New 911 Theory with a thought

"For a war to be just, three conditions are necessary - public authority, just cause, right motive."

Ernest Hemingway

Regarding "who" benefitted from this......
Right after 911 I made a list of stocks one should buy, such as military tied companies......and I was amazed in the upcoming months how many of these companies I had chosen were in on the profit grab and their stocks were going up! And I don't really know much about financial things.......I am a technical person! Wow! My own humble picks success scared me! (I certainly did not buy any of these----I am poor!)
I am very fascinated over the tech end of this stuff. I have read the old threads and I have read alot of stuff on the net in general about it. Nothing makes any sense to me........the "official explanations"........
Also what really got me thinking is the whole 'theatrics' of it all......how it looked and felt like a Hollywood movie, a 'production'. Well one can read those thoughts on the net too.
As far as "19 hijackers"......ummmmm.........does the term "red herring" occur?
Funny how they had all the proper ID and silly books on "How to Fly a Plane".
I am thinking, "props".
Finally, I DO think continuous discussion of this topic IS important so we can all learn and understand.......regardless of what 'theory' is correct......we can all learn from one another and be kept up to date. Pushing 911 under the rug and focusing on Martha Stewart's prison sentence or Paris Hilton's latest escapade is just what the "government" wants us to do. Lets not forget!
You know, now I am thinking that we ought to give up this whole "war" altogether and focus on helping those in Asia who have been devasted by the earthquake and tsunamis. Over 50,000 dead and 100,000 deaths forcasted........isn't THIS so much more important?
Or what about the treatment of females in the mid east? That is ALWAYS overlooked.......it is just OIL OIL OIL in the mideast. Or how about Africa and AIDS?????? It is telling to me---how we have been trained to fixate on a so called "threat" (Iraq). Distractions abound....a good 'fight' gets us riled more than indigent Africans dying of AIDS or a worn out wife being set on fire......
And, uh, how 'bout some JOBS for us too??????
I really, honestly, think that when the US "government" runs out of "threats" they will keep "creating" threats. They will invade Canada. Or Jamaica. Or ANYWHERE. Just to keep the mindset of fear going.......to have something to DO and make biz opportunites for their corporate 'sponsors'.

[edit on 28-12-2004 by Niki]

this current war im iraq has nothing to do with "terrorists" or weapons of mass destruction. its war for busseniss. nothing else. nothing matters, just the higher stock price on the wall street.
"lets make billions while we can!", says the bush administration.

wars are never good, and peace is never bad.
but you must understand that peace is BAD for busseniss.


"Fight the rich, not their wars!"
Anonymous (headline in Freedom, January 2003)

Although i do believe that the terrible things done on 9/11 were done by Terrorists to the exclusion of all others ( i didn't always believe that but after a lot of reading i can find no other explanation ) i find the collapse of WTC 7 the most strange of all. That building was supposed to have collapsed from the effects of fire alone but there is no other instance that i have been able to find in the history of Skyscraper fires where the building collapsed from fire alone.
I can understand the two big buildings going down after they were hit and burned as well, the stresses on the building must have been enormous, but as far as I'm aware WTC 7 wasn't hit by anything substantial enough to cause the collapse the way it was reported. That is the only incident that does not make any sense to me.

You know, now I am thinking that we ought to give up this whole "war" altogether and focus on helping those in Asia who have been devasted by the earthquake and tsunamis

...dont you know...the tsunamis was part of "the" war

Originally posted by Janus
Although i do believe that the terrible things done on 9/11 were done by Terrorists to the exclusion of all others ....- - -> - - -> - - ->
but as far as I'm aware WTC 7 wasn't hit by anything substantial enough to cause the collapse the way it was reported. That is the only incident that does not make any sense to me.

oh? then you wouldn't consider that WTC-7 and the Anthrax attacks
were contingency-actions? and not just spontaneous events functioning in a Domino Effect...
because, as it is being portrayed, the USA and all the 'think-tanks' [PNAC &
CAP for example] were caught like the 'Deer-in-Headlights' routine.

i remain; incongruous

HNY= happynewyear

Originally posted by Janus
That building was supposed to have collapsed from the effects of fire alone but there is no other instance that i have been able to find in the history of Skyscraper fires where the building collapsed from fire alone.

yes, the buildings would still stand if they were "just" on fire. but you didnt mention all the airplane fuel that burned inside the buildings. that fuel created extremly high temperatures inside them. it was more like a blast furnace in an iron mill, than a world trade center. maybe the towers wouldnt collapse if the airplanes didnt have so much fuel onboard, because they just took off from airports.

but what really happned, nobody of us here really knows, and probably never will. the "real truth" is far more complicated and strange, than we all here even imagined!



"Truth sits upon the lips of dying men."
--Unknown

August 2001, Unocal and the Bush Administration (aka Carlyle Administration) invite the friendly Taliban government of Afghanistan to Texas, in hopes of completing closing talks of constructing a $2B pipeline to bring gas from Central Asia to the sub-continent.

Taliban are insulted by the small slice of profit pie and walk away from the deal. Carlyle Administration has no choice but to wipe away the saliva for now.

Couple of days/weeks later, US intel receives message of "Bin Laden looking to strike within the United States" coming out of Afganistan.

Just a few more days/weeks later, NORAD goes blind on September 11th 2001 and 3000 souls lost. Bin Laden/Al Qaeda from Afganistan declared the evil doers within 48hrs and without any criminal investigation performed. Carlyle Administration promises only days before retrobution will come swift and hard to the Taliban and "Al Qaeda" Terrorists.

6-8 Months later Hamid Karzai, former consultant for Unocal was hand selected by the Carlyle to become Afghanistan's interm president.

Guess what folks, there's a pipeline which cost $2B running through Turkey, Afganistan and Pakistan right now.

**Just another benefit to our government from the 3000 souls that were murdered 911**

For some tech stuff......
www.thepowerhour.com...

again, for those wondering about how hot fires can get--and the buildings (WTC) collapse........open fire, even with accelerants, DOES NOT BURN HOT ENOUGH TO MELT STEEL! NO! this situation WAS NOT even close to a blast furnace---a blast furnace is CONTAINED and must have PRESSURIZED OXYGEN!

Read! Take physics 101!

Other factors of note include the "collapse" of these buildings.....where were the "big chunks"? All debris was pulverized to dust. More evidence of controlled demolition. Another thing we must keep in mind is that the WTC buildings had inner steel cores-----one building, the plane only hit the corner--there is no physical reason this building should have collapsed.
But collapse it did, right after the first, on CUE! Doesn't that tell you something? Shouldn't there have been some differences? In the way these buildings fell?

side note: Here in Chicago we had a bad fire recently at the LaSalle bank building (hi rise), floors 28 and 29 were affected. The fire burned for several hours.......yet.......the building is STILL STANDING! And this is an OLD building!
story:
www.cnn.com...

Originally posted by Niki
again, for those wondering about how hot fires can get--and the buildings (WTC) collapse........open fire, even with accelerants, DOES NOT BURN HOT ENOUGH TO MELT STEEL! NO! this situation WAS NOT even close to a blast furnace---a blast furnace is CONTAINED and must have PRESSURIZED OXYGEN!

so what is your theory for the collapse of the two towers?
a bomb planted?

I think the most suspect thing about the collapse is how similar it was to a controlled demolition. If you are to follow the theory of jet fuel causing it, well then surely you must at least concede to the fact that the jet fuel was most likely not spread evenly upon impact, therefore certain locations of the structure were probably far weaker than others. What I'm trying to say is, given the fact that the structural damage was uneven, isn't just a bit odd how evenly the building went down, especially since all it would take is a very slight modification in it's downward trajectory to cause it to fall sideways? I'm not saying I believe in the conspiracies, but I do believe there is merit in the logic being applied, and that further investigation is required.

None of this will sink into the thick headed
I dont mean that in a bad way,just that our thought/theories are looked at as jokes,wishfull thinking because we are Bush haters,and most of all,uneducated crackpots.
I have been over and over on the whole 'fire' issue giving examples of the One Meridian Plaza (19hr inferno) and the tower in CARACAS, Venezuela, Oct. 18, 2004 (17hr infirno)
It keeps going back to the fuel issue which for some,common sense doesnt apply for whatever reason.Had this fuel been ENCLOSED and continued to be PRESSURIZED,maybe it would have weakened the steel.But it wasnt.Massive gaping holes allowed oxygen to turn them into regular burning fires and were mostly turned into small pockets.

But you will not change their minds as they cannot change ours.The only way is for the truth to come out from the source,and that will never happen.
Charges were set off and you can see them in the films.I dont understand why some people cant see them or explain them.

Having just read through this topic thread, roughly about 3/4's of the comments that have been given revolve around matters and topics that have been discussed countless times within ATS.

As such, many may want to consider visting this INDEX concerning such questions, claims, and assertions?
Forum Reference Index AND Thread for Discussing anything related to 9/11, Pentagon, etc.

Rehashing is fine, but if the re-hashing amounts to nothing 'new' or 'discovered' it then becomes repetitive and redundant. Just a heads-up.




seekerof

I know what ya mean,,,,
I think people rather start something new ( though it is not ) for sake of having to scroll through countless pages.
Perhaps a 9/11 theory/discussion forum is needed?
Seems that this topic is a popular one here that continues to have a new thread every other day.

as posted by SMR
Perhaps a 9/11 theory/discussion forum is needed?

That is an interesting concept, but one reason for not having such a forum would be that the topic is not really considered a "hot button" like topic anymore. If it was discussed on a near everyday basis, then it would be something to consider. For that reason, the INDEX thread on 9/11 and the like was created for the purpose of allowing members still wishing to discuss 9/11, and not really having anything new or discovered to bring to the 'table', per se', it was deemed and more preferred to have an easy access INDEX to allow for simplified searching of topics that these members would or might like to add to.

Please don't get me wrong here. Discussing the matters of and surrounding 9/11 is not discouraged. What is discouraged is the repetitive nature of the discussion, hence the INDEX. This topic started with a fairly new theory regarding 9/11 and then seems to have just strayed to repetitive and redundant. I merely wanted to give a heads-up so that some of what people are asking and asserting could easily be found within the INDEX, and perhaps in seeing some of those past topics, they would or could "resurrect" them by adding their comments to them or merely use those past topics to answer what they are questioning and/or asserting. Thats all.




seekerof

I fully agree.
That INDEX page has grown alot with more and more links.
I think the issue is that some feel they have discovered something new,although it is not,they're just a bit late,and start a new thread.
I can image the task of someone having to merge and purge a topic as this one.

As a suggestion,what if all the INDEX contents were to be in a 9/11 forum?
Perhaps all the links on that INDEX could be the threads.Then members could just pick one that suits them and post in it to continue?
Maybe even make it so no new topics could be made withough MOD permission/once over and the rest is just continuing on an already made thread.
Im willing to bet no matter what you may want to post as being new,could go into an already made thread.

What I think happened here... lol... is that the person who started the thread has JUST RECENTLY come to the conclusion (well he mentions this) that 9-11 was POSSIBLY NOT a terror attack pulled off by 19 guys and their boss who was half a world away in a cave somewhere.

So he came here and announced his grand revelation to us all. Which is great, but like has already been said... "Why didn't he ever just search this theory out himself?"

Actually what I want to know is ... "How many people out there, just have NOT in ANY way made ANY attempt to understand what really happened on 9-11?"

I mean.. if you are NOT suspicious of the WHOLE DAMN DAY, then you just don't have a clue about anything that happened during it OTHER then the fact that the news told you that 19 guys flew TWO planes in to the world trade center leveling the ENTIRE COMPLEX!

(lol)

If you are not outraged about what happened on 9-11 then you just have no idea as to what transpired. AND... AND... you probablly took science and math through the public education system in the US (sorry but you KNOW this is true). AND.. you have never read about the concerns of the families of the victims themselves and you have never done anything to learn about the day other then watch CNN... like they will EVER tell you the truth about anything.

Yes.. everyone here who thinks 9-11 had ANYTHING to do with terrorists (arab) needs desperately to read as much as they can about the events of that day... because ... and I do not mean to be mean but ... you just are completely in the dark.

And if you are in the dark about 9-11... then think about what other misconnceptions you might have reguarding... the presidency.. or even Iraq... or hell.. remember that thing called Enron? Bet you think Bush had nothing to do with that either!

But its not too late.. you still have time to learn the entire truth about 9-11 before the next one hits.


And btw.. when the 'next one hits' .. when that suitcase nuke goes off.. who do you think is going to be blamed for it? And if you were NKorea.. wouldn't you want to set off a nuke in the USA to make sure that the USA attacked Iran right now.. turning that whole M.E. situation in to a huge huge huge mess (vrs.. the minor mess that it is now). How about if you were exKGB that just wants the USA to get stuck in a war it can't win? Wouldn't you just nuke a small city and watch the USA get bogged down in a war in the M.E. forever? Huh?

I just have a hard time believing that people.. even those that do not watch TV, can still not have researched 9-11 if they have an interest in the subject in general.. I mean.. if I even thought.. all of a sudden that the US maybe had a role in that attack.. I wouldn't stop researching till I was sure I had a picture for myself of what really happened.

How about you? No?


BTW SMR: GREAT IDEA! About the making every part of 9-11 in a 9-11 discussion forum an individual topic.. THIS IS A FANTASTIC IDEA DUDE!

Like... that could be SOOOOOO usefull.. each topic stickied.. so like.. its a permanent discussion sorta... thing... well.. GOOD IDEA! I LIKE IT!

Can we ask that a 9-11 forum is put together and this set up? I looooove discussing 9-11 ..






[edit on 3/1/2005 by Vis Mega]

Originally posted by HIFIGUY
You can be assured that President Bush had no knowledge. Its some of his henchmen, who to this day are just now showing their true colors...and I think you know who I mean. Hes backpeddling in a world of crap that he helped to create and he needs to resign.
Mark my words on this day.

One Down..

Wave Goodbye to Rumsfeld.

Peace

It's not to hard to see who the real perps of 9/11 were when you finally get it through you're brain that a little plane with some jetfuel in it can't bring down a skyscraper.

So who was in charge of defense? Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz.
Cheney - Haliburton president, vice president, Norad stand down
Rumsfeld - defense guy for bush administration during 911
Wolfowitz - is now World bank president, but he was deputy of defense under rumsfeld
Silverstein - owned WTC before attacks, now owns Sears Tower, had a mishap and said the he spoke to a fire department "commander" and suggested to "pull it"
Bush's brother - Head of Securacom that's listed clients included United Airlines, World Trade Center, and others

All three have in common, high positions in US Government, part of PNAC which called for a Pearl Harbor like incident to justify pre emptive war

As co-author of a document from the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) called "Rebuilding America's Defenses" Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Dick Cheney, Jeb Bush and others had spelled out what they sought: a traumatic event that would usher in their agenda of total world domination through military and financial supremacy is a Washington foreign policy "think tank" created in 1997--motive.


It's right in front of our eyes. The facts.

[edit on 1/18/2007 by atsrules]

I believe i have come across an interesting theory of what really happened on 9/11 at the WTC. I have several quotes from survivors and witnesses of the 9/11 WTC attack. Here they are:

Nicholas Borrillo -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) on 23rd floor of North Tower:
Then we heard a rumble. We heard it and we felt the whole building shake. It was like being on a train, being in an earthquake. A train is more like it, because with the train you hear the rumbling, and it kind of like moved you around in the hall.

Paul Curran -- Fire Patrolman (F.D.N.Y.) North Tower:
I went back and stood right in front of Eight World Trade Center right by the customs house, and the north tower was set right next to it. Not that much time went by, and all of a sudden the ground just started shaking. It felt like a train was running under my feet.

Joseph Fortis -- E.M.T. (E.M.S.):
The ground started shaking like a train was coming. You looked up, and I guess -- I don't know, it was one that came down first or two? Which one?

Keith Murphy -- (F.D.N.Y.) [Engine 47]:
At the time, I would have said they sounded like bombs, but it was boom boom boom and then the lights all go out. I hear someone say oh, s___, that was just for the lights out. I would say about 3, 4 seconds, all of a sudden this tremendous roar. It sounded like being in a tunnel with the train coming at you.

Timothy Julian -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) [Ladder 118]:
You know, and I just heard like an explosion and then cracking type of noise, and then it sounded like a freight train, rumbling and picking up speed, and I remember I looked up, and I saw it coming down.


These qoutes are evidence of a vertical train that was built in secret(with help from the CIA) inside the WTC. Here is a picture of what could have been a smoke stack of a train.