Can you read this and not believe that the Bush Administration itself is responsible for the destruction of the World Trade Center four years ago?
Well, yes. The gentlemen have contradictions - do they have people swearing they set off the charges?
I ask because it seems improbable that the job could have been done without someone blabbing. Planting the charges 'just so' would take work by a skilled crew, working for many many weeks. Someone would have noticed - someone delivered X tons of explosive to the site - someone pulled the trigger ... where are these people? You can't just keep secrets like this.
October 22, 2005 at 11:23 AM
That's a big "yes" for me too, but I couldn't get past "noted theologian."
Elayne Riggs |
October 22, 2005 at 03:11 PM
Okay, okay... I agree about the unlikely circumstance of keeping it quiet, and Griffin as a noted theologian is a hoot, but it is AMAZING that those buildings fell straight down.
October 22, 2005 at 05:20 PM
Herr Bush is guilty of many things. As much as I would like to see something really major pinned on him, I can't buy this one. Same reasons offered by others. Plus some of the quoted facts on design of the building are wrong. And something like this doesn't happen without motive - none is offered. Can't think of one in the evil half of my brain. Bush is stupid, but not THAT stupid. But still...
October 23, 2005 at 06:15 AM
As I've argued elsewhere, that the Bushies might pull of something as grand as the implosion and collapse of the trade centre demands of said fellers a degree of competence otherwise unkonwn or heretofore unseen. And where oh where did he get the notion that 63% of Canadians believe it - this now 'known fact'.
October 23, 2005 at 02:18 PM
why the heck did WTC 7 come down, I wonder? Where is the plane debris at the Pentagon? Perfect controlled demolition via airplane? I doubt it. Inquiring minds want to know. No answers are forthcoming, some have noticed.
and motive? War On Terror
October 23, 2005 at 03:45 PM
Frank, beyond Griffin's book, The New Pearl Harbor, and Larry Silverstein recounting his decision to 'pull' WTC7, there is overwhelming evidence--probably not that well reported Stateside--pointing to a Gulf of Tonkin incident.
I think most people quietly accept it, but will deny the consequences of complicity because it is in their interests, as First World consumers, to do so.
Brian, if the Bushies are anything, it is competent. And I mean that seriously. Through a quiet, creeping coup, they have taken over the United States of America. Were any idiot able to do it, it'd no longer be worthwhile. More, bar a few facelifts here and there, the Bushies are not going anywhere anytime soon.
As for the WTC implosion--look at it this way. By the mid-1970s, what was uppermost in developers' and architects' minds? How to keep their buildings up? No. They knew how to do that. They wanted, built into their plans and construction, the means to remove them as cost-effectively as possible. And they were.
And they did.
Mike Golby |
October 23, 2005 at 03:54 PM
Damn, you carry no link facilities, Frank. Never mind. Just being here more than makes up for the inconvenience.
Honestly. Ask Bruce :).
The text to Griffin's book is available on the Vancouver Indymedia site and any number of sites offer the Silverstein recordings.
Hullo, Bruce. Yeah, the silence around the Pentagon's sixteen foot hole has been somewhat deafening, hasn't it? Disbelief? Denial? It doesn't really matter.
Thank God, given the enormity of the crimes committed by the Bush regime, it's taken only four years for millions of Americans to begin asking themselves some very tough questions.
Questions for which so many bloggers offered answers all those years ago.
Mike Golby |
October 23, 2005 at 04:10 PM
Oh yes the questions remain, no doubt. Still, if the WTC was brought down by explosives planted strategically, internally, it doesn't necessarily follow that it was a Bush sanctioned event.
Engineers only ever build things 'to just last'. Combine that with some corrupt development and contruction crews, cost-cutting, pragmatic skimming and a buying off building inspectors and you have a weakend structure in the first place. And speaking of engineers - assuming that planes did slam into the towers - there seemed to be whole heap of these dudes - engineers - involved in the planning and execution of the suicide mission. Perhaps the planes were merely the show - Go Team Allah - and the fall of the towers caused by explosive devices planted strategically. Just sayin'
And...what disturbs me most about most of this speculation - if the Bushies knew in advance that this was about to happen why did they let their frontman sit in a classroom for so long. Would it not have been best to offer up a strong and decisive presence.
As for the coup, Mike. These guys are corporatists. They know about hostile takeovers, for sure. But that doesn't mean they know how to run things.
As for the Pentagon. Sure looks like a missile to me. Pretty convenient, too. Must say.
October 24, 2005 at 09:56 AM
The only theory that makes sense to me is the theory of an inside job. I've seen way too much on the Internet, that bastion of uncontrolled info, that points that way. Hell, just watch the corrupt, competent-enough-for-dictatorial government-work SOBs. They had to have their new pearl harbor to launch war on the Middle East. And it unexpectedly dropped in their lap on 9/11? They couldn't stop it? The wealth of information refuting that is breathtaking.
That's a good question about the deer in headlights act by Bush, though. Although, if it was a legitimate attack, why would he sit there like that? The video is bizarre either way.
"The Pearl Harbor of the 21st century took place today," Bush wrote in his diary-for-posterity that day. All part of the propaganda. The independently shot video wasn't supposed to get out and would still be the exclusive province of the conspiracy theorists on the Internet if not for Michael Moore's movie.
October 24, 2005 at 12:04 PM
But Bruce if it was an inside job - that's a pretty big one. Ignoring intelligence, keeping military jets out of the sky on that day etc. Why then would the neo-cons not come up with something a little bigger than the yellow cake and the WMD pretense for invading Iraq. And why did they not conveniently 'find' some WMD?
Backtracking: Were the Bushies operating under the idea that bin laden was going to attack the UN buildings and not the WTC? Double-crossed by ther own black op agent? I still find it astounding that Omar and bin Laden have never been captured. I still maintain he's dead and has been since the early days after the bombing of Afghanistan.
October 24, 2005 at 01:17 PM
Yes, and how could they be so clumsy as to botch the N.O. rescue until law and order, military occupation style, was (supposedly) needed, and then float the supsension of posse comitatus act in response to bird flu. How can they be so obvious? I'm just sayin, they're whole takeover, trashing of our rights and liberties, of global standards for international cooperation, etc., has been pretty consistently in your face, and it began with 9/11.
Intelligence wasn't ignored, it was actively supressed and blocked. The coincidental mock terrorist exercise that day, directed by Cheney (the evil genius in the background, he calls himself), certainly helped. One official had to ask, is this real world?
Unfortunately, that's for "them" to know and us to find out. There are several orders of magnitude of mind fuck we're dealing with here.
But if Cheney didn't attack the U.S. on 9/11, he and his cohorts have most certainly been at it steadily since 9/12. But really, well before that.
October 25, 2005 at 10:44 AM
> but it is AMAZING that those buildings fell straight down.
Isn't designing for straight-down collapse a fundamental principle in skyscraper architecture? What city would approve a building that could take out everything in its shadow if it were able to fall over sideways? I can't believe the demolition guys work _against_ the architecture, but rather _with_ it when they take buildings down... No?
Ted M |
October 26, 2005 at 10:37 PM
Hey if you guys are looking for plane wreakage at the pentagon you will not find much Check the Prudue Indiania University site on it, and also Aluminum Burns it is even used for Rocket fuel and explosives.
Check it out on the net if you do not wish to take my word for it. Just google Aluminum combustion solid rocket motors.
Carroll Sanders |
March 13, 2006 at 08:43 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.
I'm an early adopter, a developer, and a technology bellwether - a farmer, a pacifist, a writer, a father, and a husband.