Phoenix Network Forums

The american goverment wanted a new pearl harbour to allow them to get more control. There are offical documents which show this.

Even so, im still on the fence on this, not 100% one way or the the other.

Jop wrote:The american goverment wanted a new pearl harbour to allow them to get more control. There are offical documents which show this.

Even so, im still on the fence on this, not 100% one way or the the other.

i mean seriously; no modern government would kill 1000's of there own people to try to justify a future act. (i.e Iraq)

And no there arn't any official documents hinting at US gov't attacking themseleves or wanting another pearl harbor. If it were, the bush administration would all be gone and probably in jail. and the american public would be revolting out there ass. get ur facts straight man.

although there were reports that a eminent attack on the us is possible, which the bush administration pretty much ignored.

the individuals who attacked on 9/11 are some extremist group weather it be al queda or whoever.

The entire notion of the US government conducting the 9/11 attacks is , without a doubt, completly ridiculous.
Simple rationalization, deduction, and verstehen could prove it to be, at the least, extremely improbable.

And if that were not enough, read Will's posts!
They offer a completely reasonable argument.

On January 28, 1998, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Jeb Bush, Steve Forbes, and Dan Quayle 19 other high ranking Officials signed a plan calling for the US to fake a "New Pearl Harbor" (page 63) as an excuse to invade Iraq to establish military bases.

http://www.reopen911.org/docs/Rebuildin ... fenses.pdf

i wouldnt trust a conspirists site as a valid source of information; there main goal is to make you believe.

Jop wrote:http://www.reopen911.org/docs/Rebuildin ... fenses.pdf

Will wrote:Wow, you do realise the PNAC was a PUBLISHED document outlining how US Defense funding has gone down the gutter? Such a secret document? O RLY! If the government has something the hide, they don't let everyone read about it during the 2000 election. Have you read the entire PNAC document?

[/quote]

i wouldnt be too surprised if it was the government.. thats because of multipel reasen, though many of them come from loose change its kinda weird that it was a fighter engine in pentagon and not a jet engine like it was described, and that the whole department that was blown up was empty! noone worked there that day! and, the government needed a reason for them too attack afghanistan and iraq

raich wrote:its kinda weird that it was a fighter engine in pentagon and not a jet engine like it was described

'twas?

raich wrote:the whole department that was blown up was empty! noone worked there that day!

izzat so?

haha. honestly, i have no idea. i try not to spend too much time speculating.