How did Charlie sheen become the poster boy for the 9/11 conspiracy?

Does he have an credibility? Couldn't someone else have stepped forward?

His statement: “It seems to me like 19 amateurs with box-cutters taking over four commercial airliners and hitting 75 per cent of their targets, that feels like a conspiracy theory. It raises a lot of questions." hardly instills any confidence in me that he has an inside track on the truth.
http://www.entertainmentwise.com/news?id=15027

that is all. A rare act in 'merika.

the difference is that because of his celebrity, people are LISTENING to him.

Go Charlie!

A lot of people know who he is(like him or not).He gets face time. Bringing the issue(s) to the front is what is important. It needs to be driven hard. Once it is started more credible people, such as ,physicists and others will get the media asking THEM questions.


I know celebrities post here.

Speak up. America listens.

still largely revolves around how much you distrust President Bush and are unwilling to believe something like this could have happened without his involvement.

Incidentally I've read the PNAC website many times.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

done some research on the subject. There's plenty of factual evidence out there for those who care to pursue the truth.

Bill Maher recently mentioned Bush going into Iraq because of an "article he read in the Weekly Standard". PNACer, Bill Kristol, editor of WS, was one the biggest promoters of the invasion.

The truth is now coming out and I'm not going to challenge the creds of the messenger just as long as he/she has their facts straight.

The only difference now, is that much of the
public is starting to LISTEN.

It's too bad that the public pays more attention to what the already-famous say, but it's a fact.

Sheen merely stepped in to fill the vacancy of poster boy.

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

Those are the kind of people who get the nedia attention. I actually think he has a lot of supporters anoung the american people, especially now, since none of Shrubs predictions have panned out, but you have to have name recognition, money, celebrity status, or all three to get to the media!

...Not a personal attack...just asking.

I guess I brought it up because of an earlier thread where I asked why didn't Bush just bring in WMDs to Iraq. Most of the replies where that there would be too many people involved to be able to keep it a secret. It made me think that if people here don't think that he could fake the WMD's how could he keep a huge operation like 9/11 quiet?

could you tell me what you found to be silly?

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

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

it's just that the MSM won't touch them. Most of the information isn't "secret" you can read about it if
you care to track down official documents and reports and piece together other things have been in other outlets.

As for smuggling WMDs into Iraq, well there were people like Valeria Plame who were paid to stop WMDs being smuggled around the world not to mention the rest of the world's main intelligence agencies would probably notice too. I wouldn't be surprised if Bushco thought about it or tried it but were thwarted.

"I wouldn't be surprised if Bushco thought about it or tried it but were thwarted."

They couldn't smuggle in a canister of nerve gas but managed to topple the Twin Towers. Makes no sense to me.

I believe they colluded with and facilitated the operatives who carried out the hijackings.
Where the hijackers came from, who paid them and who those people are connected to is a matter of public record.

I have no opinion on the "controlled demolition" theory, I simply don't have enough information or technical knowledge to comment on it.

most of the intelligence agency staff believe that their job is to actually STOP terrorism and STOP WMD from being smuggled around the world.

Pre-911 there were FBI agents who wanted to investigate the hijackers but were thwarted by higher-ups in Washington. The same would apply to smuggling WMD, it's not as easy as walking into a lab or a nuclear missile silo and just walking out with something.

be investigated. The problem BushCo had is that Hussein had actually destroyed ALL of his WMDs and that's something they never counted on.

Remember that this wasn't in the USA and the rest of the world, many US troops,and most Iraqis were basically lined up against the invasion during this time.

Finally, some covert operations are successful and some are not. Does that make sense to you? Because if it doesn't, perhaps you should consider taking a course in elementary logic.

let alone nuclear material... besides this kinda operation doesn't require that many people to know the full matter of their mission.

peace

What you're asking is akin to asking how the Yankees could win one World Series but lose another.

How did al Qaeda keep it quiet? Assuming there were any Arab hijackers at all, presumably they had
support personnel who've never been caught.

The assumption that any 9/11 conspiracy would have to be impossibly huge is not justified.
It only needed:

*someone to tell al Qaeda when the six simultaneous war games would paralyze the air defense
*Rummy, Myers, Condi, and Cheney to sit on their hands
*Frasca and Maltbie to squelch FBI investigations

If you want to add CD to the mix, a few al Qaeda operatives could have rented office space in the WTC
and set up the Thermite at night in the elevator shafts.

They'll have a field day with him, dragging up his involvement in the Hollywood prostitution scandal and other personal stuff from his past. That's why they seized on this one obscure statement of his, which otherwise very very few people would have ever heard or heard about. It's not him, it's the idea and profile of liberal political Hollywood they want to hold up and savage by linking this "beyond-the-pale idea" with Hollywood decadence.

The guy has been "good" for years. It took his father ratting out on him, and Charlie spending time in jail and rehab, to steer him straight.
Charlie can handle himself.

I'm telling you how he's vulnerable and how and why his remark is suddenly meat for heavy media play. Like I said, it's not about him, it's not even about the specific content of his remark. It's about treating him as the representative case and tarring all of "liberal Hollywood" in general with (A) "outrageous", "nutty", "conspiracy theory" ideas, by means of (B) the discrediting record of Charlie Sheen's "decadent behavior".

The message is do and think the opposite of whatever Hollywood's message movies tell you.

the oil companies are saying that the production of oil in Iraq is in the toilet due
to the insurgency, Iraq's instability is driving up the cost of oil around the globe,
so it sounds to me like they are moving away from Bush.

I did.

but whadda we know :evilgrin:

peace

Like his father he is smarter than the average bear

Unlike Joe and Jane Sixpack, the Sheen/Estevez family reads.

do make him appear to be smarter than the average bear, Yogi comes to mind.

by stature i mean name recognition...

i think there are many others, and they'll come forward now...

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

been corrupted. CNN couldn't cover it, but CNN Headline News ENTERTAINMENT could. CNN's entertainment division is now a more legitimate news outlet than CNN's news division.

to say something about this.

deserve the ridicule that he gets. He brings nothing to the table that could remotely be thought of as proof.

:evilgrin:

peace

I guess he was busy with life's pleasures while the less fortunate learned the truth the hard way much earlier on.

but what did Charlie bring to the table. Was he watching the Loose Change video? Because that is the wackiest bunch of made up shit I've ever seen.

What's "whacky" is in the eye of the beholder.

I think that's a start. I find the Loose Change video very hit and miss though. I prefer the political analysis in David Ray Griffin's "New Pearl Harbor" book.

I would NEVER tell any of the 9/11 families to give up and believe a whitewash headed by Cheney-Big-Oil/Airline connected cronies. Read The Terror Timeline. No conspiracy, nothing from infowars or rense, over 1700 news items in the timeline, all true events, all from mainstream sources.

Damn it, when the HELL is anyone going to get it through their goddamned skulls that believing in MIHOP doesn't require you to fully believe in CD/Pentagate? Why is it that no one wants to accept the fact that this government does not give two flying fucks about anyone but the corporations and the rich of this country and that 3,000 dead wage slaves means a gas pass in the wind to these money and power-hungry dickheads when it comes to getting what they want?

And to an earlier poster's point, the argument doesn't rely on how little you trust the idiot currently squatting in the oval office. Fuhrer Dumbass is merely a means to an end. It relies on many documented events before, during and after that day being too illogical, dubious and involving too many members of the Poppy old boy cabal to be merely coincidental.

Why is the burden of proof on Charlie Sheen?

He seems more credible than the Bush Administration to me. How about you?

proof that Atta or Marwan al Shehhi got on the planes.

How can you ask for proof when the other side provides none, and did their damndest to corrupt, destroy and hide the evidence?

On many levels. Kudos

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

by probably millions of others, but they didn't have a microphone. He's merely saying what many have been thinking and writing about from the beginning. The whole 'conspiracy theory' he mentions, never made sense to anyone who gave it a thought ~

Also, the times are changing. Had he said that two years ago, he probably would have been called a traitor amongst things, and his career, like his father's when he criticized Bush, would have been seriously threatened.

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

Other people have said it but it gets more attention when a celebrity says it. Don't complain about celebrities speaking out. It helps.

to take a look at the questions around this.

but now they have Charlie Sheen on board, I'm starting to have second thoughts.

And if Lindsay Lohan signs on, that will clinch it.

That's all my GF has been talking about, Charlie Sheen and Building Seven.

I told her this is nothing new, that there were people claiming Karl Rove twisted the knob on the detonator box on the towers and Rumsferaut personally fired a Minuteman into the Pentagon before the fires were even out.
:tinfoilhat:

nor other far-out-there-conspiracy theories. Moon landing hoax (a RW favorite), flat earth, hollow earth, planet X, alien invasion, Bush tsunami, etc.

Though that won't stop certain people from dragging in those whacky CTs in order to try and discredit 9-11 suspicions. Sometimes i think the crazy CTs are created specifically to discredit CT thinking all together - even though it's well known that large conspiracies have taken place (ie Iran-Contra, Watergate, FDR coup), and that there's no reason to assume large conspiracies no longer take place.

and that there's no reason to assume large conspiracies no longer take place.

To assume otherwise is childish as well.

No , this one's best left to the grown ups.

Talk about childish.

If you look at who has done large conspiracies in the past, and look at who's in power now, there's every reason to expect more large conspiracies in this day and age.

theories about UFO's are out of fashion now. They were popular in the 90's but life is a lot more serious now than it was then.

Also, what about that conspiracy theory that *'s CIA was/is kidnapping hundreds or thousands of mainly innocent people and flying them around the world in undercover planes to secret gulags and torturing them. Now that was just crazy nonsense wasn't it?

Oh waitaminute, no it was reported in major newspapers all over the world. Maybe they're all crazy too.

(Not too mention those once crazy theories that there were no WMD in Iraq or that * was warned that Katrina could flood New Orleans and did nothing about it).

The media has ignored everyone else, credible;
http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/

or not so much. Ed Asner has been speaking out for years on this. Gore Vidal as well, although Vidal merely asks questions and points at the Junta, the prior knowledge angle really bothers him. Vidal also believes that Pearl Harbor was "allowed to happen".

Nobody asked Sheen to step up. He just did it.

March 22 coverage on CNN;
http://www.911blogger.com/2006/03/911-skeptics-receive-fair-shake-on.html

March 24 coverage on CNN;
http://www.911blogger.com/2006/03/third-night-of-showbiz-tonights-sheen.html

1. He opened his mouth and said stuff the 9/11 truth seeker wants to hear in front of a mike .
2. He looks good.
3. His father is an activist.
4. He can read. (allthough not proven)


I think that about sums up the responses so far.

I don't understand why Charlie Sheen isn't as credible as anyone else in advancing the idea of MIHOP. Many here have been aware that it was an inside job from the start.

I would recommend Webster Tarpley's book: "911 Synthetic Terror: Made in USA."

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0930852311/qid=1143386677/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/104-3572861-0666319?s=books&v=glance&n=283155

As to conspiracy theories: From Tarpley's book:

"Objections to the 9/11 imposture in its official version are often dismissed as conspiracy theories. Supporters of the official version use this as a term of contempt, even though it is clear that to label a point of view as a conspiracy theory is in no way to refute it. The charge or insult of conspiracy theory is not only demagogical, but also intellectually dishonest, since the official version, involving as it does bin Laden and al Qaeda acting at a distance from remote caves with the help of laptops, represents a conspiracy theory (or conspiracy hoax) of a peculiarly fantastic type. Implicit in this procedure is the assumption that a conspiracy theory which is endorsed and embraced by the controlled corporate media is no longer a conspiracy theory, but rather respectable, and presumed true. Minority views which are not supported by the controlled corporate media remain conspiracy theories, and cannot be credible, no matter how true they can be shown to be." (p. 339) <emphasis added>

Isn't this the guy that wrote that nutso biography of Bush claiming he was implicated in a child sex ring in Omaha? The biography that only Lyndon Larouche would publish? Now that's what I call a credible source of information -- not.

While not flawless, it raises important questions that are not answered by the official theory. I can't help it if Tarpley is seen to be a nutcase by some.

What fault do you find with the quote I posted above regarding conspiracy theories. Seems on target to me.

As far as that bush bio, I didn't read it. I think it's about Bush Sr., and the allegations of his connections with child sex rings have been made by other than Mr. Tarpley, IIRC. I wouldn't be surprised if it were true. The Bush Crime Family - filthy criminals and perverts, all.

aka as having "balls"...

He gave voice to what so many Americans have been thinking and believe me , if there weren't others thinking this and asking the same questions, this would have faded away instead of taking on a life of its own.

Maybe he doesn't haven "an inside track" on the truth but he has the courage to open the dialogue....which these days seems to be a rare commodity - even ( especially?) among the left.

DR

And Americans just love their infotainment.

Sure, he was just musing and he's not the foremost expert on the subject. What of it?