Thread: the proof about 9-11

http://911proof.com/Index

Welcome . . . and congratulations for your willingness to look at

the proof about 9-11

No matter how painful the facts raised by this site may be, we — as patriotic Americans and people of good faith — must look at the evidence for ourselves.

This site is wholly non-partisan, and not intended to criticize or to bolster any political party. The sources cited come from across the political spectrum. The issues raised transcend political differences, and are vital to conservatives, liberals and moderates; they affect your life whether you are a republican, democratic, independent, or non-voter.
Skeptical of theories which are not based on cold, hard facts? We encourage your skepticism, and applaud you for examining the facts for yourself. There are many bizarre conspiracy theories floating around about 9/11, which are spread either out of ignorance or for malicious purposes.
Think only a handful of people question the official version of 9/11? Okay — take a look at this national poll.
Think the 9/11 Commission already investigated and reported what happened on 9/11? Very well — you might wish to start by jumping ahead to this page.
Think that no credible, high-level officials doubt the official version, or that those who question 9/11 are partisans from one side of the political aisle? Fine — skip ahead to this page.
Think that a 9/11 conspiracy would have been too big to keep secret? Or that you would have heard more about these facts on the news if they were true? Or that questioning 9/11 is insulting to America, or to the victims and their families? We understand your concerns — and we will address those too.
Are you Christian? A special welcome! Here is something you might find interesting.
This website provides links to credible sources, so that you can easily check the information for yourself (whenever possible, we cite mainstream news sources; at times we cite credible witnesses whose story is only covered by smaller publications).
Just read and click. And then make up your own mind (if you have any trouble viewing the linked video or audio clips, click here to see instructions.)
(If you are new to the Internet, or you wish to print out this material, click here to see a 1-page version of this website. If you are short on time, you can print the 1-page version and read it at your leisure — all of the information is contained on one page for that very purpose. Then come back later and click on the links to see the proof for yourself.)
If you get angry, afraid or overwhelmed by the information contained on this website ... Keep in mind that millions of Americans have felt these same things when they started to look at the facts, but they hung in there to get the full story. If they did it, you can too.
BACKGROUND: WHY DOES THIS MATTER?
A variety of current and former high-level officials have recently warned that the current administration is attempting to gain as much power and control over the American public as possible, and is using fear to accomplish that goal.

Both Time Magazine and newsman Keith Olbermann (see October 12, 2005 article) listed numerous instances in which the administration has issued terror alerts based on scant intelligence in order to rally people around the flag when the administration was suffering in the polls. This implies — as an initial matter only — that the administration will play fast and loose with the facts in order to instill fear for political purposes.

More to the point, current republican U.S. congressman Ron Paul stated that the government "is determined to have martial law", and that the government is hoping to get the people "fearful enough that they will accept the man on the white horse"

A former prominent republican U.S. congressman stated that the U.S. is close to becoming a totalitarian society and that the current administration is using fear to try to ensure that this happens.

General Tommy Franks stated that if another terrorist attack occurs in the United States "the Constitution will likely be discarded in favor of a military form of government".

And Daniel Ellsberg, the famous Pentagon Papers whistleblower, said "if there is another terror attack, "I believe the president will get what he wants", which will include a dictatorship.

Terror by Foreign Nations

But a government's attempt to increase power, or capitalize on fear, doesn't mean that a government would actually turn a blind eye to a known attack or itself carry out a fake terror attack in order to obtain its goals, right?

Well, this has happened before in foreign countries. For example, it is widely known that the Nazis, in Operation Himmler, faked attacks on their own people and resources which they blamed on the Poles, to justify the invasion of Poland. And it has now been persuasively argued — as shown, for example, in this History Channel video — that Nazis set fire to their own government building and blamed that fire on others (if you have trouble playing the clip, it is because the website hosting the clip requires you to download the clip before playing it). The fire was the event which justified Hitler's seizure of power and suspension of liberties.
And in the early 1950s, agents of an Israeli terrorist cell operating in Egypt planted bombs in several buildings, including U.S. diplomatic facilities, then left behind "evidence" implicating the Arabs as the culprits (one of the bombs detonated prematurely, allowing the Egyptians to identify the bombers). Israel's Defense Minister was brought down by the scandal, along with the entire Israeli government. See also this confirmation.
And the Russian KGB apparently conducted a wave of bombings in Russia in order to justify war against Chechnya and put Vladimir Putin into power (see also this short essay and this report).
And the Turkish government has been caught bombing its own and blaming it on a rebel group in order to justify a crackdown on that group.
Indeed, even Muslim governments appear to play this game. For example, the well-respected former Indonesian president said that the government had a role in the Bali bombings.
But That's Nuts
This sounds nuts, right? You've never heard of this "false flag terrorism", where a government attacks its own people then blames others in order to justify its goals, right? And you are cynical of the statements discussed above? Please take a look at these historical quotes:
"This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when he first appears he is a protector." - Plato

"If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy." - U.S. President James Madison

"Terrorism is the best political weapon for nothing drives people harder than a fear of sudden death". - Adolph Hitler

"Why of course the people don't want war ... But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship ... Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country." - Hermann Goering, Nazi leader.
"The easiest way to gain control of a population is to carry out acts of terror. [The public] will clamor for such laws if their personal security is threatened". - Josef Stalin
But NOT the U.S.
It is logical to assume that, even if other countries have carried out false flag operations (especially horrible regimes such as, say, the Nazis or Stalin), the U.S. has never done so.

Well, as shown by this BBC special (which contains interviews with some of the key players), it is possible that America knew of the Japanese plan to attack Pearl Harbor — down to the exact date of the attack — and allowed it to happen to justify America's entry into World War II. See also this short essay by a highly-praised historian summarizing some of the key points (the historian, a World War II veteran, actually agreed with this strategy for getting America into the war, and so does not have any axe to grind). The Pearl Harbor "conspiracy" — if true — would have involved hundreds of military personnel. Moreover, the White House apparently had, a year earlier, launched an 8-point plan to provoke Japan into war against the U.S. (including, for example, an oil embargo) And — most stunning — the FDR administration took numerous affirmative steps to ensure that the Japanese attack would be successful.

And the New York Times has documented that Iranians working for the C.I.A. in the 1950's posed as Communists and staged bombings in Iran in order to turn the country against its democratically-elected president (see also this essay).

And, as confirmed by a former Italian Prime Minister, an Italian judge, and the former head of Italian counterintelligence, NATO, with the help of the Pentagon and CIA, carried out terror bombings in Italy and blamed the communists, in order to rally people’s support for their governments in Europe in their fight against communism. As one participant in this formerly-secret program stated: "You had to attack civilians, people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple. They were supposed to force these people, the Italian public, to turn to the state to ask for greater security."

Moreover, recently declassified documents show that in the 1960's, the American Joint Chiefs of Staff signed off on a plan to blow up AMERICAN airplanes (using an elaborate plan involving the switching of airplanes), and also to commit terrorist acts on American soil, and then to blame it on the Cubans in order to justify an invasion of Cuba. If you view no other links in this article, please read the following ABC news report; the official documents; and watch this interview with the former Washington Investigative Producer for ABC's World News Tonight with Peter Jennings (click link entitled "Joint Chiefs Guilty-Northwoods").

Why Does This Matter?

Even if America has, in the past, considered or undertaken false flag operations, it has never done so in modern times. Right? We will consider this question below.

In the meantime, we invite you to read what the following very smart people are saying:

A retired 27-year CIA analyst who prepared and presented Presidential Daily Briefs and served as a high-level analyst for several presidents, stated that if there was another major attack in the U.S., it would lead to martial law. He went on to say:

"We have to be careful, if somebody does this kind of provocation, big violent explosions of some kind, we have to not take the word of the masters there in Washington that this was some terrorist event because it could well be a provocation allowing them, or seemingly to allow them to get what they want."

The former CIA analyst would not put it past the government to "play fast and loose" with terror alerts and warnings and even events themselves in order to rally people behind the flag

A member of the British Parliament stated that "there is a very real danger" that the American government will stage a false flag terror attack in order to justify war against Iran and to gain complete control domestically

And the former UN Weapons Inspector, an American, who stated before the Iraq war started that there were no weapons of mass destruction is now saying that he would not rule out staged government terror by the U.S. government.

Sorry, not buying this. As an American, it is completely insulting. Even if we take away the human element, the US government would not rid itself of two major pieces of real estate and the income that it generates.

As an American, it is completely insulting. Even if we take away the human element, the US government would not rid itself of two major pieces of real estate and the income that it generates.

what is the value of those buildings as compared to the contracts for haliburton, the lost what 6 trillion at the pentagon that no one seems concerened about.

Sorry but I have to disagree this was not about money this was about expiditing an agenda on the books for nearly 90 years and definately since 1945.

I would have not believed any of this at first either, but when I saw that the day or two after the attacks when all planes were grounded and the FBI put the Bin Ladin family on a plane in St. Petersburg Florida and I read it for myself in the St. Pete Times, I knew something wasn’t right. If they were going to hold anyone, it should have been his family, but they sent them packing out of the country. It makes no sense. But that is just what launched my curiosity. I'm sure if you took the time to read all of the facts, you would learn some disturbing things. BTW, the Trade Towers was worth more to Larry Silberstein in a pile then standing. He was paid far more for them by the insurance company than what he bought them for.

Originally Posted by jp_48504

I would have not believed any of this at first either, but when I saw that the day or two after the attacks when all planes were grounded and the FBI put the Bin Ladin family on a plane in St. Petersburg Florida and I read it for myself in the St. Pete Times, I knew something wasn’t right. If they were going to hold anyone, it should have been his family, but they sent them packing out of the country. It makes no sense. But that is just what launched my curiosity. I'm sure if you took the time to read all of the facts, you would learn some disturbing things. BTW, the Trade Towers was worth more to Larry Silberstein in a pile then standing. He was paid far more for them by the insurance company than what he bought them for.

Bin Laden's family have nothing to do with Osama's actions. He was disowned by his family long ago. They are still close to the Saudi royal family while Osama has declared war on the Saudi royal family. The reason the family was flown out of the US is likely to avoid anything ahppening to them and thereby causing a serious rift in US-Saudi relations.

Beyond the value of the real estate, the attack on the WTC cost the US a minimum of hundreds of billions in everything from lost revenues to deflated stock values.

I have problems with these sorts of conspiracy claims. Anyone who knows me could readily tell you that I am quite in tune with all sorts of monkey business going on that most people are utterly informed about, but where I draw the line between suspicion and "proof," as this sutff porports to be, is actual convincing evidence. There are all sorts of circumstantial arguments that can be made, but these do not constitute proof of anything. Just as the whole list of coincidences between Lincoln and JFK ( http://theshadowlands.net/jfk.htm ) are interesting and almost beyond the possibility of mere coincidence, what do they prove?

Beyond all of this, the fact exists that there are Muslim extremists who want to kill us. Did the CIA stage the millions of Muslims dancing in the streets in celebration on the day after the 9/11 attacks? If there were in fact forces within our own government who wanted a tragedy to use as an excuse for oppressive policies, they wouldn't need to perpetrate such a tragedy. All they would have to do is let it happen.

Crocket, well said, they are going to have to show me the ablosute proof before I buy in to the Gov. conspiracy theroy!

Originally Posted by nittygritty

Crocket, well said, they are going to have to show me the ablosute proof before I buy in to the Gov. conspiracy theroy!

Well put, Nitty. I am not averse to the concept of governmental intrigues. For example, the evidence shows me that something was screwy in the OKC Murrah Building explosion. Not only was structural steel sheared below street level, but the inverse square law was made a mockery of in the damage done to the Murrah building versus neighboring buildings relative to the structural damage in evidence, and in the Murrah Building itself along its face. I consistently place myself in the position of a juror weighing evidence presented. Where the evidence is credible and convincing, I am willing to accept the given premise. Where it is weak and circumstantial, I adhere to the concept of the presumption of innocence where guilt cannot be proven. I offer no quarter that I would not expect to be legitimately afforded myself in similar circumstances. I ask that my fair-minded fellow citizens do the same. Even my enemies may not be guilty of all the crimes imputed to them, and I do neither justice nor truth any favors by falsely accusing them. When guilt or innocence ceases to be determined objectively, justice fails and the moral high ground is lost.

I realize that my moral absolutism is lost on many here and elsewhere, but I ask what ideology is superior. Rabble rousing is easy. I would suggest that on any given day and with any given topic, I could incite a crowd to attack and likely lynch a given target. I say this in all modesty. That would be wrong. This society can only continue as a free society if it maintains its staus as a moral society, and it can only accomplish that if it adheres to the objective principles that protect the rights of the accused regardless of who the accused happens to be and what the prevailing attitude against the accused happens to be. Holding ethics, principles and morality over personal prejudice is not an easy task, yet it is one that must be accomplished if we are to maintain the ideals upon which this free republic is predicated. Where those ideals fail, the republic fails, and if the republic fails, then we have ushered in tyranny, whether it is the tyranny of the majority or the oppressive tyranny of the privileged minority. I suggest that the former inevitably leads to the latter, and I defy anyone to prove me wrong by the lessons of history.

You are so right about the Okla City bombing Crocket, I believe only a hand full of Okies, myself included, think this was all planned and carried out by Timothy McViegh, sooner or later the truth will out as it always does except the trugh about the JFK assination lol. I have always said there were many more involved in this bombing!

I'm really beginning to get to my last nerve with this shit.

Those who espouse this crap have not one wit of knowledge of the history of the islamic maniacs and ALL THE ATTACKS made by them thru the past 3.5 decades. This has been going on since many of you were a twinkle in your parents' eye.

Get a grip and go get some historical knowledge.

You'd do America a favor by helping to secure our borders BEFORE THE NEXT FREAKING ATTACK and stop expending precious energy and time {of which we have NONE to spare} on bull shit.

Just as many other the things the truth will come out eventually. I havent time to debate this issue nor do I feel compelled to. Perhaps sometime in the distant future. For now, I'll focus on saving my country.