Just How Deep Does The Rabbit Hole Really Go?

[marc stevens]

Whast else can you excpect from a bunch of cops?

I love how several cops admit there is a cover-up, and yet deny it was an inside job.

They fail to ask "Why the cover-up?"

These so-called cops also fail to realize those who participate in a cover-up are usually referred to as "accessories after the fact". (It's early, so if I misspelled something don't jump all over me.)

So, LEGALLY, those engaged in the cover-up are actors in the crime itself.

[sagas4]

admin said:

Someone should download that video as an mpg, I would, but I don't have enough hardrive space. If some could, download it, burn it to a CD and send it to me, I'll post it on my web site.

Will DO.

[sagas4]

admin said:

What else can you expect from a bunch of cops?

I love how several cops admit there is a cover-up, and yet deny it was an inside job.

They fail to ask "Why the cover-up?"

These so-called cops also fail to realize those who participate in a cover-up are usually referred to as "accessories after the fact". (It's early, so if I misspelled something don't jump all over me.)

So, LEGALLY, those engaged in the cover-up are actors in the crime itself.

I presume this is in reply to Lazer's post.

Lazer,

that is most interesting however I would not expect anything different from those who post on the site you listed.

Marc,

That is true and illustrates some of the points you make in your book. In any other situation the cops look at that information in a "crime". If someone assisted in a cover up then they are an accessory, or at least a participant; but for them to admit there is a cover up, while denying an inside job, or that at least someone inside was aware, and failing to ask the first question any good investigator asks . . . . "WHO BENEFITS?", well . . .

Irrationality on display for all to clearly see.

Cops do live in legal-land though . . .

[marc stevens]

Very true sagas. I'd like to also point out the "tampering" with evidence i.e., the sale of the steel, and the year of resistance by those doing the cover-up to a full investigation.

Someone on the net once pointed out how easy it was to figure out who the "perp" was on crime shows such as Law and Order. It's always the one who trys to stall/stop an investigation.

Hmmmmm......

Can't imagine why the smirk would oppose an investigation into 911.

[eye2i2hear]

Here's to the day when such policy enforcing would result in a simple pink slip, via casting our "vote" called our money into another security firm!!! (aka: canceling our policy with their company and taking our business elsewhere!)

[Darren Dirt]

lazerwood said:

These clueless folk are bashing someone just trying to get them to consider that there may be an alternative view.

Basically the mindset on that forum is that you must be some sort of:

bed-wetting
commie-pinko
peace-loving
draft-dodging
pot-smoking
flag-burning
hippie with
long-hair,
freaky
type person to even question the "conventional wisdom"...and if you DARE to come around here we'll bust your head!

http : / / forums.officer.com / forums/showthread.php?t=37057&page=2

Hey! I'm offended!

My hair isn't *that* long...


PS: I thought we all agreed *not* to directly *LINK* to that site, but instead to have the URL as plaintext and copy/paste it to your browser address bar.

Otherwise they may look at the referral logs, and make up some lies to shut the AiLL board down -- you never know.

I can't remember the thread where that forum was first mentioned, but whoever mentioned it made the above suggestion re. not <a href> linking to it. :-\

[lazerwood]

Sorry ... It's not a hypertext link now.

[Darren Dirt]

Thx, we're safe for another day


Oh, BTW, from a quick glance thru, in my opinion the problem with Mr. "Spine" is unfortunately he primarily uses eyewitness testimony or even rumours as his evidence, which of course results in mockery and dismissal.

Instead he should have focused on the improbability of events, and ESPECIALLY the impossibility of the *physics* (as a small example, the small hole in the Pentagon, the cell phone calls, the volume of fine dust during WTC1/2 demolitions, the perfect vertical freefall of WTC1/2/7, the "impact" crater of the Shanksville plane... not to mention the essentially impossible NORAD event, where they didn't respond, therefore it's pretty safe to deduct that they had been ordered to stand down (prolly due to the drills they were running) -- and this is only possible from Cheney or Bush, some people say)


But at least he posted a great list of Google Video links -- including Loose Change, but quite a few others as well (some I've never heard of -- like David Ray Griffin on CSPAN (!) ) ...

---

( Thread Page2; #42 )

IT is better to step on a few toes and discuss the topic now while it is still recently releventrather than in 2075 when no one could care if the gov.t did 9/11. Official Zogby polls show that 90% of Americans believe that the gov.t was behind the JFK assasination, but almost 50 years later, most people do not care, and when people do not care no intelligent discussion can be initiated on a public forum.

Hijacking Catastrophe | Karen Kwiatkowski (Lt. Col. USAF retired)
Watch

911: The Disturbing Questions | David Ray Griffin
Watch

Martial Law 9/11: Rise Of The Police State | Alex Jones
Watch part1 - Watch part2 - Watch part3

9/11: The Great Illusion | George Humphrey
Watch part1 - Watch part2

Masters of Terror | Alex Jones
Watch

David Ray Griffin Speech on CSPAN April 27 2005
Watch part1 - Watch part2

911: In Plane Site
Watch part1 - Watch part2

9-11: The Road to Tyranny | Alex Jones
Watch

Illuminazi 9-11 | Anthony Hilder
Watch

Loose Change | Dylan Avery
Watch part1 - Watch part2

And, of course, we cannot leave out George W. Bush warning Americans to never tolerate conspiracy theorists: Why is he wasting time talking about those damned conspiracy theorists instead of explaing what reparations and issues need to be initiated? Iam not even going to discuss it becaise that is self-explanitory.

Last edited by Spinethetic : 11-19-2005 at 11:56 AM.

---

- - -

Another couple of all-on-one-page lists

911 Truth Bookshelf: *
www.waronfreedom.org/bookshelf.html

Wing TV's Alternative Media Awards (unfortunately labelled with the silly words "Patriot Movement", ah well, some of the names and links are still well worth skimming through this long list)
www.wingtv.net/thornarticles/2005awards.html


* "The 911 Bookshelf" has 3 sections

1. Non-Fiction
-The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions
-9-11 Descent into Tyranny
-9-11 On Trial
-9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made in USA
-America's War on Terrorism
-Conspiracies, Conspiracy Theories and the Secrets of 9/11
-Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil
-The Day America Died
-Inside Job: Unmasking the 9/11 Conspiracies
-The New Pearl Harbor
-Painful Questions
-Pentagate
-William Rodriguez Vs. George H. W. Bush, et al.
-The Terror Timeline: Year by Year, Day by Day, Minute by Minute
-Waking up from Our Nightmare: The 9/11/01 Crimes in New York City
-The War on Freedom: How and Why America was Attacked, Sept. 11, 2001

2. A wonderful Video section, lots of stuff I've never seen anywhere else.

3. Finally, "Quick Flicks Online" -- direct link to these in emails to friends, or mirror the files yourself... Wow, all these great resources on one page!

[Darren Dirt]

Larry "Pull It" Silverstein FINALLY responds re. PBS video & WTC Building 7 -- and the media certainly didn't cover it, did anyone here even *hear* about this?

-Notice how the response included a complete lie re. the FEMA report and Building 7.



www.prisonplanet.com/articles/january2006/050106silversteinanswers.htm

Silverstein Answers WTC Building 7 Charges
Says "pull it" meant to evacuate firefighters, but there were no firefighters in the building

Paul Joseph Watson | January 5 2006

After nearly two years of steadfast silence, Silverstein Properties have finally responded to questions about what Larry Silverstein meant when he told a PBS documentary that WTC Building 7 was "pulled" in the late afternoon of September 11 2001.

* Why didn't Larry boy HIMSELF respond? And why 2 years? *

Building 7 occupied a city block immediately north of the World Trade Center complex. Photos taken minutes before its collapse show small fires on two or three floors. Building 7 became only the third steel building in history before or since 9/11 to collapse from fire damage. The other two were the North and South towers of the World Trade Center.

...


The response reads as follows.

Seven World Trade Center collapsed at 5:20 p.m. on September 11, 2001, after burning for seven hours. There were no casualties, thanks to the heroism of the Fire Department and the work of Silverstein Properties employees who evacuated tenants from the building.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) conducted a thorough investigation of the collapse of all the World Trade Center buildings. The FEMA report concluded that the collapse of Seven World Trade Center was a direct result of fires triggered by debris from the collapse of WTC Tower 1.

* Funny, I thought the FEMA report said "WE DON'T KNOW WHY BUILDING 7 COLLAPSED" *

In the afternoon of September 11, Mr. Silverstein spoke to the Fire Department Commander on site at Seven World Trade Center. The Commander told Mr. Silverstein that there were several firefighters in the building working to contain the fires. Mr. Silverstein expressed his view that the most important thing was to protect the safety of those firefighters, including, if necessary, to have them withdraw from the building.

Later in the day, the Fire Commander ordered his firefighters out of the building and at 5:20 p.m. the building collapsed. No lives were lost at Seven World Trade Center on September 11, 2001.

The State Department website then comments,

As noted above, when Mr. Silverstein was recounting these events for a television documentary he stated, "I said, you know, we've had such terrible loss of life. Maybe the smartest thing to do is to pull it." Mr. McQuillan has stated that by "it," Mr. Silverstein meant the contingent of firefighters remaining in the building.


The insurmountable problem with this explanation of Silverstein's statement is that there were no firefighters inside WTC 7.

...

So what did Larry Silverstein mean when he stated: "I said, 'You know, we've had such terrible loss of life, may be the smartest thing to do is, is pull it. And they made that decision to pull and then we watched the building collapse." He could not have meant that they should "pull" the firefighters from the building because there weren't any firefighters in the building, at least according to FEMA, NIST, and Frank Fellini, the Assistant Chief responsible for WTC 7 at that time. And if he meant "pull the firefighters" then why did he say "pull it", with no reference to anything other than the building? The argument that "pull" is not used to mean "demolish" a building is belied by the other footage in the PBS documentary. And consider the timing: "they made that decision to pull and then we watched the building collapse." Could it really be possible that some (nonexistent) fire brigade was removed from the building and just at that moment ("then") the building collapsed? Is there really any doubt here about what Silverstein meant?

The only reasonable conclusion is that Larry Silverstein's statement is an admission that WTC 7 was brought down by a controlled demolition, meaning that the official version of what happened to WTC 7 is false, and casting serious doubt on the official story that terrorists of a foreign origin destroyed the twin towers, as well as on the rest of the official account of 9/11. Note that this admission is a statement against Silverstein's own interests (putting him at odds with the official version of events and potentially jeopardizing his insurance claims). Such statements are given great weight as a matter of law.

[Darren Dirt]

911 SCHOLAR FOR TRUTH MURDERED

www.scholarsfor911truth.org/WhoAreWe.html
...
Michael Zebuhr (SM)
Bioengineering, Clemson University

"
S9/11T encourages its members to vigorously express their concerns on this score through lectures, conferences, symposia, articles, and books as well as other access routes that publicize their findings.
Founded by professors Jim Fetzer and Steven Jones, S9/11T is devoted to applying the principles of scientific reasoning to the available evidence, "letting the chips fall where they may".
"


Found from a mention by Jack Blood


Are those outspoken experts in their field, including Steven Jones (co-founder of ScholarsFor911Truth) being intimidated into silence... or worse? Is Michael Zebuhr a not-so-subtle warning to others? (Jones has already been told by BYU execs to shut up, which he has now done -- though his written words continue to make the rounds through the 'Net.)


...Notice in the story below -- covering a week-old incident -- the vivid focus is on a very brutal shot-in-the-head crime ("botched robbery", yeah right whatever...) but it makes no mention of Zebuhr's "student" field of study, let alone his membership in ScholarsFor911Truth. ...


- - -

wcco.com/topstories/local_story_082213938.html

Mar 24, 2006 7:40 am US/Central

911 Callers Traumatized By Uptown Murder

by Darcy Pohland

(WCCO) Minneapolis Police continue their intense search to find the killers of a visiting graduate student who was shot in the Uptown area of Minneapolis last weekend.

Michael Zebuhr, 25, was shot in the head during a robbery attempt Saturday night.

Witnesses who called 911 are still traumatized by what they saw.

"Every time you walk down the street, you remember the night that it happened and what you saw that night," said Kris Houlton who called 911.

...

Roommates Kang and Houlton were in their Girard Avenue apartment last Saturday when they heard gunfire on the street.

"I saw someone running away, though it was one person and so I can't say whether that was the perpetrator," Houlton said. "The minute we heard the gunshot, we ran onto the street and so did everybody else."

When the roommates and other neighbors saw how severely Zebuhr was injured, they sprang into action.

Hmmm...

[Darren Dirt]

A nice succint little article, using *shock* logic to get rid of the true conspiracy theories, and what is left? ...

"9/11 -- ELIMINATING THE IMPOSSIBLE" by Sheila Samples

www.thepeoplesvoice.org/cgi-bin/blogs/voices.php/2006/03/30/p7339

(mirror)
www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_sheila_s_060329_9_2f11____eliminating_.htm


Found, strangely enough, when I searched for the 2 words "FEMA fireman" -- apparently *every* mainstream news source uses the word "firefighter" instead, nowadays

news.google.com/news?q=FEMA%20fireman

[Darren Dirt]

Colorado 9/11 Truth Activists got MSM coverage, multiple times

Even a cover story or two

theprogressivemind.info/2004/11/911-colorado-911-visibility-another.html

...
"Look at that!" Hurley exclaims, as a customer in a nearby couch looks up. "Look at how straight down that thing comes!" There's no way it could have happened without explosives.

"And all on top of this, no steel-structure building in the world has ever before collapsed due to fire. That's fact."

They spend the next half hour spouting off facts and figures gathered from videos, books -- Internet sites -- without hesitation. They interrupt each other, and literally finish each other's sentences, as they explain how Towers 1 and 2 may have been demolished, too.

How, at 3,500 feet high, according to Galileo's law of falling bodies, it would take 9.1627 seconds for the towers to fall, without any resistance. The North Tower fell in 8.1 seconds, meaning it must have been set by explosives that hastened its fall. Not to mention the building's concrete was pulverized, a sign of a demolition, not a collapse.

How jet fuel couldn't possibly burn hot enough to melt the steel beams, or to register like it did at over 1,000 degrees days later.

How Pentagon photographs show a hole too small for a 757, and no wreckage was found at the site. Photos of unscathed office equipment and a book within the building's wreckage prove that it wasn't jet fuel burning, and video camera from a nearby gas station was confiscated by the feds.

How Operation Northwoods in the early '60s was a U.S. plan to commit terrorist attacks on our civilians and blame it on the Cubans as an excuse for war, much like Hitler did with the Socialists when he burned down the Reichstag, or FDR when he let Pearl Harbor occur.

How the Project for a New American Century (PNAC), composed of Bush administration neocons, called for another Pearl Harbor to help America dominate Eurasia and gain control of the world's strategic oil reserves.

How it all points to the fact that we have, as Worley claims, a "government who wouldn't think twice about killing American people to gain their geopolitical aims."

Much of the evidence provided by the 9/11 Truth Movement is compelling, some of it -- like that involving PNAC -- rock-solid.

But Kevin Christopher, public relations director for the decades-old myth-debunking organization CSICOP (Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal) dismisses their claims as "fringe."
...

(Also see their previous MSM coverage in [http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=912]BoulderWeekly[/url])


PS: Anyone else find it odd (coincidental? that Denise Richards has recently "come forward" with "shocking accusations" against Charlie Sheen... accusations re. alleged abuse/threats he directed at her LAST DECEMBER?

[Darren Dirt]

9/11 Revealing the Truth upcoming gathering... WOW check out the HUGE list of noteable speakers

911truth.org/911rtt/speakers.html

-even including BYU physics prof. Steven E. Jones (who I thought had been "silenced" by his academic peers/bosses) ... and "911 Eyewitness" cameraman Richard Siegel!



www.911truth.org/index.php?topic=about#about

Ever since the moment of the first impact at the World Trade Center, a struggle has raged between two broad, competing ideas of what really happened on September 11th, 2001.

The US administration delivered an almost immediate verdict, which can be described as follows: Dispatched by Osama Bin Ladin's network and motivated by hatred and religious fanaticism, 19 suicide bombers hijacked four planes, crashed three of them into their targets, and caused the collapse of the Twin Towers as a consequence of the resulting damage and fires. The 19 men did not necessarily require any accomplices within the United States; and no one in the US government could have possibly anticipated or prevented the attacks.

Even as the administration exploited this Official Story (or "Official Conspiracy Theory") as the pretext to launch new wars long in the making, independent researchers began to accumulate a vast body of evidence suggesting a different narrative for 9/11: that of the Inside Job.

The 9/11 events and the anomalies in the official story raised Unanswered Questions about:
- the unprecedented failure of the US air defense system on the morning of the attacks;
- the AWOL military chain of command during the actual attacks, including the inexplicable behavior of the presidential entourage;
- the seeming impossibility of official claims with regard to Flight 77;
- the evidence that Flight 93 was shot down;
- contradictions and dubious evidence in the official claims about the alleged hijackers and masterminds, and doubts about their real identities;
- signs that the alleged hijackers enjoyed high-level protection against discovery by honest investigators;
- evidence that the alleged hijackers were financed by states allied with US intelligence;
- suspicious and massive international financial trades suggesting foreknowledge of the attacks;
- widespread signs of official foreknowledge and, in fact, advance preparation for the 9/11 attack scenario;
- the long-running links between Islamist fundamentalist terror cells and US covert operations, dating back to CIA support for the anti-Soviet mujahedeen and Osama Bin Ladin himself;
- the demolition-like collapse of the Twin Towers and of a third skyscraper, WTC 7;
- and questions concerning who could have logically expected to derive benefit in the aftermath of a massive attack on the United States.

The suspicions received further confirmation a few weeks after September 11th, with the arrival of anthrax letters targeted only at opposition politicians and media figures, and timed to coincide with the introduction of the USA PATRIOT Act. ...

[Darren Dirt]

darrendirt said:

911 SCHOLAR FOR TRUTH MURDERED

www.scholarsfor911truth.org/WhoAreWe.html
...
Michael Zebuhr (SM)
Bioengineering, Clemson University

Michael Zebuhr, 25, was shot in the head during a robbery attempt Saturday night.

From Dylan Avery's blog ( loosechange911.blogspot.com/2006/03/911-scholar-shot-dead.html )

3.24.2006
9/11 SCHOLAR SHOT DEAD
Look, I'm all for looking at things as realistically as possible...but...

"Michael Zebuhr didn't intervene when two men stole his mother's purse, but one of the men shot him anyway. The 25-year-old Buckhannon resident and recent Davis & Elkins College died a day later.

"According to reports, Zebuhr and his mother, Dr. Suzanne Strong of Virginia, were in Minneapolis visiting Zebuhr's sister, a student at the University of Minnesota, when the shooting took place at about 9:55 p.m. Saturday.

"Inspector Kris Arneson of the Minneapolis Police Department's Fifth Precinct said the family trio and a friend were approached by two male subjects as they were returning to their vehicle following dinner at a restaurant in the Uptown area.

"Reports indicate that the suspects demanded Strong's purse which she was turned over without resistance. One of the suspects then shot Zebuhr in the head for no apparent reason, officials said.

"He was also a member of 9/11 Scholars for Truth: Michael Zebuhr (SM) Bioengineering, Clemson University

This comment from the blogger that posted it ( covertoperations.blogspot.com/2006/03/extremely-sad-news.html ) basically sums it up...

"So... since when do two muggers hit on a group of four people, then randomly shoot one of the people in the head when the money is given and there is no resistance?

According to this story ( wcco.com/crime/local_story_080225959.html ) , he was shot twice in the forehead."

Ok, we'll see how this pans out...

From the above, more about the victim: covertoperations.blogspot.com/2006/03/extremely-sad-news.html

Knowing more info now, it's even sadder, and of course more suspicious...

[Darren Dirt]

Smirk McChuckles admits that 911 foreknowledge "absurd" but never denies the allegation (I agree it's absurd, but then again most actual, documented conspiracies are pretty absurd i.e. go against rational, sane, life-honouring common sense) ... almost speechless, then he finally lets rip a hearty guffaw to justify "moving on" without actually answering Video