Welcome to July 7th People's Independent Inquiry Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit.
You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.
Member No.: 17
Joined: 23-January 06
This thread should be deleted, it doesn't belong and is really just an irritant.
Of course the Towers were destroyed by controlled demolition, and of course a missile hit the pentagon, these theories make sense and have been proved: see eg Thierry Meyssan's 'The Big Lie' re the Pentagon, and David Ray Griffin 'The New Pearl Harbour' for the Towers' demolition. In contrast, Peak Oil is rather conjectural. Fortunately, Meacher is now going ahead with his showing of Loose Change video at the House of commons this June, its the best video on the subject - and No. 1 on Google's top 100 video list. One regrets that someone on this thread wrote to Meacher trying to persuade him not to show it.
Member No.: 46
Joined: 14-May 06
I didn't write to Meacher to pursuade him not to show it, I wrote to suggest he shows another film that is based on facts and not nonsensical, badly reseatrched theories.
Of course the Towers were destroyed by controlled demolition, and of course a missile hit the pentagon, these theories make sense and have been proved:
This is just an assertion and has neither been proven, nor makes sense.
Just ask yourself some simple questions:
1) Why would they go to the risk of controlled demolition when crashing the aircraft into the towers was more than enough to get what they want? 2) If the towers were brought down by controlled demolition why were explosions reported over the space of several hours? What explosions were they? 3) They had a hijacked plane full of people and wanted to crash something into the pentagon. Why on earth would they hatch a ludicrously complicated and risky plot of somehow swapping the plane with a missle or a drone, making the plane and all its passengers disappear, then crashing the missle or drone into the pentagon, when thery could have just crashed the plane into it instead? And Why do all the witnesses say they saw a passenger jet crash into the Pentagon? Are they all part of the conspiracy? 4) If it ever went to court and you based your case on these two issue, do you think you'd win? Despite having no physical evidence, unprovable theories and 99% of the scientific opinion against you?
I think the nonsense in Loose Change is seriously undermining the 911 truth movement and we don't need any of it to prove conspiracy.
Presbyterian Church publishes 9/11 conspiracy theory Malaysia Sun Tuesday 8th August, 2006
The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)'s publishing arm has released a book that says President Bush organized New York's Sept. 11 attacks.
The decision by the 160-year-old Westminster John Knox Press, the trade and academic publishing imprint of the Presbyterian Publishing Corp., to attribute the attacks on the World Trade Center brings into the U.S. religious mainstream a conspiracy theory long held by the world's jihadists.
In 'Christian Faith and the Truth behind 9/11: A Call to Reflection and Action,' author David Ray Griffin calls the United States the world's 'chief embodiment of demonic power, says he initially scoffed at 9/11 conspiracy theories.
But after investigating he concluded that the Twin Towers were brought down by controlled demolition, military personnel were given stand-down orders not to intercept hijacked flights and the 9/11 Commission, ostensibly created to uncover the truth behind the events of 9/11, 'simply ignored evidence' that the administration was involved in the attacks.
Griffin further asserts that such events such as that of 9/11 are part of a long history of 'false-flag attacks,' attacks orchestrated by governments against their own people to garner popular support for military action.
Griffin is a professor at California's Claremont School of Theology and Claremont Graduate University, and a codirector of the Center for Process Studies.
Member No.: 35
Joined: 7-May 06
What about all those who heard and felt bombs explode around the WTC?
Although I do believe that controlled demolitions were used at the WTC, I don't see such witness statements as very reliable 'evidence' - given the circumstances you can think of numerous explanations for those sounds, and I prefer more scientific evidence.
It could be a bomb, but for example it could just as well be gas lines which explode due to the fires.
Would you know the difference hearing those sounds, not being an expert in bombs, and being in the very unusual, hectic and traumatic situation on 9/11 at ground zero ?
I don't think I would....
0 User(s) are reading this topic (0 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)