Im ashamed

Originally posted by Strangerous
Is anyone suggesting the 'Panorama' did it? No they're not as it doesn't fit their pre-conceived conspiracy theories - as I say selective repetition of half-truths.

[EDIT - adding additional info I thought relevant]

[edit on 27-6-2006 by Strangerous]

Strangerous, Visor Consulting's exercise happened at exactly the same stations that the real bombs went off at. These are the exact words of Peter Power when he was first interviewed I think on BBC Radio 5 Live.

Originally posted by uknumpty

Originally posted by Strangerous
Is anyone suggesting the 'Panorama' did it? No they're not as it doesn't fit their pre-conceived conspiracy theories - as I say selective repetition of half-truths.

[EDIT - adding additional info I thought relevant]

[edit on 27-6-2006 by Strangerous]

Strangerous, Visor Consulting's exercise happened at exactly the same stations that the real bombs went off at. These are the exact words of Peter Power when he was first interviewed I think on BBC Radio 5 Live.

I agree there are inconsistencies in what Visor has / what they're saying now - but Panorama's scenario is much closer to what actually happened - does that mean the Beeb were involved in the planning / setting of the bombs?

You do realize that was a volumized amount of molten metal flowing out of the building before the collapse and being retrieved from the debris after the collapse. As in a concentrated amount, as in it was relatively close to each other. As in there was a lot of it in a general area in concentrated amounts.

Not many materials fill that criteria. You can use what arguments you want, but there's still the volumous and concentration amount in a small general area producing that flow that still has to be refuted.

Aircraft aluminum? ---> No, molten aluminum is not that luminous when at its peak temps.

What other metals in the building fill that criteria because you have a good general amount of this stuff.

Considering the thermal pics taken after the collapse (few days after) and molten steel being and iron being retrieved from the debris, you can make some good assumptions.

Not to mention there was a huge amount of thermal activity that was documented in the basements of the WTC. The WTC were made of a lot of steel mostly.

Hmmm...

Really though, what else could the molten metal flowing out of the building and being retrieved from the debris? Really.

Originally posted by Masisoar
Aircraft aluminum? ---> No, molten aluminum is not that luminous when at its peak temps.

Yeah, and just molten aluminum is silvery, not a glowing orange-ish. For the aluminum to be that color, you'd probably have to hit heat similar to what would make steel glow about the same color.

Professor Jones melted some aluminum of his own to test (and disprove) a theory put forth by a Mr. Greening on a natural-occurring thermite in the building, and here's an image from that:

Originally posted by Griff

I have thought that thought before. That would still indicate someone on the inside.

Not necessarily. Those things are usually pretty well advertised ahead of time. Wouldn't necessarily need an inside person - just someone peripherally involved with the police/fire/medical community.

It is actually a pretty standard procedure.

Standard procedure maybe but what are the odds that it happens on the exact day in the exact fashion? Pretty darn high.

Standard procedure means that the odds aren't actually very high - it's the best most efficient way of doing it ;-) These people have a LOT of practice and experience at this sort of thing in Israel and Palestine and really, around the world - thing of the Germany discotheque bombings. Another thing that they have done is figured out the response times of police and ambulances and often try to have a secondary explosion in order to maximize casualties against these first responders.

Aluminum from the aircraft is ruled out. That's reasonably clear.

We need to look at other possible metals sources that are left that can provide the volume.

Aircraft Engines - Is the location suitable for where aircraft engines might be located from the initial impact? They would of travelled pretty far with their initial momentum during the impact from the impact zone. We should look at what they're made mostly made of if this is suitable, and the metal's melting points.

Structural Steel in the building - fires weren't hot enough. RULED OUT (atleast.. according to the official story and what happened)

Any other suggestions? Because this is a good lead to go on definately.. can't cast it aside as for it "being anything" and not significant.

Sauron I've just read your article, and you are to be congratulated upon it.

I also believe the arguments used in the PM article are largely specious in light of the evidence to the contrary, as was for example demonstrated by Jim Hoffman in his excellent article.

As far as the "drill" taking place on 7/7 in London are concerned, this is only one of a large number of extremely suspicious events associated with that day that have been (and are being) discussed elsewhere - the original ATSNN thread is here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

and here ive recently posted an article on 7/7 and its implications in London's current Big Brother surveillance society, intended to be a little tongue in cheek (my first real post to a forum ever ) it has been a bit of a hot-bed of debate during which some important information on 7/7 has been presented by several members that suggests that the official story contains many omissions and outright fabrications, and that elements within the British government were at guilty of at least wilful negligence and at most outright treason on 7/7:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

But a summary of the chronology of these "drills" on 7-7, as far as I have been able to determine, is as follows:

Peter Power is MD of Visor Consultants, a "crisis management" firm who counts amongst its clients many governmental organisations and acillary agencies in the private and public sectors, and was formerly senior Scotland Yard official specializing in counterterrorism. He said the following on a BBC Radio Interview, 7 July 2005:

POWER: At half past nine this morning we were actually running an exercise for a company of over a thousand people in London based on simultaneous bombs going off precisely at the railway stations where it happened this morning, so I still have the hairs on the back of my neck standing up right now.

HOST: To get this quite straight, you were running an exercise to see how you would cope with this and it happened while you were running the exercise?

POWER: Precisely, and it was about half past nine this morning, we planned this for a company and for obvious reasons I don't want to reveal their name but they're listening and they'll know it. And we had a room full of crisis managers for the first time they'd met and so within five minutes we made a pretty rapid decision that this is the real one and so we went through the correct drills of activating crisis management procedures to jump from slow time to quick time thinking and so on.

www.globalresearch.ca...

The above link is to an excellent article by Michel Chossudovsky on the drills and the parallels with those conducted on 9/11 etc.

It was after his first interview that the immense and overwhelming email and phone calls his company recieved as a result of his statements on these broadcasts led him to place a standard automated email response to all enquiries, which is the one strangerous quoted, I believe, and toned down his original assertion that the excercises had been PRECISELY identical, to the events to a version in which they had merely been SIMILAR, and there are other obvious discrepancies. Here are the links to the mp3/video files of the occasions where he made his statements again through other mainstream media organs:

www.infowars.net...

www.infowars.net...

(Continued in next post...)

There are many parallels between 9/11 and 7/7, and they both fit the same pattern in my view of politically motivated psy-ops - particularly because of parallels such as the following and given also the known geopolitical aspirations of certain individuals and parties (predominantly in the US administration's PNAC crazies and a couple of influential lobbies () but also, increasingly it would seem, in the UK with conservative politicians actually speaking with a straight face about eviscerating the MAGNA CARTA and Gordon Brown talking about establishing his own little Department Of Homeland Security !

1 - suspicious insider trading on the airlines/pound (9/11 and 7/7 respectively),

2 - drills occurring simulating the exact (or near exact) events simultaneous to the real events,

3 - proven government machinations to obfuscate independant enquiry and investigation into the "terrorists" (exec. order W199I in the case of 9/11 and the refusal by Tony Blair to allow an independant enquiry into 7/7 on the rather pathetically specious grounds that it would IMPEDE the ongoing efforts of the police and intelligence services against "terrorism"),

4 - evidence of government/intelligence collusion in terrorism (links between Al qaeda and the CIA and MI6 through intermediaries like the ISI in the case of 9/11, and the discovery by the Justice Department that MI6 was PROTECTING the supposed mastermind behind the London Bombings, Harun Rashid Aswat, because he was a BRITISH INTELLIGENCE ASSET in the case of 7/7),

5 - the suspicious discovery of identifying documents that survived the "suicides" of the "terrorists" intact when all else was molten slag (on 7/7 the ID of one of the supposed "bombers" was found in TWO separate locations by the police. Hmmmm.

6 - Evidence of elements of government(s) having (at least) prior knowledge of the events (

Anyway believe me we could go on, and have in the above thread in the 9/11 and 7/7 conspiracies section, which contains abundant links to the information above and far more, and also links to websites that (their other obvious foibles aside) present good summaries of the information known to be verifiable and that controverts the official conspiracy theory of the events of 7/7. And the discussion is still going.

I truly don't think that such drills, if Peter Power and/or his company Visor are to be believed in his accounts, are routine at all - if they were, client companies of Visor wouldn't have to pay them a small fortune for their "crisis management" expertise and the organisation concerned would use its own staff to ensure compliance with all obligations under law rather than subcontract to a consultancy like Visor. If Peter Power and all these rather murky ex-intelligence types who go on to found these private intelligence sector organisations like the mighty, dark Leviathan that is Kroll Associates, Marsh McLennan affiliates, etc. after exiting the military/law enforcement/intelligence world are to be believed, THEY ARE THE EXPERTS WHEN IT COMES TO COUNTERTERRORISM - they disclose their OPINIONS usually unsupported by any EVIDENCE (on the grounds of that all-too-familiar chestnut, "National Security") to the mainstream Media, who then aprrot that opinion ad nauseum to the unknowing masses until it becomes truth.

Ergo, who they say is guilty is guilty. No proof needed. They are the experts. That is what they DO. And they are paid handsomely for it by some of the most crooked organisations in the world.

If these people are to be believed, then NOBODY has the expertise to do what they can supposedly do in today's "post 9-11" climate except themselves. No, i honestly can't see how these things could possibly have been routine.

(Continued in next post..)

Something definitely stinks about Power.

About the whole thing, IMHO.

As far as the 9/11 steel thing goes, even if the fires from the jet fuel were hot enough to melt the structural steel (which they most likely weren't given the evidence, such as the fact that it is clearly visible that most of the fuel burns in the initial explosions outside the towers if I remember correctly - sorry, I'm not as fully up on all the facts of 9/11 just yet as perhaps many of you are, so forgive me if there has been new evidence that stands up to scrutiny to the contrary, since I myself have seen none), and even if there was enough jet fuel to release enough heat to weaken by conductive dissipation the WHOLE structure of the steel framed building in question (something I seriously personally doubt given the speicfic heat capacities of structural steel, the fuel carrying capacity of the aircraft, the highest temperature generated by the combustion of the fuel, etc.) such that it COLLAPSES IN ON ITS OWN FOOTPRINT SYMMETRICALLY AND AT NEAR FREEFALL SPEED WITH MINIMAL DAMAGE TO THE SURROUNDING BUILDINGS suggests incredibly convincingly that this was a controlled demolition. This is to say nothing of the mystery of building 7 or the fact that the administration committed a FEDERAL FELONY when they shipped the evidence to be melted down in China (Giuliani used to be a hotshot lawyer, did he not? His plea to the effect that he didn't know about the illegality of his actions could be no reasonable defence there. As the police have a habit of reminding us, "Ignorance of the Law is no defence".

This avoidance of the controlled demolition issue in the official resport and the mainstream media's coverage of events is again another parallel to 7/7 in London where the story of the explosive devices used and their nature changed from the initial rather final-sounding assertions by the police andmanstream media that this was almost certainly a military grade explosive to the current story that it was a unstable (and therefore unsuitable to carry - hardly practical) explosive peroxide called TATP that was home made - despite the fact that it is known that TATP is in fact an "entropic" explosive - ie. it produces NO light flash, heat or flames, which were reported by SEVERAL EYEWITNESSES to the explosions

I believe that the same Hegelian MO is at work in 7/7 as in 9/11. So far they have seemed almost identical in their execution in most important respects. And to this day, in spite of conveniently ignored facts that if stacked up would dwarf the 9/11 or 7/7 "Independent Omission Reports" by several orders of magnitude, in NEITHER case has the government allowed an truly IMPARTIAL AND INDEPENDANT enquiry. It stinks. Check it out.

Peace


Fulcanelli

I agree with Lumos


also this gov of ours cant keep any thing under wraps what makes you think they could hide a plan to kill us citezens

Originally posted by eyeblack42
also this gov of ours cant keep any thing under wraps what makes you think they could hide a plan to kill us citezens

What makes you think that the faction of our gov that "cant keep any thing under wraps" is the same faction that carried out 9/11?

Applaud the editors at PM in selecting only the easily refutable and already somewhat thin arguments against the official story.

It's a shame they were already framing how they wanted readers to think about the story from the beginning. So much for objectivity.

If you are a PM reader, don't you even feel insulted that they think you're so stupid that you'll accept a half-ass job of trying to debunk the conspiracy?

I have a question did any of you take the time to find out who was behind this Popular Mechanics article? Ben Chertoff. Chertoff...hmmmm that name sounds quite familar doesn't it. Any of you ever heard of Michael Chertoff? Yeah that guy who is in charge of Home land security for the united states of america? Yeah that guy Michael Chertoff is Ben Chertoff's cousin!!! Cue creepy conspiracy music...

Now Im that Ben's cousin Mike had any influence on his editorial decision's...direct influence that is. But what if Ben's article happened to agree with alot of the claims of the 9/11 truth movement. Do you think old Mikey boy would be too happy? And what about when Mike's superiors namely the President and Darth Vader himself found out that Mike's cousin wrote an article supporting the 9/11 theories. Hmm I just wonder some times.

The proof is in the pudding people. It's like one big joke that there playing on us and it's all right infront of our eye's all you have to do is open them.
www.google.com...

I rest my case on the Popular Mechanics article.

Originally posted by Strangerous
Don't be, conspiracy theories are in themselves intriguing.

When the question is 'conspiracy or cock-up?' many of us instinctively gravitate towards the conspiracy. In some ways it's more comforting than realising your own intelligence services and air-defence were just not up to the job.

Add in the selective presentation of the available facts, the willingness of many to repost half-truths on their own websites and you get web-groupthink.
The result is 'of course we're all correct and anyone who disagrees is part of the conspiracy' - it's easy to get sucked in.

It's happening now regarding the 7/7 Tube bombings in London (and presumably Madrid). If the 'net had been around in '39 we'd be arguing about the German invasion of Poland and whether it was justified as the Germans rolled into France.

I agree Governments exploit such opportunities, that's their stock in trade. Doesn't mean they did it though.

i have to agree with you 100 % i think things got ignored, and i think bush has used all this to go to iraq, i think 9-11 was used as a morale booster to go after iraq" hmm i bet a thousand people have said that already on here." anyways when i get to thinking about no plan is perfect because we are man, the sad thing is our imperfections cost us.

Zakattack did you even read my post pertaining to your so called ashamed feelings dealing with reading the propaganda piece written by Ben Chertoff?

Originally posted by SaucyRossy
I have a question did any of you take the time to find out who was behind this Popular Mechanics article? Ben Chertoff. Chertoff...hmmmm that name sounds quite familar doesn't it. Any of you ever heard of Michael Chertoff? Yeah that guy who is in charge of Home land security for the united states of america? Yeah that guy Michael Chertoff is Ben Chertoff's cousin!!! Cue creepy conspiracy music...

Now Im that Ben's cousin Mike had any influence on his editorial decision's...direct influence that is. But what if Ben's article happened to agree with alot of the claims of the 9/11 truth movement. Do you think old Mikey boy would be too happy? And what about when Mike's superiors namely the President and Darth Vader himself found out that Mike's cousin wrote an article supporting the 9/11 theories. Hmm I just wonder some times.

The proof is in the pudding people. It's like one big joke that there playing on us and it's all right infront of our eye's all you have to do is open them.
www.google.com...

I rest my case on the Popular Mechanics article.

I see your point in all this but who is to say that there actually brothers, i see alot of websites claiming that those to are brothers but unless i see them to on national tv in front of the world then i wont believe what i see on the internet.

zakattack is my nick name, but people believe that there are government conspiracies in scientology because supposedly the two are connected, anyways my last name is Hubbard, and a founder of scientology is L Ron Hubbard. i live in the south and i get people who wont even serve me at some restuarants cuz they think i have some relation to him, but i dont, anyways my point is obvious, just cuz they share the last same name and people can draw up a website "proving" there related doesnt mean they are.

people can draw up alot of stuff to make some sense, if i can find the article i will post it, but there was a country back in the early 40s or 50s that was workin an a sub that looked like a giant whale and moved like one that could hold up to 3 people, Now is it possible? i would say sure with todays tech why not. but there are people who believe that the locness monster is a government project that swims out of some cave somehere into the ocean with sensors and mics to record enemy subs or ships or spy on some countries " i don know that the us uses dolphins for similar things" and that there is some man inside that operates it. to be honest it souds like some hill billy from the south down here drank way to much rubbing alchohol and wrote this. ok im done blabbering so keep this thread going this is interesting to me.

Originally posted by SaucyRossy
Zakattack did you even read my post pertaining to your so called ashamed feelings dealing with reading the propaganda piece written by Ben Chertoff?

yes i read it, in ur web link i was reading from some off the sites, and some claim the Chertoff completely ignored the question" how did the towers collapse" when i read PMs article it said plainly that all it took was for the steal to get weak, my uncle and i used to be firefighter in south dakota, and one the things we learned was that steal looses 65% of its strength once it gets above 1000 degrees, after that all it takes is some twisting for the steal to give way. so lets say for example. floor 80 was a thousand degrees the steal supporting that floor section is 65% weaker then the rest so now heat tends to radiate through steal and metal, so let say floor 79-75 is 900 degrees and is now 55-60% weaker, floor 68-74 is 45-50% weaker, so when those floors cant with stand it anymore they give way and the weight of every floor from 80 on up is coming crashing down to the bottom.,i dont know how much weight that is but i would bet its alot.

and as far as people claiming what they saw, i dont know how much i believe people, when the maryland sniper shootings were going on all the witnesses said that thy saw a white van, then when the next shooting happen, oh oh oh i saw a white van, then the next one, ah ah ah white van white van, when it all came down to it they were using a car that had a hole drilled in the trunk for the barrel of the gun to stick out of, thats just an example, someone heard somebody say white van and they just went along with it, i mean there are alot of white honda civics on the road why didnt someone scream white honda civic.
kind of like the guy who said that all he saw were window-less planes, but then later said to a local paper and news channel" not cnn whom everyone thinks is in bed with bush" the he was more then a a mile and half from where he saw the plane hit.


[edit on 27-6-2006 by zakattack]

I have yet to see any undeniable proof of any of the postulated scenarios - official or conspiracy theory - that would persuade me to believe anyone knows with absolute certainty what did or did not happen on that fateful day.

Furthermore, there are less dramatic, yet equally diabolical means of carrying out (or allowing) what happened on 9-11, than those put forth by the most popular conspiracy theories. Too many potential layers, I feel, go without consideration. I was reminded yesterday for example, while re-reading the Northwoods documentation in the National Archives, that compartmentalization of operational procedure can readily produce scenarios in which actual participants in an operation don't know what they're truly participating in.

There are simply too many unknowns and unverifiable possibilities to establish the airtight facts of what went down that day. With that in mind, I have to say that just as no single conspiracy theory has been able to convince me that the official story is definitely bogus, no single article in any publication can convince me that the official story is true either. So don't get too disillusioned just yet, and don't allow yourself to make assumptions. We still don't know.

Originally posted by SaucyRossy
Zakattack did you even read my post pertaining to your so called ashamed feelings dealing with reading the propaganda piece written by Ben Chertoff?

How does Chertoffs cousin have anything to do with it? What exactly is it you're saying?--Chertoffs cousin "made up" all the information presented in the article?

HEY VUSHTA... How come you never respond to the FACTS? Please respond to this:

Originally posted by Sauron
I came across this article written by Peter Sault the other day so I emailed Peter to see if I could get his permission to repost it here on ATS. Well I received Peter's reply this morning with his permission to do so, so here it is in it's entirety. Any opinions welcome.

'

Popular Mechanics' & Other CIA Front Organizations

From Peter Wakefield Sault
[email protected]
2-11-5

I have just read Jim Hoffman's response to Popular Mechanics 9/11 article that tries to debunk the truth about 9/11 by the use of the 'straw man' tactic. Although everything in his response is quite correct and exposes the straw man for what it is, I feel Mr Hoffman was dealing with this particular issue at the wrong level. Approached from a different angle the article tells us who really was behind 9/11 and who is still desperately trying to cover it up. This is how it works:-


'Popular Mechanics' is published by the Hearst Corporation, proprietor (chairman of the board). George R. Hearst grandson of William Randolph Hearst, sometime would-be builder of large aeroplanes.
www.business-magazines.com...
www.cjr.org...
www.hearstcorp.com...

The president and CEO of Hearst Corporation is one Victor F. Ganzi, since June 1st, 2002. Mr Ganzi is also an officer/director of the Hearst Foundation.

Click for a full size view

www.hearstcorp.com...
www.oaklandwib.org...

A close look at the titles of the books on the shelf behind Mr Ganzi in the photo (GANZI_2003_2_BW.jpg) reveals that some part of Mr Ganzi's early career was spent working for the owners of the Atlantic City Boardwalk and associated hotels and casinos; sometime friends of a certain Mr Frank Sinatra, as I recall.

Victor F. Ganzi is on the board of directors of The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University (CASA), alongside Columba Bush, wife of Jeb Bush, Governor of Florida, brother of George W. Bush, President of the USA and son of George H.W. Bush, former DG of the CIA.
www.nationalfamilies.org...


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
www.in-q-tel.org...

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

www.cia.gov...

So, we should all be most grateful to 'Popular Mechanics' and its new editor James Meigs for indirectly telling us who the real perpetrators of 9/11 were by its rather long-winded "blind 'em