Do you believe the official account of 9/11 is accurate?

[Loose Nuke]

Poll question: Do you believe the official account of 9/11 is accurate?

[LibDemAlways]

1. If they wanted the truth to come out they would have

created a real independent investigative body from the get-go, given them all the money and resources they needed, and let the chips fall where they may. Instead they resisted putting together any commission, and finally, under pressure, allowed a small group of flunkies on a limited budget to hold some hearings and propose a few suggestions, and even those have been ignored.

All evidence points to a cover-up on the part of the Bush Crime Family. We'll probably never know the extent of their involvement.

[UCLA02]

2. Just saw Loose Change (2d Edition) and...

Ho. Lee. Shit.

Oh, and to answer your quiestion...uh..."no"...

[speedoo]

3. LIHOP and MIHOP don't stand up to scrutiny.

Incompetence, however, is proven by this misadministration daily.

[longship]

4. Zero credibility for LIHOP or MIHOP

But there is significant evidence for incompetence in that this misadministration has yet to do one thing right in their five years.

On edit: Why, oh why is there yet another wacko conspiracy theory thread this morning?
:popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:

[Media_Lies_Daily]

17. Why are you wanting people to believe that this is a "wacko....

...conspiracy thread"? That's a favorite tactic of rightwingers when defending the Warren Commission and other documents spouting the rightwing party line.

Perhaps you should go to the PNAC website and read their document entitled "Rebuilding America's Defenses"...here are the links:

The Project for the New American Century
<http://www.newamericancentury.org/>

Rebuilding America's Defenses
<http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf>

QUOTE from page 63:

"Further, the process of transformation,
even if it brings revolutionary change, is
likely to be a long one, absent some
catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a
new Pearl Harbor."

You can find the original signatories to PNAC on this site along with additional members:

<http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Project_for_the_New_American_Century>

Some additional info on PNAC can be found on these websites:

<http://pnac.info/>
<http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1665.htm>

[longship]

22. Post hoc ergo propter hoc

??????? PNAC????

Time to get out the :popcorn: again.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

29. Did you go to any of the sites I posted?

[longship]

50. I don't have to go to any of those sites.

I know what they all say happened. I know what their so-called "proof" is.
It's all a collection of debunked assertions, counterfactuals, and fatuous arguments.
A study of the 9/11 MIHOP sites would be a valuable exercise to anybody who wanted to understand how propaganda works. It's pretty much all rubbish defended by moonshine. I've been through it all before. I don't need to go through it again. However, the 9/11 conspiracies have such huge memeic strength, I no longer see it possible to debunk them. N.B., that doesn't mean that I think they're true. It only means that I group 9/11 MIHOP in the same category as Creation Science/Intelligent Design.

Note that I am not defending the Gov't Reports on 9/11 which contain many omissions and totally ignore ChimpCo's inability to read the clear warnings of impending attacks of precisely the kind that happened on 9/11. Whether or not the ChimpCo response was deliberate, or through incompetence, we likely will never know for sure. However, from ChimpCo's lack of response in other events since 9/11 (Katrina) we pretty much can conclude the latter.

[stickdog]

59. You really need to check out the site in question.

It's not AT ALL what you think. Your response couldn't be more ignorant.

[petgoat]

101. So first you say (#4) LIHOP has zero credibility

and an hour later you say: "Whether or not the ChimpCo response was deliberate, or through
incompetence, we likely will never know for sure."

Maybe you better get your story straight before holding yourself out as the Voice of Reason.

[moodforaday]

47. I'll raise you a non sequitur

If someone says to you, "you know, I really need cash bad, if only my uncle kicked the bucket I could get my hands on his estate", and then said uncle dies in unclear circumstances, are you going to repeat your Latin quip, or are you going to consider this person a suspect?

[longship]

51. Necessary but not sufficient.

"Post hoc ergo propter hoc" only says that one has to have a connection other than the fact that one event predates another to establish cause and effect.

On its own, a connection of PNAC to 9/11 conspiracy theories is by definition, post hoc ergo propter hoc.

Anyway, using PNAC to justify disappearing airliners, invisible explosives, invisible missles, non-existent controlled demolitions, and a impossibly complex global conspiracy of thousands is lame.

I can't believe I'm getting sucked into this again. MIHOP never happened and there is precisely zero evidence that it did. Let's just leave it at that.

[moodforaday]

52. OTOH, there is evidence

that the official story does not add up. At best, the official story is incomplete. There has never been a real, forensic investigation or if there was one, results were never made public. This is all I'm saying. In a weak version, MIHOP does not imply the doer; only that the story as told by BushCo is incomplete, inconsistent and in many ways implausible.

You're also disregarding historical MIHOPs - the Reichstag fire, quite possible Pearl Harbor and the very factual (though aborted) Operation Northwoods. It's not like it's never been done before.

Personally I subscribe to a "strong" version of MIHOP; I believe there is evidence of complicity on the US side. That doesn't mean I think Bush engineered it; I'm pretty much convinved he personally had no idea.

[longship]

55. None of this is germaine.

You aren't really suggesting that the Reichstag fire is support for 9/11 MIHOP? Pearl Harbor? What do these things have to do with 9/11 MIHOP? Nothing! So, of course I am disregarding them. They're straw men.

If you are interested in Pearl Harbor, check out "And I Was There: Pearl Harbor and Midway Breaking the Secrets" written by Admiral Edwin Layton, chief security officer for both Admirals Kimmel and Nimitz. Layton wrote it in response to many of the conspiracy theories floating around. If one can fault Layton's account it's that it was told from the perspective of an intelligence officer fighting a Washington bureaucracy. Personality differences leak into the story too much. Regardless, it is a remarkable book and a very good read and will give one fresh perspective on the known facts. In particular Rochefort's part in both Pearl Harbor and Midway comes close to being raised to it's proper importance.

Remarkably, for a very good accounting of the events of 7 Dec 1941, the film, "Tora, Tora, Tora" comes pretty close, in spite of Hollywood's tendency to muddle the facts with added fictional characters. (Colonel Rufus Bratton, E.G. Marshall's role, was a composite character created out of whole cloth. They should have told Rochefort's story instead.)

[stickdog]

61. Exactly. Of course Bin Laden did 9/11 by himself!

Didn't Bin Laden sink the Maine in a bold faced, indefensible act of aggression?

Didn't Bin Laden sink the Lusitania in the exact same manner?

Didn't Bin Laden set the Reichstag fire?

Didn't Bin Laden catch us completely by surprise at Pearl Harbor?

Wasn't Bin Laden behind the Gulf of Tonkin incident and Operation Northwoods?

Didn't Bin Laden indefensibly shoot down KAL 007 in cold blood? And Flight 587? And TWA 800?

And didn't Bin Laden kill all those little kids in the Oklahoma City bombing and Waco, Texas?

So who else could it possibly be?

[longship]

64. So your response to my calling you on a straw man

is to erect even more straw men.

Pshaw! Don't MIHOPers have any inkling on how to construct a cogent, logical, and persuasive argument? Or is it all oneupsmanship with straw men, argument from incredulity, argument from authority, and other fatuous rheotorical tricks.

As usual, the argument is going nowhere. That's the only place it can go when MIHOPers are involved. I'm outta here.

[stickdog]

72. What's your response to me asking you WHERE THE FUCK IS

YOUR PHYSICAL EVIDENCE:

that the towers came down due to high temperature exposure

that the 19 hijackers were who the FBI says they were

that the Pentagon was hit by a plane piloted by a rank amateur

that the 19 hijackers the FBI say got on the planes were actually there?

Why did the WTC-7 building fall? Why was NIST unable to recover A SINGLE SCRAP of metal from WTC-7 for their recently released metallurgical analysis?

Why wasn't Bush evacuated from that school? Why did he keep reading about a pet goat when Card supposedly told him "America is under attack"?

What was Rumsfeld doing in the 80+ minutes it took for him to arrive at his command post?

Why did General Myers have a cloudy memory the events of 9/11 when he testified to the Senate two days later? Why did he give two contradictory stories about when the military first got planes up in response to 9/11 during this same Senate hearing?

Why did NORAD's response timeline change several times, only to be completely rewritten by the 9/11 Commission?

What caused the seismic explosion signature in the vicinity of Shankstown at 10:06 EDT even though the 9/11 Commission swears that ALL other physical evidence proves that Flight 93 crashed at 10:03 EDT?

Why did Jeb Bush and federal agents seize records from Huffman Aviation - Florida flight school of Mohammed Atta, and other 9/11 hijackers - in the middle of the night following the attacks of September 11th and load them onto a C-130? And why did Jeb Bush know, hours after the attack, exactly where to look?

And the list goes on and on and on ...

[longship]

80. The towers came down because

They had a huge airliner, with 90,000 kg of jet fuel, slammed into them at 400 knots.
Millions saw it live. Thousands saw it in person.

Dozens of people were on the media that day describing the airliner that they witnessed hitting the Pentagon. Hundreds others witnessed that first hand, too. After all, it happened at freaking rush hour!

Or, all all these people in on the conspiracy, too? How many thousands of people have to be in on the conspiracy for what MIHOPers are suggesting?

Planted explosives? Tens of thousands of people occupy those buildings daily, and often many late into the night. Almost all of them got out alive. Where are the witnesses? I know, they're all in on the conspiracy.

Invisible Missiles? No witnesses? Hey! They're invisible!

Disappearing airliners full of people? Hey, they disappeared. Is that why there's no evidence for what MIHOPers claim?

A couple frames of fuzzy video means that there were squibbs? How so? The freaking building was collapsing. Why wouldn't something get ejected? After all, the freaking air has to go somewhere as the ceilings collapse onto the floors.

Buildings must have been explosively imploded because they didn't topple like a domino? What the fuck kind of logic is that? And who in the Sam Hell says that that's even possible? Nobody, that's who.

MIHOP is rubbish.

[stickdog]

83. I notice that you didn't answer any of my questions.

How ever did they keep the Manhattan Project secret?

How ever did they keep Operation Northwoods secret?

How ever did they keep every fucking covert intel operation in the last 50 years secret?

Your "analysis skills" are pathetic.

[Name removed]

87. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[drdtroit]

91. Just keep pretending everything is OK!

:patriot:

[DemInDistress]

113. you sound like King George the Imbecile...

" Let us not tolerate outrageous conspiracies " what a jerk !! that was before evidence to the contrary appeared. How dare we question that Imbecile? "ROTFLMFAO"
Bet you buy into that "Ludicrous 911 Report?

there is just 2 possibilites..
1. Arabs hijacked 2 commercial jets and crashed them into the Twin Towers taking down three (3) buildings from fires which BTW have never collapsed a building due to fires or
2. The World Trade Center was brought down with explosives that only needed a cover like maybe 2 commercial jets crashing into both of the Towers.

I FIRMLY BELIEVE NUMBER 2.. WHEN THE UNANSWERED QUESTIONS ARE ADDRESSED ADEQUATELY WITH REASONABLE ANSWERS I WILL RE-EVALUATE MY POSITION.

[petgoat]

104. "The towers came down because"

Talk about your post hoc ergo propter hoc!

How many thousands of people have to be in on the conspiracy

I count about ten, besides the hijacking team.

One to tell al Qaeda about the war games.
Rummie, Condi, Myers to do nothing.
Frasca and Mueller to obstruct FBI investigations.

If al Qaeda rented space in the WTC, part of their hijack support team could
even have planted the explosives.

You are illogically linking MIHOP to controlled demolition. Taking CD out would
not disprive MIHOP.

[DemInDistress]

112. even better story about Pearl....

Commentary
December 7, 1941: A Setup from the Beginning
December 7, 2000
Robert B. Stinnett
Day Of Deceit Robert Stinnett... http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=103
Honolulu Advertiser..



As Americans honor those 2403 men, women, and children killed—and 1178 wounded—in the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, Hawaii on December 7, 1941, recently released government documents concerning that “surprise” raid compel us to revisit some troubling questions.

Yet, Roosevelt believed that provoking Japan into an attack on Hawaii was the only option he had in 1941 to overcome the powerful America First non-interventionist movement led by aviation hero Charles Lindbergh. These anti-war views were shared by 80 percent of the American public from 1940 to 1941. Though Germany had conquered most of Europe, and her U-Boats were sinking American ships in the Atlantic Ocean—including warships—Americans wanted nothing to do with “Europe’s War.”

Throughout 1941, FDR implemented the remaining seven provocations. He then gauged Japanese reaction through intercepted and decoded communications intelligence originated by Japan’s diplomatic and military leaders

[petgoat]

103. "Post hoc ergo propter hoc" is properly used to debunk faulty

concepts of proof.

You misuse it in applying it to exclude evidence.

[libertad]

24. What other prez have we had that holds hands with the leaders

of Saudi Arabia on a regular basis (literally).

[Rude Horner]

5. I disagree

Besides, how close can the scrutiny be when the administration has blocked all attempts at a independent investigation, and shipped off all the WTC debris before it could be examined?

[longship]

8. Sigh!

Besides, how close can the scrutiny be when the administration has blocked all attempts at a independent investigation

Why would they want their incompetence to be revealed? And isn't this the way that they have reacted to *everything* they've done? So how in the Sam Hell does it imply some special thing in this case?

...and shipped off all the WTC debris before it could be examined?

This allegation has been falsified. Not *all* the debris was shipped off. They didn't need *all* the debris to determine cause and effect.

When the facts don't fit, MIHOPers make things up.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[monktonman]

13. ok the pentagon????

MIHOPS and LIHOPS making it up??????
Dude go take another look.
No way a plane hit that building.

[longship]

14. Sorry, not gonna bite.

MIHOP Pentagon story has already been debunked.
That won't stop MIHOPers from repeating it anyway.

[monktonman]

18. OK so maybe I'm not up on things...

please debunk the pentagon story for me.
Show me how a plane hit that building.
at least give me a hint.

[longship]

23. I don't have to.

It's already been done. Look for yourself.
Hole in Pentagon was the size of the airliner fuselage. But that won't stop MIHOPers from claiming that it wasn't.

[moodforaday]

48. Yeah, was debunked - by Michael Chertoff's cousin

...in Popular Mechanics. Is this the authority you're referring to?

[bpilgrim]

92. it's a DU/WWW tradition

though i have come to expect nothing in the defense of the indefensible these days.

peace

[Media_Lies_Daily]

25. Debunked by whom? The NeoCons? You don't have to....

...overtly do much of anything to facilitate an attack on the U. S. All you have to do is soften security, delay responses, or make changes to certain processes.

For instance, most of the CAP aircraft were participating in drills on 911...drills involving hijacked airliners. Wouldn't you agree that could have added to the confusion on 911?

Additionally, prior to 911, CAP aircraft could be released by NORAD as soon as they got word from air traffic control that an airliner hijacking was in process. Under the new process, only Rumsfeld could authorize the release of interceptors...a release that was delayed by at least 25 minutes.

And why were the planes that were chosen to intercept the airliners released from two airbases (south of Boston, MA, and south of Hampton, VA) so far away from the action? Why did they fly at speeds below Mach 1 instead of kicking in the afterburners to fly at the fastest possible speeds?

Tell us again how MIHOP has been debunked, and the authors of the debunking.

[rinsd]

15. "No way a plane hit that building."

Not that I believe in MIHOP or LIHOP but that last tidbit is rejected by virtually all 9/11 "students".

[monktonman]

20. ok so if its rejected

then what is it ?
Let it or made it
it didnt just happen by itself.

[Rude Horner]

16. I beg your pardon

I haven't made anything up.

I have read quite possibly the most comprehensive book written to date on the matter, "Timeline of Terror". I would highly suggest you read it. It may open your eyes.

[stickdog]

63. You are completely IGNORANT about this issue.

There isn't a shred of physical evidence from the WTC towers that suggests they collapsed due to hot fires and NO STEEL was ever recovered from WTC-7 that wasn't HIGHLY suspicious and unexplained:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=45315&mesg_id=45315

[petgoat]

105. "They didn't need *all* the debris to determine cause and effect."

No they didn't need it all. But they needed some they didn't get. Every piece of steel
was stamped with an ID number, so the entire impact zone could have been reassembled.
As it is, NIST has not one piece of core steel showing heating above 250 degrees C.

It is permissible for a naive conspiracy theorist to spout out about what *might* be possible.
Your certainty is unjustified when you have not bothered to learn the facts.

[zapperlot]

117. you have it !!

>Why would they want their incompetence to be revealed? And isn't this the way that they have reacted to *everything* they've done? So how in the Sam Hell does it imply some special thing in this case?

Hello from Germany,

Thats an important fact: "Why would they want their incompetence to be revealed?"

They CAN hide their incompetence. And they do it. Nobody was fired for incompetence. Even in higher positions neither from NORAD or CIA et al. was fired for incompetence.

Same like in Guantanamo or Abu Graib. Wildest violence of rights and nobody of the real responsible persons have to leave his/her seat. This sounds like they were backed by higher Persons in the hierarchy. So there won´t be any independent comissions. And every information is hidden by "national security" issues.

There have been a short circuit in your democratic-system. legislature, judiciary and executive seems to be in only one hand. (and trust me I unfortunally know what can follow on this)

I think the american people have to act urgent, if they want their country back.
For other countries it is nearly impossible to do anything against your democratic losses. The only folk who could stop it are yourself !

Greetings
Zapperlot

[libertad]

26. Exactly! * has very close ties with the Saudi's and why else

cover up attempts to investigate?

[moodforaday]

46. You really believe *everyone* was incompetent?

The administration is one thing, believe what you will, though if you believe they really tried to bring democracy to Iraq or to help the NOLA people and failed through incompetence...oh well, it's your call. But to truly assume the 9-11 incompetence theory you must also assume that NORAD is entirely incompetent, that FAA is entirely incompetent, that all East Coast flight controllers are likewise, that all those who operate air defense systems are similarly incompetent... sorry, it's absurd.

On the other hand, you also have to believe superhuman competence of 19 guys who had barely learned how to fly. One of them, Hani Hanjour, was so bad his flight school reported him to FAA - not because they thought he was a terrorist, but because they thought he was a menace as a pilot.

It's so easy to disprove all the conspiracy theories - just release all evidence. FBI confiscated all the video footage from around the Pentagon: looks like they weren't so incompetent after all. Or is it incompetence that is preventing the FBI from releasing those tapes?

Was it incompetence to be running "plane crashes into building" warmages on 9-11? Or did the hjackers have a mole in the defense? If the latter, why hasn't this been investigated, why has no-one stood trial for espionage?

Incompetence is usually punished. Show me one person in authority on 911 who was subsequently punished for incompetence.

[longship]

60. No, I don't believe the administration.

But believing in 9/11 MIHOP has nothing to do with believing the administration.

One of the most ludicrous claims is that the WTC was actually constructed with demolition charges built into it--in the late 1960's!!. Equally ridiculous is the claim that the demolition charges were somehow planted in the days prior to 9/11--in a building with tens of thousands of people daily. Of course, there will not be one solitary witness to this coming forward any time soon. Another is that four airliners full of people just like you and me somehow were mysteriously carted off so that the military could fly other airplanes, missiles, alien death ray machines, into the buildings. Of course these airliners and the people in them were subsequently destroyed and killed, respectively. Or, is it that they are still safe and enjoying themselves drinking Pina Coladas on a warm beach in some foreign land somewhere? Of course, this would make all those people were in on the conspiracy, too. I forget which one it is.

My favorite MIHOP claims are those that in one way or another violate known scientific or engineering principles. How about that building (especially a very tall one like WTC1, WTC2, or WTC7) should be able to hold together while it topples like a domino. Or, that steel needs to melt in order for it to deform. That jet fuel setting fire to paper, carpet, wood, etc.in a closed space somehow acts just like jet fuel burning by itself in the open. There is so much bad, bad science in the MIHOP conjectures that it's laughable.

Might as well invoke space aliens and crop circles, too. That will really help make the MIHOP case. Or how about invoking some deities. Maybe a coven of witches invoked Satan and he did it. Or, the lunatic theological right was correct about the rapture except for the fact that the only virtuous Christians to be taken up to heaven just happened to be a group of commodity and stock traders in the WTC area and some clerks working for the military in the Pentagon. Or, maybe it was just the space aliens who wiped the Klingons off Uranus.

I think that all these theories deserve consideration as well. After all, aren't all theories on equal footing? The necessary conditions for acceptance as a valid theory are solely a peculiar brand of plausibility. Is that how it is?

Or is there a more rigorous methodology which would serve better?

I think the latter.

[m0nkeyneck]

79. ridiculous

Concrete pulverized into fine dust while the buildings collapsed at near free fall speeds; controlled demolition w/ explosives seems to be the only valid interpretation. MIHOP, LIHOP or whatever …3 freak collapses of steel reinforced concrete buildings on one day is not impossible but so improbable that it might as well be.

[jmowreader]

81. Okay, you've made your point, Longship...

now let me throw a counterargument at you. Because I believe the WTC was rigged with charges in the days prior to 9/11.

Professional explosive demolition companies spend months planning a shot because they're trying to minimize (actually, prevent) damage to adjacent structures, cause the least amount of seismic activity, injure or kill no one, and demolish the building at the lowest possible cost.

The people who blew up the WTC wanted as much death and devastation as they could accomplish. Therefore, they used the same techniques Army engineers use to blow bridges. If you kinda chopped the building in two with fifteen or twenty floors above the blast points, those fifteen or twenty floors are going to start moving, and they'll pull the whole building down with them.

You can either remotely detonate the charges, or rig up some sort of seismic sensor that detects the plane hits.

IIRC someone affiliated with the BFEE was head of security at the WTC immediately prior to 9/11. Yes, he would let in another member of the BFEE.

Now let me dismiss a really ludicrous theory: that the heat of jet fuel fires managed to drop this building. Someone find a photo of a plane hitting a WTC tower and notice the signature: the huge fireball. That's the Jet A in the wings. DemoTex probably knows right off the top of his head how much of the 60,000 pounds of fuel that was in the plane when it left Logan would have been out in the wing tanks, but I fear it's a large majority of the total load. Also remember that the planes didn't load out of Logan then immediately fly to NYC and drive into the side of the WTC--they went out to the midwest, then turned around and came back to the east coast. You don't do that without burning fuel. So okay. You've got a plane that's burned up quite a bit of fuel seeing America, then deposited almost all the remaining gas in it on the side of the building...but the small amount of fuel in the part of the plane that made it all the way into the building was supposed to be enough to create heat sufficient to destroy the whole structure? I'm sorry, but I don't buy it.

I also don't believe the official lie about the 19 hijackers who couldn't fly paper airplanes suddenly acquiring the skills that would allow them to fly Boeing jetliners like they were in the Blue Angels. I really believe that one of two things happened: either Mohammad Atta was the greatest character actor the Muslim world has ever known in that he managed to convince professional flight school instructors he couldn't fly a plane when he was really good at it, or the men in the co-pilots' seats on those four planes were real Islamic airline pilots and were actually driving. Those things have two control yokes for a reason.

Now let me ask the people who really believe the official government story: The whole thesis of this website is that Bush is completely full of shit about everything. If Bush said the sky was blue you'd go outside and look up. If Bush said dogshit ice cream cones weren't very good, you'd have one just in case he was kidding. Why, then, would you believe Bush on this?

[longship]

82. Okay, fine.

Where are the witnesses to this planting of explosives? Where the fuck are they? Tens of thousands of highly educated people occupied these buildings daily. Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence. You have no witnesses to this. Hundreds of people would take many months to plant such explosives as you are suggesting. Where are the whistle blowers? Let's make this very, very clear, your claim is not just extraordinary, it's more like the ravings of a delusional lunatic. Especially since your entire argument is based on counterfactuals, gross illogic, and totally unsubstantiated (and lunatic) conjecture.

Furthermore, there is no need for freaking explosives since the god damn buildings were hit by fuel laden airliners at over 400 fucking knots. That's 2 billion joules of energy even ignoring the damn fuel-air explosion which ensued. And WTC 7 was decimated by the collapse of two of the largest buildings in the world collapsing right next to it. The whole facade of WTC 7 towards the WTC towers was ripped apart with a 20 story diameter hole. It's amazing the damned thing didn't collapse right then and there.

Pardon my language, but what you people are suggesting is total garbage.

[jmowreader]

93. Bullshit. Twelve people. One night per tower. Easy.

Listen close, folks, for I shall only say this once.

The men in the black helicopters may be crashing through my window after I hit send. No problem.

This is how to set a cutting charge.

1. Measure the steel you plan to cut. Get the thickness, height and width of each member. Length doesn't matter. In this case you don't need to measure the actual steel--the dimensions are on the building plans which, as public records, reside in the city building inspector's office for all to view.

2. Get a block of C-4 and form it into strips as thick, and at least three times as wide as they are thick, as the steel to be cut. Then cut pieces off these strips. To use the example of the steel we're thinking about cutting, which is basically 12-inch square-section tubing, we'll need two pieces a foot long and four pieces six inches long.

3. Get a roll of Primacord and cut six long pieces. Tie an Uhli knot--it serves the same purpose as a blasting cap--in one end, and leave the other end plain. Trim all six pieces to EXACTLY the same length. This doesn't work unless all six charges go off in exactly the same microsecond, and you build delays with Primacord by varying the length of the cord. Embed one Uhli knot in each piece of C-4.

4. Approach the steel to be cut and draw a level line all the way around it. Attach one long piece and two short pieces (it looks like a C when you're done) to the steel below the line, the rest above the line. Make sure none of the explosive crosses the line, or this won't work. Wrap some duct tape around it to make sure it stays in place.

5. Rig the rest of the columns, making sure that the charges are set at various heights on the structure. This introduces oscillations into the framework that ensure its collapse.

6. Run a loop of Primacord around the perimeter of the building so you can tie the cutting charges into it. Tie each charge into the Primacord loop; this is called a ring main.

7. Finally, attach a blasting cap to the end of the ring main and let fly. When these explode, the top charges will force their metal toward the bottom charges, while the bottom charges will force their metal toward the top charges...neatly clipping the metal at the line between them.

I saw something that said they rigged the building with charges every ten floors. That's bullshit on its face--not only didn't they need the extra explosives, it wouldn't look authentic unless the floor that was sheared off was close to the airplane hit.

There were 240 support columns holding up WTC 1 and WTC 2. If you've got your explosives cut already, you can set one of these in a couple of minutes--this is a technique Army engineers use to blow up enemy bridges, and since the enemy tends to guard bridges jealously, our guys have to be able to work fast. (Army engineers taught me this. I only did it in practice.) In a large building, there's enough room in the floor system for an employee to crawl around--this way he can work on the HVAC without disrupting the tenants. Let's say it would have taken 10 minutes for a man to crawl to one girder, set a cutting charge on it, tape it off and move to the next girder. If you had 10 men setting charges and two tying them into the ring main, each man had to set 24 charges. At 10 minutes per charge, that's six charges per hour per man, or four hours to set all of the charges. Add another hour to finish the ring main and check everyone's work...go into the building at 9pm, come out at 2am. Come back the next day and rig the other building.

Last I checked, a BFEE member was working security at the WTC in late-summer 2001.

Yes, it is very possible to rig a building like this to blow in two nights--especially weekend nights. The only real problem is finding 12 people both evil enough to pull the job and tightlipped enough to not brag about it.

[DemInDistress]

114. YOUR AN IDIOT AND A FLAME BAITER..

WT2 did little to no damage to WT7. As a matter of fact the reported fires occurred long after the collapse of WT1, WAS IT ARSON? It seems peculiar that fires broke out of the 7/8th floors where the CIA had a special ops office AND the SEC on the 12th floor was consumed. Why those 2 floors? H'm? Could it be the criminal investigations of cheney and halliburton? I wonder?
Secondly, after larry silverstein signed that lease in July 2001 he held numerous fire drills and evacuations, why? Was there an ulterior motive? I think so, removed as many potential witnesses as possible.
Third, Marvin Bush had the BOMB SNIFFING DOGS REMOVED DAYS BEFORE THE ATTACKS. WHY?

911 SMELLS AS BAD AS YOUR ILLOGICAL POSTS.. (LOL) YOUR A GOP BAITER !! NO?

[spooked911]

90. Sigh. You couldn't be more wrong about alternative 9/11 theories.

I think you are being willfully dense about this. I really wonder why.

[spooked911]

89. Bush and Cheney ARE incompetent

but they had little to do with 9/11. They covered it up pretty well though

[bullimiami]

6. nothing but lihop and mihop are left if you really start looking.

there are just too many incredible 'no way' items for coincidence.

[Warren DeMontague]

7. One and two are definitely out, but I don't have enough information

to personally make a clear call as to which one- or combination thereof- of the last three most accurately describes the real situation. :patriot:

[Rude Horner]

9. Read

"Timeline of Terror" by Paul Thompson, or "The New Pearl Harbor" by David Ray Griffin. Both are excellent books to learn more.

[monktonman]

21. dude are you a book salesmen????

[Rude Horner]

30. No

They are excellent books and I recommend them.

[monktonman]

31. ok so you sell books for free

[Rude Horner]

34. I'm not sure what you're getting at

This particular thread is about the events of 911. I've read a couple books on the subject that I found very informative and I recommend them. Is there a problem?

[monktonman]

40. no problem

its just that no book is going to convince my eyes that a plane hit that building.
Its like saying if I knew all the facts i would realize Rodney King didnt get a beat down.
So I could read until I was blue in the face and still not believe that a plane that large hit a building and them just vaporized.
No book had to tell me about eye witness accounts or the size of the plane or the tiny hole it made of the missing parts or the skill it takes to fly a plane like that or the missing video tape or etc...... All I had to do was open my eyes and look at the scene.
So keep reading.

[Rude Horner]

41. Ok, now you're really confusing me

I'm on YOUR side. I don't believe the official story of 911. I'm a MIHOP'er. I don't believe a plane hit the Pentagon either.

These books help DEBUNK the official story.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

38. The poster is RECOMMENDING a book that you can find....

...and read. He's not giving you anything but advice, and that's free.

[monktonman]

42. look at your handle and tell me to go buy a book?????

[Rude Horner]

43. What?

:wtf:

Is it just me, or is anybody else confused about what this person is trying to tell me?

[Desertrose]

56. Totally....

I think he doesn't like your name....:shrug:

Thanks for the book tips. :)

[Rude Horner]

62. Thanks

I hope you get a chance to read one or both. :)

[DemInDistress]

115. Paul Thompson and David Ray Griffin...excellent choices...

excellent reads.. some people just wont accept the facts RH.. Many debunker's and fortunately even more 911 truth seekers. If "we the people " had all the confiscated evidence the bush crime family would be arrested,
charged, indicted, convicted and be sitting in DEATH ROW today..

I'm with you on this book issue. I get it !!

[LSK]

35. you just said you didnt have enough information

:shrug:

[Warren DeMontague]

54. Actually, *I* said it. Which doesn't mean I haven't been exposed to

various arguments and theories. (Got plenty to read already- thanks!) It only means that I don't have enough of what I consider factual information to properly ascertain which of the last three options MOST accurately describes reality.

But I do know enough to know that the official story sure as hell doesn't add up. Just like the Warren Commission Report.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

39. Are you being deliberately obtuse?

[longship]

67. I'lll look those up.

But I'm dumping them at the first sign of disappearing airliners. ;-) Just kiddin'.

Thanks for the tip, buddy. Apparently some folks here are capable of carrying on a reasonable conversation. Kudos to you for that.

[CJCRANE]

123. "New Pearl Harbor" is excellent.

I bought it recently (along with "Fooled Again") because I was tired of trying to explain things to a friend of mine who kept calling me a "conspiracy theorist".

I've told him if he wants to know the facts he can borrow the books any time he likes.
Now he's told me that he knows the facts already. However, when I ask him a simple question (like "who's Sibel Edmonds?")
he can't answer so it's pretty he clear he just doesn't want to know the truth.

[Loose Nuke]

28. People must've had various levels of involvement

I think Bush was used, but his behavior that morning indicates he knew the attack was going to happen- not cancelling the photo op even though they knew a tower had been hit before they went, and the Secret Service must have been alerted to the fact that 2 planes had gone wildly off course, turned off their transponders and wouldn't respond to radio. Then they stayed a half hour after the 2nd tower was hit- Secret Service didn't make a move to get him out, just let all those kids be potential targets. Cheney, Rumsfeld, Myers, Eberhard, Ashcroft, Mueller, Frasca, Tenet, etc.- the Commission totally let these people off easy and didn't question their "incompetence", conficting stories, contradictions, odd behavior, etc. I think they must've been in on the planning- how could the air defense stand down have happened otherwise? It's clear that standard, time-tested procedures were grossly violated, and during a great crisis. The FAA landed every plane in the US, "flawlessly" according to the Commission, shortly after the crisis began- an unprecedented task- calling for intercepts was a routine procedure. FAA's been gagged, but what info did come out, it seems they even went OUTSIDE normal procedures to try and stop 9/11, and were blocked by NORAD and the DoD. Many, many other people could've been used as well, and not known what they were involved in- it's called "compartmentalization". A lot of Americans feel terrorism is a real threat, and better them than us- they want to believe the story. They want to believe the government can be trusted and will protect us. A lot of other people see terrorsism as threat to their interests- a lot of terrorists are motivated not by hatred of our "Freedoms", but by the evil, ruthless, selfish, destructive exploits of Corporate America in their countries. The CIA and Corporate America have done evil for political-economic reasons all over the world without regard to creed or race, just whatever they could get away with, though the craziest, most violent resistance has come from the Islamic ones, that's for sure. That's why it's convenient to label them the boogeyman, now that the Soviet Union collapsed. The neocons and the military-corporate complex have benefitted tremendously from the official story. They're really, really rich and can afford to buy people for $100,000, a million, 100 million, whatever. Many people don't want the truth to come out cuz their way of life and making money would collapse. Many, many people have come forward and been gagged, fired and threatened and their stories have been generally ignored by the media. See open letter to the Commission signed by 25 FBI and National Security Experts, including Sibel Edmonds http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0409/S00157.htm

A new investigation needs to address these issues and A LOT more. Anyone read "The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions", by David Ray Griffin? The 115 he documented can be quickly reviewed at http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20050523112738404

[Stephanie]

10. LIHOP

[tlsmith1963]

12. Here is Why...

...I think that 9/11 was an inside job. They keep trying to block investigations, & the FBI was told not to go after Moussaoui. If you have nothing to hide, you don't behave like this. You would want to get to the bottom of things just like everyone else. They behave 100% like people who have something to hide.

Tammy

[Loose Nuke]

36. If the government has nothing to hide

Then they shouldn't mind the citizenry monitoring their activities.

[TomClash]

126. Of course they have somethiing to hide

But is it incomptence? Or complicity?

[HamdenRice]

19. Even if you disagree with LIHOP or MIHOP, it is not wacky

It is not believed by a fringe of society. About 50% of New Yorkers polled in 2004 believe there was government complicity. Now, both the Village Voice and New York Magazine have run major pieces on 9/11 Truth, both sympathetic. The author of the NY Magazine piece was on Rachel Maddow's AAR show this morning and admitted that his research has made him move from incompetence theory to LIHOP; he also was an eyewitness of the collapse of WTC 7.

On AAR, Randi Rhodes and Jeanine Garafolo have both said that 9/11 is an inside job. Mike Malloy devoted an entire show to it and says the only mystery to him is how it could have been done so sloppily and obviously. CNN has done a respectful open minded segment.

This very poll shows a majority of DUers believe in either LIHOP or MIHOP.

So fine, if you don't think LIHOP or MIHOP. But can you cease with the obviously counterfactual assertion that the theory is "wacky" or that only a fringe of people believe it?

[longship]

45. Argument from authority

nt

[stickdog]

69. "Argument" from ass.

It's ain't whacked out just because you haven't looked into it.

[file83]

78. LOL - nope. WRONG again. "Argument from authority" means

that someone is claiming to be an authority on an issue, which he/she was not. This person was citing the opinions of people with popularity and polls of popularity.

So what you mean to say is that it's an "Appeal to Popularity".

longship, if you are going to start throwing out labels of Logical Fallacies on people with no other explanation, at least make the effort to get the label right, ok?

Buh-bye now. Thanks for flying Fallacy Airlines. Have a nice trip. (Appeal to Humor)

UPDATE: One other thing, if you believe the 9/11 Commission Report because the authors are "Authorities" on the matter, then....:eyes:

[Make7]

88. RE: "This very poll shows a majority of DUers believe...."

HamdenRice says:

This very poll shows a majority of DUers believe in either LIHOP or MIHOP.

Really? Are you saying that there are less than 246 active DU members?

- Make7


NOTE - the following are the poll results at the time of this post.

[libertad]

27. It doesn't make sense that he just sat there at that school with

terror attacks going on in our country. It was too bizarre.

[LSK]

33. and he said he saw the 1st plane hit

Now how is that possible!?!?

[sabbat hunter]

76. not to defend *

but the man cannot even pronounce nuclear correctly.
or remember the name of the federal reserve
so we think he meant what he said when he said he saw the first plane hit?

or maybe his earpiece was on the fritz the day he said that? lol

[LSK]

32. I linger between LIHIOP and MIHOP

[petgoat]

106. Then HIHOP is for you.

Helped it Happen on Purpose.

That's "The Big Wedding" theory; al Qaeda was already up to something, and the Bushcists
decided to crash the party and make it bigger and better.

Of course if Osama was wearing his CIA Asset hat when he ordered (if he ordered) the attacks,
that shifts it back to MIHOP even if al Qaeda dupes did the job.

[meganmonkey]

37. I've said it before and I'll say it again

The idea of a bunch of dudes managing to hijack 4 airplanes, and crash them into their intended targets with a 75% success rate with a couple of box cutters as their only weapons is the least credible 9/11 conspiracy theory out there.

[longship]

44. Argument from incredulity

nt

[stickdog]

70. You say MIHOP is out there. What about about 19 ragtag Arabs

pulling it off by their little lonesomes? Isn't that at least as nuts of a theory?

Think: means, motive, opportunity, evidence, investigatory gusto.

[jmowreader]

94. Who says they were all "ragtag Arabs"?

"Al Qaeda" is Arabic for "the base."

It's a database containing the names of a thousand or so people who are allied to the goals of Osama bin Laden, and who have various skills.

Last I checked, there is such a thing as an Islamic airline pilot. And at least a few of them have to be anti-Western.

You can fly a jetliner from the right seat, correct? What would stop the planners from choosing four men who can't drive cars without hitting things to send to flight school in the US (because they knew that stories about how well they flew from their flight school instructors would be all over the airwaves right after they martyred themselves), putting them in the left seats during the hijackings, then putting Real Airliner Pilots in the right seats, from where they could fly the planes into the towers just as pretty as you please?

[stickdog]

95. So it's really easy to believe that they did it with no inside help,

but ridiculous to think they they could have pulled it off with inside help?

How the fuck does that make sense?

[jmowreader]

108. Here's how I think it worked. This may clear things up

In the 1990s, the group "Project for a New American Century" was formed. We know them as PNAC. It is a group of Reagan/Bush Administration insiders who found themselves outside the government when the voters kicked Poppy Bush's sorry ass to the curb in 1992. Most of its members are in Dubya Bush's inner circle--Dan Quayle is one of the few who are not.

These are the same people who created Osama bin Laden by (1) training and arming him and his group to help run the Soviet Army out of Afghanistan then (2) turning him anti-American by stationing infidels in Saudi Arabia, which is sacred soil to him. They had his phone number.

Sometime between the issue of "Rebuilding America's Defenses" (PNAC's controlling document, which calls for a "new Pearl Harbor") and the installation of Poppy Bush, a member of PNAC who knows Osama got out the Rolodex, dialed Osama and told him "we are going to take back America in the 2000 election, and we kinda need your help. We would like you to perform a major attack in America. We don't care what it is, but it needs to be huge. If you do this, you'll gain major street cred in the terrorist world, and we won't do anything to you. Plan something out, let us know what it is and get back to us."

Osama decides to conduct a kamikaze attack on the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and the Capitol Building. He is told that when the planes hit the WTC, they need to hit within a certain range of floors.

Osama goes to his database, finds eight pilots (four to fly the planes, four as backup) and gets them on board. He then finds twelve other crazy-ass individuals and sends four of them to flight schools in the US as cover. All of them flunk spectacularly, with one being reported to the FAA as a menace to aviation and another being reported to the FBI when he asked to be taught to fly jumbo jets but not to land them.

In 2000, PNAC uses various tricks, ruses and felonies to install their man George Walker Bush into the White House.

In August 2001, several things happen:

* their figurehead president signs an executive order requiring executive-branch approval to scramble fighters in response to a hijacking
* the WTC is rigged with cutting charges to ensure the success of the attack Osama is going to perform (this could have been done by the PNAC members themselves; anyone who can read the Army's Demolitions field manual--which is written at a fifth-grade level and has pictures--could do this)
* Bush ignores the 8/6/2001 PDB entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike Within US"

On September 10, 2001, Bush flies to Florida to prepare to read a storybook to children the next day.

On September 11, Bush reads the storybook as Osama's people carry out their missions. Three are successful. The mission destined for the Capitol Building is retaken by the passengers and subsequently shot down by the Air Force.

On September 12, Bush transitions from figurehead president to figurehead king.

- - - - -

Before anyone starts, this theory is no more far-fetched than one in which four men who couldn't fly paper airplanes managed to perform complex aerobatics in planes that aren't very aerobatic, then precisely fly them into the sides of buildings.

[Desertrose]

57. but they found a passport to prove it!

:evilgrin: What more proof does anyone need??



:hi:meganmonkey
:hug:DR

[meganmonkey]

121. ...

:hug:

:hi:

[Xenotime]

49. There were no hijackers...

They planes were remote controled. The recordings were faked and broadcasted on a frequency used by planes. The "passengers" were either taken capture or eliminated. Probably eliminated because it's cheaper that way.

There are so many elements in this lie, it's like 10 JFK assinations. I read one report stating the buildings were designed for quick demolition due to thier height. How do we know the explosives weren't built into the structure of the building? Then, you just remote detonate them.

[sabbat hunter]

77. built into the building

demolitions have a shelf live. a shelf life that would have long expired on 9/11. dont you also think at least one person involved in the construction of the WTC would have come forward either at that time or now and said "hey why are there explosives built into the building"?


its like saying that a plane was supposed to hit WTC 7, but they imploded it anyway. (anyone who says that doenst know the design of lower manhattan, it would have been impossible to fly a plane and hit WTC 7 due to the buildings around it)

[petgoat]

107. "it would have been impossible to fly a plane and hit WTC 7"

Quit making up "facts." That's 7 at the base of the towers.

[CJCRANE]

53. I thought

B*sh and Cheney cleared the whole thing up when they went together and had their informal chat with the 9/11 commission..?

:silly:

[m0nkeyneck]

58. the laws of physics decided to take a day off on 911

nothing is real; everything is permitted

[longship]

66. ;-)

* Tall buildings can only topple like dominos.
* Steel has to be melted in order to deform.
* Gravity alone is insufficient to bring down a severly damaged tall building.
* Light alloy airliners remain intact when they slam into reinforced concrete (or steel) at over 400 knots.
* Atomized fuel-air explosions cannot do any structural damage and will not ignite other flammables.
* Etc.

[stickdog]

71. Any physical evidence for any of your claims?

Sorry, but no:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=45315&mesg_id=45315

[file83]

74. So did the air defense shield around the Pentagon.

[Rich Hunt]

65. who are 'they'?

I do think 'they' MIHOP, and I think that 'they' covered it up...I just don't have the same 'they' as some other people.

I refuse to flatter a bunch of criminal corporate interests and their international and intra-national crime network by referring to them as 'the government'.

The far right attacks 'the government'. Always has. Democrats defend the concept of government, especially the federal government.

[file83]

75. That's what we want to FIND OUT!!!

We will never know exactly who "they" are until we have an ACTUAL investigation will UNLIMITED supoena powers.

[rman]

96. Same folks who did JFK, MLK, Iran-Contra, Bay of Bigs, FDR coup

(in no particular order), to name a few.
A transnational network of corrupt politicians, corrupt govt agents, corporatists, and (traditional) organized crime - all in all a kind of elitist global super mafia. To put it another way, it's one of two armies in the ongoing class-warfare.

I wholeheartedly agree with your statements regarding "the government" in this context.
Though i do think that concentration of political and economic power is one of the root facilitators, so i'd like to see that distributed at more local levels, and less of it centralized at the federal level (let alone global...).

[savemefromdumbya]

68. The official story is definitely NOT accurate

I'm amazed they are not scared that this will all come out. Just need someone to squeal

[jschurchin]

73. Believe me, they are not..........

worried in the slightest.

[Andre II]

84. The fact that several hijackers

had doubles (in case of Atta proven beyound doubt) is a simple way of proving that it wasn't al Qaeda.

[dailykoff]

85. Oh hell no.

9/11 was all about getting rid of three asbestos-packed white elephants and turning massive corporate liabilities into public health liabilities.

They also got 2,500 potential litigants off their backs.

[dailykoff]

86. p.s. that explains why the insurance companies played along.

They didn't want to get stuck paying out on thousands of individual multi-million asbestosis judgements, either.

[Desertrose]

97. I remember here on DU shortly after 9-11

someone did a lot of digging on the suits about asbestos/WTC and linked it to cheney's company(ies) in Montana or something. Many of us pretty much figured that was why they took the towers down right then....as you said...save a lot of legal hassles & payouts.

Wonder if the archives are still around...they'd be on the old pre-2003 DU, right?

[dailykoff]

98. Yes the potential liability was staggering.

There were about 40,000 WTC workers as I recall. If each of them won a $5 million asbestosis judgement, which is not at all unlikely, Halliburton, which at some point absorbed W.R. Grace, the supplier of all that asbestos, the PA, and their insurers would have been facing a liability of $200 billion.

I think the actual insurance payout was in the neighborhood of $5 billion.

So they "saved" themselves $195 billion -- the Enron way.

:crazy:

[Grateful for Hope]

99. Since all that asbestos is now in the atmosphere

of lower Manhattan, and people are beginning to become sick and die from lung ailments, I hope that those lawsuits begin to come to fruition.

[dailykoff]

100. Me too.

But I suspect that anybody trying to sue the WTC for asbestos poisoning will run up against the Patriot Act and half a dozen other obstructions that weren't there before 9/11, and that they'd find a way to foist it onto the public no matter what the judgement was.

[Grateful for Hope]

102. Probably true

but, I need to hold onto a glimmer of hope that maybe, just maybe the truth will prevail, and that those responsible will be held accountable.

I know, I know, fairy tales almost never come true.

[petgoat]

109. Murder Will Out

Murder will out, that see we day by day.
Murder is so wlatsom and abominable

(Geoffrey Chaucer)

That's what I always say about 9/11. Simply wlatsom!

[mirandapriestly]

110. Is that from Canterbury Tales?

things never change, do they?

[petgoat]

118. Yes indeed, from the Nun's Priest Tale nt

[TomClash]

125. There was an excluson in SP's policy for asbestos related claims

and the primary and excess insurance carriers challenged several aspects of SP's claims in court, even on appeal.

[DemInDistress]

116. right on the money with that statement... 6 billion dollars in

potential lawsuits not to forget the billions it would take for asbestos abatements.. Excellent choice and BTW the first mention here in this thread..

^5.. very good.

[mirandapriestly]

119. never thought of that about the insurance co.s, good thinking..nt

[DemInDistress]

111. Originally, I gave "King George the Imbecile I " the benefit of the

doubt. But as the weeks and months passed I became suspicious and firmly believed in "LIHOP" then last year when I heard the explosions which I read about for four yrs. at Eyewitness to 911.com I definitely believe now in " MIHOP". In addition "Loose Change, In Plane Site, 911 Revisited" all support my beliefs. Let us not forget the "stonewalling, denial of documents,lies, discrepancies," given to the people seeking answers. Its funny, 65 million dollars to investigate Bubba and 655k to investigate the MURDERS of 3,000 innocent people.
Sad to see that their are some 911 debunker's prowling this forum but hey, they have an opinion and I respect that but when they get hammered for it, all I can say is, "SHAME ON THEM"

Dem:

[mirandapriestly]

120. Gee, I just looked at the poll results. I thought only a "few wackos" on

DU were "mihop". I guess the poster who said that was wrong...

[Ufomammut]

122. The devil is always in the details...

One of the more interesting aspects of the 9/11 phenomenon is the number of average people who over the past four/five years have taken to really researching what happened. The result is people who have apparently memorized and can fluently recite hundreds of thousands of words per post outlining physics data, or esoteric financial details/facts of corporations involved, etc.

However, don't get me wrong - I'm glad those folks are at it, cause I know I haven't the disposition for internalizing tomes of arcane facts. I do think it leads to a lot of senseless arguing with naysayers though -- with some, they're never going to be convinced of gov culpibility because the idea that the "captains" of their "home team" are evil, unconscionable thugs is just too harsh to contemplate ...on numerous levels.

From all I've read and seen on 9/11, coupled with our government's track record of abuses - nevermind covert actions, hell, look at the evil shit they do right out in the open! - coupled with the grim reality of USA Inc and the Bushco, the PNAC, complete media control, the red herrings, the sloppy propaganda, rigged elections, "faith based initiatives" over science, the want of theocracy, the highly disturbing apocalyptic worldview of the hypocritical right wing/evangelic movement, and so on ...no, not one doubt in my mind that 9/11 happened because it was financially benefitial on numerous levels for certain businesses, and also required to justify enhancing the military industrial complex. A high-end military tecnhology economy requires an enemy. There's no money to be made from "peace."

It boils down to the standard crime question: who stands to benefit? None of what's happened could've happened without 9/11, and it's more than a bit suspect that people in our gov had established intentions and contigent plans before the fact: seems unlikely there would be such planning and massive increases in the defense budget unless there was a specific goal -- *whoops* "gee, we were attacked, guess now we have no choice but to implement all of those big plans we've just been salivating over."

In my estimation, that the naysayers can overlook or justify that basic aspect alone is mystifying ...especially when you consider everything else that's happened.

[Peter Frank]

124. Both...

lihop was reinforced by our gov.

The threat was intentionally exaggerated, amplified, & made believable by PNAC.

Pay no attention to the Cheney behind the curtain.