ozopenletter.com

__||__ 9/11 ....qp.... Guests are able to vote in polls => 9/11 Items Presented as Fact but are Hotly Disputed => Topic started by: Poddy on April 05, 2016, 01:09:48 AM

Title: Official Narrative
Post by: Poddy on April 05, 2016, 01:09:48 AM
The  Official Narrative (9/11 Commission Report) has stated that on 11th September 2011 the twin towers of the World Trade Centre (WTC1 and WTC2) were struck by jetliners (Boeing767-200) which severed perimeter and core columns and in conjunction  jet fuel caused the towers to collapse.

For those who are not familiar with the dimensions of the columns, I have compiled a series of illustrations and included some actual photograph of the columns for your consideration.

There were 57 perimeter columns per side and 47 core columns

(http://ozopenletter.com/gallery/4161_05_04_16_12_42_59.jpeg)
(http://ozopenletter.com/gallery/4161_05_04_16_12_17_28.jpeg)
(http://ozopenletter.com/gallery/4161_05_04_16_12_15_13.jpeg)
(http://ozopenletter.com/gallery/4161_05_04_16_12_14_13.jpeg)
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Poddy on April 05, 2016, 04:34:15 AM
As a comparison here is a collision between a tree (wood) and a vehicle (steel).
The tree is still standing and the vehicle is destroyed.

(http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/crime/tnwf77/picture3336893/ALTERNATES/FREE_640/MC_FATAL_04.JPG)

Compare the above with an aluminium hollow aircraft and steel beams, multiple steel beams.

Give some thought to how an aluminium, hollow fuselage or wing could sever massive steel beams.

Some video footage shows the nose of the aircraft (plastic) emerging from the other side of the building..............how is that possible?
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Lorna, KY on April 05, 2016, 06:21:22 AM
Thank you Poddy. I had no concept of the size of steel that was used in the construction of the buildings. From what is seen on television it looks like the plane just vanishes into the wall.
You have encouraged me to look into it a lot closer.
You have set out argument a lot clearer than what I have seen in the past. I will certainly be back to have another look in the future.
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Cheers on April 05, 2016, 07:35:58 AM
Got a link to the report that you read, Podds?

Nowhere in the one that I read (all 585 pages) does it seem to claim that the any of the perimeter or core columns were severed.

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/sept11/911Report.pdf
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Cheers on April 05, 2016, 07:45:50 AM
And as for the car hitting the tree, cars are designed to crumple on impact to absorb the force of the collision thus protecting the passenger cage. I've done similar to a 1986 toyota corolla traveling at about 20klm per hour when I ran up the back of another car in heavy traffic. The car I hit didn't get a scratch (an older model) but the entire front end of my car was crumpled and destroyed. That was just from hitting a bumper bar of a car at a reasonably low speed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crumple_zone

http://auto.howstuffworks.com/car-driving-safety/safety-regulatory-devices/crumple-zone.htm
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Cheers on April 05, 2016, 07:49:40 AM

Some video footage shows the nose of the aircraft (plastic) emerging from the other side of the building..............how is that possible?

Got a link?
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Cheers on April 05, 2016, 08:01:44 AM
As a comparison here is a collision between a tree (wood) and a vehicle (steel).
The tree is still standing and the vehicle is destroyed.



Cars are generally made from steel panels with obvious weaknesses at each join and each part. (example where the car door meets the bit it screws into, or the bonnet is attached by the hinges to the bit under the windshield. They are not a continuous piece of reinforced steel from bumper to bumper. They are designed to crumple on impact making the crash look worse than it really was.

Have a look at the chassis in your pic - probably the only continuous piece of steel in the car - still in one piece, eh?

https://www.quora.com/Automobile-Production-Why-are-cars-still-mainly-made-from-metal

Every report I have read says that the steel columns were only damaged by the impact of the plane and that it was the resulting fires that weakened them causing them to bow inwards as they were forced to support the weight of the internal building that was being destroyed by the fires.
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Cheers on April 05, 2016, 08:13:51 AM
"In addition to the columns weakening, the floors that were in the vicinity of those faces also weakened. And as a result of that, the floors sagged. And the sagging of the floors actually helped pull the external columns inward. And caused an inward bowing of the external columns. That is captured in photographs.

What then happened after the inward bowing is there was a stage at which a critical amount of inward bowing took place, and the columns snapped. And essentially the columns, once they snapped, the inwardly-bowed columns suddenly sprung back and out. And once that happened, the top mass, that rigid mass of somewhere on the order of 10 to 20 floors just started moving downward.

And the structure below, because of the fracturing of the columns just before it, that had snapped, was unable to withstand the energy that was released."


http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911/index.php?module=pagemaster&PAGE_user_op=view_page&PAGE_id=367&MMN_position=726:726
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Cheers on April 05, 2016, 08:28:00 AM
The design of the buildings and why they collapsed.

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/jom/0112/eagar/eagar-0112.html

Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Cheers on April 05, 2016, 08:38:19 AM
How the WTc worked

http://science.howstuffworks.com/engineering/structural/wtc1.htm
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: sam on April 05, 2016, 12:55:24 PM
Where in the report does it say the aluminium wing etc cut through steel columns?  Do you have a link? Page, paragraph? 



I have an interesting pic too.  How is this possible?

(http://ozopenletter.com/gallery/4222_05_04_16_12_53_37.jpeg)
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Poddy on April 05, 2016, 08:24:03 PM
Where in the report does it say the aluminium wing etc cut through steel columns?  Do you have a link? Page, paragraph? 



I have an interesting pic too.  How is this possible?

(http://ozopenletter.com/gallery/4222_05_04_16_12_53_37.jpeg)

Your picture is a perfect example of the Newtonian laws :)
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Poddy on April 05, 2016, 08:38:03 PM
Cheers you say that the 9/11 Commission report neglects to mention columns, I will just add that to the other myriad of other things that the neglected to mention and swept under the carpet, like the Newtonian laws.

Disregard the red square that, I expect it is the work of an overzealous photoshop editor, it is supposed to be a woman at the entry wound.
Here is some graphic proof of what the  they missed.  Count the number of columns severed. 
(http://ozopenletter.com/gallery/4161_05_04_16_8_32_10.jpeg)
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: sam on April 05, 2016, 09:00:05 PM
Your picture is a perfect example of the Newtonian laws :)

Then I have no idea what you're getting at here.  You'll will have to spell it out.  :-[
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Cheers on April 05, 2016, 09:26:17 PM
Poddy, YOU claimed that the report said that the columns were sliced through. I just asked you to show me which report you read to make that statement. The report that I found did not say that. Could you just show me the source of your information rather than a picture that you acknowledge has been photoshopped?

How is anyone supposed to comment on what you claim to be fact if they cannot see what it is you are referring to?

The  Official Narrative (9/11 Commission Report) has stated that on 11th September 2011 the twin towers of the World Trade Centre (WTC1 and WTC2) were struck by jetliners (Boeing767-200) which severed perimeter and core columns and in conjunction  jet fuel caused the towers to collapse.


Cheers you say that the 9/11 Commission report neglects to mention columns, I will just add that to the other myriad of other things that the neglected to mention and swept under the carpet, like the Newtonian laws.


That is not what I said at all.

Got a link to the report that you read, Podds?

Nowhere in the one that I read (all 585 pages) does it seem to claim that the any of the perimeter or core columns were severed.

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/sept11/911Report.pdf

THAT's what I said. Now, I may be reading a different report to the one that you have read, so I ask, so that we are on the same page, could you please show me the report that YOU read?

Could you please show me the official narrative to which you refer?

Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Poddy on April 05, 2016, 09:28:03 PM
OK.
That sliver of wood, if you notice, is tapered and straight.
From the results in the picture it must have been moving at some speed and at a right angle to the gutter. At initial impact the  motive action at to point of entry exceeded the inertia force of that area of the gutter. The nature of wood is that it is strongest in the direction in which the grain runs.
The wood being tapered would have caused friction on the sides of the initial hole created by the smaller diameter of the wood which in turn absorbed the energy of the forward motion and when all the energy was expended the system came to rest.
as in your picture :)

Your event illustrated Newtonian laws perfectly :)
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Cheers on April 05, 2016, 09:29:44 PM
Where in the report does it say the aluminium wing etc cut through steel columns?  Do you have a link? Page, paragraph? 



I have an interesting pic too.  How is this possible?

(http://ozopenletter.com/gallery/4222_05_04_16_12_53_37.jpeg)

Your picture is a perfect example of the Newtonian laws :)

In what way? Could you please explain this please?
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Poddy on April 05, 2016, 09:45:51 PM
The  Official Narrative (9/11 Commission Report) has stated that on 11th September 2011 the twin towers of the World Trade Centre (WTC1 and WTC2) were struck by jetliners (Boeing767-200) which severed perimeter and core columns and in conjunction jet fuel caused the towers to collapse.

What I said is above, I suggest that you read it again.
There is a multitude of photographic evidence that perimeter columns were severed between 30 and 32.
Extrapolating that core columns were severed is a matter of history. If they were not severed they would be still standing. perhaps the 9/11 Commission missed that salient point as well.
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Poddy on April 05, 2016, 09:47:52 PM
Cheers, you may have missed this.

OK.
That sliver of wood, if you notice, is tapered and straight.
From the results in the picture it must have been moving at some speed and at a right angle to the gutter. At initial impact the  motive action at to point of entry exceeded the inertia force of that area of the gutter. The nature of wood is that it is strongest in the direction in which the grain runs.
The wood being tapered would have caused friction on the sides of the initial hole created by the smaller diameter of the wood which in turn absorbed the energy of the forward motion and when all the energy was expended the system came to rest.
as in your picture :)

Your event illustrated Newtonian laws perfectly :)
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Poddy on April 05, 2016, 10:01:45 PM
Here is an illustration of the floor plan of one of the WTC towers I have overlayed a Boeing 767-200, in scale and at approximately the same angle as the alleged aircraft strike

(http://ozopenletter.com/gallery/4161_05_04_16_12_17_28.jpeg)


I have also included a picture of aircraft wing versus bird impact

(http://ozopenletter.com/gallery/4161_05_04_16_9_58_53.jpeg)

Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Cheers on April 05, 2016, 10:08:33 PM
Poddy, could you please just show me the report that you read so that I can read it too? If you are referring to the official narrative, don't you think that those also engaging in this discussion with you should also read it?


There is a multitude of photographic evidence that perimeter columns were severed between 30 and 32.


Which building are you talking about? To my knowledge, the jetliners hit floors 80 and 60. The live footage does not seem to show that the planes hit less than 1/3 of the way up the building, but rather the planes seem to have hit closer to the top.



Compare the above with an aluminium hollow aircraft and steel beams, multiple steel beams.

Give some thought to how an aluminium, hollow fuselage or wing could sever massive steel beams.


So how could the wings of the planes sever the columns on floor 30 if they (the planes) were 30 and 50 floors above? The planes were nowhere near floor 30 on either of the two buildings.
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Cheers on April 05, 2016, 10:11:02 PM
DEAR PODDY, COULD YOU PLEASE SUPPLY A COPY OF THE REPORT TO WHICH YOU ARE REFERRING?

Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Poddy on April 05, 2016, 10:22:26 PM
There should be only one report version

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/sept11/911Report.pdf
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Poddy on April 05, 2016, 10:27:12 PM
cheers, between 30 ad 23 COLUMNS I did not mention floors

Count them
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Cheers on April 05, 2016, 11:10:42 PM
There should be only one report version

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/sept11/911Report.pdf

Thank you. Yes, we are referring to the same report.

Now, could you please show me in this report where it said this?

The  Official Narrative (9/11 Commission Report) has stated that on 11th September 2011 the twin towers of the World Trade Centre (WTC1 and WTC2) were struck by jetliners (Boeing767-200) which severed perimeter and core columns and in conjunction  jet fuel caused the towers to collapse.



Cheers you say that the 9/11 Commission report neglects to mention columns, I will just add that to the other myriad of other things that the neglected to mention and swept under the carpet, like the Newtonian laws.


Poddy, did you read what the purpose of the report was? I think you will find that this is why these things were not mentioned in the report because it was never intended to be a report on the collapse of the buildings.

The purpose of the report was

"We  have  come  together  with  a  unity  of  purpose  because  our  nation
demands it. September 11, 2001, was a day of unprecedented shock and suf-
fering in the history of the United States.The nation was unprepared. How
did this happen, and how can we avoid such tragedy again?

To  answer  these  questions, the  Congress  and  the  President  created  the
National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (Public
Law 107-306, November 27, 2002).
Our mandate was sweeping. The law directed us to investigate “facts and
circumstances relating to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001,” includ-
ing those relating to intelligence agencies, law enforcement agencies, diplo-
macy, immigration  issues  and  border  control, the  flow  of  assets  to  terrorist
organizations, commercial  aviation, the  role  of  congressional  oversight  and
resource allocation,
and other areas determined relevant by the Commission."


The report was never responsible for commenting on the state of the buildings. The purpose of the report was to identify why the attacks were a surprise and to make recommendations for how to be more prepared in the future so as to avoid such attacks.
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Cheers on April 05, 2016, 11:16:14 PM
cheers, between 30 ad 23 COLUMNS I did not mention floors

Count them

OK. Sorry, and thanks.

But, can you now answer where the report says what you claim? Also explain why it would report anything of that nature considering that this was not the purpose of the report in the first place? That probably explains why those things weren't in it, don't ya think?
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Poddy on April 05, 2016, 11:40:14 PM
The law directed us to investigate “facts and
circumstances relating to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001,”

According to that statement, it has been assumed that the events of September 11 were a "Terrorist Attack". How could that be established without an investigation into the events?.

It goes on to say that that the reason for the 9/11 report was commissioned because of that assumption

How could the crime of September 11, being the biggest crime in the United Sates, go uninvestigated? To this date it still has not been investigated, furthermore evidence from the crime scene was destroyed as fast as possible. Why?

Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Cheers on April 05, 2016, 11:53:55 PM
Why don't you ever answer what I ask? It's like trying to get blood out of a stone! It shouldn't be this hard!

This specific report does not say what you claim that it said and nor was it ever intended to. So why try and make out that it is something that it isn't? Trying to make out that it said things that it didn't and criticizing it for not including things that it was never intended to and then trying to use that as proof that there is some conspiracy.

Why did you claim that the report said things that it didn't and why do you try and attribute things to it that are missing when they were never intended to be a part of that report anyway?

The law directed us to investigate “facts and
circumstances relating to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001,”


and what were the next sentences which outlined the scope of the report?
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Cheers on April 06, 2016, 12:10:05 AM
The law directed us to investigate “facts and
circumstances relating to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001,”

According to that statement, it has been assumed that the events of September 11 were a "Terrorist Attack". How could that be established without an investigation into the events?.

It goes on to say that that the reason for the 9/11 report was commissioned because of that assumption


An assumption that it was a terrorist attack?

"In November 2001, U.S. forces recovered a videotape from a destroyed house in Jalalabad, Afghanistan. In the video, bin Laden is seen talking to Khaled al-Harbi and admits foreknowledge of the attacks."

On December 27, 2001, a second bin Laden video was released. In the video, he said, "It has become clear that the West in general and America in particular have an unspeakable hatred for Islam. ... It is the hatred of crusaders. Terrorism against America deserves to be praised because it was a response to injustice, aimed at forcing America to stop its support for Israel, which kills our people. ... We say that the end of the United States is imminent, whether Bin Laden or his followers are alive or dead, for the awakening of the Muslim umma (nation) has occurred",

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks

 ( The commission was established on November 27, 2002 (442 days after the attack) and their final report was issued on July 22, 2004.),

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_Commission_Report

By the time it was released in 2004, Bin Laden had claimed responsibility for the attacks.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Cheers on April 06, 2016, 12:31:51 AM

" the  Congress  and  the  President  created  the
National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (Public
Law 107-306, November 27, 2002).
Our mandate was sweeping. The law directed us to investigate “facts and
circumstances relating to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001,” includ-
ing those relating to intelligence agencies, law enforcement agencies, diplo-
macy, immigration  issues  and  border  control, the  flow  of  assets  to  terrorist
organizations, commercial  aviation, the  role  of  congressional  oversight  and
resource allocation,
and other areas determined relevant by the Commission."



The legislation providing the scope for the report

http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/about/107-306.pdf

That's why it never included the missing points that you use for evidence of a conspiracy, it was never intended to. That wasn't the purpose of the report. Might as well get a copy of a Dr Seuss book and point to the lack of reference in that as evidence of a conspiracy.
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Poddy on April 06, 2016, 01:05:50 AM
Cheers I have read the 9/11 Commission Report and it is a propaganda document designed to cover up the atrocity of the September 11 event and to further strip freedom and liberties from U.S, citizens. That document is also used to justify and cover up the non action on September 11.
I am interested in what actually happened to the World Trade Center complex and the events associated those events.
The Official Narrative, whatever it may be, has not addressed those issues and in fact has actively avoided them like the plague.
What I am interested in is, why has officialdom neglected address those issues.

By the way Wikipedia is far from being a reliable source on the events of September 11.
have you ever seen the Bin Laden video confessions? have you bother to compare the video Bin Ladens to the real Bin Laden
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Cheers on April 06, 2016, 01:27:23 AM
You can't have read it because you claimed that it said things that it didn't. You don't even seem to be aware of its purpose.

You may be interested in what happened, but pointing to documents to support your position that don't say what you claim them to say or do what you claim that they do is not going to help you.

The report was never designed to answer that which you seek, so why you are looking for answers there puzzles me. And to use that as proof of a conspiracy??? It's beyond my comprehension.

Oh, and your reliable sources are what?

If you want to find answers, you do need to consider some facts and you don't seem to be using very many of those. You can't just make stuff up to fit your paradigm and expect that it not be debated when presented in a forum designed for that purpose.

Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: lightningdance on April 06, 2016, 08:09:30 AM
lost it.
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: sam on April 06, 2016, 10:04:59 AM
"Poddy, YOU claimed that the report said that the columns were sliced through. I just asked you to show me which report you read to make that statement. The report that I found did not say that. Could you just show me the source of your information rather than a picture that you acknowledge has been photoshopped?"


Same
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: ibis on April 06, 2016, 10:09:14 AM
he'll show you after he adds another option
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: sam on April 06, 2016, 10:12:18 AM
lol
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: sam on April 06, 2016, 10:50:05 AM
Cheers you say that the 9/11 Commission report neglects to mention columns, I will just add that to the other myriad of other things that the neglected to mention and swept under the carpet, like the Newtonian laws.

Disregard the red square that, I expect it is the work of an overzealous photoshop editor, it is supposed to be a woman at the entry wound.
Here is some graphic proof of what the  they missed.  Count the number of columns severed. 
(http://ozopenletter.com/gallery/4161_05_04_16_8_32_10.jpeg)


But that's the thing Poddy.  I can't see any severed columns.  What I can see are sections of the exterior columns dislodged at the points they were joined/connected.   You can see it so clearly.  I can see a few still hanging over a the joints.  Looking at the picture, I can see them being knocked out, not severed.
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Frownland on April 06, 2016, 11:12:05 AM
 what of all of us who witnessed the attack ?  I saw (witnessed ) the planes penetrate the buildings .. i didn't imagine it.
to me a lot of the scepticism is based on the fact that a small group of terrorists brought the buildings down .. ''how could they do that ?'' well.. they did it.
the WTC buildings had nothing like the torsional rigidity of a stressed air-frame .. they were constructed of cheap lighweight materials like ''dry wall'' (gyprock) and aluminium and glass with a core of steel. there's little doubt the planes shape and the limited resistance a modern building offers made the entire event completely feasable and it panned out just as we witnessed   :)
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: sam on April 06, 2016, 11:20:21 AM
"what of all of us who witnessed the attack ?  I saw (witnessed ) the planes penetrate the buildings .. i didn't imagine it."


Yes, there is that.  Forgot about it.  Were you there or watched it in real time on tv (like myself)?  Poddy, what's your take on the live telecast?
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: ibis on April 06, 2016, 11:21:47 AM
I saw (witnessed ) the planes penetrate the buildings .. i didn't imagine it

what you say were holograms  :blank:
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: sam on April 06, 2016, 11:46:12 AM
 :o





https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ek-Q0T9wK2g
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: sam on April 06, 2016, 02:16:49 PM
There should be only one report version

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/sept11/911Report.pdf

OK, I've downloaded it.  Can you point to the page number where it says the jetliners severed perimeter and core columns?
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: lightningdance on April 06, 2016, 05:45:53 PM
Is this a joke thread? Like the moon landing theories that it never happened?
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Cheers on April 06, 2016, 06:38:02 PM

What I am interested in is, why has officialdom neglected address those issues.



Podds, whilst the report we have been referring to is not the one that holds the answers to your questions, (and was never intended to), how is it that you have come to the conclusion that there were not other investigations?

I have found some investigations conducted by the FBI, but not sure what other agencies may be responsible for such investigations.

I guess from here we go the route of identifying which issues you believe have not been addressed and which agencies should have been responsible for doing so.

So, now that we know it is not practical to refer to the report made by the 9/11 Commission as it was not created to address the issues that are on your mind, can we address the issues that you believe exist one at a time so that we can examine each point?
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Cheers on April 07, 2016, 01:14:08 AM

What I am interested in is, why has officialdom neglected address those issues.



Have they neglected to address those issues?

The FBI investigations and responses.

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/ten-years-after-the-fbi-since-9-11/by-the-numbers/the-fbi2019s-9-11-role-by-the-numbers

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/ten-years-after-the-fbi-since-9-11/response-and-recovery/new-york

The flight paths and a few other statistics

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/ten-years-after-the-fbi-since-9-11/the-flights/the-flights
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Icyfroth on May 25, 2016, 05:44:47 PM
Saudi Arabia is livid over the recent passage of a bill in the U.S. Senate that would allow 9/11 victims’ families to sue the Middle Eastern nation.

The bill was recently passed by a unanimous vote, and while the Washington Times reports that President Obama has vowed to veto it, that hasn’t stopped the Saudi Arabian media from coming out swinging against the U.S. government.

According to a Breitbart report, a reporter representing Saudi Arabia is now claiming that the U.S. planned and carried out the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon to create the war on terror.

Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/3130396/saudi-arabia-legal-expert-says-that-u-s-government-blew-up-the-twin-towers-on-911/#b36VlPiIRwDoU4cl.99
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Poddy on May 31, 2016, 11:09:13 PM
Yep that fits very well into the course of events.
if anyone digs deep enough into the whole affair it becomes obvious that the american powers that be in colution with Israel are up to their necks in it.

Follow the money. As in most crimes if you follow the money it will lead you to the perp.
For instance, the Pentagon strike whiped out the team investigating the 2.5 trillion dollar  that could not be accounted for.
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Icyfroth on June 01, 2016, 09:48:26 AM
It created the smoking gun that would leverage the US into war in the Middle East.

Very similar to the way Pearl Harbour leveraged the US in WW2

Previous to that, the Americans wanted no part of it.

Yet where is the outrage?

No-one is getting the message because it gets buried in celebrity news and falls off the page in a few days.
Title: Re: Official Narrative
Post by: Poddy on June 01, 2016, 08:22:34 PM
Icy, do some research on PNAC, Project for a New American Century.