Since Lotus wanted me to point out what is wrong with this video, I decided to do exactly that.
Okay, first lets pick apart Corbett Report.
James Corbett is not a credible source simply because of how fucking radically fucking crazy he is and inconsistent. He is writing a book called 'Reportage: Essays on the New World Order', it's about a thing that DOES NOT EXIST that he INSISTS exists.
Lets take a look at his claims:
He thinks Fukushima is a cover-up
Oklahoma City Bombing was a cover-up
The US is planning to go to war with Syria
RFK's assassination was a cover-up.
There's a thing called the Auschwitz express (Fuck this douchebag)
The FBI and police use military drones to spy on citizens.
The US is arming Japan with plutonium.
This guy is clearly a fucking reactionary. He just claims EVERY big event is some sort of cover-up.
Anyway, on to this piece of shit video:
Box cutters can be very imposing as they can kill people. This idea isn't really strange as the Israeli's have gone through it on a nearly yearly basis. Guns are a bad idea to hijack planes with. And box cutters are easy to slip by pre-9/11.
Why the fuck does this matter? It's literally there JUST to discredit their capability of operation and it fucking doesn't. This is subtle trickery.
Again, more trickery. Location doesn't matter; I can call someone in fucking Australia now with my house phone so fuck this guy.
There's this thing called cells. They're groups of terrorists who act independent but with a goal. They weren't being directed by Bin Laden every step of the way and even if they were, I don't understand why this is, at all, relevant. Hijacking a plane is pretty simple when it's a one way trip. Matter of fact, Bin Laden barely had anything to do with the planning, that was all left up to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. Sure Bin Laden gave the go ahead and aided in it, but he wasn't the architect.
Even then, the communications picked up were done in code and it does take the NSA some time to decrypt them.
They didn't penetrate a heavily-defended airspace. he's acting like they flew a fucking plane into the airspace.
Hijacking a COMMERCIAL AEROPLANE in heavily defended airspace isn't crazy, the Israeli's have exceptionally defended airspace but their planes are still hijacked. No, what's crazy is using military missiles/planes to take down buildings and kill thousands of people and keep EVERYONE involved with it quiet. You never hear people who are 'involved' just those who have seen this or heard of a little bit of that. Quiet whispers.
Jesus, 2 sentences in and this shitty video is already looking horrible
Bystander effect. People are typically too fucking scared to do anything, or they're expecting their safety. I mean, how many times has a suicidal plane hijacking happened? They typically land them and hold them for ransom. I'm not the least bit surprised the passengers were not doing anything. I'm sure many of them contemplated it. Hell, we may not know, but one may have tried to and was killed for it. We don't know.
By the way, Flight 93 was where the passengers DID go after the hijackers.
They were military trained - Thirty years before. And they were pilots without physical combat experience. Being military trained doesn't make you instantly impervious to box cutters to your head.
It's no where said if a plane goes missing for an hour that you need to prepare to shoot it down. Planes aren't always 100% on radar, they do eventually go out of site, and you attempt to contact them. Of course they start to worry, but do you think they fucking EXPECTED this kind of thing happening? It's not far fetched for control to lose track of planes for small periods of time.
Now this is adding to the mix of conspirators, now the air control operators who were on duty are now involved. As are ALL air force members who are trained for this stuff or supposed to respond.
Hypocrisy doesn't disprove them. And religion wasn't reasoning for the attacks on the trade centre, it was mostly political. A religious man with strong political beliefs and devotion can be a terrorist and drink alcohol
Actually the third building was knocked down by being gutted and on fire for an entire day.
This has no source.
This also has no source.
Planes land, meaning it's not exactly crazy to fly a plane close to the ground. If you can turn a plane and land a plane and you can fly into a building, it's not that hard.
So wait a second
wait just a fucking second, if this is the REASON they hit the pentagon, then they planed the attacks literally in a day. Holy shit are you fucking kidding me? Thousands of conspirators, tonnes of money, a massive plan to execute and cover up the largest crime in human history - all in ONE day? And this asshole wants to tell us that the official 9/11 report has holes?
And why the fuck does this matter? The pentagon budget analyst office had been unoccupied and had only a few people in the area when the plane hit. And why does crashing a plane invalidate the investigation? I mean, if you can pay off thousands of people to cover this up, can't you pay off the budget analyst office?
This is more dishonest wording, all these people are on the chain of information.
"The intelligence community for some time has been warning, in a steady drumbeat Brian, that Osama bin Laden has not been heard from frankly since the beginning of the year, the USS Cole incident rather and they've been wondering when and if he will strike again..."
This is a quote from the CBS report after the attack. They aren't saying Bin Laden did it, they're saying, from what the intelligence community picked up, that Bin Laden is their current suspect and with good god damn reason. You think Intelligence groups take the day off until something happens? No they are CONSTANTLY watching groups and organisations and studying their patterns. al-Qaeda was a MAJOR threat to the US and was constantly being watched. Bin Laden wasn't this hidden threat that popped out of no where. Since the USS Cole, 1993 WTC bombing and the constant back and fourth between the US and al-Qaeda, yeah, you bet your ass his name would pop up.
Why do you think Bin Laden's name came up first?
Because al-Qaeda came up first, and who is the leader and prolific figure head? Bin Laden.
And why did that group come up first?
Because they did it before. Ramzi Yousef was a BLOOD relative to major al-Qaeda leaders.
Also to point out many people were expecting he would do something like this, like ORHA member Colonel Paul Hughes, who said the first thing that popped into his mind was that Bin Laden was at fault. Paul Hughes was fucked over in Iraq by the Bush administration and maintained an anti-war stance.
I will admit, this was a very weird, but this is such a small thing, that it doesn't really matter - staged or not. This solidifies something they already knew.
Investigation began the second the plane hit the first building. Which is what that intelligence finding above came from.
By a week. Which isn't really compelling. It takes more than a week to clean up your involvement in something like this. They were just being difficult.
This is TWO YEARS LATER that budget concerns came up. and the budget concerns aren't as dire as you'd think.
This is more of an expression they both used amongst themselves. Do you know how many investigations are like this? A fuck load.
This doesn't prove or disprove anything.
Oh yeah, totally fucking unbiased. (From a source that both doesn't work any more and is just opinionated.
I'm not doubting the illegitimacy of torture, as it's wrong, but this is exceptionally contradictory to the idea that the US did 9/11. First of all, what the fuck is KSM doing there if he's innocent? Why did KSM say he only gave false information during 'brutal periods' of torture and not the interrogations where he admitted to being a part of it? And if the entire thing is a cover-up what does him saying he lied matter, lied about what, a false plot?
Because there is absolutely no reason to? They didn't mention any of the other buildings either. It isn't pivotal to the investigation. He said it himself, they were under budget and with time constraints. Why investigate bullshit?
The only reason people want WTC7 investigated is because they're too stupid to understand basic physics.
There was no need to. It was a security preparation plan.
He sources himself and what you mention about Ptech? It's like sourcing Lockheed Martin in an essay about why the concept of war is bad. Ptech is mostly just another conspiracy tool that really has no merit.
Because it was almost a year after they started, maybe. And Sibel Edmonds can't be considered that credible. I'll be honest, they should have, but the fact they didn't doesn't prove the government did 9/11.
Fuck it, here's a quote from the commission report:
"Al Qaeda and Usama Bin Ladin obtained money from a variety of sources-"
There, he's mentioned.
Uh, the CIA were sourced a lot in the report. So yeah they were 'mentioned'.
Also the source is ridiculous and vague.
The STATE government came out with this as they considered it a coincidence. Now the STATE agency who did this, had a very different style of doing it. The only coincidence is the concept and day. "Officials at the Chantilly, Va.-based National Reconnaissance Office had scheduled an exercise that morning in which a small corporate jet would crash into one of the four towers at the agency's headquarters building after experiencing a mechanical failure."
By the way, did I mention it was the STATE government who did this? Not the FEDERAL government.
Suspected of, nothing was ever proven. This guy didn't read the sources
Also suspected. Nothing concrete.
I really don't see how testifying in secret would prove anything. As if they exposed absolutely EVERYTHING. I mean, there's this thing called lying you can do. I mean you people say they do it all the time, why not now? Oh I know why because it's convenient and sounds ~spooky~ and ~shady~
And honestly, if you just killed 3000 of your own people, lying under oath is the LEAST of your worries.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...-Midlands.html Oh what do you know they actually found them
And for the record it does matter. If you can't find the person who DID it, what's the use finding the people who funded it. This is an investigation, not an intelligence operation, if you want to get to them, you look through the ones who funded it. You want to investigate, you determine your assets.
Oh and here's the above quote from the commission: "Al Qaeda and Usama Bin Ladin obtained money from a variety of sources-"
Looking through the cited charge, being unsatisfied in this type of case is not surprising. What is surprising is for being such smoking gun evidence that the government did 9/11, a good portion of those questions are adequate or satisfactory
This kinda makes no sense.
NORAD and FEMA are pretty much the only ones who did this. NRO was something different.
Hell, even Bush had no idea NORAD was doing this. So yeah, it is a failure of imagination. There's a difference between threats like bank robbery which is likely and therefore prepared for, and things like using planes as weapons - which is unlikely and unprepared fore albeit someone had thought of it in some facet of the government, which again does not prove anything.
Uh yeah, it wasn't important. Why is this guy so fixated on AD, it's an exercise.
Insider trading literally has nothing to do with this. You see, this guy is now encroaching on territory that pretty much is trying to figure out why 9/11 was staged and he's going in several different directions.
I don't agree or know why the records were destroyed (or even if they were) but in hindsight, truly it doesn't matter. Insider trading and Able Danger don't have any bearing on why 9/11 happened. This guy is only mentioning it because it's shady. The government could have destroyed evidence of a senator cheating on his wife and this guy probably would go "If the government didn't do 911 then why did they destroy evidence that senator assfuck cheated on his wife? answer that. checkmate sheppel!"
There are literally hundreds of bits of information in detailed accuracy that you can pretty much figure it out yourself if you just did the fucking research.
And for the record, it would be against public safety. Telling people in detail how to take down a building is not a good idea. All for the sake of filler and satisfying nutcases.
If Corbett is surprised the FBI is withholding investigation information, then maybe he should start reading up on how the FBI operates.
Releasing all your evidence and investigation progress is a stupid idea.
Barry Jennings said he felt an explosion. He didn't witness it, he didn't have any information that said it happened. He just said he felt/heard it.
That is really bad evidence when you're dealing with a massively chaotic situation like 9/11. WTC plaza wasn't exactly a quiet and serene morning. Lots of people heard lots of things, and for good reason - it was LOUD.
And the fact these people are now saying Jennings was murdered because of what he knew (7 years after saying it), are assholes.
As for the rest, it goes without saying that just simply saying "I saw Bush do it himself" doesn't mean it's fact. You need to prove it.
Uh this isn't really a crazy concept.
We in the business of logic call that "running away" or "Escaping"
How much information can you possibly get about a video? Unless there's some little marker on the video footage that says "Hi I'm here L:XXXX L:XXXX" then it's just bullshit fearmongering.
There is literally zero evidence for this.
And if you look at his videos you'd see that's kinda not true. How the hell someone can judge a person getting younger without it being painfully obvious which you'd think they'd see that, is beyond me.
May I also point out, a lot of videos weren't released in chronological order:
They were released in bulk.
Good god, I wonder why. Maybe it's because it's a fucking special operation, the biggest in American history. One they don't want all over youtube?
I won't doubt the raid was a little spotty, I'm sure he was killed out of revenge and it was a messy operation. But none of that proves that 9/11 was a coverup.
Huh, the government sure sucks at covering things up.
Oh and actually killing their target:
"We don't believe that any of the special operators who were killed were involved in the bin Laden operation," a senior U.S. military official told Fox News."
Yeah so they coverupped Bin Laden's killing by not actually removing the people involved. That is incredible work.
This is the story of 9/11, brought to you by Corbett Report, which told you the truth about the NWO and RFK. (Which involved SPACE ALIENS)
You know what this guy does? He takes the SMALLEST inconsistency and concept that he finds strange or doesn't make sense in his tiny tiny mind, and treats it as smoking gun evidence that the government did 9/11.
I'll take batshit, paranoid and tinfoil, the rest is persecution bullshit and this guy is whining that his insane and misguided views are somehow considered weird. What a fucking douchebag. Fuck this guy and fuck you Lotus for exposing this awful excuse of a human being to me.
This has been a PSA by your friendly neighbourhood anti-conspiracy theorist.
Because when you ignore the facts, things seem to fit your paranoid delusions.
And all the people who rated "winner" on OP, You all should be REALLY ashamed of yourselves. Do some god damn research.