WTC Built For Destruction By Rockefeller Brothers, And It all Went Horribly Wrong

originally posted by: arrakis624
On August 22, 1939, just before the invasion of Poland, Hitler gave explicit permission to his commanders to kill "without pity or mercy, all men, women, and children of Polish descent or language."[12][13]

Genocide was to be conducted systematically against Polish people: on September 7, 1939 Reinhard Heydrich stated that all Polish nobles, clergy and Jews are to be killed. On September 12, Wilhelm Keitel added the intelligentsia to the list. On March 15, 1940 Himmler stated: "All Polish specialists will be exploited in our military-industrial complex. Later, all Poles will disappear from this world. It is imperative that the great German nation considers the elimination of all Polish people as its chief task." At the end of 1940, Hitler confirmed his pronouncement demanding liquidation of "all leading elements in Poland".[14]

Yes, Hitler invaded Poland, but it was "to protect ethic Germans," not because Poland was implicated in the Reichstag affair.

originally posted by: arrakis624
And wiki has been around for 10's of years. a reply to: DJW001

It's hard to link to a newspaper. Here, this links to a book that has been around for nearly 300 years:

www.britannica.com...

originally posted by: St Udio
the twin towers were meant to be massive Phallic Symbols dedicated to the two founders of the NWO...the Rockefeller Bros

here is a background page dealing with Nelson who was appointed the VP by Gerald Ford...
the twin towers were new & shiny back then...lead paint & asbestos were no strangers to these monuments

www.reformation.org...

has Anyone even read the link I supplied in that post yet ??

I would suggest the thread posters go back to that link...
and click the ~hot link~ found there....

...Nelson's timing was perfect. Here is the wording of the Truman sponsored 22nd Amendment:


Section 1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for MORE THAN TWO YEARS of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.


According to the terms of this Amendment, if Ford had a timely demise in '75 or '76,
Rockefeller was still eligible to serve 2 full terms or 8 years as President.
That was more that enough time to finish his Twin Towers and start World War III.



-Order of succession to the Presidency of the U.S.-

the "Twin Towers" link has very good data about the mini-Nukes placed under the pair of pagan phallic symbols




When you click the hot link on the page to get this page:

Ground Zero — The Nuclear Demolition of the Twin Towers!!

and a lot of info...

The real reason why Nelson Rockefeller wanted to be President!!


nuclear launch codes
The President of the United States is the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces. He is the ONLY person who has the authority
to launch nuclear weapons. He is always followed by a military officer who carries the launch codes or the "nuclear football"
as it is sometimes called.
For almost 2 years, by appointment only, Nelson Rockefeller as Vice President was only a heartbeat away from the Presidency
and the power to launch WW III. While Governor of New York, Rockefeller visited the Jesuit General just 2 months before the
assassination of President Kennedy and he was itching to wipe Russia off the map and fulfill Fatima for his "holiness."

Demolishing his Twin Towers and blaming the "Communists" would have provided Nelson with the reason for starting a nuclear war
with Russia and causing the deaths of millions of people!!

SMH.

Oh boy the amount of errors in the first OP just makes my head hurt. Where to begin?

For starters, do you know what Operation Paperclip was about? Hint, not this.

Second, the pbs link makes no mention of building explosives into the buildings themselves.

Third, in order to have planted explosives pre-planted "just in case" would mean constant maintenance and monitoring and making sure that NO ONE else finds it by mistake. Explosives deteriorate as does the wiring, the electronics, and everything else that is required for explosives. They would have risked detection by Port Authority and city inspectors any time they dropped in to check up on the structure or during any tenant relocation or construction or renovations of the building. Also you'd have to hide it from the thousands of workers that built the buildings. You'd have to hide it from your every day workers in the building, and youd have to hide it from any one else that needed access to the structure. Oh yes by the way, if it was in concrete in the core, then explain why large segments of the core remained standing after initial collapse? Also, Why dont we see any evidence of the core blowing up, prior to the visible movement of the exterior columns bending inwards prior to collapse? The core was standing.

Fourth, to do any of this would mean that THOUSANDS of people would have been forced to either keep quiet or all paid off for over 30+ years. The Port Authority, city engineers, FDNY, NYPD, contractors, steel workers, etc etc etc, all would have had to been paid off or silenced or kept in the dark. Wouldnt want an outside contractor remodeling a floor and as they remove a panel and see explosives rigged up to the structure.

a reply to: DJW001
Incidentally the new alias doesn't seem to have caught on.
Sources like the expert witness called in by Lloyds have escaped your attention?
Get informed.

Every city in America will burn when the truth is released about 9/11

a reply to: amurphy245

The explosives were inside the reinforced concrete infill panels in the walls of the core. The insurance was paid for buildings with the following description. 'The core comprises steel beams and columns with reinforced concrete infill panels.' Every engineering and university website I looked at claimed two layers of drywall one side and one on the other. Richard Gage said the same when I asked him. But the insurance money was paid according to John Knapton's description. Studying the method of construction shows how these panels were inserted without many witnesses. With all the combined hours of research here on ATS have any of you seen photographs of the core walls being constructed? If so please link. If not, a remarkable omission, don't you think?

In the original plan an aircraft, perhaps rigged with a detonator of some sort, could strike the building anywhere and the series of explosions would go up and down from the impact site, the top falling into the dust cloud and continuing to be destroyed, as we saw. With many years of delays resulting in degraded explosives, various tweaks were added resulting in the eventual overkill we saw, once they'd got it going. No wonder their story is so pathetic. They never believed it could go so horribly wrong.

Planes were needed so they could introduce all manner of security measures in mass transit systems. An excuse for attempting to control the unruly masses. How else to excuse the TSA without planes used in the spectacular attack? www.tsa.gov...

a reply to: bjarneorn

Attention span of a goldfish.

a reply to: arrakis624

Yep. And Joe Vialls told us the invasion of Iraq was to prepare a bunch of disturbed veterans for use as our own police when we catch on to the private banking fraud.

a reply to: St Udio

Taking the slow demolition option would have been an impossible loss of face in those circumstances. The original plan had to be followed, corrosion meant they couldn't be left standing, Replacing all the cladding and windows was not feasible. Then it all went horribly wrong.

Nice link. I've heard second hand from a military computer programmer of that era that the launch codes don't actually work. He said, "We aren't stupid. We don't want nuclear war. But they won't find out they don't work till they try it."

a reply to: GenRadek

Very weak argument, General, as I would expect. I'll pick it apart later when I have the time. Thanks for dropping in.

originally posted by: nrd101
speak to wit that you own. even though it is obvious by now. look what I mean is that people have died for speaking out.

Each time it adds thousands more to our army.

originally posted by: GenRadek
SMH.

Oh boy the amount of errors in the first OP just makes my head hurt. Where to begin?

For starters, do you know what Operation Paperclip was about? Hint, not this.

Second, the pbs link makes no mention of building explosives into the buildings themselves.

Third, in order to have planted explosives pre-planted "just in case" would mean constant maintenance and monitoring and making sure that NO ONE else finds it by mistake. Explosives deteriorate as does the wiring, the electronics, and everything else that is required for explosives. They would have risked detection by Port Authority and city inspectors any time they dropped in to check up on the structure or during any tenant relocation or construction or renovations of the building. Also you'd have to hide it from the thousands of workers that built the buildings. You'd have to hide it from your every day workers in the building, and youd have to hide it from any one else that needed access to the structure. Oh yes by the way, if it was in concrete in the core, then explain why large segments of the core remained standing after initial collapse? Also, Why dont we see any evidence of the core blowing up, prior to the visible movement of the exterior columns bending inwards prior to collapse? The core was standing.

Fourth, to do any of this would mean that THOUSANDS of people would have been forced to either keep quiet or all paid off for over 30+ years. The Port Authority, city engineers, FDNY, NYPD, contractors, steel workers, etc etc etc, all would have had to been paid off or silenced or kept in the dark. Wouldnt want an outside contractor remodeling a floor and as they remove a panel and see explosives rigged up to the structure.

Apologies for the head hurt. Thinking does that to the less able.

Operation Paperclip was about grabbing information of many kinds. Such as the rudimentary beginnings of this plan. Too many cooks spoiled the broth, methinks. Plus it was a daft idea to begin with.

This is what I wrote with reference to the pbs link. "The pbs link tells us the idea was first proposed in 1946."

There was no "just in case". It was pre-planned mass murder intended to bring political gain on a gargantuan scale.

Deterioration has been covered. It explains the desperation David made evident, the need for extra add-ons, and possibly the detonation failure. Partial detonation is evident in some of the impact images.

I understand renovations, such as holes made in the floors to connect two floors leased by the same firm, were carried out by an in-house team. Your trust in the Port Authority and city inspectors is touching but misplaced.

The construction method made hiding panel emplacement from the "thousands of workers" almost easy. To keep it short, where are the photographs of the interior construction from these "thousands of workers"? The windows weren't installed until a large part of the structure was completed. The obvious danger was enough reason to keep idle sightseers out of the bulk of the building. The workers at the top travelled up in elevators and used materials brought up by the four cranes on top. How could they or any of the ground workers have seen the core wall construction? Narrow window spaces made exterior photography challenging. Inside was a dark space to exterior photographers. The sunrise pictures show the interior from a distance, I know of no other photographs showing the interior during construction. Links most welcome if any of you know otherwise.

Not sure about this "..explain why large segments of the core remained standing.." It was a massive operational failure incorporating several other destructive technologies. But you have hit on the fact NIST couldn't begin to analyse the 'collapse', yet many of us have devoted thousands of hours unpaid to satisfy our need to know.

"Why dont we see any evidence of the core blowing up, prior to the visible movement.." Sounds like an admission that we see evidence of the core blowing up.

The installation of the panels was almost easily kept hidden from the workers due to the method of construction. Lack of outside contractors has also been covered. You wouldn't see explosives within cast concrete. Holes for connectors would be plugged until shortly before the event. They'd just look like concrete infill panels if the drywall was removed for any reason. Modifications made seem mostly to have been holes cut in the floors, not holes cut into the stairwells, lift shafts or rest rooms in the core.

This reply is a bit rushed as I have to get ready for work now. I hope it's an adequate response for the readers.

a reply to: Kester

This reply is a bit rushed as I have to get ready for work now. I hope it's an adequate response for the readers.

amazing how the evidence against grows exponentially but the evidence for the OS stays it's same pathetic unsupported bullying.....thanks for the info....but I'm sure there are those here whom see this as a 'general-nuisance'.

a reply to: Kester

Proclaiming victory a bit early......

Did you forget one thing that was conspicuously absent from the debris pile? Not one unexploded explosive. Not one detonator. Not one wiring strand. Not one piece of explosives anywhere. Now how would you explain that, considering FDNY, NYPD, PA, FBI, and hundreds of volunteer fire fighters from around the country were crawling over the pile for WEEKS and no one found any explosive materials. Explain that little doozy.

Second, were you asleep during history class in regards to Operation Paperclip? Did you just pick a random cool sounding "Operation" and hope no one would notice the minutiae of the actual subject? Operation Paperclip: The US scramble for Nazi scientists after WWII, to get all our hands on the Reich's best and brightest so they dont fall into Soviet hands. Rocketry, bio/chem warfare, aeronautics, medicine, electronics, intelligence. The best scientists that helped found our fledgling space race and new military might. Now, how in the hell did you get special "pre-rigged" buildings out of that? Please I would like to see some actual documentation of this, cause as you know, outlandish claims need to be backed up with some facts now. Which Nazi genius did they pull this one from? Also, are you know mixing Nazis into this 9/11 Conspiracy? My God, this rabbit hole just keeps getting deeper and deeper.

Third, where exactly are you getting this from? Do you have actual proof of any of this? The PBS link makes no mention of any Operation Paperclip, nothing about Nazis, and nothing about any pre-planted hidden explosives. Why are you making things up?

Fourth, remember that fire in the WTC back in the 1970s........ Feb13, 1975. A large fire broke out and yet not one explosive detonated accidentally.

Sorry chief, all you got is one fairy tale that is fun reading, but nothing more. You have no evidence, no proof, not one credible shred of anything tangible to back up any of this nonsense. That is all this idea is...... nonsense. I read your make-believe about hiding explosives as coating on rebar and such garbage. What kind of explosives are we talking here? How about this, I'll start calling out explosives and you say stop when I get to the one that was most likely used, ok? Here goes: Dynamite, TNT, gunpowder, C-2, C-3, C-4, SEMTEX, AMATOL, AMMONIUM NITRATE, primacord, pyrotol, ANFO, PETEN, RDX, C-B, C-C, TORPEX, Shellite......... any ringing a bell?

Where did they say there concrete walls in the core? I recall drywall and thick sheetrock being used. Not so much in terms of concrete. Maybe the staircases, and the light concrete used in the floor decking. But not so much in the core itself.

a reply to: amurphy245

I think what we saw was what was intended,we know from basic physics that the "pancake effect" is impossible as the smaller top section of the building does not have the energy to destroy the larger undamaged section so this implies that we saw a controlled demolition ,

No this implies that you know nothing of building structures, kinetic and potential energies and loads. Therefore you are falsely using physics(as many members do) to support your theory.

It was not a solid block that the upper weight fell upon. It was singular connections that couldn't withstand the stresses of a massive kinteic load. The weight fell on the upper, still stamding floor connections. These connections were suddenly subjected to forces outside of their design specifications

a reply to: GenRadek

just a noob reader who has no idea...can answer me this ?

Fourth, remember that fire in the WTC back in the 1970s........ Feb13, 1975. A large fire broke out and yet not one explosive detonated accidentally.

which floors were the fires on ?

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

nevermind the 11th floor and consumed 6 other floors ..fair to say the fires burned upwards....so can anyone with building demolition knowledge tell us how many lower floors would need to be rigged on a 110 floor building to create a free fall event like was seen on that fate full day ?

I was surprised you didn't mention architect Paul Laffoley who worked on the design of the Twin Towers:

"Twin Tower architect, Paul Laffoley tells of the Bin Laden Construction Co. asking him where to put the demolition charges" Paul describes a meeting with Yamasaki and Bin Laden Construction Company reps: And they would go around to different desks, and one of them came over to me. You know, he was wearing a turban and all this kind of stuff....And he says, 'Where shall we put the demolition devices?' And I said, 'What the hell are you talking about? This is a piece of paper; there's nothing up there yet.' They put in demolition devices to facilitate removal of the and easy re-development.

a reply to: Murgatroid

well then maybe paul laffoley could answer my question