30-10-2015, 08:01 PM
This is how I understand the multiple collapse scenario:
First, to create a catastrophic and catalyzing event, the buildings had to come down in the way they did. For example, just having the buildings remaining as they should have been as a couple of smoldering stubs, the story line would have remained on the buildings as well as on the "terrorists."
Secondly, exquisite care in prepping the WTC 1 & 2 for their desired collapse had to make a plausible explanation that fire weakened the buildings. The explanation had to be quickly disseminated to clear the way for the national gaze be turned toward war. Cue Harley Guy and other "experts":
Third, the problematic collapse of WTC 7 was given a quick display and scrubbed from the news cycle. I vaguely recall at the time that they had to bring the building down because it would endanger rescue efforts. The explanation was assigned to the "clean-up" crew to make it stay away from the headlines. They were mostly successful. Here is a video I just saw for the first time. You can see and hear the explosions.
Here is an excellent forensic examination of a film of an Ashley Banfield interview just as WTC 7 came down.
The attack was well-planned operation and it worked.
Ron Suskind quoting Karl Rove:
Karl was right.
EDIT: I talked to a long time fireman a few years ago. He said, "All I know, those buildings were meant to come down that day."
First, to create a catastrophic and catalyzing event, the buildings had to come down in the way they did. For example, just having the buildings remaining as they should have been as a couple of smoldering stubs, the story line would have remained on the buildings as well as on the "terrorists."
Secondly, exquisite care in prepping the WTC 1 & 2 for their desired collapse had to make a plausible explanation that fire weakened the buildings. The explanation had to be quickly disseminated to clear the way for the national gaze be turned toward war. Cue Harley Guy and other "experts":
Third, the problematic collapse of WTC 7 was given a quick display and scrubbed from the news cycle. I vaguely recall at the time that they had to bring the building down because it would endanger rescue efforts. The explanation was assigned to the "clean-up" crew to make it stay away from the headlines. They were mostly successful. Here is a video I just saw for the first time. You can see and hear the explosions.
Here is an excellent forensic examination of a film of an Ashley Banfield interview just as WTC 7 came down.
The attack was well-planned operation and it worked.
Ron Suskind quoting Karl Rove:
Quote:The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. "That's not the way the world really works anymore." He continued "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that realityjudiciously, as you willwe'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors … and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."
Karl was right.
EDIT: I talked to a long time fireman a few years ago. He said, "All I know, those buildings were meant to come down that day."
"We'll know our disinformation campaign is complete when everything the American public believes is false." --William J. Casey, D.C.I
"We will lead every revolution against us." --Theodore Herzl
"We will lead every revolution against us." --Theodore Herzl