Patriot, or Wingnut?

Actor Charlie Sheen questions official 9/11 story on radio show - story gets picked up on CNN Showbiz Tonight - going on day 3 of CNN coverage...

"It seems to me like 19 amateurs with box cutters taking over four commercial airliners and hitting 75% of their targets, that feels like a conspiracy theory. It raises a lot of questions." [more Sheen quotes inside]

Video clips of the CNN coverage of the interview have been posted at:

BUT... here's where it gets REALLY interesting:

In addition to three days worth of coverage on the story, CNN is running an ongoing post show poll - here's the skinny - of the nearly fifty thousand votes so far, about 84% agree that the US Government is covering up facts about 9/11:

CNN 9/11 online poll results

Speaking of polls, while the above CNN poll is for entertainment purposes and wasn't scientifically administered, this one in 2004 sure was...

So it seems to me, the question is this: Is there any truth to what Sheen and others in the "9/11 truth" movement are saying?

Is he a brave patriot, or just terribly confused?

Mark Twain had the following to say about Patriotism:

"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."

What do YOU think? Comment below. More from the Sheen story inside.

"I was up early and we were gonna do a pre-shoot on Spin City, the show I used to do, I was watching the news and the north tower was burning. I saw the south tower hit live, that famous wide shot where it disappears behind the building and then we see the tremendous fireball."

"There was a feeling, it just didn't look any commercial jetliner I've flown on any time in my life and then when the buildings came down later on that day I said to my brother 'call me insane, but did it sorta look like those buildings came down in a controlled demolition?"
Sheen said that most people's gut instinct, that the buildings had been deliberately imploded, was washed away by the incessant flood of the official version of events from day one.

Sheen questioned the plausibility of a fireballs traveling 1100 feet down an elevator shaft and causing damage to the lobbies of the towers as seen in video footage, especially when contrasted with eyewitness accounts of bombs and explosions in the basement levels of the buildings.

Regarding building 7, which wasn't hit by a plane, Sheen highlighted the use of the term "pull," a demolition industry term for pulling the outer walls of the building towards the center in an implosion, as was used by Larry Silverstein in a September 2002 PBS documentary when he said that the decision to "pull" building 7 was made before its collapse. This technique ensures the building collapses in its own footprint and can clearly be seen during the collapse of building 7 with the classic 'crimp' being visible.

The highly suspicious collapse of building 7 and the twin towers has previously been put under the spotlight by physics Professor Steven Jones and Kevin Ryan of Underwriters Laboratories, the company that certified the steel components used in the construction of the World Trade Center towers.

"The term 'pull' is as common to the demolition world as 'action and 'cut' are to the movie world," said Sheen.

Sheen referenced firefighters in the buildings who were eyewitnesses to demolition style implosions and bombs.

"This is not you or I watching the videos and speculating on what we saw, these are gentlemen inside the buildings at the very point of collapse."

"If there's a problem with building 7 then there's a problem with the whole thing," said Sheen.

Bush's behavior on 9/11

Sheen then questioned President Bush's actions on 9/11 and his location at the Booker Elementary School in Florida. Once Andy Card had whispered to Bush that America was under attack why didn't the secret service immediately whisk Bush away to a secret location?

By remaining at a location where it was publicly known the President would be before 9/11, he was not only putting his own life in danger, but the lives of hundreds of schoolchildren. That is unless the government knew for sure what the targets were beforehand and that President Bush wasn't one of them.

"It seems to me that upon the revelation of that news that the secret service would grab the President as if he was on fire and remove him from that room," said Sheen.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

To me, what makes 9/11 so

To me, what makes 9/11 so suspicious is the PNAC document that mentions a "new Pearl Harbor."

That and...

That and this:

WTC 7, which wasn't hit by a plane, had fires on just a few floors, yadda yadda.

Also, the "no steel framed skyscraper collapsing from fire before or since" bit makes me a bit suspicious.

Certainly, after Iraq, WMDs, Plamegate, Katrina, NSA domestic wiretaps, torture, and major, heinous mucking with the constitution, any last shred of doubt I might have felt as to whether these guys would do something like this if they could is gone.

I've done a lot of digging on this stuff, and there are a lot of unanswered questions and details that certainly don't seem to fit the official narrative of 9/11.

I'm not sure about much re: 9/11, but I am sure that the Kean Commision was a joke, and as far from an independent, non-partisan investigation as you could get.

In many ways, it's a textbook model for how not to avoid conflicts of interest in an investigation. F'rinstance: Phillip Zelikow, the ex-direc of the 9/11 commision was a frickin' Bush admin member, and co-wrote a book with Condi Rice for chrissakes.

From Wikipedia:

"Philip Zelikow served on President Bush's transition team in 2000-2001. After George W. Bush took office, Zelikow was named to a position on the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, and worked on other task forces and commissions as well, including the National Commission on Federal Election Reform.

In Rise of the Vulcans (Viking, 2004), James Mann reports that when Richard Haass, a senior aide to Secretary of State Colin Powell and the director of policy planning at the State Department, drafted for the administration an overview of America’s national security strategy following September 11, Dr. Rice, the national security advisor, "ordered that the document be completely rewritten. She thought the Bush administration needed something bolder, something that would represent a more dramatic break with the ideas of the past. Rice turned the writing over to her old colleague, University of Virginia Professor Philip Zelikow.” This document, issued on September 17, 2002, is generally recognized as a watershed document in the War on Terrorism.

Because Philip Zelikow's significant involvement with the administration of George W. Bush, many have questioned the propriety of his position as executive director of the 9/11 Commission, which examined the conduct of George W. Bush and Condoleezza Rice. Both the 9/11 Family Steering Committee and 9-11 Citizens Watch demanded his resignation, without success."

CNN Poll

Once the government and the press have lost credibility, there is no telling what people will believe. I always thought stupidity explained more things than conspiracy, but with Bush & Company, who can tell?

grounded planes

Were the grounded planes ever fully investigated? I never followed it too close, but I've always wondered about some of the statements and rumors that were bandied about.

I'm not sure what to think

I'm not sure what to think about a lot of this stuff, but this video seems to raise some interesting/disturbing questions. Fellow 43sbers - take a look and tell me what you think:


Warning, that file is huge, over and hour and 20 minutes for the full video.

and it will scare the hell out of you.