Lauren Johnson Wrote:Think of the first days after 9/11, we saw a mediocre President rise to the occasion and become a Great Leader.
Not just a mediocre president. An illegitimate one. He was not elected but appointed by his father's cronies on the Supreme court bench with evidence of massive voting fraud and there was all sorts of justifiable challenges to his occupation of the White House.
"The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it." Karl Marx
"He would, wouldn't he?" Mandy Rice-Davies. When asked in court whether she knew that Lord Astor had denied having sex with her.
“I think it would be a good idea” Ghandi, when asked about Western Civilisation.
What has Robertson said about all this? Has he kept a low profile? agreed with NIST? I remember him briefly speaking on the PBS "New York" final episode (again, this may be an all too obvious question to you all).
Jeffrey Orling Wrote:But there was no reason to drop 7... the twins would have served the purpose you envision.
There is plenty of reason when you remember who where the tennants in there.
Oh please... why not let the fires destroy the files you are so concerned with?
I meant GWB.
Roberston who was the engineer along with Skilling is avoiding the controversy because he (they) doesn't want to defend their design. It was clever, innovative and cheap and cut many corners and dropped like a lead sinker with no means to arrest... poor egress etc. Hard to defend except to say that the plane did not knock the tower down... which was no big feat really. Robertson and Skilling have heavy hearts because they know they are somewhat complicit in the deaths of the occupants and first responders in the tower. They clearly don't want to be dragged inro court and they learned their lesson and they believe that the planes and then fires did the tower in... which is true but how they rationalize and avoid the ROOSD explanation for the collapse. Engineers didn't cause the towers to come down... their designs allowed them to rather too easily... and there was no effective means to stop it... or for trapped people to escape.
Just blame it on the planes and move on is how they think. But the entire engineering community acted like a blue line of silence protecting their clan. As per typical... disgusting. ASCE tried a bit in the beginning ('02 congressional hearings) but were told to zip it up as it would be bad for their profession. Shut up and let the blame fall squarely in the terrorists.
7
If it was part of the plan... why wait 7 hrs? Why not add it right on on top of the twins with the cameras all rolling? No sensible reason to delay till 5:20. What happened of course is that the heat took longer to act and was acting on stronger though fewer connections... and again no means to suppress the fires which had 30,000 gallons of fuel to cook the steel. They lied about the recovery of said fuel... that was simple... couldn't be the fuel we got it all... hahahahaha
Let us say, for the sake of argument, that the towers were rigged to come down after the planes hit. Why would this have to be done? To hide something concerning the planes or the hijackers? To create even greater terror/spectacle? Or were there other targets of opportunity in the Twin Towers?
Would it have been acceptable for John F. Kennedy to be revived at Parkland? How then the Vietnam War, the perpetuation of the Cold War, the security of the CIA and the Federal Reserve, in short, the world of the security state.
It has been suggested that the psychic energy would have been directed at the surviving skeletons rather than the wars of revenge.
It would be best to destroy utterly the evidence the 9/11 Commission did not look for, the evidence of explosives, molten steel, weakened steel, and the like.
In view of the 1978 operation conducted clandestinely in the City Bank it would be entirely possible for the identified interested parties in Ryan's long work to have enacted the preparations.
Certainly the observables are other than the official explanation.
Van der Lubbe was used to put the NSDAP and Hitler at the levers of power without recourse to parliamentary oversight or electoral recall.
Kennedy removed brought the war and salvation for facilitators LBJ Hoover Marcello plus all that marvelous dope and Kissinger's lurid buzzings in David Rockefeller's shell-like ear of exploitable resources.
To Iraq then, and to Afghanistan.
Note that the Axis of Evil had a short life. CFR coauthors Gates & Brzezinski ended it in 2004 ("Iran: Time for a New Approach") then the fatal NIE of 2007 saying the Ayatollah and his Monkey Boy were only Atoms for Peace niks.
How about the anomalies of 93. And the Pentagon plane that wasn't on tape. Or was it.
We know now that 9/11 and JFK63 were other than advertised--and we may safely say with guilty knowledge.
Thus has it been with TWA 800 and OKCBomb and Waco--and the Boston pressure cooked military triumph over posse comitatus.
We still have the Church Lady assuring us there is nothing to see here.
As though a knee-jerk.
cui bono wasn't Sonny's brother
Every line in these 9/11 threads has a silly refrain--can you hear it
Saw these folks in 66. He was loaded and blowing his lines--they didn't rhyme
She ditched him, got some interesting new parts
he hit a tree when cruise missiles interrupted Harkin's heap-o-dung
Thanks to you all for the input. I did have some tentative answers to the hypothetical question I posed which are similar to the ones proposed, but I wanted to hear from those who have spent more than just passing time trying to figure out how 9/11 all played out.
I know this is probably not the right place for this aspect of the question, but one of the more intriguing pieces of the puzzle was the "interagency" murkiness going on, as made clear by these articles which discuss various ways in which CIA was running "parallel" "penetration" operations requiring the shutdown of, say, DIA surveillance.
It is SO familiar: CIA anti-FPCC alongside FBI anti-FPCC in New Orleans, but apparently serving an entirely different purpose.
Actually, the last article is about CIA. The other two are DoD internal.
The presented tale of the fall of the towers is bogus.
Two reasons present.
First the things I was told by Ironworkers and Operating Engineers that went to NYC on the afternoon of the 11th.
Second, my own observation of the towers fall that day.
Not enough thermal energy was ever available to soften the steel as the fable is told.
I know how much heat and pressure it takes to "rebend" structural steel.
Misfabrication at the shop occurs, it is then the job of the Ironworker to apply the heat and pressure to bend the beam into the proper shape/alignment in the field.
So it is the old Richard Pryor thing, who ya gonna believe "Me or your lying eyes?"
No other story building ever collapsed from internal and sustained fires of paper and wood. Ignited by kerosine quickly consumed.
Not even buildings that burned for DAYS.
So someone rewrote the laws of physics for just that one day.
Or WE WUZ HAD like we were in Sept. 1964 when the WC published their bullcrap.
After these issues came forth I don't pay much attention to 911.
I know when I am being LIED to by my Government.
It has become easier to detect after years of deception.
Read not to contradict and confute;
nor to believe and take for granted;
nor to find talk and discourse;
but to weigh and consider.
FRANCIS BACON
hutup:
