A few debunking links

I see the anti-semitism is still strong in this thread despite the jew haters claiming there is none. Hysterical!

BTW, anyone ever notice how the irrational jew haters always leave out a key individual who is just as rabidly anti-jewish?

 

Don't you mean:

 

boy you aint kidding.that picture there of Bush kissing the Isreal flag really IS worth a thousand words.its a known fact the zionsits jews are mass murderers.thats why Bush is kissing that flag.He loves mass murderers.Its not just the Israli jews that were behind this all though you know? You keep talking about the Israeli involvement in it which is true but if you leave out factions in our government that were involved,you give them ammunition to use against you that you are anti semitic because yeah,while those peoples pics need to be there as people who orchestrated it,the other pics that need to be included in there as well are Bush,Cheney,Rumsfield,Rice,and the other neocons in the Bush administration along with Clinton as well.Clinton is involved in it up to his ears every bit as much as Bush is.

In fact,they tried to pull it off in 93 under Clinton in failed so they came back in sept 2001 this time to succeed in pulling it off.

 

911, you're always good for a laugh on a Monday morning and a reminder of just how utterly ridiculously stupid some people truly are. Keep up the good work!

 

Hahaha do you actually think he's kissing the flag? It's in the background. Oh man, Patriot you aren't lying. What a laugh, that is awesome.

 

[video=youtube;zhnNy5EsebA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhnNy5EsebA&feature=player_embedded[/video]

 

Well Holston, at least you're really changing it up. This video for a change.

I did a quick image search to track down that George W. Bush image in front of the flag as well. It was no surprise to see that the only websites that even referenced the image were anti-semite website.

 

And your still as full of it as ever.


Here are some Jews that don't think things are as funny as you do.

[video=youtube;xnqWs8pAsRk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnqWs8pAsRk[/video]

They do agree with you however, that anyone who suggests that any Jews could have been involved in any part of the 9/11 plot must be "racist".

Why is this not a surprise to me coming from these folks?

http://www.israelmilitary.net/showthread.php?p=110394

http://www.henrymakow.com/jewish_comic_insults_millions.html


What's really funny is that these same people get their panties in the awfullest wads when anyone jokes about how obsessed they are with money, even when they admit it themselves and even brag about their skill in relieving others of it!

Talk about ridiculous.

 

You can't get too much of a good thing.

 

Blah blah blah, I hate jews, blah blah blah, I have no evidence jews did it, blah blah blah conjecture blah blah blah gentile men blah blah blah

Did I hit everything?

 

Not quite.


Let me suggest to you that "those who hate our freedoms" are those who have taken them away from us.

http://www.businessinsider.com/ndaa-outrage-continues-to-grow-online-2012-1

http://www.examiner.com/article/how-ndaa-impacts-americans-human-civil-rights-and-martial-law

http://rense.com/general79/rduh.htm


It's worth noting that it was JEWS like the Orthodox Joseph Lieberman who sponsored these bills and rammed them through Congress......

just like they sneaked this little resolution through the House in some kind of fat watchacallit right when every one was adjourning to go play golf and be wined and dined by the Jewish lobby and their shiksa hoes.

http://www.thewatcherfiles.com/noahide_laws.html

 

[video=youtube;k6pEZf8P_RE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6pEZf8P_RE[/video]

 

[video=youtube;n_fp5kaVYhk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_fp5kaVYhk[/video]

 

Your video forgot to say that Larry Silverstein lost millions of dollars on 9/11, and afterwards. Which means your video is lie, which means you're lying.

 

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/silverstein.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/27/nyregion/27rebuild.html?oref=slogin&oref=slogin&_r=0

http://investigate911.info/silverstein.htm

SIlverstein's explanation for the "Pull it" remark was that he was referring to firemen. Since there were no firemen in the building that means his explanation was a lie.

It is also a lie that there was no damage done to building 7 prior to the collapse.

Bush and Rice lied about no one having conceived of the attacks.

Giuliani was warned to evacuate his bomb shelter in 7 long before it was announced publicly that building 7 was going to fall.

That means someone warned him way in advance of the collapse. That means someone had advance knowledge of 7's collapse at a time when they shouldn't have. The same thing is indicated by the insider trading that occurred. Large profits which were gained as a result of those pull options were left unclaimed. The identities of those who placed them had to have been known by the government because it is impossible to make them without revealing ones identity.
The government claimed they were of no significance since "no ties to" any terrorist organizations were discovered.
Then just who were those ties to?

According to the government , that is of no significance.

Who's lying here?

You know. And so does everyone else.

 

http://investigate911.info/silverstein.htm

 

Still can't respond to the numerous lies you've told and that have been pointed out to you? Wow. Piling lies on top of other lies doesn't do your credibility any good, does it.

As for your question of who is lying here, we all know it is you. I've proven that. You've run from responding to the proof.

So let's look at your latest batch of lies.

Wrong. Firemen WERE trying to control the damage to WTC 7 after the collapse as proven by firefighter testimony. They were ordered to pull back a distance equal to the height of the building due to concerns about the collapse of the building. This is well documented.

Yet nobody but Barry Jennings, a man with many conflicting points in his testimony, makes this claim. Not one firefighter ever claimed there was damage to WTC 7 before the crash which would have been a major concern. Not one tenant of WTC 7 ever claimed there was damage to the building during the evacuation after the second plane hit. The explosions Barry claimed to have felt have been determined to be the collapse of the South tower despite his claim to the contrary.

And then they admitted that someone had. What's your point? Do you have evidence Rice or Bush were told of attacks on buildings by hijacked planes prior to 9/11? Of course you don't. Therefore what Rice testified to and then corrected was the truth.

BWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! More proof you don't even have a frickin clue as to what happened on 9/11. WTC 7 was completely evacuated after the second plane hit. Even your own precious Barry Jennings described the building and the "bomb shelter" as deserted.

No, that means you are once again lying your ass off about what happened on 9/11. Making (*)(*)(*)(*) up and then pretending it is proof is just retarded, but it is the only thing you have left.

The put options on United were not claimed, but they know who placed them. It was an institutional investor who made a hedge bet that United Stock would fall. The hedge was that he purchased a huge quantity of American Airlines stock which they then lost money on after 9/11.

This has been explained to you before, which means you are knowingly and willingly lying your ass off. Anyone surprised? Anyone?

Investors. Do you not know the purpose of the stock market? Well, since you are clueless about leases, it would not come as any surprise you are clueless about the stock market being used to make investors money. Apparently you think the money can only go to terrorist organizations or some other nefarious organization. Funny, but completely retarded. Try again.

 

You know they wont watch that movie right? anything that proves them wrong and they ramble on senselessly they ignore.hee hee.

 

tHE octa's sure never get tired of getting their arses handed to them on a platter from you.hee hee.they got to earn that paycheck you know,they wouldnt come back for their constant arse beatings they get from you here for free as we both know.hee hee.thats so very true.they cant get around that one no matter how many tiems they try to weasel out of it that all of a sudden silverstein says that he was referring to the firefighter pulling out when he said to pull it.somehow all of a sudden the firefighters become an IT.

 

Hey Holston,have you seen this video by chance?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lv9K1QWlESA

further proof this fraud Obama is just that,a fraud,Hope and change.yeah thats real change alright bowing down to Israel like he does just like Bush.No difference whatsoever.Nothing like hearing it from the horses mouth how he bows down to israel.

as you can see in that video,the bought off and paid for members of congress give the israel prime minister a loud standing ovation after his speech.You would never catch them giving that loud thunderous ovation for the leader of new zealand.I guarantee you that.thats because they are bought off by the zionists.check your pm.got a question to ask you.

 

Patriot pretty much summed it up, but on top of that Barry Jennings has openly stated he does not believe 9/11 was a conspiracy. He has made it appoint to appear on a BBC documentary, and other television shows stating that he is anti-woo. Using him as a witness is completely ridiculous. Since you guys love youboob so much, check out a post at JREF with multiple links to youboob. This is straight from Berry Jennings himself.

<<<Mod Edit: Personal Attack Removed>>>

 

Barry Jennings did not "state openly that he did not believe 9/11 was a conspiracy", at least not in the films in which he allegedly retracted his earlier statements.

I watched the videos which the JREFers say he does this. He did not.

What he said was that he told them that he didn't say he was "stepping over dead bodies". That much he denied. However the fellow who did the original interview has him on tape clearly indicating that very thing.

Jennings also replied that he did not believe our government was capable of doing conspiring to kill it's own citizens.

Neither do I, depending on how you are defining "government". If you define the government as the system of laws and regulations which include the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, then no the government is not capable of conspiring to kill it's own citizens. That is, up to the point in which W Bush and Prez Yomamma nullified them.

NOW our government very well can, not only arrest, imprison, and torture it's own citizens, but can KILL them as well, all on the simple word of His Imperial Majesty, the Prezzzz.


IF by "government" you mean to include every Mother's son who is employed by the government, then I would so NO, our "government" is NOT capable of conspiring to kill it's own citizens. It is far to massive for that. There is no way you could fit them all into the same room. Even if you could, there is no way that you could get that many people to agree on anything, let alone murder.

If by "government" you mean a select cabal of individuals employed in government positions who all share the same ideological objectives or who would stand to profit mutually from such an enterprise, then YES our government IS capable of killing it's own citizens.


Operation Northwoods is one example which proves this capability.


It is also fairly well known that the "military industrial complex" was guilty of prolonging WWI because it was so profitable for them. One may ask "Who IS the 'military industrial complex?" Could anyone produce a current list of names for all the members of the "military industrial complex". One can easily see what a daunting task that providing a comprehensive list of it's members would be, for there exist many underlings who simply follow orders as well as varying degrees of involvement among participants at the top as well.

Nevertheless, few people would deny that a "military industrial complex" DOES exist. One of those people would have been Dwight Eisenhower who I believe was responsible for coining the term.


There are some entities for which precise definitions are lacking. One example would be the exact population of a large city. This changes from moment to moment and can never be exact except within acceptable working limits.


If one is allowed to use the term government loosely to refer to a number of people who are employed within the government and be selective about them, then one could say that the "government" was capable of a conspiracy insofar as one could find individuals within it who would conspire to commit murder.

To say that it is impossible for anyone to enter into the government who is capable of such a thing is almost as ridiculous as saying that it is impossible for a politician to lie. We all know this isn't true.

We also know that intelligence agencies have routinely assassinated political targets and those who were considered enemies or obstructions. No one can deny for example that Israel has been guilty of this. No one would except possibly De Bunkos or pro Zionists. They live in a fairy tale world where all the good guys wear white hats and Jews from the Lone Star State of Israel while all the bad guys wear black hats and live in Muslim countries. One can do no wrong and the other can do nothing but evil.

Any rational person who admits the nature of humans everywhere can see how laughable this concept is. But in war one is forced to reduce everyone and everything down to these absurd terms.



Getting back to Jennings. IF it is true, as Jennings said, that something blew out the stair well as he earlier reported, and IF his statement about being told not to look down ("You can tell when you are stepping over bodies".) and IF it is true that these events occurred BEFORE either tower fell, and BEFORE the second plane even struck, THEN that totally destroys the "official" story being told about what caused tower 7 to fall. This in turn destroys the government story, the NIST report, and everything which followed, including the reason for entering into the illegal wars which were launched.


NOW. IF the above IS TRUE, THEN it can mean nothing else except that there WERE conspirators, and that these people WERE capable of conspiring to commit murder.

NOW............what FOOL is going to believe that those people, after having gone to all that trouble, being guilty as they were would allow the testimony of one or two people to throw a wrench into their beautifully executed plan?

And would Barry Jennings be FOOL enough not to realize that if this were true, that no "government" protection plan would save him from being silenced?


It is also true that the fellow who did the original interview with Jennings also hired a private investigator to locate Jennings after Jennings dropped out of sight and refused to say any more. The interviewer DID want Jennings to corroborate what he said earlier didn't he? Of course he did. What else could he want?

According to him, not only did Jennings clam up and close the door, but the very private investigator who was hired to probe further called him up and abruptly dropped the case, telling his employer not to contact him any further about the case.

It occurs to me that those who would want Jennings to keep his mouth shut did not want to leave any loose ends dangling around and were not willing to accepts Jennings promises to do that.

To De Bunkos all of this is just too far fetched even though countless examples of such pressures being brought to bear on people in other cases resembling this one can be cited. But then De Bunkos are basing everything they say on the a priori assumption that no "government conspiracy" was possible and that if one ever occurred that at least one or two people would not be able to resist the temptation to blab about it.

One may recall that the Jew who ratted Nixon out, alias "Deep Throat" remained silent for decades, that mob members routinely keep their mouths shut OR ELSE, and more specifically that a conspiracy DID, according to De Bunkos themselves occur in which Osama Bin Laden and numerous others not only kept mum, but avoided detection by the combined forces of US and Israeli intelligence, the CIA, the FBI, and the NSA!

 

To this day we only have uncertifiable rumors as to who actually was responsible for 9/11. The FBI has admitted that they have no solid evidence linking Bin Laden to 9/11. We also have films of US Jews masquerading to be Arab terrorists producing films to that effect.

We have known mistranslations of things that Bin Laden said as well as mistranslations given for the President of Iran.

To deny that Jews are incapable of these kinds of falsifications is to say that Jews are incapable of lying at all. And how can one make such a preposterous assertion in light of the Kol Nidre prayer which Jews make for themselves to recuse themselves from such?


In addition there are also the suspicious deaths of the Washington Madam who WAS scheduled to testify but who "committed suicide" right after making a public announcement that she had no such intention of killing herself. Ask any large city detective whether organized crime uses this means of disposing of people and they will confirm that they do. De Bunkos would have us believe that they always leave their calling card.


Then there was the dentist fellow who was "blabbing" about having seen one or more of the terrorists BEFORE 9/11 and of having tried to report him to authorities to no avail.

Then there are the testimonies of Susan Lindauer and Lt Col Anthony Shaffer. Lindauer was imprisoned and Shaffer had his books burned and was smeared. There is also Professor Jones who was forced to retire.

What we have observed is the systematic character assassination of anyone and everyone who has openly expressed doubts about the official account of 9/11. The fact that this effort to destroy their careers and their reputation is universally supported in the media ought to tell anyone with common sense that this could not happen so consistently with such frequency without a media "conspiracy" to silence them all.

Do I think the local New lady is involved in this "conspiracy" and that she receives a regular memo containing instructions as to how to handle this issue? No. She's far too dingy for that. But like most people, she's not so insensitive that she's unable to take a hint or to apprehend intuitively what is expected from her by the superiors who allow her to keep her comfortable position.

Everyone knows what peer pressure is. And every free thinker surely has experienced the force of "political correctness".

The question then arises, WHO determines what is "politically correct"? Is there a list of people who gather periodically to decide what's in and what's out? NO. But we can derive a clue from Who is behind these formulations by considering what becomes of people who for one reason or another run contrary to the machine that manufactures the rules. One might take the example of what became of Jimmy Carter after he published his book "Peace Not Apartheid". Was he not vilified by the media? And isn't the name of this once darling of Liberalism considered a dirty word almost as much as Richard Nixon? Isn't he lumped in the same category with Pat Buchanan who is regularly called a "Nazi" for his attitudes?


It doesn't take that much intelligence to put these things together and see the pattern, just a little information that you won't get from mainstream media.

 

The main conspiracy theory about 9/11 is that our government was involved in the attack. Jennings claiming our government wasn't involved is denying the conspiracy. There are a small, anti-semitic segment that likes to try and blame the Jews, but they get very little traction because their overwhelming bigotry makes it clear to everyone that they are talking out their ass.

You know someone is about to make an incredibly stupid remark when they try to redefine the term outside the standard definition used in the context provided.

Another bull(*)(*)(*)(*) claim.

Yet you are perfectly willing to believe in a conspiracy that would involve thousands? That's rich!

So show us who took the orders and what the orders are. Go ahead. You've made the claim. Why don't you back up your bull(*)(*)(*)(*) for once? It would be a refreshing change of pace. Or are you trying to convince us Bush was up in the towers wiring explosives while Cheney was out planting evidence in Shanksville?

 

Bull(*)(*)(*)(*). Northwoods proves we can think up of stuff like Northwoods. There is a huge difference between having a plan and executing that plan. I don't expect you will admit the difference, but everyone knows.

To say the government consists of thousands of people willing to kill 3000 Americans and remain perfectly quiet about the whole thing is equally ridiculous, yet you keep doing so. What does that tell you? It tells me you KNOW your claims are bull(*)(*)(*)(*), but wish to keep up the lies to push your anti-semitic agenda.

Israel has never hidden the fact that if they are going to go after you that they will go after you. It is also well known that there are covert operations inside the government. It takes a special kind of retard to not be able to differentiate between a covert operation involving very few people and killing 3000 people in a huge conspiracy involving thousands. That's not exactly "covert" is it? Nope.

So, since you want to talk about rational people and human nature, what are the odds of having thousands of people involved in a conspiracy, yet be able to keep perfect silence for over a decade? Any rational person would say it would be near to impossible to do such a thing with a couple hundred people. Some say you can't keep a conspiracy like that a secret with more than a handful of people. It is human nature to want to divulge that kind of information, yet you wish us to not only believe there were thousands of people involved who are all so dedicated to Bush et. al. that they would forego any fame / money / noteriety for exposing the conspiracy even across administrations? Wow. You sure ask a lot out of us rational people.

That is a (*)(*)(*)(*)-ton of ifs, most of which have been proven to be false. Not to mention all the other evidence you so conveniently ignore that backs up the official story.

You start with bull(*)(*)(*)(*), you end with bull(*)(*)(*)(*). You've failed to make your initial claim, and now you wish to use your initial claim to prove all other claims? That is absolutely retarded.

Yet the above is proven to be false even by Jennings' own words. Of course, truthers never wish to believe any clarifications after anything they like has been said.

So by your (*)(*)(*)(*)ed up logic, they would have to kill the thousands of people involved in the conspiracy to make sur ethey don't "throw a wrench into their beautifully executed plan". Your bull(*)(*)(*)(*) is patently false by your own logic.

Except Barry wasn't in on the conspiracy. Nobody but a bunch of idiots were taking his claims out of context and pretending Jennings' testimony proves some kind of conspiracy that Jennings himself didn't believe.

More conspiratard crap.

If I had a bunch of truthtards constantly hounding me, I would clam up as well. We've seen how killtown harassed people. I can imagine how the rest are.

So why didn't the government just off him within a couple days of 9/11? Some convenient accident somewhere. Hell, they are already guilty of three thousand murders, what's one more? And the only people who would believe it was the government are truthers who nobody believes in the first place. Yet he was allowed to live and keep on talking. More evidence your bull(*)(*)(*)(*) is false.

It goes far beyond that. We actually demand a little thing called EVIDENCE before we will believe some **** and bull story about a conspiracy involving thousands where the people telling the **** and bull story can't even back up their own claims or admit to their own lies. Yeah. Truthers have a lot of credibility. They are probably the only group with less credibility than seedy politicians.

Wow. Another bunch of completely bull(*)(*)(*)(*) lies by holston. Mark Felt was not Jewish. His grandfather was a Baptist minister! Second, Felt spilled the beans within months of Watergate. Where are the anonymous people involved in the conspiracy or know about the conspiracy? You don't have a single person stepping forward for something as major as 9/11, yet people are willing to step forward for other, much less serious crimes? How does that work? It doesn't. Thanks for proving once again that there would have been leaks by now, even if they were anonymous.