Demolition Access To The WTC Towers - Kevin Ryan

[Peter Presland]

I do not want to steer this to another technical thread. Suffice it to say we witness buildings collapse and in the case of 7 the collapse is compared to a CD so obviously CDs collapse. The issue is what gets them to collapse. CDs typically rely on stored and then released gravity PE for something like 95% of the energy for the collapse/destruction. I don't know how this figure is derived but the take away is that it's a straw that breaks the camel's back concept or the weakest link can cause a mighty failure such as one 1" diameter corroded pin in the Miamus River Bridge which led to a massive section of the bridge to plunge into the river. How much energy did it take to corrode that pin? As I've maintained for years the issue to understand the collapses is how and which forces came together to overwhelm the capacity of the columns and permit tops to drop. And No... it does not take 10-15 floor masses to initiate ROOSD in THOSE structures.

We agree all of that. The only question remaining is, as you say, "how and which forces came together to overwhelm the capacity of the columns and permit tops to drop." You appear to exclude anything external to the forces generated by the impacts, fires and possible aging/weakening of structural components. I OTOH do not. In fact I think the evidence points precisely to there being an external cause as the initiator - the practical impossibility of the fires burning hot and long enough to have had any significant effect on the steelwork - fireproofed or not - being my main reason.

As for the rest of your post dealing with Ryan; in summary it is an extended exercise of your own glaring confirmation biases in that it seeks to demonstrate that the the official narrative, with just a few of its better known shortcomings duly acknowledged, could be basically correct. It is also as wildly speculative as anything I have read on the loonier fringes of the 'Truth Movement' - the para on the state-of-mind of the alleged hijackers being perhaps the most glaring example.

I don't want to weary the list with a point by point reply but here are few more examples by way of illustration:

...I am convinced that hitting buildings as wide as almost a city block was not as difficult as one might imagine and probably simpler.

Pilots who have made it their business to study the issue carefully, AND been brave enough to make there finding public, disagree with you. By the time the Twin Tower would have become visible to the 'pilot' of those planes, their altitude/speed combination, as descibed in the OCT, would have rendered them uncontrollable by even the most experienced of pilots.

I do find it hard to believe and am pissed off that the air defenses was so unresponsive.

There is a vast amount of uncontested evidence about the failure of the air defense systems. It points to deliberate actions aimed at effectively disabling them for the duration of the attacks as a far more plausible explanation (to those able shed the need to believe such a thing unthinkable anyway). Virtually none of the relevant questions were asked by either the Congressional investigation or the K-H Commission. You really should read chapter 8 of Ryans book on one General Ralph Eberhart if you don't mind getting REALLY pissed off.

The coincidence of the war games is quite curious. This seems to be a convenient cover for the attack... literally do what was being gamed and the gamers would easily be confused. How could they not be? This seems to have been in play in London on 7/7 if I recall.

There are no genuine coincidences where the major events of deep politics are concerned, much less a whole series of connected ones as is the case of 9/11. It would take several pages to provide even a brief 101 on the engineered gestation of major deep events. Suffice to say that so-called exercises are invariably part and parcel of them.

You credit the alleged hijackers with far more intelligence - both personal and of the SIS kind - than is remotely plausible. They were disaffected angry young men who hated America and, as you say 'controlled' - the question you do not address is 'Controlled by Whom?'. I suggest that 'a guy on kidney dialysis in an Afghan cave using a lap-top and mobile phone' (credit to James Corbett) is somewhat less plausible than Deep-State elements of one or more of the most sophisticated intelligence apparatuses on earth. Again, unthinkable to those with the OCT confirmation bias, but to dismiss the most plausible explanation out of hand without examining the massive corpus of public domain evidence that supports it and to duck and dive with near infantile (no offense intended) explanations instead, it is simply a cop-out.

Then there's the insider trading

Indeed there is. IOW someone had foreknowledge and the wherewithal to trade it. The question again is 'Who?' - In fact that question screams at us and I am not prepared to countenance explanations that claim to show it could all have been just another innocent coincidence - in that long stream of connected ones mentioned earlier. Records that would clearly answer the question have been destroyed and the one individual, Wirt Walker, known to have quadrupled his money on a trade placed immediately before the attacks has never been officially questioned on it because - wait for it..... 'Mr Walker had no conceivable connection to the Islamic terrorists that carried out the attack' - hows that for circular, confirmation-bias reasoning?

So at best I can see perhaps a LIHOP or LIHOI...

I do not accept a distinction between LIHOP and MIHOP. As for incompetence; I confess to getting some satisfaction from Establishment efforts to persuade us of their own gross incompetence - its amusing with just a touch of Schadenfreude - even when the individuals most responsible escape censure and are even promoted for their alleged dereliction. As a credible explanation for events though, it does not cut the mustard as they say.

When the SIS's get to know of a 'terrorist operation in the making' it is pretty much NEVER at the last minute. Mostly they are there from near outset as originator, agent-provocateur, logistics-equipment supplier, protector from legitimate LE interest, financier, etc etc.- Almost always unknown and unsuspected by their dumb angry patsies, whose first inkling is when they find themselves caught-in-the-act at the last minute, or heading for a building in a remote controlled aeroplane while believing they were on some sort of exercise - that sort of thing. IOW, it is the very essence of SIS's activity to control terrorist groups. Where there aren't any but fear of terrorism is deemed necessary to control restive populations, they are manufactured - Operation Gladio being among the most notable post WWII such undertakings.

because I do accept that Islamic fundies hated the US (with ample justification) and realized that only insurgency and asymmetrical warfare - terrorism would work for them....

Those who 'realise that only terrorism will work for them' are the perennially gullible, useable and disposable 'angry young men'. Their leaderships are quite another matter. Islamic world leaders and the notional 'terrorist' leaders (ie those so accused by the US) are not fools. They clearly understand that terrorism against the US/West is dramatically counter-productive to their own interests. So, in addition to 'motive means and opportunity' an equally promising line of inquiry is of course 'Qui Bono?' and it is most definitely not the Islamic world that the 'terrorists' are supposed to be fighting for.

Would these hawks conceive and carry out the false flag? Conceive yes? Would they or could they carry it out? Who knows? I don't believe they planted bombs or even needed the the WTC to be destroyed... 4 hijacked planes would have been a casus belli. Several struck towers even better... but destroying building 7 late in the afternoon? Hardly makes sense as a motive for anyone.

If (when?) you accept that the architects and facilitators of 9/11 were part and parcel of the US Deep State and not just a bunch of pathetic, angry young men controlled by OBL, it becomes blindingly obvious why both the Twin towers and WT7 had to be destroyed; but, when all the available evidence is sifted, understanding the precise mechanisms of their destruction is not necessary to a 'beyond reasonable doubt' verdict that 9/11 was indeed a US Deep State operation from start to .... well to right now.

Ryan's book is unique in that it collates masses of factual and undisputed evidence on key individuals. You may dismiss that as merely demonstrating the connectedness of the Washington aristocracy - easy and trite fare from someone who has not read it. But IMO, any genuinely open-minded person who HAS read it will credit it with doing a lot more than that.