The entire event was a scam that drew the line between people in power and the working class.

Too bad the working class is too busy bickering about stupid shit to do anything about it. These "rich" peons have another thing coming.

I agree but it's more than that.

Since the 60s a revision had been building up.

In the late 1990s and early 2000s was the last stages of this revolution.

Rage Against The Machine type of revolution.

Then we got hit with the worlds biggest threat and it "united" all of us. If you were now a "reactionary" you were no different than a terrorist or were seen as unpatriotic.

They tried again with the Occupy movement but then AGAIN it was distraction and division before letting the full force get unleashed.

There is a wave of change coming. And the powers that be can keep trying to build flood dams. But their karma is going to come back.

I can remember when it was "unpatriotic" to question the 2003 Iraq invasion.

Then his unit burnt his armor and personal diaries. Truly fucked up.

Link please?

They've stripped his wiki page and links. Unbelievable. I can't find shit regarding this, yet it happened.

Lemme look deeper.

Army Secretary Peter Geren is expected to recommend that a retired three-star general be demoted for his role in providing misleading information about the death of Army Ranger Pat Tillman, military officials say, in what would be a stinging and rare rebuke.

Lt. Gen. Philip Kensinger, who headed Army special operations, is one of seven high-ranking Army officers expected to get official reprimands for making critical errors in reporting the circumstances of Tillman's friendly-fire shooting in Afghanistan in April 2004.

The probes found that nine officers — including four generals — were at fault in providing the bad information and should be held accountable. But the reports determined that there was no criminal wrongdoing in the actual shooting, and that there was no deliberate cover-up. https://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-07-26-tillman_N.htm

I'll continue to update this as I go.

Tillman's celebrity, as one who gave up a professional football contract to join the Army after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, made his death major news. The military at first concocted a heroic story about how Tillman, a specialist posthumously promoted to corporal, had been killed in a fierce firefight with the enemy, despite obvious evidence that he had been shot by his own men at close range. More than a month later, a military investigation reported publicly that the death was not linked to enemy fire.

White House Denies Request for Documents in Ex-NFL Player's Death

Army medical examiners were suspicious about the close proximity of the three bullet holes in Pat Tillman's forehead and tried without success to get authorities to investigate whether the former NFL player's death amounted to a crime, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press.

"The medical evidence did not match up with the, with the scenario as described," a doctor who examined Tillman's body after he was killed on the battlefield in Afghanistan in 2004 told investigators. The doctors — whose names were blacked out — said that the bullet holes were so close together that it appeared the Army Ranger was cut down by an M-16 fired from a mere 10 yards or so away.

Ultimately, the Pentagon did conduct a criminal investigation, and asked Tillman's comrades whether he was disliked by his men and whether they had any reason to believe he was deliberately killed. The Pentagon eventually ruled that Tillman's death at the hands of his comrades was a friendly-fire accident.

The medical examiners' suspicions were outlined in 2,300 pages of testimony released to the AP this week by the Defense Department in response to a Freedom of Information Act request.

• In his last words moments before he was killed, Tillman snapped at a panicky comrade under fire to shut up and stop "sniveling."

• Army attorneys sent each other congratulatory e-mails for keeping criminal investigators at bay as the Army conducted an internal friendly-fire investigation that resulted in administrative, or non-criminal, punishments.

• The three-star general who kept the truth about Tillman's death from his family and the public told investigators some 70 times that he had a bad memory and couldn't recall details of his actions.

• No evidence at all of enemy fire was found at the scene — no one was hit by enemy fire, nor was any government equipment struck.

The Pentagon and the Bush administration have been criticized in recent months for lying about the circumstances of Tillman's death. The military initially told the public and the Tillman family that he had been killed by enemy fire. Only weeks later did the Pentagon acknowledge he was gunned down by fellow Rangers.

With questions lingering about how high in the Bush administration the deception reached, Congress is preparing for yet another hearing next week.

The Pentagon is separately preparing a new round of punishments, including a stinging demotion of retired Lt. Gen. Philip R. Kensinger Jr., 60, according to military officials who spoke on condition of anonymity because the punishments under consideration have not been made public.

In more than four hours of questioning by the Pentagon inspector general's office in December 2006, Kensinger repeatedly contradicted other officers' testimony, and sometimes his own. He said on some 70 occasions that he did not recall something.

At one point, he said: "You've got me really scared about my brain right now. I'm really having a problem."

Tillman's mother, Mary Tillman, who has long suggested that her son was deliberately killed by his comrades, said she is still looking for answers and looks forward to the congressional hearings next week.

"Nothing is going to bring Pat back. It's about justice for Pat and justice for other soldiers. The nation has been deceived," she said.

The documents show that a doctor who autopsied Tillman's body was suspicious of the three gunshot wounds to the forehead. The doctor said he took the unusual step of calling the Army's Human Resources Command and was rebuffed. He then asked an official at the Army's Criminal Investigation Division if the CID would consider opening a criminal case.

"He said he talked to his higher headquarters and they had said no," the doctor testified.

Also according to the documents, investigators pressed officers and soldiers on a question Mrs. Tillman has been asking all along.

"Have you, at any time since this incident occurred back on April 22, 2004, have you ever received any information even rumor that Cpl. Tillman was killed by anybody within his own unit intentionally?" an investigator asked then-Capt. Richard Scott.

Scott, and others who were asked, said they were certain the shooting was accidental.

Investigators also asked soldiers and commanders whether Tillman was disliked, whether anyone was jealous of his celebrity, or if he was considered arrogant. They said Tillman was respected, admired and well-liked.

The documents also shed new light on Tillman's last moments.

It has been widely reported by the AP and others that Spc. Bryan O'Neal, who was at Tillman's side as he was killed, told investigators that Tillman was waving his arms shouting "Cease fire, friendlies, I am Pat (expletive) Tillman, damn it!" again and again.

But the latest documents give a different account from a chaplain who debriefed the entire unit days after Tillman was killed.

The chaplain said that O'Neal told him he was hugging the ground at Tillman's side, "crying out to God, help us. And Tillman says to him, 'Would you shut your (expletive) mouth? God's not going to help you; you need to do something for yourself, you sniveling ..." Web Archive

I'll continue to update this as I go. Waybackmachine is saying pages no longer exist. No shit.

It's all being wiped from memory.

History is "written" by the victors. Ha.

Friendly fire via WA Post

Soldiers on the scene said they were immediately sure Tillman was killed by a barrage of American bullets as he took shelter behind a large boulder during a twilight firefight along a narrow canyon road near the Pakistani border, according to nearly 2,000 pages of interview transcripts and investigative reports obtained by The Washington Post.

The documents also show that officers made erroneous initial reports that Tillman was killed by enemy fire, destroyed critical evidence and initially concealed the truth from Tillman's brother, also an Army Ranger, who was near the attack on April 22, 2004, but did not witness it.

It's still that way. You know this.

No, it isnt. Now it is antisemitic.

Only on this sub.

I’m proud to be an American, because at least I know that I’m free....pfft

As long as the vast majority of people are fed and have roofs over their heads (EBT, Section 8 housing) there won't be any revolution.

Material comforts placate the masses. Such is the genius of the elites’ façade.

Current administration is not placating the poor. Time's they are a'changin'.

If your "revolution" is to implement some kind of communist world order then you are now my enemy. I can't believe some people in the "conspiracy community" want some form of state control or centrally planned economy. Skeptical of government, yet want to empower an even stronger more secretive and ruthless government in its place? Doesn't make much sense to me.

Or we want, ya know, an actual democracy rather than the oligarchy run by the rich, twisted fucks our government is currently controlled by?

You don't think those same twisted rich fucks wouldn't be your ruler in a proletarian dictatorship? Power corrupts my friend and the same predatory disgusting elites will rise to power no matter what kind of government is in place. You think Stalin, Lenin and the rest of those pieces of garbage were some working class heros? Psychopaths are drawn to power and when you give the state even more power like socialists do you get an even more corrupt ruthless regime that have no qualms in murdering people in the name of the greater good.

Who ever claimed they wanted communism? I said a democracy...

Why? You still want rulers? You want a tyranny of the majority?

Right?

Like where did anyone on here mention replacing what we have with communism, haha

I think we can all agree that we would never implement a communist "government", after being able to rid ourselves of the corruption.

Relevant user name.

You watched Rage Against The Machine videos on Moloch Television.

The entire event

If you are referring to 9/11, how far have you looked into the symbolism of what took place that day?

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Jewish%20Lightning

Lucky Larry!

record deletion

Building 7 was demolished to hide evidence of how the Twins were demolished. It was the command center for the 2 main demolitions, and they chose to destroy that evidence rather than have it discovered and have some very, very difficult questions to answer.

You know they were in a tough bind when pulling it and having to come up with an explanation for its unexplainable collapse was seen as preferable to having to explain what investigators would have found in the basement had they left it standing.

93 was intended to hit into building 7 but something happened causing the plane to crash. They still decided to "pull it" even though there was no catalyst for the collapse to happen. This was the biggest mistakes ever made and with the rise of the internet age the lies get exposed at an exponential rate.

93 was intended to hit into building 7

Exactly. Something went wrong, but they wen't ahead with it anyway.

While the official WTC I and II stories are impossible, I always felt the 9/11 movement would do better focusing on WTC VII and the Pentagon.

In the aftermath of 9/11, I think it is somewhat unlikely we will have the option of electing a good person as President. We will be forced to deal with the newest bride of this 21st century monstrosity of a government. Obama...McCain...Romney...Clinton...etc. All sociopaths?

I like how you mention 1 president, 3 non presidents, and leave out the current president.

The jury is still out on the current president. So far, they are all extreme war mongers. That says a lot.

Has Trump stopped the drone attacks? Ni Has he pulled out everyone from the middle east? No. He is continuing the war monger policies of Obama, who was continue the war monger policies of Bush.

Trump has had plenty of time to stop this and he hasn't.

The jury is not still out.

Trump actually cut funding to Syrian rebels after he got office, though he's still supporting the Saudi and Israel regimes like you said. North Korea talks could be promising at least, we'll see.

we'll see

Civilian deaths by drone strikes have spiked with Trump. We're already seeing what he is: Another war-puppet of a president, sucking Satan's cock like his predecessors.

I can't believe anyone takes the role of president seriously. You've noticed they all recite lines written for them by other people? How foreign policy in particular follows a smooth curve from one president to the next? Yeah.

I agree he's a Zionist puppet but at least so far we haven't had entire countries (Libya, Syria, Iraq) added to list of destabilization. One of the things he ran on was to stay out of Syria and he's tried his hardest but the damn lies about gas attacks keep pulling him back in.

Presidents are like gameshow hosts to take the critical punches instead to the people controlling the MIC & private fed "money on the backs of working slave income taxpayers".

I've heard others say 93 was crashed intentionally to make up a bogus story of some people fighting back.

This makes more sense than a third plane into WTC7, to me.

Why does that make more sense?

Look up the trajectory of 93. It takes it no where near NYC. Crashed intentionaly makes tons more sense considering.

Fascinating explanation!

But wasn’t 93 headed for Washington?

You can bet they spent most of the day debating whether or not to pull it, which is why it wasn't taken out until 5 pm or so that day.

Wouldn't this kind of decision already been taken in the planning phase? Seems odd to leave the ending to such a complex plan/conspiracy up to last minute debate.

Because radical Muslims are nice and would never fly planes into buildings and kill thousands of Americans.

Yes, we all saw the thing happen live on TV and all evidence confirms - but muh never ending mental gymnastics...

Yes, we all saw the thing happen live on TV

Many of us saw three buildings come down basically identically when only two planes were involved.

You're not gonna convince anyone of this horseshit here.

Possibly. I don't believe the people directly responsible for activating the Twins demolition scheme were the same ones who planned "9/11" though. They were victims in a sense and doing what they thought best at the time.

Though you can be sure all 3 buildings already had their method of demolition calculated and in-place long in advance, and it had nothing to do with any conventional means of demolition much less absurd and borderline retarded "fire" theories.

I'm waiting another 15 years and hoping someone involved spills the beans on their death bed

'Spill the beans' to who?

Neo’s expiration date.

And that is just the beginning of the Matrix -> 9/11 rabbit hole.

Even if there was a "plausible reason" to pull it, how could you rig it for implosion floor by floor in just a few hours (and while it was supposedly on enough fire to threaten collapse)? Impossible.

It was originally intended to be hit by flight 93, but something wen't wrong.

The 'plane' that wrecked and left no plane wreckage

It was rigged well before the day.

The insurance papers rubbed against the mortgage papers and started a fire.

Underrated comment

The insurance papers rubbed against the mortgage papers and those rubbed against the us constitution, the talmud and 12 hours of banking records, and started a fire.

ftfy lol

It could literally be just money. Some people are just that rotten.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=XgcQJxmx028

This should put all notions that the building came down because of fire to rest.

People say this is evidence of wtc7 being demolished with explosives and then other people say this is evidence of the floors collapsing seconds before the whole building came down due to fire.

This video is the love child of evidence and and roschach test at this point.

This link doesn’t work anymore..... weird

This video is fake, edited disinfo, similar to videos showing missiles hitting the Pentagon. It was a controlled demolition but I wouldn't use this video as evidence.

There is no justifiable reason for Bldg 7 to be "pulled". It was "pulled" because that was in the "plan". The plan to create a "new Pearl Harbour"

You seriously dont believe a camel hugger in cave pulled off the worst atrocity in the history of the country surely?

In the same manner of as the drills that were occurring on the same day were training for. Just...

Pull as in pull the fire crews. It didn’t mean pull the building down.

The building collapsed because of the fire. People claim that’s impossible but it just happened in Brazil. Buildings fail when they burn for long periods of time.

Yeah but thats when theyre fully engulfed and even then rarely and not after burning for like a day

No, that’s not true. They pulled the crews at 3:30. The building is collapsed at 5:21. That’s almost 2 hours later.

Why are you down voting and ignoring the truth? Other person is right. It was left to burn without firefighters hours before it came down

Because facts and logic break their BS theory.

The building collapsed because they couldn’t control the fire.

If you listen to full the recording in context he is saying to pull the crews that are in the building. Whether they demolished the building or not is a separate issue.

Ok, for the record I don't believe the official 9/11 story. But if you are looking for 1 plausible explanation as to why a building would be "pulled", it could've been a safety issue to leave it standing.

Again, I don't believe this to be the case...but it is a reason to demolish it.

Enron evidence was housed in the security and exchange office in building 7 all was lost. Cheney was involved in Enron

I can’t believe no one has mentioned this yet.

The reason is most likely tied to the fact that WTC 7 held some critical offices to National Security. Namely, the CIA.

My theory: WTC 7 was always rigged for demolition in the event that the CIA office had to be evacuated by all personnel. The last person to leave starts the timer, leaves, and notice is given to the Fire Department that the decision has been made to pull the building, so it gets evacuated by all FD personnel.

Not necessarily. He definitely has a CIA handler though who probably told him what to say.

The destruction was just a natural consequence of preexisting emergency procedure.

Do you have any evidence whatsoever to support this speculation?

It was home to the financial records of big corporations. Select companies had their debt erased along with the building.

And pulled during a terror attack. And the amount of time to rig an office building, esp in Manhattan, for demo takes more than 30 mins.

It takes weeksactually.. with drilling into concrete pillars and fuse-wires everywhere. It's not like the movies where they just slap on a remote-controlled stick of c4 to a pillar and off you go...

Ive soent a lot of time thinking about this and how it fits. And believe you me that i dont believe the official explanation. Wtc7 was definately rigged to blow but the decision to do that wasnt a primary part of the overal plan. As if it was a plan b option.

So was it pulled to hide some kind of corporate intel or aomething along those lines? Possibly. But why the whole building? Maybe part of the plan was to burn certain areas and if maybe that wasnt successful then the killswitch could have been used.

Was it pulled for aome type of public safety concern? Super duper minimal possibility. Mostly because this could have been executed later after the madness with the consultation of many other people when things calmed down the next day or through the week.

Money? This is my best guess and i think it fits occams razor. Why was larry involved so much? I guess because he was in on it but for the insurance payouts. He got twice back in insurance for all 3 buildings if im not mistaken. TWICE. So he didnt just get paid back and compensated for the destruction. He sued again and got a second double dip. This guy made out like a bandit. And this is one of the facts we dont need to theorize. I mean, go double check that i am recalling it correctly, but its not a theory. It happened. My guess is he insisted on being given a killswitch for wtc7 and the option to pull. That order was relayed to those capable of execution and when larry made the call they followed his order. Then larry got paid.

He wasn't a firefighter, he was part of the demolition team. It was pulled exactly like the other towers, minus the jets. You're not so dense as to think they were executing a professional demolition shortly after the other towers were dropped? Much work needs to be done in advance to demolish a building. 911 was murder, mass murder, and the conspirators should be hanging from the spikes on the memorial, Larry should be on the highest one, upside down, naked like Mussolini.

Hear! Hear!

When you're committing a crime you maintain radio silence. Your point is not clear at all. Talk about a needle in a haystack. Non sequitur. What's your point? Are you defending the murderers?

Ok, I'll stop reserving a memorial spike for you. Seems to me the NSA already knows who pushes for justice on the mass murder, and more importantly, they know who produce false theories, distractions and general shilling against same. An analysis will show the IP of said parties, where their located, and the web that connects these parties, finally a forensic financial analyst could follow the money to the planners and perpetrators, cementing the connection to PNAC.

Then interrogations should proceed until these is no reasonable doubt as to who did it. Finally we can make some neckties and rent a crane to escort them to the spikes. It could be a pay per view show benefiting the victims and their families.

I believe WTC7 was meant to go to down in the smoke of the twin towers. No questions asked.

When the smoke cleared, they realized they fucked up. They evacuated to avoid questions, then blew the rest of the charges. 9 seconds later the building was gone.

Has anybody here looked into building eight? If so what do you think caused it, to me it almost looks like a direct energy weapon... it looks like someone just scooped out the whole middle of the building

Think you're thinking of building 6

Yeah i couldn't remember which one it was, i knew it was a number next to 7 haha but its certainly scary shit, makes me wonder if building 7 is just a distraction

Super weird and scary shit for sure. Don't think 7 is a distraction as most never even knew about it. It still isn't well known. But 6 deserves much more attention than it gets for sure

That's what I'm thinking, 7 was the go to for "conspiracy theorists" but even among that group 6 is virtually unheard of I honestly only heard about it from the Talk is Jericho podcast and was like... damn haha. I do think it's a good thing that more people are learning about 7 and it being a controlled demo but I really want more info on 6 I really can't imagine what could've done that to a structure

Yeah it's crazy. I heard about it here I think, and I think it was this video by Dana Durnford - guy is super intense and I love it. He does a lot of Fukushima vids which are pretty great. That video has some crazy pictures, like the one from the thumbnail here

That guy is standing inside the hole and you can count the floors as Dana shows. It's all missing material. Fucking nuts

Thats sweet imma check those out tomorrow thanks bud!

Insurance.

If I am a firefighter and just witnessed the most horrible terrorist attack, the last thing I would be thinking about is "pulling" or demolishing a building that is still in tact

Because pull it meant pull firefighters out of the building. Listen to the entire exchange and you understand the context of the statement.

You mixed your commen sense in with my conspiracy theories.

They had been planning on how to demolish the building since the 1980s. Asbestos and problems with the aluminum facade being bolted directly to the steel beams creating electro galvanic corrosion.

In the 1980s they used an entire floor for a team engineers to plan out how to demolish the buildings. After a year the team was dismissed. The total cost was going to be $6 billion in 1980s money.

Basically it was to expensive and to dangerous demolish publicly.

I don’t buy it. Asbestos is safe as long as it’s not tempered with. You can encapsulate it in Place. Many buildings have asbestos. It’s only an issue when you tear it down or remodel it for the most part.

I worked on several projects in Vegas where many of the buildings had asbestos. We didn’t tear the building down. We just didn’t touch the asbestos.

One question did you know pull it was a code word in demolition before the 9/11 event?

"pull it" is not used in demolition.

I have never worked in demolition so cannot speak to the truth of this however truthers often cite this as the OP seem's to have done. My point is the person who said "pull it" was unlikely to have known demolition terminology.

isn't the obvious reason that it wouldve been pulled to keep it in its footprint and avoid it toppling onto other buildings? i'm pretty sure that'll be the story about the twin towers too, when they admit they were all demolished with internal charges

Have you ever been to New York? When they toppled they damaged buildings blocks away. As in tore big holes in granite. I’ve seen it. The damage is mind boggling.

It wasn’t a controlled demolition.

of course i've been to new york. it's impossible to demolish a building without damaging another. half of the highrises in nyc have nets on them because they're falling apart, but they can't be traditionally demolished, because a controlled demolition is not controlled enough to not affect other buildings in an urban setting. they literally have to pick buildings apart from the top down, and they've never done it on a building as large as the WTC buildings.

a lot of good answers here

record destruction insurance free up the land

the differential in land price before and after the demolition of the entire complex is massive due to the fact they were condemned buildings filled with asbesthos

if they left it up it would still have to be destroyed and in another 5 hours it would have been a symbol of resilience, if it was still standing it would have been a huuuuuuge mess for the owners.

the first step to realizing what 9/11 is about is realizing they were condemned buildings the owner desperately wanted destroyed, not some national treasure or precious infrastructure.

Think about it, now this one guy and his descendants and friends have the 'freedom' sic tower, maybe the biggest perpetual free money fountain in the world, and that may print money for hundreds of years.

Dozens of people won't work a day in their lives from this money, and silverstein is a zionist over american, so you can expect all manner of israel/mossad hijinx in that building for sure. (just like you can the new white house probably btw fwiw)

building 7 was taken down because it was planned, because someone wanted to capitalize on the real estate price differential and avoid costly government regulations, and they wanted the power to rebuild things and profit off of it.

it's like buying an old car that can barely even move, throwing a rock at it, then claiming it was destroyed by religious fanatics from peru, and then using the insurance money to build an 18 wheeler and then calling yourself a national hero.

only there were 3000 people killed and it freaked everybody in the world t/f out.

That's not what "pulling" means. They meant pull the firefighters out because the building was beyond hope. "Pull" is not used in demolition to mean detonate. For that they use the word "shoot," not "pull."

Why did Silverstein say pull 'it' rather than pull 'them', then?

He meant to say 'pull out' to the firemen, not 'pull it'..

Silverstein had drawn up plans for WTC7’s replacement well before 9/11. Like the other buildings it was riddled with asbestos and a white elephant that would require a very expensive refit to clear it.

Better to grossly over insure the building and demolish it.

The perps behind 9/11 needed Silverstein’s help to lease the whole site, he actually only owned WTC7, to change the security and maintenance crews and allow access to plant explosives, as planes alone would not bring them down. In effect the planes were the patsies.

Silverstein’s reward for his cooperation and silence, was a new asbestos free building and of course the enormous insurance payout for the whole site.

The “reward” for the responders and workers clearing the site, is continuing illness and death from the effects of inhaling the asbestos dust. Not sure, but I think I read that more fireman et al, have died since 9/11 from related health issues than died on the day, The “gift” that keeps on killing.

He didn't grossly over insure it. The financial backers actually wanted more insurance coverage. Larry actually wanted less.

Mr. Silverstein was wrangling with the banks backing his bid, Mr. Boyd explained in the memo, a copy of which was obtained by The Observer . The banks wanted $5 billion in coverage. Mr. Silverstein’s team, which then valued the complex at $3.9 billion, argued that a total catastrophe was “outside the realm of possibility.” Mr. Silverstein himself had dismissed the cost of such insurance-$25 million a year-as “far too expensive,” the memo said.

Ultimately the banks settled for less, $3.5 billion in coverage. Twelve days later, Mr. Silverstein closed the deal.

Silverstein also wasn't the one who originally won the bidding to begin with. Vornado won but the owner didn't have enough financial backing to pay the price he bid. After several months the Port Authority gave up with them and went to the runner up, Larry, who still had backing issues to work out himself even.

That being said, Larry owed a mortgage on the buildings. The insurance payout had to pay for that. The actual contract also required that he rebuild the buildings along with paying the same rent payment even if a building wasn't there. Just to try and get enough to cover everything he had to go through lawsuits (lawsuits which he didn't win). So, for a guy who was so in on it...he's seems very out of the loop.

It was filled with asbestos is one theory. Silverstein bought it, but instead of paying more than the building was worth to clean it up, he had it demolished and cashed out on the insurance - twice, I believe, since the WTC was considered two terrorist attacks.

Not necessarily. He definitely has a CIA handler though who probably told him what to say.

Or we want, ya know, an actual democracy rather than the oligarchy run by the rich, twisted fucks our government is currently controlled by?