24-04-2009, 01:58 AM
(This post was last modified: 24-04-2009, 02:12 AM by Bruce Clemens.)
From
http://911review.com/precedent/decade/index.html
1990s Precedents for 9/11/01
The 1990s saw several deceptions used as pretexts for wars and the advancement of police-state aparatuses.
While none of these incidents shares all of the most important features with the 9/11/01 attack, each has several important parallels. The most direct precedent to the 9/11/01 attack was the Oklahoma City bombing. In both case most of the damage was produced by hidden explosives but blamed on a diversion. Consider this comparison:
OKC 1995 collapse produced by internal explosives
explained as progressive collapse
WTC 2001 collapse produced by internal explosives
explained as progressive collapse
OKC 1995 AMFO truck bomb
WTC 2001 767 crashes
OKC 1995 patsies Timothy McVeih and Terry Nichols
WTC 2001 patsies Mohammad Atta, et.al.
OKC 1995 absent during attack: FBI and ATF personnel
WTC 2001 absent during attack: CEOs
OKC 1995 evidence handling: rubble buried without analysis; surveillance tapes suppressed by FBI steel recycled without analysis;
WTC 2001 evidence handling: Ground Zero photographs prohibited; Pentagon surveillance tapes suppressed by FBI
OKC 1995 legislation passed in wake of: Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996
WTC 2001 legislation passed in wake of: USA PATRIOT Act of 2001
Kevin Ryan notes an additional parallel in A New Standard For Deception : In both cases a small group of engineers provided a report supporting the official story, and in both cases the small group was composed mostly of the same individuals.
http://911review.com/precedent/decade/index.html
1990s Precedents for 9/11/01
The 1990s saw several deceptions used as pretexts for wars and the advancement of police-state aparatuses.
While none of these incidents shares all of the most important features with the 9/11/01 attack, each has several important parallels. The most direct precedent to the 9/11/01 attack was the Oklahoma City bombing. In both case most of the damage was produced by hidden explosives but blamed on a diversion. Consider this comparison:
OKC 1995 collapse produced by internal explosives
explained as progressive collapse
WTC 2001 collapse produced by internal explosives
explained as progressive collapse
OKC 1995 AMFO truck bomb
WTC 2001 767 crashes
OKC 1995 patsies Timothy McVeih and Terry Nichols
WTC 2001 patsies Mohammad Atta, et.al.
OKC 1995 absent during attack: FBI and ATF personnel
WTC 2001 absent during attack: CEOs
OKC 1995 evidence handling: rubble buried without analysis; surveillance tapes suppressed by FBI steel recycled without analysis;
WTC 2001 evidence handling: Ground Zero photographs prohibited; Pentagon surveillance tapes suppressed by FBI
OKC 1995 legislation passed in wake of: Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996
WTC 2001 legislation passed in wake of: USA PATRIOT Act of 2001
Kevin Ryan notes an additional parallel in A New Standard For Deception : In both cases a small group of engineers provided a report supporting the official story, and in both cases the small group was composed mostly of the same individuals.
"If you're looking for something that isn't there, you're wasting your time and the taxpayers' money."
-Michael Neuman, U.S. Government bureaucrat, on why NIST didn't address explosives in its report on the WTC collapses
-Michael Neuman, U.S. Government bureaucrat, on why NIST didn't address explosives in its report on the WTC collapses