24 Sep 2011 08:35:44
Im ny humble opinion, I do not believe that 9/11 was a government act or that they had anything to do with the falling of the twin towers. I just cannot imagine the U.S government etc..giving the go ahead to this kind of act. My belief is that it was an act of terrorism which could have been prevented with better security checks at U.S airports. The towers falling I believe happened because 2 giant airplanes flew into the buildings. The sheer weight of the floors above the impact zones and loss of support beams/structure crashing down along with weakened structural damage due to fire,fuel, weight etc must of been huge. That is why they did not topple and just dropped straight. A controlled explosion of that magnitude to bring the towers down would have seen the building materials travel miles not just around a short vacinity. Also the cost of the clean up operation, Re building/structuring of buildings around the site to,the war in the middle East would have been huge and not worth it. Also the chances of being found out would never have been worth it. But.. the peril of United 93, I do not understand how anyone can know what really went on onboard that flight and also why there was nothing in the air to stop the plane heading to the capital of the US which they knew was hijacked and they had already seen the devestation caused to New York. Security was unbeliveably lax.
Mike
Well mike...i appreciate and understand your point on this subject!!in my opinion i just cant see how the building collapsed the way it did without any controlled demolition!! just to let you know my background, i have a degree in both structural engineering and construction management and in all my experience and education i have never come across structural steel columns which would or could act in the way the ones in the twin towers did without some sort of controlled explosion!!also,anyone in my field too would and have been critical of the report given on the collapse of the towers,something which was overlooked by the 911 commission,which was publicly slated by some of the members as being a sham!!
to add to that about what went on in the planes, namely united 93, nobody can be sure what went on. there was a lot of reports about people on these planes ringing their families and that, but i saw a documentry and did a little research myself and the technology required for a person to ring a mobile from a mobile phone in an airplane wasnt available until 2004. these people who claimed people had rang them from their mobiles on the different flights specified that it was indeed their mobils phones and not the phone on the plane, which would have been technologically impossible at the time!!something to think about!!
PmacC
to add to that about what went on in the planes, namely united 93, nobody can be sure what went on. there was a lot of reports about people on these planes ringing their families and that, but i saw a documentry and did a little research myself and the technology required for a person to ring a mobile from a mobile phone in an airplane wasnt available until 2004. these people who claimed people had rang them from their mobiles on the different flights specified that it was indeed their mobils phones and not the phone on the plane, which would have been technologically impossible at the time!!something to think about!!
PmacC
Agree · 6 · Disagree · 0
Dream on.......
nz
nz
Agree · 4 · Disagree · 0
I'm with PmacC on this. Even the rubbish youtube videos clearly show explosives going off down one side of the collapsing buildings. I am not going to slate you at all for your thoughts Mike, but I do disagree with you 100%. This is a case of curing the symptoms rather than the cause so to speak - you talk of lax security etc, or the government not giving the go ahead - but consider this - governments are controlled by higher powers still. Everyone knows that. People didn't say Bush was a puppet for nothing - he was just so stupid he made it look unbelievably obvious. I strongly recommend you watch a series called The Arrivals by The Wake Up Project, either on youtbe or on their home page, it is fantastic. Even if you are not religious and don't believe some things such as the return of the anti-christ, it doesn't mean that the people who could have been responsible don't, and it really is an eye-opening series. I'd also recommend having a look at press conferences regarding the fighter jets who were ordered to stand down from shooting down the incoming jets, even though they had been scrambled some time before impact.
Lastly, I have to say I do question your idea about the demolitions (IMO they were demolitions). There is no way a sky scraper built the way those were built would simply collapse because a jet flies into them. They are built with those considerations in mind because they are so tall. Rather like when you take an axe to a tree, the area above the damage will topple, so should the towers. In theory those towers should have collapsed from the crash sites upwards, falling sideways like a tree and demolishing other buildings. As far as I know this never happened. The entire building were brought down in a controlled manner in arguably the world's biggest farce ever known. The only way those buildings would have toppled straight as you suggest due to weakened structure etc is if something came along and hit the very bottom of the tower, all the way round. Isn't it odd how very little if any neighbouring buildings got taken out when the towers fell? I would also argue that a controlled detonation would not send building materials miles, rather an genuine toppling could have done.
Did you know ALL surrounding CCTV evidence on all the buildings whose camera could have accidentally caught this farce have been confiscated? Isn't that weird?
Finally, the overall cost if the clean up, in terms of the overall wealth of those arguably responsible, is so minuscule it would never have been a consideration.
You have asked yourself why there was nothing in the air to stop United 93 heading to the capital....yet you do not believe the whole thing was pre-arranged and by those at the top of the US govt.
I hope you do watch the The Arrivals, that to me is the only thing I have seen anywhere that attempts to make sense of that awful day.
Peace.
Raz
Lastly, I have to say I do question your idea about the demolitions (IMO they were demolitions). There is no way a sky scraper built the way those were built would simply collapse because a jet flies into them. They are built with those considerations in mind because they are so tall. Rather like when you take an axe to a tree, the area above the damage will topple, so should the towers. In theory those towers should have collapsed from the crash sites upwards, falling sideways like a tree and demolishing other buildings. As far as I know this never happened. The entire building were brought down in a controlled manner in arguably the world's biggest farce ever known. The only way those buildings would have toppled straight as you suggest due to weakened structure etc is if something came along and hit the very bottom of the tower, all the way round. Isn't it odd how very little if any neighbouring buildings got taken out when the towers fell? I would also argue that a controlled detonation would not send building materials miles, rather an genuine toppling could have done.
Did you know ALL surrounding CCTV evidence on all the buildings whose camera could have accidentally caught this farce have been confiscated? Isn't that weird?
Finally, the overall cost if the clean up, in terms of the overall wealth of those arguably responsible, is so minuscule it would never have been a consideration.
You have asked yourself why there was nothing in the air to stop United 93 heading to the capital....yet you do not believe the whole thing was pre-arranged and by those at the top of the US govt.
I hope you do watch the The Arrivals, that to me is the only thing I have seen anywhere that attempts to make sense of that awful day.
Peace.
Raz
Agree · 4 · Disagree · 0
Cheers mate. {Ed001's Note - no worries, sorry it should be done soon.}
Agree · 0 · Disagree · 0
Um... Ed001 is that not you? Just re-read the beef between He Who Knows and yourself.... sorry if I have got it wrong there haha. {Ed001's Note - no, I don't do the techy stuff, it is not my area of expertise at all! 033 is the man that can.}
Agree · 0 · Disagree · 0
Mike, what about WTC 7, how did this collapse as this was not hit by a plane? It fell into its own footprint as did the twin towers.
Paragon
Paragon
Agree · 4 · Disagree · 0
Look, all im saying is that is my opinion, but there is obvious doubt there because of how I question the Pentagon flight and also Utd93. I just can not get my head round a President of the US doing such a thing against their own people, thousands of them too. If anything were to ever come out proving this indeed was the case, there would be hell to pay and the US would be no more. But thank you for not shooting me down with insults and I will look into the videos/programmes you have recommended. Also 1 question for the first guy who replied-thank you for your response- How much explosive would have to have been put into the trade centre to make it collapse? If a huge plane, full of fuel did not cause the buildings to collapse, how much explosive would it take,how would you plant it and how would you not be seen planting such huge,huge ammounts? Thanks all.
Mike
Mike
Agree · 2 · Disagree · 0
Mike, thats the thing that doesn't sit easy with me. How could someone sign off such a thing?...But someone did, not the president, it goes way beyond that. I really urge you to take a look at stuff people have recommended, theres a hell of a lot out there.
Paragon
Paragon
Agree · 2 · Disagree · 0
Ok try again.
Firstly i think the idea of a conspiracy involving the US govt is montrous which is why i don't believe it. Also surely it would have leaked.
Secondly i do think some very strange stuff happened that day that are starting to add up into a possible conspiracy. At best they are strange and a little unsettling and at worst they do suggest a conspiracy happened.
In order to reconcile the 2 conflicting viewpoints i suggets the following theory.
As suggested our friend the Illuminati WERE behind it.
They did not involve the US govt.
1. They did not trust the govt apparatus to keep the secret after all they are one of the most leaky govts around.
2. They did not need govt help to accomplish this, they have lots of money and other resources, and plenty of people in key positions.
3. By keeping the govt out of the loop they could have complete plausible denialbility. Bush and co could be convincing when they said it wasn't us.
4. They have enough people in positions of influence that they only needed to say to them just do such and such on such and such a day. All these actions built up into the chaos of the day. These people only have pieces of the jigsaw and can't or won't mention anything.
5. Look at Bush's reaction at the school. Disbelief. But at what? that America was under attack or just at how they were attacked. Maybe he knew or suspected something was going to happen but wasn't expecting that. Also he has no actual knowledge so can't prove it, but is credible at denying it. Perfect puppet.
So maybe it did happen. They got their oil war and increased profits. Govt doesn't collapse as they don't know its a conspiracy.
For me though where do the islamics fit into it? they thought they were striking a blow against the great satan, not acting for the NWO. Duped by the Illuminati?
Mort.
Firstly i think the idea of a conspiracy involving the US govt is montrous which is why i don't believe it. Also surely it would have leaked.
Secondly i do think some very strange stuff happened that day that are starting to add up into a possible conspiracy. At best they are strange and a little unsettling and at worst they do suggest a conspiracy happened.
In order to reconcile the 2 conflicting viewpoints i suggets the following theory.
As suggested our friend the Illuminati WERE behind it.
They did not involve the US govt.
1. They did not trust the govt apparatus to keep the secret after all they are one of the most leaky govts around.
2. They did not need govt help to accomplish this, they have lots of money and other resources, and plenty of people in key positions.
3. By keeping the govt out of the loop they could have complete plausible denialbility. Bush and co could be convincing when they said it wasn't us.
4. They have enough people in positions of influence that they only needed to say to them just do such and such on such and such a day. All these actions built up into the chaos of the day. These people only have pieces of the jigsaw and can't or won't mention anything.
5. Look at Bush's reaction at the school. Disbelief. But at what? that America was under attack or just at how they were attacked. Maybe he knew or suspected something was going to happen but wasn't expecting that. Also he has no actual knowledge so can't prove it, but is credible at denying it. Perfect puppet.
So maybe it did happen. They got their oil war and increased profits. Govt doesn't collapse as they don't know its a conspiracy.
For me though where do the islamics fit into it? they thought they were striking a blow against the great satan, not acting for the NWO. Duped by the Illuminati?
Mort.
Agree · 1 · Disagree · 0
Mort you make some interesting points, however I feel you have perhaps taken a general statement that governments were involved and kind of taken it to different proportions than intended? Well speaking for myself anyway, when I say 'the government was behind it' I don't mean that it was something everybody knew about in all the offices after open discussion or after private emails or documents and plans were distributed... I mean the same thing as you: that one Illuminati member, who is a US military official, operates as his colleagues and employers would have him work, but also covertly in an extra capacity. That would tie in with your 4th point too. The Illiminati members, if it is all true, occupy positions of status in government and media - they are not elected by illuminati until they reach those positions (or maybe they are but they just don't know it yet...you get my drift)...Madonna was not associated with Illuminati until well into her career, until she was established as one of the biggest selling artists of all time. Same with Christina and Britney, and if you watch the Arrivals or have already you will understand the relevance of my point. So Mr. Innocent dedicates his life to serving his country, or becoming a billionaire, or head of media (side note - the banks are all owned by families who have been associated with Illuminati since it all began centuries ago), gets to the top, and finds that his family or his life is in danger if he doesn't do this or that... or maybe he is simply Illiminati and a Luciferian.
True Islam has been played as badly as the next person in all of this... again, go to the roots of Islam and you will see it is as innocent a religion as the next... but through all of this a hate figure had to be created, be that an individual or an entire religious sect, and Islam is the one. Did you know that in the relevant native countries apparently Al Quaeda for example doesn't really exist? It is apparently just a western name to give something that doesn't exist to create the illusion of a threat to western society. That ties in with the theories of there never being nuclear weapons ready to start WW3.
Raz
True Islam has been played as badly as the next person in all of this... again, go to the roots of Islam and you will see it is as innocent a religion as the next... but through all of this a hate figure had to be created, be that an individual or an entire religious sect, and Islam is the one. Did you know that in the relevant native countries apparently Al Quaeda for example doesn't really exist? It is apparently just a western name to give something that doesn't exist to create the illusion of a threat to western society. That ties in with the theories of there never being nuclear weapons ready to start WW3.
Raz
Agree · 3 · Disagree · 0
Raz, no offence, but are you saying Britney and Christina are part of something bigger, this Illuminati? I think that kind of statement is a bit too much!
Agree · 3 · Disagree · 0
Raz thats sort of the point i was trying to make. That was the second time i typed that as my computer strangeky went wobbly when trying to post it the first time and in trying to get it all down again i might have over simplified what i was trying to say.
I didn't mean that the whole govt was involved, it would have to be a small cabal that probably wouldn't have had the full jigsaw anyway leaving them unable to admit conspiracy. But the more people that tend to know about something the more likely it is to leak Watergate is a good example.
Definetly key indiviuals in the system that were able to instigate certain parts of the plan, change things or just generally enable certain repsonses.
Off on a tangent are madonna, Britney Spear etc Illuminati or is that just an example of people trying to tie everything into the Illuminati?
I feel no organised religion is truly innocent and they all tend attract fanatics. Would be intertesting to know how much they were manipulated into this by the Illuminati. I certainly suspect that they did do what they did on the day itself, given support by the Illuminati, help with planning and the such like. And they were just puppets, thinking their plan was for their cause when all along it was for someone elses. And they made the perfect hate figure which they were prepared to do anyway, just that it backfired on them.
Mort.
I didn't mean that the whole govt was involved, it would have to be a small cabal that probably wouldn't have had the full jigsaw anyway leaving them unable to admit conspiracy. But the more people that tend to know about something the more likely it is to leak Watergate is a good example.
Definetly key indiviuals in the system that were able to instigate certain parts of the plan, change things or just generally enable certain repsonses.
Off on a tangent are madonna, Britney Spear etc Illuminati or is that just an example of people trying to tie everything into the Illuminati?
I feel no organised religion is truly innocent and they all tend attract fanatics. Would be intertesting to know how much they were manipulated into this by the Illuminati. I certainly suspect that they did do what they did on the day itself, given support by the Illuminati, help with planning and the such like. And they were just puppets, thinking their plan was for their cause when all along it was for someone elses. And they made the perfect hate figure which they were prepared to do anyway, just that it backfired on them.
Mort.
Agree · 0 · Disagree · 0
Not offended mate - I appreciate that sounded slightly mental - but like I say that comment will mean nothing to you if you haven't watched the Arrivals. The only thing I will ask is that you either watch the series where you will discover the relevance of my comment (sum: worldwide pop artists e.g. Madonna, Britney, Celine Dione, Christina used to drip feed society with Illuminati ritual, imagery etc, subliminally desensitizing us) or just accept that it will appear as though I am crazy .
Raz
Raz
Agree · 1 · Disagree · 0
Mort - you're right, it is probably most likely that any roles played by various members of sects or security teams or whatever, will have known so little about the insight to their actions that they could never allude to conspiracy, that would be the safest way of keeping it schtum. If people don't know, what can they spill?
Organised religion is one of the worst things the human race could ever have experiences/created IMO and in that sense Islam as we know it is no different... definitely full of fanatics. But what I will say is that this applies to modern Islamists. Back when these religions started they all tallied with each other - there was a creator, God. That should have been it. But over a few thousand years, little bits have been added to create rifts, new religions, and I don't know to explain the impact that has had on mankind. There is a theory that behind every religious group there is the Illuminati, because one of their aims is to create a society in which there is no faith or no belief in a single God. By creating warring religious groups they have actually done a lot to achieve this. If you go right back to the roots of Islam (Muslim), Judaism, and Christianity, they are al basically exactly the same religion! They are all the exact same concept but over time look at the bloodshed over who's was 'more true'. There are theories that has been a Luciferian intention since day 1.
Raz
Organised religion is one of the worst things the human race could ever have experiences/created IMO and in that sense Islam as we know it is no different... definitely full of fanatics. But what I will say is that this applies to modern Islamists. Back when these religions started they all tallied with each other - there was a creator, God. That should have been it. But over a few thousand years, little bits have been added to create rifts, new religions, and I don't know to explain the impact that has had on mankind. There is a theory that behind every religious group there is the Illuminati, because one of their aims is to create a society in which there is no faith or no belief in a single God. By creating warring religious groups they have actually done a lot to achieve this. If you go right back to the roots of Islam (Muslim), Judaism, and Christianity, they are al basically exactly the same religion! They are all the exact same concept but over time look at the bloodshed over who's was 'more true'. There are theories that has been a Luciferian intention since day 1.
Raz
Agree · 1 · Disagree · 0
Make some great points Raj. I will defo catch the programmes you mention. Love this kind of thing! Great to hear from people as informed/knowledgable. Good banter too, from most! Cheers, Mike.
Agree · 0 · Disagree · 0
Bush wasn't really involved on 9/11, to some extent maybe, but if you actually check out his whole day that day, he was kept out the way.
Cheney (vice president at the time) was in control that day. Bush couldn't even get on to the whitehouse that day, and when he briefly did get through, the lines would black out. He was then taken to an underground bunker, and spent most a lot of the day there. THE PROJECT FOR THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURY played all the cards, check it out guys, really quite disturbing stuff. RUMSFELD, CHENEY, WOLFOWITZ and PERLE!
Even their own documentation puts them in the suspect line, but nothing gets done about it.
Peace
Jay
Cheney (vice president at the time) was in control that day. Bush couldn't even get on to the whitehouse that day, and when he briefly did get through, the lines would black out. He was then taken to an underground bunker, and spent most a lot of the day there. THE PROJECT FOR THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURY played all the cards, check it out guys, really quite disturbing stuff. RUMSFELD, CHENEY, WOLFOWITZ and PERLE!
Even their own documentation puts them in the suspect line, but nothing gets done about it.
Peace
Jay
Agree · 0 · Disagree · 0
)...Madonna was not associated with Illuminati until well into her career, until she was established as one of the biggest selling artists of all time. Same with Christina and Britney,
So it wasn't bin laden it was 3 pop starts that blew up the WTC not a brain between the 3 of them to come close to this. {Ed001's Note - I am sorry but I don't understand your post at all. What has your post got to do with the original one? Perhaps you have failed to understand what the guy has said? I tell you what, I will explain it again for you. What he is saying, is that pop stars, such as Madonna, are being used to leak Illuminati symbolism into the world. To make it seem ok to use and normal, maybe even cool, so that it will stop being associated with all that is wrong with the world. Nothing to do with them being involved in plots and plans, or even as actual members of the Illuminati. Whether it is true or not is a completely different matter, one I personally am unsure of either way.}
So it wasn't bin laden it was 3 pop starts that blew up the WTC not a brain between the 3 of them to come close to this. {Ed001's Note - I am sorry but I don't understand your post at all. What has your post got to do with the original one? Perhaps you have failed to understand what the guy has said? I tell you what, I will explain it again for you. What he is saying, is that pop stars, such as Madonna, are being used to leak Illuminati symbolism into the world. To make it seem ok to use and normal, maybe even cool, so that it will stop being associated with all that is wrong with the world. Nothing to do with them being involved in plots and plans, or even as actual members of the Illuminati. Whether it is true or not is a completely different matter, one I personally am unsure of either way.}
Agree · 0 · Disagree · 0
Come on now the WTC was an act of terrorism not some faked idea that the govornment or pop worlds wannabees have come up with an elaborarte plan to cause all this death and distruction for the sake of oil prices. It was a terrorist attack end off. {Ed001's Note - if you say so, it must be true, because I am sure you have access to all possible sources of information regarding the subject and clearly have an open mind to decide fairly.}
Agree · 0 · Disagree · 0
Why so argumentitave ed thats my opinion there is no way that this could be done without this being leaked by someone no matter how many tattoos that they put out to the public. {Ed001's Note - tattoos? I am not being argumentative, but the fact you are claiming there are no leaks is completely and utterly wrong. Why do you think people are asking questions?}
Agree · 0 · Disagree · 0