Nerd Mentality T-Shirts!
 
NerdWednesday, February 22nd 2006.

Dark Aerow

What is seen

Posts: 4,004

Join Date: Jun 2003

Location: What is not seen

Oh Dubya!! -- you got some splainin' to do.
WARNING! anyone without an open-mind should immediatly close your browser for I do not want to deal with your nonsensical bull-****.

All free-thinkers, read on, this is some very serious allegations. All of which are backed up with sources.

"Oh Lucy! - You Gotta Lotta
'Splainin To Do"

A TIMELINE SURROUNDING SEPTEMBER 11TH - IF CIA AND THE GOVERNMENT WEREN'T INVOLVED IN THE SEPTEMBER 11 ATTACKS
WHAT WERE THEY DOING?

by Michael C. Ruppert

[© COPYRIGHT 2001, All Rights Reserved, Michael C. Ruppert and From The Wilderness Publications, www.fromthewilderness.com. May be copied and distributed for non-profit purposes only.]

[Expanded and Revised Sept. 4, 2002 - Evidence of Bush Administration Foreknowledge and complicity is now overwhelming. Since our last revision July 11, 2002, 16 New Items! (noted in RED)]



Nov. 2, 2001, 12:00 PST -- On Oct. 31 the French daily Le Figaro dropped a bombshell. While in a Dubai hospital receiving treatment for a chronic kidney infection last July, Osama bin Laden met with a top CIA official -- presumably the chief of station. The meeting, held in bin Laden's private suite, took place at the American hospital in Dubai at a time when he was a wanted fugitive for the bombings of two U.S. embassies and last year's attack on the USS Cole. Bin Laden was eligible for execution according to a 2000 intelligence finding issued by President Bill Clinton before leaving office in January. Yet on July 14, 2001 he was allowed to leave Dubai on a private jet, and there were no Navy fighters waiting to force him down.

In 1985 Oliver North -- the only member of the Reagan-Bush years who doesn't appear to have a hand in the current war -- sent the Navy and commandos after terrorists on the cruise ship Achille Lauro. In his 1991 autobiography "Under Fire," while describing terrorist Abu Abbas North wrote, "I used to wonder: how many dead Americans will it take before we do something?" One could look at the number of Americans Osama bin Laden is alleged to have killed before Sept. 11 and ask the same question.

It gets worse, much worse. A more complete timeline listing crucial events both before and after the Sept. 11 suicide attacks, which have been blamed on bin Laden, establishes CIA foreknowledge of them and strongly suggests that there was criminal complicity on the part of the U.S. government in their execution. It also makes clear that the events that have taken place since Sept. 11 are based upon an agenda that has little to do with the attacks.

[June 19, 2002] -- As the revelations of Bush Administration foreknowledge have progressed from silence, to trickle, to cascade, the question has now changed from forcing the evidence into the open into one of forcing both the media and the people to avoid denying this information in the hopes that their desire for a sense of "normalcy" can be fulfilled. As many of us have known for years, normalcy went out the window forever when the first plane hit the tower. And what has been revealed will not be resolved with an expensive fact-finding commission, a few firing, or even an impeachment proceeding. What is needed in America -- and in the global economic system -- is an overhaul, not a tune up.

1. 1991-1997 - Major U.S. oil companies including ExxonMobil, Texaco, Unocal, BP Amoco, Shell and Enron directly invest billions in cash bribing heads of state in Kazakhstan to secure equity rights in the huge oil reserves in these regions. The oil companies further commit to future direct investments in Kazakhstan of $35 billion. Not being willing to pay exorbitant prices to Russia to use Russian pipelines, the major oil companies have no way to recoup their investments. [Source: "The Price of Oil" by Seymour Hersh, The New Yorker, July 9, 2001 - The Asia Times, "The Roving Eye Part I Jan. 26, 2002.]

2. January 1995 - Philippine police investigating a possible attack on the Pope uncover plans for Operation Bojinka, connected to World Trade Center (WTC) bomber Ramsi Youssef. Parts of the plan call for crashing hijacked airliners into civilian targets. Details of the plan are disclosed in Youssef's 1997 trial for the 1993 WTC bombing. [Source: Agence France-Presse, Dec. 7, 2001]

3. Dec. 4, 1997 - Representatives of the Taliban are invited guests to the Texas headquarters of Unocal to negotiate their support for the pipeline. Subsequent reports will indicate that the negotiations failed, allegedly because the Taliban wanted too much money. [Source: The BBC, Dec. 4, 1997]

4. Feb. 12, 1998 - Unocal Vice President John J. Maresca -- later to become a special ambassador to Afghanistan -- testifies before the House that until a single, unified, friendly government is in place in Afghanistan, the trans-Afghani pipeline needed to monetize the oil will not be built. [Source: Testimony before the House International Relations Committee: http://www.house.gov/international_relations/105th/ap/wsap212982.htm]

5. August 1998 - After the U.S. cruise missile attacks on Al Qaeda targets in Afghanistan in retaliation for the African embassy bombings, Unocal officially withdraws from participation in the CentGas trans-Afghani gas pipeline project. [Various sources, Unocal]

6. 1998 - The CIA ignores warnings from Case Officer Robert Baer that Saudi Arabia was harboring an Al Qaeda cell led by two known terrorists. A more detailed list of known terrorists is offered to Saudi intelligence in August 2001 and refused. [Source: Financial Times Jan. 21, 2001; "See No Evil" by Robert Baer (release date February 2002)]

7. April 1999 - Enron with a $3 billion investment to build an electrical generating plant at Dabhol, India loses access to plentiful LNG supplies from Qatar to fuel the plant. Its only remaining option to make the investment profitable is a trans-Afghani gas pipeline to be built by Unocal from Turkmenistan that would terminate near the Indian border at the city of Multan. [Source: The Albion Monitor, Feb. 28, 2002]

8. July 4, 1999 - President Clinton signs Executive Order 13129, which freezes Taliban assets in the U.S. and prohibits trade between the Afghan fundamentalist regime and U.S. entities. [Source: Federal Register, Vol. 64, No. 129, July 7, 1999]

9. 1998 and 2000 - Former President George H.W. Bush travels to Saudi Arabia on behalf of the privately owned Carlyle Group, the 11th largest defense contractor in the U.S. While there he meets privately with the Saudi royal family and the bin Laden family. [Source: Wall Street Journal, Sept. 27, 2001. See also FTW, Vol. IV, No. 7 - "The Best Enemies Money Can Buy"
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/carlyle.html]

10. March 2000 - An FBI agent, reportedly angry over a glitch in Carnivore that has somehow mixed innocent non-targeted emails with those belonging to Al Qaeda, destroys all of the FBI's Denver-based intercepts of bin Laden's colleagues in a terrorist investigation. [Source: The Washington Post, May 29, 2002]

11. 2000 (est.) - The FBI refuses to disclose the date of an internal memo stating that a Middle Eastern nation had been trying to purchase a flight simulator. [Source: Los Angeles Times, May 30, 2002]

12. August 2000 -- Suspected Al Qaeda operatives wiretapped by Italian police made apparent references to plans for major attacks involving airports, airplanes and the United States according to transcripts obtained by the Los Angeles Times. The Times suggests that the information might not have been passed to U.S. authorities (hard to believe), but it did report that Italian authorities would not comment on the report. The Times also noted that "Italian and U.S. anti-terrorism experts cooperate closely." [Source: The Los Angeles Times, May 29, 2002]

13. Oct. 24-26, 2000 - Pentagon officials carry out a "detailed" emergency drill based upon the crashing of a hijacked airliner into the Pentagon. [Source: The Mirror, May 24, 2002]

14. January 2001 - The Bush Administration orders the FBI and intelligence agencies to "back off" investigations involving the bin Laden family, including two of Osama bin Laden's relatives (Abdullah and Omar) who were living in Falls Church, Va. -- right next to CIA headquarters. This followed previous orders dating back to 1996 that frustrated efforts to investigate the bin Laden family. [Source: BBC Newsnight, Correspondent Gregg Palast, Nov. 7, 2001]

15. Jan. 30, 2001 - Sept. 11 hijacker Ziad Jarrah was questioned in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). A number of UAE, Middle Eastern, European, and U.S. sources were cited in this CNN report, which said the CIA requested Jarrah be interrogated because he had been in Afghanistan and was suspected to have ties to terrorists. An unnamed CIA spokesman said the other sources' claims that the agency knew anything about Jarrah before Sept. 11 were "flatly untrue." Jarrah's Jan. 30 detainment at the airport in Dubai, UAE came six months after he took flying lessons in the U.S. Jarrah was released because "U.S. officials were satisfied," said the report. [Source: CNN, Aug. 1, 2002 http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/08/01/cia.hijacker/index.html]

16. Feb. 13, 2001 - UPI terrorism correspondent Richard Sale -- while covering a trial of bin Laden's Al Qaeda followers -- reports that the National Security Agency has broken bin Laden's encrypted communications. Even if this indicates that bin Laden changed systems in February, it does not mesh with the fact that the government insists that the attacks had been planned for years.

17. May 2001 - Secretary of State Colin Powell gives $43 million in aid to the Taliban regime, purportedly to assist hungry farmers who are starving since the destruction of their opium crop in January on orders of the Taliban regime. [Source: Los Angeles Times, May 22, 2001]

18. May 2001 - Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, a career covert operative and former Navy Seal, travels to India on a publicized tour, while CIA Director George Tenet makes a quiet visit to Pakistan to meet with Pakistani leader Gen. Pervez Musharraf. Armitage has long and deep Pakistani intelligence connections. It would be reasonable to assume that while in Islamabad, Tenet, in what was described as "an unusually long meeting," also met with his Pakistani counterpart, Lt. Gen. Mahmud Ahmad, head of the ISI. [Source: The Indian SAPRA news agency, May 22, 2001]

19. June 2001 - German intelligence, the BND, warns the CIA and Israel that Middle Eastern terrorists are "planning to hijack commercial aircraft to use as weapons to attack important symbols of American and Israeli culture." [Source: Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Sept. 14, 2001; See
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/f_a_zeitung_story.html]

20. June 8, 2001 - Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) publishes a story headlined, "Central Asia: Charges Link Russian Military to Drug Trade." According to the article, figures for 1999 published in a report by the United Nations Drug Control Program (UNDCP) revealed that 80 percent of the heroin consumed in Western Europe originated in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The UNDCP report also revealed half of the drugs in that 80 percent traveled through Central Asia. A study by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace published in March 2000 said Russian soldiers headquartered in Tajikistan were suspected of helping drug traffickers by providing them with transportation facilities. This was confirmed by a Russian intelligence officer who told the Moscow News weekly, "You can come to an arrangement [with custom officials] so that the search of military transport planes remains purely formal. The same goes for train convoys carrying military cargo [to Russia from Tajikistan]." [Source: www.rferl.org/nca/features/2001/06/08062001111711.asp]

21. July 2001 - FBI agents in Arizona write a memorandum warning about suspicious activities involving a group of Middle Eastern men taking flight training lessons in Phoenix. The memorandum specifically mentions Osama bin Laden and warns of connections to terrorist activities. [Source: The New York Times, May 14, 2002]

22. summer 2001 - The National Security Council convenes a Dabhol working group as revealed in a series of government e-mails obtained by the Washington Post and the New York Daily News. [Source: The Albion Monitor, Feb. 28, 2002]

23. summer 2001 - According to a Sept. 26 story in Britain's The Guardian, correspondent David Leigh reported that "U.S. department of defense official, Dr. Jeffrey Starr, visited Tajikistan in January. The Guardian's Felicity Lawrence established that U.S. Rangers were also training special troops in Kyrgyzstan. There were unconfirmed reports that Tajik and Uzbek special troops were training in Alaska and Montana."

24. summer 2001 (est.) - Pakistani ISI Chief Gen. Ahmad (see above) orders an aide to wire transfer $100,000 to Mohammed Atta who was, according to the FBI, the lead terrorist in the suicide hijackings. Ahmad recently resigned after the transfer was disclosed in India and confirmed by the FBI. The individual who makes the wire transfer at Ahmad's direction is Ahmad Umar Sheik, the lead suspect in the kidnapping and murder of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl. [Source: The Times of India, Oct.11, 2001.]

25. summer 2001 - The online newswire online.ie reports on Sept. 14 that an Iranian man phones U.S. law enforcement to warn of an imminent attack on the WTC in the week of Sept. 9. German police confirm the calls but state that the U.S. Secret Service would not reveal any further information. [Source:
http://www.online.ie/news/viewer.adp?article=1512332.
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/online_ie_story.html ]

26. summer 2001 - Jordanian intelligence, the GID, makes a communications intercept deemed so important that King Abdullah's men relay it to Washington, probably through the CIA station in Amman. To make doubly sure the message got through it was passed through an Arab intermediary to a German intelligence agent. The message: A major attack was planned inside the U.S., and aircraft would be used. The code name of the operation was "The Big Wedding." "When it became clear that the information was embarrassing to Bush Administration officials and congressmen who at first denied that there had been any such warnings before Sept. 11, senior Jordanian officials backed away from their earlier confirmations." This case was authenticated by ABC reporter John K. Cooley. [Source: International Herald Tribune (IHT), May 21, 2002]

27. summer 2001 (est.) - The National Security Agency intercepts telephone conversations between bin Laden aide Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and Mohammed Atta and does not share the information with any other agencies. [Source: Jonathan Landay, Knight Ridder Newspapers, June 6, 2002]

28. June 26, 2001 - The magazine indiareacts.com states that "India and Iran will 'facilitate' U.S. and Russian plans for 'limited military action' against the Taliban." The story indicates that the fighting will be done by U.S. and Russian troops with the help of Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. [Source: indiareacts.com, June 26, 2001]

29. summer 2001 - Russian intelligence notifies the CIA that 25 terrorist pilots have been specifically training for missions involving hijacked airliners. This is reported in the Russian press and news stories are translated for FTW by a retired CIA officer. (Note: The story currently on the Izvestia web site has been edited to delete a key paragraph.) [Source: Izvestia, Sept. 12, 2001,
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/izvestia_story_pic.html]

30. July 4-14, 2001 - Osama bin Laden receives treatment for kidney disease at the American hospital in Dubai and meets with a CIA official, who returns to CIA headquarters on July 15. [Source: Le Figaro, Oct. 31, 2001]
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/Le Figaro_osama_dubai.html

31. July 15, 2001 - Members of the G8, meeting in Genoa, Italy, discuss the Taliban, pipelines, and the handing over of Osama bin Laden. According to Pakistani representative Ambassador Naiz Naik, the U.S. delegation, led by former Clinton Ambassador to Pakistan Tom Simmons warned of a "military option" if the Taliban did not change position. [Source: Jean-Charles Brisard and Guillaume Dasquie, "Bin Laden: La Verite Interdite," pp76-7. Thanks to Prof. Peter Dale Scott]

32. July 2001 - Immediately after the G8 Summit three American officials -- Tom Simmons (former U.S. ambassador to Pakistan), Karl Inderfurth (former assistant secretary of state for South Asian affairs) and Lee Coldren (former State Department expert on South Asia) -- meet with Pakistani and Russian intelligence officers in Berlin and tell them that the U.S. is planning military strikes against Afghanistan in October. A French book released in November, "Bin Laden - La Verite Interdite," discloses that Taliban representatives often sat in on the meetings. British papers confirm that the Pakistani ISI relayed the threats to the Taliban. [Source: The Guardian, Sept. 22, 2001; the BBC, Sept. 18, 2001; The Inter Press Service, Nov. 16, 2001; Alexander's Gas and Oil Connections, Feb. 21, 2002]

33. July 2001 - The G8 summit at Genoa, Italy is surrounded by anti-aircraft guns, and local airspace is closed off after Italian and Egyptian officials (including President Hosni Mubarak) warn American intelligence that airliners stuffed with explosives might be used to attack President Bush. U.S. officials state that the warnings were "unsubstantiated." (But I wonder if they would have taken away the anti-aircraft artillery?) [Source: Los Angeles Times, Sept. 27, 2001]

34. July 26, 2001 - CBS News reports that John Ashcroft has stopped flying commercial airlines due a threat assessment. Ashcroft told the press that he didn't know anything about what had caused it.

35. Aug. 2, 2001 - U.S. ambassador to Pakistan, Christine Rocca (a former CIA officer), meets in Islamabad with a Taliban ambassador and demands the extradition of bin Laden. This was the last known meeting on the subject. [Source: Brisard and Dasquie, p 79. Thanks to Prof. Peter Dale Scott]

36. August 2001 - The FBI arrests an Islamic militant linked to bin Laden in Boston. French intelligence sources confirm that the man is a key member of bin Laden's network and the FBI learns that he has been taking flying lessons. At the time of his arrest the man is in possession of technical information on Boeing aircraft and flight manuals. [Source: Reuters, Sept. 13, 2001]

37. Aug. 11 or 12, 2001 ‚ U.S. Navy Lt. Delmart "Mike" Vreeland, jailed in Toronto on U.S. fraud charges and claiming to be an officer with U.S. naval intelligence, writes details of the pending WTC attacks and seals them in an envelope, which he gives to Canadian authorities. [Source: The Toronto Star, Oct. 23, 2001; Toronto Superior Court Records]

38. August 2001 - As reported in the IHT both a French magazine (name not given) and a Moroccan newspaper simultaneously report that a Moroccan agent named Hassan Dabou had penetrated Al Qaeda to the point of getting close to bin Laden, who was "very disappointed" that the 1993 bombing had not toppled the WTC. Dabou was called to the U.S. after reporting this, which curtailed his ability to stay in touch with the organization and gather additional intelligence that might have prevented the attacks. Though not proved beyond a doubt, these stories have been met with a wall of silence. [The IHT, May 21, 2002]

39. August 2001 - Russian President Vladimir Putin orders Russian intelligence to warn the U.S. government "in the strongest possible terms" of imminent attacks on airports and government buildings. [Source: MSNBC interview with Putin, Sept. 15, 2001]

40. August 2001 - President Bush receives classified intelligence briefings at his Crawford, Texas ranch indicating that Osama bin Laden might be planning to hijack commercial airliners. [CBS News; CNN, May 15, 2002]

41. late-August 2001 - Prince Turki, the pro-U.S. head of Saudi intelligence (also known to be close to bin Laden), is replaced by his more neutral half-brother, Prince Nawwaf who is an ally of Crown Prince Abdullah. [Source: Saudi Arabian Information Resource, Aug. 31, 2001; http://www.saudinf.com/ - Thanks to Prof. Peter Dale Scott]

42. August/September 2001 - The Dow Jones Industrial Average drops nearly 900 points in the three weeks prior to the attack. A major stock market crash is imminent.

43. August/September 2001 - According to a detailed 13-page memo written by Minneapolis FBI legal officer Colleen Rowley, FBI headquarters ignores urgent, direct warnings from French intelligence services about pending attacks. In addition, a single Supervisory Special Agent (SSA) in Washington expends extra effort to thwart the field office's investigation of Zacarias Moussaoui, in one case rewriting Rowley's affidavit for a search warrant to search Moussaoui's laptop. Rowley's memo uses terms like "deliberately sabotage," "block," "integrity," "omitted," "downplayed," "glossed over," "mis-characterize," "improper political reasons, "deliberately thwarting," "deliberately further undercut," "suppressed," and "not completely honest." These are not terms describing negligent acts but rather, deliberate acts. FBI field agents desperately attempt to get action, but to no avail. One agent speculates that bin Laden might be planning to crash airliners into the WTC, while Rowley ironically noted that the SSA who had committed these deliberate actions had actually been promoted after Sept. 11. [Source: Associated Press, May 21, 2002]

44. Sept. 3-10, 2001 - MSNBC reports on Sept. 16 that a caller to a Cayman Islands radio talk show gave several warnings of an imminent attack on the U.S. by bin Laden in the week prior to 9-11.

45. early-September 2001 - An FBI internal document, based upon field notes from Minnesota field agents discloses that the agents had been investigating and had questioned the "20th hijacker," Zacarias Moussaoui. The field notes speculate that Moussaoui, who had been taking flight lessons, might crash an airliner into the WTC. Interestingly, the field agents' requests to obtain a search warrant for his personal computer were denied. French intelligence confirms to the FBI that Moussaoui has ties to terrorist groups and may have traveled to Afghanistan. The agents also had no knowledge of the Phoenix memo (See Item #18). One news story states that agents were in "a frenzy," absolutely convinced that he was "going to do something with a plane." [Source: Newsweek, May 20, 2002 issue, story by Michael Isikoff].

46. Sept. 1-10 2001 - In an exercise, called Operation "Swift Sword" and planned for four years, 23,000 British troops are steaming toward Oman. Although the 9-11 attacks caused a hiccup in the deployment, the massive operation was implemented as planned. At the same time two U.S. carrier battle groups arrive on station in the Gulf of Arabia just off the Pakistani coast. Also at the same time, some 17,000 U.S. troops join more than 23,000 NATO troops in Egypt for Operation "Bright Star." All of these forces are in place before the first plane hits the WTC. [Sources: The Guardian; CNN; Fox; The Observer; International Law Professor Francis Boyle, the University of Illinois.]

47. Sept. 4-5, 2001 - A freshman at Brooklyn's New Utrecht High School who had recently emigrated from Pakistan reportedly predicts the destruction of the World Trade Center a week prior to the 9-11 attacks, according to the JournalNews newspaper in White Plains, N.Y. Citing "three police sources and a city official familiar with the investigation" as well as confirmation from the FBI that the bureau had received this information, the paper reported that in the midst of a heated class discussion the student pointed to the World Trade Center from a third story window and said, "Do you see those two buildings? They won't be standing there next week." New York City Board of Education spokeswoman Catie Marshall confirmed for the JournalNews "that school officials reported the matter to police within minutes of the Sept. 11 attack" and students told the paper that "FBI agents and NYPD detectives descended on the school on Sept. 13 to interrogate the student [who made the prediction] and others in his class," which was "an English class for Arab-American students." [Source: The JournalNews, Oct. 11, 2001, http://www.thejournalnews.com/newsroom/101101/11warumors.html]

48. Sept. 5, 2001 - "Five hundred websites -- many of them with an Arab or Muslim connection -- crash when an anti-terrorism taskforce raids InfoCom Corp. in Texas," reported Britain's the Guardian on Sept. 10, 2001. A taskforce of approximately 80 federal agents and officials from the FBI, Secret Service, INS, Customs, Bureau of Diplomatic Security, IRS, and Commerce Department occupied InfoCom's office building in the Dallas suburb of Richardson, Texas for four days, "copying every hard disc they could find." InfoCom hosts many websites for Middle Eastern clients and is located across the street from the Holy Land Foundation, a charitable organization which has been alleged to have connections with terrorist groups. InfoCom's vice president of marketing, Ghassan Elashi, is also the chairman of the Holy Land Foundation. [Source: The Guardian, Sept. 10, 2001, http://www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/journalist/story/0,7792,549590,00.html]

49. Sept. 7, 2001 - Florida Governor Jeb Bush signs a two-year emergency executive order (01-261) making new provisions for the Florida National Guard to assist law enforcement and emergency-management personnel in the event of large civil disturbances, disaster or acts of terrorism. [Source: State of Florida website listing of Governor's executive orders]

50. Sept. 6-7, 2001 - Put options (a speculation that the stock will go down) totaling 4,744 are purchased on United Air Lines stock, as opposed to only 396 call options (speculation that the stock will go up). This is a dramatic and abnormal increase in sales of put options. Many of the United puts are purchased through Deutschebank/A.B. Brown, a firm managed until 1998 by the current executive director of the CIA, A.B. "Buzzy" Krongard. [Source: The Herzliyya International Policy Institute for Counterterrorism (ICT), http://www.ict.org.il/, Sept. 21, 2001 (Note:The ICT article on possible terrorist insider trading appeared eight days *after* the 9/11 attacks.); The New York Times; The Wall Street Journal; The San Francisco Chronicle, Sept. 29, 2001]

51. Sept. 10, 2001 - Put options totaling 4,516 are purchased on American Airlines as compared to 748 call options. [Source: Herzliyya Institute - above]

52. Sept. 6-11, 2001 - No other airlines show any similar trading patterns to those experienced by United and American. The put option purchases on both airlines were 600 percent above normal. This at a time when Reuters (Sept. 10) issues a business report stating, "Airline stocks may be poised to take off."

53. Sept. 6-10, 2001 - Highly abnormal levels of put options are purchased in Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, AXA Re(insurance) which owns 25 percent of American Airlines, and Munich Re. All of these companies are directly impacted by the Sept. 11 attacks. [Source: ICT, above;
FTW, Oct. 18, 2001, http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/oct152001.html]

54. 2001-2002 - It has been documented that the CIA, the Israeli Mossad, and many other intelligence agencies monitor stock trading in real time using highly advanced programs reported to be descended from Promis software. This is to alert national intelligence services of just such kinds of attacks. Promis was reported as recently as June 2001 to be in Osama bin Laden's possession and, as a result of recent stories by Fox, both the FBI and the Justice Department have confirmed its use for U.S. intelligence gathering through at least summer 2002. This would confirm that CIA had additional advance warning of imminent attacks. [Sources: The Washington Times, June 15, 2001; Fox, Oct. 16, 2001;
FTW, Oct. 26, 2001, - http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/11_19_01_magic_carpet.html
FTW, Vol. IV, No. 6, Sept. 18, 2001 - http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/sept1801.html;
FTW, Vol. III, No. 7, Sept. 30, 2000 - http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/pandora/052401_promis.html]

55. Sept. 9, 2001 - President George W. Bush is presented with detailed war plans to overthrow Al Qaeda, according to U.S. and foreign sources speaking to NBC News. [Source: MSNBC, May 16, 2002. Thanks to Prof. Peter Dale Scott]

56. Sept. 10, 2001 - This item has been removed solely at the request of the party previously named in this entry. Recent court proceedings – which occurred after the news story we had cited - have indicated that there was no connection between the story listed here, the person named therein and the attacks of 9-11-01. At the request of the previously named party, FTW has replaced the $1,000 reward with a $1,000 donation to The Childrens Defense Fund on behalf of the named party and the issue is now amicably resolved without any hard feelings between that party and FTW.

57. Sept. 10, 2001 - According to Newsweek, a group of top Pentagon officials suddenly cancelled travel plans for the next morning, apparently because of security concerns. [Source: Newsweek, Sept. 24, 2001]

58. Sept. 10, 2001 - The Houston Chronicle reports the FBI was notified of a fifth grader from a Dallas suburb who told his teacher, "Tomorrow, World War III will begin. It will begin in the United States, and the United States will lose." The Chronicle was unclear on specifically when Garland, Texas school district officials told the FBI about the incident, but it was some time between Sept. 13, 2001 and the story's publication date of Sept. 19, 2001. [Source: Houston Chronicle, Sept. 19, 2001 http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/metropolitan/1055222]

59. Sept. 10, 2001 - San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown receives a call from what he described as "his security people at the airport" eight hours before the terrorist attacks "advising him that Americans should be cautious about their air travel," as reported by the San Francisco Chronicle. Brown was scheduled to fly to New York from San Francisco International Airport. He told the Chronicle the call "didn't come in any alarming fashion, which is why I'm hesitant to make any alarming statement." [Source: San Francisco Chronicle, Sept. 12, 2001, http://www.sfgate.com/today/0912_chron_mnreport.shtml]

60. Sept. 11, 2001 - The National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), the federal agency that runs many of the nation's spy satellites, schedules an exercise involving a plane crashing into one of the agency's buildings. "On the morning of Sept. 11, 2001," according to a website advertising a homeland security conference in Chicago run by the National Law Enforcement and Security Institute, CIA official John Fulton and his team "were running a pre-planned simulation to explore the emergency response issues that would be created if a plane were to strike a building. Little did they know that the scenario would come true in a dramatic way." Fulton is the head of the NRO's strategic gaming division. [Source: National Law Enforcement and Security Institute, http://www.nlsi.net, http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20020821/ap_wo_en_ge/us_sept_11_plane_exercise_1]

61. Sept. 11, 2001 - After the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon occur, National Public Radio's congressional correspondent David Welna reports, "I spoke with congressman Ike Skelton, a Democrat from Missouri and a member of the Armed Services Committee, who said that just recently the director of the CIA warned that there could be an attack -- an imminent attack - on the United States of this nature. So this is not entirely unexpected." [Source: http://www.thememoryhole.org/updates.htm]

62. Sept. 11, 2001 - United Air Lines flight 23, scheduled to fly from New York City to Los Angeles was delayed after four Muslim passengers began demanding that the plane take off immediately. This happened apparently after the first plane had hit the WTC. The passengers were thrown off the flight. [Source: The Globe and Mail, June 13, 2002]

63. Sept. 11, 2001 - Gen. Mahmud of the ISI (see #16), friend of Mohammed Atta, is visiting Washington on behalf of the Taliban. He is meeting with the Chairmen of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, Rep. Porter Goss, R-Fla., and Sen. Bob Graham, D-Fla., [Source: MSNBC, Oct. 7, 2001; The New York Times, Feb. 17, 2002]

64. Sept. 11, 2001 - Employees of Odigo, Inc. in Israel, one of the world's largest instant messaging companies with offices in New York, receive threat warnings of an imminent attack on the WTC less than two hours before the first plane hits. Law enforcement authorities have gone silent about any investigation of this. The Odigo research and development offices in Israel are located in the city of Herzliyya, a ritzy suburb of Tel Aviv that is the same location as the Institute for Counter Terrorism, which eight days later reports details of insider trading on 9-11. [Source: CNN's Daniel Sieberg, Sept. 28, 2001; MSNBC Newsbytes, Brian McWilliams, Sept. 27, 2001; Ha'aretz, Sept. 26, 2001]

65. Sept. 11, 2001 - For 50 minutes, from 8:15 AM until 9:05 AM, with it widely known within the FAA and the military that four planes have been simultaneously hijacked and taken off course, no one notifies the President of the United States. It is not until 9:30 that any Air Force planes are scrambled to intercept, but by then it is too late. This means that the National Command Authority waited for 75 minutes before scrambling aircraft, even though it was known that four simultaneous hijackings had occurred. [Source: CNN; ABC; MSNBC; Los Angeles Times; The New York Times; www.tenc.net]

66. Sept. 11-12, 2001 - Nearly a month before the first reported outbreak, White House officials start taking the powerful antibiotic Cipro to treat anthrax. By the end of the year it will be known that the Ames strain of anthrax used in the attacks against Sens. Leahy and Daschle was produced by CIA programs coordinated through Fort Detrick, the Batelle Memorial Institute and the Dugway Proving Ground. [Source: NBC; CNN; www.tetrahedron.org, www.judicialwatch.org]

67. Sept. 13, 2001 - China is admitted to the World Trade Organization quickly, after years of unsuccessful attempts. [Source: The New York Times, Sept. 30, 2001]

68. Sept. 14, 2001 - Canadian jailers open the sealed envelope from Mike Vreeland in Toronto and see that is describes attacks against the WTC and Pentagon. The U.S. Navy subsequently states that Vreeland was discharged as a seaman in 1986 for unsatisfactory performance and has never worked in intelligence. [Source: The Toronto Star, Oct. 23, 2001; Toronto Superior Court records]

69. Sept. 15, 2001 - The New York Times reports that Mayo Shattuck III has resigned, effective immediately, as head of the Alex Brown (A.B.) unit of Deutschebank.

70. Sept. 29, 2001 - The San Francisco Chronicle reports that $2.5 million in put options on American and United airlines are unclaimed. This is likely the result of the suspension in trading on the New York Stock Exchange after the attacks, which gave the Securities and Exchange Commission time to be waiting when the owners showed up to redeem their put options.

71. Oct. 10, 2001 - The Pakistani newspaper The Frontier Post reports that U.S. Ambassador Wendy Chamberlain has paid a call on the Pakistani oil minister. A previously abandoned Unocal gas pipeline project from Turkmenistan, across Afghanistan, to Pakistan is now back on the table "in view of recent geopolitical developments."

72. Oct. 11, 2001 - The Ashcroft Justice Department takes over all terrorist prosecutions from the U.S. Attorneys office in New York, which has had a highly successful track record in prosecuting terrorist cases connected to Osama bin Laden. [Source: The New York Times, Oct. 11, 2001]

73. mid-October 2001 - The Dow Jones Industrial Average, after having suffered a precipitous drop has recovered most of its pre-attack losses. Although still weak and vulnerable to negative earnings reports, a crash has been averted by a massive infusion of government spending on defense programs, subsidies for "affected" industries and planned tax cuts for corporations.

74. Oct. 29, 2001 - The Bush Administration drafts "an executive order that would usher in a new era of secrecy for presidential records and allow an incumbent president to withhold a former president's papers even if the former president wanted to make them public," wrote the Washington Post. The order also required members of the public to prove "at least a demonstrated, specific need'" for a president's papers to be released. Critics contend this would overturn the 1978 Presidential Records Act, which releases documents after 12 years. The White House maintained that a Supreme Court decision in 1977 allows presidents various privileges for their records. [Source: Washington Post, Nov. 1, 2001, http://washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A20731-2001Oct31?language=printer]

75. Nov. 21, 2001 - The British paper The Independent runs a story headlined, "Opium Farmers Rejoice at the Defeat of the Taliban." The story reports that massive opium planting is underway all over the country.

76. Nov. 25, 2001 - The Observer runs a story headlined "Victorious Warlords Set To Open the Opium Floodgates." It states that farmers are being encouraged by warlords allied with the victorious Americans are "being encouraged to plant as much opium as possible."

77. Dec. 4, 2001 - Convicted drug lord and opium kingpin Ayub Afridi is recruited by the U.S. government to help establish control in Afghanistan by unifying various Pashtun warlords. The former opium smuggler who was one of the CIA's leading assets in the war against the Russians is released from prison in order to do this. [Source: The Asia Times Online, Dec. 4, 2001]

78. Dec. 25, 2001 - Newly appointed Afghani Prime Minister Hamid Karzai is revealed as being a former paid consultant for Unocal. [Source: Le Monde]

79. Jan. 3, 2002 - President Bush appoints Zalmy Khalilzad as a special envoy to Afghanistan. Khalilzad, a former employee of Unocal, also wrote op-eds in the Washington Post in 1997 supporting the Taliban regime. [Source: Pravda, Jan. 9, 2002]

80. Jan. 4, 2002 - Florida drug trafficking explodes after 9-11. In a surge of trafficking reminiscent of the 1980s the diversion of resources away from drug enforcement has opened the floodgates for a new surge of cocaine and heroin from South America. [The Christian Science Monitor, Jan. 4, 2002]

81. Jan. 10, 2002 - In a call from a speaker phone in open court, attorneys for Mike Vreeland call the Pentagon's switchboard operator, who confirms that Vreeland is indeed a naval lieutenant on active duty. She provides an office number and a direct dial phone extension to his office in the Pentagon. [Source: Attorney Rocco Galati; Toronto Superior Court records]

82. Jan. 10, 2002 - Attorney General John Ashcroft recuses himself from the Enron investigation because Enron had been a major campaign donor in his 2000 Senate race. He fails to recuse himself from involvement in two sitting federal grand juries investigating bribery and corruption charges against ExxonMobil and BP Amoco, which have massive oil interests in Central Asia. Both were major Ashcroft donors in 2000. [Source: CNN, Jan. 10, 2002; FTW, "The Elephant in the Living Room, Part I," April 4, 2002,
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/04_04_02_elephant.html]

83. Jan. 23, 2002 - Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl is kidnapped in Pakistan. Pearl is reported dead on Feb. 21. Lead suspect Ahmad Umar Sheik, former colleague of Gen. Ahmad, is arrested on Feb. 12 and named as the lead suspect in the kidnapping and murder. Legal sources close to the Pakistani government tell FTW that Pearl was investigating the ISI. [Source: CNN.com]

84. Feb. 9, 2002 - Pakistani leader Gen. Musharraf and Afghan leader Hamid Karzai announce their agreement to "cooperate in all spheres of activity," including the proposed Central Asian pipeline. Pakistan will give $10 million to Afghanistan to help pay Afghan government workers. [Source: The Irish Times, Feb. 9, 2002]

85. Feb. 18, 2002 - The Financial Times reports that the estimated opium harvest in Afghanistan in the late-spring 2002 will reach a world record 4,500 metric tons.

86. mid-April, 2002 - World Bank chief James Wolfensohn, at the opening of the World Bank's offices in Kabul, states he has held talks about financing the Trans-Afghanistan gas pipeline. He confirms $100 million in new grants for the interim Afghani government. Wolfensohn also states that a number of companies have already expressed interest in the project. [Source: Alexander's Gas and oil Connections, citing an Agence France-Presse story]

87. May 13, 2002 - The BBC reports that Afghanistan is about to close a deal for construction of the $2 billion gas pipeline to run from Turkmenistan to Pakistan and India. The story states, "work on the project will start after an agreement is expected to be struck" at a summit scheduled for the end of the month. Unocal will build the pipeline. [Source: BBC, May 13, 2002]

88. May 2002 - A number of sources report progress on both oil and gas pipelines. Regional sources state that Unocal will re-emerge as a pipeline contender after withdrawing from the CentGas pipeline project in 1998. Unocal denies plans to revive the gas pipeline but curiously neglects to mention whether or not it has any interest in the oil pipeline, which local sources say is moving ahead. [Source: The Dawn Group of Newspapers, May 7, May 17, May 22, 2002]

89. May 30, 2002 - Afghanistan's interim leader, Hamid Karzai, Turkmenistan's President Niyazov, and Pakistani President Musharraf meet in Islamabad to sign a memorandum of understanding on the trans-Afghanistan gas pipeline project. The three leaders will meet for more talks on the project in October. The Turkmen-Afghan-Pakistani gas pipeline accord has been published and can be viewed at the following website: http://www.gasandoil.com/goc/news/nts22622.htm. [Source: NewsBase, June 5, 2002]

90. May 16, 2002 - White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer states unequivocally that while President Bush had been warned of possible hijackings, "The president did not -- not -- receive information about the use of airplanes as missiles by suicide bombers." [Source: CBS News, May 15, 2002]

91. May 19, 2002 - Former FBI Agent Tyrone Powers, now a professor at Anne Arundel Community College states on radio station KISS 98.7 that he has credible evidence suggesting that the Bush Administration did in fact allow the Sept. 11 attacks to further a hidden agenda. [Source: http://www.indymedia.org - May 20, 2002]

92. May 31, 2002 - FBI Agent Robert Wright delivers a tearful press conference at the National Press Club describing his lawsuit against the FBI for deliberately curtailing investigations that might have prevented the 9-11 attacks. He uses words like "prevented," "thwarted," "obstructed," "threatened," "intimidated," and "retaliation" to describe the actions of his superiors in blocking his attempts to shut off money flows to Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups. These are not words of negligence. They are words describing deliberate and malicious actions. [Source: C-SPAN website]

93. June 4, 2002 - Air Force Lt. Col. Steve Butler, who had called President Bush a joke and accused him of allowing the Sept. 11 attacks to happen, is suspended from his post at the Defense Language School in Monterey, Calif. and could face a court martial. [Source: Associated Press, June 4, 2002]

94. June 14, 2002 - Common Dreams website publishes an account from a former member of the 1/118th Infantry Battalion of the South Carolina National Guard: "My unit reported for drill in July 2001 and we were suddenly and unexpectedly informed that all activities planned for the next two months would be suspended in order to prepare for a mobilization exercise to be held on Sept. 14, 2001. We worked diligently for two weekends and even came in on an unscheduled day in August to prepare for the exercise. By the end of August all we needed was a phone call, which we were to expect, and we could hop into a fully prepared convoy with our bags and equipment packed." [Source: Common Dreams, http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0614-02.htm]

95. June 17, 2002 - Reuters reports that Butler's case has been resolved without the necessity of a court martial. (I guess so. There's enough material here to prove him right. -- MCR) [Reuters, June 17, 2002]

96. July 2, 2002 - Motions from Zacarias Moussaoui are unsealed in federal court, indicating that Moussaoui wants to testify before both a grand jury and Congress about the Sept. 11 attacks. Moussaoui claims to have information showing that the U.S. government wanted the attacks to happen. [Source: The Washington Post, July 3, 2002]

97. July 3, 2002 - The first-ever shipment of Russian oil, 200,000 metric tons, arrives in Houston. [Source: The Moscow Times, July 6, 2002].

98. July 6, 2002 - Afghan Vice President Hajji Abdul Qadir is assassinated by Afghan warlords. The New York Times reports that Qadir may have been assassinated by opium warlords upset by Qadir's efforts to reduce the rampant opium farming and processing that has taken place since the U.S. occupation. Qadir had been overseeing a Western-backed eradication program, according to the Times. However, the opium warlords of the region are same ones sponsored, protected, and in some cases released from prison by the CIA and who have been protected by President Bush's special envoy, Zalmay Khalilzad. It is reported that the raw opium is being refined near U.S. bases at Kandahar. [Sources: The New York Times, July 8, 2002; Far Eastern Economic Review, April 18, 2002]

99. July 26, 2002 - White House security prevented the legal watch-group Judicial Watch from serving Vice President Cheney with a lawsuit filed on behalf of Halliburton shareholders. Before becoming vice president Cheney was CEO of Halliburton, which has filed for bankruptcy. [Source: Cybercast News Service, cnsnews.com]

100. Aug. 2, 2002 - The FBI asked members of the House and Senate intelligence committees to take lie-detector tests as investigators try to determine who leaked information to CNN about communications in Arabic that made vague references to an impending attack on the United States. The communications were intercepted by the National Security Agency on Sept. 10 but weren't translated until Sept. 12. [Source: Associated Press story published in the Boston Globe, Aug. 2, 2002, http://www.truthout.org/docs_02/08.03A.fbi.lie.det.p.htm]

101. Aug. 5, 2002 - The Associated Press reported Russia's major role over the last five years in the trafficking of Afghan heroin into Europe. [Source: Santa Fe New Mexican, Aug. 5, 2002, www.sfnewmexican.com]

102. Aug. 16, 2002 - A Knight Ridder story discloses that members of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's staff have created a special planning unit for an invasion of Iraq. The unit is composed primarily of civilians and was spearheaded by conservative members of Rumsfeld's staff, such as Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz. The story was headlined, "White House Methodically Preparing for Iraq Campaign." [Source: Knight Ridder Newspapers, www.truthout.org/docs 02/08.17B.wh.prep.irq.p.htm]

103. Aug. 28, 2002 - The Globe and Mail of Canada reports Afghanistan will become the world's top producer of opium this year, surpassing Southeast Asia. [Source: the Globe and Mail, Aug. 28, 2002]

Now, let's go back to the Oct. 31 story by Le Figaro -- the one that has Osama bin Laden meeting with a CIA officer in Dubai in July 2001.

The story says, "Throughout his stay in the hospital, Osama Bin Laden received visits from many family members [There goes the story that he's a black sheep! --MCR] and Saudi Arabian Emirate personalities of status. During this time the local representative of the CIA was seen by many people taking the elevator and going to bin Laden's room.

"Several days later the CIA officer bragged to his friends about having visited the Saudi millionaire. From authoritative sources, this CIA agent visited CIA headquarters on July 15, the day after bin Laden's departure for Quetta.

"According to various Arab diplomatic sources and French intelligence itself, precise information was communicated to the CIA concerning terrorist attacks aimed at American interests in the world, including its own territory.

"Extremely bothered, they [American intelligence officers in a meeting with French intelligence officers] requested from their French peers exact details about the Algerian activists [connected to bin Laden through Dubai banking institutions], without explaining the exact nature of their inquiry. When asked the question, What do you fear in the coming days?' the Americans responded with incomprehensible silence.

"On further investigation, the FBI discovered certain plans that had been put together between the CIA and its 'Islamic friends' over the years. The meeting in Dubai is, so it would seem, consistent with 'a certain American policy.'"

Even though Le Figaro reported that it had confirmed with hospital staff that bin Laden had been there as reported, stories printed on Nov. 1 contained quotes from hospital staff that these reports were untrue. On Nov. 1, as reported by the Ananova press agency, the CIA flatly denied that any meeting between any CIA personnel and Osama bin Laden at any time.

Who do you believe?

WATCH THIS PAGE FOR CONTINUING ADDITIONS TO THIS TIMELINE



EDIT: Sorry bout posting the wrong article. Crazy

This is the revised list.
___________________

"If one rejects laissez faire on account of mans fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action." -Mises

"I would remind you, that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice...and let me remind you also, that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." - Goldwater

NerdWednesday, February 22nd 2006.

sharkwrath48

Dino-Rhino

Posts: 334

Join Date: Nov 2005

long enough article i got bored and stopped reading half way through but i smell a conspiracy
NerdWednesday, February 22nd 2006.

bleeper2.0

Livid

Posts: 6,522

Join Date: Aug 2005

Location: London

FTW, November 2, 2001 -- 1200 PST -- On October 31, the French daily Le Figaro dropped a bombshell.



Most of the conservatives stopped taking the quote seriously from that point

NerdWednesday, February 22nd 2006.

Darkdolphin

N-Phile

Posts: 3,618

Join Date: May 2002

Location: PA

Ahhhhh, another conspiracy theory thread......this one is even more vast than the others.

Well, if you're going to believe an unspecified anonymous source, here's one that contradicts it, only its not anonymous.

http://www.islamonline.net/english/news/2001-11/02/article10.shtml

"He was never a patient here for any days," Chief Executive Officer Bernard Koval told Agence France-Presse (AFP). "Osama bin Laden has never been here. He's never been a patient and he's never been treated here. We have no idea of his medical condition. This is too small a hospital for someone to be snuck through the backdoor."

"I've spoken to all the medical workers, physicians, and Callaway himself and they know nothing. I was here for the whole month of July," Officer Koval said. "It's erroneous and fallacious."
NerdWednesday, February 22nd 2006.

Dark Aerow

What is seen

Posts: 4,004

Join Date: Jun 2003

Location: What is not seen

Good job mister Dolphin you've (almost? Of course the CIA would never admit to meeting with bin laden. CIA has the ability to fabricate any evidence they want) debunked one of the many allegations in my post. Thumbs up

I'm just going to say that you've debunked it. Now do the same for the rest.
___________________

"If one rejects laissez faire on account of mans fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action." -Mises

"I would remind you, that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice...and let me remind you also, that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." - Goldwater
NerdWednesday, February 22nd 2006.

Drunken Savior

Jeffersonian

Posts: 5,163

Join Date: Sep 2005

Location: West Coast

None of those source links work...
NerdWednesday, February 22nd 2006.

Dark Aerow

What is seen

Posts: 4,004

Join Date: Jun 2003

Location: What is not seen

lol, posted the wrong article, that was the old one...

Here's the revised list with more evidence.

http://www.copvcia.com/free/ww3/02_11_02_lucy.html

Oh also, Mr. Dolphin the revised list mentions the fact that the CIA denies meetig bin laden. (last 7 paragraphs)
___________________

"If one rejects laissez faire on account of mans fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action." -Mises

"I would remind you, that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice...and let me remind you also, that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." - Goldwater
NerdWednesday, February 22nd 2006.

Good Doctor

i'll be your king volcano

Posts: 5,581

Join Date: Sep 2003

Location: Tampa

Look, I have an open mind. I don't believe we've ever been to the moon, and I hallucinate at every available opportunity.

But ****ing **** can you stop with this already? Yes, there's more to it than people know. Just like basically anything involving the government. If everyone doesn't know that the government is crooked, they're ****ing idiots already. The trick is to NOT DIE or get ****ED by them. As long as you can maintain your own happiness, who the **** cares? Conspiracy theories are a waste of time.
___________________
right for you again and again my velvet goldmine
NerdWednesday, February 22nd 2006.

Dai Grepher

Nerd

Posts: 90

Join Date: Jan 2006

A collection of baseless rumors? Meh.
NerdWednesday, February 22nd 2006.

unkwon

Miss Round and Plump!

Posts: 5,145

Join Date: Jun 2004

Location: Texas

Good Doctor

Look, I have an open mind. I don't believe we've ever been to the moon, and I hallucinate at every available opportunity.

But ****ing **** can you stop with this already? Yes, there's more to it than people know. Just like basically anything involving the government. If everyone doesn't know that the government is crooked, they're ****ing idiots already. The trick is to NOT DIE or get ****ED by them. As long as you can maintain your own happiness, who the **** cares? Conspiracy theories are a waste of time.


Tell me about it my parents are nuts about conspiracies it's rather embaracing!
___________________
Now if only I could change to Mr Fat instead of Miss round and plump.

NerdWednesday, February 22nd 2006.

MrSnuggles

Banned

Posts: 8,229

Join Date: Jun 2004

Location: Land of the free, home of the brave

its amazing to me how the biggest, most complicated conspiracies are always the ones that are never leaked and are only talked about by fringe lunatics. you would think with something this big and vast, SOMEBODY would have come out and let the whole world know of this insidious plot.
___________________
JFK: Ich bin ein Berliner
BHO: Ich bin ein beginner
NerdWednesday, February 22nd 2006.

Robjomak

still going strong

Posts: 8,019

Join Date: Jan 2005

Location: Philadelphia

They're obviously all silenced by the Bush administration through elaborate and villainous torture, in a faraway castle surrounded by a moat of lava. That's why these theories haven't been blown open yet.
NerdWednesday, February 22nd 2006.

Machine Knight

It's Not Lupus

Posts: 2,783

Join Date: Sep 2004

Location: MI, USA

Robjomak

They're obviously all silenced by the Bush administration through elaborate and villainous torture, in a faraway castle surrounded by a moat of lava. That's why these theories haven't been blown open yet.



Dude get serious...
















































..they used jedi mind tricks.
___________________

NerdWednesday, February 22nd 2006.

Darkdolphin

N-Phile

Posts: 3,618

Join Date: May 2002

Location: PA

Dark Aerow

Good job mister Dolphin you've (almost? Of course the CIA would never admit to meeting with bin laden. CIA has the ability to fabricate any evidence they want) debunked one of the many allegations in my post. Thumbs up

I'm just going to say that you've debunked it. Now do the same for the rest.

That was a hospital official, not CIA member who denied it, so that would mean the hospital and its doctors are also in on the conspiracy. Anyway....

1-9- All happened prior to the Bush administration. There's absolutly nothing there that sugggests that any of the events have anything to do with September 11th. Some oil company meeting with some Taliban officers in 1997 does not make Bush guilty. Sorry.

Another point...the "Bin Laden family" (which numbers approx. 600 people) is not Osama Bin Laden. There are members of the family throughout the world and right here in the US now. As far as we know, they have no ties to terrorism or Osama Bin Laden and their whereabouts are not secret. Therefore someone meeting with someone from the Bin Laden family sometime in the 1990's also does not implicate Bush.

10-11- I don't know what these have to do with anything. One is an FBI agent doing something illegal BEFORE Bush was in office...another is so vague its pretty funny...an unnamed government attempting to buy a flight simulator at an unspecified time (once again before Bush was in office)? Hardly suggests any credible, imminent threat.

12- There are dozens of threats every day. This one was during the end of the Clinton administration. How does that implicate Bush? If it was such an imminent threat, if anything, Clinton should have acted on it.

13- If they planned the attacks....WHY WOULD THEY CARRY OUT AN EMERGENCY DRILL...that would completely defeat the point of attacking ourselves!

14- see above...the family has already disavowed Osama. I've seen various Bin Laden family members interviewed on major news networks, so its not like they are living in secret or doing anything illegal, unless a whole bunch of governments are conspiring to let them go free, considering there are family members throughout the world. Plus...the orders that are referenced above dated back to 1996...once again long before Bush was in office.

15-103- I'm going to sleep, maybe tomorrow.Wink

NerdWednesday, February 22nd 2006.

RansacK

Pompon Flower

Posts: 385

Join Date: Aug 2005

Location: Red Sox Nation

Ya. let's stop with the ridiculous conspiracy threads.
NerdThursday, February 23rd 2006.

Paul Weller

Lakitu

Posts: 11,584

Join Date: Sep 2002

Yeah, honestly... I don't really give a ****.

In this era of history, there is a lot of fishy **** happening in the government. I believe that the CIA was involved with the crack epidemic, as well with some other sketchy **** that we don't know about... we're never being completely invovled of the truth...what do you expect?

I guess we have to tolerate it since there's jack **** we can do about it.... it's fun to speculate and read about, but it's retarded to get seriously concerned with it.
___________________
We're all just hapless victims of knowledge and learning and such
The man you thought you licked 'em but you choked in the clutch
Brent Black, you said it yourself it's an ethereal kind of flu
A Mac virus reveals the plot of the fiendish Fu Man Chu
NerdThursday, February 23rd 2006.

Machine Knight

It's Not Lupus

Posts: 2,783

Join Date: Sep 2004

Location: MI, USA

You should have just kept all this in the one thread Jeff.

It's alright to try to inform people. But when you try to push all this info on people by making several threads which all share a common theme your going to get negative reactions, regardless to how credible the sources are. This is because people don't like to be suddenly "overwelhmed" with info. You need to feed people info like you feed a child. Little bit at a time. Otherwise they are going to have knee jerk reactions, only read what they feel like, and miss out on info that probably could have been very enlightening. This helps nothing but to further divide people.

Every government is corrupt. You can't avoid it. I really don't beleive either side. Both have there own agendas. We will never know 100% what exactly happened. No matter how much evidence either side produces it will never be enough. It really boils down to who you have faith in.

And personally I do not have faith in either side.
___________________
NerdThursday, February 23rd 2006.

RansacK

Pompon Flower

Posts: 385

Join Date: Aug 2005

Location: Red Sox Nation

In this era of history, there is a lot of fishy **** happening in the government. I believe that the CIA was involved with the crack epidemic, as well with some other sketchy **** that we don't know about... we're never being completely invovled of the truth...what do you expect?



On the topic of crack, the man who introduced cocaine to popular American culture came from my hometown. George Jung, the movie Blow is his lifestory.

NerdThursday, February 23rd 2006.

Dark Aerow

What is seen

Posts: 4,004

Join Date: Jun 2003

Location: What is not seen

I don’t deal in conspiracy theory. I deal in Conspiracy fact.

Dolphin your straw-man-tactics are outlandish. You claim that the first 9 points are completely irrelevant because bush wasn't in office yet. Just because bush wasn't in office doesn't mean that him and the people around him were frolicking through fields, drunk off their asses, and shooting each other with bird-shot. On top of that, you provided one source and one source alone for only one point. Yet the Michael Ruppert has provided sources for every single one of his points, many of which are from legal documents and whatnots.

I find it hard to believe that none of you can see the glaring inconsistencies with the official explanation.

This video is 7 minutes long and quickly rattles off a few of the main points and barely scratches the surface of the mounds and mounds of evidence compiled by sites such as ST911.org (scholars for 9/11 truth) who have submitted what people in the scientific community believe to be absolutely undeniable proof that the towers couldn't have collapsed the way that the government told us.

I've researched all of this for well over 100 hours and have yet to find undeniable proof that the 9/11 truth movement is BS and have yet to find any quality evidence that supports the government propagan....err...explanation.

The more I search the more I find glaring inconsistencies.

And to all you people that seem to think I just hate bush, well I got news for you. I voted for bush in the 2004 elections (ask Machine Knight, he'll confirm that) and now I wish I hadn't voted for bush.

The reason the bush administration would be able to get away with this has already been proven by everyones reaction in this thread. I'm currently writing an article that explains why the bush administration is able to get away with this, It'll likely be finished next week, I'll be sure to post it here.
___________________

"If one rejects laissez faire on account of mans fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action." -Mises

"I would remind you, that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice...and let me remind you also, that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." - Goldwater
NerdThursday, February 23rd 2006.

Dawson

Mr. Tambourine Man

Posts: 10,533

Join Date: Mar 2003

Location: Australia

I'm going to go cum on a slice of bread and eat it. BRB.
___________________
NerdThursday, February 23rd 2006.

Dark Aerow

What is seen

Posts: 4,004

Join Date: Jun 2003

Location: What is not seen

Get out of my thread dawson.

WARNING! anyone without an open-mind should immediatly close your browser for I do not want to deal with your nonsensical bull-****.



Next time read the opening sentences of my threads so that you wont have to waste your time.


Also, for all of you people that are so convinced of the official story, there's a quick easy way for you to WIN ONE MILLION DOLLARS.

All you have to do is prove that the world trade centers weren't brought down by demolitions.

Reopen911.com
___________________

"If one rejects laissez faire on account of mans fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action." -Mises

"I would remind you, that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice...and let me remind you also, that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." - Goldwater

NerdThursday, February 23rd 2006.

RansacK

Pompon Flower

Posts: 385

Join Date: Aug 2005

Location: Red Sox Nation

All you have to prove is the towers were brought down by demolitions with definitive proof.
NerdThursday, February 23rd 2006.

Faramir

Swoop

Posts: 259

Join Date: Jun 2004

I have an open mind, just not for reading anything that long.
___________________
It's not that I'm lazy....it's just that I don't care.
NerdThursday, February 23rd 2006.

Dark Aerow

What is seen

Posts: 4,004

Join Date: Jun 2003

Location: What is not seen

RansacK

All you have to prove is the towers were brought down by demolitions with definitive proof.


http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html
http://911review.com/articles/griffin/nyc1.html

Where's their million dollars? They have proven it, but no one wants to listen.

Moreover that is only the beggining of their evidence, they've compiled even more and have done many tests to verify the evidence in their peer-reviewed papers.

Faramir, i present to you, the EXTREMELY SHORT (it's barely a snap-shot fo the evidence that has been compiled) version in convient video form.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9124194186333362123&q=9/11+reopen
___________________

"If one rejects laissez faire on account of mans fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action." -Mises

"I would remind you, that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice...and let me remind you also, that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." - Goldwater

NerdThursday, February 23rd 2006.

Leather McWhip

Lakitu

Posts: 1,448

Join Date: May 2005

Location: Chicago

I don't think I believe any of this, but one thing stuck out at me as being extra ridiculous. That reopen911 site links to this "mayjor evidence" that because Hotel Windsor burnt for 24 hours and didn't collapse to the ground like the trade towers, there must've been a conspiracy. Well one thing to note is that the Windsor Towers didn't have a 747 slam into the side of it, destroying a great deal of it's load berring capabilities. Also, I'm sure just the sheer force of having a huge jet slam into a building like that is enough to significantly weaken it's structure.

And have you ever thought that the towers collapsed because the tops of them collapsed first, thus placing an enormous amount of weight on the bottom half of the trade center, ultimately leading it to collapse completely?
___________________
"I'm not one of these fair weather fans." "You go to Wrigley Field, you have a beer, beautiful people up there. People aren't watching the game. It's not serious. White Sox, that's baseball. Southside."

- Barack Obama (The first black President of the United States of America)
NerdThursday, February 23rd 2006.

RansacK

Pompon Flower

Posts: 385

Join Date: Aug 2005

Location: Red Sox Nation

http://video.google.com/videoplay?d...3&q=9/11+reopen



Come on, that video is ridiculous. It tries to sound legitmate by opening with a prayer to the the victims and soldiers. Ironically, bu stirring up the pot, they only create more problems and distress for the survivors of the victims.

NerdThursday, February 23rd 2006.

Dark Aerow

What is seen

Posts: 4,004

Join Date: Jun 2003

Location: What is not seen

Leather McWhip

I don't think I believe any of this, but one thing stuck out at me as being extra ridiculous. That reopen911 site links to this "mayjor evidence" that because Hotel Windsor burnt for 24 hours and didn't collapse to the ground like the trade towers, there must've been a conspiracy. Well one thing to note is that the Windsor Towers didn't have a 747 slam into the side of it, destroying a great deal of it's load berring capabilities. Also, I'm sure just the sheer force of having a huge jet slam into a building like that is enough to significantly weaken it's structure.

And have you ever thought that the towers collapsed because the tops of them collapsed first, thus placing an enormous amount of weight on the bottom half of the trade center, ultimately leading it to collapse completely?


RansacK

Come on, that video is ridiculous. It tries to sound legitmate by opening with a prayer to the the victims and soldiers. Ironically, bu stirring up the pot, they only create more problems and distress for the survivors of the victims.


Both of you are guilty of one count of ignoring the facts.

http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html
http://911review.com/articles/griffin/nyc1.html

Also, Ransack, the good majority of the victims of these events are behind this movement. They want to know the truth. It's the government that's been distressing the victims not the people at reopen911.com

I particularly find this part of Ray griffins research to be rather humorous.

Total Collapse: The official theory is even more decisively ruled out by the fact that the collapses were total: These 110-story buildings collapsed into piles of rubble only a few stories high. How was that possible? The core of each tower contained 47 massive steel box columns.[24] According to the pancake theory, the horizontal steel supports broke free from the vertical columns. But if that is what had happened, the 47 core columns would have still been standing. The 9/11 Commission came up with a bold solution to this problem. It simply denied the existence of the 47 core columns, saying: “The interior core of the buildings was a hollow steel shaft, in which elevators and stairwells were grouped” (Kean and Hamilton, 2004, 541 note 1). Voila! With no 47 core columns, the main problem is removed.


___________________

"If one rejects laissez faire on account of mans fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action." -Mises

"I would remind you, that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice...and let me remind you also, that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." - Goldwater

NerdFriday, February 24th 2006.

Darkdolphin

N-Phile

Posts: 3,618

Join Date: May 2002

Location: PA

Dark Aerow

I don't deal in conspiracy theory. I deal in Conspiracy fact.

Dolphin your straw-man-tactics are outlandish. You claim that the first 9 points are completely irrelevant because bush wasn't in office yet. Just because bush wasn't in office doesn't mean that him and the people around him were frolicking through fields, drunk off their asses, and shooting each other with bird-shot. On top of that, you provided one source and one source alone for only one point. Yet the Michael Ruppert has provided sources for every single one of his points, many of which are from legal documents and whatnots.

Outlandish? There's NO EVIDENCE that Bush has some insane amount of power that he was running the government throughout the 90's. Believing that is outlandish. If you're so sure there was a conspiracy during the 90's as well, maybe you should take a look at the administration that was in office?

Leather McWhip

I don't think I believe any of this, but one thing stuck out at me as being extra ridiculous. That reopen911 site links to this "mayjor evidence" that because Hotel Windsor burnt for 24 hours and didn't collapse to the ground like the trade towers, there must've been a conspiracy. Well one thing to note is that the Windsor Towers didn't have a 747 slam into the side of it, destroying a great deal of it's load berring capabilities. Also, I'm sure just the sheer force of having a huge jet slam into a building like that is enough to significantly weaken it's structure.

And have you ever thought that the towers collapsed because the tops of them collapsed first, thus placing an enormous amount of weight on the bottom half of the trade center, ultimately leading it to collapse completely?

Shhhhhh! You're ruining the conspiracy!

NerdFriday, February 24th 2006.

Dark Aerow

What is seen

Posts: 4,004

Join Date: Jun 2003

Location: What is not seen

Ok, I'm done, you guys enjoy your life while you can.

Ignorance is bliss.
___________________

"If one rejects laissez faire on account of mans fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action." -Mises

"I would remind you, that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice...and let me remind you also, that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." - Goldwater
NerdSaturday, February 25th 2006.

Paul Weller

Lakitu

Posts: 11,584

Join Date: Sep 2002

FOr whoever said that the Windsor Towers didn't have a plain crash into them....

either did building 7.


I have a question though involving the pentagon on the missile theory. If the government wanted to lie to people and tell them a 747 went into the Pentagon, why didn't they just fly a 747 into the Pentagon.

I do believe a 747 was flown into the Pentagon. It was flied directly into it, and there HAS been airplane crashes where there were no plane parts and everything was debris.

There is a lot of fishy stuff floating around though. It's fun to speculate, but all in all it's hard to confirm anything. I do believe we were deceived in some way, but it's not going to change anything even if I do concentrate on that belief for too long, so why bother?




And guys, all this might say is that terrorists planeted bombs as well. I think the Pentagon **** is rubbish, but we've known that the terrorists were in our country for some time, so it's very plausible that bombs were planted.

That had to be the case in building's situation.
___________________
We're all just hapless victims of knowledge and learning and such
The man you thought you licked 'em but you choked in the clutch
Brent Black, you said it yourself it's an ethereal kind of flu
A Mac virus reveals the plot of the fiendish Fu Man Chu
NerdSaturday, February 25th 2006.

MrSnuggles

Banned

Posts: 8,229

Join Date: Jun 2004

Location: Land of the free, home of the brave

FOr whoever said that the Windsor Towers didn't have a plain crash into them....

either did building 7.



building 7 collapsing is just more reason to believe that there was no conspiracy. if it can fall down simply because it caught on fire, then its not out of the question that a plane would knock both of the twin towers down. not to mention the planes were loaded with jet fuel.

why would they set charges in building 7 too? you have to be living in an alternate universe for any of this to make sense.
___________________
JFK: Ich bin ein Berliner
BHO: Ich bin ein beginner

NerdSaturday, February 25th 2006.

Paul Weller

Lakitu

Posts: 11,584

Join Date: Sep 2002

Dude did you read the report? It's physics man. Jet Fuel does not burn hot enough to melt steal. There had to be some sort of explosive planted in the building. Buildings don't collapse because of fire. It's phyically impracticle that all three buildings collapsed because of fire. It wasn't hot enough to completely destroy the steal. It's math, man. There had to have been explosives too.

I don't see how it was possible for that to happen any other way.
___________________
We're all just hapless victims of knowledge and learning and such
The man you thought you licked 'em but you choked in the clutch
Brent Black, you said it yourself it's an ethereal kind of flu
A Mac virus reveals the plot of the fiendish Fu Man Chu
NerdSaturday, February 25th 2006.

MrSnuggles

Banned

Posts: 8,229

Join Date: Jun 2004

Location: Land of the free, home of the brave

other reports say the steel DID melt, and that the weight on the top was too much for the lower levels to handle. thats why it collapsed from the top. it makes complete sense. what makes no sense is blowing up building 7.
___________________
JFK: Ich bin ein Berliner
BHO: Ich bin ein beginner
NerdSunday, February 26th 2006.

jazzman

Beware the Meteorologist

Posts: 3,988

Join Date: Jul 2002

Location: Home

MrSnuggles

other reports say the steel DID melt, and that the weight on the top was too much for the lower levels to handle. thats why it collapsed from the top. it makes complete sense. what makes no sense is blowing up building 7.



The owner probably had the buildings wired in case something ever happened and the buildings were going to collapse sideways. That way, the damage could be somewhat contained, as opposed to their fall knocking down other skyscrapers that he owned and killing tens of thousands of people. You want to know what would be really frightening? If every building above a certain height was pre-wired in the event of an imminent collapse that is not completely vertical. The first tower did fall sideways at first.
___________________
Need someone to visit my Animal Crossing:WW town so that I can get Nookington's. PM me if you'll visit my town.
My friend code is:
2148-4650-8590
Thanks much!

NerdSunday, February 26th 2006.

Darkdolphin

N-Phile

Posts: 3,618

Join Date: May 2002

Location: PA

Shortdude123

Dude did you read the report? It's physics man. Jet Fuel does not burn hot enough to melt steal. There had to be some sort of explosive planted in the building. Buildings don't collapse because of fire. It's phyically impracticle that all three buildings collapsed because of fire. It wasn't hot enough to completely destroy the steal. It's math, man. There had to have been explosives too.

I don't see how it was possible for that to happen any other way.

Read the Popular Mechanics report. They confirmed it was possible.

NerdSunday, February 26th 2006.

MrSnuggles

Banned

Posts: 8,229

Join Date: Jun 2004

Location: Land of the free, home of the brave

jazzman

The owner probably had the buildings wired in case something ever happened and the buildings were going to collapse sideways. That way, the damage could be somewhat contained, as opposed to their fall knocking down other skyscrapers that he owned and killing tens of thousands of people. You want to know what would be really frightening? If every building above a certain height was pre-wired in the event of an imminent collapse that is not completely vertical. The first tower did fall sideways at first.


thats an interesting idea, but i still believe what you see is what you get.
___________________
JFK: Ich bin ein Berliner
BHO: Ich bin ein beginner

NerdSunday, February 26th 2006.

Dark Aerow

What is seen

Posts: 4,004

Join Date: Jun 2003

Location: What is not seen

That popular mechanics article is complete and utter fabrication.

The media will do anything to make a dollar or two.

This article effectively debunks every claim that Popular mechanics made - http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pm/

Note: there are numerous other articles that go more in depth to debunk popular mechanics. Thats the shortest one I found. I know how much you people seem to hate reading about facts, so naturally I picked the shortest article to make it easier for you.

Also, you cant deny that jet fuel cant melt steel. It just cant. It's impossible, even if the jet fuel could burn at it's highest temperature; which I assure you, it wasn't. the black smoke indicates that the fire wasn't getting enough oxygen, therefore burning at a lower temperature. Also, there was a lady standing in the opening where the planes hit, if the fire was really as hot as the government said, it would be extremely unlikely she could have made it to the opening.

EDIT: I dont know why I keep arguing this, you guys continually ignore the facts and try to explain them away with straw-man tactics and illogical claims.
___________________

"If one rejects laissez faire on account of mans fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action." -Mises

"I would remind you, that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice...and let me remind you also, that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." - Goldwater
NerdSunday, February 26th 2006.

Paul Weller

Lakitu

Posts: 11,584

Join Date: Sep 2002

Yeah. The fact is that jet fuel can't melt steal. Fire has never caused a building to completely collapse.

And Building 7 should not have collapsed. a plane didn't even ****ing hit it.
___________________
We're all just hapless victims of knowledge and learning and such
The man you thought you licked 'em but you choked in the clutch
Brent Black, you said it yourself it's an ethereal kind of flu
A Mac virus reveals the plot of the fiendish Fu Man Chu
NerdSunday, February 26th 2006.

Darkdolphin

N-Phile

Posts: 3,618

Join Date: May 2002

Location: PA

Shortdude123

Yeah. The fact is that jet fuel can't melt steal. Fire has never caused a building to completely collapse.

And Building 7 should not have collapsed. a plane didn't even ****ing hit it.

1) Yeah, and buildings have never been hit by two 747's before, so its kinda tough to know how they'll respond. This wasn't just a routine fire. If it was a conspiracy, why wouldn't the government say "Oh the terrorists must have planted explosives in the buildings as well." Makes a lot more sense.

2) Why would the government bring bulding 7 down so much later? Makes no sense. If it was part of the conspiracy, they would have blown it up when the other buildings were hit.

Dark Aerow

I dont know why I keep arguing this, you guys continually ignore the facts and try to explain them away with straw-man tactics and illogical claims.



We're using illogical claims? Just look at your senseless arguments and (lack of) logic.

NerdSunday, February 26th 2006.

Dark Aerow

What is seen

Posts: 4,004

Join Date: Jun 2003

Location: What is not seen

Jet fuel cannot melt steel, it's impossible; yet there was molten steel found at ground zero.

You keep ignoring this fact, over and over again.
___________________

"If one rejects laissez faire on account of mans fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action." -Mises

"I would remind you, that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice...and let me remind you also, that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." - Goldwater
NerdSunday, February 26th 2006.

Coconut

Can has custom title?

Posts: 15,975

Join Date: May 2002

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html
NerdSunday, February 26th 2006.

MrSnuggles

Banned

Posts: 8,229

Join Date: Jun 2004

Location: Land of the free, home of the brave

i still want to know what the motivation for all of this was. why go through such an intricate conspiracy? what is in it for Bush?
___________________
JFK: Ich bin ein Berliner
BHO: Ich bin ein beginner
NerdSunday, February 26th 2006.

Coconut

Can has custom title?

Posts: 15,975

Join Date: May 2002

MrSnuggles

i still want to know what the motivation for all of this was. why go through such an intricate conspiracy? what is in it for Bush?




It's such an intricate conspiracy since their is a lack of information about the whole ordeal and a stigma of mystery as well.



That said, I don't think it's a conspiracy.

NerdSunday, February 26th 2006.

Paul Weller

Lakitu

Posts: 11,584

Join Date: Sep 2002

who the **** is saying bush did this? all that ANYBODY is saying is that something ISN'T right. We found out what wasn't right. Now the question is why. Nobody is saying why. It's probably very simple
___________________
We're all just hapless victims of knowledge and learning and such
The man you thought you licked 'em but you choked in the clutch
Brent Black, you said it yourself it's an ethereal kind of flu
A Mac virus reveals the plot of the fiendish Fu Man Chu
NerdSunday, February 26th 2006.

Darkdolphin

N-Phile

Posts: 3,618

Join Date: May 2002

Location: PA

Dark Aerow

Jet fuel cannot melt steel, it's impossible; yet there was molten steel found at ground zero.

You keep ignoring this fact, over and over again.

Nope....
"Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn't need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength--and that required exposure to much less heat. "I have never seen melted steel in a building fire," says retired New York deputy fire chief Vincent Dunn, author of The Collapse Of Burning Buildings: A Guide To Fireground Safety. "But I've seen a lot of twisted, warped, bent and sagging steel. What happens is that the steel tries to expand at both ends, but when it can no longer expand, it sags and the surrounding concrete cracks." "Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F," notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. "And at 1800° it is probably at less than 10 percent." NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat.

But jet fuel wasn't the only thing burning, notes Forman Williams, a professor of engineering at the University of California, San Diego, and one of seven structural engineers and fire experts that PM consulted. He says that while the jet fuel was the catalyst for the WTC fires, the resulting inferno was intensified by the combustible material inside the buildings, including rugs, curtains, furniture and paper. NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F."


A building with steel at 10% of its strength will collapse. You don't need the whole building to turn into molten, melted steel. And from the link Coconut posted:

"The additional problem was distortion of the steel in the fire. The temperature of the fire was not uniform everywhere, and the temperature on the outside of the box columns was clearly lower than on the side facing the fire. The temperature along the 18 m long joists was certainly not uniform. Given the thermal expansion of steel, a 150°C temperature difference from one location to another will produce yield-level residual stresses. This produced distortions in the slender structural steel, which resulted in buckling failures. Thus, the failure of the steel was due to two factors: loss of strength due to the temperature of the fire, and loss of structural integrity due to distortion of the steel from the non-uniform temperatures in the fire."

NerdSunday, February 26th 2006.

Brian10488

Change is a sound

Posts: 10,877

Join Date: Oct 2003

Location: Chicago

"there has been corruption in the white house since Jefferson" Family Guy
___________________

Let's bury the hatchet. We smoke um peace pipe! -Jerry Seinfeld

NerdSunday, February 26th 2006.

Darkdolphin

N-Phile

Posts: 3,618

Join Date: May 2002

Location: PA

Shortdude123

who the **** is saying bush did this?

Lets see....the thread is called "Oh Dubya!! You got some splainin' to do." Unless they are referring to some other "Dubya" I'll go out on a limb and say its referring to Bush. The thread starter has implied all along that Bush is involved. Plus, plenty of the conspiracy theorists blame Bush. They say that he knew about the plot, called off the Air Force, is good buddies with Bin Laden, and/or rigged the whole event himself (and then went on to trigger the Asian tsunami and conjure up Hurricane Katrina with a giant weather machine! (but thats a topic for another conspiracy thread)). PLENTY of people think Bush did this. I agree, its ridiculous.

NerdSunday, February 26th 2006.

Dark Aerow

What is seen

Posts: 4,004

Join Date: Jun 2003

Location: What is not seen

MrSnuggles

i still want to know what the motivation for all of this was. why go through such an intricate conspiracy? what is in it for Bush?


Is it really that hard to see a motive? Open your eyes.

Short version:


  • Greed
  • power
  • opportunity
  • New american century


Medium Version:

The attacks on september 11th were a means to mobilize the american people "like a new pearl harbor" as was stated in the "Project for the new american century" which was created by a neo-conservative think-tank, whose members included Dick Cheney, Jeb Bush, Paul Wolfowitz and Donald Rumsfeld. Since the attacks the bush administration has been able to do whatever they want under the pre-text of 9-11. Patriot act, Afghanistan, iraq, etc...

In the project for the new american century their primary goal is to build an "American global leadership".

When people are in a state of fear, they are easily susceptable to suggestion. so when the president comes out and says some heroic words, the people of america unite and follow. Like a bunch of sheap. The attacks on 9/11 effectively help to make the Bush administrations agenda, a reality.

There are many more motives for other groups that may or may not be directly involved. But, the motive I explianed above is the primary motive.

Long version:

http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20051112152750305
http://johnmccarthy90066.tripod.com/id416.html

any questions?
___________________

"If one rejects laissez faire on account of mans fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action." -Mises

"I would remind you, that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice...and let me remind you also, that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." - Goldwater
NerdSunday, February 26th 2006.

Paul Weller

Lakitu

Posts: 11,584

Join Date: Sep 2002

Well Dubya has some explaining to do because the 9/11 reports and **** are inaccurate.

Why?
___________________
We're all just hapless victims of knowledge and learning and such
The man you thought you licked 'em but you choked in the clutch
Brent Black, you said it yourself it's an ethereal kind of flu
A Mac virus reveals the plot of the fiendish Fu Man Chu
NerdSunday, February 26th 2006.

Dark Aerow

What is seen

Posts: 4,004

Join Date: Jun 2003

Location: What is not seen

Darkdolphin

Nope....
"Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn't need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength--and that required exposure to much less heat. "I have never seen melted steel in a building fire," says retired New York deputy fire chief Vincent Dunn, author of The Collapse Of Burning Buildings: A Guide To Fireground Safety. "But I've seen a lot of twisted, warped, bent and sagging steel. What happens is that the steel tries to expand at both ends, but when it can no longer expand, it sags and the surrounding concrete cracks." "Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F," notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. "And at 1800° it is probably at less than 10 percent." NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat.

But jet fuel wasn't the only thing burning, notes Forman Williams, a professor of engineering at the University of California, San Diego, and one of seven structural engineers and fire experts that PM consulted. He says that while the jet fuel was the catalyst for the WTC fires, the resulting inferno was intensified by the combustible material inside the buildings, including rugs, curtains, furniture and paper. NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F."


A building with steel at 10% of its strength will collapse. You don't need the whole building to turn into molten, melted steel. And from the link Coconut posted:

"The additional problem was distortion of the steel in the fire. The temperature of the fire was not uniform everywhere, and the temperature on the outside of the box columns was clearly lower than on the side facing the fire. The temperature along the 18 m long joists was certainly not uniform. Given the thermal expansion of steel, a 150°C temperature difference from one location to another will produce yield-level residual stresses. This produced distortions in the slender structural steel, which resulted in buckling failures. Thus, the failure of the steel was due to two factors: loss of strength due to the temperature of the fire, and loss of structural integrity due to distortion of the steel from the non-uniform temperatures in the fire."


I've already read this and This doesn't explain why molten steel was found at ground zero.

Debunking the official theory

"No Prior Collapse Induced by Fire

The official theory is rendered implausible by two major problems. The first is the simple fact that fire has never---prior to or after 9/11---caused steel-frame high-rise buildings to collapse. Defenders of the official story seldom if ever mention this simple fact. Indeed, the supposedly definitive report put out by NIST---the National Institute for Standards and Technology (2005)---even implies that fire-induced collapses of large steel-frame buildings are normal events (Hoffman, 2005).[4] Far from being normal, however, such collapses have never occurred, except for the alleged cases of 9/11.

Defenders of the official theory, of course, say that the collapses were caused not simply by the fire but the fire combined with the damage caused by the airliners. The towers, however, were designed to withstand the impact of airliners about the same size as Boeing 767s.[5] Hyman Brown, the construction manager of the Twin Towers, said: “They were over-designed to withstand almost anything, including hurricanes, . . . bombings and an airplane hitting [them]” (Bollyn, 2001). And even Thomas Eagar, an MIT professor of materials engineering who supports the official theory, says that the impact of the airplanes would not have been significant, because “the number of columns lost on the initial impact was not large and the loads were shifted to remaining columns in this highly redundant structure” (Eagar and Musso, 2001, pp. 8-11). Likewise, the NIST Report, in discussing how the impact of the planes contributed to the collapse, focuses primarily on the claim that the planes dislodged a lot of the fire-proofing from the steel.[6]

The official theory of the collapse, therefore, is essentially a fire theory, so it cannot be emphasized too much that fire has never caused large steel-frame buildings to collapse---never, whether before 9/11, or after 9/11, or anywhere in the world on 9/11 except allegedly New York City---never.

One might say, of course, that there is a first time for everything, and that a truly extraordinary fire might induce a collapse. Let us examine this idea. What would count as an extraordinary fire? Given the properties of steel, a fire would need to be very hot, very big, and very long-lasting. But the fires in the towers did not have even one of these characteristics, let alone all three.

There have been claims, to be sure, that the fires were very hot. Some television specials claimed that the towers collapsed because the fire was hot enough to melt the steel. For example, an early BBC News special quoted Hyman Brown as saying: “steel melts, and 24,000 gallons of aviation fluid melted the steel.” Another man, presented as a structural engineer, said: “It was the fire that killed the buildings. There’s nothing on earth that could survive those temperatures with that amount of fuel burning. . . . The columns would have melted” (Barter, 2001).[7]

These claims, however, are absurd. Steel does not even begin to melt until it reaches almost 2800° Fahrenheit.[8] And yet open fires fueled by hydrocarbons, such as kerosene---which is what jet fuel is---can at most rise to 1700°F, which is almost 1100 degrees below the melting point of steel.[9] We can, accordingly, dismiss the claim that the towers collapsed because their steel columns melted.[10]

Most defenders of the official theory, in fact, do not make this absurd claim. They say merely that the fire heated the steel up to the point where it lost so much of its strength that it buckled.[11] For example, Thomas Eagar, saying that steel loses 80 percent of its strength when it is heated to 1,300˚F, argues that this is what happened. But for even this claim to plausible, the fires would have still had to be pretty hot.

But they were not. Claims have been made, as we have seen, about the jet fuel. But much of it burned up very quickly in the enormous fireballs produced when the planes hit the buildings, and rest was gone within 10 minutes,[12] after which the flames died down. Photographs of the towers 15 minutes after they were struck show few flames and lots of black smoke, a sign that the fires were oxygen-starved. Thomas Eagar, recognizing this fact, says that the fires were “probably only about 1,200 or 1,300˚F” (Eagar, 2002).

There are reasons to believe, moreover, that the fires were not even that hot. As photographs show, the fires did not break windows or even spread much beyond their points of origin (Hufschmid, 2002, p. 40). This photographic evidence is supported by scientific studies carried out by NIST, which found that of the 16 perimeter columns examined, “only three columns had evidence that the steel reached temperatures above 250˚C [482˚F],” and no evidence that any of the core columns had reached even those temperatures (2005, p. 88).

NIST (2005) says that it “did not generalize these results, since the examined columns represented only 3 percent of the perimeter columns and 1 percent of the core columns from the fire floors”. That only such a tiny percent of the columns was available was due, of course, to the fact that government officials had most of the steel immediately sold and shipped off. In any case, NIST’s findings on the basis of this tiny percent of the columns are not irrelevant: They mean that any speculations that some of the core columns reached much higher temperatures would be just that---pure speculation not backed up by any empirical evidence.

Moreover, even if the fire had reached 1,300˚F, as Eagar supposes, that does not mean that any of the steel would have reached that temperature. Steel is an excellent conductor of heat. Put a fire to one part of a long bar of steel and the heat will quickly diffuse to the other parts and to any other pieces of steel to which that bar is connected.[13]

For fires to have heated up some of the steel columns to anywhere close to their own temperature, they would have needed to be very big, relative to the size of the buildings and the amount of steel in them. The towers, of course, were huge and had an enormous amount of steel. A small, localized fire of 1,300˚F would never have heated any of the steel columns even close to that temperature, because the heat would have been quickly dispersed throughout the building.

Some defenders of the official story have claimed that the fires were indeed very big, turning the buildings into “towering infernos.” But all the evidence counts against this claim, especially with regard to the south tower, which collapsed first. This tower was struck between floors 78 and 84, so that region is where the fire would have been the biggest. And yet Brian Clark, a survivor, said that when he got down to the 80th floor: "You could see through the wall and the cracks and see flames . . . just licking up, not a roaring inferno, just quiet flames licking up and smoke sort of eking through the wall."[14] Likewise, one of the fire chiefs who had reached the 78th floor found only “two isolated pockets of fire.”[15]

The north tower, to be sure, did have fires that were big enough and hot enough to cause many people to jump to their deaths. But as anyone with a fireplace grate or a pot-belly stove knows, fire that will not harm steel or even iron will burn human flesh. Also in many cases it may have been more the smoke than the heat that led people to jump.

In any case, the fires, to weaken the steel columns, would have needed to be not only very big and very hot but also very long-lasting.[16] The public was told that the towers had such fires, with CNN saying that “very intense” fires “burned for a long time.”[17] But they did not. The north tower collapsed an hour and 42 minutes after it was struck; the south tower collapsed after only 56 minutes.

To see how ludicrous is the claim that the short-lived fires in the towers could have induced structural collapse, we can compare them with some other fires. In 1988, a fire in the First Interstate Bank Building in Los Angeles raged for 3.5 hours and gutted 5 of this building’s 62 floors, but there was no significant structural damage (FEMA, 1988). In 1991, a huge fire in Philadelphia’s One Meridian Plaza lasted for 18 hours and gutted 8 of the building’s 38 floors, but, said the FEMA report, although “[b]eams and girders sagged and twisted . . . under severe fire exposures. . . , the columns continued to support their loads without obvious damage” (FEMA, 1991). In Caracas in 2004, a fire in a 50-story building raged for 17 hours, completely gutting the building’s top 20 floors, and yet it did not collapse (Nieto, 2004). And yet we are supposed to believe that a 56-minute fire caused the south tower to collapse.

Unlike the fires in the towers, moreover, the fires in Los Angeles, Philadelphia, and Caracas were hot enough to break windows.

Another important comparison is afforded by a series of experiments run in Great Britain in the mid-1990s to see what kind of damage could be done to steel-frame buildings by subjecting them to extremely hot, all-consuming fires that lasted for many hours. FEMA, having reviewed those experiments, said: “Despite the temperature of the steel beams reaching 800-900°C (1,500-1,700°F) in three of the tests. . . , no collapse was observed in any of the six experiments” (1988, Appendix A).

These comparisons bring out the absurdity of NIST’s claim that the towers collapsed because the planes knocked the fireproofing off the steel columns. Fireproofing provides protection for only a few hours, so the steel in the buildings in Philadelphia and Caracas would have been directly exposed to raging fires for 14 or more hours, and yet this steel did not buckle. NIST claims, nevertheless, that the steel in the south tower buckled because it was directly exposed to flames for 56 minutes.[18]

A claim made by some defenders of the official theory is to speculate that there was something about the Twin Towers that made them uniquely vulnerable to fire. But these speculations are not backed up by any evidence. And, as Norman Glover, has pointed out: “[A]lmost all large buildings will be the location for a major fire in their useful life. No major high-rise building has ever collapsed from fire. The WTC was the location for such a fire in 1975; however, the building survived with minor damage and was repaired and returned to service” (Glover, 2002).



Multiple Evidence of Controlled Demolition

There is a reverse truth to the fact that, aside from the alleged cases of 9/11, fire has never caused large steel-frame buildings to collapse. This reverse truth is that every previous total collapse has been caused by the procedure known as “controlled demolition,” in which explosives capable of cutting steel have been placed in crucial places throughout the building and then set off in a particular order. Just from knowing that the towers collapsed, therefore, the natural assumption would be that they were brought down by explosives.

This a priori assumption is, moreover, supported by an empirical examination of the particular nature of the collapses. Here we come to the second major problem with the official theory, namely, that the collapses had at least eleven features that would be expected if, and only if, explosives were used. I will briefly describe these eleven features.



Sudden Onset: In controlled demolition, the onset of the collapse is sudden. One moment, the building is perfectly motionless; the next moment, it suddenly begins to collapse. But steel, when heated, does not suddenly buckle or break. So in fire-induced collapses---if we had any examples of such---the onset would be gradual. Horizontal beams and trusses would begin to sag; vertical columns, if subjected to strong forces, would begin to bend. But as videos of the towers show,[19] there were no signs of bending or sagging, even on the floors just above the damage caused by the impact of the planes. The buildings were perfectly motionless up to the moment they began their collapse.



Straight Down: The most important thing in a controlled demolition of a tall building close to other buildings is that it come straight down, into, or at least close to, its own footprint, so that it does not harm the other buildings. The whole art or science of controlled demolition is oriented primarily around this goal. As Mark Loizeaux, the president of Controlled Demolition, Inc., has explained, “to bring [a building] down as we want, so . . . no other structure is harmed,” the demolition must be “completely planned,” using “the right explosive [and] the right pattern of laying the charges” (Else, 2004).[20] If the 110-story Twin Towers had fallen over, they would have caused an enormous amount of damage to buildings covering many city blocks. But the towers came straight down. Accordingly, the official theory, by implying that fire produced collapses that perfectly mimicked the collapses that have otherwise been produced only by precisely placed explosives, requires a miracle.[21]



Almost Free-Fall Speed: Buildings brought down by controlled demolition collapse at almost free-fall speed. This can occur because the supports for the lower floors are destroyed, so that when the upper floors come down, they encounter no resistance. The fact that the collapses of the towers mimicked this feature of controlled demolition was mentioned indirectly by The 9/11 Commission Report, which said that the “South Tower collapsed in 10 seconds” (Kean and Hamilton, 2004, p. 305).[22] The authors of the report evidently thought that the rapidity of this collapse did not conflict with the official theory, known as the “pancake” theory. According to this theory, the floors above the floors that were weakened by the impact of the airliner fell on the floor below, which started a chain reaction, so that the floors “pancaked” all the way down.

But if that is what happened, the lower floors, with all their steel and concrete, would have provided resistance. The upper floors could not have fallen through them at the same speed as they would fall through air. However, the videos of the collapses show that the rubble falling inside the building’s profile falls at the same speed as the rubble outside[23] (Jones, 2006). As Dave Heller, a builder with degrees in physics and architecture, explains:

the floors could not have been pancaking. The buildings fell too quickly. The floors must all have been falling simultaneously to reach the ground in such a short amount of time. But how?. . . In [the method known as controlled demolition], each floor of a building is destroyed at just the moment the floor above is about to strike it. Thus, the floors fall simultaneously, and in virtual freefall. (Garlic and Glass 6)



Total Collapse: The official theory is even more decisively ruled out by the fact that the collapses were total: These 110-story buildings collapsed into piles of rubble only a few stories high. How was that possible? The core of each tower contained 47 massive steel box columns.[24] According to the pancake theory, the horizontal steel supports broke free from the vertical columns. But if that is what had happened, the 47 core columns would have still been standing. The 9/11 Commission came up with a bold solution to this problem. It simply denied the existence of the 47 core columns, saying: “The interior core of the buildings was a hollow steel shaft, in which elevators and stairwells were grouped” (Kean and Hamilton, 2004, 541 note 1). Voila! With no 47 core columns, the main problem is removed.

The NIST Report handled this most difficult problem by claiming that when the floors collapsed, they pulled on the columns, causing the perimeter columns to become unstable. This instability then increased the gravity load on the core columns, which had been weakened by tremendously hot fires in the core, which, NIST claims, reached 1832°F, and this combination of factors somehow produced “global collapse” (NIST, 2005, pp. 28, 143).

This theory faces two problems. First, NIST’s claim about tremendously hot fires in the core is completely unsupported by evidence. As we saw earlier, its own studies found no evidence that any of the core columns had reached temperatures of even 482°F (250˚C), so its theory involves a purely speculative addition of over 1350°F.[25] Second, even if this sequence of events had occurred, NIST provides no explanation as to why it would have produced global—-that is, total--collapse. The NIST Report asserts that “column failure” occurred in the core as well as the perimeter columns. But this remains a bare assertion. There is no plausible explanation of why the columns would have broken or even buckled, so as to produce global collapse at virtually free-fall speed, even if they had reached such temperatures.[26]



Sliced Steel: In controlled demolitions of steel-frame buildings, explosives are used to slice the steel columns and beams into pieces. A representative from Controlled Demolition, Inc., has said of RDX, one of the commonly used high explosives, that it slices steel like a "razor blade through a tomato." The steel is, moreover, not merely sliced; it is sliced into manageable lengths. As Controlled Demolition, Inc., says in its publicity: “Our DREXSTM systems . . . segment steel components into pieces matching the lifting capacity of the available equipment.”[27]

The collapses of the Twin Towers, it seems, somehow managed to mimic this feature of controlled demolitions as well. Jim Hoffman (2004), after studying various photos of the collapse site, said that much of the steel seemed to be “chopped up into . . . sections that could be easily loaded onto the equipment that was cleaning up Ground Zero.”[28]



Pulverization of Concrete and Other Materials: Another feature of controlled demolition is the production of a lot of dust, because explosives powerful enough to slice steel will pulverize concrete and most other non-metallic substances into tiny particles. And, Hoffman (2003) reports, “nearly all of the non-metallic constituents of the towers were pulverized into fine power.”[29] That observation was also made by Colonel John O’Dowd of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. “At the World Trade Center sites,” he told the History Channel, “it seemed like everything was pulverized” (History Channel, 2002).

This fact creates a problem for the official theory, according to which the only energy available was the gravitational energy. This energy would have been sufficient to break most of the concrete into fairly small pieces. But it would not have been anywhere close to the amount of energy needed to turn the concrete and virtually all the non-metallic contents of the buildings into tiny particles of dust.



Dust Clouds: Yet another common feature of controlled demolitions is the production of dust clouds, which result when explosions eject the dust from the building with great energy. And, as one can see by comparing videos on the Web, the collapses of the towers produced clouds that are very similar to those produced by controlled demolitions of other structures, such as Seattle’s Kingdome. The only difference is that the clouds produced during the collapses of the towers were proportionally much bigger.[30]

The question of the source of the needed energy again arises. Hoffman (2003), focusing on the expansion of the North Tower’s dust cloud, calculates that the energy required simply for this expansion---ignoring the energy needed to slice the steel and pulverize the concrete and other materials---exceeded by at least 10 times the gravitational energy available.

The official account, therefore, involves a huge violation of the laws of physics---a violation that becomes even more enormous once we factor in the energy required to pulverize the concrete (let alone the energy required to break the steel).

Besides the sheer quantity of energy needed, another problem with the official theory is that gravitational energy is wholly unsuited to explain the production of these dust clouds. This is most obviously the case in the first few seconds. In Hoffman’s words: “You can see thick clouds of pulverized concrete being ejected within the first two seconds. That’s when the relative motion of the top of the tower to the intact portion was only a few feet per second.”[31] Jeff King (2003), in the same vein, says: “[A great amount of] very fine concrete dust is ejected from the top of the building very early in the collapse. . . [when] concrete slabs [would have been] bumping into each other at [only] 20 or 30 mph.”

The importance of King’s point can be appreciated by juxtaposing it with the claim by Shyam Sunder, NIST’s lead investigator, that although the clouds of dust created during the collapses of the Twin Towers may create the impression of a controlled demolition, “it is the floor pancaking that leads to that perception" (Popular Mechanics, 2005). The pancaking, according to the official theory being defended by Sunder, began at the floor beneath the holes created by the impact of the airliners. As King points out, this theory cannot handle the fact, as revealed by the photographs and videos, that dust clouds were created far above the impact zones.



Horizontal Ejections: Another common feature of controlled demolition is the horizontal ejection of other materials, besides dust, from those areas of the building in which explosives are set off. In the case of the Twin Towers, photos and videos reveal that “[h]eavy pieces of steel were ejected in all directions for distances up to 500 feet, while aluminum cladding was blown up to 700 feet away from the towers” (Paul and Hoffman, 2004, p. 7). But gravitational energy is, of course, vertical, so it cannot even begin to explain these horizontal ejections.



Demolition Rings: Still another common feature of collapses induced by explosions are demolition rings, in which series of small explosions run rapidly around a building. This feature was also manifested by the collapses of the towers.[32]



Sounds Produced by Explosions: The use of explosives to induce collapses produces, of course, sounds caused by the explosions. Like all the previous features except the slicing of the steel columns inside the building, this one could be observed by witnesses. And, as we will see below, there is abundant testimony to the existence of such sounds before and during the collapses of the towers.



Molten Steel: An eleventh feature that would be expected only if explosives were used to slice the steel columns would be molten steel, and its existence at the WTC site was indeed reported by several witnesses, including the two main figures involved in the clean up, Peter Tully, president of Tully Construction, and Mark Loizeaux, president of Controlled Demolition, Incorporated. Tully said that he saw pools of “literally molten steel” at the site. Loizeaux said that several weeks after 9/11, when the rubble was being removed, “hot spots of molten steel” were found “at the bottoms of the elevator shafts of the main towers, down seven [basement] levels” (both statements quoted in Bollyn, 2004).[33]

Leslie Robertson, a member of the engineering firm that designed the Twin Towers, said: “As of 21 days after the attack, the fires were still burning and molten steel was still running” (Williams, 2001). Knight-Ridder journalist Jennifer Lin, discussing Joe "Toolie" O'Toole, a Bronx firefighter who worked for many months on the rescue and clean-up efforts, wrote: "Underground fires raged for months. O'Toole remembers in February seeing a crane lift a steel beam vertically from deep within the catacombs of Ground Zero. 'It was dripping from the molten steel," he said'" (Lin, 2002). Greg Fuchek, vice president of sales for LinksPoint, Inc., which supplied some of the computer equipment used to identify human remains at the site, described the working conditions as "hellish," partly because for six months, the ground temperature varied between 600 degrees Fahrenheit and 1,500 degrees or higher. Fuchek added that "sometimes when a worker would pull a steel beam from the wreckage, the end of the beam would be dripping molten steel" (Walsh, 2002). And still more witnesses spoke of molten steel.[34]

This testimony is of great significance, since it would be hard to imagine what, other than high explosives, could have caused some of the steel to melt.



The importance of the nature of the collapses, as summarized in these 11 features, is shown by the fact that attempts to defend the official theory typically ignore most of them. For example, an article in Popular Mechanics (2005), seeking to debunk what it calls some of the most prevalent myths about 9/11 fabricated by “conspiracy theorists,” completely ignores the suddenness, verticality, rapidity, and totality of the collapses and also fails to mention the testimonies about molten steel, demolition rings, and the sounds of explosions."


Source: http://www.st911.org/
___________________

"If one rejects laissez faire on account of mans fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action." -Mises

"I would remind you, that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice...and let me remind you also, that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." - Goldwater

 
The time is now 01:33 PM. (EST)
Nerd Mentality | Back to top