English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

16 answers

No... but sometimes the media does.

They sometimes conveniently forget to include the fact that they were Islamic extremists.

Thanks for your question! Have a great day.

2007-01-16 07:06:58 · answer #1 · answered by theearlybirdy 4 · 3 0

Yes they are. When the Bush administration took over from the clinton administration they were told that Al Qaeda was planning an attack. Bush was basking in the Sun and enjoying his golfing, crawford ranch holidays and hugging the Arabs with Dick Cheney while neglecting his responsibilities. This is enjoying the victorty from the recent victory in the 2000 Dud election.Remeber 9/11 happened in the year 2001. He took over office in year 2000. Due to his neglect the terrorist had the upper hand. While bush was rubbing shoulders with the Saudi Arabs and trying to manipulate the oil market back here in Texas. Now you know why the price of gas has shot up. In Clintons admin the price of gas was $1 per gallon. In Bush admin it went over $3 and hovers around $2.5 most of his tenure. While the oil companies have been reaping in record profits.

2007-01-16 15:38:49 · answer #2 · answered by saran_d 2 · 0 0

Not only do I think the NeoCons are covering up the truth about 9/11, but I think the official 9/11 story is a "Big Lie".

_____________________________

Most all the evidence that is available to us, show that the WTC buildings were rigged with explosives. Our own government had motive as was well as an opportunity to do this crime. Here is the evidence, presented for your scrutiny.

FAKE CONFESSION
The official government story is that the 9/11 attack was orchestrated by Al Qaeda, which is lead by Osama bin Laden. The proof our government provided was a video with Osama confessing to the crime. The problem with the video is that the person in the video does not look like Osama bin Laden: See picture.
http://911blimp.net/vid_fakeOsamaVideo.shtml
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pk519bkcLjg

EVIDENCE
There are many other factors that do not fit the official story. They include, secondary explosions that were seen, heard, reported, and recorded by firefighters, in and around the WTC buildings.
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-4574366633014832928&q=firefighter+bombs+in+the+building
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcRs1fv8i3I
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHz9YWVgJWM

Here is a video clip showing a trail of explosions just before the destruction wave.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_DkzhonpGY&mode=related&search=

Molten, beyond red hot, "steel" was video recorded coming out of the South Tower just before it collapsed. Jet fuel does not burn hot enough to turn steel to liquid. Melted red hot steel was also found in "ground zero" of all three WTC buildings, including WTC7; the one no jet ever hit.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=ExrVgioIXvk&search=thermite
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3D2myMbQjQ

FORENSICS
A chemical analysis of the solidified molten iron,conducted by independent firms, yielded an explosive, called Thermite. Also found was a WTC core beam; most probably cut using the demolition cutting charge (Thermate). No core beams were left standing beyond a few feet high, for it to have been cut by an Iron Workers torch. Click on pic. to enlarge.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc_charges.html

CONFESSION
We also have a video recording, where owner Larry Silverstein, admits to demolishing WTC7.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7750532340306101329

MOTIVE
The New Conservatives (Neo-Cons), with the help of their friends, started planning the invasion of Iraq, shortly after Pres. Bush took office. Apparently, the plan would include the attack of the WTC buildings. It did this to get the support of congress and the nation, to attack Iraq. Read it from their own PENAC document. Pay special attention to the section entitled "Creating Tomorrow's Dominant Force" page 50 and the top of page 51, where it states we need a new Pearl Harbor attack to get the ball rolling.
http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

OPPORTUNITY
Witnesses saw a work crew going into the WTC buildings with rolls of wire, supposedly for internet upgrades. Tenants were moved around while crews "upgraded" the cable systems. The Port Authority cut power to the building for a whole weekend, just prior to the attack; shutting down the entire security systems. Witnesses also heard crews operating heavy hammering equipment that left a gray cement like dust, in the building. This activity took place just weeks before the 911 attack: The Port Authority had released control of the buildings to Larry Silverstein, six weeks prior to the attack: He made upwards of $5 billion off of the attack.
See "9/11 Mysteries" video: Time = 1:03:55 through 1:07:00 and 1:19:55 through 1:24:09
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6708190071483512003&q=911+mysteries&hl=en-CA

__________________________________

There is also strong evidence to support a Douglas A-3 Skywarrior armed with a missile hit the Pentagon. One thing we can be certain about; it was not a Boeing 757, as our government claims. Listen to this retired General, He says, "The Plane does not fit the hole; so what did hit the Pentagon...?"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2VoUN-7RVU&eurl=

One might expect to see three holes in the pentagon, one for the main body and two more for each engine. The engine and engine parts were found outside of the building, they never penetrated the building thus no hole was created by them. The deep 18 foot hole was most probably made by an on board missile and not the aircraft itself. A radiation expert claims high-radiation readings near the Pentagon indicates depleted uranium (DU) munitions may have been used.
http://www.rense.com/general67/radfdf.htm

Witnesses say, the U.S. military secretly had Raytheon Co. refit an A-3 Skywarrior with new jet engines, a missile, and a Global Hawk guidance system, just prior to 9/11. Coincidentally, five key executives of Raytheon Co. went missing on 9/11. The official word is they died in the hijacked planes on 9/11.
http://tomflocco.com/fs/WitnessesLink.htm

The Jet engine(s) found may be key to identifying what type of aircraft hit the Pentagon: At the very least, they help determine a Boeing 757 did not hit the Pentagon. Both the jet engine housing as well as a "front end rotor head" have been identified as belonging to a Pratt & Whitney JT8D jet engine. The P&W JT8D engine has been used on the smaller Boeing 727 as well as a retrofit for the A-3 Skywarior. Two P&W JT8D's do not provide enough thrust to get a Boeing 757 off the ground much less sufficient power to perform the military precision maneuvers the aircraft in question did.
http://www.rense.com/general63/ident.htm
http://www.karlschwarz.com/02-02-05_Schwarz.pdf

A photograph of a cracked windshield found at the crash site strongly resembles the top canopy glass found on the Skywarrior: No windows of this shape are found on a Boeing 757.
http://home.att.net/~carlson.jon/911Pentagon.htm

The landing gear is one part found in the crash site that may be linked to a Boeing 757. It could also be a part that was retrofitted on an A-3 Skywarrior, since the wheels would most likely need to be replaced with something still available.
http://www.pentagonresearch.com/084.html

A geometric analysis can show the aircraft that hit the Pentagon is under 85 feet long and therefore too small to be a Boeing 757, which is over 155 feet long. An A-3 Skywarrior is 76 feet 4 inches long. See geometric analysis: also see revision note under comments.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Avt4N5qfsIKkwbXeL7iLXmPsy6IX?qid=20061122203115AAj8XR6

2007-01-16 23:34:02 · answer #3 · answered by Joe_Pardy 5 · 0 0

Bias history- it means history written by the victors. Propanga which is extended to fit the victors agenda. But anyways, the truth is Bush did not warn the nation about an in coming attack on Us soil neither did he care at the time what the Cia was telling him. That is the truth.

2007-01-16 15:20:05 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

It's all about how you look at covering up the truth, but in all actuality the government did in fact do nothing to prevent it from happening. Do I think that it was controlled? No, i honestly don't think that it was controlled. In my honest belief it was a really dumb mistake!

2007-01-16 15:08:50 · answer #5 · answered by chapman_red 2 · 2 1

Not much truth that wasn't seen live on television that day. If you do, you need a hobby.

2007-01-16 15:08:38 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

If you think they are covering up "the truth" then what is the truth??

2007-01-16 15:20:02 · answer #7 · answered by Da-Nuh-Nuh Da-Nuh-Nuh 2 · 1 1

I think they may be fudging a bit. My opinion is they were well aware of what was going to happen but..they let it happen because they needed the public approval to go into the middle east, and what better way to get that than let a bunch of middle easterners blow up our shiot. The public gets mad and gives Bush and his posse the A-ok to go blow up some tents...

2007-01-16 15:17:39 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

Yup

2007-01-16 15:14:11 · answer #9 · answered by timmy2505 2 · 1 1

yes because we got warnings about it but nobody did anything to protect those people.in a way it pissed me off because if they knew why didnt the government do something?

2007-01-16 15:10:17 · answer #10 · answered by kate 1 · 1 2

fedest.com, questions and answers