911 CT, how many people?

Di0genes

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Looked into him for 20 seconds. He's affiliated with quackwatch who seem to me seem to me to be a shill org for allopathic medicine.

Allopathic medicine being what the rest of the world calls medicine.

Here is a good example.


http://www.quackpotwatch.org/opinionpieces/RacketeeringColorado.htm

Hmm sounds like these CAVITA people are Gillian Mc Keith level fraudsters.


Yeah from your link

I won't be truly happy until I see, on the nightly TV news, the quackbusters, all of them, taken away in shackles by Federal Marshalls. I work on that EVERY DAY - and I'm getting closer.

GarlicBread

Boo Radley wrote: »

The first one looks like a bird, or more likely two. The second, based on the focus/blur, is likely to be a bug. It's very close to the camera and clearly no where near the buildings. Plus, why would a stealth bomber be flying at that angle straight towards the ground?

I have to say this is the most imaginative interpretations of the mundane I've come across in relation to 9/11.

That's one amazing bird, i doubt it though.

The second one couldnt be a bug because it comes from behind the building. It would have to be a giant bug........

I found the other video of the same object, probably some military plane.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DoE8Uz2ia3M
Forward to 8:48 to 8:52, its very clear, and its the exact same object going by and an unbelievable speed. Precisely at the moment of impact.

Go to 9:35 on the same video and its the same object again from a different angle. Clearly another smaller plane going very fast.

meglome

GarlicBread wrote: »

That's one amazing bird, i doubt it though.

The second one couldnt be a bug because it comes from behind the building. It would have to be a giant bug........

But how could a plane turn like that and head towards the ground?

Boo Radley

GarlicBread wrote: »

That's one amazing bird, i doubt it though.

The second one couldnt be a bug because it comes from behind the building. It would have to be a giant bug........

I found the other video of the same object, probably some military plane.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DoE8Uz2ia3M
Forward to 8:48 to 8:52, its very clear, and its the exact same object going by and an unbelievable speed. Precisely at the moment of impact.

A different bird. Also it's flying at a completely different angle. Honestly. The first one is two birds, go to around 35 seconds and look at how the second bird comes from above in line with the smoke in the background. Appears they collide. If you don't agree we should leave it at that. I'm confident in what I'm seeing and there's no point in going in circles.

Plus, I don't think it's particulary amazing for a bird to shraply turn in the air. It's what they do.

GarlicBread

meglome wrote: »

But how could a plane turn like that and head towards the ground?

I dont know, im just pointing out that there is a mountain of anomalous stuff in alot of the footage of that day.

GarlicBread

Boo Radley wrote: »

A different bird. Also it's flying at a completely different angle. Honestly. The first one is two birds, go to around 35 seconds and look at how the second bird comes from above in line with the smoke in the background. Appears they collide. If you don't agree we should leave it at that. I'm confident in what I'm seeing and there's no point in going in circles.

Birds do not travel that fast and do not randomly appear at the exact moment of impact in multiple videos which were taken miles apart. These objects are going so fast you can barely see them, they cant be anything other than military planes unless the footage is fraud.

meglome

GarlicBread wrote: »

I dont know, im just pointing out that there is a mountain of anomalous stuff in alot of the footage of that day.

You pointed some birds which would be frightened by the impact noise. A plane or missile couldn't turn like that, so we're are left with birds or bugs.

GarlicBread wrote: »

Birds do not travel that fast and do not randomly appear at the exact moment of impact in multiple videos which were taken miles apart. These objects are going so fast you can barely see them, they cant be anything other than military planes unless the footage is fraud.

Seems to be travelling as fast as birds or bugs. Do you wonder why no one saw anything strange at the time?

Brown Bomber

quasar2010 wrote: »

personally I believe that if you wanted to commit such a crime then the people behind it would have to display the same beliefs, motivations and determination to be able to sell this to the world.
If you look at certain facts before 911 and compare those facts after 911 then logic should tell you if the motives are plausible or not.
Based on the CT that the Bush/Rockerfeller foundation are beginning to corner the world's oil and Gas supplies within the middle east and Asia you could look at several facts then try to apply logic. Here are a few.
First fact is that two oil giants based in the United States have been trying since the 1980's to build a pipeline from the Caspian sea across many Countries including Afghanistan to the Indian ocean. This is no secret and it has been estabished that the two companies have ties with the Bush/Rockerfeller fundations. This is a proven fact. It is also a proven fact that after 1995 the deal fell apart after it was apparant that the Taliban aswell as other factions was not going to let that happen.
The next fact is simple, the twin towers and the Pentagon were attacked, it was established that the Taliban were partly to blame and Afghanistan was invaded as a result.
The next fact is that Iraq was invaded on the basis that it had WMD which were a threat to the western world and the stability of the region.
The next fact is that it didn't have any WMD.
The next fact is that the trans Afghanistan pipeline is now under construction because the Taliban have been removed. This is no secret.
The next fact is that oil is being pumped from Iraq and being used by the western world, again this is no secret.
So to sum it all up in a quick sentence you could say:- Before 911 there was no pipeline in Afghanistan and no oil production for the western world coming from Iraq and after 911 we now have a gas pipeline in Afghanistan and the oil is pumping from Iraq. All facts.
Anyone suggesting to me that America is an opportunist nation and that it just happened to stumble upon the idea of stripping these Countries of their Hydrocarbons after 911 and not before must be the most naive person ever to walk the face of this planet.
Money is the biggest motivator, the biggest belief among fellow brothers and the biggest determination that any Industrial nation can possibly have behind it, it always has been and it always will be. Everyone has a price, thats how we are brought up - to want more.

And then they were planning an attack on Afghanistan before 9-11.

Tuesday, 18 September, 2001, 11:27 GMT 12:27 UK
US 'planned attack on Taleban'

A former Pakistani diplomat has told the BBC that the US was planning military action against Osama Bin Laden and the Taleban even before last week's attacks.
Niaz Naik, a former Pakistani Foreign Secretary, was told by senior American officials in mid-July that military action against Afghanistan would go ahead by the middle of October.

Russian troops were on standby


Mr Naik said US officials told him of the plan at a UN-sponsored international contact group on Afghanistan which took place in Berlin.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1550366.stm

You asked about keeping people quiet. Torture and murder sends out a very clear message. Note the name above - Niaz Naik.

Former Pakistan foreign secretary Niaz Naik murdered

ISLAMABAD: Former Pakistan foreign secretary Niaz A Naik, who was involved in back-channel diplomacy with India during the 1999 Kargil conflict, has been tortured and murdered by unidentified persons at his residence here, police said on Saturday.

Read more: Former Pakistan foreign secretary Niaz Naik murdered - The Times of India http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/pakistan/Former-Pakistan-foreign-secretary-Niaz-Naik-murdered/articleshow/4871869.cms#ixzz15fEL22oT

GarlicBread

meglome wrote: »

Some people think a lot of things. If you use edited, altered or highly compressed video then yes lot's of things can look odd. When those things don't appear in the uncompressed and unedited video, which they don't, there is no mystery. Course no such technology exists to fake a hologram of the plane so that all the people watching and videoing could be fooled.



There's about an 18 second gap from the impact to that bird flying past. Not only am I saying it's a bird I'm saying it's very obviously a bird reacting to the sound of the impact. Somehow this stealth plane takes 18 seconds to fly around and reacts like a bird? And how do you think not one person saw or heard this mystery plane?
But let's imagine this plane existed for a moment what was doing there? Was it projecting the hologram using tech that also doesn't exist?



Go look at hi-res copies of the original footage and this can be shown to be total nonsense.

To be honest I can barely comprehend this no plane stuff. Whatever about saying there was explosives in the buildings but that all the people watching were somehow tricked into seeing and videoing planes that were not there is just ridiculous.

I didnt say there was no planes, i only heard it mentioned a few times. Im only pointing out the different pieces of footage that im my opinion, show other activity going on apart from the airliners.

These videos have been around for years and years since it happened, i doubt somone took them and edited them and then re-released them.

Brown Bomber

Di0genes wrote: »

Allopathic medicine being what the rest of the world calls medicine.



Hmm sounds like these CAVITA people are Gillian Mc Keith level fraudsters.


Yeah from your link

I suggest you read the link again before you make repeat unsubstantiated smears.

Boo Radley

GarlicBread wrote: »

Birds do not travel that fast and do not randomly appear at the exact moment of impact in multiple videos which were taken miles apart. These objects are going so fast you can barely see them, they cant be anything other than military planes unless the footage is fraud.

Firstly, what I claim to be birds are not going that fast. I'm not sure what makes you think they are. They are also relatively close to the camera which means they would traverse the width of the screen in what might seem a super speed when compared to something farther away. It's straight forward enough.

GarlicBread

meglome wrote: »

Seems to be travelling as fast as birds or bugs. Do you wonder why no one saw anything strange at the time?

These things were barely captured on camara let alone human eyes.

The 3 pieces of footage of the second hit, with one being miles away, showing 3 different birds, all going 1000mph and flying off the screen in less than a second, at the exact same time in the exact same location going past the same side of the tower.

Sure thing.

Di0genes

Brown Bomber wrote: »

If you take it as a given the details of the official conspiracy theory more or less then all you need are 19 Arab patsies working for "former" CIA asset bin Laden.

There's no evidence Bin Laden ever worked of the CIA.

and their and their dancing Mossad handlers to film it along qith Michael Chertoff to cover for them.

Evidence linking Michael Chertoff to the bombers, Evidence that "dancing jews" were the "mossad handlers" of "the Al Qaeda cells?"

All parties involved wouldn't need to be encouraged to keep quiet; the fact the they were involved in the most despicable act of treason in my life time guarantees this.

Thats a wonderful reverse catch 22. We've learnt that other conspiracies fall apart due to people feelings guilt, you're saying the level of guilt they feel, keeps this conspiracy alive?

Brown Bomber

Di0genes wrote: »

There's no evidence Bin Laden ever worked of the CIA.

What like a name badge? Or a tax return? give it a rest...

Di0genes wrote: »

Evidence linking Michael Chertoff to the bombers, Evidence that "dancing jews" were the "mossad handlers" of "the Al Qaeda cells?"

And look who brings religion into it :rolleyes: I have no idea about the dancing Israelis religion, if they have one at all.

It was Chertoff who had the dancing Israelis who were high-fiving each other as people were jumping from office windows released after they were refusing lie detector tests, at least one was "former" IDF counter-intelligence and Urban Moving Systems was a Mossad intelligence front.

squod

Brown Bomber wrote: »

What like a name badge? Or a tax return? give it a rest...

I lol'ed.

Divorce Referendum

squod wrote: »

I lol'ed.

Easy to make you laugh isnt it :rolleyes:

Yitzhak Rabin

Quit the bickering!....everyone.

meglome

GarlicBread wrote: »

These things were barely captured on camara let alone human eyes.

The 3 pieces of footage of the second hit, with one being miles away, showing 3 different birds, all going 1000mph and flying off the screen in less than a second, at the exact same time in the exact same location going past the same side of the tower.

Sure thing.

But it's more believable that some sort of stealth craft was doing 1000mph right over a huge city but no one saw or heard it? An aircraft that can fly very like a bird or insect but completely unlike a plane. One that can do that speed towards the ground but not hit the ground. My suggestion is rather than invent this special plane how about we look the at the obvious and believe it was a bird or insect close to the camera. It was September there would be plenty of birds and insects about.

Di0genes

Brown Bomber wrote: »

I suggest you read the link again before you make repeat unsubstantiated smears.

I have read the claim and it's filled with unsubstantiated smears.

Brown Bomber

Di0genes wrote: »

I have read the claim and it's filled with unsubstantiated smears.

You said:

Hmm sounds like these CAVITA people are Gillian Mc Keith level fraudsters.

Please support your claim of fraud against CAVITA through that link you have "read" or better yet save us both the hassle and admit you were wrong.

Di0genes

Brown Bomber wrote: »

What like a name badge? Or a tax return? give it a rest...

So you have no evidence Bin Laden worked for the CIA? great so you'' retract the claim.

And look who brings religion into it :rolleyes: I have no idea about the dancing Israelis religion, if they have one at all.

It was Chertoff who had the dancing Israelis who were high-fiving each other as people were jumping from office windows released after they were refusing lie detector tests, at least one was "former" IDF counter-intelligence and Urban Moving Systems was a Mossad intelligence front.

Where's your link between the "dancing jews" (dancing Jews being the common term with the alleged incident) ( oh and can you point out any non jewish members of Mossad?) as being the "Mossad handlers" to the "Al Qaeda cell" who carried out the attacks?

Di0genes

Brown Bomber wrote: »

You said:



Please support your claim of fraud against CAVITA through that link you have "read" or better yet save us both the hassle and admit you were wrong.

Cracks knuckles.

The alleged cause of NICO is not localized jaw infections but avascular osteonecrosis (AO). AO is a real condition that is most often associated with the head of the femur (hip bone) and is common among athletes who play contact sports such as football. It occurs because repeated trauma can damage the blood supply to areas such as the hip where there is not a lot of collateral circulation (the presence of many blood vessels that deliver to the same area). Because the jaw has abundant collateral circulation, most experts do not think that AO can occur there. The treatment of NICO is the same as for CO; invasive and irreversible surgeries and extractions.


The research on NICO is very limited. No randomized controlled studies related to "NICO" diagnosis and treatment have been published. Bouquot is the main person diagnosing NICO in the tissue specimens obtained by dentists who claim that the condition exists. Several other pathologists who reviewed some of the same specimens have judged the tissue to be entirely normal. Some proponents locate their alleged problem areas with an unapproved ultrasound device called the Cavitat.


The concepts of cavitational osteopathosis and NICO have been promoted by the American Academy of Biological Dentistry. Postgraduate seminars held by this organization have persuaded a number of dentists and some physicians to claim they can cure such conditions as arthritis, heart disease, and pain throughout the body by removing infected cavities within the patient's jawbones.


Believers in "biological dentistry" have taken the treatment one step further. They claim that root-canal-treated teeth cause NICO as well as a host of other chronic systemic diseases. They recommend removing all root-canal-treated teeth and most of the other teeth close to the area where they say an infection exists. According to a 1994 article in Milwaukee Magazine, a group of local patients filed suit against several practitioners of this bizarre and dangerous therapy. These patients had many perfectly healthy teeth removed without any improvement in their diseases. (I don't know the outcome of the suits.)

In September 2005, Aetna filed an amended counterclaim which described how Cavitat Medical Technologies and members of its board of scientific advisors taught dentists how to miscode insurance claims in order to get paid for diagnosing and treating NICO. The amended counterclaim listed 22 dentists who allegedly filed a total of 427 fraudulent claims for which they got paid. The list included 185 from Bouquot, 53 from Shen, 50 from Shankland, 29 from Glaros, and 17 from Jones. Aetna sought recovery of its legal costs plus punitive damages that could have amounted amount to millions of dollars. In January 2006, the judge ruled on narrow legal grounds that Aetna did not have standing to file its counterclaim. This ruling was unfair and could have been appealed. However, in April 2006, apparently pressured by the judge, Aetna paid $2.1 million rather than facing the uncertainty of a trial by jury in front of a hostile judge. The settlement terms were supposed to be confidential, but subsequent events disclosed the payment amount.
Cavitat's suit did not achieve its primary purposes. Its backers hoped that the prospect of facing racketeering charges would intimidate dental licensing boards as well as other insurance companies, but no such effect is apparent. Although Cavitat's name has been replaced by a more general statement in Aetna's Clinical Policy Bulletin, the Cavitat device and NICO-associated practices still remain ineligible for insurance coverage and are unlikely to be covered by other companies. The latest (November 17, 2009) version of Aetna's policy states:

1. Aetna considers surgery (including scraping of “infected cavities” and removal of root-canal-treated teeth) and/or any other therapies (e.g., rinsing the “cavity” with colloidal silver and administering chelation therapy and intravenous vitamin C) and bone graft replacement for the treatment of neuralgia inducing cavitational osteonecrosis (NICO) related diagnoses to be experimental and investigational because the clinical significance of this syndrome is in question.
2. Aetna considers the use of devices to image the jawbones to diagnose NICO or NICO-type conditions experimental and investigational because there is no adequate scientific evidence to support their clinical value.

Cavitat also got embroiled in a nasty battle over the disposition of the $2.1 million. In 2006, the attorney who filed the Aetna suit sued Cavitat for more than $500,000 in unpaid attorneys fees. Cavitat defaulted and then tried to block recovery of the money by filing for bankruptcy. Aetna, Cavitat, and the attorneys reached a settlement agreement under which Cavitat's original attorneys got most of what they asked for.
Aetna does not appear to be interested in seeking recovery of the money it paid in response to miscoded claims. However, other insurance companies have been alerted to look more closely at claims submitted for NICO-related proceduresand more victims of NICO surgery have filed lawsuits against its practitioners. Cavitat Medical Technologies may also be facing other trouble. During a bankruptcy hearing, Cavitat President Bob Jones disclosed that in May 2006, his records had been seized by a "SWAT team raid from the FDA into our home and offices."

ecause most insurance companies do not cover procedures related to "cavitational osteonecrosis," many of the dentists who diagnose NICO try to hide their activities by "miscoding" or deliberately misstating facts of a case. Common ploys to "hide" NICO surgery are to state that the patient has osteomyelitis (bone infection), cysts, granulomas, or another pathology near the tip of the tooth root. These diagnoses would not normally stand out for scrutiny because periapical cysts and granulomas are fairly common. To detect miscoding, it would be necessary to compare a particular dentist's diagnostic patterns with what would be expected from a dentist who practices appropriately. Osteomyelitis near tooth sockets is not common. Deceptive dentists typically list routine (and often unnecessary) extractions as "surgical extractions" (thus charging more) and then scrape out bone from the socket and tooth roots, claiming that an "infection" or osteomyelitis exists. NICO advocates may also remove every tooth with a root canal treatment, regardless of success or failure of the treatment. They claim that root canal treated teeth are "toxic" and cause "cavitations," without any valid biological basis or clinical data to support these assertions.
Insurance carriers would be wise to require a pre-extraction diagnosis for every extracted tooth, and periodically require pre-extraction x-ray films on a random basis. In cases of suspected fraud, pretreatment x-ray films should always be reviewed. Review of the diagnoses submitted would help uncover fraud cases. Other claim patterns that should trigger an examination for fraudulent treatment include:
Multiple extractions on the same day in the same quadrant, coupled with diagnoses of cavitations, osteomyelitis, or other bony pathology

• Any diagnosis of "NICO"
• Removal of root canal-treated teeth without cause
• Multiple bone biopsies
• Bone biopsies coupled with extractions
• Osteomyelitis without months of documented antibiotic therapy
• Multiple bone surgeries done by general dentists.

• Aetna's Clinical Policy Bulletin explaining why does not cover Cavitat ultrasonography for diagnosing "NICO"
• Aetna Rips the Lid off the Cavitat conspiracy
• Is this dental diagnosis real? A radical treatment prompts a lawsuit by Aetna—and raises questions for the FDA. Business Week, Jan 18, 2006.
• Unconventional dentistry: Part IV. Unconventional dental practices and products
• "Biological dentists" charged with unprofessional conduct in California.
• Aetna's counterclaim against Cavitat Medical Technologies and Robert J. Jones
• Aetna's amended counterclaim against Cavitat Medical Technologies and Robert J. Jones
• FDA warning letter to Robert Jones (2003)
• Brauer C. Export report on regulatory improprieties for Cavitat device
• Greer R. Expert report on NICO and Cavitat
• Marx RE. Expert report (NICO case reviews)
• BlueCross BlueShield of Illinois medical policy statement on NICO
• Anthony G. Roeder, D.D.S. charged with unprofessional conduct
• James Shen, D.D.S. surrenders dental license
• Wesley Shankland, D.D.S. placed on five-years' probation
• Offbeat dentists sued for negligence

http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/cavitation.html

Shall I go on?

Di0genes

squod wrote: »

I lol'ed.

The claim that Bin Laden worked for the CIA is a corner stone of the conspiracy about the attacks.

The substantiated argument is non existent. Why would Bin Laden work for the CIA what would he gain from this arrangement? He was independently wealthy, he didn't need the money.

Brown Bomber

Di0genes wrote: »

Cracks knuckles.












http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/cavitation.html

Shall I go on?

All that stuff was in the link I posted, yeah? The on that you referred to?
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=69091930&postcount=32
Actually don't bother responding if you don't mind. I'm not interested.

My name is URL

Di0genes wrote: »

The claim that Bin Laden worked for the CIA is a corner stone of the conspiracy about the attacks.

The substantiated argument is non existent. Why would Bin Laden work for the CIA what would he gain from this arrangement? He was independently wealthy, he didn't need the money.

'worked for' might be a bit much. How about 'had a mutual contact with'? It's no secret that other members of the Bin Laden family had interests in the US and vice versa, is it?

Di0genes

Brown Bomber wrote: »

All that stuff was in the link I posted, yeah? The on that you referred to?
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=69091930&postcount=32

No none of that stuff was in the post you linked to.

Actually don't bother responding if you don't mind. I'm not interested.

I'll take that as admission from you that you give up and admit I'm right.

Brown Bomber

Di0genes wrote: »

The claim that Bin Laden worked for the CIA is a corner stone of the conspiracy about the attacks.

The substantiated argument is non existent. Why would Bin Laden work for the CIA what would he gain from this arrangement? He was independently wealthy, he didn't need the money.

Why in your humble opinion did Jacob Rothschild work for MI5?

Di0genes

My name is URL wrote: »

'worked for' might be a bit much. How about 'had a mutual contact with'?

Where's the evidence that Bin Laden had contact with the CIA?

It's no secret that other members of the Bin Laden family had interests in the US and vice versa, is it?

It's a huge powerful family.

Di0genes

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Why in your humble opinion did Jacob Rothschild work for MI5?

Okay, your original claim was

19 Arab patsies working for "former" CIA asset bin Laden.

I'm not going to let you start making this about the Rothschild or anything else. where is your evidence that Bin Laden was a "former" CIA asset?

My name is URL

Di0genes wrote: »

Where's the evidence that Bin Laden had contact with the CIA?



It's a huge powerful family.

Where's the evidence that he had no contact with the US.. either by proxy or through a double agent? Do you honestly believe that the best intelligence agency in the world had absolutely no idea that Bin Laden had operatives in the US before the attacks took place and just happened to evacuate members of his family after the attacks, regardless of the airspace still remaining closed at that time?