Israel and 9/11 - An Introduction

[Lauren Johnson]

Lauren this is not proper use of logic. You presume the conclusion (crime) and then cite the evidence that justifies it... destruction of evidence. (Lack of evidence). Joe did it but I can't prove it because he destroyed all the evidence. In fact the crime WAS the destruction of evidence in this case.

While we can all agree that criminals don't want to leave evidence around pointing to them and their crime... but if there is no evidence we can't simply assume that this is because it was removed by the criminals to avoid being nailed.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

What we need to find is affirmative evidence... *finger prints* ... literal or figurative which connects the evidence back the the perps... perhaps through the mechanics and so forth.

Nanothermite... if it IS a high tech explosive and it CAN be proven to have been there and used would be very hard for the military to disassocaite themselves from this. They would have had to supply it, placed it, or had it stolen from them.. if they are the sole source for the stuff. That would be damning evidence.

Unfortunately NT is still not proven but more of an assertion made by one team of researchers. If this is in the dust... and there is more dust around (I'm sure) it needs to be tested by other labs. I believe Milette is doing that now. Let's see what he comes up with.

First, I notice that you did not respond to the video itself. So let me go back to it to place in a its context.

Second, I am not presuming a crime. We say it happening on TV. Who did it? Who had the motive, the means, and the opportunity (MMO). Incredibly, we were told that 19 hijackers pulled this off and for three years I believed it. For me, the hardest part was just to allow the thoughts that someone internal to the US could have done this to invade my head. The hardest part was to state what I could reasonably call knowledge. I do accept the NT thesis as proven subject to falsification. The documented presence of NO would disprove the governments' case, but it would not prove the Who did it? But the prime suspects would be developed around MMO. Obviously, my prime suspects would have included a powerful cabal of para-military and intelligence assets with bureaucratic cover.

Third, now on to WTC7. Even though it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, you say maybe its just a squirrel. With the video I posted I claim is proof that explosives were planted before 9/11. (This presumes that nobody could and would have wired up the buildings to implode in that short amount of time under those conditions. After all, WTC6 was taken down weeks later. What would the hurry be with WTC7?)

Finally, whether explosives were used is the starting point to solving the crime. If explosives were used, the 4 pilots and the 15 muscle guys are minor figures if not just props for the Grand Narrative. Is the video a "fingerprint?" Yes, but not the fingerprint of a foreign terrorist plot. It is a fingerprint of someone else; someone closer to home.

Jeffrey, I doubt this will satisfy you; but at least I hope you will specifically comment on the posted video.

[Ed Jewett]

http://kennysideshow.blogspot.com/2012/0...round.html


which links to


http://mybigfatanti-zionistlife.blogspot...+Stinks%29

which reads as follows:


An Israeli TV ad promoting the cable network HOT makes fun of a Mossad terror attack in which Israeli agents inadvertently blow up an Iranian nuclear plant by pushing a button on a computer tablet.

When the Mossad agent shows the various features of the computer tablet to the other Israeli agents, one accidently pushes a button which causes the nuclear plant in the background to explode. To this, the character then says, "What? Another mysterious explosion in Iran?"


The Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz has an article on the ad and Iran's reaction to it here:
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-de...t-1.410773


The commercial reveals the Israeli attitude about Mossad terror attacks in foreign nations. No other nation would produce a similar commercial in which their secret service blows up a nuclear plant in another nation. It's unthinkable. The Israelis, however, think it's funny.


The ad has several of the key elements of the false-flag terror attacks of 9/11. It features Israeli agents and Mossad operatives working undercover and using disguises, just like the 5 dancing Israelis who were arrested on 9/11 in New Jersey. These Mossadniks use computers to detonate pre-placed explosives to destroy an important asset. This is exactly what happened to the Twin Towers on 9/11. There is certainly nothing funny about Israeli terrorism. Just ask the 10,000 American children who lost their father or mother on 9/11.


Sources:
"Iran mulls ban of Samsung over Israeli commercial depicting attack on nuclear plant", Ha'aretz, 3 February 2012
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-de...t-1.410773


Source: Bollyn.com
POSTED BY ANDIE531 AT 12:25 AM

[Ed Jewett]

It should be further noted that, through posts that suggest that I am a "9/11 Truther", I can be seen as a potential terrorist by the FBI.

[Jeffrey Orling]

Lauren,

Second, I am not presuming a crime. We say it happening on TV. Who did it?

Who had the motive,

What WAS the motive? That IS one of the key questions. Was it to cause fear, extensive damage, humiliation to the USA or the appearance of this, to destroy the entire WTC?

the means

This depends on if you consider the WTC a HUGE entire site demolion project. Perhaps the plot was only to crash plans into the twins... damage them and the those who designed the plane attack had no idea that it would destroy the entire complex

and the opportunity (MMO).

This again presumes an extensive CD. Suppose they attack was just planes even if it wasn't 19 hijackers. Still hijackers could and would be blamed by the USA... convenient excuse for war. Maybe the planes were hijacker by Mosad agents, loaded with thermite or even a full load fuel to ensure extensive burning and NO explosives were placed.


Incredibly, we were told that 19 hijackers pulled this off and for three years I believed it. For me, the hardest part was just to allow the thoughts that someone internal to the US could have done this to invade my head. The hardest part was to state what I could reasonably call knowledge. I do accept the NT thesis as proven subject to falsification.

The why not accept the directed energy weapons until proven false? Why is the some obscure hi tech substance found of admittedly questionable explosive power with no mechanism of how it was used, or evidence of its use and you accept it as evidence of CD until falsified? Ha??????

The documented presence of NO would disprove the governments' case, but it would not prove the Who did it?

Only if the NT could be shown to have caused the collapses. No one has even proposed how this was done.

But the prime suspects would be developed around MMO. Obviously, my prime suspects would have included a powerful cabal of para-military and intelligence assets with bureaucratic cover.

One cartainly can suspect the military was associated with NT's presence... but again we still haven't demonstrated its USE.

Third, now on to WTC7. Even though it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, you say maybe its just a squirrel. With the video I posted I claim is proof that explosives were planted before 9/11. (This presumes that nobody could and would have wired up the buildings to implode in that short amount of time under those conditions. After all, WTC6 was taken down weeks later. What would the hurry be with WTC7?)

The OCT fibbed about 7 and took years took 7 yrs come up with fib. Engineering and scientific analysis of the visual record points to destruction below the 8th floor which led to a core collapse hollowing out the building and then we see the hollowed out curtain wall and the facade of a building collapse. The core destruction began right after the first plane struck if Barry Jennings account of what was going on in 7 is true. This could have been placed explosive inside the Con Ed substation or it could have been the sub station itself which exploded from a voltage spikes caused by the plane and then 20,000 gallons of diesell poured down from the 7th floor tanks burning all day weakening the transfer trusses until the core which they supported collapsed down. Sure they could have placed bombs in the substation to go off at 9:48. 7 took 7 hrs for it to *let go"... there were no bombs going off JUST prior to its dropping. There were explosions heard by Jennings and others early in the AM. The sub station was totally destroyed and the tanks emptied. There was smoke emerging from the north lower floors of 7 and fires come out there. There were huge intake grilled to ventilate all the machinery, power station, and HVAC equipment there.

Finally, whether explosives were used is the starting point to solving the crime. If explosives were used, the 4 pilots and the 15 muscle guys are minor figures if not just props for the Grand Narrative. Is the video a "fingerprint?" Yes, but not the fingerprint of a foreign terrorist plot. It is a fingerprint of someone else; someone closer to home.

IF IF IF...

How about IF the authorities were aware of the explosions in the sub station and it was their responsibility to protect the public and were exercising their franchise to keep people out of harm's way. As such they would issues comments to the press and so forth to let people know. This happened when a building was on fire this past year adjacent to the metro north rail in Harlem. The entire rail traffic on going north out of Grand Central was stopped and there were advisories issued to the press and public.

Chandler's theories about NT are complete fantasy. Explosives can't create powerful energetic blasts without extemely load percussive noise. Perhaps the mischief was quiet incendiaries.

The sounds heard just prior the the actual downward motion of the curtain wall WAS the collapse the the floors inside the bottom of the building. They likely WERE collapse down onto the sub station... at first in massive slabs... BOOM BOOM.. one after the other until the drop accelerations and the sound merged into a roar and then the curtain wall with nothing behind it collapsed rather silently... compared to what came just before.

I don't subscribe to the foreign terrorist plot... There's lot's wrong with that theory. But I the case for CD has not been made and so we don't know what happened. We do know that a lot of people such as David Chandler are seeing what they want to see, hearing what they want to hear and cherry picking what they think is evidence of CD... and even that is often misinterpreted.

We know NIST produced what amounts to a cover up. We don't know who or what they were covering up. Why? They were told to support the policies which were already in place or had been decided even before 9/11.