Bombshell:Fox News hit piece inadvertently reveals Silverstein Wanted To Demolish Building 7 On 9/11

[Adrian Mack]

For a dead end, it has a lot of followers.

It does! I understand the attraction. But whenever the MSM attempts to debunk 9/11 research, it focuses on controlled demolition, or "no planes". The MSM has never attempted to examine US govt., military and Intelligence foreknowledge, which goes directly to the heart of 9/11 and is far too dangerous. This is why I think it's distraction and why I can imagine somebody at Fox actively attempting to keep CD on the boil.

[Mark Stapleton]

For a dead end, it has a lot of followers.

It does! I understand the attraction. But whenever the MSM attempts to debunk 9/11 research, it focuses on controlled demolition, or "no planes". The MSM has never attempted to examine US govt., military and Intelligence foreknowledge, which goes directly to the heart of 9/11 and is far too dangerous. This is why I think it's distraction and why I can imagine somebody at Fox actively attempting to keep CD on the boil.

The MSM will never examine Govt, military or intelligence foreknowledge. The MSM is controlled by Zionists with a substantial stakeholding in the armaments industry and the war on terror.

You advocate the ultimate dead end.

By contrast, CD is the most obvious and easily accesible evidence of conspiracy to experts and novices alike. Tower 7 fell into its footprint without being hit. The suggestion this was caused by ground shift from the Twin Towers collapse is as absurd as the magic bullet theory and you don't need to be a 9/11 expert to know that.

[Adrian Mack]

The MSM will never examine Govt, military or intelligence foreknowledge.

Not only that but it will propagandize all elements of 9/11, which includes framing perception of the so-called Truth Movement. And it logically focuses on the weakest arguments, in this case CD.

Tower 7 fell into its footprint without being hit. The suggestion this was caused by ground shift from the Twin Towers collapse is as absurd as the magic bullet theory and you don't need to be a 9/11 expert to know that.

Almost everything suggested about 9/11 is absurd. Why burden yourself with having to prove the unprovable (CD)? There's enough damning evidence available and on the record to make your case without the need to hypothesize a scenario that increases the plot by orders of magnitude, and, again, which will never be proven. Especially not through some probable stealth disinformation coming through Fox. Remember Rumsfeld's missile "flub"?

Cdrs toil endlessly over "how" - to the delight of the still massively influential MSM, I might add! - when the "who" and the "why" are barely concealed at this point.

[Anthony Marsh]

For a dead end, it has a lot of followers.

It does! I understand the attraction. But whenever the MSM attempts to debunk 9/11 research, it focuses on controlled demolition, or "no planes". The MSM has never attempted to examine US govt., military and Intelligence foreknowledge, which goes directly to the heart of 9/11 and is far too dangerous. This is why I think it's distraction and why I can imagine somebody at Fox actively attempting to keep CD on the boil.

Most of the 9/11 Truthers I know split into one of two camps. Either LIHOP which means let it happen on purpose as in Bush/Cheney/necons/intelligence seeing that an attack was planned and let it happen in order to start another war. Or MIHOP which means that group carried out the attack to use the attack as a pretext to start another war. Not leaving in the hands of incompetent terrorists who might screw it up or chicken out.
They often point to the neocon manifesto that in order to get their invasion of Iraq the US would have to suffer another Pearl Harbor. But I point out to them that at Pearl Harbor those were not US pilots flying US planes attacking our own soil. It really was a preemptive strike by our known enemy. Further, it was the final step of a US program to provoke Japan into attacking the US. We intentionally provoked Japan to attack us to rally the public to enter the war. It worked.
I believe the same is true for 9/11. The Pentagon has a special section which has the mission of provoking other countries and terrorist groups into attacking the US. Osama Bin Laden authorized the terrorist attack by al Qaeda. I don't know why, but some people have a tendency to get a little annoyed when you try to assassinate him 129 times and kill his children and friends.
So I see 9/11 as another case of PIHOP, provoked it on purpose.

[Malcolm Pryce]

This seems to me to be a misinterpretation of the New Pearl Harbour thesis. When the neo-cons called for a NPH they were simply referring to the shock value of Pearl Harbour in galvanising American public opinion to accept a radical militarisation of society. It makes no difference who the pilots were or who they were fighting.

As for MIHOP, LIHOP or your new PIHOP, the fact remains that US troops were preparing in July to go into Afghanistan in September so they knew damn well the attack was coming. I don't believe PIHOP is that accurate.

As for LIHOP, the problem is, it sounds nice on paper but out in the real world, as I understand it, you simply cannot allow such latitude and have to take control of every aspect of such a plan, hence MIHOP. To see what I mean, consider the famous case of Hani Hanjour the miracle pilot who did the famous corkscrew dive on his alleged approach to the Pentagon. This aeronautical manoeuvre ensured he flew into the empty wedge of the Pentagon and missed the offices of the Joint Chiefs. Now imagine you were Rumsfeld on the morning of 9/11 sitting in your office knowing the attack was on the way. You know, too, the suicide bomber has given you his solemn word that he will fly into the back of the building and miss you at the front. How do you feel? Confident that he will keep his word? I think not. There's no way you can rely on that to happen. Hence the use of a missile to hit a pre-ordained spot.

That's my take on it anyway.

[Mark Stapleton]

Cdrs toil endlessly over "how" - to the delight of the still massively influential MSM, I might add! - when the "who" and the "why" are barely concealed at this point.

While still influential, the MSM's power is waning, and I don't know if they are taking much delight over the 9/11 debate, which is really all over, imo.

Indeed the who and why are barely concealed. 9/11 was carried out by the Zionist power configuration, probably headquartered within the Israeli Government, using their extensive network of influential Zionist helpers throughout the US and beyond, the most influential of all being the western mainstream media. The purpose was of course a catalysing event which would drive the US into fighting Israel's enemies in the region (ie. almost everyone), while at the same time decieving the American public into supporting these actions as part of an overall state of permanent war against the designated patsy, Islam. A massive wealth transfer from the taxpayer to the armaments industry was icing on the cake but Americans have long been conditioned to accept this (freedom isn't free, it costs folks like you and me...etc).

It worked pretty well for a while. This thread is worth a look:

http://www.deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/...php?t=3458

[Ed Jewett]

This is like deja vu all over again, morning sickness redux. I have adopted and applied Charles Drago's mantra on Dallas to the events of 9/11. I no longer have any need to debate, or to offer up proof. The homework has been done; the information is there to see (or to not see). Those who cannot see are either cognitively challenged or have some agenda whose design is unknown but can be deduced over time. But it is necessary to move on to other tasks.

[Mark Stapleton]

This is like deja vu all over again, morning sickness redux. I have adopted and applied Charles Drago's mantra on Dallas to the events of 9/11. I no longer have any need to debate, or to offer up proof. The homework has been done; the information is there to see (or to not see). Those who cannot see are either cognitively challenged or have some agenda whose design is unknown but can be deduced over time. But it is necessary to move on to other tasks.

I agree. We may move on to other tasks, but I doubt America can move on until it faces the truth of Dallas and 9/11 and gets the Zionist monkey off its back.

[Ed Jewett]

"... we are mired in a war that has cost us $988,803,497,182, the greatest ecological disaster of the industrial/petroleum age is raging in one of our most productive fishery/ecosystems, and we’ve been victimized by $15 trillion robbery of unknown final proportions (and the robbers are telling us how to wire the vault shut), and the great energy source is about to run dry...."

In order for us to gain (if, indeed, anything can be gained back at this point), we need a lot of monkeys to learn rapidly how to rinse the sand off of their sweet potatoes before we have another such event as 9/11 with consequences even more grim.

[Adrian Mack]

The homework has been done; the information is there to see (or to not see).

Having the 9/11 Commission account for its omissions, conflicts of interest and outright lies is all it would take. No controlled demolition necessary.