Charlie Sheen's skepticism regarding 9/11

[Sixpack]

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles...arliesheen.htm

Your opinions ? :/\chop

[blue3golf]

In every tragedy there are always those people that think it's a conspiracy. Maybe one day something will happen that will be accepted at face value. the real question is why did he wait almost 5 years before going public with this, maybe because only now there are that many disgruntled people out there that he has alopt of support.

[Sixpack]

What puzzles me most about Sheen's and other 'whistleblower's' reasoning is what motive could the US admin possibly have to ploy such horrible acts ? Sure, from a technical perspective anything is possible I guess, but for what possible reason ?

[jumpy]

I'm not convinced of the truth either way (other than lots of innocent people died for no good reason) and though I'm not one to believe everything I see at face value, I recon it was probably Islamic fundamentalists all the way- you'd have to go to a very dark place to start thinking that it was a US government decision to 'stage' an attack on US home soil to rally the people to strike first at Iraq etc...
But there are however some quite interesting and remarkably calm accounts of 9/11 from a rather different perspective, make of them what you will, I'm not advocating this as a 'truth' or something that I subscribe to in any way, but it's an interesting video to watch none the less (it's quite long...) :
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...q=loose+change

[STEED]

There is so much information on 9/11 now its hit and miss hard to know what is true and what is false. And how much of it is propaganda put out by all sides.

[CCIP]

Generally speaking, conspiracy theories are rarely true. A couple of friends of my family are big on 9/11 conspiracies - but, really, I think the conspiracy explanations are so contorted by comparison to the official versions, in all likelyhood they're baloney. That's just the way conspiracy theories usually are. :hmm:

[Sixpack]

Okay, I sounded naive there.

Let me get this straight:

Sheen & Co don't exclude the possibility Bush & Co planned, composed, organized and staged the 9/11 script in order to 'shock and awe' in Iraq ? Afghanistan being nothing but an opener clearly to legitimize real target Iraq ?

[DeepSix]

Charlie Sheen.... isn't that the guy with the reoccurring drug problem?

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Sixpack

What puzzles me most about Sheen's and other 'whistleblower's' reasoning is what motive could the US admin possibly have to ploy such horrible acts ? Sure, from a technical perspective anything is possible I guess, but for what possible reason ?

Even I do not seriously think it was an intentional conspiracy, nevertheless the benefit for the reputation of Bush, who was in a severe politcal crisis and was not taken seriously by most, is obvious. For him, nothing better than a huge catastrophe could have happened. Lozs' of media coverage for him. Lot's of moving speeches. His poll values rocketed into the sky all of a sudden. 9/11 and the time after was the highlight of his presedency, concerning his popularity.

[JSLTIGER]

This website generates many queries from people in response to some of the other theories that are put forward relating to the collapse - namely that it was a controlled explosion.

The initial impact/further weakening by fire reasoning is based on uncontestable knowledge about the behaviour of structures in general, and the weakening of steel under fire conditions, plus video footage of the events and examination of the steel afterwards. The official FEMA report written by engineering experts came to this conclusion based on the evidence.

However, should additional evidence come to light that supports a different theory, the author is willing to reassess his views.

The fire wasn't hot enough to melt the steel
There has never been a claim that the steel melted in the fire before the buildings collapsed, however the fire would have been very hot. Even though the steel didnt melt, the type of temperatures in the fire would have roughly halved its strength.

There would have been variations in the distribution of the temperature both in place in time. There are photos that show people in the areas opened up by the impact, so it obviously wasnt too hot when those photos were taken, but this is not to say that other parts of the building, further inside were not hotter. In addition, to make a reasonable conclusion from these photos, it would be important to know when they were taken. It might be possible that just after the impact the area wasnt very hot, but as the fire took hold the area got hotter.

The way the building collapsed must have been caused by explosions
One demolition expert on the day of the collapse said it looked like implosion but this is not very strong evidence. Implosion firstly requires a lot of explosives placed in strategic areas all around the building. When and how was this explosive placed in the building without anyone knowing about it. Second, implosion required more than just explosives. Demolition experts spend weeks inside a derelict building planning an event. Many of the beams are cut through by about 90% so that the explosion only has to break a small bit of steel. In this state the building is highly dangerous, and there is no way such a prepared building could still be running day to day like WTC was.

Why did the building fall so quickly?
The buildings did fall quickly - almost (but not exactly) at the same speed as if there was no resistance. Shouldn't the floors below have slowed it down? The huge dynamic loads due to the very large momentum of the upper floors falling were so great that they smashed through the lower floors very quickly. The columns were not designed to carry these huge loads and they provided little resistance.

What about World Trade Center 7?
I have not studied WTC in any great detail and cannot offer any theories on its collapse mechanism. In the chaos of the day, little attention was paid to WTC7, so there is less evidence available on the damage it sustained before it collapsed. However, some questions that you may want to ponder ...
* While it did not receive any direct impact form the planes, how much debris hit at as the main towers collapsed and what damage did it cause?
* To what extent (if any) did the shock or vibrations caused by the collapse of WTC1 & 2 affect the integrity of WTC7?
* Did any unseen damage to the WTC7 foundations occur in the collapse of WTC 1 & 2?
* Did any of the fire suppression systems in WTC7 function?

From: http://www.civil.usyd.edu.au/wtc.shtml

[AG124]

I personally don't believe that there is any chance that 9/11 was a governmental conspiracy - there does appear to be to much evidence to the contrary (even if some things appear a little suspicious at first glance).

But what do you think would happen to George W Bush and the rest of his administration if it was conclusively proven that they had engineered the attack and those thousands of American deaths? Would all the Christian conservatives of America still support him to the last? Probably, some of them at least.

But maybe there should be an independent investigation, just to prove that there was no conspiracy. I think that such a display of transparency would bring a degree of confidence to the administration and boost its image - does anyone agree?

[Type941]

they are just asking for a new investigation but with same poeople in charge when the whole thing happened still being on top, it's unlikely. I'd say if in say 10 years US will have a clearly anti Bush president (unlikely, as in US he'll be propagaded into a war hero and his sins will be forgotten)- than there might be a new investigation. The emperor's clothes article recording the sequence of events with the air defence forces not reacting is a very interesting piece that hasn't been officially desputed by the WH, nor was it even adressed.

In any case, it's unlikely it's about Bush. He doesn't look smart enough to pull off things of this magnituted. his VP though....I get the feeling that guy can do things like that with ease.

At least read this: http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles...explosions.htm

[AG124]

In any case, it's unlikely it's about Bush. He doesn't look smart enough to pull off things of this magnituted. his VP though....I get the feeling that guy can do things like that with ease.

Yeah that is true - whether or not you like Bush, he's not exactly the most intelligent president the US has ever seen. Still, if there was some kind of 9/11 conspiracy, he would probably have to be in on it even as just a figurehead. Dick Cheney would be the evil mastermind.

[Iceman]

Red is grey and yellow white...and we decide which is right and which is an illusion.


Power of suggestion....jedi mind tricks for the weak minded...maybe it was Red Octobers Bigfoot who pulled it all off...helped by aliens.

[Abraham]

Gaawwwnnnn.

Here we go again:

After Osama Bin Laden attacked the US Embassies in Kenia and Tanzania Bill Clinton fired 75 Tom Cruise Missiles at training camps of Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. But the camps appreared to be empty on that day, so only some environmental damage was done.

Later analysis showed that Clinton had fortfeied a unique chance to fight Muslim extremism. Immediately he started preparing a much bigger, evil and sinister scheme, a full blown attack on the US 'Pearl Harbour' style (without the battleships of course). The masterplan was ready halfway Clinton's second term and preparations could begin.

Clinton - of course - expected Al Gore to win the 2000 Presidential Elections. So long before 2000 he contacted O. B. Laden (of course at a secret location in Saudi Arabia). There is footage of Madeleine Albridge being in Saudi Arabia around that time.
O.B. Laden fell for the idea to attack the US and then de reattacked and started preparations in mid 1998.

When Bush won the elections the whole plan was under threat of being cancelled. Gore - who had intimate knowledge of the Clinton Laden deal tried to save the plan by requesting a recount of votes in Florida if only to save the plan. Alas, exit Clinton, no Gore.

But during the transmission of power from the outgoing to the incoming administration Bush and Cheney were brieved on the plan. Clinton pointed out that he was actually fooling O.B. Laden, because the so-called attack on America would result in a much bigger attack on the Middle East to grap all the oil from the poor Arabs and to improve the trade balance of the US by exporting a lot of democracy.

Bush & Cheney were sold. Next thing: everybody was sworn to secrecy, the Twin Towers were secretly prepared for demolition, the hyjackers did not know that their actions had the approval of the US President, the US air defense system went down on cue, all the Jews were warned by the Mossad not to go to work the next day and this story is based upon real facts...