alexands
03-27-2006, 03:06 PM
Very interesting and well researched. I've never given much thought to 9/11 being an inside job so Loose Change did get me thinking. I weighed the points on the video and categorized them by coincidence, compelling, curious, and crap. Some of the stuff was very curious (engine parts at pentagon, plane in PA was not there, no bodies, etc..). Coincidence (Put options, Northwood memo, unamanned flight tests). Before I can apply the crap label, I need to see if there are answers out there that I have.
1. It appears clear that Bush was going to invade Iraq before he was even sworn in a president. The PNAC charter mentions the need for a modern day Pearl harbor to get things rolling. Bush was able to use 9/11 to that affect, but some could argue he was going to war with Iraq regardless. If he planned 9/11 I would think he would have already fabricated a link to Iraq. If the 19 hijackers were made up, then why make them mostly Saudi (our "allies") as opposed to Iraqi?
2. If Bush did stage 9/11 to "get the ball rolling" did it have to be so elaborate? Wouldn't America have taken notice if only ONE tower was brought down? The risk of being busted for such a diabolical act is so great it makes no sense to take any more risk than is absolutely necessary. Why 4 planes, 3 towers, the pentagon and an alleged White House plane? My bet is that the same effect would have been had with just one tower taken out.
3. Keeping the plan secret. The feds have been pretty good at keeping entire programs secret even from those participating in it. Take the F117 Stealth Fighter for example. Many people worked on that for years without any knowledge of what the actual final product is. Only a few key team members knew the entire plan. It has been suggested that the 9/11 plan worked the same way. I have a few problems with that. There are two key tasks that would have given the entire thing away - the people responsible for actually flying the remote controlled planes and the people who rigged the towers with explosives. Wiring 3 complete buildings the size of WTC with explosives is no easy task. If a group of people were called upon to rig the buildings it would take a considerable amount of time and equipment. Especially doing it under cover. Enough time that at someone would have to ask the question “WHY ARE WE DOING THIS? SOMETHING ISN’T RIGHT”. Same thing with the remote controlled planes. If a person was asked to do something so unbelievable at some point they would break. If I had to guess I would estimate that over 100 people were in the know. For a plan this outrageous that is WAY too many people. The risks are severe.
4. Explosives would have been found in WTC before 9/11. I have to believe that it would take a sh*tload of explosives to bring the towers down perfectly. So much, in fact, that some maintenance worker would at some point have discovered it. Rigging a building like that and not being discovered is pretty far fetched if you ask me.
5. Real dead people on flights. Real people did, in fact, die on those flights. Widows were made, insurance policies paid out, funerals had, the whole nine yards. The 280 or so people who boarded those planes are no longer in existence as a matter of public record. Are we to believe that we now have 280 people living under aliases? These were ordinary people (like you and me) what would compel ALL of them to be involved? If a person boarded a plane to San Francisco and ended up in Cleveland (as Loose Change explains) then they would certainly be alive today. But, there were several prominent people and executives on those flights that are very much dead now. People who it would have made no sense for them to “disappear”.
6. Airlines. The airlines and the airports would have to have a role in this. Why would an airline deliberately be involved in such an act that would most certainly negatively impact their business? And you have to ask – How many people at an airline and the airport would have to be in on it? People boarded planes headed for real destinations. Tickets were issued, gates were used, etc. Loose Change has you believe they were diverted to Ohio. So, what happened when they got to Ohio? And the planes cannot still be flying. Aviation records are far too detailed that if the plane was still flying it would be discovered by someone.
7. Moussaoui. Why would we keep one “patsy” around to try? Why couldn’t all 19 have been killed and that would be that? What does Bush gain by keeping another “loose end” hanging around? The downside (i.e. being busted) is far greater than the upside. If Bush did indeed “clean up the crime scene” as quick as possible at Ground Zero why keep this Moussaoui guy around?
For the record, I dislike Bush as much anyone else. I believe he’s dumb enough to come up with something this far fetched, but I have to believe that for it to be successful it would have happened without his involvement. He’s just too stupid. I will be more inclined to believe in the coverup if someone can shed some light on my questions above.
Thanks,
Scott
1. It appears clear that Bush was going to invade Iraq before he was even sworn in a president. The PNAC charter mentions the need for a modern day Pearl harbor to get things rolling. Bush was able to use 9/11 to that affect, but some could argue he was going to war with Iraq regardless. If he planned 9/11 I would think he would have already fabricated a link to Iraq. If the 19 hijackers were made up, then why make them mostly Saudi (our "allies") as opposed to Iraqi?
2. If Bush did stage 9/11 to "get the ball rolling" did it have to be so elaborate? Wouldn't America have taken notice if only ONE tower was brought down? The risk of being busted for such a diabolical act is so great it makes no sense to take any more risk than is absolutely necessary. Why 4 planes, 3 towers, the pentagon and an alleged White House plane? My bet is that the same effect would have been had with just one tower taken out.
3. Keeping the plan secret. The feds have been pretty good at keeping entire programs secret even from those participating in it. Take the F117 Stealth Fighter for example. Many people worked on that for years without any knowledge of what the actual final product is. Only a few key team members knew the entire plan. It has been suggested that the 9/11 plan worked the same way. I have a few problems with that. There are two key tasks that would have given the entire thing away - the people responsible for actually flying the remote controlled planes and the people who rigged the towers with explosives. Wiring 3 complete buildings the size of WTC with explosives is no easy task. If a group of people were called upon to rig the buildings it would take a considerable amount of time and equipment. Especially doing it under cover. Enough time that at someone would have to ask the question “WHY ARE WE DOING THIS? SOMETHING ISN’T RIGHT”. Same thing with the remote controlled planes. If a person was asked to do something so unbelievable at some point they would break. If I had to guess I would estimate that over 100 people were in the know. For a plan this outrageous that is WAY too many people. The risks are severe.
4. Explosives would have been found in WTC before 9/11. I have to believe that it would take a sh*tload of explosives to bring the towers down perfectly. So much, in fact, that some maintenance worker would at some point have discovered it. Rigging a building like that and not being discovered is pretty far fetched if you ask me.
5. Real dead people on flights. Real people did, in fact, die on those flights. Widows were made, insurance policies paid out, funerals had, the whole nine yards. The 280 or so people who boarded those planes are no longer in existence as a matter of public record. Are we to believe that we now have 280 people living under aliases? These were ordinary people (like you and me) what would compel ALL of them to be involved? If a person boarded a plane to San Francisco and ended up in Cleveland (as Loose Change explains) then they would certainly be alive today. But, there were several prominent people and executives on those flights that are very much dead now. People who it would have made no sense for them to “disappear”.
6. Airlines. The airlines and the airports would have to have a role in this. Why would an airline deliberately be involved in such an act that would most certainly negatively impact their business? And you have to ask – How many people at an airline and the airport would have to be in on it? People boarded planes headed for real destinations. Tickets were issued, gates were used, etc. Loose Change has you believe they were diverted to Ohio. So, what happened when they got to Ohio? And the planes cannot still be flying. Aviation records are far too detailed that if the plane was still flying it would be discovered by someone.
7. Moussaoui. Why would we keep one “patsy” around to try? Why couldn’t all 19 have been killed and that would be that? What does Bush gain by keeping another “loose end” hanging around? The downside (i.e. being busted) is far greater than the upside. If Bush did indeed “clean up the crime scene” as quick as possible at Ground Zero why keep this Moussaoui guy around?
For the record, I dislike Bush as much anyone else. I believe he’s dumb enough to come up with something this far fetched, but I have to believe that for it to be successful it would have happened without his involvement. He’s just too stupid. I will be more inclined to believe in the coverup if someone can shed some light on my questions above.
Thanks,
Scott