But the American people have been conditioned to think it is all of our lives. It's like discovering your uncle "Sam" has been the one behind a serial killing spree. I don't believe everyone in our system of government is inherently evil or even corruptible. Maybe I'm being naive, but I still think there are decent people in the system, just misled and pressured to go with the their party's agenda, which is being influenced and dictated mostly by corporate or foriegn political monied interests.
No it would not take legions of people in the know to carry out such a crime. Like most secretive operations, the details would only need to be known by only a few within our government agencies and depts.
Why else were the attacks done on the same day as terror drills? To divert and confuse,
"is this real world or exercise?"
Again tho, only a few men in key positions of authority within our government were instrumental in facilitating this crime. For example, I sure as hell don't think Bush had anything to do with any strategic planning of 9-11. The details were probably known to Cheney and the rest of the PNAC members in the administration. Others I believe were threatened and made to stand down. Trillions announced as missing from the Pentagon the day before 9-11 and a fear of disclosing wrong doing by those might have been enough for some to just fall back, this is just one speculative theory.
The planes were tools used as weapons to show America was under attack, but those buildings had to come down and this was assured before hand.
Even if they weren't totally destroyed the fact that the attacks happened would have been enough to proceed with the invasions, and war agenda previously planned. But why rebuild/repair those buildings that had so many problems,and plans were made years ago to dismantle them anyway, when you could assure that they would be completely destroyed, repairing the damage wouldn't be cost effective, and demolishing 7 and whatever harmful secrets it contained probably was beneficial to some as well.
If NIST would have said they strongly suspected other means of destroying those buildings was suspected and found, it would have caused a shit storm and fingers would get pointed in other directions, and they couldn't have all that going on. Alqaeda and Muslims had to be blamed, and the Taliban for "harboring" them.
Take a close look at who was in those positions of power and authority at the time, and then take a good look at the PNAC and who they were affiliated with and who their loyalty is to. Nuttyyahoo was so bold he declared the 9-11 attacks as "good for Israel", because there were people in the US government that ensured America would go and kill Israel's enemies around the world, and especially in Iraq where Saddam was paying 25 grand for each suicide or terrorist plot that killed Israeli's.
So to say "THE" US government was behind it all is wrong. There were well placed Israeli operatives and loyalists within it that facilitated the attacks, and their Sayanim that allowed their buildings to be the target. It was a brilliantly evil plan, that along the way had its miscues and it's those miscues that demanded a closer examination of the details the perps deemed unimportant, ignored, or pretended did not even exist and this is why many don't believe the OCT.
If these criminals had the kind of power, people and resources to carry out such a plan, it wouldn't be too difficult to make life very hard on those that even dared to speak up. They would be quite capable of intimidating, bribing, or "disposing" off any thing or anyone they felt was a threat.
The NIST report had to stay in line with there being only outside source that used planes to attack the US, and that there was nothing else used to destroy those buildings. They had to stay on script as only planes hijacked by fanatical Muslim extremists were responsible, but upon closer examination it falls apart.
The NIST report is not the only instance where the conspiracy theory falls apart either
but it was crucial in keeping the fable going.
It might not take many people to plan 9/11, but I think it would take a decent number to execute it. Transporting and planting all the explosives, working with the terrorists and setting them up to make the attack, covering up afterwards, that's going to require quite a few 'bit players' to accomplish.
I don't believe the rigging of the buildings was done by Americans, at least at this moment. Silverstein is an Israeli Sayanim, and the security was controlled. Besides if like many of you suspect that gravity
was all that was needed to finish the "collapses" after "weakening" a few floors, then not much else would have been needed. Providing access to a small crew under the guise of "repairs" for a few months wouldn't necessitate including "thousands' like some idiots on here have proposed was needed. Recruiting fanatics would not require shit loads of personnel either. Once you get them on a plane that would be guided courtesy of Dov Zakheim's System Planning Corporation after it was hijacked from the hijackers in flight, and knowing that the terror drill/war games are going to take place, who else is needed?
As you said, if the objective was to go to war in Afghanistan and Iraq, simply having the planes hit the towers would have done it, even without the collapses. Why then go through all the trouble, and risk discovery, to add explosives to bring the buildings down?
Because as I just explained the WTC had to come down they were tagged for dismantling years prior. Read about those buildings and the myriad of problems the Port Authority was having with them. They were a prime target for an insurance scam, and subsequently an illegal demolition, and they planned ahead of time to rush the crime scene evidence away, and had their spin-masters in place ready to tell the world it was Alqaeda and OBL within minutes after the attack.
The cover worked well then and it's still working on people like yourself..."What are you talking about? WE ALL saw what happened!"
Right??
I haven't yet seen the NIST report, or the idea that the planes caused the collapses, fall apart. I guess that's what we're doing here, finding out how you think that it does and how I think it holds together.
We've already disagreed to some degree about the molten metal/steel. What's next to view differently?!
How can you defend a conspiracy theory when so much is ignored out of the body of the investigation that is supposed to explain things? It's not just that the NIST investigation ignored relevant information that warranted further study, but it's also HOW they came to their conclusions, manipulating data to fit the "observed outcome" and in other cases keeping the data and how it was obtained a secret.
We've seen in this thread many instances of having to rely on ignoring evidence and witnesses, and people having to jump to highly improbable assumptions regarding the molten steel, to the point that when they are shown all the evidence against them, they resort to sidetracking tactics bringing up Nazis's and the Joooos and such.
I think that I made my point clear that the instance of the NIST ignoring molten steel, that was even seen my Robertson and many others, and how much steel there was compared to the quantity of aluminum, and where it was placed throughout the towers, and where the melted steel was reported to have been uncovered and seen, not to mention that WTC 7 had the same phenomena and had even less aluminum then the towers....Well it should be a no brainer when I say I lost respect for the NIST and feel they have no credibility or integrity.
If you or others feel that this is no big deal, then you are purposefully doing so in order to maintain your official CT intact in your own minds, and that;s fine by me as I made my point, and made some of you look foolish in the process of doing so.
Now the primary objective of the NIST investigation was to determine the cause of the WTC buildings collapses, and NIST should have conducted a forensic examination of the full body of evidence and this includes the molten steel. GZ was a crime scene, wasn't it?
And because many credible eyewitnesses, including firemen who were on the scene that day, reported that they heard and saw explosions,NIST should have investigated this without any bias, but they again chose to downplay these reports that were as widespread as the reports of the molten steel "running like little rivers".
The NIST investigators should have viewed their testimony of the molten steel and the explosions as hard evidence and considered this a starting point in its investigation, but they didn't because NIST assumed, from the outset that the hijacked planes solely responsible for the demise of the 2 TTers. They took it for granted that the plane impacts set in motion a chain of events that led all the way to "catastrophic structural failure". They even stated this explicitly in their Executive Summary
“The tragic consequences of the September 11, 2001 attacks were directly attributable to the fact that terrorists flew large jet-fuel laden commercial airliners into the WTC towers. Buildings for use by the general population are not designed to withstand attacks of such severity; building codes do not require building designs to consider aircraft impact".
NIST NCSTAR 1, WTC Investigation, Preface, xxxi.
Because NIST never even entertained the possibility of a planned demolition, or infiltration of the buildings by "terrorists" it never bothered to look for evidence of any.
This despite the WTC being bombed in 1993.
NIST was NOT going to go there, and I'll bet they were "encouraged" not to do so either.
There's no fucking way the head people at NIST were going to go against the Bush administration, and the many in it who were powerful enough to replace them, end their careers, or worse... risk some unfortunate "accident" befalling them or their families.
I just can't see the intelligent people within such a prestigious institution conducting the investigations in such a manner, and full of such glaring discrepancies, and highly questionable tactics, some "secret" that a lowly high school physics teacher forced this multi-million dollar financed agency to back track and have to admit they were wrong about the FF that indeed occurred at WTC 7.
Hundreds of people and reports about molten steel, some seen falling out of the window of one tower? All 3 wreckage piles confirmed to have molten steel UNDERNEATH them, but only 2 of the buildings had planes inside them? No obstacle was too great to overcome for NIST, they simply pretended all these people and what they saw didn't even exist. Close to the same number of credible people who saw and heard explosions? No problem there either....What people, what melted steel???
How convenient that they were forced to have to resort to computer simulation instead of real world testing of the remnants of the buildings, because someone saw to it that most of it was hauled away...
It never tested steel samples recovered from GZ for traces of explosives.
Their investigation included omissions of importance and wreak of of political interference
and pressure.
Not only were there eyewitness accounts of these things, but they also ignored 2 scientific papers that were published, one of them by FEMA that claimed and confirmed that sulfur residues on samples of WTC steel. This indicated the possibility that something else attacked the steel other then planes and jetfuel that day.
The possibility of this needed to be checked, if only just to rule it out but those in charge at NIST yet again, chose not to go there and pretended this didn't exist.
It's really telling when we have people come on here and confidently proclaim that nothing like this occurred or was never found or never confirmed and that somehow the responsibility of the investigation should have fallen to the people at GZ like firemen, rescue workers and others who were there to document the aftermath. This is dishonest and weakens their argument even further even without having to post all the things that I did a few pages back.
If some of you think that NIST conducted a credible investigation because they ignored these important things and instances and ignored all the hundreds of people that were witness to them, then have the nerve to use this and try to proclaim the views of others are a wild CT, you folks are only here to be antagonists and don't give a fuck about accuracy, honesty, credibility, or integrity.
This is akin to a crime scene having evidence that a gun was
also used in the crime because gunshots were heard by witnesses and GSR (gun shot residue) or shell casings were found on site, but because this evidence would point to other suspects other then the one you were
encouraged to suspect who you were told used a box cutter only, and who your CO's had in mind all along, (maybe even before the actual crime took place) then the shell casings and GSR were "lost" or ignored, and because of that, you feel you can declare "see there was no evidence" that a gun was used, so it just had to be the
these guy/s.
The circumstances, the villains and the "evidence" were set up and easily confirmed because "we all saw the planes and the buildings collapsed!" and come hell or highwater that was the way any investigations and reports were going to go, but there is proof of
evidence tampering.
