Julian Cope presents Head Heritage

Head To Head
Log In
Register
U-Know! Forum »
9-11 self inflicted?
Log In to post a reply

Pages: 13 – [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Next ]
Topic View: Flat | Threaded
PMM
PMM
3109 posts

Edited May 29, 2006, 18:55
9-11 self inflicted?
Mar 31, 2006, 17:40
Someone posted here a few months ago about this...

A video showing that the towers appeared to explode, a fraction of a second before the planes hit.

Now, one of the survivors has gone to Venezuela in anticipation of an official Venezuelan government enquiry into 9-11.

More here:

http://www.propagandamatrix.com/articles/march2006/310306launchinvestigation.htm

Also, I don't have the book to hand, so I can't quote directly, but Richard Heinberg, in the book, "Powerdown" lists his concerns about why a full domestic enquiry has been resisted all the way, about why interceptors weren't scrambled as soon as the first inklings of a hijack came through, as is standard procedure, and other stuff that I can't recall.

So could it be true? The enormity if it is true beggars belief. To bomb your own country as a pretext for military hegemony? My first reaction was that this is all a load of conspiracist nonsense, but things don't add up, and with peak oil imminent, the system is fighting for its existence. I suppose all things are possible.
Lawrence
9471 posts

Re: 9-11 self inflicted?
Mar 31, 2006, 18:41
Well whether it's true or not something is still rotten in Denmark about it!

When I was in NYC a couple of weekends ago I went to the History of Law Enforcement museum. Indeed one half of the top floor was about 9-11 (or 11-9) and I would not see it. I do not wish to revisit such an event merely for 'rememberance' of something that has been used as an excuse for folly and idiocy. Most likely it was loaded with propaganda anyways -- I'd imagine it was all pictures of Bush giving the finger...
Father Sky
Father Sky
323 posts

Re: 9-11 self inflicted?
Apr 01, 2006, 17:15
There was a French book making these conspiracy claims not too long after 9/11, 'L'Effroyable Imposture,' can't remember the author right now. Presented as a serious tome packed with irrefutable evidence - in fact it wasn't at all convincing and I don't believe it. More like a cash-in on very poor taste.
jshell
333 posts

Garbage
Apr 01, 2006, 23:39
Sorry, but I utterly resent this absolute garbage being circulated, promulgated, call it whatever! Sit back and think about the consequences for any govt being caught carrying out a self-inflicted atrocity like this. What would be the result? Absolute fcuking civil meltdown, anarchy, civil war and worldwide financial holocaust benefitting no-one at all. Set-up an office block, sorry 2 office blocks with explosives and then fly planes into them at the same time detonating the bombs on the same floors...give me a friggin' break! I reckon there are govt organisations responsible for thinking up this utter crap to keep all the nutters/conspiracy theorists and borderline psychotics busy and divert their attention from the real problems going on just now, be that global warming, Iraq, Iran, Guantanamo or even the Lizard-king's world domination......the last bit was tongue firmly in cheek!
Lawrence
9471 posts

Re: Garbage
Apr 02, 2006, 01:13
Well if that 'garbage' really is true we now know what to expect when the truth comes out... Frankly I dunno what to believe about 9-11 but it sure has been capitalised on in a really crass way! Both the conspiracy stuff and that idiotic jigoistic propaganda machine...
Lawrence
9471 posts

Re: Garbage
Apr 02, 2006, 01:14
Jingoistic, I mean...
jshell
333 posts

Re: Garbage
Apr 02, 2006, 11:20
Totally agree Lawrence. These occurences are grabbed by people who try to mould them to suit their own agendas. Look at the theories surrounding the supposed faking of the moon landings: Many NASA scientists will admit that it was easier to put a man on the moon than create and operate a comfortable, safe(ish), re-useable supersonic jet-liner. Was Concorde a myth?
jshell
333 posts

Re: Garbage
Apr 02, 2006, 15:12
And I'll raise you:

http://www.pentagonresearch.com/mike.html

A guy who watched a 757 hit the building with his own eyes.

The website is full of contradictions and part the 'proof' of conspiracy is that there were few bits of aircraft lying outside of the building! Of course, it's thin aluminium and it hit a blast proof building at 300+mph - it got fcuking shredded! The forward momentum of the kerosene fuel would cut through a building like a lance - and strangely enough there's a round exit hole - that's what should be expected. There was no nose cone found - it either was shredded, or burnt as aluminium does when exposed to high temps such as that found in plane crashes. No seats, of course bloody not, they're thin aluminium with foam and fabric over them and would be shredded.

Between my colleague sitting beside me and I, we've either seen or been involved in 3 crashed aircraft recovery's. All that's left are the pieces that don't burn or are thrown clear. There are very few pieces over a couple of feet wide, and they didn't hit buildings at full tilt. The rest can mostly be collected in plastic bags apart from the titanium engine and undercarriage parts.
jshell
333 posts

And another thing..
Apr 02, 2006, 15:33
I've read all about the WTC towers being brought down by explosives, rather than the planes. I've re-watched the videos and these towers fell from the top down. The towers buckle out at the point of aircraft impact and start falling downwards taking the lower floors out progressively. On the other hand, any demolition job with explosives involves destroying the base of a building with successive blasts travelling up the building so as to drop the whole thing in one neat-ish pile.
Moon Cat
9699 posts

Re: And another thing..
Apr 02, 2006, 15:40
presuming you want a neat demolition and not something that looks like something else..

I'm with you though overall.
Pages: 13 – [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Next ] Add a reply to this topic

U-Know! Forum Index