Was 9/11 a conspiracy??

Was 9/11 a conspiracy??

Created by djhixx on Oct 13, 2007

55,132 votes

Click on an option to vote

yes

no

well, im not sure

crucifiedguy

“atheism is knowing the bible ”

Since: Jan 09

fictional hell

#256082 Jun 3, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
I really don't care what you think. Where did flight 77 go if not into the Pentagon? More Twoofer BS.
Show me flight 77 in the pentagon . Unless you can't then just tell me you can't and I'll stop asking.

Post disclaimer here.....then provide your answer.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#256083 Jun 3, 2013
crucifiedguy wrote:
<quoted text>
A discrepancy ? Lets see .If you can't find it , it was there but then it is gone and no-one knows where it went ... that's fuckin theft .
See, That is where you tin foilers and your Alex Jones sites that just read headlines make you a uninformed moron, oh well, I tried to give you a clue that someone did not steal 1-1/2 of the total US government annual expenditures or it would have been huge news.

THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN A CLUE!

The entire federal budget in 2000 was $1.8 trillion, so $2.3 trillion going missing sounds hardly like something that could be swept under the rug.

CLUE #2 FOR THE TIN FOIL GANG!

In the current environment, DoD has a serious credibility problem in financial management. On January 11, 2001, in the confirmation hearing of the Secretary of Defense (SECDEF), Senator Byrd questioned the Defense Department’s inability “to receive a clean audit opinion in its financial statements”. He went on to say,“I seriously question an increase in the Pentagon’s budget in the face of the department’s recent (inspector general) report. How can we seriously consider a $50 billion increase in the Defense Department’s budget when the (Department of Defense’s) own auditors–when DoD’s own auditors–say the department cannot account for $2.3 trillion in transactions…”

In subsequent Senate testimony of February 13, 2001, Senator Grassley referenced these questions and continued,“…these reports show that DoD has lost control of the money at the transaction level. With no control at the transaction level, it is physically impossible to roll up the numbers into a top-line financial statement that can stand up to scrutiny and, most importantly, audit.”

While DoD may debate some of the criticisms of its financial statements and the size and components of the $2.3 trillion issue, we think that corrective action requires radical financial management transformation. For the FY 1999 financial statements, the auditors concluded that $2.3 trillion transactions of the $7.6 trillion entries to the financial statements were “unsupported”. DoD notes that many of these entries included end-of- period estimates for such items as military pension actuarial liabilities and contingent liabilities, and manual entries for such items as contract accounts payable and property and equipment values. DoD would further note that the “unsupported” entries are “not necessarily improper” and that documentation does exist in many cases, albeit, not adequate for the auditing standards imposed.
The last paragraph tells the story. The accounts are complicated, with $7.6 trillion transactions for one year (that's not saying they spent $7.6 trillion, they spent far less, but the transactions are between departments, so get entered multiple times). And about a third of them do not have documentations "adequate for the auditing standards imposed"
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#256084 Jun 3, 2013
crucifiedguy wrote:
<quoted text>
Show me flight 77 in the pentagon . Unless you can't then just tell me you can't and I'll stop asking.
Post disclaimer here.....then provide your answer.
DONE!

http://rense.com/general32/phot.htm
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#256085 Jun 3, 2013
crucifiedguy wrote:
<quoted text> Fair enough where's the fuselage?
Barf bags, luggage , In flight meal trays , or any thing pointing to flight 77?
FLIGHT 77 did not crash into the PENTAGON BECAUSE I CAN'T SHOW YOU A BARF BAG, I AM SURE THAT WAS HIGH ON THEIR LIST TO DOCUMENT?

What a tin foil nut bag you are! What proof do you need next, THE SAMS CLUB CARD FROM THE PERSON in SEAT 23B?
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#256086 Jun 3, 2013
crucifiedguy wrote:
<quoted text>
What the hell is this ?
Wikipedia ?Are you joking ? Must be something you can't answer so you send me to another controlled website
A CONTROLLED WEBSITE?

AND A FEW DAYS AGO I MIGHT BE A PAID DISINFO AGENT?

Oh boy your stripes are showing, and they are shiny as tin foil!
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#256087 Jun 3, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
Numerous good sources says it is, their opinions far out weigh yours.
SHOW ME ONE SOURCE, One documented link that states every inch of the Pentagon if filmed.

crucifiedguy

“atheism is knowing the bible ”

Since: Jan 09

fictional hell

#256088 Jun 3, 2013
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong as usual!
A: Violations of safety codes and regulations are not de facto evidence of negligence, not even close.
AND THE CLINCHER!
B: The Port Authority and the WTC were exempt for NYC safety codes. Summery judgement granted, case dismissed with prejudice in favor of the defendants.
http://www.fireengineering.com/articles/2007/...
Once again your post http://www.topix.com/forum/topstories/TSBMT04...

So what your saying here is it doesn't matter if silverstein is responsible for the safety of everyone in the wtc buildings or not he cannot be held accountable because these towers were exempt from persecution because they belong to the port authority ?
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#256089 Jun 3, 2013
onemale wrote:
My philosophy is: seeing is believing
I have NOT yet seen any video of a jet crashing into the Pentagon. NONE!
I can see them, Atoms, don't exist, Air does not exist, Gravity does not exist!
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#256090 Jun 3, 2013
crucifiedguy wrote:
<quoted text>
This is your post http://www.topix.com/forum/topstories/TSBMT04... referring to silversteins neglect.
All I did was understand what you were saying and confront you with it.
Yea, Too bad you just shoot from the hip and pretend you know things that are way above your head, such as the impact of safety codes on negligence suits and THE FACT THAT THE WTC was exempt from such codes!
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#256091 Jun 3, 2013
crucifiedguy wrote:
<quoted text>
... because these towers were exempt from persecution because they belong to the port authority ?
And there you go with your reading comprehension, I said buildings codes, not some sort of blanket immunity.

IS THERE AN ADULT AT HOME, PUT THEM ON THE LINE AND I WILL SEE IF THEY CAN EXPLAIN IT TO YOU!

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#256092 Jun 3, 2013
Anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
Of the events that occured in what seems like a short time span today, I always believed the jet airliner crashing where it did in the Pentagon was the least complex. All the proof was there despite a camera video.
There were many people who say flight 77 crash into the Pentagon. The C-130 pilot saw the maneuver and the explosion. Ted Olson's wife was on that flight and had a telephone conversation. You are 100% correct. Flight 77 could go no other place without detection.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#256093 Jun 3, 2013
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
Yea, Too bad you just shoot from the hip and pretend you know things that are way above your head, such as the impact of safety codes on negligence suits and THE FACT THAT THE WTC was exempt from such codes!
Exactly. Silverstein is going to commit an unthinkable crime and expose his complicity.

RIGHT!!!! ROTFLMAO

crucifiedguy

“atheism is knowing the bible ”

Since: Jan 09

fictional hell

#256094 Jun 3, 2013
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
See, That is where you tin foilers and your Alex Jones sites that just read headlines make you a uninformed moron, oh well, I tried to give you a clue that someone did not steal 1-1/2 of the total US government annual expenditures or it would have been huge news.
THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN A CLUE!
The entire federal budget in 2000 was $1.8 trillion, so $2.3 trillion going missing sounds hardly like something that could be swept under the rug.
CLUE #2 FOR THE TIN FOIL GANG!
In the current environment, DoD has a serious credibility problem in financial management. On January 11, 2001, in the confirmation hearing of the Secretary of Defense (SECDEF), Senator Byrd questioned the Defense Department’s inability “to receive a clean audit opinion in its financial statements”. He went on to say,“I seriously question an increase in the Pentagon’s budget in the face of the department’s recent (inspector general) report. How can we seriously consider a $50 billion increase in the Defense Department’s budget when the (Department of Defense’s) own auditors–when DoD’s own auditors–say the department cannot account for $2.3 trillion in transactions…”
In subsequent Senate testimony of February 13, 2001, Senator Grassley referenced these questions and continued,“…these reports show that DoD has lost control of the money at the transaction level. With no control at the transaction level, it is physically impossible to roll up the numbers into a top-line financial statement that can stand up to scrutiny and, most importantly, audit.”
While DoD may debate some of the criticisms of its financial statements and the size and components of the $2.3 trillion issue, we think that corrective action requires radical financial management transformation. For the FY 1999 financial statements, the auditors concluded that $2.3 trillion transactions of the $7.6 trillion entries to the financial statements were “unsupported”. DoD notes that many of these entries included end-of- period estimates for such items as military pension actuarial liabilities and contingent liabilities, and manual entries for such items as contract accounts payable and property and equipment values. DoD would further note that the “unsupported” entries are “not necessarily improper” and that documentation does exist in many cases, albeit, not adequate for the auditing standards imposed.
The last paragraph tells the story. The accounts are complicated, with $7.6 trillion transactions for one year (that's not saying they spent $7.6 trillion, they spent far less, but the transactions are between departments, so get entered multiple times). And about a third of them do not have documentations "adequate for the auditing standards imposed"
Who was reprimanded for this inadequate accounting ? Where did the money go ? This reference to 7.6 trillion is a side show for dumb assess . I don't give a rats ass about transactions between departments as this is not where the money went.
The 2.3 trillion is unaccounted for ! Who is responsible?
What has been done about it ? Was it resolved? Did the tax paying citizens receive any restitution?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#256095 Jun 3, 2013
crucifiedguy wrote:
<quoted text>
Who was reprimanded for this inadequate accounting ? Where did the money go ? This reference to 7.6 trillion is a side show for dumb assess . I don't give a rats ass about transactions between departments as this is not where the money went.
The 2.3 trillion is unaccounted for ! Who is responsible?
What has been done about it ? Was it resolved? Did the tax paying citizens receive any restitution?
Where did thousands of highly valuable and rentable square footage go?

You must be kidding me.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#256096 Jun 3, 2013
So Silverstein disposes of some of the most valuable rental property and tenants in the world for a short term gain?

Right.

We got it.....TWOOOF
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#256097 Jun 3, 2013
crucifiedguy wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't give a rats ass about transactions between departments as this is not where the money went.
The 2.3 trillion is unaccounted for !
LMFAO! Any change you noticed this while you pound you keyboard with you fists in a tin foil rage.

"the auditors concluded that $2.3 trillion transactions of the $7.6 trillion entries to the financial statements were “unsupported”. DoD notes that many of these entries included end-of- period estimates for such items as military pension actuarial liabilities and contingent liabilities, and manual entries for such items as contract accounts payable and property and equipment values. DoD would further note that the “unsupported” entries are “not necessarily improper”"

BUT SURE, LETS KEEP GOING!

The technology revolution has transformed organizations across the private sector, but not ours, not fully, not yet. We are, as they say, tangled in our anchor chain. Our financial systems are decades old. ACCORDING TO SOME ESTIMATES, WE CANNOT TRACK $2.3 TRILLION IN TRANSACTIONS. WE CANNOT SHARE INFORMATION FROM FLOOR TO FLOOR IN THIS BUILDING BECAUSE IT'S STORED ON DOZENS OF TECHNOLOGICAL SYSTEMS THAT ARE INACCESSIBLE OR INCOMPATIBLE.
We maintain 20 to 25 percent more base infrastructure than we need to support our forces, at an annual waste to taxpayers of some $3 billion to $4 billion. Fully half of our resources go to infrastructure and overhead, and in addition to draining resources from warfighting, these costly and outdated systems, procedures and programs stifle innovation as well. A new idea must often survive the gauntlet of some 17 levels of bureaucracy to make it from a line officer's to my desk. I have too much respect for a line officer to believe that we need 17 layers between us....
[plenty more here, please go read the whole thing]
http://www.defense.gov/speeches/speech.aspx...

It's not that the money is "missing", then, at least according to Rumsfeld, more that incompatible and aging financial systems don't allow it to be tracked throughout the system. A DoD news document from April 2002 spelled this out even more clearly:
In fiscal 1999, a defense audit found THAT ABOUT $2.3 TRILLION OF BALANCES, TRANSACTIONS AND ADJUSTMENTS WERE INADEQUATELY DOCUMENTED. THESE "UNSUPPORTED" TRANSACTIONS DO NOT MEAN THE DEPARTMENT ULTIMATELY CANNOT ACCOUNT FOR THEM, SHE ADVISED, BUT THAT TRACKING DOWN NEEDED DOCUMENTS WOULD TAKE A LONG TIME. AUDITORS, SHE SAID, MIGHT HAVE TO GO TO DIFFERENT COMPUTER SYSTEMS, TO DIFFERENT LOCATIONS OR ACCESS DIFFERENT DATABASES TO GET INFORMATION.
http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx...

crucifiedguy

“atheism is knowing the bible ”

Since: Jan 09

fictional hell

#256098 Jun 3, 2013
Charlie Sheen wrote:
You forgot your disclaimer ,silly!
Please check your links before posting them . only one link provided actually got me somewhere the rest gave a 404 error.
Try it again only this time with a disclaimer.
Shredding a commercial airliner into refrigerator size pieces yet leaving dead bodies dressed and complete with all limbs is simply amazing. Punching a round hole through a concrete wall with a shredded airplane is fu*king marvelous!

Okay you got me I'm a believer..........NOT!
What a bunch of shit .

crucifiedguy

“atheism is knowing the bible ”

Since: Jan 09

fictional hell

#256099 Jun 3, 2013
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
A CONTROLLED WEBSITE?
AND A FEW DAYS AGO I MIGHT BE A PAID DISINFO AGENT?
Oh boy your stripes are showing, and they are shiny as tin foil!
Wikipedia is a publicly controlled web sight.
As far as the paid disinfo agent goes are you?
I like my tin foil hat ... It keeps the bullshit you keep spouting out of my hair.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#256100 Jun 3, 2013
crucifiedguy wrote:
<quoted text>
Wikipedia ?Are you joking ? Must be something you can't answer so you send me to another controlled website


Controlled by the Jewish Chupacabra who live on middle earth and control the gravity machines?
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#256101 Jun 3, 2013
crucifiedguy wrote:
<quoted text>
You forgot your disclaimer ,silly!
Please check your links before posting them . only one link provided actually got me somewhere the rest gave a 404 error.
Try it again only this time with a disclaimer.
Shredding a commercial airliner into refrigerator size pieces yet leaving dead bodies dressed and complete with all limbs is simply amazing. Punching a round hole through a concrete wall with a shredded airplane is fu*king marvelous!
Yea, We get it tinfoil, that hole was 16 feet +, how tall is a human or for that matter the average Chupacabra!

But we get it, all things point to 77, but you want the bodies drug out so the building is in the background or it's not proof!

What an Alex Jones wannabee!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 3 min Travesty 52,404
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 4 min Gabriel 992,172
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 35 min awesome wise man 693,338
the Lord JEHOVAH YAHWEH..has ALWAYS EXISTED??! 1 hr Holy dr Shrink 7
I need a name for a song. 2 hr LatinoVargas55 1
Why I’m no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 2 hr Holy dr Shrink 446,000
Jake Tapper: I Lied About Trump S Hole Comment 2 hr Frmr Dem Now4Trump 1
More from around the web