- - - - - - - - - - - - -

Monday, September 11, 2006

5 Years on - 101 Questions about 9/11



5 years on from the media event that has redefined our current global culture, there are still many questions left unanswered. Here are some conspiracy questions from various conspiracy sites from around the world…..

1: If the Twin towers collapsed due to the planes hitting them, why did Fire Fighter, Louis Cacchioli tell People Weekly that a bomb went off inside the Tower as he was evacuating people?

2: Why did the Port Authorities fight for a year to keep audio tapes from rescue crews secret?

3: Why when the full transcripts were finally released did rescue crews report blinding flashes and cracking sounds inside the Towers which are consistent with a ‘Controlled Explosion’?

4: If the fire was so intense that it caused the steel to melt, and eventually the collapse of both towers, why did Fire Chief Palmer not only manage to reach the 78th Floor of the South Tower, but also state that he could put the fires out?

5: If the heat of the fire ‘weakened’ the metal and that was what lead to the collapse, how come the first Tower to get hit was the second to fall?

6: If the fire from the plane collision cause the Towers to collapse, why did Columbia University in New York register a 2.1 and 2.3 seismic shock moments before each Tower collapsed?

7: How come the melting point of the steel was 2,800 degrees F, yet the maximum temperature that can be reached by hydrocarbon jet fuel is 1,520 degrees F. Yet the clean up operation found molten steel in the basement 5 weeks after the collapse. The claim is that only high explosives could have generated the heat necessary to create so much molten steel.

8: Why was this entire giant crime scene effectively cut up and melted down so as to destroy any evidence?

9: Why did some investigating the collapse feel that the planes on their own could not have brought down the buildings and why did some of them feel that they were purposely hindered in their investigation?

10: How come in the entire history of high rise firefighting, no burning building has ever collapsed in on itself in the manner of a controlled explosion, yet it happened three times on September 11th?

11: How come in every video of the Tower collapses, there are mini explosions 30 stories beneath the collapse shock wave?

12: Why were there a series of ‘power downs’ within the Towers and WTC7 prior to September 11th which shut off security cameras and electronically locked doors.

13: Why did Daria Coard, a Guard at the WTC say that after these mysterious security closures, bomb-sniffing dogs weren’t allowed into either Towers or WTC7?

14: Why hasn’t Marvin Bush, the younger brother of George W Bush was on the Board of a company called ‘Securacom’ who ran the security for Dulles Airport, United Airlines AND the WTC been investigated? Isn’t it odd that the younger brother of George W Bush was also running security for those three?

15: How come no bodies, and very little debris was found at the Flight 93 crash site in Shanksville?

16: How come On October 26, 1999, the famous golfer Payne Stewart boarded a private Learjet in Florida and left for Texas. Shortly after takeoff, Stewart's jet veered sharply off course and began heading northwest. All contact with air controllers was lost. Within 15 minutes of having gone off course, US fighter jets had already intercepted the jet, yet on September 11th 4 planes were allowed to just wander around and do what they like for two hours?

17: How come two planes landed at Cleveland Hopkins Airport on September 11th that closed the entire airport?

18: Why did the US ignore warnings of an attack from the Australian Secret Intelligence community in days before the September attacks?

19: How can Osama Bin Laden who needs dialysis treatment for failing kidneys run a terrorist organization from a cave?

20: How come according to the 9/11 Commission, NONE of the planes black boxes were ever found? But they did find a Hijackers passport?

21: How come Firefighters Michaael Bellone and Nicholas DeMasi claim that black boxes were found?

22: How come there is 3 minutes at the end of the Flight 93 cockpit voice recorder that are missing?

23: Why are the cell phone calls from passengers on the planes so short and the caller always ends the call, only to call back? Why do some of the callers use their full name when calling people like their Mother (eg, “Hello Mum, it’s John Smith calling), and why do the callers ask so often “You believe me don’t you”, while they are telling their ‘story’? And why are the calls all from the same flight, Flight 93?

24: In 1999, the Los Alamos research site announced they had the technology to mimic any voice, does this technology have anything to do with these strange calls?

25: How could Cell phoneswork on a plane in 2001? At the cruising altitude of these planes, 32 000 feet, there is a .006% success rate for cell phone connections. It wasn’t until 2004 that American Airline planes were fitted with technology that allowed Cell phone calls. Why would Qualcomm and American Airlines spend do much money fitting out planes for cell phone use in 2004 when they apparently worked so well in 2001?

26: How come some of the 19 hijackers have been found alive and well?

27: How come some of the Hijackers were trained at U.S. Air Force bases and CIA-connected Huffman Aviation. Many of the accused “religious fanatics” acted more like degenerate contract agents, as they flashed wads of cash, visited strip clubs, drank profusely, blew cocaine, smoked weed, cavorted with strippers and had strange meetings in the drug-rich Florida keys.

28: How come Financial transactions in the days before the attack suggest that certain individuals used foreknowledge of the attack to reap huge profits. The evidence of insider trading includes:
* Huge surges in purchases of put options on stocks of the two airlines used in the attack -- United Airlines and American Airlines
* Surges in purchases of put options on stocks of reinsurance companies expected to pay out billions to cover losses from the attack -- Munich Re and the AXA Group
* Surges in purchases of put options on stocks of recorded by several financial services companies hurt by the attack -- Merrill Lynch & Co., and Morgan Stanley and Bank of America
* Huge surge in purchases of call options of stock of a weapons manufacturer expected to gain from the attack -- Raytheon
* Huge surges in purchases of 5-Year US Treasury Notes
In each case, the anomalous purchases translated into large profits as soon as the stock market opened a week after the attack: put options were used on stocks that would be hurt by the attack, and call options were used on stocks that would benefit.

29: Further to that insider knowledge, what about the report that Convar, a German computer company responsible for helping companies and accountants in New York restore their data from over 400 hard drives that were recovered from the World Trade Center's rubble. Convar recovered information from 32 different computers that suggested insider trading took place on 9-11. Richard Wagner, an expert at Convar:
“There is a suspicion that some people had advance knowledge of the approximate time of the plane crashes in order to move out amounts exceeding 100 million dollars. They thought that the records of their transactions could not be traced after the main frames were destroyed.
After their analysis, Convar handed the results over to the FBI. Although the FBI was legally bound to investigate who was responsible, to date they have done no such thing.”

30:Why did Ben Sliney, in his first day on the job as hijacking coordinator for the FAA, delayed calls to NORAD.

31:Why did NORAD just happen to run at least 7 hijacking drills on the morning of September 11th like Operation Vigilant Guardian where commercial jets crashed into government buildings in Manhattan, Washington DC, and Virginia. Were these “mock” drills, designed to distract the honest people within NORAD and the FAA?

32:What about the document called “Operation Northwoods” signed off in 1962 by the Joint Chiefs of Staff like Generals Lemnitzer and Landsdale? These men, sworn to protect the Constitution, devised a plan to create false-flag terrorism in order to engineer a war with Cuba. Their treasonous plans included the following:
-"Hijacking attempts against civil air and surface craft could appear to continue as harassing measures condoned by the Government of Cuba."
-"Exploding a few plastic bombs in carefully chosen spots, the arrest of Cuban agents and the release of prepared documents substantiating Cuban involvement also would be helpful in projecting the idea of an irresponsible government."
- "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba . . . casualty lists in U.S. newspapers cause a helpful wave of indignation."
This document was discovered in the National Archives and has been the subject of mainstream articles by ABCNEWS and others. It stands as clear evidence that the U.S. government has designed plans to engineer terrorist attacks and blame them on foreign enemies.

33: How come in the ‘Bin Laden Confession tape’ of December 14th, 2001, which security forces ‘found’ in a house in Pakistan, a left handed Bin Laden is seen writing with his right hand? And how come Bin Laden is seen wearing a gold ring on his finger, when the wearing of gold rings is forbidden in Islam? And why didn’t Osama Bin Laden look like Osama Bin Laden in this ‘Confession Tape’? Was this really Osama Bin Laden?

34: How come the ‘Hijackers’ left a ‘how to fly’ manual in Arabic, a copy of the Koran and a poster of Osama Bin Laden in the carpark? This was either the most obvious plant in the history of policing or the dumbest hijackers in the history of hijacking. The New Yorker suggests the trail was made on purpose.

35: What happened to the Gold that was stored in safes at the bottom of the WTC? The London Times estimates the god to be valued at $750 million Large amounts of gold are stored in vaults in the massive basement below the WTC, and some of this is being transported through the basement on the morning of September 11th. Several weeks later, recovery workers will discover hundreds of ingots in a service tunnel below WTC 5, along with a ten-wheel lorry and some cars (which were, presumably, transporting the gold). The lorry and cars had been crushed by falling steel, but no bodies will be reported found with them, so presumably they were abandoned before the first WTC collapse, at 9:59 a.m.

36: How come the a Air Force didn’t launch Jet fighters which can launch jet fighters to 29,000 feet in 2.5 minutes. We also know that the two co-chairmen of the 9/11 Commission have just written a book that reveals that the US military lied to the Commission about its failure to intercept the hijacked airliners.

37: The Pancake theory for the Tower collapse put forward as the official explanation doesn’t explain how the free-fall speed was so fast. Is the reason the towers came down at approximately free-fall speeds is because they came down, totally unopposed by lower structures, under the influence of gravity (which was presumably in effect). Combining that conclusion with what is seen in the videos indicates that supports for the lower floors were taken out, just in time, ahead of (to keep up with) the falls, in an illusive, very high-tech, high-energy demolition-on-demand. In other words, the towers did not passively fail, they were actively failed.

38: Why did Some staff members and commissioners of the Sept. 11 panel concluded that the Pentagon's initial story of how it reacted to the 2001 terrorist attacks may have been part of a deliberate effort to mislead the commission and the public rather than a reflection of the fog of events on that day, according to sources involved in the debate.

39: Did the $2.3 Trillion dollars missing from the Pentagon Budget that Rumsfeld declared on September 10th have anything to do with the money necessary to Black Op something as large as September 11th?

40: How come out of the 4 possible explanations for what happened on September 11th …
(A) The Official Story (a.k.a. “The Official Conspiracy Theory”). The received Bushian line: Osama, nineteen freedom-haters with box cutters, etc. As White House press secretary Ari Fleischer said, there was “no warning.”
(B) The Incompetence Theory (also the Stupidity, Arrogance, “Reno Wall” Theory). Accepts the Official Story, adds failure by the White House, FBI, CIA, NSA, etc. to heed ample warnings. This line was advanced, with much ass-covering compensation, in The 9/11 Commission Report.
(C) LIHOP (or “Let It Happen on Purpose”). Many variations, but primarily that elements of the U.S. government and the private sector were aware of the hijackers’ plans and, recognizing that 9/11 suited their policy goals, did nothing to stop it.
(D) MIHOP (“Made It Happen on Purpose”). The U.S. government or private forces planned and executed the attacks.
…The ‘Official’ version is the least likely to have occurred.

41: Was it convenient for the WTC 7 building to collapse in the same ‘Controlled Detonation’ manner as the Towers seeing as the WTC7 building happen to house a secret CIA office on the 25th floor along with The IRS, the Department of Defense, and the Secret Service occupying the ninth and tenth. The Securities and Exchange Commission (home to vast records of bank transactions) was on floors 11 through 13. The 23rd floor was home to Rudy Giuliani’s Office of Emergency Management, his crisis center. If this wasn’t enough, the mortgage of 7 WTC was held by the Blackstone Group, headed by Pete Peterson, chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations. The New York CIA station was believed to have been the largest and most important CIA domestic station outside the Washington area.

42: How come William Rodriguez – acclaimed as the ‘last man pulled out of the rubble’, a cleaner who was at the WTC, has reported several times that there was an explosion in the Basement before the first plane hit?

43: Why was it reported that the Pakistani ISI Director Lt. Gen. Mahmood Ahmed paid $100 000 to lead Hijacker, Mohamed Atta, especially in relation to the incredibly tight relationship the ISI had with funding Islamic extremists in the past.

44: Why did one of Mahmood’s subordinates tell a US undercover agent that the WTC were going to be attacked? Chairman of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, Senator Bob Graham was given such a warning in August.

45: Why did ISI Director Lt. Gen. Mahmood Ahmed, Chairman of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, Senator Bob Graham, 10-year veteran of the CIA’s clandestine operations wing, Representative Porter Goss, Senator Jon Kyl and the Pakistani ambassador, Maleeha Lodhi all meet in Pakistan weeks before September 11?

46: Was it just coincidence that ISI Director Lt. Gen. Mahmood Ahmed, Chairman of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, Senator Bob Graham, 10-year veteran of the CIA’s clandestine operations wing, Representative Porter Goss, Senator Jon Kyl and the Pakistani ambassador, Maleeha Lodhi all happened to meet again on September 11? Does anyone else find it odd that a man accused of sending money to Mohamed Atta and having foreknowledge of the attack should be meeting such powerful American figures before and on the day of September 11th?

47: Would September 11th have happened if the United States hadn’t of played god by trying to create the Soviet Union’s own Vietnam? The official story is that the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, but that wasn’t the case, in a 1998 interview, Zbigniew Brzezinski, President Jimmy Carter’s National Security Adviser, revealed that the CIA began destabilizing the pro-Soviet Afghan government six months earlier in a deliberate attempt to get the Soviets to invade and have their own Vietnam-type costly war. Brzezinski rhetorically asks, “What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Muslims or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the Cold War?”

48: Did the historic ties between the CIA and ISI and the Saudis play a larger role in the September 11 attacks? The US and Saudi Arabia give a huge amount of money (estimates range up to $40 billion total for the war) to support the mujahedeen guerrilla fighters opposing the Russians. Most of the money is managed by the ISI, Pakistan’s intelligence agency.

49: Wasn’t Osama bin Laden funded by the CIA? In early 1980, Osama bin Laden begins providing financial, organizational, and engineering aid for the mujahedeen in Afghanistan, with the advice and support of the Saudi royal family. Some, including Richard Clarke, counterterrorism “tsar” during the Clinton and George W. Bush administrations, believe he was handpicked for the job by Prince Turki al-Faisal, head of Saudi Arabia’s Secret Service. The Pakistani ISI want a Saudi prince as a public demonstration of the commitment of the Saudi royal family and as a way to ensure royal funds for the anti-Soviet forces. The agency fails to get royalty, but bin Laden, with his family’s influential ties, is good enough for the ISI. (Clarke will argue later that the Saudis and other Muslim governments used the Afghan war in an attempt to get rid of their own misfits and troublemakers.) This multinational force later coalesces into al-Qaeda.

50: Wasn’t the ISI supported warlord, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, who helped Bin Laden’s MAK orginisation also a massive opium runner and has been called “an ISI Stooge and creation”.

51: Didn’t the US help with sowing hatred in the region with USAID and the University of Nebraska, by spending millions of dollars developing and printing textbooks for Afghan schoolchildren. The textbooks are filled with violent images and militant Islamic teachings, part of covert attempts to spur resistance to the Soviet occupation. For instance, children are taught to count with illustrations showing tanks, missiles, and land mines. Lacking any alternative, millions of these textbooks are used long after 1994; the Taliban are still using them in 2001. In 2002, the US will start producing less violent versions of the same books, which President Bush says will have “respect for human dignity, instead of indoctrinating students with fanaticism and bigotry.” (He will fail to mention who created those earlier books).

52: Didn’t the Pakistani ISI and CIA Gain from Drug Production in the 1980s off the backs of the very ‘Islamic Fascists’ that we are now fighting? The Pakistani ISI starts a special cell of agents who use profits from heroin production for covert actions “at the insistence of the CIA.” “This cell promotes the cultivation of opium, the extraction of heroin in Pakistani and Afghan territories under mujahedeen control. The heroin is then smuggled into the Soviet controlled areas, in an attempt to turn the Soviet troops into heroin addicts. After the withdrawal of the Soviet troops, the ISI’s heroin cell started using its network of refineries and smugglers for smuggling heroin to the Western countries and using the money as a supplement to its legitimate economy. But for these heroin dollars, Pakistan’s legitimate economy must have collapsed many years ago.” The ISI grows so powerful on this money, that “even by the shadowy standards of spy agencies, the ISI is notorious. It is commonly branded ‘a state within the state,’ or Pakistan’s ‘invisible government.’”

53: Did the ISI cut a deal with Bin Laden between 1980-1987? According to controversial author Gerald Posner, ex-CIA officials claim that Gen. Akhtar Abdul Rahman, Pakistani ISI’s head from 1980 to 1987, regularly meets bin Laden in Peshawar, Pakistan. The ISI and bin Laden form a partnership that forces Afghan tribal warlords to pay a “tax” on the opium trade. By 1985, bin Laden and the ISI are splitting annual profits of up to $100 million a year.

54: Didn’t the CIA, MI6 and ISI spread Islamic terrorist even further in March, 1985? The CIA, MI6 (Britain’s intelligence agency), and the ISI agree to launch guerrilla attacks from Afghanistan into then Soviet-controlled Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, attacking military installations, factories, and storage depots within Soviet territory, and do so until the end of the war. The CIA also gives subversive literature and Korans to the ISI, who carry them into the Soviet Union.

55: Didn’t CIA Director William Casey turn al-Qaeda into a global player? According to Australian journalist John Pilger, in this year, “CIA Director William Casey [gives] his backing to a plan put forward by Pakistan’s intelligence agency, the ISI, to recruit people from around the world to join the Afghan jihad. More than 100,000 Islamic militants [are] trained in Pakistan between 1986 and 1992, in camps overseen by the CIA and [the British intelligence agency] MI6, with the [British special forces unit] SAS training future al-Qaeda and Taliban fighters in bomb-making and other black arts. Their leaders [are] trained at a CIA camp in Virginia.” This operation is named Operation Cyclone. While the operation is originally designed to defeat the Soviets in Afghanistan, it continues for several years after the Soviets leave Afghanistan in 1989. Eventually, around 35,000 Muslim radicals from 43 Islamic countries will fight with the Afghan mujahedeen. Tens of thousands more will study in the hundreds of new madrassas (Islamic schools) funded by the ISI and CIA in Pakistan. Their main logistical base is in the Pakistani city of Peshawar.

56: Did Richard Murphy, assistant secretary of state for Near East and South Asian relations during the Reagan administration, really say, “We did spawn a monster in Afghanistan. Once the Soviets were gone [the people trained and/or funded by the US] were looking around for other targets, and Osama bin Laden has settled on the United States as the source of all evil. Irony? Irony is all over the place.”

57: Is it true that In the late 1980s, Pakistani President Benazir Bhutto, feeling the mujahedeen network has grown too strong, tells President George H. W. Bush, “You are creating a Frankenstein.” However, the warning goes unheeded. And that by 1993, President Bhutto tells Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak that Peshawar is under de facto control of the mujahedeen, and unsuccessfully asks for military help in reasserting Pakistani control over the city. Thousands of mujahedeen fighters return to their home countries after the war is over and engage in multiple acts of violence. One Western diplomat notes these thousands would never have been trained or united without US help, and says, “The consequences for all of us are astronomical.”

58: Why was the Head US Consular Official in Saudi Arabia told to issue visa to unqualified applicants in 1989? Michael Springmann, head US consular official in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, later claims that during this period he is “repeatedly told to issue visas to unqualified applicants.” He turns them down, but is repeatedly overruled by superiors. Springmann loudly complains to numerous government offices, but no action is taken. He is fired and his files on these applicants are destroyed. He later learns that recruits from many countries fighting for bin Laden against Russia in Afghanistan were funneled through the Jeddah office to get visas to come to the US, where the recruits would travel to train for the Afghan war. According to Springmann, the Jeddah consulate was run by the CIA and staffed almost entirely by intelligence agents. This visa system may have continued at least through 9/11, and 15 of the 19 9/11 hijackers received their visas through Jeddah, possibly as part of this program.

59: Where are those Weapons of Mass Destruction that was the reason we had to invade Iraq after September 11th?

60: Would the up to 250 000 dead Iraqis be happy with the war on terrorism?

61: Now it has been proven that Saddam posed no threat with WMDs and had no links to al-Qaeda – how is the war on terror in Iraq justified?

62: Did Bush plan for Regime Change before becoming President?

63: Did UK Ministers know the WMDs were an excuse?

64: Did the Project For The New American Century hint that September 11th was a set up?

65: Why were we originally told that the war in Iraq could not cost more than $100 Billion, but has actually cost to date$313 349 887 731

66: Why were so many clues missed that warned America about the pending September 11th attack? Was it incompetence or was it because they knew it was coming?

67: Why was FBI Deputy Director, John O'Neill told to stop investigating Al-qeada accounts?

68: Why did Atta decide to study at Opa Locka, a famous hub of 6 Navy training bases and includes government partners like U.S. Coast Guard Air Station, Police (Miami-Dade) Aviation Unit? And why was Atta allowed to study since he was stopped by the police for driving without a license and also for violating his visa?

69: If there was no premeditated plans for an attack on Iraq, how come two U.S. carrier battle groups arrive in the Gulf of Arabia just off the Pakistani coast before 9/11, and 17,000 U.S. troops join more than 23,000 NATO troops in Egypt for Operation 'Bright Star' on 9/11? What was the purpose of both of these operations?

70: Why did the Bin Laden website expire on September 11th?

71: Is it just a coincidence that the Bush family and Bin Laden family are connected through the Carlyle Group? And isn’t it a coincidence that Calyle, being a defense contractor, has increased its profits because of the war their sons have kick started? And what did George HW Bush say to the bin Laden family in 2000?

72: Why was Vladimir Putin’s warning to the CIA about a possible terrorist attack ignored? Vladimir Putin was so certain of the information he received in the summer of 2001 of an impending attack that he personally instructed Russian intelligence to tell Bush "in the strongest possible terms" (his own words on Sept. 15, 2001) of an impending attack involving airports and government. The Russians told the CIA that 25 terrorist pilots had been specially trained to execute suicide missions. It was around the same time that the FBI was receiving tips about suspicious Arabic men in U.S. flight schools.

73: Why was the French Secret Service ignored when they informed the CIA about terrorist attacks on America?

74: When Italian Deputy Prime Minister Gianfranco Fini informed the CIA about a possible attack on the American president "with the use of an airplane", why was he ignored?

75: When did President Mubarak, of Egypt, informed the CIA about a possible attack on America with an "airplane stuffed with explosives", why was he ignored?

76: Why is the Bush administration so strongly against a real investigation into the events of 9-11?

77: Why did John Ashcroft stops flying commercial, citing an unidentified "threat" in July 2001?

78: Why did Bush dissolve the Bin Laden Task Force? What would have happened had this focused and knowledgeable group been in place 9 months before 911?

79: Why were there plans to invade Afghanistan before September 11?

80: Why by July 1st, were 3 Senators warning of an impending attack on the US?

81: If all these warnings of an impending attack from Bin Laden were coming in why did the ISI allow Bin Laden to have dialysis in July?

82: Why did the CIA meet with Bin Laden months before the attack?

83: How did Hijacker Khalid Almihdhar, who was on the terrorist watchlist, reenter the US without any problems months before September 11?

84: Counterterrorisim ‘tsar’ Richard Clarke warns on July 5thy that a spectacular Terrorst attack, why was he ignored by the FAA and FBI?

85: Why did, on July 10th, the FBI ignore FBI agent Ken Williams who warns people of investigative interest are all learning to fly planes. Williams began investigating October 1996.

86: Why did Attorney General Ashcroft tells the FBI that he doesn’t want to hear any7thing more about Terrorists wanting to launch attacks.

87: And why did Ashcroft oppose counter terrorist funding on September 10th?

88: Why were the US still meeting with the Taliban in August 2nd?

89: Why was the memo called ‘Bin Laden determined to strike the US” not enacted upon?

90: Why did America not react when the Israeli Government warn them in August that an attack was imminent?

91: Why wasn’t the head of the CIA’s Counter Terrorism head listened to on August the 15th? Cofer Black, head of the CIA’s Counter Terrorism Center, says in a speech to the Department of Defense’s annual Convention of Counterterrorism, “We are going to be struck soon, many Americans are going to die, and it could be in the US.” Black later complains that top leaders are unwilling to act at this time unless they are given “such things as the attack is coming within the next few days and here is what they are going to hit.”

92: Why was the New York Air National Guard Unit sent to Saudi Arabia weeks before Sept 11 and were only due back on September 11th at 3pm. Effectively stopping these fighters from scrambling on September 11th

93: Did the PNAC have a hand in the September 11th events? This is what Thomas Donnelly, deputy executive director of the PNAC, explains to the Washington Post weeks before the attacks, that the US should embrace its role as imperialist hegemon over the world. He says many important politicians privately agree with him. “There’s not all that many people who will talk about it openly,” he says. “It’s discomforting to a lot of Americans. So they use code phrases like ‘America is the sole superpower.’” He also says, “I think Americans have become used to running the world and would be very reluctant to give it up, if they realized there were a serious challenge to it.”

94: Why was there still no movement from America when Mossad gave the CIA a list of terrorists living in the US, and 4 of the hijackers names are on this list. This was two weeks before September 11.

95: Why was a report sent by the FBI’s New York office recommending that an investigation be launched “to determine if [Khalid] Almihdhar is still in the United States” turned down? The New York office tries to convince FBI headquarters to open a criminal investigation, but it is immediately turned down.

96: Why was another report edited so as to not allow a search of Zacarias Moussaoui’s possessions? A previously mentioned unnamed RFU (Radical Fundamentalism Unit) agent edits the Minnesota FBI’s request (see August 23-27, 2001) for a FISA search warrant to search Zacarias Moussaoui’s possessions. Minnesota is trying to prove that Moussaoui is connected to al-Qaeda through a rebel group in Chechnya, but the RFU agent removes information connecting the Chechnya rebels to al-Qaeda.

97: Why in the final weeks before the attack did the FBI finally respond to tracing Khalid Almihdhar by appointing someone who had little experience with theInternational Terrorism Squad

98: Why did America still do nothing even when Egypt warn 10 days before the attack that al-Qaeda are about to launch attacks.

99: Why in late August were further fighter planes sent overseas?

100: Why did two large tenants of the WTC building trade stocks in a suspicious manner, suggesting they had insider knowledge of the impending disaster?

101: WHY At 2.40pm on September 11th, as the buildings are smoldering and the first intelligence reports are being demanded – Donald Rumsfeld first suggests that Iraq should be hit in response!

51 Comments:

At 11/9/06 9:50 am, Anonymous Morphyoss said...

Who the hell is boomer? I think the name you are looking for is Bomber, idiot.

Great post Bomber, there are just so many questions that have gone unanswered. It really makes you think long and hard about the official version of events.

 
At 11/9/06 10:25 am, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I wonder what actually hit the pentagon building that day, where are the marks on the building where the wings should have smashed into the sides? A big plane like that travelling at a speed of hundreds of miles fast makes such a small hole? Where's the wreckage of the plane? Must be the only time in aviation history where that ever happened.

 
At 11/9/06 10:29 am, Anonymous jon said...

I think having the music from the X-files playing would have been a nice touch.

Bomber, I like your good work of which there is plenty, but it's posts like this that tend to undermine the good stuff and gives your detrators ammunition.

I see there is much discussion about the subjects that you and Tim blog about which is good, but it almost seems to be more about whipping people into a froth than actually getting resolving anything. More often than not, the subject seems to be changed or the participants are distracted by another topic that is hotly commented upon. A little more focussed approach may see more resolution (of course I'm assuming that's what you're after...it may not be).

 
At 11/9/06 10:52 am, Blogger Brewerstroupe said...

Jon.

One would be naive to seek resolution through these pages. A more realistic aim would be to get people to critically examine what is reported in the mainstream press. I think tumeke does a good job of this. The detractors are simply an amusing sideshow. The ammunition Bomber provides serves only to blacken their own faces when it blows back. Personally, I wouldn't be without them. When there is no literate or informed opposition to keep one busy, they provide target practice.
Take AB's banging on about "cops on this site". I mean, what's all that about? One doesn't even have to be a marksman to knock them off.

 
At 11/9/06 1:08 pm, Anonymous jon said...

Yep like I said I think that much the discussion and scrutiny that this site generates is postive & provides opportunity for many perspectives to be explained (though it seems at times only the really noisy perspectives get attention)

Some of the character assination and insults are of less value even as a sideshow....with so much interesting content available (here and elsewhere) I'd suggest that sideshow is redundant.

My comment about resolution is based along the following lines. It seems that there is much discussion, thinking & (gasp) even learning (perhaps even in that order ;op) occuring for participants, but structuring the output from where I sit would be great so that it wouldn't so much be like sentance that suddenly & abruptly stops. Many of the topics that are being posted about are conversations that make up a larger theme. When the conversation abruptly stops what I sense is missing is the momentum is lost and the conversation's relevance to the theme too is lost.

To not seek resolution or perhaps learning would perhaps be like having a one night stand (coz we really don't know who the other participant(s) are) but not the point of orgasm. The act has been embarked upon, is probably mostly completed but there's not the big payoff at the end (that helps you sleep at night). ;o)

 
At 11/9/06 2:20 pm, Anonymous mr smith said...

I read the Popular Mechanics article and there are still questions in my mind as well - love the 911 timetable stuff too, that is a very good site - can't believe all the warnings the Americans were given which they didn't react to

 
At 11/9/06 3:21 pm, Anonymous molly ringwald said...

Or you could just do what anonymous does and source your arguements from up your own asshole.

 
At 11/9/06 3:27 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Another internet toughguy. Go fuck yourself :)

 
At 11/9/06 3:37 pm, Blogger Brewerstroupe said...

"What is the credible alternative narrative"

Good post.

I tend to share your view of 911 but I have not yet enquired into the alternative theories.

A few years ago I would have laughed at anyone who suggested that the U.S. administration would spend twelve months on a disinformation campaign to persuade it's own citizens of the morality and necessity of invading a sovereign nation.

I would also have regarded as incredible that the U.S. would go ahead with such a plan resulting in 3,000 deaths among their own troops and possibly 100,000 deaths, mostly civilian, in that subject country.

Particularly incredible is that the rationale for this invasion is given as a "War on Terror". One assumes that this means Al Quaeda. I am told by one of the posters here that this organsation comprises less than 1,000 members.

More incredible is that this U.S. administration has seen fit to break all ties with the Geneva Convention and, in the process, destroy the United Nations Organisation.

Most incredible of all is that despite Al Quaeda saying it, despite President Ahmadineajad saying it and despite the many academics and former high U.S. Government officials saying it; not one member of this U.S. administration has said one word about the real grievance that led to the attack on Sept 9, 2001.

In view of this I shall be following up the links bomber posted because to me, nothing is incredible any more.

 
At 11/9/06 3:42 pm, Blogger Brewerstroupe said...

President Ahmadineajad of Iran said it:

“A regime has been established which does not show mercy even to kids, destroys houses
while the occupants are still in them, announces beforehand its list and plans to assassinate Palestinian figures and keeps thousands of Palestinians in prison. Such a phenomenon is unique – or at the very least extremely rare – in recent memory.
Another big question asked by people is why is this regime being supported?”
http://72.14.235.104/search?q=cache:v5RWPlOBK90J:news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/09_05_06ahmadinejadletter.pdf+Iran+letter&hl=en&gl=nz&ct=clnk&cd=3

Oama Bin Laden said it

“All that is going on in Palestine for the last 11 months is sufficient to call the wrath of God upon the United States and Israel.”
http://www.public-action.com/911/oblintrv.html

W. Scott Thompson Adjunct Professor of International Politics. The Fletcher School, Tufts University, Former White House Fellow and Assistant to the Secretary of Defense (1975-77) said it:

"An international coalition to rid the region and the world of a monster is a good thing. Why then does Washington have so little international support for its imminent war to achieve "regime change" in Iraq?...
The real reason why America can't get support for its war can be summed up in one word, Palestine...On a broader front the creation of a Palestinian state would remove the sting that young Arabs have felt so poignantly. And then, instead of seeing the West's inevitable victory over Saddam Hussein in Iraq as yet another humiliation, they could look to the building of new foundations of - we hope - democratic Arab states throughout the Middle East."
"Iraq - It's the Right War, But at the Wrong Time"
The Nation (Thailand)
March 18, 2003

George Bush said:

“They hate our freedom.”

 
At 11/9/06 3:49 pm, Anonymous mr smith said...

That’s ridiculous – yes there were warnings – check out questions

80: Why by July 1st, were 3 Senators warning of an impending attack on the US?

82: Why did the CIA meet with Bin Laden months before the attack?

84: Counterterrorisim ‘tsar’ Richard Clarke warns on July 5thy that a spectacular Terrorst attack, why was he ignored by the FAA and FBI?

85: Why did, on July 10th, the FBI ignore FBI agent Ken Williams who warns people of investigative interest are all learning to fly planes. Williams began investigating October 1996.

89: Why was the memo called ‘Bin Laden determined to strike the US” not enacted upon?

90: Why did America not react when the Israeli Government warn them in August that an attack was imminent?

91: Why wasn’t the head of the CIA’s Counter Terrorism head listened to on August the 15th? Cofer Black, head of the CIA’s Counter Terrorism Center, says in a speech to the Department of Defense’s annual Convention of Counterterrorism, “We are going to be struck soon, many Americans are going to die, and it could be in the US.” Black later complains that top leaders are unwilling to act at this time unless they are given “such things as the attack is coming within the next few days and here is what they are going to hit.”

The US spend $30 billion a year on 'intelligence' - and they screwed this up? And for asking those questions we are wrong?

 
At 11/9/06 4:08 pm, Anonymous America the Beautiful said...

So in that case there weren't bombs in the WTC? No conspiracy by Bush? Lets face it, if its all about Palestine, and the US puruports to support Israel, then why did the USA not stop the attacks if they knew they were going to occur?

 
At 11/9/06 4:28 pm, Anonymous jon said...

Check out what youtube has on the subject of Rumsfeld lying. Watching his reaction when he gets fairly and squarely caught out is interesting and thought provoking.

 
At 11/9/06 4:30 pm, Blogger Simon said...

Good work bomber.

These questions need to be asked...

personally I like to focus on the unbelieveable and anomalous aspects of 9/11 and the pure facts.

There were many reports of bombs going off in the buildings before WTC1 and 2 collapsed.

Larry Silverstein admitted ona PBS documentary that they "pulled" WTC7. "pull" is jargon for a controlled demolition. The explosives must have been planted weeks before. WTC7 was the command bunker for a drill involving hijacked aeroplanes crashing into the WTC and the pentagon at the exact same time. It was the NY headquaters of the CIA and the Secret Service.

There have only been three modern steel core buildings to collapse due to fire in history. All were on 9/11.

If people bother to check the facts out for themselves then it's pretty clear who orchestrated it. Don't just look up "debunking 9/11 theories", investigate the facts.

9/11 has been used as an excuse for the murder of thousands of innocent people. There are people out there right now being tortured and killed because of a criminal element that has taken over the US administration. (not that it was any better 100 years ago...)

 
At 11/9/06 4:30 pm, Blogger Brewerstroupe said...

america the beautiful

That's easy.
The neo-cons had no show of getting their pax americana agenda going without an excuse. Even Bubba and the missus in the trailer park look askance at attacks without provocation.

I tend to the view that intelligence leading up to 911 was, at best, mishandled. Some deliberate play might have been at work but the nature of intelligence gathering is such that you get a bit here, you get a bit there. If you don't put the pieces together the right way before the event, it is easy to say that you had all the pieces after it's all over.

 
At 11/9/06 4:36 pm, Anonymous Jayson Blair said...

This is an unintentionally hilarious grab-bag of contradictory assertions and pseudo-questions. From what I can tell, your basic thesis is that that the US co-ordinated these attacks as part of a fascist attempt to further a neo-con agenda. Yet "Questions" 47-55 trot out the familiar (and not invalid) criticisms that the US funded Osama, hoping to mire the Soviet Union in their own Vietnam?

So what you are actually trying to say Bomber? That the US is this incredibly cunning super-fascist state capable of plotting this outrageous attack against itself (while simultaneously, as a previous poster pointed out, being unable to plant WMDs in Iraq?) Or that, through shortsightedness, stupidity and all-round dumbarseholery, they created/exacerbated a situation that exploded with unforseen and calamitous circumstances.

It's one or the other buddy. Whatever one you choose, knocks out at least 50 of your questions as absurdities.

Having said that, I don't think anyone doubts that nefarious elements within the US administration have exploited 9/11 to advance their own agendas. But that's a million miles from postulating the sort of conspiracy theory you're developing here.

Incidentally, I suggest that you read again the New York magazine feature, "The Ground Zero Grassy Knoll", one of the few credibly-researched sources you cite. You'll see here that that the stuff you reprint as scientific fact are the opinions Father Frank Morales a self-described "average wild-eyed, foaming-at-the-mouth conspiracy nut."

That's not to say he's wrong, but I'd be much more interested in hearing from a chemistry/physics expert as to how, for instance, the steel could have melted at this alleged "low" heat. But then that's harder work than trawling through the net and rehashing tired old conspirary theories (though it's good to see you've lifted your game on the acknowledgment/citation front.)

 
At 11/9/06 5:25 pm, Anonymous sdm said...

At the end of the day, yes, there was information sitting in a draw somewhere that pointed to the fact that terrorists were going to fly planes into building. But to say it was deliberate, or a jewish conspricy, as some have claimed, is ridiculous.

I have been consistent in my criticism of US intelligence post 9/11 - i wrote a thesis on NZ intelligence and security measures implemented post 9/11.

How many people have been fired as a result on the intelligence failures of 9/11? none

We must never forget those people who lost their lifes though. The left spends a lot of time mourning the loss of innocent civilians - well, the same thing happened here. People died, it was an act of war. The Bush administration were asleep at the helm, key clues were missed that could have prevented the tragedy of 9/11

 
At 11/9/06 5:46 pm, Blogger Simon said...

All the evidence points to the fact that none of the "hijackers" were skilled enough to fly the planes... no-one seems to pick up on the fact that they were trained at US miliary bases. Duh. How obvious can it get?

(bomber - i'd have used less questions to illustrate my point.)

 
At 11/9/06 5:58 pm, Blogger Simon said...

---- “Larry Silverstein is a rather large player within the realms of 21st Century real estate, finance, and politics.”14 He “…had taken out a long lease on the World Trade Center only six weeks before 9/11. In a PBS documentary entitled ‘America Rebuilds’, originally aired in September of 2002, Silverstein made the following statement about Building 7:

‘I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, “We’ve had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.” And they made that decision to pull, and we watched the building collapse.’”

--- “It is inconceivable that anyone could be running around placing explosives in exactly the right places all within seven hours. In fact, implosions take a minimum of two weeks and up to two months to plan and place the charges. The fire department of New York does not even train their personnel to do controlled demolition. They are done by highly skilled experienced specialists who plan and test far ahead.”

 
At 11/9/06 6:48 pm, Anonymous jon said...

I'm a bit confused with Simon's first post as it seems to contradict itself, but I suspect this is what Simon is trying to highlight about Bomber's post...which I've admittedly not read most of.

Anyway to share a little of my experience.

One of my pilot mates by the name of Shaun (who coincidentally went to the same school & year as Bomber...who probably didn't see eye to eye with Bomber) was working as a flight instructor at a flight school in the Phoenix Az during 96-98, which I myself visited in that time.

After 9/11 Shaun recognised one of the names of the guys who apparently was one of the hijackers, as a student at the flight school.

My own experience flying being (marginally) in control of aifcraft as a non-qualified pilot would suggest that most people could fly sucessfully without much training particularly if no landing is required.

 
At 11/9/06 6:52 pm, Blogger woman wandering said...

I guess the key problem with this theory is what it means for the world if it's true.

People will fight tooth and nail for it not to be true because if it is ... then what is there left for them to believe in?

Having watched this presidency and having read 'the Project For The New American Century' (link on question 64) a few years ago, my first words were 'Don't these guys know that this should be a secret society?' I was stunned.

What they had written was beyond belief ... terrifyingly so.

I've lived in Turkey, I know the power of the media and those who like to fiddle with it and used watch in disbelief as CNN (one example) spun a Turkey I didn't recognise. None of us foreigners there recognised it ... it was a joke and yet the repercussions of that spin have cost the Turks a lot in terms of credibility in joining the EU.

We can either walk about inside the bubble and question nothing, or we can explore the fact that it just might be that some people in this world see the masses as pawns on a massive chessboard.

These questions do need answers. It's that simple, then we can go forward or we can work out how we fix things.

 
At 11/9/06 7:24 pm, Blogger Brewerstroupe said...

Wandering woman.

Lovely post. Bush was one of the first to say that 911 changed the World. He was wrong. There have been many such acts of terrorism before this. Hopefully it is the aftermath and the U.S. reaction that changes the World or at least the way we view the morality of World leaders.

SDM

It was not an act of war. Just as the Unibomber did not commit an act of war. Wars are between States.

 
At 11/9/06 8:12 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Looks like this crap is an industry.

How do people have the time, don't most people work, have family to look after, walk the dog etc...

This post - can anyone be bothered to read it all ...... is hardly orginal ..... the answers are out there even to stupid questions it seems.

From the New York Post......

FIVE YEARS AFTER 9/11: TINFOIL
HATS ATTACK


By MICHELLE MALKIN


September 10, 2006 -- DEBUNKING 9/11 MYTHS: WHY CONSPIRACY THEORIES CAN'T STAND UP TO THE FACTS BY THE EDITORS OF POPULAR MECHANICS, FOREWORD BY SEN. JOHN MCCAIN HEARST, 192 PAGES, $14.95
I GET several e-mails from 9/11 conspiracy theorists every week, usually typed in all capital letters with minimal punctuation and maximum sputter. Here's a typical message I received last Tuesday: "It appears you are not a believer. So, I have only one question, perhaps, but doubtfully, you can answer. WHY DID BUILDING SEVEN COME DOWN?"

As it happens, Popular Mechanics magazine's new book, "Debunking 9/11 Myths," answers that question concisely - with the caps key off. Among the unhinged fever swamps in academia and on the Internet, there is widespread suspicion that World Trade Center 7 collapsed as a result of a controlled demolition set by Secret Service and CIA agents who had offices there.

Reality check for the Twilight Zoners: Federal investigators and experts believe a combination of massive damage from falling debris plus raging fires led to a progressive collapse of WTC 7, causing structural failures that brought the building down.

Popular Mechanics patiently bats down the paranoid delusions of Bush-bashers and terrorism-deniers who have seized on flimsy evidence and cherry-picked quotes and misquotes to bolster their cockamamie theories.

Consider how the conspiracists have abused 20-year veteran New York City firefighter Louie Cacchioli. A People magazine article attributed this quote about WTC 7 to Cacchioli after the attacks: "We think there was [sic] bombs set in the building." But Cacchioli told Popular Mechanics he was misquoted: "I said, 'It sounded like a bomb.' I tried to explain what I meant [after the fact], but it was already out there."

Cacchioli has been contacted repeatedly by people hoping he will say there were bombs in WTC 7, but he refuses to do so. According to the book, Cacchioli is "distressed at the inaccurate use of his name in conjunction with conspiracy theories."

He's not alone. Popular Mechanics also interviewed Marc Birnbach, a freelance videographer whose words have also been twisted by the tinfoil hat brigade. On the day of the attacks, Birnbach told Fox News in a live broadcast that he "didn't see any windows" on United Airlines Flight 175 before it crashed into WTC's South Tower. Revisionists have exploited the no-windows statement to perpetuate claims that the South Tower was hit by a military cargo plane or fuel tanker.

Never mind that chunks of fuselage with passenger windows from Flight 175 were found in debris at Ground Zero. Or that the simple explanation for Birnbach's inability to see the windows is that the plane was banked sharply as it approached the South Tower, tilting the windows upward. Or that Birnbach himself rejects the cargo plane/tanker nuttiness: "I think they are completely out of line."

In their quest for "truth," the 9/11 Truthers' response to reality is just that: "Never mind."

If it were only a fringe few spewing tall tales about 9/11, Popular Mechanics' book wouldn't have been worth writing. But the movement has gone mainstream, with champions including actor Charlie Sheen and the Web site "Scholars for 9/11 Truth." There are now nearly two dozen of them at colleges and universities across the country accusing the White House of engineering 9/11, ranting about planted bombs, lecturing and selling books.

The movement has seeped into the political arena as well. DNC chair Howard Dean notoriously entertained "Bush knew" theories on a Beltway radio show in 2003. This past week, Democrat Bob Bowman - who fingers Dick Cheney, not Osama bin Laden - as 9/11's mastermind, won Florida's 15th Congressional District primary. Another Truther seeking office: Democrat Joshua Smith, in Washington state, who wants Rep. Jim McDermott's seat.

Multiple uploads of "Loose Change," a leading 9/11 crackpot documentary, have been posted on YouTube.com and downloaded hundreds of thousands of times. The director, Dylan Avery, appeared on a radio show recently to scoff at American Airlines Flight 77 pilot Chuck Burlingame. Avery mocked hijackers' using box cutters and plastic knives to subdue passengers. He then accused the father of 11-year-old victim Bernard Brown Jr., a passenger on Flight 77 on his first plane ride for a school field trip, of having advance knowledge of the attacks because he "took an unusual day off work" from his job at the Pentagon to play golf. In a painful twist of fate, Brown's son's plane was crashed into the Pentagon.

"Debunking 9/11 Myths" is a necessary antidote to counteract the vile and poisonous effects of Trutheriness. Unfortunately, it will not cure the persistent symptoms of Bush Derangement Syndrome that have blinded so many to the evils of jihad that exploded before our eyes five short years ago.

www.hotair.com

 
At 11/9/06 10:15 pm, Anonymous sdm said...

"SDM

It was not an act of war. Just as the Unibomber did not commit an act of war. Wars are between States. "

And then the cold war ended....to frame global politics purely in the context of interstate behaviour displays a fundamental lack of understanding.

Now I do believe that states are at the centre of the intenational system - but this is a war. Osama declared as much

You dont play 9/11 as insignificant . About 2973 people died in a deliberate act of terror. To downplay that I find morally repugnant.

Osama went to war with the United States. Did he have a cause? yes. But the problem we again come back to with Brewer is the fact that he views the world in black and white - anything done against America is justified, if america lifts a finger it is disproportionate.

I hope they find bin Laden, and I hope they kill him. I want America to defeat al Qaeda


mmm.....more wine....

 
At 11/9/06 10:17 pm, Anonymous sdm said...

"you down play" it should read

 
At 11/9/06 10:49 pm, Blogger Brewerstroupe said...

And then the cold war ended....to frame global politics purely in "the context of interstate behaviour displays a fundamental lack of understanding."

I have a fundamental lack of understanding of what you're trying to say here.

"but this is a war. Osama declared as much"

I could declare I am at war with Elbonia. Don't make it a war.

Downplay 911?

What are you implying?
That I am somehow immoral for pointing out that 100,000 kids died during the sanctions, softening up, period of the Iraq war?
That the minimum count of the civilian deaths in Iraq approaches 45,000?
That 4,126 Palestinians have been killed since September 29, 2000? That 1200 innocent bystanders have just been murdered in Lebanon?

I think 911 must take a lot of up playing to get to where you are coming from.

 
At 11/9/06 11:03 pm, Anonymous sdm said...

"I could declare I am at war with Elbonia. Don't make it a war."

No it doesnt - but when you attack them it does


"What are you implying?
That I am somehow immoral for pointing out that 100,000 kids died during the sanctions, softening up, period of the Iraq war?
That the minimum count of the civilian deaths in Iraq approaches 45,000?
That 4,126 Palestinians have been killed since September 29, 2000? That 1200 innocent bystanders have just been murdered in Lebanon?"

All of which are significant. As is 9/11.

The problem with the right is that it only looks at 9/11 - the problem with the left is that it ignores 9/11

 
At 11/9/06 11:09 pm, Blogger Brewerstroupe said...

No it don't. If I attack them I am a either a criminal or insane, probably both

Numbers Scott.
Remember the chat we had about Jihaadis.
Check the numbers. Watch what they do.
Believe only what you see with your own eyes.

 
At 11/9/06 11:15 pm, Anonymous roger said...

Is anyone here is familar with the building on Fort st Auckland called the "vero building"? http://www.fletcherconstruction.co.nz/project/13#

Its 39 levels, and would have to be one of the tallest and largest buildings in Auckland.

Do think people would feel just a little bit suspicious if a fire resulted in the building to implode on itself and fall like a controlled demolition? This considering the fact that no major multistoried building in history has evey collapsed due to fire, and if one ever did i highly doubt it would fall perfectly into itself

WTC7, being 47 stories was alot taller than the Vero building, but yet the building just happened to implode on itself as a result of "diesel fires" from fuel tanks within the building.

hmmmmm yep, id be like everyone else and believe it, coz thats what they tell me to believe

scarcsim and ignorance is bliss.

Kia Kaha Bomber :)

 
At 12/9/06 11:41 am, Anonymous Anonymous said...

jayson blair

You're not wrong either about some questions being contradictory, nor even about some being completely ludicrous (I just love that "controlled demolition" conspiracy theory; it cracks me up every time), but I don't think there's any harm in Bomber presenting some far-fetched ideas to round out the numbers to 101. He's only reprinting what others have said. If you need to be able to extract some merit out of that post, the main point he's making is that the establishment's story on the events of 9/11 (and the leadup towards it) is not as cut and dried as they would have us believe.

Some people will no doubt end up following some links to the sites of mad conspiracy theorists. So what? Is prompting people to think outside the square harmful in and of itself? By all means rebut the issues that trouble you the most, but I would suggest that making people think can only be a good thing.

- Nobody.

 
At 12/9/06 1:08 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bomber - perhaps the NZ cops destroyed the towers when the gigantic torture tazer they were using on disaffected seditionists (Maori or PI of course)they had kidnapped from NZ and had taken to the top secret torture house in NY blew up!

 
At 12/9/06 2:20 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Did something happen on November the 9th? Did i miss it?

 
At 12/9/06 2:24 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ok, someone's (sic) got to bite.

Here are my answers. Admittedly I pulled most of them out of my arse. Feel free to flay me alive. They should be good for entertainment if nothing else.

1: Bollocks
2:
- (a) Because they were investigating the things themselves and knew they would be criticized if someone else found something they didn't
- (b) Because in the US nobody in government tells anyone anything unless either they are forced to, or unless it will help them or their cause
3: Bollocks...
4: ...don't...
5: ...make...
6: ...me...
7: ...laugh
8: Because to most organizations in the US, including the government, the military, and large corporate entities, the public, including all "untamed" media, is regarded as a hostile entity to be blinkered and misled in order to restrict them from interfering as much as possible. See also 2(b)
9:
- (a) Bollocks
- (b) Because they were purposely hindered. See 8
10: Um, something to do with planes loaded with aircraft fuel hitting those buildings perhaps?
11: Bollocks
12: Coincidence
13: See 8
14: Nepotism and corruptive self-protection. See also 8
15:
- (a) Because the military got to it first to put the "right" spin on things
- (b) Because it was shot down by US fighters. Yes, you read that right. Having said that, I don't really blame them for doing that under the circumstances
16: Random acts of incompetance? Alternatively, see 15(b)
17: Something's being covered up, but who really cares? Aren't you used to that yet anyway?
18: Because they get thousands of those from different sources every day, and given that none had ever turned out to be anything other than made-up scaremongering, threats like that were never going to be taken seriously
19: Because although Osama Bin Scapegoat might have started the avalanche,
- (a) he obviously didn't do it all alone and
- (b) it's got enough momentum now to continue on its own now so his part in masterminding terrorism is clearly overrated now, even if it wasn't to start with
20: Because they were found. See 8
21: Because they were found. See 8
22: Most likely because it was shot down. See 15
23: Because the whole story is made up, either for propaganda reasons or... see 15
24: No
25: Sorry, that correlation is flimsy
26: Because the FBI are only humans like everyone else
27: Because everyone is naive to some degree
28: Stock trading coincidences like that happen almost every week
29: Honestly, there's bugger-all evidence about that, and it's not even an extreme coincidence
30: Um, because it was his first day on the job? He didn't want to jump the gun?
31: They run drills like that all the time
32: Bollocks. More wishful thinking than concrete plan
33: Right, the tape is a fake, all propaganda and spin. But see 8
34: Possibly coincidence. Alternatively, same as 33
35: Who knows!
36: They did, but the first planes caught them by surprise. As for flight 93, see 15
37: Bollocks
38: See 8
39: Bollocks
40: Actually, (D) is by far the least likely and you know it
41: Bollocks
42: Bollocks. (Geez, this is becoming repetitive, I'm going to have to start replying to this lunatic subject soon. More than likely, the noise was so loud he didn't have a clue where it was coming from, and who knows what the sound waves bounced off on their way to him anyway)
43: Dunno
44: See 18
45: Coincidence
46: Probably coincidence. Wouldn't hurt to investigate everything like this though. But see 15
47: Not really. The US had many other reasons to engender dislike, some of them justified, some not (for example, many places despise the US just because they believe it is responsible for all the porn in the world)
48: Dunno
49: Hey, the UniBomber was American
50: Yes
51: The US's involvement in the repellant parts of those textbooks is overestimated
52: "Conspiracy theories R US"
53: See 52
54: Ironic isn't it
55: If true, unlucky
56: He said it
57: See 18
58: I can't even begin to speculate on this one
59: They don't exist
60: Nope
61: It isn't
62: Before? Possibly. Regardless, he was certainly looking for an opportunity when 9/11 rolled along
63: It's more likely that they were fooled along with most of the rest of the population
64: Nah
65: Because costs are always underestimated
66: The former
67: Who knows what stuff goes on when money is involved? But it didn't have anything to do with 9/11
68: Because it was a good place to learn? Because he got away with it?
69: Coincidence - military manoeuvres happen all the time
70: A very sinister coincidence, if it was one
71: Coincidence
72: See 18
73: See 18
74: See 18
75: See 18
76: See 8
77: Because he heard something that worried him? But see 18
78: Naivety and possibly incompetance
79: Because it's an area of unrest which some in the US thought they might have to deal with at some stage
80: Because there were signs of threats increasing. But see 18
81: Because they weren't specifically about Bin Laden. See also 18
82: Because they didn't have reliable evidence. See also 18
83: As above
84: See 18
85: See 18
86: See 18
87: See 18
88: Because they didn't know the Taliban were planning something like 9/11
89: See 18
90: See 18
91: See 18
92: Coincidence
93: No
94: See 18
95: See 82
96: For secrecy's sake. But it wouldn't have made any difference if that piece had been included. See 18
97: Someone must have been doing their job well to convince people to take the threats even half seriously. See 18
98: See 18
99: Coincidence
100: See 28
101: See 62

- Nobody.

 
At 12/9/06 2:34 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's a book review of course it’s a cut and paste. I am not as smart as you and don't have so much time on my hands .......

HOWEVER ...... as you will see I named my source .... From the New York Post......

I repeat .....

FROM THE NEW YORK POST .....

Now I will go and do what the working classes do - work.

You will go and do what the university ‘educated’ self appointed, smug, know it all's do - keep on talking while doing nothing, I would keep it that way if I were you. You are much safer with very known actresses than you would be amongst the South Auckland classes - they might not appreciate you quite as much as you think they should.

In my experience condescending, frauds don’t go down to well in the real hard world and far from the people who you purport to care about being grateful for your attention you might get a kicking.

Talk is cheap and loved by lazy, pretentious, conceited, hypocrites - realistic useful action is something only the genuinely useful do, I am not useful either but, unlike you, I don’t delude myself about that reality.

I have known bomb victims, not from these attacks but from before you were born when the IRA were doing it.

What right those people had to change society in the way they have only you know. Before you were born we could walk up to politician and talk to them, not saying they would listen but you could do it. You could walk up to the door of number 10 and have your photo taken, now, of course, everything and everyone is surrounded by armed guards and you can’t get within 1,000 meters.

A little historical anecdote – many years ago I was in Blackpool (before the bombing) when the Conservative party conference was on, we dared a friend to go and ask the PM (Ms Thatcher) for a dance, he did and she did, pretty sporting of her we thought. OK thing like that don’t change the world like you do but it was a nice gesture perhaps.

These days he would be arrested before he got within a mile of any British PM and it was terrorism that did that. You will never experience a world where we could do things like that just for a laugh, there were no metal detectors, were never searched and that’s a shame in my opinion. I have never been physically harmed by a terrorist attack but my life has been changed by them.

 
At 12/9/06 4:26 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

anonymous

I am not useful either but, unlike you, I don’t delude myself about that reality.

Mate, you are a total hoot! But even so, you (maybe indirectly) raised some questions that are worth discussing. How many of our freedoms are worth losing in the name of extra "security"? How often does that extra security turn into oppression? And if we submit in the name of security and live in fear, aren't the terrorists winning? Or are we better off because we're less naive?

Here's one perspective on it:

http://grrm.livejournal.com/2006/08/11/

- Nobody.

 
At 12/9/06 8:58 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bomber, you're upsetting people because you're doing too well. You've hit the bigtime. People are taking you seriously. Congratulations! FWIW, I've really been enjoying these discussions.

Hopefully Tim won't take it too personally.

- Nobody.

 
At 13/9/06 9:26 am, Anonymous kla said...

Coming here via P. Roberts article.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article14921.htm

Unpopular Mechanics is one of those anti-truth things that attacks a few items (weak) and ignores thousands. Does anyone know the publisher? Do they also own Carnal Nowledge Network and Fix News?

As for hate messages, they come out like cockroaches when the lights go out, but there are X hundred million folks on the Internet. In fact, they are the only reason why normal people cannot exchange comments without fony names.

This article lists 101 points to refute the official version (all valid) but if they won't respond to 1, they won't respond to ad infinitum (which we are heading to).

 
At 13/9/06 9:41 am, Blogger Brewerstroupe said...

Popular Mechanics is published by Hearst. The CEO of Hearst (Ganzi)has strong ties to the CIA and Neo-con elements in the administration.

Victor F. Ganzi is a member of B.E.N.S. - "Business Executives for National Security" wherein we learn that "When it came time to evaluate In-Q-Tel, the CIA's innovative technology development enterprise, Congress turned to BENS"
In October 2002, B.E.N.S. received a "CIA Agency Seal Medallion" for its work on the In-Q-Tel program.

In-Q-Tel? It is described as "A new partnership between the CIA and the ‘private sector’(my apostrophes),” making it a classic front for traditional fascism and other American-style old-fashioned family values
http://www.in-q-tel.org/

A look at the names involved in In-Q-Tel quickly reveals it as a front for Zionism Central.

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/inqtel/

 
At 13/9/06 1:39 pm, Blogger karlos said...

I think we’ve all somewhat missed the point.

Whether the attacks were US engineered or carried out by foreigners is irrelevant. What happened on 11 Sept 2001 was a terrorist attack, a crime against humanity. Those who lost their lives were innocent people, and there is no justification for their murder.

But the US people are taking it out of context and using it to warp the Western mind against an exaggerated enemy.

Thousands of lives have been lost due to criminal military actions taken by the US, also and Israel. Over 5000 Palestinians have been killed by Israel in the last 5 years. Over 70,000 homes have been destroyed since year 2000. Shit 1300 Lebanese civilians were killed by Israel in one month. The death toll of Iraqis in their ‘liberation’ has probably surpassed the American deaths in Vietnam.

The issue at the moment is: how is this attack is being used, by politicians and the media? To what end?

Let’s not let questions about the perpetrators of the attack cloud our judgement as to the consequences of the attacks.

I have always liked conspiracy theories because they challenge the norm, but I take them with a grain of salt.

 
At 13/9/06 1:42 pm, Anonymous Jayson Blair said...

Fair point Karlos.

 
At 13/9/06 2:46 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

why dont the US just get out of the middle east and let them all kill each other? Brewer and karlos will all say that they will just cuddle each other, but i bet you are wrong!

 
At 13/9/06 3:35 pm, Anonymous deano said...

I agree anon. Why does the West, especially America, waste so much time and money and so many lives over there? Developing alternative energy sources is crucial. If we can do that, the Middle East will go back to being the backward irrelevancy it deserves to be.

 
At 13/9/06 4:23 pm, Blogger karlos said...

Ok anon / deano,

I challenge you to write an letter to your Members of Parliament and asked them to:
1. Pressure the US to withdraw it's military from Middle East.
2. Pressure the US to end its financial & military support for Israel.

As to your comment of the ME being backward, whilst the Europeans were living in the "Dark Ages", Arab science was flourishing with discoveries and inventions. In the Middle Ages, Europe was heavily influenced by Islamic science:

* The idea of the college was a concept which was borrowed from Muslims.

* Muslims not only passed on Greek classical works but also introduced new scientific theories, without which the European Renaissance could not have occurred.

* In the field of Mathematics the number Zero (0) and the decimal system was introduced to Europe, which became the basis for the Scientific revolution.
Source: http://www.ais.org/~bsb/Herald/Previous/95/science.html

Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science_in_the_Islamic_World) says:
The important contributions made by Islamic scholars can be seen in many words still in use today: alkali, algebra, alchemy, alcohol, Aldebaran, Altair, Algol, alembic, algorithm, almanac, Almagest, through to zenith and zero.

Back to your cave now deano.

 
At 13/9/06 4:51 pm, Anonymous deano said...

Yes, yes, the Arabs had advanced civilisations- once.
It's a shame that ME development ended in the Middle Ages, though, isn't it, Karlos. It is backward now. If it wasn't for winning the biggest lottery in history (having their nations situated over massive oil reserves), these nations would be nothing. All their technology is imported. Most of the skilled technicians who run their industries (especially the oil industry) are ex-pats. My own father built hotels there when I was a youngster. Only oil money keeps these countries important. That, and the threat of radical Islam.

And I advocate the West, especially America, pulling out of the ME, and I am attacked by a leftie? How odd.

 
At 13/9/06 5:19 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh and Deano, could you please fuck off you xenophobic piece of shit.
I think you will find that the Stormfront talkboards will be more appreciative of your hate fuelled vitriol.

 
At 13/9/06 7:35 pm, Anonymous deano said...

Anon- I'm not 'fucking off' just because you asked nicely. Who are you? Why are you not even man or woman enough to attach a name to your post?
You call me xenophobic just because I made some disparaging comments about certain aspects of the Middle East? Get a reality check. Of course there are good people there but many are indoctrinated with hatred for us. Many of their traditions and laws are backward. You should be able to point these things out without being accused of being a xenophobe. I'm actually living overseas at the moment. There are only two white people in my neighbourhood. I am the only white employee at my work. I am the only white person in my rugby team. Hardly the actions of a xenophobe.
What is Stormfront? Never heard of it.
Now reply with your name or fuck off.

 
At 14/9/06 7:57 am, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Deano, (if that is your name)
You need a name.
Howabout John, or Peter, or James. Happy.

You are saying you can be a xenophobic shit but can justify it by saying that "some of my friends are black". What a great defence hahaha.

Yeah, right.

Like I said, fuck off to stormfront (you know exactly what it is), you racist piece of shit.

 
At 14/9/06 9:15 am, Blogger karlos said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

 
At 30/9/06 3:35 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

It made interesting reading. I reckon there is some truth in this but I reckon other parts are pure shit

 
At 11/10/06 4:00 pm, Blogger brad said...

MALKIN SHCMAILKIN


"On the day of the attacks, Birnbach told Fox News in a live broadcast that he "didn't see any windows" on United Airlines Flight 175 before it crashed into WTC's South Tower. Revisionists have exploited the no-windows statement to perpetuate claims that the South Tower was hit by a military cargo plane or fuel tanker."

and she talks about "MISQUOTES"

THIS is what he said...

It definitely didn’t look like a commercial plane. I didn’t see any windows on the side. Again it was not a normal flight that I’d ever seen at an airport. It had a blue logo on the front and it did not look like it belonged in the area.

not to mention MANY people who saw a small plane, a cesna, or 737

also not to mention there is growing evidence that many of the videos were fakes.
thats not as hard to beleive as irt sounds.
lost of them were turned into the FBI by average people off the streets.

and
"That is not an American airline!"

wonder why if you google it...
http://www.google.com/search?q=Birnbach+windows+plane
you get a ton more hits of "debunkers" than you do of the "conspiracy kooks" like me.

Brad

911review.org

 
At 15/10/06 6:47 pm, Anonymous Enlightenment said...

One thing that struck me as odd in the days after 9/11 was Bush saying "We will not tolerate conspiracy theories [regarding 9/11]". Sure enough there have been some wacky conspiracy theories surrounding the events of that day. The most far-fetched and patently ridiculous one that I've ever heard goes like this: Nineteen hijackers who claimed to be devout Muslims but yet were so un-Muslim as to be getting drunk all the time, doing cocaine and frequenting strip clubs decided to hijack four airliners and fly them into buildings in the northeastern U.S., the area of the country that is the most thick with fighter bases. After leaving a Koran on a barstool at a strip bar after getting shitfaced drunk on the night before, then writing a suicide note/inspirational letter that sounded like it was written by someone with next to no knowledge of Islam, they went to bed and got up the next morning hung over and carried out their devious plan. Nevermind the fact that of the four "pilots" among them there was not a one that could handle a Cessna or a Piper Cub let alone fly a jumbo jet, and the one assigned the most difficult task of all, Hani Hanjour, was so laughably incompetent that he was the worst fake "pilot" of the bunch. Nevermind the fact that they received very rudimentary flight training at Pensacola Naval Air Station, making them more likely to have been C.I.A. assets than Islamic fundamentalist terrorists. So on to the airports. These "hijackers" somehow managed to board all four airliners with their tickets, yet not even ONE got his name on any of the flight manifests. So they hijack all four airliners and at this time passengers on United 93 start making a bunch of cell phone calls from 35,000 feet in the air to tell people what was going on. Nevermind the fact that cell phones wouldn't work very well above 4,000 feet, and wouldn't work at ALL above 8,000 feet. But the conspiracy theorists won't let that fact get in the way of a good fantasy. That is one of the little things you "aren't supposed to think about". Nevermind that one of the callers called his mom and said his first and last name, more like he was reading from a list than calling his own mom. Anyway, when these airliners each deviated from their flight plan and didn't respond to ground control, NORAD would any other time have followed standard operating procedure (and did NOT have to be told by F.A.A. that there were hijackings because they were watching the same events unfold on their own radar) which means fighter jets would be scrambled from the nearest base where they were available on standby within a few minutes, just like every other time when airliners stray off course. But of course on 9/11 this didn't happen, not even close. Somehow these "hijackers" must have used magical powers to cause NORAD to stand down, as ridiculous as this sounds because total inaction from the most high-tech and professional Air Force in the world would be necessary to carry out their tasks. So on the most important day in its history the Air Force was totally worthless. Then they had to make one of the airliners look like a smaller plane, because unknown to them the Naudet brothers had a videocamera to capture the only known footage of the North Tower crash, and this footage shows something that is not at all like a jumbo jet, but didn't have to bother with the South Tower jet disguising itself because that was the one we were "supposed to see". Anyway, as for the Pentagon they had to have Hani Hanjour fly his airliner like it was a fighter plane, making a high G-force corkscrew turn that no real airliner can do, in making its descent to strike the Pentagon. But these "hijackers" wanted to make sure Rumsfeld survived so they went out of their way to hit the farthest point in the building from where Rumsfeld and the top brass are located. And this worked out rather well for the military personnel in the Pentagon, since the side that was hit was the part that was under renovation at the time with few military personnel present compared to construction workers. Still more fortuitous for the Pentagon, the side that was hit had just before 9/11 been structurally reinforced to prevent a large fire there from spreading elsewhere in the building. Awful nice of them to pick that part to hit, huh? Then the airliner vaporized itself into nothing but tiny unidentifiable pieces no bigger than a fist, unlike the crash of a real airliner when you will be able to see at least some identifiable parts, like crumpled wings, broken tail section etc. Why, Hani Hanjour the terrible pilot flew that airliner so good that even though he hit the Pentagon on the ground floor the engines didn't even drag the ground!! Imagine that!! Though the airliner vaporized itself on impact it only made a tiny 16 foot hole in the building. Amazing. Meanwhile, though the planes hitting the Twin Towers caused fires small enough for the firefighters to be heard on their radios saying "We just need 2 hoses and we can knock this fire down" attesting to the small size of it, somehow they must have used magical powers from beyond the grave to make this morph into a raging inferno capable of making the steel on all forty-seven main support columns (not to mention the over 100 smaller support columns) soften and buckle, then all fail at once. Hmmm. Then still more magic was used to make the building totally defy physics as well as common sense in having the uppermost floors pass through the remainder of the building as quickly, meaning as effortlessly, as falling through air, a feat that without magic could only be done with explosives. Then exactly 30 minutes later the North Tower collapses in precisely the same freefall physics-defying manner. Incredible. Not to mention the fact that both collapsed at a uniform rate too, not slowing down, which also defies physics because as the uppermost floors crash into and through each successive floor beneath them they would shed more and more energy each time, thus slowing itself down. Common sense tells you this is not possible without either the hijackers' magical powers or explosives. To emphasize their telekinetic prowess, later in the day they made a third building, WTC # 7, collapse also at freefall rate though no plane or any major debris hit it. Amazing guys these magical hijackers. But we know it had to be "Muslim hijackers" the conspiracy theorist will tell you because (now don't laugh) one of their passports was "found" a couple days later near Ground Zero, miraculously "surviving" the fire that we were told incinerated planes, passengers and black boxes, and also "survived" the collapse of the building it was in. When common sense tells you if that were true then they should start making buildings and airliners out of heavy paper and plastic so as to be "indestructable" like that magic passport. The hijackers even used their magical powers to bring at least seven of their number back to life, to appear at american embassies outraged at being blamed for 9/11!! BBC reported on that and it is still online. Nevertheless, they also used magical powers to make the american government look like it was covering something up in the aftermath of this, what with the hasty removal of the steel debris and having it driven to ports in trucks with GPS locators on them, to be shipped overseas to China and India to be melted down. When common sense again tells you that this is paradoxical in that if the steel was so unimportant that they didn't bother saving some for analysis but so important as to require GPS locators on the trucks with one driver losing his job because he stopped to get lunch. Hmmmm. Yes, this whole story smacks of the utmost idiocy and fantastical far-fetched lying, but it is amazingly enough what some people believe. Even now, five years later, the provably false fairy tale of the "nineteen hijackers" is heard repeated again and again, and is accepted without question by so many Americans. Which is itself a testament to the innate psychological cowardice of the American sheeple, i mean people, and their abject willingness to believe something, ANYTHING, no matter how ridiculous in order to avoid facing a scary uncomfortable truth. Time to wake up America.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home