"9/11 Press for Truth" - 1 Week of screenings in Oakland 9/15 - 9/21

Grand Lake Theater
3200 Grand Ave
Oakland, CA 94610
Theatrical exclusive for 1 week:
FRI – SAT: 5:00, 7:00, 9:00
SUN: 5:00, 9:00
MON – WED: 5:00, 7:00, 9:00

For a listing of many other upcoming screenings across the country please visit:

To host your own screenings please visit:

Bush Tells Barnes Capturing

Bush Tells Barnes Capturing Bin Laden Is ‘Not A Top Priority Use of American Resources’
Weekly Standard editor Fred Barnes appeared on Fox this morning to discuss his recent meeting with President Bush in the Oval Office. The key takeaway for Barnes was that “bin Laden doesn’t fit with the administration’s strategy for combating terrorism.” Barnes said that Bush told him capturing bin Laden is “not a top priority use of American resources.”

Off Topic

I just got this unteresting e-mail from a truther friend and wanted to share it.

Insanity Then And Now

Edith Cavell made a fatal mistake. She mistakenly believed she lived
in a
democracy. She was a British nurse working in Belgium in 1915. She saw
hand the horrors of trench warfare. She also saw a quick and easy means
England to end the war with a victory. She wrote a letter to the
Mirror which was published on April 15th, 1915. She said that "Belgian
Relief" efforts were actually being sent to Germany which would have to
for peace without this aid from the allies. England was quite literally
feeding the German army that was killing millions of French and English
soldiers. What she did not know was that similar allied war materiel
being sent to Germany via Sweden and other neutral nations. If her
had been followed, there never would have been any need for America to
the war. The Kaiser could have stayed on the throne and Hitler could
have risen to power. And of course Russia would have become a
monarchy led by the Social Democrats. We know the aletrnative. World
War II,
the Korean and Vietnam wars and 60,000,000 killed in Soviet
camps. More than 500,000 young Russian girls were raped to death in the
first three years of the revolution. And the NKVD admitted to killing
350,000 priests in the first two years of Soviet rule. That and the
of Verdun which killed 800,000 men would never have happened if Edith
Cavell's plea had been heard by the British public.

Her letter was read by Sir William Wiseman who was the head of British
Intelligence in North America for MI6. He was a partner at the
owned Kuhn and Loeb Investment Bank. He ordered the Germans to arrest
Cavell. She was subsequently shot as a spy. Her mistake was to think
she lived in a democracy where the people could vote, write letters to
editor and have a say in the life and death decisions of the nation.
She did
not live to see what we have seen. We know that the same bankers who
financed the allies also financed the Soviet Jewish revolution. And
same banks also financed Hitler. In 1935 the Rothschild owned Bank of
England loaned the Nazi dictator the monetary equivalent of 50,000,000
ounces of gold. When Hitler remilitarized the Ruhr, the French wanted
to put
a stop to the Austrian upstart. They asked England for help. The Bank
England said that if the French did make any moves against Hitler, they
would start a run on the French franc and would send France into an
more severe depression.

England also sent its Foreign Secretary to Germany to tell Hitler that
English government wanted him to gather 80,000,000 Germans together to
defend Europe against the Communists who did pose a serious threat to
Western civilization. He was told that the invasions of Austria and
Czechoslovakia and Poland would be countered only by diplomatic
After the invasion of Austria and Czechoslovakia, the German General
sent two officers to London in March of 1939 to avois war. The Germans
not prepared for war. They had developed jet engines but did not expect
so they did not build them in large quantities. The German military
to arrest Hitler and to stop the war. Everyone who died after April 1,
died as the result of the allies not accepting German and Japanese

The Germans suffered from the same illusion that had afflicted Edith
They did not realize the full depth of the insanity and depravity of
allied leaders. The bankers wanted Communism to expand into eastern
China, French Indochina and Korea. They wanted Israel to become a
super power in the Mideast. They did not mind that hundred of millions
people would die in their wars and their concentraion camps and planned
starvations. Most observers of the modern military scene do not list
civilians in the poorer nations who died from starvation and other
related conditions due to the Cold War as xasualties of war. If the
had not been engulfed in the Cold War, would ther have been an arms
race in
Africa, Latin America and Asia? And, if they had been allowed to
their own currencies as Lincoln had done in the civil war, would they
paying over 10% of their GDP in interest payments to maintain the
Fiction of
Government Debt? Julius Nyrere once asked if the West expected Africans
starve their children to death to pay the interest on these (fictional)
debts. If we add these deaths otherwise attributed to poverty to the
then the death toll for not listening to Edith Cavell has exceeded half
billion. If we had listened to her, we would not face the possibility

On September 10th, 2001 Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld admitted that
trillion dollars in defense appropriations could not be accounted for.
during the first Reagan administration the Grace Connission said that
America could save one hundred billion dollars a year by auditing
spending among other things. If you ever want to get a congressman to
and dance go to a public forum and ask about the billions of dollars
each week from unaudited federal government contracts. Catherine Austin
Fitts, the former manging partner at Dillon Read once found a single
in San Diego with ten HUD backed mortgages totaling for buildings that
existed. These loans were never repaid and were part of the more than
billion dollars in "bad debts" the Clinton Housing Dept had to write
Susan Gaffney, the HUD spokeswoman, told the Senate she made no effort
recover any of that money for the taxpayers.Both she and the Senators
that what the elite steal is theirs and is never to be returned.

On Setpmber 11th, 2001 a plane hit the Pentagon. It originally
the offices of Donald Rumsfeld, but it made a fortuitous and difficult
maneuver, a 270 degree turn. It came in at 400 plus mph descending
feet to hit the offices of the auditors looking for the missing 2.3
dollars. The alleged pilot had been refused a rental on a single engine
airplane in the summer of 2001. He could not take off, make 4 turns and
land. He was not the pilot of whatever it was that hit the Pentagon
office as the Armed Forces Instiitute of Pathology (AFIP) did extensive
testing of the remains found on the plane and found no Arab DNA.

Also on September 11th, 2001 World Trade Center tower 7 collapsed in
seconds. It was never hit by a plane and suffered only from minor
fires. It
was an obvious controlled demolition. Steel girders weighing 2,000 and
pounds were videotaped being ejected from the Twin Towers 100 feet at a
degree angle. This is not possible without the presence of explosives.
are hunmdreds of eyewitnesses to a series of explosions bringing down
Twin Towers. And we even have a few who saw and heard explosions prior
the first plane hitting the WTC. The $20,000,000 NIST report (National
Institute of Safety and Standards) said the explosions in the
levels were caused by jet fuel spilling down the elevator shaft and
in the basement. How the jet fuel got to the basement before the plane
the Tower is not explained.

On July 7th, 2005 bombs were detonated underneath three subway cars in
Lodon. We have actual witnesses to the bombs being placed under the
Four Britons of Pakistani descent were alleged to have been suicide
This is not likely as the subway schedule would not permit them to get
where they were to where the bombs exploded underneath the cars. It has
noted by many that not one of the three planes would have reached their
destinations without the "terror drills" preventing NORAD, the FAA and
Pentagon from responding in the normal fashion to hijackings. There
also "terror drills" in London on 7-7-2005. In fact the drills took
place at
the exact hour and the exact location of the bombings. The odds of a
coincidence are 1/19 X 1/364 (the tube is open 19 hours a day 364 days
year)times 1/274 X 1/274 X 1/274 as there 274 stations in the system.
in the media has asked either the head of Transport For London, an
and former head of logistics for the CIA, or the Israeli firm Verint
was in charge of security for the subways to explain the coincidences

This is a brief essay and not intended to catalogue all of the proof of
depth of the insanity and depravity of our allied leaders. I just want
everyone to confront the same reality that Edith Cavell faced. Our
choice is
the same as hers. Are we willing to allow the people who think they own
government to blow up subways and buildongs with our citiaens inside in
order to start wars?

Currently, we are being told that Iran is threatening our very
What would happen to America if either it or Israel launched at strike
Iranian nuclear facilities many of which are located underneath crowded
cities? Iran would regard the attack as a declaration of war by the
U.S. and
Israel even if only the latter made the initial air assault. The
could fire Russian made SS-29 and SS-22 anti-ship missiles plus NATO
simultaneously from 5 different angles totaling 140 degrees at every
ship in
the Persian Gulf. We would lose over 10,000 sailors in the first few
minutes. 40% of the world's oil supply would be taken off the market
and the
price of oil would soar to $300 a barrel and gasoline to $10 a gallon.
world would correctly perceive that the American Navy was s floating
trap and dump the dollar. Prices would double and triple overnight. And
prices would spiral even higher cutting after tax wages by more than
50% and
pensions by more than 90%. And those 40,000 Iranian suicide volunteers
with the same kissiles Hexbollah used in Lebanon would cut off American
troops in Iraq from their supply lines. They could take many troops
Of course the American public would demand we strike Iran, Syria and
left of Iraq and the Mideast with nuclear weapons. But that would not
restore the lives of our soldiers and sailors nor would it bring back
American economy and the country we knew as children. It certainly
would not
restore the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Israel would survive
quick;y make arrangements with Vladimir Putin's Russia to replace the
States as the world's sole remaining super power.

The alternative is that we can reject Insanity and tell the truth that
WTC and London subway bombings were Inside Jobs.


To read about Edith Edith Cavell and Sir William Wiseman go here:

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/reserve.htm (Scroll down to pagees 71 and

To read about Dov Zakheim, Israel Donald Rumsfeld and the trillions of
dollars missing from the Pentagon go here:


To read about the London subway bombings go here:

www.London77Truth.com or here

Daniel Fey
The Truth of 911 Shall Set You Free From The Lie

Another columnist don't want to do all the homeworks


Just the facts . . . at least as we know them
I beg your pardon.

Apparently I made a major error of fact in a recent column. It turns out, contrary to what I wrote, there never was a Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attack on the United States. It wasn't hijacked airliners that brought down the twin towers of the World Trade Center. Nor did any airplane plow into the Pentagon. Nor did United Flight 93 come to Earth in a field in Shanksville, Pa. Rather, this tragedy was staged by the U.S. government in order to dupe the nation into an oil war in the Middle East.

Or at least so I am told by a surprising plurality of readers. Add to that Hugo Chávez, president of Venezuela and renowned loose cannon, who said in a speech Tuesday it's possible the U.S. government had a hand in attacking itself on Sept. 11.


Of course, it's also possible the U.S. government doesn't even exist, that it and we and Chávez himself are only figments of the imagination of a little boy staring into a snow globe.

Possible, but not bloody likely.

I don't propose to spend time debating whether Sept. 11 unfolded as the official record says it did. If eyewitness accounts (''I happened to look up and I saw this airplane not more than 50 feet up coming right at us,'' Alan Wallace, a witness at the Pentagon, told The Washington Post), cockpit voice recordings (''Please, please don't hurt me,'' a voice on United Flight 93 pleads), cellphone calls (passenger Thomas Burnett told his wife, ''I know we're all going to die. . . . I love you, Honey'') and common sense (if the planes were not crashed, what happened to them and their passengers?) are not enough to make the case, I can't imagine what would.

No, I only bring this up because of what it says about our growing tendency to embrace separate but unequal facts en route to separate but unequal truths.


You might call it cynicism, but cynicism is quaint and 20th century compared to this new tendency to reflexively reject any facts provided by government or the dreaded mainstream media. Conspiracy theorizing is not new -- ask Elvis next time you see him -- but what is new is that the Internet has broken the government/media monopoly on the dissemination and definition of news.

While that's good in many ways, one troubling byproduct is this new notion that you cannot truly understand the great and terrible events of our time without access to some ''factier'' facts promulgated by some website most of us never heard of with an ideological slant that conveniently mirrors one's own.

Granted, government lies sometimes and conspires sometimes and media fail sometimes to be energetic watchdogs. So certainly people have a right -- a duty -- to be skeptical of both.

This, however, isn't skepticism. It's rote rejection, baby tossed out with bath water.

Once upon a time, we all drew from the same body of fact. We may have constructed different truths, but they were all based upon commonly accepted facts. We all knew, for instance, that the shuttle Challenger exploded in 1986. From that, we could debate what the tragedy meant and we might or might not reach consensus, but as long as no one argued that it was really destroyed by aliens, we at least had the same frame of reference.


No longer, as the questions of whether there was really a terrorist attack on Sept. 11 make abundantly clear. So honest debate becomes nearly impossible and consensus, even more so. I mean, you may think a wall looks best in yellow, I may think it looks best in red. But if we can't agree on what yellow and red are or what a wall is, we have no basis for even arguing about it.

If you doubt that, ask yourself: When's the last time you had a political debate that was fruitful as opposed to merely loud?

Don't feel bad. I can't remember myself.

VIVA "Press for Truth"!!

This movie is the best so far, by far. I feel totally comfortable recommending this to anyone. People who might be turned off by the speculative approach of Loose Change should watch this one first. Thanks Paul Thompson. Thanks Jersey Girls & other intelligent 9/11 family members!

IAEA: U.S. report on Iran 'dishonest'

This story didn't stay up too long, it was out around 3am last nite. I can't find it anywhere now.


By GEORGE JAHN, Associated Press Writer Fri Sep 15,
6:33 AM ET
VIENNA, Austria -

A recent House of Representatives committee report on
Iran's nuclear capability is "outrageous and
dishonest" in trying to make a case that Tehran's
program is geared toward making weapons, a senior
official of the U.N. nuclear watchdog has said.

The letter, obtained by The Associated Press on
Thursday outside a 35-nation board meeting of the
International Atomic Energy Agency, says the report is
false in saying Iran is making weapons-grade uranium
at an experimental enrichment site, when it has in
fact produced material only in small quantities that
is far below the level that can be used in nuclear

The letter, which was first reported on by The
Washington Post, also says the report erroneously says
that IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei removed a senior
nuclear inspector from the team investigating Iran's
nuclear program "for concluding that the purpose of
Iran's nuclear program is to construct weapons."

In fact, the inspector was sidelined on Tehran's
request, and the Islamic republic had a right to ask
for a replacement under agreements that govern all
states relationships with the agency, said the letter,
calling the report's version "incorrect and

"In addition," says the letter, "the report contains
an outrageous and dishonest suggestion that such
removal might have been for 'not having adhered to an
unstated IAEA policy barring IAEA officials from
telling the whole truth about the Iranian nuclear

Dated Aug. 12, the letter was addressed to Rep. Peter
Hoekstra (news, bio, voting record), chairman of the
House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. It
was signed by Vilmos Cserveny, a senior director of
the Vienna-based agency.

An IAEA official, who spoke on condition of anonymity
because he was not authorized to comment on the
letter, said it was written "to set the record

Jamal Ware, a spokesman for the House committee,
confirmed they had received the letter and said the
chairman had referred it to Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich.,
and Rep. Rush Hold, D-N.J. They will review it and
issue a formal response if necessary, he said.

"All IAEA complains about is a photo caption. If you
read the report, it's very clear that what it is
saying is that Iran is working to develop the
capability to enrich uranium to weapons grade, not
that they have done so," Ware said. "They use a string
of adjectives, while not pointing to any substantive
criticism of the report. There are areas where we
would disagree with them. A disagreement does not make
what we say erroneous."

The dispute was reminiscent of the clashes between the
IAEA and Washington over whether Saddam Hussein was
trying to make weapons of mass destruction, including
nuclear arms. American arguments that Saddam had such
covert arms programs were given as the chief reason
for invading Iraq and toppling Saddam.

ElBaradei's criticism of the U.S. standpoint on Iraq
and subsequent perceptions that he was soft on Iran in
his staff's investigation of suspicions Tehran's
nuclear activities may be a cover for a weapons
program led to a failed attempt last year by
Washington to prevent his re-election.

OT: Troubles in Norway

There is currently a lot of discussion here in Norway about statements made by a muslim leader. In an internet interview he claimed that Muslims were not responsible for 9/11, and refered to the movie Loose Change. Since then, a lot of hit pieces has been written, mostly critisizing the muslims for their views. So far it doesn't look very good for the truth movement.

Here are some articles in English:



Cavuto, believe it or not, is even more of a lapdog than Hannity types.

Jon Stewart Explains the 'Cavuto Mark'

News Hounds | September 15 2006

Jon Stewart, that keen observer of American journalistic practices, has revealed the use of a new kind of punctuation mark by Fox News -- the Cavuto -- which Stewart says is cleverly used to turn any statement, no matter how outrageous, into a simple, seemingly fair, question. With video.
On the "Daily Show" on Wednesday (September 13, 2006), Stewart aired a segment on the increasing use of question marks in the chyrons of 24-hour news channels. He ribbed CNN a little for its use of questions on the lower third of its screen -- questions such as "Can Your Purse Make you Sick?" or "What If ... ?"

"...Cavuto's not saying these things. He's just asking, like, 'Is your mother a whore?' What? I'm not saying she's a whore. I'm just wondering out loud if she is a whore. All I'm saying is that reasonable people who have banged your mother for money can disagree."

Stewart then has his own chyron with a question mark. I won't spoil it for you. Enjoy!

Why wasn't WTC 2 evacuated immediately but rather the opposite

When one of the 911 victims mother talked about her daughter on cspan on Tuesday the following from Paul Thompson's timeline came to mind.

My comments first:

It is amazing that WTC 2 occupants are not told to evacuate

after the first plane hit WTC 1 but even told they could go

back to work. Sounds like someone wanted there to be as many casualties as possible ?

Then We have Bush saying he doesn't give any orders to

respond to the attack until 9:55. How is this possible ?

And then we have Rumsfield saying:
And someone walked in and handed a note that said that a

plane had just hit the World Trade Center. And we adjourned

the meeting, and I went in to get my CIA briefing ... right

next door here.

To me this is all a smoking gun:

We have no mandatory evacuation orders.
We have Bush, who certainly with all the electronic gadgets

in his limo must have know by at least 8:50 about the attacks.

And Rumsfield hears about the first plane but doesn't even

bother to make sure that the WTC 2 building is evacuated but

non chalantly goes to the his next meeting. How could he not

realize that this is a possible terrorist attack and evacuate

WTC 2. WTC was a prime target, it had already been hit in


Why didn't they call on their phones immediately to evacuate

WTC 2. They had to have known that it was next. This proves

complicity ?

And what about Rumsfield predicting a big event. He could

only be talking about the 911 attacks because there has been no other big event for the past 5 years. Another smoking gun.

Following 4 pieces are from Paul Thompson's timeline:

(Before 9:00 a.m.): Fire Department Advice to Evacuate WTC

Tower Fails to Reach People Inside

Shortly before 9:00 a.m., fire department commanders at WTC

Tower One advise Port Authority police and building personnel

to evacuate Tower Two. However, there is no evidence that

this advice is communicated effectively to the building

personnel in Tower Two. When an announcement is made to

evacuate at 9:02 a.m. (one minute before the building is

hit), it does not direct everyone to evacuate, and advises

only that everyone may wish to start an orderly evacuation if

warranted by conditions on their floor. [9/11 Commission,


Entity Tags: World Trade Center

(9:00 a.m.): WTC South Tower Announcement: OK to Return to


A public announcement is broadcast inside the WTC Tower Two

(the South Tower, which has yet to be hit), saying that the

building is secure and people can return to their offices.

[New York Times, 9/11/2002] Such announcements continue until

a few minutes before the building is hit, and “may [lead] to

the deaths of hundreds of people.” No one knows exactly what

is said (though many later recall the phrase “the building is

secure”), or who gives the authority to say it. [USA Today,

9/2/2002] Additionally, security agents inside the building

repeat similar messages to individuals in the tower. For

instance, one survivor recounts hearing, “Our building is

secure. You can go back to your floor. If you’re a little

winded, you can get a drink of water or coffee in the

cafeteria.” [New York Times, 9/13/2001] Another survivor

recalls an escaping crowd actually running over a man with a

bullhorn encouraging them to return to their desks. [Newsday,

9/12/2001] Businessman Steve Miller recalls hearing a voice

say over the building’s loudspeaker something similar to:

“There’s a fire in Tower One. Tower Two in unaffected. If you

want to leave, you can leave. If you want to return to your

office, it’s okay.” [Washington Post, 9/16/2001] British

visitor Mike Shillaker recalls, “As we got to around floor

50, a message came over the [loudspeaker], telling us that

there was an isolated fire in Tower One, and we did not need

to evacuate Tower Two. Again, thank god we continued down,

others didn’t.” [BBC, 9/1/2002] Despite messages to the

contrary, about two-thirds of the tower’s occupants evacuate

during the 17 minutes between the attacks. [USA Today,


(After 8:46 a.m.): Emergency Response Plans Activated by

Officials, Not by Bush

President Bush will say in a speech later that evening,

“Immediately following the first attack, I implemented our

government’s emergency response plans.” [US President,

9/17/2001] However, the Wall Street Journal reports that

lower level officials activate CONPLAN (Interagency Domestic

Terrorism Concept of Operations Plan) in response to the

emerging crisis. CONPLAN, created in response to a 1995

Presidential Decision Directive issued by President Clinton

and published in January 2001, details the responsibility of

seven federal agencies if a terrorist attack occurs. It gives

the FBI the responsibility for activating the plan and

alerting other agencies. Bush in fact later states that he

doesn’t give any orders responding to the attack until after

9:55 a.m. [Wall Street Journal, 3/22/2004; US Government,


(Before 8:46 a.m.): Rumsfeld Reportedly Predicts Terror


Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul

Wolfowitz, and Representative Christopher Cox (R) are meeting

in Rumsfeld’s private Pentagon dining room, discussing

missile defense. Rumsfeld later recalls, “I had said at an

eight o’clock breakfast that sometime in the next two, four,

six, eight, ten, twelve months there would be an event that

would occur in the world that would be sufficiently shocking

that it would remind people again how important it is to have

a strong healthy Defense Department that contributes to—that

underpins peace and stability in our world.” [Larry King

Live, 12/5/2001] Wolfowitz recalls, “And we commented to them

that based on what Rumsfeld and I had both seen and worked on

the Ballistic Missile Threat Commission, that we were

probably in for some nasty surprises over the next ten

years.” [Vanity Fair, 5/9/2005] There are confused accounts

that Rumsfeld says, “I’ve been around the block a few times.

There will be another event,” just before the Pentagon is hit

by Flight 77, but such comments may have been made around

this time instead. Rumsfeld says, “And someone walked in and

handed a note that said that a plane had just hit the World

Trade Center. And we adjourned the meeting, and I went in to

get my CIA briefing ... right next door here [in my office].”

[Larry King Live, 12/5/2001]


That is very interesting. We should keep an eye on it.

...i just finished watching

...i just finished watching 9/11 Press for Truth.
Actually it's even more hangout than i expected.

Well produced, it's in reality a harmlesss story of the Jersey Girls, the 9/11 Panel, many hints on "negligence" (not even LIHOP), prior warnings (which works for the same spin) plus Thompson's favourite "Pakistan connection" with the strongest part on Randy Glass (already well known online). We had Glass once on INN World Report.

Then again, Pakistan is a political red herring anyway and works into the setup strategy of worldwide fascists which might trigger this trojan 'connection' for a war between India (Lockheed) and Pakistan when they really need it.

Also, where Thompson once was strong -the chronological analysis of pre- 9/11 wargames and terror drills, still a strange blackout in this dokumentary, co-produced by Kyle Hence.

Hence wasn't even aware of the only easter egg, he put into the documentary almost at the end:

Karl Rove obviously confirmed, that Bush was sitting in the school because being part of a (terrorist exercise?) "drill".

The only way the perps can spin away this soft 'hangout slip' is to declare a reading exercise as a drill.
Others have to decide on this.


9/11 Press for Truth is a harmless "2003" stylish conspiracy narrative which distracts (on purpose?) from the physical evidence and some other so called "controversial" 9/11 research.

This documentary will not even provoke some flagwavers, who are supportive of the official story, neither it will bother some leftgatekeepers.

If Loose Change is pepper, Jon Albanese's movie was salt, but "9/11 Press for Truth" is less than sugar.

September 15, 2006
Bush 9/11 Drill? -Selected "9/11 Press for Truth" Clips and Complete Mirror

By ewing2001

picked up at:
check out also :
Was Bush sitting in Booker Elementary School as part of a terror exercise drill?
Did Karl Rove confuse the word "drill" with a "reading exercise"?

Karl Rove:
"...The President thought for a f.. second or two about
getting up and walking down the room but the drill was coming to a close and he didn't want to alarm the children..."

911 press for truth- john ashcroft jet

Added September 14, 2006
From aliveboy1

more at:
911 press for truth- dan rather
911 press for truth- saddam bin laden
911 press for truth- strange escapes
911 press for truth - August 6th memo

complete version at:

yesterday «


RP's tape?

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

How sick is that?

A big point in the movie is that this admin had enough pre 9/11 intelligence to know as soon as the first tower hit that EVERYONE should be evacuated from BOTH TOWERS. EVERY ONE!!! PERIOD!!!!!!

The fact that they didn't do this, the fact that Bush knew of the first attack and gave no order to protect the lives to the innocent citizens of this country that he gave AN OATH to protect is TREASONIOUS. P E R I O D!

The fact that Bush instead of giving this order to save the lives of perhaps over a thousand US citizens choose to read “My Pet Goat” with a bunch of school children for a damn photo opportunity is not only SICK it is again TREASONIOUS! P E R I O D!!!!

The fact that the secrete service, whose sole job is to protect the commander and chief in times of peril, to assist him when the country is under attack so that lives will not be lost, did not do their job that day is by it’s very nature TREASOIOUS! P E R I O D!!!!!

People this is FACT and it should make you mad as HELL!!! Forget for a minute how the towers came down, how the Pentagon was attacked, how flight 93 came down. This administration had advance knowledge that the would be a terrorist attack on the WTC buildings and when it happened did NOTHING to evacuate the occupants of those buildings. WHO CAN REFUTE THAT NOW? WHO??? WHO CAN CALL YOU CRAZY FOR REVEALING THE PAINFUL FACTS TO THEM?

Who can tell you that this administration (President Bush and those close to him to be more specific) isn’t responsible for their deaths?

Would it be any different if Iran was believed to have missiles that could reach the towers and the President received a PDB that stated Iran plans on blowing up the twin towers with long range missiles, the first tower gets hit with a missile and no one does anything to evacuate the first and second tower, then the second tower gets hit by a missile and still no one evacuates the towers. Then after over a half an hour the towers collapse killing everyone inside the buildings. Don’t you think that people would be outraged if this happened? So what, because the “terrorist” used hijacked airliners as missiles instead of using actual missiles it makes it somehow O.K.

How sick is that?

I’m telling you that for this point alone you have to promote this move, because that is the sad truth of FACT that is staring everyone in the face that watches this movie. If they are too stupid to care then let the dead bury the dead.

Good point

I'm not a timeline expert, but it needs to be asked:

When did the Feds know for a fact (officially) that it was a terrorist attack? (We know they knew months ahead, but I mean officially on the record that's admitted when they knew).

Could they have acted immediately to evacuate those two buildings, especially after the first tower was hit, and knowing full-well another one was headed that way?

I know that question has been posed before in terms of why WTC security allowed everyone to stay or go back inside - BUT WHAT ABOUT THE FEDS' NON-ACTION?

Also, this footage on MSNBC that someone posted on another thread is just incredible about the WTC remains stored in the hangar at JFK. The part about the blob that's supposedly several floors compacted together is just chilling - AND THEY CLAIM THE TEMPERATURES REACHED WERE THAT OF THE CORE OF THE EARTH !!!!!

What is the temperature of the core of the Earth, and can jet fuel, carpet, desks and paper burning even come close to those temperatures?

Very telling.


They can't explain the Mineta Testimony: