9/11 truth now!

The transcript quotes Mr. Salem as saying that he wanted to complain to F.B.I. Headquarters in Washington about the Bureau's failure to stop the bombing, but was dissuaded by an agent identified as John Anticev.

Mr. Salem said Mr. Anticev had told him,

"He said, I don't think that the New York people would like the things out of the New York Office to go to Washington, D.C."

Another agent, identified as Nancy Floyd, does not dispute Mr. Salem's account, but rather, appears to agree with it, saying of the `New York people':

"Well, of course not, because they don't want to get their butts chewed."

 

Imply being the operative word.

 

Yea, the articles probably do imply that because they're people who think it was a conspiracy. Guess what if there was some massive government conspiracy the FBI would not be involved at all, the FBI is the peasants of government police and intelligence.

 

The article I primarily quoted was from the New York Times.

 

...and?

Could you post the article(s)

 

I know, I looked up the author, but editorials are allowed to have their own opinion. The NYT has had some whacked out things in its editorial section before

 

The New York Times later reports on Emad Salem, an undercover agent who will be the key government witness in the trial against Yousef. Salem testifies that the FBI knew about the attack beforehand and told him they would thwart it by substituting a harmless powder for the explosives. However, an FBI supervisor called off this plan, and the bombing was not stopped. [New York Times, 10/28/1993]

Not to be repetitive I just want to be clear.

 

Yes, this is the government trying to stop a terrorist attack before it happens. Despite how it seems, the government is not this monolithic, all power being. It's an organization made up us hundreds of various smaller organizations put together that involves millions of people.

 

Could you post the WHOLE article or the articles you are quoting from.
You're starting to sound like BCH (well atleast he posts the source)

 

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x92060

I think this should produce the article in question for you.

I try to not post a bunch of links to encourage real time discussion.

 

Again, that's not a false flag, that's the government trying to prevent a terrorist attack. Jeez why does the government bother to do anything, they try, they get blamed for doing it, they fail, they get blamed for doing it

 

Thanks.

Yes, but by only quoting "juicy bits" your not giving enough context, imho.
It's easier to discuss something if everybody is aware of the full details (or atleast full article) of what you are talking about.
Cherry-picking springs to mind.

 

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8797525979024486145#
http://www.lyricsfreak.com/b/bob+marley/iron+lion+zion_20021821.html

 

http://wtcdemolition.com/blog/node/2503

Quote by Michael Ruppert
FOR THE RECORD Although at first I was very skeptical based on the energy around certain books that became popular in 2002-2003, I later found out that there were hundreds of independent eyewitnesses on I-395 who saw an airliner hit the Pentagon. In a court of law their testimony could never be overcome by videotapes or interpretations that have no proof of authenticity. That testimony could never be negated by speculation or expert opinion. And I have been convinced for a long time now that an airliner did, in fact, strike the building.

But we here do not rely on eyewitnesses no matter what their credentials are because they are attention whores who's testimony is unreliable due to PTSD from the chaos and confusion of the events of September 11th.

 

Because these "credible" people have yet to actually come up with any proof of anything after 10 years except vague theories, they want it to exist, so hence they believe it.

 

The Woolsey gag order created an Omerta-like mob silence that Firefighters and Police Officers have had to deal with to this day.

http://www.congresscheck.com/2009/1...ey-handed-down-gag-order-to-911-firefighters/

Interestingly, CDI was also hired to bury the rubble of the Murrah Building in the wake of the Oklahoma City Bombing.

Bollyn also cites Mark Loizeaux, president of Controlled Demolition Inc. (CDI) of Phoenix, MD, as having seen molten steel in the bottoms of elevator shafts "three, four, and five weeks" after the attack.

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/moltensteel.html

Emphasis on elevator shafts.

 

They want it too.

 

I don't get it, what's the point? Especially to the Oklahoma city bombing, companies with experience and connections get the contracts, this is how both politics and the business world work.

 

Debris of the federal building was then carted off to a private landfill and guarded 24 hours a day by Wackenhut private security. Nothing to hide there then, eh? The FEMA team that investigated why the towers collapsed was headed by Dr. W. Gene Corley, the same individual the government called upon to whitewash the Waco fire enquiry and the Oklahoma City bombing.”

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/atlantean_conspiracy/atlantean_conspiracy23.htm

The point is this man with awesome accounts with government contracts witnessed molten steel in "the bottoms of the elevator shafts". This may as well be a good red blooded American doing his job which is what I expect from my fellow countrymen. He saw the molten steel.

I would bet he has been told what not to have seen by now. ($10?)

He may not have known that the molten steel did not exist as the official account claims. Lots of rescue workers ect claim to have seen molten steel.

Yes, burning jet fuel is hot, but, melting cross members of a 100 story building on every other floor with high temperature burning explosive enhancing material would more likely produce such pools of this melted metal.

 

Damn, FEMA uses the same guy to head investigations of buildings collapsing, real big surprise. What about the fact numerous groups including the designers of the tower did their own study into it too.

Debris was taken to a landfill and guarded, maybe, just maybe, they didn't want thousands of people climbing around on twisted metal trying to collect parts of the WTC as souvenirs.

Uhhh, explosives don't melt steel. It takes constant exposure to high temperature, hence why the steel wasn't melted to begin with until the weight and heat of millions of tons of debris came crashing down. You can burn, or you can explode, you can't have it both ways.