rep testifies before congress that an Afghan pipeline can't happen without a single stable Afghan gov't and asks the US to use it's influence to end conflicts there. (US House of Reps)
*

Aug '98 - Unocal suspends Afghan pipeline activities because of deteriorating political conditions there. (Unocal)
*

Dec '98 - Unocal drops out of Afghan pipeline consortium. (Unocal)
*

1999 - US paid entire annual salary of Taliban gov't in hopes to secure a stable Afghan gov't to allow US companies to build a pipeline there to connect to the Caspian Sea. (SF Chronicle)
*

May '01, US gives $43 million to Afghanistan and becomes their largest donor two years in a row. (CNN)
*

Some say current military campaign in Afghanistan has hidden objective - revive gas pipeline and open the way for U.S. companies to build further facilities to carry central Asian oil. (BCC)
*

Dec '02 - Afghan gas pipeline deal signed. (BBC, SF Chronicle)
*

May '05 - Afghan pipeline draws closer to reality, Afghan President said project was a 'top priority.' (Christian Science Monitor)

Iraq, oil

219.

1998 - PNAC calls for a war in Iraq to oust Saddam Hussein who they say threatens Israel and the world's oil supply. (ABC, PNAC)

*

Jan '01 - Bush had pre-9/11 Iraq war plan according to Treasury Dept memo. (CNN)
*

Bush made plans for ousting Saddam and for Iraq's oil before 9/11. (BBC)
*

9/11 - Barely 5 hrs after the Pentagon crash, Rumsfeld begins strike plans against Iraq. (CBS)
*

Feb '02 - Bush admin was warned statements that Iraq trained Al Qaeda in weapon making was fabricated, yet they would later use same statements as foundation for military action in Iraq. (NY Times, AFP)
*

White House officials say privately 9/11 was main reason for war in Iraq (ABC), Bush says US is in Iraq because of 9/11. (CNN, White House)
*

Jan '03 - Memo reveals Bush was determined to invade Iraq despite UN backing and discusses ways to provoke Saddam into a confrontation. (NY Times, BBC)
*

Sept '03 - Poll later finds 70% Americans believe Saddam-9/11 link. (USA Today)
*

Downing Street Memo warned Saddam not a threat and US fixed intel around their war policy. (London Times)
*

9/11 Panel says no evidence connecting Iraq to Al Qaeda. (Washington Post)
*

Oct '04 - CIA report later concludes no WMD's in Iraq as Bush used to help justify war. (CNN, BBC)
*

Dec '04 - Ex-CIA agent says he was sacked for not faking Iraq WMD reports. (Washington Times)

[Dark7]

so what are you trying to say info?

[Jeffery]

He's saying a bomb that went off 8 years before 9/11 was proof the FBI ran the planes into the towers.

[Kyir]

He's saying a bomb that went off 8 years before 9/11 was proof the FBI ran the planes into the towers.

IT ISN'T?!?!?!?!??!!?

[InfoWarrior]

Once again, did you predict a plane crashing into the Pentagon? Because you would probably be the only living American person who did.

Actually, he isn't. In October 2000, the Pentagon conducted Project MASCAL. The Project involved simulations of passenger planes flying into the Pentagon. Ironically, one of the guys who worked on MASCAL was the same man who would pilot Flight 77 when it allegedly crashed into the Pentagon. In 1999, NORAD conducted drills of a plane flying into the World Trade Center. They requested a similar drill, only to have the Pentagon as the target, but this drill was rejected.


But once again you've ignored all counterarguments. And if you really want to base an entire conspiracy over the quality of external security cameras, I truly pity you.

Whose basing an entire case on it? It's one of the many questions, and it's a good one. Where's the footage from all the cameras that caught the crash and why have they not been released? It's just one question in a long list.


Civilians arent just let onto Pentagon property (especially not to randomly film one bright, sunny morning). And we have exactly zero footage of the first plane hitting the towers, because nobody predicted it. So why would we of the Pentagon?

No, we have footage of the first plane hitting. Haven't you seen the Naudet film? They caught the crash. It isn't very clear, but it catches the crash.

As for the argument of "re-surfacing the Pentagon..." first of all, how do you know that? Second of all, even if they did... you realize you're arguing that they resurfaced (which they are constantly doing to the pentagon--which I'm sure Loose Change (which would appear to be your only source) failed to mention) just to smash it to smithereens? Ok.... How does that make sense?

The area that was hit was the only area which was being renovated, which made it nearly completely empty, most of the people inside were civilians. It was also reinforced with blast-resistant windows. Who even mentioned Loose Change as a source?

if u guys really think US gov had a hand in 9/11 why the f*** would they pick the wtc? Why not a less importand building, then go invade iraq?

It's not that important to them:

http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/baltsun/access/80432234.html?dids=80432234:80432234&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&date=Sep+12%2C+2001&author=ARTHUR+HIRSCH&pub=The+Sun&desc=Loved%2C+hated%2C+center%27s+profile+was+towe ring]They were hated money losers (http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/baltsun/access/80432234.html?dids=80432234:80432234&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&date=Sep+12%2C+2001&author=ARTHUR+HIRSCH&pub=The+Sun&desc=Loved%2C+hated%2C+center%27s+profile+was+towe ring)


I have yet to see the images and phone recordings that were mentioned - is there a problem with the alledged enormous amount of "evidence"?

Well, that's because I wasn't here. I'm back now, and I gave you the information.

He's saying a bomb that went off 8 years before 9/11 was proof the FBI ran the planes into the towers.

I love this situation which has been seen by so many message boards. The 'conspiracy theorist' comes in and posts some of his stuff, then everyone who disagrees with him completely misrepresents his argument.

I'm not using it as evidence that they did it.

I'm using it as evidence that covert forces of the US government (Forces smarter than Bush, Cheney, Rove for the "They're too stupid!" crowd.) had the will to do something like 9/11. They did WTC93, so it's stupidity to say "THEY WOULD NEVER DO ANYTHING LIKE THAT.".

IT ISN'T?!?!?!?!??!!?

No, it isn't. It's proof that they didn't have a problem with doing something like that.

[Kyir]

No, it isn't. It's proof that they didn't have a problem with doing something like that.

Sarcasm











































Your Head.

[Dark7]

THEY NEVER DID SOMETHING LIKE THAT!

show me proof that they DID.

[meat.eater]

Once again, Info, everything you have said has been spoon fed to you. And the things that havent been have very little relevance to 9/11 without the "facts" of the stuff that has been spoon fed to you.

Look, there are literally thousand of "arguments" that you people bring up as to how the government was behind the September 11th attacks. So many of you claim that we just "believe what the media tells us" and that there is "more than what meets the eye," but the fact is that your information is coming straight from a media source. An extremist media source. An unreliable media source. But fact (and I mean actual fact--not assumption or misinterpretation) is, all of your arguments can be refuted by common sense, which it's not surprising that you overlook, or they have no credible source behind them.

Which doesnt make you a quote-unquote "conspiracy theorist," as you described yourself, it just makes you a full blown conspiracy theorist. And the rest of functioning society has proved them wrong before, like with JFK, and we'll continually do it again.

The sad thing is, you'll never see how biased and hypocritical you are. Which is why it is completely pointless to even argue with people like you anymore. The only thing productive to do is to show the young people of America, whose minds you're poisoning with filth, that there is a common sense truth out there beyond the confusing, convincing BS that your theories vomit out--which is why I've been directing the majority of my posts at bloodreign, not you.

Sometimes I really wish we did have it your way and changed our government around. Because then maybe we wouldnt even have the freedom to express theories against our own government, and you'd be locked in jail. But I'm sure you never thought of that.

[Dark7]

http://img75.imageshack.us/img75/8538/beforemarriage7jrdb9.jpg
somehow i felt this applied to infowarrior.

Remeber its not rape. Its suprise sex.

[Wizzy`]

Dark7, you sir, are a dumbass.

[Kyir]

Dark7, you sir, are a dumbass.

GASP!

[Dark7]

http://img240.imageshack.us/img240/4661/dumbassbj5.jpgits possible

Edit: nope wait i have a picture for myself

[InfoWarrior]

THEY NEVER DID SOMETHING LIKE THAT!

show me proof that they DID.

http://nwo.media.xs2.net/tape/emad%20salem.mp3

Once again, Info, everything you have said has been spoon fed to you. And the things that havent been have very little relevance to 9/11 without the "facts" of the stuff that has been spoon fed to you.

You will say it again and again, and finally, I can say nothing more in response to your comments about me being spoon fed information other than: You're wrong.

Look, there are literally thousand of "arguments" that you people bring up as to how the government was behind the September 11th attacks. So many of you claim that we just "believe what the media tells us" and that there is "more than what meets the eye," but the fact is that your information is coming straight from a media source. An extremist media source. An unreliable media source. But fact (and I mean actual fact--not assumption or misinterpretation) is, all of your arguments can be refuted by common sense, which it's not surprising that you overlook, or they have no credible source behind them.

Then refute them. I have hardly put forward any arguments relating to 9/11 in this post, so you can't really say that all my arguments can be refuted using common sense. Let's take the London bombings, for example, since that is what this topic is about. Refute my argument on that with your great common sense. Here's something to start with:

Initially, it was reported that the explosions were caused by a power surge. Scotland Yard had advanced intelligence warnings of bombings, so if they had advanced warnings, then why did they report that it was caused by a power surge for hours?

That is a reasonable argument, which raises a very good question. Now, using your common sense, tell me why it is not a good question?

Which doesnt make you a quote-unquote "conspiracy theorist," as you described yourself, it just makes you a full blown conspiracy theorist. And the rest of functioning society has proved them wrong before, like with JFK, and we'll continually do it again.

Um, actually, no. The JFK conspiracy has never been debunked. If you haven't been following, that one already broke wide open. Didn't you hear about the HSCA investigation?


The sad thing is, you'll never see how biased and hypocritical you are. Which is why it is completely pointless to even argue with people like you anymore. The only thing productive to do is to show the young people of America, whose minds you're poisoning with filth, that there is a common sense truth out there beyond the confusing, convincing BS that your theories vomit out--which is why I've been directing the majority of my posts at bloodreign, not you.

What's hypocritical about my arguments? You can't even say what, yet you still say it? And you say I'm the one full of bullshit. Am I poisoning the minds of poor little children by raising good questions about these events? Hey, I have an idea. You seem to be pretty confident that I am wrong, and that you are right. So, let's see you fully refute the information I posted in my initial post. If you can't, you are silently admitting that you can only throw insults around and try to sound smart, yet you cannot respond intelligently to the argument that has been put forward.

Sometimes I really wish we did have it your way and changed our government around. Because then maybe we wouldnt even have the freedom to express theories against our own government, and you'd be locked in jail. But I'm sure you never thought of that.

'Have it my way'? You are making more of a fool out of yourself every time you post. I never said that people are being locked up. Your bullshitting again. Can't you see that by attacking things I've never said and trying to make it look as if I've actually said them, you just expose yourself as someone who disagrees, but doesn't have anything intelligent to say? You know what you are doing, and have been doing? Presenting straw man arguments. Keep on using your straw man tactics. It is easily visible and seethrough to anyone who takes the time to read this whole post.

I am not poisoning minds. I am raising valid questions. I thank everyone who has raised valid and intelligent questions relating to my argument. I hope a majority of people reading this post can see right through this guy's straw man game.

[Kyir]

Initially, it was reported that the explosions were caused by a power surge. Scotland Yard had advanced intelligence warnings of bombings, so if they had advanced warnings, then why did they report that it was caused by a power surge for hours?

Because Bureaucracy is flawed.

[Dark7]

another thing in your sig. Whos questioning columbine/v.tech? cmon thats just silly.

[meat.eater]

Then refute them. I have hardly put forward any arguments relating to 9/11 in this post, so you can't really say that all my arguments can be refuted using common sense. Let's take the London bombings, for example, since that is what this topic is about. Refute my argument on that with your great common sense. Here's something to start with:

Initially, it was reported that the explosions were caused by a power surge. Scotland Yard had advanced intelligence warnings of bombings, so if they had advanced warnings, then why did they report that it was caused by a power surge for hours?

That is a reasonable argument, which raises a very good question. Now, using your common sense, tell me why it is not a good question?

"Intelligence" doesnt mean "they know it's going to happen." Even on the off chance that they did know absolutely everything that was about to happen, perhaps they dont want to freak out an entire country that has no military outside of a Navy that they were just bombed?

Those are just 2 quick points off the top of my head--I havent even researched the London Bombings much at all. I know very little about them. But both of those seem like logic to me. Rather than jumping immediately to "ITS THE GOVERNMENT!"

Um, actually, no. The JFK conspiracy has never been debunked. If you haven't been following, that one already broke wide open. Didn't you hear about the HSCA investigation?

I heard how it basically said nobody was involved except for Oswald, because he's a crazy assassin. Oh, you're right. Oswald is American. So it must be the government!

What's hypocritical about my arguments? You can't even say what, yet you still say it? And you say I'm the one full of bullshit. Am I poisoning the minds of poor little children by raising good questions about these events? Hey, I have an idea. You seem to be pretty confident that I am wrong, and that you are right. So, let's see you fully refute the information I posted in my initial post. If you can't, you are silently admitting that you can only throw insults around and try to sound smart, yet you cannot respond intelligently to the argument that has been put forward.

'Have it my way'? You are making more of a fool out of yourself every time you post. I never said that people are being locked up. Your bullshitting again. Can't you see that by attacking things I've never said and trying to make it look as if I've actually said them, you just expose yourself as someone who disagrees, but doesn't have anything intelligent to say? You know what you are doing, and have been doing? Presenting straw man arguments. Keep on using your straw man tactics. It is easily visible and seethrough to anyone who takes the time to read this whole post.

I am not poisoning minds. I am raising valid questions. I thank everyone who has raised valid and intelligent questions relating to my argument. I hope a majority of people reading this post can see right through this guy's straw man game.

Your hypocrisy comes from challenging the very government that allows you to challenge it.

Sure, you're raising questions. But you're raising extremely loaded questions that to a young person would assume they were wrong to disagree. Beyond that, you're jumping to conclusion about what it is that you "know," assuming your own "facts," and still implying yourself as "correct." None of which are credible. And you still have yet to address the fact that all of your information was attained in the same matter as ours--through the media. And your oppositions information is coming from a lot more credible source--the government. It's all a matter of who you choose to believe and how cynical toward the government you already are. The only real difference between you and I is that you choose not to believe anything the government tells you (but are more than willing to believe what other every-day extremist cynical conspiracy theorists shove in your face). Which isnt my problem or the governments problem.. it's your own damn paranoia.

I never said you said people would be locked up. I'm simply pointing out it is the government that allows you to trash it so much. Kind of paradoxical, eh? I just find it amusing that if you ever did overthrow the government or advocated for anarchy (god help us), you wouldnt be able to trash the government anymore. I find it amusing that it's the very thing you adamantly oppose that lets you adamantly oppose it. Thats all.

Also, you realize by pointing the finger at me for using straw-man tactics... you're just using straw-man tactics too. Not to mention your entire 2nd to last paragraph was complete, whiny falsified BS that I never said. So who's using "straw man tactics?" Oh right, but that's just more hypocrisy I can point out on your end. Thanks for solidifying my argument full circle.

[InfoWarrior]

another thing in your sig. Whos questioning columbine/v.tech? cmon thats just silly.

No, it's not. Columbine looked to be another staged operation. Hundreds of eyewitnesses told of shooters other than Harris and Klebold, and there was many indications of government control over the operation.

Something you should know is that Eric Harris, before moving to Littleton, lived at Plattsburgh Air Force Base according to the Plattsburgh-Press Republican.

--Why did numerous ear-witnesses say at least one attacker was firing a fully-automatic weapon?

--Why did police concentrate on setting up a perimeter at the same time dispatch(via phone) is hearing the sound of gunshots within the school?

--Why did it take police so long to enter the school, and why did it take almost three hours for them to reach the library, the area where the shooters were last seen? Who gave the orders not to go in?

--Why did over 100 eye- and ear- witnesses dispute the official theory of only two shooters? Why did over 40 of those witnesses identify other participants BY NAME?

--If the two shooters committed suicide shortly after noon, as police claim, how come at least 35 witnesses saw or heard suspects/gunshots/explosions after that time?

--Why are there conflicting eyewitness accounts on the place and manner in which at least four of the dead victims were killed? Were victims being moved around? Was the crime scene being rearranged?

--If left-handed Klebold shot himself in the left temple, why was his suicide weapon found clutched in his right hand?

--How did students manage to keep seriously wounded teacher Dave Sanders alive for more than three hours while awaiting rescue, yet he was dead within 20 minutes of the police taking control of him? His corpse was later found with his shirt off. Is that first-aid? Or a sure-fire way of sending someone into shock?

--What was the motive? Why would two teens who were not bullied, did not hate everyone, and were not psychopathic suddenly decide to destroy the lives of a dozen fellow students and themselves just six weeks before graduation?

--Why would Harris and Klebold plan for a suicide mission and at the same time make normal plans for a post 4-20 future? Like seeking help on an English class essay from a teacher a few days before the attack, like making a date to see a movie the day after, like putting in a work schedule for the next week, like going to an out-of-town college with your dad to pick out a dorm room, like making plans to visit your old friends in New York.

--Where is the gun shot residue(GSR) test evidence for Harris and Klebold and the other suspects?

--Why was fingerprint evidence for Harris and Klebold not found on all but two of the hundreds of obects gathered at the scene? Whose fingerprints, if any, were found on the weapons seized?

--Why does the official story claim, without a shred of evidence, that it was Harris and Klebold that set the South Wadsworth diversionary bomb (an incendiary device that exploded a couple of miles away from the school at the same time the shooting started)?

--Why did authorities claim the two shotguns seized had no serial numbers when later documents clearly show they did have serial numbers? Why did they not try to find out who sold Harris and Klebold the Hi-Point 9mm rifle and the pump-action shotgun that were used in the shooting?

--Were the school administrators warned, as rumored? Who was Principle Frank DeAngelis looking for, as reported by one student who saw him running up and down the interior cafeteria stairs right before the shooting broke out?

--Why did a science teacher tell his students that they had been expecting a fire drill? Was a bomb found in a trash can on 4-19, as one source indicated? Were bomb threats phoned into the school on the morning of 4-20, as two others claimed?

--Why didn't the Final Report conclude that shooters entered Science rooms 1 and 8, when numerous shell casings were taken from these areas?

--Why didn't the Final Report mention the brief exit of a shooter on the east side, according to many eyewitnesses?

--If the person seen on the roof of the school was a repairman, as police claim, why do witnesses say he was holding a weapon? Were shell casings found there, as some said?

--Who scheduled 'crisis training' drills at Columbine High Schol(CHS) in the weeks before and what was the exact nature of this training?

--What was a Denver police officer and a JeffCo sheriff doing at CHS that morning before the shooting started?

--What does reputed video evidence from the library and admin office areas show? Why does local media refuse to release on-scene video footage from the first half-hour of the incident?

--What happened to all the evidence taken from the computers of the trenchcoat mafia gang?

--Where are dozens of missing interviews of students, especially those in the science hall? Why are there still thousands of pages of investgatory materials that have never been made public, including hundreds of reports of non-Columbine witnesses and tipsters?

--Why has the school district's own report on the shooting, which included the extensive disciplinary records of the trenchcoat mafia associates, not been made public?

--Did investigators even try to interview Harris' psychologist, the man perhaps best positioned to know his mental state at the time?

--Why did investigators show a remarkable lack of curiousity about connections with numerous similar school violence-related incidents occuring around the same time in the metro-Denver area and around the country?

--Why did LAPD and Los Angeles Sheriff's Office personnel travel to the scene afterwards? What was the subject of a 10-minute phone call made by the NYPD to the Jefferson County Sheriff's Office on 4-20?

--Who invited the FBI and the ATF to the scene?

--Why was the US Attorney's Office (federal) consulted on 'prosecutive decisions' for this local crime?

--Why was all but one of the seven 'investigatory' teams headed or co-headed by an FBI man? (the one exception was a team headed by a CBI(Colorado Bureau of Investigation) man, who was himself 'ex'-FBI) Was the entire crime scene 'federalized' soon after the shooting started, under powers granted by the 'Anti-terrorism Act' ("for the protection of the people and the state") signed by President Clinton exactly three years before- on April 20, 1996?

--Why did FBI special agent Dwayne Fusilier not recuse himself from the investigation, as his son helped make a Columbine school video two years before that eerily mimicked the shooting?

--What were two high-ranking military figures (a colonel and a general) in cami uniforms doing at the scene? Why was a memorial service at a public park afterwards ringed by military trucks? Who authorized a flyover by military jets and why?

--Why did the Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA) hold a four-day disaster training course 18 months before, "designed specially to adress the needs of Jefferson County," for future Sheriff John Stone and other county representatives?

--Is it just coincidence that the episode of CBS' television show "The Promised Land" that was scheduled to air that week featured a kid firing a gun in front of a Denver high school? Or that the plot of the WB's "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" for that week was a student gunman and a plot to kill every one at school? Or that MTV aired a Justice Department-produced program called "Warning Signs" about violence and its effect on young people on 4-22-99 (date was scheduled before Columbine)?

--When ABC's "20/20" news program decided to do a show about a disturbing new educational phenomenom called 'Death Education,' back in the early '90s, why did they choose Columbine High as the featured school?

[InfoWarrior]

Virginia Tech was also suspicious. Cho's sister worked for McNeil Technologies, which is run by the Council On Foreign Relations. Police stood down, allowing the massacre to happen for hours. Cho was somehow able to get a gun, even though he was an outpatient. There are so many questions about Virginia Tech, and so much evidence of a black op, that I'm not going to start listing all of it. I'll just give you some stuff for starters:

*Multiple reports showing that more people were involved

*TV programs which were eerily like the massacre happening shortly before and on the day

Thanks to starviego/starvosan for this info.

--4-4-07
CBS "Crossing Jordan," title "Faith", concerning a school bus kidnapping for ransom. One of the two hikackers is identified as a janitor at the school. The other hijacker is later identified as an ex-soldier, special-ops type.

--4-10-07
Episode of the CBS action series "The Unit" entitled "In loco Parentis**" depicted a Virginia school being taken over by gunmen.
Captors who make no demands take children of government officials and foreign nationals hostage in a Wash DC area school.
Quote from the script:
"I don't know if its Munich or Columbine." (Munich refers to hostage taking of Israeli athletes at Olympics in that city back in '72)

--4-10-07
CBS 'Criminal Minds' episode title "The Perfect Storm"
Episode is about a duo of sadistic serial killers, who enjoy making videos of their victims and sending them to the relatives. While explaining the dynamic of killing duos, the profilers mention Harris and Klebold of Columbine fame, and briefly flash their senior class pics across the screen.

--before 4-16-07
The movie "Higher Learning"(released Jan 1995 by Columbia Pictures) Played on cable channel in the days before the shooting. In it, a shooter (white nazi) kills himself on a university campus after shooting students.

--4-15-07
"Dateline NBC" devoted its entire edition to the story of the psychotic murderer John Hyde and the failure of mental health experts to heed warnings about the danger he posed after he was released from hospital care. In a series of shootings in Albuquerque, New Mexico, in 2005, Hyde allegedly killed five people... In a question that seems relevant to the Virginia Tech shootings, which began just 12 hours after it was broadcast, the Dateline show included the tag line: "Why wasn't a mentally ill man stopped before he launched his brutal rampage?" NBC is the same network to which the Virginia Tech gunman sent a disturbing multi-media "manifesto" about his motives.



==========

4-16-07 VTech Massacre

==========


--After 4-16
Fox network pulled that week`s episode of the crime drama "Bones," which features a body found on a college campus[/b].





















-------------
**One more thing about that episode of "The Unit":

At some point the members of the 'Unit' find out that the hostage takers are Chechnyan, and they mention the very real Beslan School #1 attack in southern Russia. One of the "Unit" characters says something like "Yeah, and today is the third anniversary of Beslan." However, that hostage taking incident occured on 9-1-04, which would put the 'date' of the fictional TV event at 9-1-07. Which is strange for an episode that was first aired on 4-10-07. Or are they trying to give us a little hint of what is still to come?

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/16/vtech.shooting/index.html
--Police have one shooter in custody, and as part of routine police procedure they continue to search for a second shooter, the university said in a written statement.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/S/SOU_VIRGINIA_TECH_SHOOTINGS_VAOL-?SITE=VARIT&SECTION=US
--(AP) One person was killed and seven or eight more were shot on the Virginia Tech campus Monday before police arrested a suspected gunman, officials told The Associated Press. Tech confirmed a suspect's arrest.....

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,266310,00.html
----Virginia Tech's Web site earlier said one shooter was in custody and officials searched for a second shooter as "part of routine police procedure...."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/04/16/DI2007041600763.html
Windermere, Fla.: Planet Blacksburg reports two additional people taken into custody.

http://www.planetblacksburg.com/2007/04/shootings_on_campus_result_in_death_and_injury.php
--2:52pm: The shooter was found in the basement of Norris Hall.
--According to a source in University Relations one person has been taken into custody in relation to the shooting that has occurred on campus. University Relations said there were unconfirmed reports of a second arrest late in the morning.

http://p076.ezboard.com/fcrtfcrtfmainforum.showMessage?topicID=3533.topic
I know a few people in VT. One of my friends was shot but he's fine. Here's some info I know from them.
-People are reporting seeing two different shooters, but cops are saying there's only one shooter and he's been killed. He did hear one cop questioning how one person could do this.

http://www.postchronicle.com/news/breakingnews/article_21275253.shtml
Virginia Tech Shooting Update 2 - A gunman reponsible for multiple deaths, is currently dead and a second was thought to be be on the loose at Virginia Tech in Blacksburg. Police have shot and killed the shooter in and now believe he was the only gunman although police are reluctant to connect the shootings. However, another individual was seen being arrested.

http://www.timesdispatch.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=RTD/MGArticle/RTD_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1173350761552
Shortly after 11 a.m., university officials told The Times-Dispatch that one person was in custody and another was being sought. At 11:19, one man was seen in custody and in handcuffs in the back of a police car outside Burruss Hall.

http://www.wlos.com/template/inews_wire/wires.national/3011ca1f-www.wlos.com.shtml
At an evening news conference, Virginia Tech Police Chief Wendell Flinchum refused to dismiss the possibility that a co-conspirator or second shooter was involved.

http://www.myfoxboston.com/myfox/pages/News/Detail?contentId=2939412&version=1&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=TSTY&pageId=3.3.1
A government official with knowledge of the shooting said the gunman had been arrested.

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article2455023.ece
Officials said the gunman acted alone. But at one point three people were seen being escorted away from Norris Hall, the teaching building where most of the shootings took place, in handcuffs. That raised at least the possibility of a wider criminal conspiracy.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18138907/site/newsweek/
blueiyed(student Laura Anne Spaventa) (11:02:05 AM): unconfirmed report from campous spokesperson: 2 people have been apprehended, 2 people killed

[Kyir]

That is possibly the most amount of crap I have ever seen shoved into two posts. A large amount of that is based on these "witnesses", who had just passed through what was almost certainly the most traumatic time of their life.

GFG.

[Wizzy`]

I like to write long posts so people think i'm smart.

[Kyir]

I like to write long posts so people think i'm smart.

My sentence is longer, therefor, I am the one who is smarter then how smart you claim to be.

[Dark7]

Once again kyir summed up your posts for me, im not going to read all that shit. I read one of thoes things and its still fucking theory!(stupid theory at that)
I wasnt even aware that v.tech/columbine were even considered to be a gov. conspiracy untill today. I guess u do learn something new everyday.

Pictures usually do the trick for me, not long posts.

http://img70.imageshack.us/img70/7194/idiot41423sy1.jpg

^infowarrior

[InfoWarrior]

"Intelligence" doesnt mean "they know it's going to happen." Even on the off chance that they did know absolutely everything that was about to happen, perhaps they dont want to freak out an entire country that has no military outside of a Navy that they were just bombed?

I never said it meant they knew it was going to happen. Though, if you have intelligence, and then explosions suddenly happen in the London Underground, then why would it be assumed that it was a power surge and not bombs?

Those are just 2 quick points off the top of my head--I havent even researched the London Bombings much at all. I know very little about them. But both of those seem like logic to me. Rather than jumping immediately to "ITS THE GOVERNMENT!"

I don't jump to that conclusion. I need to see the evidence. I've seen the evidence, and I was able to get a pretty good idea of who carried it out and how from the information that's out there already, which includes eyewitness testimony and documentation/reports.

I heard how it basically said nobody was involved except for Oswald, because he's a crazy assassin. Oh, you're right. Oswald is American. So it must be the government!

Bring those straw men on. I've never made connections as loose as that, so your satire holds no affect. And, you obviously didn't read enough about it. It concluded that the assassination was probably the result of a conspiracy.

Your hypocrisy comes from challenging the very government that allows you to challenge it.

That's not hypocritical. You're now basically saying that anyone who criticizes the government on anything is a hypocrite. That doesn't hold up. I'm not contradicting myself.


Sure, you're raising questions. But you're raising extremely loaded questions that to a young person would assume they were wrong to disagree.

Well, to that young person, I say make up your own mind. Do your own research. See if my conclusions hold up to your independent research.

Beyond that, you're jumping to conclusion about what it is that you "know," assuming your own "facts," and still implying yourself as "correct." None of which are credible.

If you speak of the CCTV image, then I know it is fake because of the anomalies in it. Just look at it and try to find these anomalies. I'm sure you'll find a few. I cannot see why you would say the things that I'm saying are not credible. All of that eyewitness testimony came from credible sources. The CCTV image analysis is just a matter of seeing what's wrong in the image.

And you still have yet to address the fact that all of your information was attained in the same matter as ours--through the media. And your oppositions information is coming from a lot more credible source--the government.

Name where you cite the government. Also, by saying that, are you implying that Cambridge Evening News and Le Monde and USA Today made up those stories?

Kind of paradoxical, eh? I just find it amusing that if you ever did overthrow the government or advocated for anarchy (god help us), you wouldnt be able to trash the government anymore. I find it amusing that it's the very thing you adamantly oppose that lets you adamantly oppose it. Thats all.

Who ever talked of overthrowing governments? I'm just pointing out lies told by the government, and calling for change.


Also, you realize by pointing the finger at me for using straw-man tactics... you're just using straw-man tactics too. Not to mention your entire 2nd to last paragraph was complete, whiny falsified BS that I never said. So who's using "straw man tactics?" Oh right, but that's just more hypocrisy I can point out on your end. Thanks for solidifying my argument full circle.

No, no, no. By making a straw man, one takes an argument that their opponent has never used and then attempts to knock it down. You've done that numerous times, and I'm just pointing it out, so I am not using a straw man argument. I don't see how you got to that conclusion.

[Learz]

Infowarrior: What do you do all day? You must have blown about 6 hours on this thread alone.
Also, take it from me, conspiracy theories are fun.... but don't believe everything.
Even if it makes sense.
Even if it's provable.

About 99% of that stuff out there is BS. Yes, you do find occasional gems in the rough, but please, don't try to shove it down our throats. If you REALLY feel this strongly about it, get a blog.

Mods: does Infowarriors IP match anyone else's?

[InfoWarrior]

That is possibly the most amount of crap I have ever seen shoved into two posts. A large amount of that is based on these "witnesses", who had just passed through what was almost certainly the most traumatic time of their life.

GFG.

And guess what? They corroborate. Confusion would give you a bunch of messed up contradictory reports. Many of the eyewitnesses are corroborated by other eyewitnesses. You're wrong.

I like to write long posts so people think i'm smart.

If the information is long, then it will have to be a long post. People don't make long posts necessarily to sound smart.

Once again kyir summed up your posts for me, im not going to read all that shit. I read one of thoes things and its still fucking theory!(stupid theory at that)
I wasnt even aware that v.tech/columbine were even considered to be a gov. conspiracy untill today.

If you refuse to read the testimony and documentation, then you have no grounds to disagree. You continue to basically go "LOL vtech/columbine conspiracy sooo stupid", yet you refuse to even check out the questions, testimony, tv 'coincidences', and reports.

[Dark7]

ok... before a mod finds out.

ITS BEEN ME ALL ALONG LOL


http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/1448/surprisebuttseckzvl6.jpg

[InfoWarrior]

Infowarrior: What do you do all day? You must have blown about 6 hours on this thread alone.
Also, take it from me, conspiracy theories are fun.... but don't believe everything.
Even if it makes sense.
Even if it's provable.

I know, I don't believe everything. There is a lot of BS out there. One needs to separate the bull from the good information/questions. I have posted lists of questions about columbine, eyewitness testimony showing more than one shooter to be involved, and reports of second shooters at Virginia Tech, as well as a list of tv programs that went on around that time, which involved shootings.

About 99% of that stuff out there is BS. Yes, you do find occasional gems in the rough, but please, don't try to shove it down our throats. If you REALLY feel this strongly about it, get a blog.

I'm not shoving anything down anyone's throat. This is an online forum. No one needs to click this post and read it.

[Kyir]

And guess what? They corroborate. Confusion would give you a bunch of messed up contradictory reports. Many of the eyewitnesses are corroborated by other eyewitnesses. You're wrong.




Except they don't, you have claims of multiple people, but none of them agree on how many. You also have official reports have no additional people, unless you want to say that our Government controls everything?

[InfoWarrior]

Except they don't, you have claims of multiple people, but none of them agree on how many. You also have official reports have no additional people, unless you want to say that our Government controls everything?

That argument doesn't make sense. What is more credible to you on the issue of Columbine. A report, written by people who weren't there, or a bunch of people who were actually there.

And, yes, they name different numbers of people. That still doesn't change that they are naming more people. Like, seeing only two people wouldn't disprove that there were three. Just means they didn't see the third person. Are you willing to just disregard all of this testimony and accept that Harris and Klebold brought over 100 bombs into Columbine by themselves? Read all of those accounts, and you will have no doubt that others were involved. There are just too many eyewitnesses to discount with the ol' "THEY WERE CONFUSED" claim.

[Kyir]

That argument doesn't make sense. What is more credible to you on the issue of Columbine. A government report, written by people who weren't there, or a bunch of people who were actually there.

There are just too many eyewitnesses to discount with the ol' "THEY WERE CONFUSED" claim.

No, and no, because again, none agree, so there is a very good chance that that's exactly what happened.

[meat.eater]

I have two relatives who were in the Springfield, OR, shootings. And I live about 15 minutes from Thurston High, so this hits rather at home for me.

--Why did numerous ear-witnesses say at least one attacker was firing a fully-automatic weapon?
Yeah, I'm sure the school was dead silent so ear-witnesses could pick out exactly how many shots were being fired and at what rate.

--Why did police concentrate on setting up a perimeter at the same time dispatch(via phone) is hearing the sound of gunshots within the school?
So police officers wouldnt die also.

--Why did it take police so long to enter the school, and why did it take almost three hours for them to reach the library, the area where the shooters were last seen? Who gave the orders not to go in?
So police officers wouldnt die also. I know, it's a hard concept to understand.

--Why did over 100 eye- and ear- witnesses dispute the official theory of only two shooters? Why did over 40 of those witnesses identify other participants BY NAME?
I'm sure the shooting happened in slow motion so people could stop and take a few minutes to study the people shooting bullets at them.

--If the two shooters committed suicide shortly after noon, as police claim, how come at least 35 witnesses saw or heard suspects/gunshots/explosions after that time?
Discrepency in time/testimony. Show me the testimonies.

--Why are there conflicting eyewitness accounts on the place and manner in which at least four of the dead victims were killed? Were victims being moved around? Was the crime scene being rearranged?
Must be the slow motion thing again. So they could study everything that was happening rather than that whole, you know, natural instinct to GTFO.

--If left-handed Klebold shot himself in the left temple, why was his suicide weapon found clutched in his right hand?
I have no idea. Nobody else does either. But yeah, because it was in his right hand must mean the government was involved. Good argument.

--How did students manage to keep seriously wounded teacher Dave Sanders alive for more than three hours while awaiting rescue, yet he was dead within 20 minutes of the police taking control of him? His corpse was later found with his shirt off. Is that first-aid? Or a sure-fire way of sending someone into shock?
He died from blood loss. Which takes several hours. Students didnt "keep him alive." The police were simply shortly too late to be able to save him. Blood transfusion cant really take place through shirts, though.

--What was the motive? Why would two teens who were not bullied, did not hate everyone, and were not psychopathic suddenly decide to destroy the lives of a dozen fellow students and themselves just six weeks before graduation?
Dumb argument. Not even worth discussing. Let's try to understand Charles Mansion while we're at it.

--Why would Harris and Klebold plan for a suicide mission and at the same time make normal plans for a post 4-20 future? Like seeking help on an English class essay from a teacher a few days before the attack, like making a date to see a movie the day after, like putting in a work schedule for the next week, like going to an out-of-town college with your dad to pick out a dorm room, like making plans to visit your old friends in New York.
Suicide isnt a "I'll pencil myself in for next Thursday" event. It just happens.

--Where is the gun shot residue(GSR) test evidence for Harris and Klebold and the other suspects?
None of us know how GSR research works, none of us are qualified to talk about it.

--Why was fingerprint evidence for Harris and Klebold not found on all but two of the hundreds of obects gathered at the scene? Whose fingerprints, if any, were found on the weapons seized?
None of us know about fingerprinting CSI, so none of us are qualified to talk about it.

--Why does the official story claim, without a shred of evidence, that it was Harris and Klebold that set the South Wadsworth diversionary bomb (an incendiary device that exploded a couple of miles away from the school at the same time the shooting started)?
Because something exploded only a couple miles away right when the shooting started happening. You answered your own question.

--Why did authorities claim the two shotguns seized had no serial numbers when later documents clearly show they did have serial numbers? Why did they not try to find out who sold Harris and Klebold the Hi-Point 9mm rifle and the pump-action shotgun that were used in the shooting?
Because authorities who obtained the weapons didnt have access to the documentation and serial numbers. You have no idea who they contacted regarding the weapons, so dont act like you do.

--Were the school administrators warned, as rumored? Who was Principle Frank DeAngelis looking for, as reported by one student who saw him running up and down the interior cafeteria stairs right before the shooting broke out?
That doesnt even back your governmentally involved claim at all. Its just a statement saying there may have been warning that caused the principle to run around. I would have done the same thing.

--Why did a science teacher tell his students that they had been expecting a fire drill? Was a bomb found in a trash can on 4-19, as one source indicated? Were bomb threats phoned into the school on the morning of 4-20, as two others claimed?
Same answer as the previous question.

--Why didn't the Final Report conclude that shooters entered Science rooms 1 and 8, when numerous shell casings were taken from these areas?
You didnt see the final report. And it's completely impossible for shell casings to be kicked around while people are running for their lives.

--Why didn't the Final Report mention the brief exit of a shooter on the east side, according to many eyewitnesses?
You didnt see the final report, nor were you there to be an eyewitness.

--If the person seen on the roof of the school was a repairman, as police claim, why do witnesses say he was holding a weapon? Were shell casings found there, as some said?
"Some said" isnt very credible. Show me witness statements. Show me pictures. Show me that it was a gun, not a drill (like a rapairman might have--gasp).

--Who scheduled 'crisis training' drills at Columbine High School(CHS) in the weeks before and what was the exact nature of this training?
Every high school has crisis training of some sort. Its scheduled by the school board.

[meat.eater]

--What was a Denver police officer and a JeffCo sheriff doing at CHS that morning before the shooting started?
I have no idea. I see tons of police officers around high schools.

--What does reputed video evidence from the library and admin office areas show? Why does local media refuse to release on-scene video footage from the first half-hour of the incident?
Oh, get real. For the same reason that we dont get footage firefighters pulling dead bodies out of 9/11 wreckage. You really want media coverage on people getting murdered? Showing actual people with actual families who actually mourned their deaths... being massacred. You're sick.

--What happened to all the evidence taken from the computers of the trenchcoat mafia gang?
I dont even know what this regards.

--Where are dozens of missing interviews of students, especially those in the science hall? Why are there still thousands of pages of investgatory materials that have never been made public, including hundreds of reports of non-Columbine witnesses and tipsters?
Because, like in every situation involving running around and fear, there are a lot of different stories. Many of them arent very relevant. Yes. There were some stories reported by kids that were probably off, just like there was on 9/11. But the majority, as determined by CSI's, that were relevant, share similar traits. Its so convenient how you overlook those accounts.

--Why has the school district's own report on the shooting, which included the extensive disciplinary records of the trenchcoat mafia associates, not been made public?
Once again, I dont know what this concerns.

--Did investigators even try to interview Harris' psychologist, the man perhaps best positioned to know his mental state at the time?
I dont know. Neither do you, apparently.

--Why did investigators show a remarkable lack of curiousity about connections with numerous similar school violence-related incidents occuring around the same time in the metro-Denver area and around the country?
Define "violence related" and show me the proof of them.

--Why did LAPD and Los Angeles Sheriff's Office personnel travel to the scene afterwards? What was the subject of a 10-minute phone call made by the NYPD to the Jefferson County Sheriff's Office on 4-20?
Why did firefighters from Eugene Oregon go to New York City after 9/11? Because they care? You dont know the subject of a 10 minute phone call, so done assume it. Who am iI kidding.. you dont even have proof of a 10 minute phone call.

--Who invited the FBI and the ATF to the scene?
Probably the CPD. That's what they do.

--Why was the US Attorney's Office (federal) consulted on 'prosecutive decisions' for this local crime?
It affected a nation. So it was treated nationally.

--Why was all but one of the seven 'investigatory' teams headed or co-headed by an FBI man? (the one exception was a team headed by a CBI(Colorado Bureau of Investigation) man, who was himself 'ex'-FBI) Was the entire crime scene 'federalized' soon after the shooting started, under powers granted by the 'Anti-terrorism Act' ("for the protection of the people and the state") signed by President Clinton exactly three years before- on April 20, 1996?
You do realize the FBI gets involved in mass murder, right? It's just what they do.

--Why did FBI special agent Dwayne Fusilier not recuse himself from the investigation, as his son helped make a Columbine school video two years before that eerily mimicked the shooting?
Because he's an FBI agent and it's his job.

--What were two high-ranking military figures (a colonel and a general) in cami uniforms doing at the scene? Why was a memorial service at a public park afterwards ringed by military trucks? Who authorized a flyover by military jets and why?
Once again, I dont know, neither do you. I'm pretty sure flyovers are pretty easy to get, though. We have one every year for 4th of July.

--Why did the Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA) hold a four-day disaster training course 18 months before, "designed specially to adress the needs of Jefferson County," for future Sheriff John Stone and other county representatives?
Once again, I dont know, neither do you.

--Is it just coincidence that the episode of CBS' television show "The Promised Land" that was scheduled to air that week featured a kid firing a gun in front of a Denver high school? Or that the plot of the WB's "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" for that week was a student gunman and a plot to kill every one at school? Or that MTV aired a Justice Department-produced program called "Warning Signs" about violence and its effect on young people on 4-22-99 (date was scheduled before Columbine)?
Yeah, entertainment and the government go hand in hand. :rolleyes: Perhaps you're looking at it backwards. Perhaps the TV was what pushed him over the edge. Who knows.

--When ABC's "20/20" news program decided to do a show about a disturbing new educational phenomenom called 'Death Education,' back in the early '90s, why did they choose Columbine High as the featured school?
Just stop for a second and realize that you just made a claim implying that the government was planning--in coordination with the entertainment industry, to shoot up a high school half a decade before it happened. My old high school once got on the news as an example of how our public high school pools needed better lifeguards. And then a kid almost drowned and had to receive CPR about a month later. They must have planned it.

[InfoWarrior]

No, and no, because again, none agree, so there is a very good chance that that's exactly what happened.

You're wrong. Many agree. Also, I responded to your argument of contradictions among eyewitnesses.

The following eyewitnesses implicate Robert Perry as being a third shooter.

1) Cyrstal Archuleta(EP1-197)
"...she did see one person throw a pipe bomb. .....She told me at the time she thought it was Robert Perry."

2) Seth Dubois(EP21-125)
"...Seth told Katherine(Carlston) that Robert Perry was seen shooting a girl in the back while leaving the library."

3) Wade Allen Frank(EP1-91)
"Mr. Frank told me that he thought origonally one of the individuals(shooting) was someone by the name of Robert..." "He stated that the person was tall, approximately 6'3" and kind of ackward(sic) and gangly."

4) Bryan Frye(EP25-69)
"He stated that the person he had previously believed this shooter to be was Robert Perry. .....In a previous interview, after receiving his yearbook, he had told his father that he believed the shooter to be Robert Perry. He also stated that the gunman had bad acne."

5) Courtney Haulman(EP25-91)
"There was three guys. The guy I remember most was the main guy. He's over 6' tall and has long curly dark-colored hair. He was wearing a trench coat. His name is Robert Perry."

6) Lacey Hohn(EP1-186)
"...can you identify or descibe who was shooting? ....Ms. Hohn said that she does not believe it was Harris or Klebold. Ms. Hohn believes it was an individual named Robert."

7) Bijen Monty(EP1-110)
"I asked her if she saw the source of the shooting. She told me she saw who she thought, at the time, was Robert Perry with a gun hanging around his neck. She said she never actually saw him shoot the weapon.

"She asked me if I had any information in regards to Robert Perry. I informed her I did not."

8 ) Tessa Nelson(EP1-113)
"I asked her if she saw the source of the shots. She said she saw a male, who she thought was Robert Perry, wearing boots, dark jeans with dark hair, walking down the stairs outside the cafeteria. She said the male suspect pulled a gun and started shooting."

9) Katelyn Sue Place(EP21-285)
Kate said, "It was (Redacted). I'm almost positive of it. I remember looking him dead in the eye. He was in my debate class..... . ...Dylan kind of looked like Robert, but Dylan doesn't have the long face. Robert's teeth are messed up and he was smiling and I saw his teeth then. Kate said that she has since seen pictures of Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris, and she said, "It's not one of them."(Referring to the person she saw shooting out on the outside commons.)

"She remembers him shooting Ann Marie(Hochalter). .... Robert was just randomly shooting. ...Robert was still shooting. ....Kate said that Robert shot Ann Marie before he smiled at Kate. ....She looked and saw Jason(Autenrieth) trying to help Ann Marie, dragging her away from Robert, to the side."

10) Lacey Smith(4470)
"On the diagram she depicts (Redacted) as walking in through the doors, past where she was sitting, and going in about as far as they north end of the school store. It was at that time she heard the windows breaking and then realized she was hearing shots.

"....she did not have any trouble indentifying PERRY when he walked past her. I asked SMITH how sure she was that the person she saw and spoke with was (Redacted). I asked, "90 percent sure? 50 percent sure?" Her response was "100 percent sure." I then showed SMITH a photo lineup which included a picture of Dylan KLEBOLD, and asked her if the person who walked past her was in the lineup. She stated he was NOT in the lineup. .....As (Redacted) passed her and was near the commons area of the cafeteria, she then explained that (Redacted) pulled a weapon out from under his trench coat and started firing into the cafeteria.

11) Brenton Hooker(16397)
"....he turned around and observed an individual he thought was ROBERT PERRY(ex-student of Columbine High School) standing outside the door just to the north of the main entrance shooting a pistol in his direction...." ....HOOKER described the individual he thought was PERRY as 6'8" - 6'11" in height, very skinny, tight black pants, black trench coat..."

12) Tyler Chenoweth(1830)
"A student named Jen Smull saw through the (science classroom)door during the incident and said that the tall suspect had curly hair and was the student who came to a Halloween party as a warlock. He thought of Robert Perry based on that description."


The following eyewitnesses identified a (Redacted) as being the shooter, with the description fitting Perry's:

13) Tiffany Lien(968 )
"Lien stated she believed gunman number one was (Redacted).... ...Lien stated that she was approximately twenty to twenty-five feet away from gunman number one and looked at him face to face for approximately 25 seconds, frozen in her tracks." Tall male had long black trench coat, black jeans, dark brown hair. His hair was kind of long and had curls. He was skinny and his shoulders kind of hunched over. ...She also stated that the gunman had bad acne.

14) Kristen Long(20245)
"Long said suspect definitely had dark hair and a large nose, thought it might be (Redacted)."

15) Rusty Shyler(5464)
"The individual was very tall. ...Shyler saw his face partially and thought based upon his dress and size that it may have been (Redacted). He was a hundred percent sure it was (Redacted). He described (Redacted) as being 6'6" to 6'7" tall and having lots of zits."

16) Chris Thierren(1207)
Saw a tall shooter with acne, large nose, shoulder-length hair. "He stated that the picture he saw was of (Redacted) and he was 'pretty sure' he was the shooter he saw that morning at CHS."

17) Erin Walton(4139)
"Erin Walton said she knew one of the shooters, and that he not one of (the) two Eric and Dylan. ...he was a senior named (Redacted). and he was very tall, had bad acne scars on his cheeks.... "


The following witnesses did not identify the shooter, but the descriptions fits Perry's:


18 ) Pat Caruso(2683 and EP17-13)
"Thought the suspect looked like a trench coat student he has seen before who had bad acne, ....curly long dark brown hair, wearing black trenchcoat.... and a tie-dyed shirt, pink or yellow."

19) Justin Norman(3929)
"Upon the hill we saw a tall guy with blond hair, acne, big nose and buck teeth.... the guy had a handgun and he shot one kid in the ankle and another who didn't move." (Note: Accoding to Norman in a later interview, this was Klebold, though the description is more indicative of Perry.)

20) Joanathan Ballard(1765)
"One of the (trenchcoated)kids(who was walking the halls during the shooting-implied to be a shooter) was about 6'5" or 6'6",.... I later saw on channel 4 or 9 news, I'm almost positive, that same man or teen, on t.v., acting all worried." (Note: this can't be Harris or Klebold, as they died in the shooting.)

[meat.eater]

I don't jump to that conclusion. I need to see the evidence. I've seen the evidence, and I was able to get a pretty good idea of who carried it out and how from the information that's out there already, which includes eyewitness testimony and documentation/reports.

Your evidence is not evidence. It is people saying things without credibility, and you choosing to believe it.

Bring those straw men on. I've never made connections as loose as that, so your satire holds no affect. And, you obviously didn't read enough about it. It concluded that the assassination was probably the result of a conspiracy.

----------
The HSCA concluded in its 1979 report that (emphasis added):

1. Lee Harvey Oswald fired three shots at President John F. Kennedy. The second and third shots he fired struck the President. The third shot he fired killed the President.
2. Scientific acoustical evidence establishes a high probability that two gunmen fired at President John F. Kennedy. Other scientific evidence does not preclude the possibility of two gunmen firing at the President. Scientific evidence negates some specific conspiracy allegations.
3. The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that President John F. Kennedy was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy. The committee was unable to identify the other gunmen or the extent of the conspiracy.
* The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that the Soviet Government was not involved in the assassination of President Kennedy.
* The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that the Cuban Government was not involved in the assassination of President Kennedy.
* The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that anti-Castro Cuban groups, as groups, were not involved in the assassination of President Kennedy, but that the available evidence does not preclude the possibility that individual members may have been involved.
* The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that the national syndicate of organized crime, as a group, was not involved in the assassination of President Kennedy, but that the available evidence does not preclude the possibility that individual members may have been involved.
* The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that the Secret Service, Federal Bureau of Investigation, and Central Intelligence Agency were not involved in the assassination of President Kennedy.
4. Agencies and departments of the U.S. Government performed with varying degrees of competency in the fulfilment of their duties. President John F. Kennedy did not receive adequate protection. A thorough and reliable investigation into the responsibility of Lee Harvey Oswald for the assassination was conducted. The investigation into the possibility of conspiracy in the assassination was inadequate. the conclusions of the investigations were arrived at in good faith, but presented in a fashion that was too definitive.

The Committee further concluded that it was probable that:

* four shots were fired
* the third shot came from a second assassin located on the grassy knoll, but missed.

The HSCA agreed with the single bullet theory, but concluded that it occurred at a time point during the assassination that differed from any of the several time points the Warren Commission theorized it occurred.

The Department of Justice, FBI, CIA, and the Warren Commission were all criticized for deficient job performance in their subsequent investigations, deficient in revealing to the Warren Commission information available in 1964, and the Secret Service was called deficient in their protection of the President.
----------



That's not hypocritical. You're now basically saying that anyone who criticizes the government on anything is a hypocrite. That doesn't hold up. I'm not contradicting myself.

Who ever talked of overthrowing governments? I'm just pointing out lies told by the government, and calling for change.

No, I'm saying anyone who calls for change on the basis that their government is evil and tells lies is a hypocrite. STRAW MAN! STRAW MAN!

Well, to that young person, I say make up your own mind. Do your own research. See if my conclusions hold up to your independent research.

There's a difference between asking questions, asking loaded questions, and implying answers. You tend to do the latter.

If you speak of the CCTV image, then I know it is fake because of the anomalies in it. Just look at it and try to find these anomalies. I'm sure you'll find a few. I cannot see why you would say the things that I'm saying are not credible. All of that eyewitness testimony came from credible sources. The CCTV image analysis is just a matter of seeing what's wrong in the image.

What if I look at your little image and say "bad picture quality" (like most security cameras are)? Then what?

Name where you cite the government. Also, by saying that, are you implying that Cambridge Evening News and Le Monde and USA Today made up those stories?

I'm implying that magazines release conspiracy theories because people read them, and the occasional moron chooses to believe them. And I think they are baseless and dumb.

No, no, no. By making a straw man, one takes an argument that their opponent has never used and then attempts to knock it down. You've done that numerous times, and I'm just pointing it out, so I am not using a straw man argument. I don't see how you got to that conclusion.

I dont feel I have been a straw man. So I feel by you calling me a straw man, you are using a fake argument regarding how I use fake arguments, just to knock me down. But we can continue that circle all day.

[Dark7]

oh man im running out of good pictures

[InfoWarrior]

Yeah, I'm sure the school was dead silent so ear-witnesses could pick out exactly how many shots were being fired and at what rate.

Automatic fire is pretty distinct, because of how rapid it is. If there was a chance they didn't hear automatic fire, why did many they say they did?

So police officers wouldnt die also.

Their job is to risk their lives for the safety of others.

So police officers wouldnt die also. I know, it's a hard concept to understand.

Read my previous comment.

I'm sure the shooting happened in slow motion so people could stop and take a few minutes to study the people shooting bullets at them.

If they were that unsure, why did they name these people? Common sense.

Discrepency in time/testimony. Show me the testimonies.

Patti Nielson checked her watch and knew it was 1:00, and she heard more shooting. This was confirmed by more testimony. The 35 accounts are in the Columbine report.

"I wondered why the SWAT teams weren't there yet. I thought at any time someone would come in and say 'It's all right to come out.' It didn't take that long to get to the school." Sometime after 1:00 p.m. Nielson says she heard someone return to the library and she heard more shots. "I didn't hear any conversation, any yelling, just rat-tat-tat.'' Nielson even checked her watched for the exact time.

CNN confirmed Nielson's statement, "One student identified as James, who called a television station on his cell phone from inside the school, said he had heard more shooting around 1 p.m., about two hours after the incident began."

Must be the slow motion thing again. So they could study everything that was happening rather than that whole, you know, natural instinct to GTFO.

Once again, why would they say something if they weren't sure. That's what you keep missing with that argument.

I have no idea. Nobody else does either. But yeah, because it was in his right hand must mean the government was involved. Good argument.

Don't be a dumbass. This is a simple discrepancy being pointed out. The gun is in the wrong hand, and fired from the right hand to the left temple. It is inconceivable to me why someone would attempt to shoot themselves in the left temple with their right hand, especially when their left hand is their dominant hand. What it suggests is that someone killed Klebold and planted the gun used to kill him in his right hand. Possibly Harris, or one of the other shooters.

He died from blood loss. Which takes several hours. Students didnt "keep him alive." The police were simply shortly too late to be able to save him. Blood transfusion cant really take place through shirts, though.

Students were talking to him, trying to keep his mind off the bleeding, and the help never came. They were not 'shortly too late'. They were hours late, when students were holding up signs saying that he was bleeding to death. No one said blood transfusion can take place through shirts.

Dumb argument. Not even worth discussing. Let's try to understand Charles Mansion while we're at it.

It is just another question in a mountain of questions.

Suicide isnt a "I'll pencil myself in for next Thursday" event. It just happens.

Well, they seemed to have it planned for that date, based on journal entries.

None of us know how GSR research works, none of us are qualified to talk about it.

I'm not getting into the technical issues to do with GSR research. I'm asking where this evidence is.

[InfoWarrior]

None of us know about fingerprinting CSI, so none of us are qualified to talk about it.

I'm not getting into the technical issues of the fingerprints. I'm just asking a question about it and the weapons.

Because something exploded only a couple miles away right when the shooting started happening. You answered your own question.

Though, they should have hard evidence that the bomb was planted by Harris and Klebold if they are to make that conclusion.

Because authorities who obtained the weapons didnt have access to the documentation and serial numbers. You have no idea who they contacted regarding the weapons, so dont act like you do.

Yes, I do have an idea. The Columbine Report shows what happened in the investigation, who was interviewed, who was contacted.

You didnt see the final report. And it's completely impossible for shell casings to be kicked around while people are running for their lives.

The final report is publicly available.

You didnt see the final report, nor were you there to be an eyewitness.

The final report is publicly available, and while I was not, others were, and they have given their testimony, which indicate this.

"Some said" isnt very credible. Show me witness statements. Show me pictures. Show me that it was a gun, not a drill (like a rapairman might have--gasp).

According to Donna Taylor (Mother of wounded student Mark Taylor), Mark Taylor saw the roof suspect, and said they were armed with a gun. I never said there was definitely casings found on the roof. Remember, 'some said' is 'some said'. Take it for what it's worth.

Every high school has crisis training of some sort. Its scheduled by the school board.

Isn't it quite the 'coincidence' that these drills happened just before the massacre?

I have no idea. I see tons of police officers around high schools.

Why would a Denver police officer be at a Littleton high school? That's the question. Sure there are police officers around high schools. But it's weird that one from Denver would be at Columbine that day.

Oh, get real. For the same reason that we dont get footage firefighters pulling dead bodies out of 9/11 wreckage. You really want media coverage on people getting murdered? Showing actual people with actual families who actually mourned their deaths... being massacred. You're sick.

I never said they need to air them, but this evidence should be available.

I dont even know what this regards.

Harris and Klebold were connected to the Trench Coat Mafia. This same group said they wanted to blow up the school, had a hit list, and was very violent. Eyewitnesses named numerous members of the group as participants in the attack.

Define "violence related" and show me the proof of them.

(In next reply)

[Dark7]

theres a lot of closed minded people on these forums, but it still amazes me that you wont even acknowledge the possibilty that the us government had nothing to do with these events.

[InfoWarrior]

Numerous incidents happened prior, during, and shortly after the massacre.

--Prior to 4-20-99
Chief of Police, McComb, Mississippi said a local trench coater--"carbon copy of Harris and Klebold"--"was doing planning"(of a school shooting?) Chief said the youth was in custody. "It is believed by the chief that there many be some connection."(21111)

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

--4-17-99
"West Metro Fire Investigator Dave Green advised Pomona High School students (Redacted) and (Redacted) arrested on April 17, 1999 with explosives. Also within past month (Redacted) contacted in early AM hours at Pomona High School in fatigues. Claimed to be on maneuvers..... There is no connection with this investigation."(17824)

Note: the "splatter punks", those three guys in black jackets and camo pants seen on national TV being arrested in Clement Park(next to CHS) were initially accused of a planned attack on Pomona High School(same school district as CHS) "based on numerous tips the police received". A 'phony" bomb threat would cause Pomona HS to be evacuated about a week later.

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

--4-19-99
There was a probable planned attack with many similarities to Columbine in far-off Evans High School in Georgia. The Columbia County Seriff's Department in Appling, Georgia questioned two students(Michael Buckner, 15, and an unk youth) on April 19, 1999(the day before Columbine) regarding death threats they reportedly had made at Evans High. Police seized guns at both boys homes as well as computers, and "Excalibur and Samurai-type swords". They both were believed to practice some type of witchcraft, and they participated in LARP war games. They wore trench coats over their all-black outfits with combat boots. {Note that all of these characteristics were shared with the TCM in Colorado.}

The Georgia authorities said there was no connection to the events in Colorado, which was "contrary to many news reports fueled by roumor, that are currently circulating throughout the region." Early local media reports, however, said the two groups were in internet contact or were visiting the same web site.
[FBI Report on Columbine, pg 8]

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

--4-19-99
Employee at Stein Elementary School got voice mail message on 4-19 that she saved for the cops:
"Yes, I'm one of the trench coat robbers, so you idiots and(sic) if you don't give up $10million we're going to kill everybody in the school. You have my warning."
The Stein Elementary Security Office says "It is believed to be young children."
(17977)

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

--7:30am on 4-20-99
Bomb found at Highlands Ranch High School(neighboring Douglas County)(7962)

"The sheriff's office also made two arrests in connection with a bomb hoax April 20 at Highlands Park Ranch School.

"Four days after the incident, the sheriff's office charged Ben A. Bennett, 18, and Jonathan Reich, 18, with the possession, use or removal of explosives or incendiary devices--a felony.

"One teen is a student at the high school and the other is a former classmate....

"As new of the shootings at Columbine High School began to spread, rumors began to circulate that the fake bomb was in fact legitimate.

"The bomb was not real" Deputy Kim Stuckenschneider of the sheriff's office said. "It just happened at the wrong time. That had absolutely no connection whatsoever with Columbine. It's just a rumor."
[Douglas County News Press, 4-22-99]

Cops said it was a "hoax".


==========

--11:15am on 4-20
Columbine Massacre begins

==========

--At 1:30pm on 4-20
A gun with ammo is found in the trunk of a student's car at Kiowa High School(Denver metro area). The owner, 17, tried to run away. Cops also said he may have threatened others, and that he vowed revenge.
[DP.com 4-22, see "How tragedy unfolded"]

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

--8:50pm on 4-20
A theft of four handguns occurs from the Jumbo Sports Store in the town of Lone Tree in Douglas County using smash-and-grab techniques. Arrested later was 18yr old Joel David Freiboth, ex-CHS student at 7700 South Garrison Street and an unidentified 17yr old in the 5800 block of South Garland Way. Four handguns were recovered.

"...the suspects do live in the area and have ties to Columbine High School" according to the Douglas County Sheriff's spokesperson.

"No motive has been established, but one possibility is that they were arming themselves because they were scared and wanted to protect themselves.

"With Freiboth was a 14yr old boy, a student at Columbine who claimed to be a witness to the shooting, authorities said."
[DP.com(DenverPost online) for 4-22-99. Header: "Two CHS students arrested"]

Cops implied it was a "hoax".

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

--4-21
In Colorado Springs(70 miles south of Denver), one Shannon Waltz and three other teenagers dressed "as gothics in black trench coats and masks were charged with trespassing after a disturbance wedesday afternoon at Coronado High School." Another report had them armed with 'firecrackers'. Three were students at another high school and one was a dropout.
[DP.com for 4-22, see "Notes from somber days"]

Cops said it was a "hoax".

[InfoWarrior]

More incidents:


--4-21 Shutdown of Kennedy High
Manager of a 7-11 near Kennedy High School, she sees 3 males, including one wearing TC(tall, slender, long blonde hair, shoulder length) enter her store at 1:55pm on 4-20, acting 'strange' and 'nervous'. They deny any knowledge of what's going on at CHS. Dana Baylis(8912)

Manager of 7/11 at South Wadsworth and Yukon has video of TCMers from Kennedy High wearing trenchcoats on 4-20-99. Other kids say there will be an incident at Kennedy High on 4-21-99.(19680)

"A 'potential link' to students responsible for the massacre at Columbine High School triggered the shutdown Wedesday(4-21) of Denver's Kennedy High School .... the boundaries of the two schools are adjacent.... However, they said it wasn't a bomb or bomb threat that prompted the school's closure, along with the closure of all ten Denver high schools....denver Lt. Frank Conner said Kennedy was closed primarily because of its proximity to Columbine."--Denver Post, 4-22-99

Kennedy High School student Aaron Ratliff's journal entry dated 2-22- titled "56 days to classified information". (56 days after 2-22 is 4-20-99) He said it referred to pot smoking.--(17854)

-A 15-year-old Kennedy High School freshman was arrested(5-14-99) for allegedly threatening to kill classmates and a teacher and blow up the Denver school. † The youth allegedly told two students about detailed plans to handcuff those on a hit list to desks and "blow their hands off or shoot them in the head," police said. "He also said he was going to go in the hallways and start shooting other students. He said it was going to be Columbine all over again."

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

--4-22-99
Chesterfield, VA, VirginiaRichmond Times-Dispatch, 4/23/99
Two Manchester High School students were charged yesterday with conspiracy offenses in an alleged scheme to manufacture explosive devices and detonate them inside the 2,400-student school with the intent "to kill more than one person." The students, ages 14 and 15, each were charged with conspiracy to manufacture explosive devices and conspiracy to commit capital murder. They're charged with conspiracy to commit capital murder and manufacture explosive devices. Chesterfield County Police said the stolen key and alleged bombing scheme at Manchester High School were not intended to copy the Colorado crimes, instead, the two teens charged were making plans to manufacture bombs long before the Littleton massacre.

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

4-22-99
R.E. Lee High School, Staunton, Virginia, Richmond Times-Dispatch of 4/24/99
Police arrested a 14-year-old high school student Thursday on a bomb-
making charge after a tipster alerted them to an apparent parallel
with the deadly Colorado school shooting. Prompted by news reports
of the Littleton, Colo., massacre, someone in the Staunton area directed authorities to a Web page the local teen allegedly had set up, the city prosecutor said.

R.E. Lee High School shut down for two days in Staunton, VA area because a student had threatened bombing. He was arrested after a home search turned up a pipe bomb and a floor plan for the school. After the arrest, the rumors were so wild that the school was shut down while it was searched.
From: rwt60 (emailname) *
04/30/99 10:03:12 PDT

[Although the arrest occured on 4-22, the fact that the suspect had a website setup may indicate it was created before 4-20. And what was the "apparent parallel" with Columbine?]

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

Petersburg, Newport News, and Culpeper, VARichmond Times-Dispatch, 4/24/99
Students have been arrested on a variety of charges in Petersburg,
Newport News and Culpeper in the wake of the deadly shooting in
Colorado that has focused attention on school safety.

-freerepublic
Five students arrested in Richmond VA and charged with conspiracy for contemplating a Columbine style attack.
From: rwt60 (emailname) *
04/30/99 10:03:12 PDT

In the Richmond, Virginia, area, at least 13 students have been arrested in recent days for making various threats. One police official said: "I've never seen anything that's quite taken on the hysteria that this has. Rumors are just feeding on themselves ..."

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

--4-25-99
"Two 16-year old males were arrested Thursday(4-22-99) for making bomb threats to Douglas County High School(on 4-21) in Castle Rock(Colorado), according to county officials. They claimed to be members of the Trench Coat Mafia, officials said."(Denver Post, 4-25-99 and FBI-1619)

"Someone called the school about 11am Wedesday and stated: "This is the Trench Coat Mafia and there is a bomb in the building; detonation time three minutes." Investigators got tips from numerous parents and students implicating two boys, a student and a former student, Stuckenschneider said. They were charged Thursday with making false reports of explosives and conspiracy, which are both felonies,...."

"The reason we're pushing so hard for felony coviction on this is so we won't get so many hoaxes," Stuckenschneider said."(Denver Post 4-23-99 and FBI-1619)

Cops think it was a "hoax".

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

--4-27-99(or before)
"Student found with pipe bomb at Dakota Ridge High School"(18665). Same student arrested a couple of weeks later.

Also,
--Shane Neuhouse "provided information on (Redacted's) criminal activity and (his)plans to attack Englewood High School."(21154)

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

-4-30-99
Faye "Rae" Holt, 34, of Westminster(Colorado), the mother of a former Pomona High School student, was arrested(4-30-99) on false reporting and felony menacing charges for bomb scare that forced the evacuation of the school. She is suspected of calling the school on 4-28-99, claiming there were bombs in backpacks and saying "There goes your students. There goes your school. This is not a Joke."

Witness accounts led police to Holt, Arvada police spokeswoman Susan Rossi said.
The task force investigating the Columbine shootings was called in to determine if the threat was connected to the events at Columbine, but police have discounted that, Rossi said. Authorities believe she was just unhappy with the school.
"She had ongoing dealings with the school ... and felt her son did not get treated fairly,'' District Attorney Dave Thomas said.

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

--1-1-01
Rampart Range- Proving ground for teen killers? Unless there's another Rampart Range in the Denver area, this shooting range was also used by another group of Colorado teen killers- the "Operation and Reconnaissance Agents" who in Jan 1, 2001 killed three people in rural Park County. The three teens involved were students at Palmer High School in Colorado Springs, and reportedly used the range to test automatic weapons. This case has many interesting parallels to the Columbine shootings: satanism, study of military tactics, accusations of mind control, a charismatic leader, facsination with knives and swords, etc, etc.

I wonder if they closed the range to prevent it from becoming some kind of tourist attraction to conspiracy theorists.

[InfoWarrior]

Why did firefighters from Eugene Oregon go to New York City after 9/11? Because they care? You dont know the subject of a 10 minute phone call, so done assume it. Who am iI kidding.. you dont even have proof of a 10 minute phone call.

All of those questions come from the final report, and who assumed the subject of the phone call? If the SWAT team had it covered, I don't know why the LAPD would be there. I'd also like to see their report on the incident.

You do realize the FBI gets involved in mass murder, right? It's just what they do.

Yes, but it really seems that the investigation was being minded on a federal level.

Because he's an FBI agent and it's his job.

There is a possible conflict of interest, though. The fact that his son made videos of trench coated shooters attacking the school might be a point of interest for the investigation.

Once again, I dont know, neither do you. I'm pretty sure flyovers are pretty easy to get, though. We have one every year for 4th of July.

The military being involved in a SWAT operation seems rather strange to me.

Once again, I dont know, neither do you.

These drills are just another 'coincidence', huh?

Yeah, entertainment and the government go hand in hand. Perhaps you're looking at it backwards. Perhaps the TV was what pushed him over the edge. Who knows.

It's called a psychological operation. Do some research on Mockingbird and psyops, and it will become very suspicious to you that these tv programs went on near the time the massacre happened (These kind of things went on with Virginia Tech as well).

Just stop for a second and realize that you just made a claim implying that the government was planning--in coordination with the entertainment industry, to shoot up a high school half a decade before it happened. My old high school once got on the news as an example of how our public high school pools needed better lifeguards. And then a kid almost drowned and had to receive CPR about a month later. They must have planned it.

It's called a psyop. They did it with 9/11 (The "Lone Gunmen" pilot episode). Do some research on Operation Mockingbird.

[Kyir]

--What was a Denver police officer and a JeffCo sheriff doing at CHS that morning before the shooting started?
I have no idea. I see tons of police officers around high schools.


There's one who spends every day at my school, there really is nothing strange here.

As to those claims, witnesses say wrong things all the time, what makes this different?

Plus, Occam's Razor proves me right.

[Dark7]

soo... how do these events link the us gov to planning columbine/v.tech at all?

[InfoWarrior]

Your evidence is not evidence. It is people saying things without credibility, and you choosing to believe it.

Eyewitnesses have credibility. They were there.

The HSCA concluded in its 1979 report that (emphasis added):

1. Lee Harvey Oswald fired three shots at President John F. Kennedy. The second and third shots he fired struck the President. The third shot he fired killed the President.
2. Scientific acoustical evidence establishes a high probability that two gunmen fired at President John F. Kennedy. Other scientific evidence does not preclude the possibility of two gunmen firing at the President. Scientific evidence negates some specific conspiracy allegations.
3. The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that President John F. Kennedy was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy. The committee was unable to identify the other gunmen or the extent of the conspiracy.
* The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that the Soviet Government was not involved in the assassination of President Kennedy.
* The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that the Cuban Government was not involved in the assassination of President Kennedy.
* The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that anti-Castro Cuban groups, as groups, were not involved in the assassination of President Kennedy, but that the available evidence does not preclude the possibility that individual members may have been involved.
* The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that the national syndicate of organized crime, as a group, was not involved in the assassination of President Kennedy, but that the available evidence does not preclude the possibility that individual members may have been involved.
* The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that the Secret Service, Federal Bureau of Investigation, and Central Intelligence Agency were not involved in the assassination of President Kennedy.
4. Agencies and departments of the U.S. Government performed with varying degrees of competency in the fulfilment of their duties. President John F. Kennedy did not receive adequate protection. A thorough and reliable investigation into the responsibility of Lee Harvey Oswald for the assassination was conducted. The investigation into the possibility of conspiracy in the assassination was inadequate. the conclusions of the investigations were arrived at in good faith, but presented in a fashion that was too definitive.

The Committee further concluded that it was probable that:

* four shots were fired
* the third shot came from a second assassin located on the grassy knoll, but missed.

The HSCA agreed with the single bullet theory, but concluded that it occurred at a time point during the assassination that differed from any of the several time points the Warren Commission theorized it occurred.

The Department of Justice, FBI, CIA, and the Warren Commission were all criticized for deficient job performance in their subsequent investigations, deficient in revealing to the Warren Commission information available in 1964, and the Secret Service was called deficient in their protection of the President.

They did conclude that it was probably a conspiracy, and that there was probably a second gunman. We now have E. Howard Hunt confessing on live radio before his death that he was in on it, along with the CIA. Didn't you hear about that? A CIA conspirator confirmed the theories of a CIA assassination of JFK.

No, I'm saying anyone who calls for change on the basis that their government is evil and tells lies is a hypocrite. STRAW MAN! STRAW MAN!

No, they are not. To be a hypocrite, they would need to contradict themselves with an action. Someone who says "You shouldn't fucking swear" is a hypocrite. I am not contradicting what I am saying with what I am doing.

There's a difference between asking questions, asking loaded questions, and implying answers. You tend to do the latter.

Well, I encourage people to make their own conclusions.

What if I look at your little image and say "bad picture quality" (like most security cameras are)? Then what?

Bad picture quality would not account for a railing bar going through someone, or someone having a part of their leg missing.

I'm implying that magazines release conspiracy theories because people read them, and the occasional moron chooses to believe them. And I think they are baseless and dumb.

If you took the time to read the articles I talked about, they weren't writing about conspiracy theories, they were simply documenting testimony. And, it's not right to generalize all conspiracy theories as 'baseless and dumb'. Sure, some are. Tupac and Elvis are not alive, and the moon landings were not fake. Though, the case on the London Bombings I am presenting is backed up.

I dont feel I have been a straw man. So I feel by you calling me a straw man, you are using a fake argument regarding how I use fake arguments, just to knock me down. But we can continue that circle all day

You've implied that I believe things that I never said I believed. That is using straw man tactics.

[InfoWarrior]

There's one who spends every day at my school, there really is nothing strange here.

As to those claims, witnesses say wrong things all the time, what makes this different?

Plus, Occam's Razor proves me right.

The question here is why a Denver police officer was at a Littleton school that day.

And, the difference is that there are many people saying the same thing. When many eyewitnesses corroborate, then they must have seen what they claim to have seen.

soo... how do these events link the us gov to planning columbine/v.tech at all?

Which events?

[InfoWarrior]

meat.eater: I'm sorry if I've offended you. I have nothing against you, and I apologize for repeatedly accusing you of straw man tactics. While you did misrepresent my argument from time to time, I was being a tad too harsh. Sorry. I just want to keep this debate civil. Let's not take to insults.

[Kyir]

Someone in school violated the law in Denver who lived in Littleton perhaps?

[InfoWarrior]

Someone in school violated the law in Denver who lived in Littleton perhaps?

It's possible. That would be a good explanation, though it would bring up another 'incident on the day' problem. It seems too much of a coincidence that similar trench coater shootings would be happening all over the nation at around that time. The presence of the Denver police officer is a question that needs to be answered, as is the presence of the LAPD, the absence of the school's incident report, and the presence of the military and North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

[meat.eater]

I could care less if you offend me, bud. I'm more concerned with you falsely influencing people who are unable to stand up against BS like I may be able to.

I'm not discussing mindless opposite-extreme arguments with you until you address:

Look, there are literally thousand of "arguments" that you people bring up as to how the government was behind the September 11th attacks. So many of you claim that we just "believe what the media tells us" and that there is "more than what meets the eye," but the fact is that your information is coming straight from a media source. An extremist media source. An unreliable media source. But fact (and I mean actual fact--not assumption or misinterpretation) is, all of your arguments can be refuted by common sense, which it's not surprising that you overlook, or they have no credible source behind them.

It's all a matter of who you choose to believe and how cynical toward the government you already are. The only real difference between you and I is that you choose not to believe anything the government tells you (but are more than willing to believe what other every-day extremist cynical conspiracy theorists shove in your face). Which isnt my problem or the governments problem.. it's your own damn paranoia.

Because besides from that little fact, everything else we say will just immediately take opposite stances. Yes, I think you're completely wrong for reasons that make absolute sense to me and most of the rest of society, but there's no need for me to tell you that anymore.

Please address the quote.

[uniquinous]

I've come into this with an open mind, to see if there's any merit to the evidence presented, and well, I've found none.

Automatic fire is pretty distinct, because of how rapid it is. If there was a chance they didn't hear automatic fire, why did many they say they did?Most high school kids have no clue what automatic gunfire sounds like.

But if you don't believe that, try this lil experiment on for size. Go to your local high school after hours. You know, the one with the long, narrow halls with solid walls and little sound dampening. Now, stamp your show hard and flat against the stone floor at 1 second intervals and have a listen. Anything can sound like automatic fire if echoes reverberate between close walls. ;)

Their job is to risk their lives for the safety of others. You are quite uninformed, eh? That sounds like when someone tells me "Your job is to stop people from calling me a noob!" well, no. The job of the police is in safety, not sacrificing their own lives for no reason whatsoever. Look at the name of this very game: tactics. Now, how well would you be able to secure the board in this game if you just blindly rushed your units into enemy territory? Think about it, please.

Re: The Teacher. Bleeding to death takes time. The kids had signs you say? Tell me: amongst the gunfire and the scrambling for their lives, when did they decide to break out the arts and crafts tools and make legible signs which could be seen from afar? :huh: You seem quick to blame some secret plot instead of sheer human stupidity and mistakes which happen at every single instant in a day. Is it more likely that there was some ridiculous plot to kill a teacher, and all officials on the scene were paid off or in on it? Or is it more likely that there was a crisis and people just plane ol' screwed up a few things?



Here's a few other questions:

Can you name any major national crisis involving gunfire in the past 2 decades which was NOT, in your opinion, a secret government plot?

If this was black ops covert elite pwntar plans, wouldn't our smartest, best, strongest forces be smart enough not to make some of the silly inconsistencies you point out? For example, if there was a government plot at columbine, why would our elite ops put the gun in the wrong hand?

I mean, you're so quick to point to inconsistencies - and that's fine -they're interesting - but they're not indicative of anything else. In fact, if you look at both possibilities to all of these events you describe (real catastrophe vs government planned conspiracy), you'll see that almost every single inconsistency you point out would be an inconsistency for either of the two possibilities.

So casing were found where there alledgedly weren't shots fired... And if it were the government, would you expect to see shells there? The answer is no for both cases.

But in the end, what is the motive for all of these school shootings if they were gov inspired?

So in the end, you're seen as a nutjob because in your world there's no such thing as an actual catastrophe, and because inconsistencies would still be inconsistent in your alternate explanation.

[l2oving Elve]

Duh it was George Dubyeh Bush. Not even kidding. He planned it all, everything in the world that has happened.

[meat.eater]

PS. In response to your answers to Columbine.

You seem to be a perfectionist and expect too much out of people. When a police officer asks you for a testimony and you're a 14 year old boy who's scared out of his mind, you tell him what you thought you saw. Furthermore, because of the heightened activity, he may have literally thought he saw this. Just because someone is labeled an eyewitness, doesnt mean their account of 100% correct. And the majority did label the correct things. You just like to concentrate on the people who didnt see the same thing (which will happen in every situation). Along the same lines of this are people that literally make up testimonies to achieve attention--kind of similar to making up conspiracy theories to get attention.
Similarly, you expect authorities to be perfect. Sorry, but no it isnt a police officers job to risk their lives to save someone else. That's called a superhero. It's their job to enforce the law. And you said it yourself about the bomb that exploded at the same time--it was an original assumption probably mentioned for the sole purpose that it happened simultaneously. When investigated, that was denied. You're making too much of it.

Finally: why should the evidence be readily available to an everyday bloke like yourself? We should have to convince you that the government wasnt involved by showing you evidence to prove otherwise. That is literally sad. Whatever evidence that was obtained wa viewed by the people who should be studying evidence, it does not need to be shown to you. Its the same with 9/11. I'm quite sure there probably are things that investigators have access to that we have not seen regarding 9/11. But for the same reason we have no idea what went on in area 51, we dont have access to it. But why on earth should you be allowed to see it? Opposing conspiracy theory is not a good reason. You have no reason to see what you are not allowed to see.

[bloodreign]

But why on earth should you be allowed to see it? Opposing conspiracy theory is not a good reason. You have no reason to see what you are not allowed to see.


Realy? Let me blindfold you and then rob you of everything you hold dear.

Why is the government allowed non-disclosure?
You would be singing a different tune if you were a widow or a father to any 9/11 victim or to any of the other massacres that ifowarrior has gone on about.

I think full disclosure would put to rest "conspiracy theories"
As to why the public is deemed unworthy or that it is unneccesary is beyond me.

Its like a little kid telling another kid he has no candy in his hand, the other kid knows there might be candy there, so he asks for some candy but is declined then he tries to open the other kids hand and is now struggling with the other kid....

10 times out of 10 there is candy involved.

[Geoffrey]

Meat owns.

[meat.eater]

Realy? Let me blindfold you and then rob you of everything you hold dear.

Why is the government allowed non-disclosure?
You would be singing a different tune if you were a widow or a father to any 9/11 victim or to any of the other massacres that ifowarrior has gone on about.

I think full disclosure would put to rest "conspiracy theories"
As to why the public is deemed unworthy or that it is unneccesary is beyond me.

Its like a little kid telling another kid he has no candy in his hand, the other kid knows there might be candy there, so he asks for some candy but is declined then he tries to open the other kids hand and is now struggling with the other kid....

10 times out of 10 there is candy involved.

One of the dumbest posts of the year. I lost an uncle to a car accident several years ago. You couldnt pay me enough money to watch any film that showed him die. So, if you honestly think it is on any member of a 9/11 victims family agenda to see footage of their dead relative, you'd be wrong. So dont speak for them. Because you're wrong.

The only people who want to see grotesque footage are people like you. Because nobody else feels like anything needs to be proved. "Putting conspiracy theories to rest" isnt really part of our governments agenda, thank god, because conspiracy really has nothing to do with the government--just paranoid peoples personal propaganda (go 4 P-words in a row!)

The government has always and will always privatize information. Not because they "have something to hide," but so ignoramuses like yourself dont know about information that has absolutely nothing to do with you. Why on earth would you deem yourself qualified to know everything?

Yeah, and that candy belonged to the person who was holding it, not the annoying little prying kid.
But since when did having information that you dont have = a corrupted, lying government? It doesnt. It just means you're out of the loop. Actually, it means you were never in the loop considering you have absolutely zero to do with 9/11. But, the government has a lot of information you dont have, and not just regarding catastrophe's.

[Wizzy`]

http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero13/pentagone/images/avion-incrustation.jpg

Come on guys, it's simple..As the plane was hitting the Pentagon, it transformed into a missile.

Duhh.

[Dark7]

well that looks like a plane hit it pretty clearly, just look at the sides of the building, their all effed up and shiz from the wings.

[uniquinous]

just paranoid peoples personal propaganda (go 4 P-words in a row!)

Not because they "have something to hide," but so ignoramuses like yourself dont know about information that has absolutely nothing to do with you. Nice! Good use of ignoramus in a sentence! w00tah!

[Learz]

Suicide isnt a "I'll pencil myself in for next Thursday" event. It just happens.
Heehee.

Anyway, people, go to your fridge, and have a beer.

This thread probably comes in second to the RDT for "most time wasted".

In the end, who cares?
Let's suppose that Infowarrior is 100%, totally correct about EVERYTHING.

Great!
...now what?
:dry:

You won't find any proof. Even if you did, the government can deny it. And if you press it, the government can obviously assassinate you, and then deny THAT.
In high-brow circles, this is called a lose-lose situation.

Gosh. You people really need a hobby.
*looks at Infowarrior*
A DIFFERENT hobby....

[the bird]

Anyone can be a killer. I know for a fact cause I hear stuff from my fellow marines about this shit. One of my ssgts killed a kid in iraq for walking over to him with some water. I turned out that the kid had a bomb in his chest and that ssgt didn't know he had one there.

I'm for one getting tired of hearing these conspiracy theories. Then a few nights ago I walk into a place to get something to eat and some guy came up to me talking about income tax and how there is no law for it. I see people burning our flag and shit and I want to get out and kick there ass. I'm like shit if u dont like this place then get the fuck out of here. One of my friends from the beach started that bs and he was been watching those youtube movies and he told me the usa is billions of dollars in debt with china and he can't even tell me why. I set there and ask him why, and he can't tell me why cause all he knows is we are. I'm like dude do some homework on the shit before u start talking about this shit cause i will ask why and all this other shit. ughhh I can't even talk about this shit with out getting mad.

[High Heat]

just paranoid peoples personal propaganda (go 4 P-words in a row!)

The government has always and will always privatize information. Not because they "have something to hide," but so ignoramuses like yourself dont know about information that has absolutely nothing to do with you.

Nice! Good use of ignoramus in a sentence! w00tah!

But more important, is the plural of ignoramus really ignoramuses? And to think, all these years I've been saying ignorami. :huh:

[Jeffery]

origami?

[Neeko-MC]

We know who did it them iraq SCUM..!! I live about 3 hours from london.

[TDP_Serp_TDP]

We know who did it them iraq SCUM..!! I live about 3 hours from London.
i know ill prolly get flamed for this but, assuming your talking about the london bombings neeko, it wasn't actually iraqi people, they were British people who mother or father or something like that originally came from some eastern country , but through all their muslim beliefs and views were, as the media put it "brainwashed" with all this stuff about Jihad n shit. Not that im defending them, personaly cant stand them since they attacked Glasgow airport :P

[Neeko-MC]

i know ill prolly get flamed for this but, assuming your talking about the london bombings neeko, it wasn't actually iraqi people, they were British people who mother or father or something like that, but through all their muslim beliefs and views were, as the media put it "brainwashed" with all this stuff about Jihad n shit. Not that im defending them, personaly cant stand them since they attacked Glasgow airport :P

Ok i think it's sick what they have done, so many people got hurt and stuff for nothing.

[l2oving Elve]

Bloodreign is awesome and funny. Meat is pretty cool too, I used to know him pretty good on a different account, if I remember correctly.

[uniquinous]

But more important, is the plural of ignoramus really ignoramuses? And to think, all these years I've been saying ignorami. :huh:

oh realist, the terrorist (see the similarity in names?) will have something to say about that linguistic debacle