Former Governor Jesse Ventura Picks Fight With Feds Over 9/11
 

https://youtube.com/watch?v=ck0sF5wnH4Q

his little alarmist tv show discredits anything he's ever come out with... which is unfortunate...

ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah!!11

so bldg 7 was not only prewired and loaded with explosives to bring it down, it was also emptied out prior!

lolololololololol

http://standupforamerica.files.wordp...e-the-body.jpg

http://www.canoe.ca/WrestlingImagesV...ura_elvira.jpg

http://www.wrestlingtradingcards.com...series1/53.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3090/...9ae27d1440.jpg

Well, in fairness I guess, he makes a point to specifically not say that he thinks it WAS demolished but rather asks why nobody ever looked for explosives after declaring it was in free-fall when it collapsed.

A politician is like a teenager: you know when they're lying when their mouths are moving.

I dont think building 7 was demolished and I dont think we KNEW for a fact that 9/11 was going to happen. But I firmly believe that our idiot leader did jack shit about being prepared after ignoring critical evidence laid right on his desk. Then purposfully mislead the people into supporting a shitty war that had nothing to do with it.

I like Jesse but that video makes him look like a fool.

Clinton Or Bush?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4540958/ns/nightly_news/

he raises some good points.
why the debris was never examined for one.

pretty sure buidling 7 was a demolition for insurance money.. heard this several times

you heard?

That is a good question, but people attach that one with accusations, wild crazy ones at that so when it comes for someone to answer them they laugh it off as just being a wild accusation that they shouldn't have to address.

ventura peaked with predator.

it's been downhill for him ever since

Clinton begged the Republican controlled congress to expand surveillance on suspected terrorists, and they refused. I've posted the link a million times and it makes no difference, just like it would make no difference if someone posted a picture of Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam Hussein.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/theblo...eld_saddam.jpg

wow people are so quick to dismiss a former governor who is also a former Navy demolitions expert

i say him having been a governor something none of us here have ever done, and also being a Navy demolitions expert gives him a little bit of credit

but I guess ANYONE even Albert Einstein would be an idiot if he suggested something funky happened on 9/11

Building #7 makes me question everything about 9/11.

i wasn't so quick to discount him at all. in fact, i made special efforts to tune into his shows, listen to what he has to say, etc. years.

i still do, i watched that clip. i'm open to any data on 9/11 and will always try to be.


but the fact is, the truthers haven't provided any data. they only challenge the current data, which is good and fine and all. but it only goes so far if they can't provide viable and provable explanations.

well to be fair
all the data was packed into crates and sent to china for recycling

so there will never ever be anymore evidence

He's right.

Well who but the government has and had access to any data about 9/11? They control that flow of information so the lack of any information to the contrary can be expected. One has to use reason, past experience and logic in the absence of such information.

I was just askiing what president was responsible, Clinton had the chance to get Osama before 9/11 and he also bombed Iraq

links pulled

When part of the 9/11 commission does not even believe the official report you have to question it. But saying the buildings were set to be demolished may be a stretch.

If we acted on every threat that came in, we would not get anything done.
Until 9-11 no one even thought someone could pull this off.
Same theory as the people on the flights, most hijackings ended in a standoff.
Now days, people will fight for their life on a flight, before they thought it would land and be worked out!

precisely but nothing in the truther movement has provided anything sound yet, other than hyperbole and 'what if' scenarios. Which is fun to watch and speculate about, I have been sucked in myself in the past admittedly, but when you look at it closer it is just that.. what if scenarios and hyperbole...

I have no idea what happened but some things do seem to defy logic. But then again, the government is known for gross mismanagement, so some of the things like not investigating could just be plain stupidity.

But more money was spent investigating Bill Clinton's oval office blow job than was spent on the 9/11 commission. What's up with that?

They REALLY wanted to find something on Clinton, and really didn't on 9/11.

Also, whats up with the claim that tax cuts for corps = more jobs? If that was the case, we'd be overflowing with all the more jobs from the last 10 yrs of tax cutting.

In addition to that, if no long-term effects are seen yet from the deep water horizon oil spill (doy, it was only last year), why are new deep water permits being issued already and why isn't everyone going nuts that BP is wanting to begin drilling again?

Why do oil and gas companies continue to receive millions in our tax money (called government grants) when they are the most profitable businesses in the history of mankind, literally?


a) taking in less money = we'll take in more money
b) making the most money ever = please take some more money and dont pay it back
c) we need to get off oil = please go drill some more oil

Yes some things defy logic! Crooks and liars, what a racket.

What? Yes, it was demolished. You even have the owner of the building saying on national TV that he gave the ok for them to demolish it.



Only question being, why was WTC7 already wired with explosives for an implosion like that?

rofl no shit

watching that building fall straight into the ground on itself is like wow. only professional demolition could get a building to fall straight into itself without taking out other buildings.

do you know how many days prior that it takes to wire up a building to get it to fall like that? several days or maybe even weeks and they definitely didn't do it in a matter of hours with debris, fire and smoke making visibility impossible.

Anyone who wants to investigate 9/11 can currently do so on the Internet, if they haven't already then they're probably not that interested. The evidence is so conclusive that it's hard to disagree with; only basic common sense is required.

It's 2011 now, there are more serious events coming, and if you still think 9/11 was Muslims you will never believe what's going to happen next or the truth behind it

1. Create 44 fake people. Assign them actors as their families.
2. Create a fake flight. Call it flight 93.
3. Create a terrorist hijacking plot of fake flight 93.
4. Ignite a bomb or missile in the middle of some field in PA.
5. Claim that it was fake flight 93 with the made up 44 passenger/crew.
6. Have their fake families grieve.
7. Conduct similar catastrophic events in front of a live audience in NYC and Washington DC and make sure it gets televised nationally.
8. All the while keeping this under wraps 100%. Making sure that not even Wikileaks is able to get any insider whistle blower info.

That is what we are going to do in order to initiate war. I know Bill Clinton couldn't cover up a blowjob, but we can sure enough cover this one up without one leak ever getting out.

He needs to shave his hair, and wear something less crazy looking... :pimp:helpme

here we go............

its just hard to believe that not one but two buildings crashed completely perfectly downwards, on top of themselves, didn't tip one bit, didn't show any signs of being weaker on wide side than the other despite being hit with a PLANE on one side

not once, but twice.

ive seen so many demolitions go sour and the building fall over one way more than the other and those are controlled demolitions made to bring the building down perfectly even

how did two planes randomly hitting the two buildings have the exact same effect, and that effect was for the towers to crash perfectly down into a pile of rubble

and how did the US government find the passports of the people they said did it in that rubble if there are whole bodies they couldn't find? passports are made of paper, paper that burns, and you have to assume that these guys were in the hottest part of the fire.

it just doesn't add up. i know there isn't any evidence to the contrary but you have to think if things don't add up and something sounds/looks fishy then there usually is something more to it.

I think he is great

The day when the truth does come out, that's when it's really time to worry!

The last time they really admitted the truth about something it was the day before 9/11

9/10/2001: Rumsfeld says $2.3 TRILLION Missing from Pentagon https://youtube.com/watch?v=xU4GdHLUHwU

It happened 3 times.

All evidence points to China being behind 9/11. But since they were the largest holder of US debt, the US couldn't really do anything but place blame on a scapegoat and maybe come away with a little oil as an aside. I'm still confused why people think the US govt was behind the attacks.

What evidence is that on China? I've never seen any

everybody knows china did it for all that scrap iron they got on the cheap!

:thumbsup :thumbsup :thumbsup

one of the places i heard this from

Because of Asbestos.

The World Trade Center was not in compliance of the new asbestos building codes
and it was estimated to cost $2 Billion dollars to correct.
The best financial option was to blow the buildings up.

These buildings were rumored to be wired back in the 1980s.

LOL @ "rumored".

Remember all of the lung ailments that the first responders suffered? :winkwink:
Concrete particles would unlikely be small enough to enter the critical part of the lungs,
so guess what did.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mucus

'"Links-Pulled": Silverstein Slipped Up, Admitting WTC 7's Demolition'

http://911review.com/errors/wtc/pullit.html

Has anyone here even read about building 7 in the 9/11 commission report? No, because the 9/11 commission refused to investigate building 7.

LOL, I wonder how many people actually believe that?

"Well, let's wire this building up for a demolition now, because you know, sometime in the next couple decades we might want to demolish it. No worries, just wire it now, and I'm sure the explosives will all still work fine in two decades."

That sounds plausible. :1orglaugh

https://youtube.com/watch?v=mV784UEGWHY

Wow, people still question the free-fall speeds of all 3 towers?

lolwaykup

when did i ever say that the planes weren't hijacked and crashed? lets get a couple things straight....

i worked in structural steel as a project manager on and off for the past 10 years and you're going to post shit you know absolutely nothing about?

you're saying a building made from hardened grade a992 steel (that can handle the weight of 50,000?65,000 psi LOL) that has been sprayed with fireproofing buckled and fell within a matter of a few hours? it also had a sprinkler system in case of fire. yet not only did it fall it crumbled every floor until it hit the ground. it didn't just fall on the floors where the steel supposedly failed it completely fell from top to bottom until it was entirely demolished and nothing could be recovered. not to mention it fell without harming any of the surrounding buildings within mere feet of the 42 stories of steel that hit the floor like a sack of potatoes.

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evid.../wtc7_pile.jpg

ALSO it's a federal fucking building. this thing was built and gone over with a fine tooth comb by so many god damn inspectors its ridiculous. and there is a 100% chance it went like 5x over the original budget because they had to do so many repairs on teh building before it was ever approved. i've worked on everything from the bay bridge in san francsico to the bart rail system and let me tell you they are a fucking NIGHTMARE. i also know it wasn't going to fall like that from falling debris from the other building and a fire. that building wasn't hit by a plane and it didn't have jet fuel all over it.

next time you get a chance go find yourself a 3ft long piece of an enormous beam thats a992 and fire proofed (so heavy u couldn't pick up 6 inches of it because thats what they undoubtedly used) and throw it in the hottest fire you can produce. you'd have to lay it in the coles and let it sit there for a few hours before you even saw it turn red. now tell me what in those buildings could get a flame that hot and that concentrated on the beams for them to turn red and buckle? plastic cubicles, steel filing cabinets, maybe a few expensive oak desks by the executives, plastic and foam chairs, thin carpeting, papers, computers? i mean come the fuck on it's not like the building was built out of cedar trees. jesus christ structural steel buildings don't fall like that period. i don't know what else to say.

if that isn't enough proof for you hey why don't you take a look @ the oklahoma city building that was more than half way blow up and was literally still standing. it didn't take some debris damage and fire it took on a fucking bomb that blew half of it up and it stood like a champ.

http://911research.wtc7.net/non911/o...britannica.jpg

You make a very good point..:thumbsup:thumbsup