Reply With Quote
Marvin Bush had the entire situation under control, so any conspiracies are futile.
No not that offer -- this onebut if you are ready to put together an actual theory that is more plausible than the 9/11 commission report I'm all ears.
Marvin Bush had the entire situation under control, so any conspiracies are futile.
http://www.washingtonspectator.com/a...15bushes_2.cfmMarvin Bush was reelected to the Stratesec [formerly Securacom -- CD] board of directors annually from 1993 through 1999. His last reelection was on May 25, 1999, for July 1999 to June 2000.....Securacom got the $8.3 million World Trade Center security contract in October 1996 and received about $9.2 million from the WTC job from 1996 (a quarter of its revenues that year) to 1998. But in 1998, the company was "excused from the project" because it could not fulfill the work, according to former manager Al Weinstein, and the electronic security work at the WTC was taken over by EJ Electric, a larger contractor.
Did you ever set up dominos and knock them into one another as a kid?
How much ing science do you need?
^^ not according to the current ceo of the company, and you didnt mention united airlines
Link?
Everything I've read says Stratesec is out of business.
yall convinced me though, I believe the 911 Commission Report is 100% factual and nothing was omitted
I'm certainly willing to consider some other explaination.
Nobody has one though.
I mean NOBODY.
http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0204-06.htm
and will links ever convince anyone of anything?
united, im done i gotta go return some video tapes
From your article:It also had a three-year contract to maintain electronic security systems at Dulles Airport, according to a Dulles contracting official. Securacom/Stratesec also handled some security for United Airlines in the 1990s, according to McDaniel, but it had been completed before [Marvin Bush's] arriving on the board in 1998.What does that even mean? Whose fiscal year?Marvin P. Bush, the president's youngest brother, was a director at Stratesec from 1993 to fiscal year 2000.So he left a company that was effectively fired from its job with the WTC three years before the attacks and went to a company that lost millions of dollars in claim payouts after the 9/11 attacks. What exactly is the conspiracy angle here?Marvin Bush's last year on the board at Stratesec coincided with his first year on the board of HCC Insurance, formerly Houston Casualty Co., one of the insurance carriers for the WTC. He left the HCC board in November 2002.
I'm glad you posted something by Margie Burns though. That will make it easier for you to believe what she wrote three years after that article you posted.http://www.margieburns.com/blog/_arc...6/1784217.htmlStratesec is bankrupt and no longer exists
Last edited by ChumpDumper; 02-11-2007 at 05:46 PM.
From your article mookie -
I guess it's too much of a logical reach to say that no one knew why the shuttle blew up when it did, whereas it was pretty ing clear that planes were flown into the WTC towers.On the very day of the tragic space shuttle crash, the government appointed an independent investigative panel, and rightly so. Why didn't it do the same on Sept. 12, 2001?
I didn't need some independent commission to tell me what I saw with my own eyes on CNN on 9/11.
Your link completely convinced me that Marvin Bush had nothing at all to do with the 9/11 attacks.
Well, I saw the In Plane Sight vid. For the most part I was dissapointed. That whole thing he pointed out about the supposed plume of smoke before any of the towers fell down was a little off to me. If that were to have really happened I think everyone would have questioned it. That would have been too obvious to overlook. I saw the Not in Plane Sight vid and saw how they debunked it. I've seen other videos that dealt with the flash before the impact of the towers. That never raised any red flags for me. It was just a result of impact. The pod theory was laughable as well. This doesn't make me discredit everything and accept what is widely believed though. I wish I had the link to the video that I first saw. It didn't dwell on what Plane Sight dealt with. It also presented everything in a more professional manner. The music wasn't as dramatic
thats why links are so awesome, united
I dont see where youre going ahf
united
my pc froze earlier when you posted all those links to where the 911 hijackers were officially identified
Loose Change is slicker and just as egregiously bad.I wish I had the link to the video that I first saw. It didn't dwell on what Plane Sight dealt with. It also presented everything in a more professional manner. The music wasn't as dramatic
Loose Change 2nd Edition
Loose Change 2nd Edition Viewer's Guide
Read the latter while watching the former. If you can't pick out the obvious lies and flaws in Loose Change, the guide will.
Why don't you just email the guy who wrote the book and ask him if he thinks those are the guys. He only spent three years travelling through twenty countries checking them out. It might not be enough for you.
[email protected]
I dont see where youre going ahf
united
The question was why wasn't an independent investigative panel formed the same day as 9/11 happened when one was formed when the shuttle blew up.
My point was that in the case of the Challenger disaster, no one knew why the shuttle blew up. Plus, NASA had a culture of sweeping problems under the rug.
Conversely, it was pretty ing clear what happened on 9/11 - jumbo jets loaded with fuel crashed into the buildings, and then they fell.
Didn't we go over this on another thread?
I'm not ilegal. I have a green card.
From the Loosechangeguide:
Lemnitzer may have been the most rabid anticommunist of anyone in a high position in the U.S. Throughout the Eisenhower and Kennedy administrations he continually pushed for an invasion of Cuba. After the Bay of Pigs fiasco, that idea was not welcome in the White House.
May have not been welcome at the WH, but you can't tell me the spooks just gave up the fight.
Now, if you wanted to increase defense spending in the areas that the PNAC recommends, what is the LAST thing you'd want to do? Answer: get involved in a ground war and subsequent occupation of a country where many citizens are fighting a guerilla-style campaign against you and against each other with AK-47s, RPGs, and IEDs made from cell phones and 10,000 tons of old artillery s s.
Star wars was proving to be a dog for most defense companies. With the Soviet monster no longer a viable scare after its economic collapse, the powers-that-be needed a new enemy, one that they could easily manipulate and a war that would last perpetually, guaranteeing perpetual profits.
How can someone claim to be a serious debunker and not be intellectually honest?
If the U.S. planned the attacks of 9/11 as a pretext to invade Iraq, why did they use 15 Saudis as "scapegoats," and not 15, or 20, Iraqis?
...this forum is proof one that most Americans don't know the difference between a Saudi, Pakistani, Afghani, Kuwati, or Indian for that matter....all they know is that Muslims attacked the WTC and we need to kill the whole bunch of them.
The rest is up to the wing-nut media.
You can't tell me how they pulled off 9/11 -- or even if that is what you believe.From the Loosechangeguide:
May have not been welcome at the WH, but you can't tell me the spooks just gave up the fight.
The same way someone can say someone else was behind 9/11 and then not say who or why or how.
Star wars was proving to be a dog for most defense companies. With the Soviet monster no longer a viable scare after its economic collapse, the powers-that-be needed a new enemy, one that they could easily manipulate and a war that would last perpetually, guaranteeing perpetual profits.
How can someone claim to be a serious debunker and not be intellectually honest?
And you don't have to be a serious debunker to debunk Loose Change. Just have
some common sense.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
