9/11

[enigma2517]

Been researching this for the past few months.

9/11 In Plane Sight

Good movie, there are some other ones out there as well, like umm....Loose, Painful Deceptions, etc.

* http://physics911.org/
* http://www.serendipity.li/wtc.html#what_actually_happened
* http://www.serendipity.li/wot/anti-war.htm
* http://serendipity.ptpi.net/wot/holmgren/11.htm
* http://911research.wtc7.net
* http://wtc7.net
* http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/b7/index.html
* http://nyc.indymedia.org/front.php3?articl...4&group=webcast (http://nyc.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=82574&group=webcast)
* http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4582.htm
* http://www.radiofreeamerica.tv/video/2003-...2/911-group.swf (http://www.radiofreeamerica.tv/video/2003-12-12/911-group.swf)
* http://news.globalfreepress.com/
* http://www.911-strike.com/
* http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=22004
* http://home.comcast.net/~skydrifter/exp.htm
* http://whatreallyhappened.com/blackmail.html
* http://disc.server.com/discussion.cgi?disc...5885;title=APFN (http://disc.server.com/discussion.cgi?disc=149495;article=45885;title=APF N;article=45885;title=APFN)
* http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/oct2001/bond-o05.shtml
* http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timelin...n/dayof911.html (http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/main/dayof911.html)
* http://www.media-criticism.com/Baltimore_S...er_09_2003.html (http://www.media-criticism.com/Baltimore_Sun_911_Letter_09_2003.html)
* http://portland.indymedia.org/front.php3?a...9&group=webcast (http://portland.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=44629&group=webcast)

Those are all interesting sites.

If this is true (and it seems harder to deny everyday) then it definetely creates a biiig problem. I almost hate to say it, but maybe this is just one of those prime examples that will show people how the state can't defend them after all (quite possibly, just the opposite).

Anyway, what are your thoughts on this? Real or fake?

[RedSkinheadUltra]

With so many real and proven crimes why do we need conspiracy theories?

[bolshevik butcher]

Because this is a major crime? And one that has been used to justify two illegal wars?

[anonymous red]

call me a reactionary capitalist pig, but i really don't think our gov't did this to itself purposely. there were already plans being drawn up to invade both iraq and afghanistan well before the events of 9/11. all the bombing of the trade center did was speed up the time table and, as clenched fist said, gave the administration its justification to feed to the american people

[lennonist-leninist]

Originally posted by anonymous [email protected] 13 2005, 05:13 PM
call me a reactionary capitalist pig, but i really don't think our gov't did this to itself purposely. there were already plans being drawn up to invade both iraq and afghanistan well before the events of 9/11. all the bombing of the trade center did was speed up the time table and, as clenched fist said, gave the administration its justification to feed to the american people
I think your right that the bombing of the trade centers just gave the u.s the peoples motivation to attack afghanistan. But i dont agree with you on how the u.s. goverment would do this purposely i think that thay had to have somthing to get the american people on there side and if it tooke killing a couple hundred people then i think thay would do it.

[anonymous red]

well it was more like 2,700 people that were killed - from all walks of life and many nationalities.

[violencia.Proletariat]

Originally posted by anonymous [email protected] 13 2005, 05:13 PM
there were already plans being drawn up to invade both iraq and afghanistan well before the events of 9/11.
have any links about this?

[viva le revolution]

9/11 was bad. ok, get over it!
That was years ago! I see people dying here in the third world all the time and repressed all the time! Where are the tears for them?

[anonymous red]

Its purpose was not just to make money but to establish an American presence in Central Asia....oh March 1,2001, the Taliban provoked international outrage by blowing up two monumental ancient Buddhist statues at Bamiyan. The United States lost patience and concluded that "regime change" was in order...As Alexander's Gas & Oil Connections reported in February 2002, "Plans to destroy the Taliban had been the subject of international diplomatic and not-so-diplomatic discussions for months before September 11. There was a crucial meeting in Geneva in May 2001 between U.S. State Dept., Iranian, German, and Italian officials, where the main topic was a strategy to topple the Taliban and replace the theocracy with a 'broad-based government.'...Further meetings took place after the G8 session in Berlin among American, Russian, German, and Pakistani officials, and Pakistani insiders have described a detailed American plan of July 2001 to launch military strikes against the Talibanfrom bases in Uzbekistan and Tajikistan before mid-October of that year..."Bush's favorite Afghan," Zalmay Khalilzad, joined the National Security Council on May 23,2001 just in time to work on an operational order for an attack on Afghanistan. On August 2, 2001, a former CIA officer held the United States' last official meeting with the Taliban in Islamabad. In light of this trajectory, it would appear that the attacks of September 11 provided an opportunity for the United States to act unilaterally to remove the Taliban, without assistance from Russia, India, or any other country.

taken from The Sorrows of Empire by Chalmers Johnson. i recommend the book to everyone on this board. it is well researched and meticulously footnoted. it is a fresh, seemingly accurate, and tragic interpretation of american forgeign policy since it came under neo-con control. the above excerpt relates to american plans to topple the taliban because the radical and unpredictable regime stood in the way of a central asian oil pipeline the u.s. has been trying to develop for years.

[enigma2517]

You guys kinda missed the point.

9/11 sucks but i'm not really whining about that.

I'm talking about how scary it is that the government quite possibly had something to do it.

Anonymous Red: What you "think" really isn't that relevant. We're communists be scientific about this. Actually go to the websites and find out for yourself. Not saying I'm right, just saying that going on just a hunch doesn't really matter, nor does it contribute to the discussion.

Those plans you speak of, I'm quite familiar with them. Would a local populace support something so outlandish. Before 9/11 WMD's would make people go psshhh. After the whole "terrorism" paradigm, things have changed a lot. Not to mention the domestic crackdown on civil liberties at home. Those in charge definetely stand to gain from this

[Colombia]

I cannot see why the government would plan to destroy such valuable buildings to their capitalist economy. After the planes crashed, tons of jobs were lost in NY. It makes little sense that the USA would plan this.

[anonymous red]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2005, 02:14 AM
I'm talking about how scary it is that the government quite possibly had something to do it.

Anonymous Red: What you "think" really isn't that relevant. We're communists be scientific about this. Actually go to the websites and find out for yourself. Not saying I'm right, just saying that going on just a hunch doesn't really matter, nor does it contribute to the discussion.

Those plans you speak of, I'm quite familiar with them. Would a local populace support something so outlandish. Before 9/11 WMD's would make people go psshhh. After the whole "terrorism" paradigm, things have changed a lot. Not to mention the domestic crackdown on civil liberties at home. Those in charge definetely stand to gain from this
it's really not that scary. remember the u.s.s maine? pearl harbor? there is a precedent for government foreknowledge of or involvement in attacks on the united states. was the u.s. government involved directly in the events of 9/11? i doubt it. has the government been completely transparent about what transpired that day? most likely, no. so what's the truth? somewhere between the official version and the conspiracy theories i'd imagine, but, much like the kennedy assassination, i doubt that we'll know the truth anytime in the near future. the real issues we should be dealing with are those we know to be fact. it's a fact that united states intended on invading afghanistan and iraq with or without the events of 9/11. afghanistan especially would have been a relatively easy sell to the american populace. humanitarian intervention, anyone? it worked for clinton in eastern europe. it would work again against a radically repressive theocracy in a country most people probably couldn't point out on a map pre-9/11. so why would the gov't put together some sort of insanely complicated plot to demolish the pinnacles of american and international capitalism? the sheer number of people who would have been involved in the plan, its execution, and its cover-up would be outrageous. how do you keep that many people silent?

[bolshevik butcher]

I don't think the U$ did it, but i think a lot more oculda been done to stop it and as farenheight 9/11 showed the investigation afterwards was shocking.

[jsm21588]

The government was definetely involved in the attack. This is the perfect crie i guess you could say. There are so many possibilities as to what could have happened. WTC building 7, theres a video of charges that go off at the top of the building rightHERE (http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/november2004/281104unmistakablecharges.htm) The collapsing was controlled and it is more than obvious. This was done using implosion methods, the fire on the second floor, wouldnt burn through the extremely strong steel used in the building. I'm a welder, so please dont challenge me on the fact that the steel would not melt from the fire they say was in the building, you need an extremely hot and oxidized flame to break the steel, which nature could not provide. Although steel hotels have burned down, but it take a numerous amount of hours before it can happen, this was all within minutes, the buildings were down.

To Implode a building the explosions go off first from the groud floor and work there way up, while at the same time the roof is also the first thing to go. One must first remove the main inner load bearing walls first which in turn causes the roof to collapse initially. If there were any papers on structural work that took place before the incident, see where they may have taken place at. The corners are the strongest points on the building, and when the plane hit it was more an illusion and a loud noise so people would not hear the sounds of explosions. If the building was hit only by planes, they would have toppled instead of falling like a pancake. If the planes only hit the top floor there would have been a hole and lots of fire, the top would not have been able to go through the entire building, unless the inner load bearing walls were weakened. The north tower collapsed in approx. 10 seconds and the South in approx. 8 seconds, which is way to fast for a plane hit.

There are also seismic recordings from waves in the ground, and also blasts that were heard by the firefighters after the buildings were down. I remember reading somewhere about the company CDI and their advanced technology in the implosion of buildings. This company has huge ties with the Military-Industrial complex and was present during the investigation and handled the clean-up of the Alfred murrah building.

Also, how do we know anybody was in the planes? Look at the technology that we have, those Predator things can be flown with nobody in a cockpit, simply a man far away with a joystick, whos to say that it can not be accomplished on a much larger scale. The passports that were found, i would love to see one of those, completely readable, if everything was that burnt, there never would have been a possibility for anything like that to be found.

Occam's Razor, anyone?

[anonymous red]

http://www.prisonplanet.com/021104vonbuelow.html

this transcript was pretty interesting.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Fuck all this conspiracy bullshit, it's a distraction.

Occam's Razor says that a bunch of muslim fundies thought it would be a good idea to strike out at the 'great satan' by flying a plane into a large public monument.

[anonymous red]

ironically, this popped up on the drudge report today (gotta see what the enemy is up to ;)):


A former Bush team member during his first administration is now voicing serious doubts about the collapse of the World Trade Center on 9-11. Former chief economist for the Department of Labor during President George W. Bush's first term Morgan Reynolds comments that the official story about the collapse of the WTC is "bogus" and that it is more likely that a controlled demolition destroyed the Twin Towers and adjacent Building No. 7. Reynolds, who also served as director of the Criminal Justice Center at the National Center for Policy Analysis in Dallas and is now professor emeritus at Texas A&M University said, "If demolition destroyed three steel skyscrapers at the World Trade Center on 9/11, then the case for an 'inside job' and a government attack on America would be compelling." Reynolds commented from his Texas A&M office, "It is hard to exaggerate the importance of a scientific debate over the cause of the collapse of the twin towers and building 7. If the official wisdom on the collapses is wrong, as I believe it is, then policy based on such erroneous engineering analysis is not likely to be correct either. The government's collapse theory is highly vulnerable on its own terms. Only professional demolition appears to account for the full range of facts associated with the collapse of the three buildings."

http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20...02755-6408r.htm (http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20050613-102755-6408r.htm)

[enigma2517]

Response to Columbia:

Ever hear of insurance. The guy who owns the buildings was having a lot of problems with recent repairs and renovations, and on top of that the buildings were insured for billions! At the current time the owner of that land is trying to collect insurance for both buildings (seperate attacks), thus doubling whatever he'd get in the first place. Estimated profit: at least 500 million. Not bad eh?

As for the others I don't see why you're so skeptic about this. Its not a conspirarcy if you can prove it.

Just research the following:

Enormous lack of wreckage at the pentagon (initial hole in the building was about 16 feet wide. How does a 747 vanish into a building?

How the twin towers fell (video evidence of implosion/controlled demolition)

Why the towers fell (ok seriously somebody answer this for me, how does a building specifically designed to withstand fire collapse from exactly that. They were steel support beams holding it up, jet fuel can't melt that. Moreover, how is this the first steel building EVER to collapse from fire)

Why was WTC7 "pulled" (demolished)?

Anonymous red: I see your point in some of this but a lot of it is just really sad, indiciting how you barely read anything that i posted anyway. Many of the 9/11 sites I've visited are very "patriotic", as far as they can be anyway. These aren't anti-statist lefties like us, these r just regular people presenting simple but important question about the events of that day. And I'm no scientist either it would take an idiot to not understand the physics of this. The melting point of steel is a prime example, along with other basic concepts involving gravity, trajectory, etc. Its all set up for the common man to see.

This whole tread makes me lose faith in some lefties. When presented with scientific information somebody tries to rebutal, but with no actually reference to any of the original material. Its all just, I have a hunch that or nah they would never do that.

And 9/11 made a huge difference in the invasion of Afghanistan/Iraq. Wars need support from the public. How the hell were we just going to go in there. Plans might have been in place but they wouldn't have turned into anything significantly more than just that without a material basis for the whole action.

Look I've read a lot about "conspirarcy theories" in my life, and yes some of them were tempting but still far too far fetched and, more importantly, unsubstainiated by FACT. This on the other hand is quite different from any run of the mill story about UFOs and what not.

The motive, the historical precedent and the option were all present on 9/11. Don't shrug this off as being unimportant. Why ***** about economic inequity and human rights and shit if the government is allowed to kill off its own population PUBLICALLY in a way that entirely benefits itself.

Please, you don't have to agree with me, but for the love of god at least READ about it

[jsm21588]

I completely agree with Enigma. I talked to a guy at a restaurant while i was waiting about this, and we got to the topic of the pentagon, an obvious missile attack. Like enigma said, how can a 747 leave a 16 ft. wide hole and vanish into a building? Things were way too controlled and even when i read about the CDI people being there, isn't that a little suspicious. Sure they may be able to pass of being there for engineering reasons, but they may also be there for some charges that may have not gone off. Charges were plainly in the building. Here is a quote from Dr. Hyman Brown about the collapse


Dr. Hyman Brown from the WTC construction crew, who claims that the WTC buildings collapsed “due to fires at 2,000 [degrees] F melting the steel.”

2000 DEGREES!?!?! IS HE FUCKIN SERIOUS!! I guess you can't trust somebody who's name is in a vagina.

We use oxy/fuel for cutting, and that heats up to
Acetylene when burned with oxygen gives a temperature of 3200°C to 3500°C (5800°F to 6300°F), which is the highest temperature of any of the commonly used gaseous fuels. I work with Acetylene and Oxygen a lot when im welding, and the flame takes a considerable amount of time to heat up metal, and without it being an oxidized flame it won't heat it up at all. Even the jet fuel is not hot enough, it would take much longer than it did for the metal to heat up to a melting point. Especially since the where the WTC Towers were hit, were made of metal that was supposedly 1/4" thick to 5/8" for WTC 1 and 1/4" to 13/16" for WTC 2.

Dr. Browns information (read the whole article) (http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/researcher_sheds_more_doubt.htm)
Article about oxy/acetylene (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_welding)
Good sight about the structure of building, not a government site (http://serendipity.nofadz.com/wot/wtc_ch2.htm)
Governments claim to the buildings structure (http://www.house.gov/science/hot/wtc/wtc-report/WTC_apndxB.pdf#search='steel%20used%20in%20wtc')

[Super Mario Conspiracy]

If it wasn't a plane that hit the Pentagon, then how do we explain this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbara_K._Olson

[The Z-Man]

Originally posted by Clenched [email protected] 13 2005, 04:48 PM
And one that has been used to justify two illegal wars?
Thats the only thing that really matters. Who cares about anything else? They used it to justify 2 wars.

[Super Mario Conspiracy]

And not only to use it in war, but in America itself too:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13233

...and in Iraq:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13303

...not to mention Patriot Act I and II.

[mo7amEd]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2005, 08:30 AM
With so many real and proven crimes why do we need conspiracy theories?
SOO TRUE!!!

ive been saying that in another forum.. the immortal technique forum and people consider me as beeing crazy, just becoz i have an own opinion and say that we cant prove the US gov's planning of 911, therefore concentrate on other PROVEN crimes made by the US.

[RedStarMilitia]

Either way, if the government was involved with 9/11 or whether it gave them the footing they needed to gain support and invade Iraq then the government is corrupt either way. To kill your own people to invade Iraq, or to justify what your doing on the basis of the dead people sickens me. Both ways America/Britian is in Iraq on false protenses. If this conspiracy is true it is ridiculously ironic that America is the real terrorist force. (which it is anyway).