Huge Reaction To Charlie Sheen 9/11 Story

[Ufomammut]

(*Note to moderators: although "Rense" is referred to in the article, this is NOT linked from their source*)

Huge Reaction To Sheen 9/11 Story
Linked on Drudge, later removed

Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com | March 21 2006

Yesterday's Charlie Sheen story, in which the actor went public with his grave suspicions about the official story of 9/11, received widespread interest across the Internet and was even linked on the Drudge Report for a time, a news website that gets more traffic than the New York Times.

Our observations will now center around the question of if any mainstream outlets will pick up the story or seek to interview Mr. Sheen regarding his comments. The story is obviously big enough to be of interest to a wide readership but its context may cause establishment controlled media to shy away in journalistic cowardice.

http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/sheen_questions_official_911_story_huge_reaction.htm

[Name removed]

1. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

39. How does this get deleted while the rest of this thread stays? n/t

[goclark]

2. Great read and bookmarked

[Algorem]

3. hope he doesn't get Marilyn Monroe'd

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

4. "Leading alternative website Rense.com"

:rofl:

Followed shortly thereafter by

:puke:

[HamdenRice]

5. New York Magazine - today's issue has huge 9/11 Truth story

There are several threads about it in the 9/11 Forum, or you can go straight to New York Magazine's article here:
http://www.newyorkmetro.com/news/features/16464/index.html

[Ufomammut]

6. NY Magazine is SOOOO "tinfoil!" LOL

[HamdenRice]

9. So is the Village Voice!

The premiere alternative weekly paper of the nation did a sympathetic 9/11 Truth ISSUE, a few weeks ago, with a cover story and several side stories.

This thing is definitely on the verge of coming out. We might as well face it.

[electropop]

20. Excellent article!

We should pass it to family and friends.

[benburch]

7. RENSE!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

The only involvement of Bush in this was a conspiracy to ignore threats and quash investigations until some terrorist event occurred to give him the excuse to start a war and keep himself in power.

He didn't fly cruise missiles into the Pentagon.

The WTC buildings were not loaded to the rafters with bombs labeled; "Property of the Bush Family Evil Empire; If found drop in any mailbox, postage guaranteed."

The airplanes were not remotely controlled.

It was LIHOP, not MIHOP.

Anybody who believes MIHOP is either a GOP disinformation artist or a credulous fool.

[HamdenRice]

14. Can you explain this under the incompetence theory?

Shortly after 9/11, the Wall St. Journal reported that the person who financed Mohammed Atta was the head of Pakistan's intelligence agency, Gen. Mahmoud Ahmad. He sent $100,000 to Atta via an agent in Dubai, named Saed Sheikh. Atta used the money for expenses, like flight school training.

Gen. Ahmad, the financer of the 9/11 plot, flew to Washington DC on or about 9/06/01 to confer with the top leadership of the Pentagon, CIA, National Security Council and State Department. On 9/11, as the planes flew into the towers, Gen Ahmad, financer of the 9/11 plot, was having breakfast with Porter Goss, Chair of the House Intelligence Committee, and soon to be head of the CIA.

So tell me, as a skeptic, how can you reconcile, the financier of the 9/11 hijackings and attacks meeting with the top officials of the Defense and intelligence community in DC with the incompetence theory of 9/11?

And these financial connections and meetings are not theories; they were reported in many mainstream media sources.

Incidentially, the Wall St. Journal journalist who did this reporting was Daniel Pearl. You may remember that Pearl was kidnapped and beheaded in Pakistan, ending this journalistic line of inquiry into the Pakistan-Atta connection. Saed Sheikh was convicted of the killing.

[benburch]

18. Never, ever said incompetence!

It was intentional.

But they didn't bomb the buildings, use drones, cruise missiles, h-bombs, death rays, or any of that sort of thing.

Nor did they know in advance what terrorist act would happen, but given the record of Clinton having to squish terrorist attacks left and right, knew that one would happen and be their key to power.

[HamdenRice]

23. How could they not know what terrorist event would happen if ...

they were meeting for nearly a week with the guy who financed it? When asked, Porter Goss admitted that the subject of his breakfast with Gen. Ahmad was "terrorism" emanating from Afghanistan. What terrorism was emanating from Afghanistan, other than that of Osama bin Laden?

Do you think he flew to DC to not talk about the plot he had set in motion? Would the financier of 9/11 feel safe going to the country that was about to be attacked by his own plot unless he had assurances? It makes no sense outside of a MIHOP context.

But I agree, that the issue of explosives, etc is unproven and unproveable at this point; but I wouldn't discourage anyone from discussing it as "crazy" considering what we know did happen.

[galatea]

21. Bush and Rove

count on people like you, who believe everything they see on TV.

You obviously didn't research the subject at all or have ANY proof to make such foolish statements.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

35. Bush and Rove ate my mother!

Kkkkkkkkkarrrrrrrrllllllllll!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[RBHam]

24. Ben, watch this video...

And then explain to me how all the black boxes were lost in the WTC fire, but one of the hijacker's passports was supposedly found on the street below.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8260059923762628848

Please, Ben. YOU KNOW ME!

I am NOT a GOP disinfo artist, OR A FOOL!!!!

Go ahead, ben.

Just click on the link.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8260059923762628848

The truth is waiting for you.

Take a chance.

Open your mind..

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8260059923762628848

[joeunderdog]

25. Since we're painting skeptics with a wide brush...

those who don't believe MIHOP just haven't read enough. They're also the ones who believe the Warren Report because there's NO WAY a government could cover up a story that big, right?

I originally thought the MIHOP people were a bunch of paranoid conspiracists. But the more I read, the sicker my stomache felt, and the more I had to face the nauseating truth.

Why didn't the Secret Service remove the President of the United States from "imminent danger" when he was told "We are under attack'? Seems strange. Wouldn't you think that thaere would be some kind of protocol on this? I guess they were just getting to the good part in My Pet Goat.

[RaleighNCDUer]

31. And what plane crashed into WTC7?

How did we know the names of the 19 terrorists before we knew the names of all the passengers on the 4 planes, even though the terrorists would likely be using false identities and the passengers were all listed on the passenger manifests?

There's more MIHOP here than some care to know.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

33. Well, since the 9/11 delusionals...

...can't even agree that planes crashed into one and two world trade center, I think it's safe to say that the one that crashed into 7 had a cloaking device.

[onenote]

8. charlie sheen? Puh-leeze

according to the item linked in the OP, Charlie Sheen apparently is a "highly regarded" individual and thus his doubts about the official 9/11 story are particularly noteworthy.

Bull. Sheen's an actor, period. And one with a lot baggage at that. Why anyone would point to Sheen's statements as furthering the discussion of what happened on 9/11 is beyond me.

onenote

[benburch]

10. My sexworker friends...

say that Sheen was a nice guy. A good customer.

[hiley]

16. what is your

point?

[RagingInMiami]

13. Well, wasn't his dad president of the U.S. at one point?

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

36. No no, that doesn't work.

If it did, we'd have to give credence to the things Dubya says.

[reprehensor]

11. More Brat Pack. n/t

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

12. Charlie, Charlie, Charlie......

He just hasn't been the same since he got rid of Ginger Lynn.

[Yollam]

15. "If the media ignores Sheen it's proof of a coverup"?

No offense, I am convinced that Bushco LIHOP at the least, and that the 9-11 report was a whitewash. But I couldn't care less what Charlie Sheen says about anything. Martin Sheen, maybe, but Heidi Fleiss' top client? A bit hard to take seriously...

[Ufomammut]

22. The point is obvious: people are suckers for celebs of any stripe

So if ol Charlie Sheen can turn a few more heads to the wild inconsistencies, implausibilities and omissions of the "official" version of the crimes of 9/11, so be it.

And who cares what "baggage" he has? Every person I know or have known has it: it's called life.

[Yollam]

26. I saw nothing specific or credible in the article to pique my interest.

"Charlie Sheen says 9-11 was a cover-up!" Big Whoop. I bet 40% of Americans think it was a cover-up. Where's the details, the evidence, the POINT?

[RBHam]

27. The truth is but a mouse click away.

Nobody has even TRIED to refute this documentary.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8260059923762628848

[Yollam]

29. That's terrific and I have seen it.

But what does it have to do with Sheen?

[Ufomammut]

30. Is he not a citizen of the US?

By your logic, or lack there of, any socio-political issue that doesn't in a most direct manner "have to do" with me is beyond my concern or comment?

[onenote]

40. sure, but he's not a "highly regarded" person on anything

let alone 9/11 and a story claiming that he is and that his speaking out on 9/11 is of particular significance is laughable. You want to build a case that its not just "conspiracy nuts" that think there's more to the 9/11 story? Then stop relying on Charlie Sheen to make your case.

onenote

[RBHam]

43. We don't need Sheen to MAKE the case...

The case has been made.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8260059923762628848

[Harald Ragnarsson]

48. Funny, people say the same thing about Dr Jones of BYU

Who on earth IS good enough to speak about 911 I wonder?

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

32. Yes, imagine that.

[Ufomammut]

28. Such research won't be conveniently spoon-fed to you via TV

Besides, one person's view doesn't reflect that of nearly three-hundred million in our country.

[HamdenRice]

17. The point is not that Charlie is some kind of expert ...

neither are Elizabeth Taylor and Madonna experts on AIDS. The point is that a prominent person has voiced the concerns of many people who are scolded "only conspiracy nuts" believe that. Taylor and Madonna made a big impact on AIDS in the 80s not because their opinion was expert, but because they made it acceptable to talk about.

What Sheen did was brave and will give the courage to also speak out, to the plurality of people who according to some polls now believe the Bush administration was in some way complicit in 9/11.

[RaleighNCDUer]

37. Well put. nt

[onenote]

42. the story played up Sheen as a "highly regarded" person

which is about as lame a claim as you can make. And if Madonna or Liz Taylor, in speaking out about AIDs, have espoused a conspiracy theory, I missed it. If they held press conferences tomorrow saying AIDS was a government plot (something some folks believe), they would be labelled conspiracy nuts as well.

onenote

[Grateful for Hope]

50. Excellent point. n/t

[PATRICK]

19. Interesting

Movie stars can learn what "outrageous" statements they will NOT be mocked out for because the topic itself is taboo. You can have a theory that cries out for jeering and mockery and it will be avoided like the plague.

Why? Because they want zero serious discussion leaking around the edges, zero curiosity, zero backfire since more people would believe Sheen than American journalism anyway. Regardless of the facts the issue is one of the crippled, propagandist nature of the media.

The fact is that for all the failures and facts about 9/11 nothing has been done, no one held accountable, no lie(such as the inner circle pleading ignorance). The issues that can't be touched by the fearful, lockdown media and is spoiling their game at smearing the messenger.

It is hard to draw lines in the murk of secrecy. Certainly any suspicion is warranted if they want to play that game to their sole benefit. personally, and it wouldn't do much to add pressure against this secrecy, I prefer the clarity of what we do know. That the WH knew of attacks but continued its focus on its primary agenda and effectively did derail security priorities in the process. The lies are publicly known and partially documented, the meltdowns and errors just lying there still undisturbed by any adjustment on the part of the administration. For them nothing changed on 9/11.

Secrecy. Stonewalling. Zero accountability. Empty talk for homeland security and continued endangerment through the relentless priorities. A crippled 9/11 investigation with zero consequences. A redirection of all post 9/11 priorities toward the WH prior agenda.

That is bad enough and with excellent reason to assume that many of the protected secrets would offer more explanations and damning evidence, albeit perhaps not as complicated and fantastic as the black ops MIHOP theory. In placing all their behaviors in other scandals side by side one can detect patterns to assume almost everything up to the level of MIHOP with growing hints that MIHOP is a step they are willing to take- if only they could get it to work! But they don't need to to continue.

The blowup over scapegoating Brown led to leaks revealing what engages the WH and what does not, starting from Bush. Then there is still an annoying suspicion that long term plans for exploitation of national disasters is just waiting to be plugged in when the inevitable happens. What doesn't concern them at all, in the slightest, is what happens in war, in disasters to anyone but themselves. Over and over behavior is set in stone and mirrored overall by the media, its private mailbox to the nation.

When this defensiveness about alternate scenarios causes head shaking and moaning and sends some to bickering among themselves like the poor tearing apart their own neighborhoods in frustration, one should spring to their side(maybe not BEHIND them!) and say it makes a lot more sense than the childish swill of the official press and government reporting and demands that the whole veil of secrecy be lifted. It does not matter what can be debunked but what can be proved, acted upon and reported that has not been. Angry people are filling the void. Let that void be filled in by the truth.

And there are conspiracies by Bush business, the Vulcan cabal, the GOP. A secret plan to commit illegal actions or actions that subvert the democratic process. We have them all the time when local GOP town supervisors go into secret sessions excluding Dems. The press notes those although the pressure doesn't stop those actions. The theory being that they are up to no good. The guessing comes in with imagining details barely hinted at in the smoke. Guessing is legitimate if accountability and information is deliberately withheld. Going a step further in frustration is understandable. Still waiting to hear what the defense of the secret keepers is that is understandable beyond the guilt explanation.

[RBHam]

34. Former Bush official resigns over WTC demolition.

From the Wash Times:

"It is hard to exaggerate the importance of a scientific debate over the cause of the collapse of the twin towers and building 7. If the official wisdom on the collapses is wrong, as I believe it is, then policy based on such erroneous engineering analysis is not likely to be correct either. The government's collapse theory is highly vulnerable on its own terms. Only professional demolition appears to account for the full range of facts associated with the collapse of the three buildings."

http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20050613-102755-6408r.htm

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

38. Ah yes, a real expert.

Former chief economist for the Department of Labor uring President George W. Bush's first term Morgan Reynolds

[RBHam]

41. You want an expert?

Here ya go...

UL Executive Speaks Out on WTC Study


"The buildings should have easily withstood the thermal stress caused by pools of burning jet fuel." - Kevin Ryan

Friday, November 12, 2004
(911Truth.org news service -- updated 11/13, 11/14)

An executive at Underwriters Laboratories (UL), the company that certified the steel used in the construction of the World Trade Center, has questioned the common theory that fuel fires caused the Twin Towers to collapse.

In a letter dated Thursday (11/11, complete text below), UL executive Kevin Ryan called on Frank Gayle, director of the government team that has spent two years studying how the trade center was built and why it fell, to "do what you can to quickly eliminate the confusion regarding the ability of jet fuel fires to soften or melt structural steel."

Kevin Ryan is Site Manager at Environmental Health Laboratories (EHL) in South Bend, Indiana. This is a division of UL, the product-compliance and testing giant. Because UL certified the WTC steel for its ability to withstand fires, the steel's performance on September 11 is obviously of concern to the company. While Ryan's letter does not constitute an official statement from Underwriters Laboratories, it suggests incipient disagreements between UL and NIST about the true cause of the WTC collapses.

Gayle is deputy chief of the Metallurgy Division at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and head of the "NIST and the WTC" team. A draft of the government agency's final report on the WTC collapses is due in January.

Ryan copied the letter to Gayle in e-mails to David Ray Griffin, author of the New Pearl Harbor, and to Catherine Austin Fitts, who is a member of the 911Truth.org board. Griffin requested and received permission to distribute Ryan's letter to other parties. The letter was published Friday (11/12) at septembereleventh.org, the site of the 9/11 Visibility Project.

911Truth.org called Ryan Friday to confirm his authorship. Ryan made it clear he is speaking for himself only, not on behalf of his laboratory or the company, but others at UL are aware of his action.

The letter raises disturbing questions, pointing out that the temperatures of fuel fires in the towers on September 11 appear to have been far too low to cause a failure of the structural steel.

A chemist by profession, Ryan said he considers Gayle to be a good scientist and an honest person. Given the impact of September 11 on events around the world, Ryan said everyone needs to know the full truth of what really happened on that day.

more...

http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20041112144051451

[Ufomammut]

44. Former Reagan/Bush admin member Paul Craig Roberts likewise

Doubts the official story, as I'm sure many do - or many know - but aren't coming foward yet.

[OnceUponTimeOnTheNet]

45. K&R

What happened to WTC7?

[earth mom]

46. Glad to see this.

Yeah, it's a celebrity. So what?! Who's gonna speak truth to power these days? Certainly NOT our so called journalist HOs! :eyes: Most of em are too damn afraid to speak the truth, so it's left to those who have access to the media: "celebrities". Hey, it's better than nothing. So, I'd rather someone speak out rather than no one at all.

BTW-It's amazing that so many people around here have been brainwashed with the "official story" aka "LIES" spewed by the BFEE. Haven't they learned yet that EVERYTHING and I mean EVERYTHING that comes out of a BFEE mouth is a LIE?! :freak:

[salvorhardin]

47. And Alex Jones is more credible than Rense how?

This is a man who claimed that the space shuttle Columbia breakup was part of some globalist conspiracy, with the usual antisemitic overtones:

A report circulated by conspiracist Alex Jones claimed the shuttle disaster was a "textbook psychological warfare operation," a "mass distraction/mass unifier" that was part of a plan the US government had laid out in the 1960s known as the "Northwoods" plan. This document included the assertion that the Joint Chiefs had proposed blaming Cuba if any problems arose with the 1962 launch of John Glenn.

Jones noted that he had proclaimed three weeks prior, "that there was a very good chance that the globalists would do something horrible concerning the latest Colombia mission." He went on to say,

"Understand, the psychological warfare technicians do not even need to publicly blame Iraq for the Columbia disaster. It will serve as a distraction in the global press during the final weeks of war preparation in the gulf. It will serve the dual purpose of unifying the country behind President Bush as he grandstands."

The other reasons why the disaster had to have been planned, according to Jones, was that,

"This is the first Israeli in space -- the fact that he died on board is given twice as much attention than the other six are getting combined. This is being used as a type of tribal bonding mechanism for the coming war for empire in the Middle East. "Our champion warriors died with your champion warriors..." - Jones's Web site, (2/1) 11 AM EST
http://www.adl.org/Anti_semitism/columbia.asp

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Christophera]

51. LARED Called Sheen Up And Said. "There's No Proof" But Notice, He Hasn't P

osted in this thread.

Just kidding, because I know how much it bugs the DI's when cultural authority/leadership actually speaks in a coherent fashion on 9-11.