FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in 
Top Reasons Indicating an Inside Job
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> 9/11 HardCorps Specifics Investigation
  ::  Previous topic :: Next topic  
Author Message
macauleym



Joined: 27 Jan 2006
Posts: 124

PostPosted: Sat Sep 02, 2006 6:21 pm    Post subject: The importance of history to undermining the 9/11 myth Reply with quote

After reading DL's and Gary's posts in this thread, I was going to post a reply here, but it turned out rather long and isn't specifically about "top reasons why 9/11 was an inside job", so I posted it as a new topic in 9/11 3i Discussion:

The importance of history to undermining the 9/11 myth

Follow the link if you're interested (it's tangentially related to this thread); otherwise, carry on.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dilbert_g
Guest





PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2006 4:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I realized I took the "Top Ten" and changed it, so I APOLOGIZE TO ALL if that was too arrogant of me.

What I mean is, I changed the topic from "Top Ten" to "How to make a case verbally", which I happen to like, but I did not ACK changing the topic somewhat.

(I hope my later 'reduction' to Top Four is more in line with brevity.)
Back to top
Squinn



Joined: 19 Feb 2006
Posts: 19

PostPosted: Tue Sep 05, 2006 5:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Those who benefited from 9/11:

1. Weapons Industry

2. Oil Industry
a. Afghanistan pipeline
b. Iraqi oil wells

3. George W. Bush
a. Family
b. Friends
c. Business partners

4. Insider Traders

5. Insurance Beneficiaries
a. Larry Silverstein
b. Westfield America, Inc.
c. Lloyd Goldman

6. US Government

7. United Nations

8. Israel

9. Media

10. Illuminati
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Continuity



Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Posts: 1671
Location: Municipal Flat Block 18A, Linear North

PostPosted: Tue Sep 05, 2006 6:30 pm    Post subject: Lloyd Goldman Reply with quote

Wasn't familiar with 5(c) Lloyd Goldman - so I Googled him - 1st thing that pops up:
Quote:
A CHRONOLOGY OF STRUGGLE AT 111

Nancy Wells works in her unheated apartment/artist's studio while the walls of adjacent vacant studios are coming down around her, and the hallways fill with plaster dust and exposed electrical wiring from the unsupervised and reckless demolition of her occupied building. Disabled with a broken arm, she is one of the many determined tenant artists resisting the efforts of Jersey City's richest slumlord, New York billionaire real estate speculator Lloyd Goldman, (co-owner of the World Trade Center) to drive them from their studios and demolish the arts center at 111 First Street. They've had to contend with an apparently orchestrated campaign of intimidation and harrassment, including arson, car bashings, and being deprived of heat since Nov.7, 2004.

BRIEF ON 111 FIRST STREET ART BUILDING

The 111 First Street Arts Center is located near the waterfront in Jersey City, just across the Hudson River from the World Trade Center site. Built in the 1860's, the famous P. Lorillard Tobacco Company, once one of the largest of our nation's tobacco manufacturers, is now the 111 Building, a unique brick architectural treasure.

The 111 First Street Building is owned by NY/NJ property owner Lloyd Goldman. Investors Lloyd Goldman and Joseph Cayre joined with developer Larry Silverstein in buying the World Trade Center 99-year lease for $3.2 billion.

Since 1988, the 111 building has been a mixed-use complex. While the majority of tenants are visual artists, the building's roster also includes musicians, composers, filmmakers, crafts people, custom cabinetmakers, art galleries, art-furniture makers, graphic artists, stained-glass artists and artisans, actors, yoga and therapeutic massage studios. This magnetic cultural community is the product of almost two decades of effort by hundreds of professional artists and small-business owners, whose contribution toward the creation of a positive humanistic and human scale identity for Jersey City is now seriously in jeopardy. It's loss would be a tragedy. The tenants at 111 First Street are struggling to make sure that does not happen.
......


Sounds like a *nice* bloke, hunh?

from: http://www.111first.com/news/whatsnew_detail.cfm?id_news=67074995

_________________
The rule for today.
Touch my tail, I shred your hand.
New rule tomorrow.

Cat Haiku
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
dilbert_g
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 4:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'd send him a nasty letter too, but my time is not unlimited.

I'll put it on my list.

Naturally jerks like him would destroy an art community to raze it and build an empty office building.
Back to top
destro
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 8:20 am    Post subject: firefighters or the government Reply with quote

aspectus wrote:
here's my quick feeble attempt

10- internal papers like northwoods etc
9- history of false flag terror
8- the blame put on CIA assets
7- the false war that followed
6- mysterious building 7 collapse, and what was inside that building
5- thermate like spew just before collapse
6- conspicuous suicides ater the fact
5- resignations of top officials after the fact
4- pre-event insider trading
3- immediate disposal of evidence
2- lack of defense against the second strike
1- duh snap the fuck out of it dude, watch the buildings fall


aspectus you forgot to mention the LIES of the EPA and the coverup of the death of nearly a thousand workers down at ground zero. plus all the dogs that died. Plus on a personal note I've always said this, my own bent on 9.11 is; look 343 firefighters died that day, firefighters have instincts about, 'is it safe to enter this burning building?' I just don't believe that every fireman who reported to the scene that day had the wrong instinct, those who went in and those who failed their brothers, NO i dont believe THAT, and that's my beef on 9.11. Maybe its because I had a grandfather that was a volunteer firefighter and im irrational on this point, but if guts count for anything that's my gut.
Your thoughts?
Back to top
dilbert_g
Guest





PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2006 1:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
LIES of the EPA and the coverup of the death of nearly a thousand workers down at ground zero.
plus all the dogs that died.

Plus on a personal note I've always said this, my own bent on 9.11 is; look 343 firefighters died that day, firefighters have instincts about, 'is it safe to enter this burning building?' I just don't believe that every fireman who reported to the scene that day had the wrong instinct, those who went in and those who failed their brothers, NO i dont believe THAT, and that's my beef on 9.11.


Example of a moron post from a seemingly intelligent guy = CIA Fake.

EPA failures/ordering workers back is corruption (or errors), not complicity. It's terrible, but secondary. It does prove that the govt DOES NOT GIVE A SHIT ABOUT PEOPLE, but there is much more positive evidence to show that --- like Gulf of Tonkin --- or like Sept 11 itself.

I saw 911Truth on TV with Scarborough clip. When asked for hard hitting stuff in a brief time, spokeman grinned like a moron and though he did mention ONE fairly-decent point, he switched to complaining about the failure of the Fire Dept radios. Typical.

One is mass murder. The other is incompetence in procurement and budgeting. Morons like that 911Truth spokesperson and Loose Change and Destro regularly mix up strong proof with speculative side issues.

Dogs. Cities like NYC kill probably 1000 dogs a day. OH, that the dogs may have died of RADIATION or other poison. Dust, respiratory collapse. Well, that's SPECULATION. Has anyone had the dogs autopsied?

And though it may be very sad about DOGS, the first area of focus must be the 3000 PEOPLE. Dogs are trained to work, and used in situations where risk to humans could be borne by an animal. Call PETA.

CIA Fakes and morons waste time trying to argue about off-focus side issues and minutae. This causes normal people who are "agnostic" or skeptical about conspiracy theories to roll their eyes.

Firefighters know their job is RISKING THEIR LIVES to save lives. Were they to stay home due to danger? Tapes show they were inside the building and had the fires subdued in the South Tower, when it exploded. That's not on them. If that tape is accurate, they were murdered/sacrificed on the altar of the pre-planned G.W.o.T.

Quote:
Life is only a dream and we are the imagination of ourselves.--- Bill Hicks


I like Bill Hicks' work. He destested morons and he destested the government as a criminal murder machine.
Back to top
Fintan
Site Admin


Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 6590

PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2006 9:25 pm    Post subject: Great Discussion Reply with quote

Well, I suppose that's it a credit to all on the BFN Forum that such an
intelligent discussion of the 9/11 Top Ten Reasons could cover so much
from so many angles in only a couple of forum pages. Wow. Goldmine.

Well worth reading again. Don't miss mccauleym's offtopic. Lots to think
about. I will kick in some opinions and we can draw towards some
conclusions over the weekend.

Thanks again.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
atm



Joined: 16 Apr 2006
Posts: 3859

PostPosted: Sat Sep 09, 2006 8:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Squinn

that was looking like a really good list until you mentioned...

atm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Continuity



Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Posts: 1671
Location: Municipal Flat Block 18A, Linear North

PostPosted: Sat Sep 09, 2006 11:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

DATM,

Maybe that's why he put it at #10 - kinda ironically....Wink

_________________
The rule for today.
Touch my tail, I shred your hand.
New rule tomorrow.

Cat Haiku
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Squinn



Joined: 19 Feb 2006
Posts: 19

PostPosted: Sat Sep 09, 2006 12:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Continuity wrote:
DATM,

Maybe that's why he put it at #10 - kinda ironically....Wink

Oh, thank God! Was that the one? I was afraid he was talking about Israel, or should I say #8. It's just a name for a secret organization that may not have a name, or one of many that we have no full knowledge. It was listed last only because of its uncertainty, nothing more. I couldn't think of a tenth one; I meant no harm.

I did a quick search of the forum and found "#10" listed one or more times in 66 posts. What's the deal? Are certain words now being censored out as well as certain subjects?

BTW: I sense a little paranoia in the forum. Should members with fewer posts be suspected as being disrupters? (Forgive me if that's not the right word.)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Continuity



Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Posts: 1671
Location: Municipal Flat Block 18A, Linear North

PostPosted: Sat Sep 09, 2006 12:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Naww - atm's a little susceptible to going off when he spots things that, on the surface, appear to make no sense, or are innacurate... Wink

I used to use, occasionaly, the word 'Illuminati' as you had, Squinn, to describe the undefined, nebulous group that seems to be exerting overarching power over world events, but I have found myself steering clear of that word due to the unfortunate associations it has.

I think mainly what I'm talking about here, is that when a lot of ppl who are aware on some levels of 'conspiracy' issues use the word 'Illuminati' they are specifically referring to the bloodline, mystical-school, occult & even reptilian view of things, and that's definately *not* where I'm coming from when I speak of these things. So that's why *I* stopped using the word, anyway...

Addendum: Maybe there should be a new rule - a new way - you're only allowed to use the word 'Illuminati' if you say it slowly, in an Alan Watt voice, and you put air-quotes around it. There. That should solve that problem!

_________________
The rule for today.
Touch my tail, I shred your hand.
New rule tomorrow.

Cat Haiku
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Squinn



Joined: 19 Feb 2006
Posts: 19

PostPosted: Sat Sep 09, 2006 12:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Continuity wrote:
Naww - atm's a little susceptible to going off when he spots things that, on the surface, appear to make no sense, or are innacurate... Wink

I used to use, occasionaly, the word 'Illuminati' as you had, Squinn, to describe the undefined, nebulous group that seems to be exerting overarching power over world events, but I have found myself steering clear of that word due to the unfortunate associations it has.

I think mainly what I'm talking about here, is that when a lot of ppl who are aware on some levels of 'conspiracy' issues use the word 'Illuminati' they are specifically referring to the bloodline, mystical-school, occult & even reptilian view of things, and that's definately *not* where I'm coming from when I speak of these things. So that's why *I* stopped using the word, anyway...

Addendum: Maybe there should be a new rule - a new way - you're only allowed to use the word 'Illuminati' if you say it slowly, in an Alan Watt voice, and you put air-quotes around it. There. That should solve that problem!

Thanks, Continuity! It's much more reassuring when replies to my posts are straightforward. I had no idea that the so-called "I-l-l-u-m-i-n-a-t-i" referred to the ones that you listed. I always thought of it as a post-graduate cult-upgrade from "cap & gowns" and "skull & crossbones." I'll be more careful in the future.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
devabarry



Joined: 03 Jul 2006
Posts: 132
Location: Zionosphere

PostPosted: Sun Sep 10, 2006 4:21 pm    Post subject: A picture worth 2001 words Reply with quote

[/img]
_________________
"There are two kinds of secrets: those we keep from others, and those we keep from ourselves." -Frank Warren
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Continuity



Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Posts: 1671
Location: Municipal Flat Block 18A, Linear North

PostPosted: Sun Sep 10, 2006 4:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ah, yes - the infamous 'Coup' - 'Party Music' withdrawn album cover - I believe that Ted Gunderson was a big fan, believe it or not...
_________________
The rule for today.
Touch my tail, I shred your hand.
New rule tomorrow.

Cat Haiku
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> 9/11 HardCorps Specifics Investigation All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Page 2 of 8

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

Theme xand created by spleen.