CIA Malcolm Howard Deathbed Confession - I Brought Down WTC7

Discussion in '9/11' started by Bob0627, Jul 15, 2017.

  1. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,017
    Likes Received:
    1,065
    Trophy Points:
    113
    True there are some who have that kind of mentality but they are a rare few, certainly not even a small minority. As anyone can see, nearly all the comments following the videos on YouTube are from those who believe WTC7 was controlled demolished. I don't believe most of these people have a desire to believe 9/11 was an inside job, they just believe it on their own volution.

    The bigger problem is the US government constantly insulting the intelligence of rational people by feeding them fairy tales such as "they did this because they hate our freedoms" and it was a "failure of imagination". They are the biggest perpetrators of disseminating fake stories for propaganda purposes to try to support their agenda.

    The CIA story, even if it's a hoax, serves to promote the 9/11 issue. There are still so many people who are unaware that WTC7 was destroyed on 9/11 and the controversy surrounding it. It's important that people get educated on the subject. Preferably of course not with fake news as the source but it does give them food for thought.
     
  2. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,017
    Likes Received:
    1,065
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well to be accurate, according to the official story, only 3 out of 4 teams were successful (75%). The 4th team was thwarted by an act of incredible heroism. The 3 teams however did score a 100% accuracy rate, totally unmolested by the greatest military defense system on the planet. This is also what I mean by official government fake news.
     
    Last edited: Jul 19, 2017
  3. HonestJoe

    HonestJoe Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2010
    Messages:
    10,855
    Likes Received:
    1,525
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I’m not convinced. I don’t see how anyone could so easily and unconditionally believe something like this video. When you’re talking about extreme claims relating to an established controversial topic from clearly questionable sources, scepticism should be natural (after all, that’s your position). I don’t think anybody could blindly accept this kind of thing without having a predetermined bias in favour of it.

    I’d question “bigger”. It’s really all part of the same problem and I don’t see any justification in drawing such a stark line between propaganda supporting a government line and propaganda challenging it.

    I don’t think it does you line any favour to be honest. The kind of rational people you’d need to appeal to are going to be turned off by hoaxes and fakes, making it even more difficult to catch their attention when (if!) you have anything legitimate to raise. Even if you posted a real death-bed confession in the future, we’re all going to remember that time you posted the hoax one and be less inclined to believe it.
     
  4. Capt Nice

    Capt Nice Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2017
    Messages:
    5,475
    Likes Received:
    4,088
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    WOW. If it's being circulated on the web it must be true.
     
    Last edited: Jul 19, 2017
    ArmySoldier likes this.
  5. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,017
    Likes Received:
    1,065
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If you read the comments, many do believe the video is true. IMO they don't believe it's true because they all want it to be true, they believe it's true because they've believed WTC7 was controlled demolished well before they saw this video. I don't see it as an unconditional belief, I see it more as a belief based on guilt by association.

    Correct. As you described in my case, the clearly questionable source is the US government and the extreme claim is the official 9/11 narrative. But that doesn't mean for me that I'm biased toward any specific theory that I blindly accept as true just because it directly contradicts the official 9/11 narrative. I'm still looking for legitimate evidence (preferably the physical kind supported by science and/or reliable eyewitnesses if and when available) regardless of the overwhelming circumstantial evidence.

    There is not one iota of comparison for me. The US government has the power and the means that no other entity has. When the US government disseminates propaganda/fake news it's always for the purpose of getting the ignorant/gullible to support its agenda. And the US government will carry out that agenda on the basis that its story is purported to be fact. When other entities disseminate propaganda/fake news, it does not have anywhere near the effect that the US government has.

    Maybe. Personally I'd rather bring attention to the controversy as often as possible rather than remain silent. As they say SILENCE = DEATH and ignorance is not bliss.
     
  6. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,017
    Likes Received:
    1,065
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And if the US government says so it must be true, right? In this day and age (and probably always) it's often difficult to determine what is fact and what is fiction.
     
  7. psikeyhackr

    psikeyhackr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,079
    Likes Received:
    38
    Trophy Points:
    48
    It is merely interesting and amusing. Even if it it true what evidence could he provide? He would have had to have kept it hidden from the CIA for years. So unless he provides that, it goes in the same category with the BBC announcing the collapse before it happened. Without the requirement of a time machine. :party:

    psik
     
    Last edited: Jul 19, 2017
  8. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,017
    Likes Received:
    1,065
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If it's a hoax the only value it has is what I believe it has, to bring the issue to the forefront. If it's not a hoax, then it's a lot more than interesting or amusing.

    Details such as how exactly was it accomplished, names of accomplices, who authorized/ordered it, who pulled the trigger, when, why, under what pretext, dates, etc. He is unlikely to have any physical evidence but might be able to point to how that could be uncovered, if possible.

    What does that mean? The claim is that he is ex-CIA.

    Not really, if it's real he can provide the above information and that would be vastly different than the BBC's premature announcement. But it might also lead to the answer for that premature announcement, which BTW, came from 4 different MSM sources. If it is a hoax then there's no relationship at all.
     
  9. Capt Nice

    Capt Nice Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2017
    Messages:
    5,475
    Likes Received:
    4,088
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Sorry, I was being sarcastic.
     
  10. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,017
    Likes Received:
    1,065
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Actually I have to contradict myself. There is still a relationship, a positive one. It makes people aware that WTC7 was reported destroyed before it actually was, for those who weren't aware before. And unlike the video that is in question, it's documented reality. It's also extraordinary, just like 3 buildings being virtually leveled in seconds all on the same day. When you have some coincidences, you can attribute them to coincidences, when you have an uncanny amount of them, some of them so extremely convenient, as the video says, "too perfect", these are not coincidences, that is incredibly obvious.
     
    Last edited: Jul 19, 2017
  11. psikeyhackr

    psikeyhackr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,079
    Likes Received:
    38
    Trophy Points:
    48
    That might be something that is verifiable. But how do we know he isn't just a disgruntled ex-employee with a grudge and nothing to lose now that he is dying? But if he provides verifiable leads then that qualities as evidence.

    psik
     
    Last edited: Jul 19, 2017
  12. psikeyhackr

    psikeyhackr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,079
    Likes Received:
    38
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I know. This is something that qualifies as worth being sarcastic about until it turns up worthwhile leads.

    psik
     
  13. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,017
    Likes Received:
    1,065
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If it was it likely would have already been verified or rejected.

    We don't know anything for a fact, never mind that.

    That's what I said, so far all we have is an unverified story and a couple of 3rd party YouTube narrations of the same story. With nothing more to go on it can only be treated as highly suspect.
     
  14. Cornergas

    Cornergas Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2017
    Messages:
    363
    Likes Received:
    148
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Gender:
    Male

    Right. But Bush promoted General Myers the man in charge..for incompetence, or being a good little boy and covering up 9/11 and allowing it to happen?
     
  15. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    5,616
    Likes Received:
    1,901
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I find it absolutely credible, and consistent with this government today. The government takes care of its own. Many books have been written about the CIA being in the drug business, Iran-Contra came and went, the CIA admitted Gary Webb was right about their drug trafficking, yet nobody went to prison for it.

    Why on earth would they prosecute one of their own for 911? Their behavior in cover-up is consistent.
     
    Bob0627 likes this.
  16. ArmySoldier

    ArmySoldier Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2014
    Messages:
    28,641
    Likes Received:
    9,462
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We don't need to listen to the US government. We look at the evidence. Whereas the conspiracy nuts ONLY look at SOME parts of the evidence and ignore major facts. Conspiracy theorists pick apart one little piece of the story and try to come up with various reasons to why it might not be right.
     
  17. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,017
    Likes Received:
    1,065
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You are generalizing, lumping everyone into the same group think mentality. In fact the above is a group think claim because I've heard the same or similar from many different posters. You're also conflating conspiracy "nuts" with conspiracy theorists. Just who are conspiracy theorists? The vast majority are in the law enforcement and justice industry (prosecutors, police, FBI, CIA, etc.) as well as those legislators who enact criminal conspiracy laws. Most earn a lucrative living from conspiracy theories. Government claims are often unsupported by evidence or based on partial evidence while classifying potentially contradictory evidence, usually to try to get the majority to support a self serving agenda.

    You don't want to listen to the US government? That's fine but the US government doesn't listen to you and acts on their claims, supported or unsupported, whether you listen or not. For me history has proven that all governments are a conspiracy against their people, there are NO exceptions. This nation was founded because its former government conspired against its people. You can read the list of conspiracies in our founding document, the Declaration of Independence. Nothing has changed since and in fact we are in a worse situation than the founders were. The primary protest was taxation without representation. We are inundated with taxes on just about everything, far exceeding the taxes assessed during colonial times. And our alleged representatives do not represent us, they represent the military industrial complex, billionaires and select corporations. Those who line their pockets.

    One can say something similar about those who trust government. They only look at some parts of the evidence, that which the government claims is evidence and ignore contradictory evidence, some (over)classified under pretext of national security, some readily available.

    “They must find it difficult, those who have taken authority as truth, rather than truth as authority.” - Gerald Massey



    If you believe all the above is conspiracy theory posted by a conspiracy nut, I'm ok with that. What it is is conspiracy fact, supported by history and evidence, it is not theory.

     
  18. ArmySoldier

    ArmySoldier Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2014
    Messages:
    28,641
    Likes Received:
    9,462
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The problem is, the WTC7 conspiracy isn't a fact. It's a theory. Maybe "nut" was the wrong word, I didn't mean to be insulting. My apologies for coming off that way.

    There are so many theories about 9/11 that it's easy to see a pattern here. The theorist focuses on one aspect of the attack and creates a theory based off that (let's take jet fuel for instance), and digs into that. Then creating a background story.
     
  19. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,017
    Likes Received:
    1,065
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm not sure what you're referring to exactly but so far there are only WTC7 collapse theories. The primary one being the unsupported NIST (government) theory. A building collapse theory is not a conspiracy theory, it's merely a theory. When and if the WTC7 collapse theory is a proven fact (whichever theory it is) then it becomes either a conspiracy fact or no conspiracy at all. As of now, the primary WTC7 conspiracy theory is that NIST conspired to obfuscate the truth about the destruction of WTC7 (and that is supported by many facts including some of NIST's own documented admissions). As you may or may not know I created a thread on the subject.

    You are generalizing once again. Everyone is different, you can't lump everyone into the same mindset. True there are many 9/11 theories and that is because the US government never legitimately investigated 9/11 and published unsupported/contradictory theories as fact. So the "pattern" begins with the official US government conspiracy theory.
     
  20. ArmySoldier

    ArmySoldier Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2014
    Messages:
    28,641
    Likes Received:
    9,462
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The one area I question is how one of the 9/11 hijackers passports survived. I can't remember if that was just a rumor or true. But if true, I wonder how that happened.
     

Share This Page