See other 9/11 Articles
Title: High Quality Full Version of "9-11 Mysteries: Demolitions" Now Posted to Google Video
Source:
Google Video
URL Source: http://video.google.com/videoplay?d ... 90071483512003&q=911+Mysteries
Published: Sep 18, 2006
Author: Brilliant patriots
Post Date: 2006-09-18 23:29:20 by Arator
Ping List: *Restore the Republic* Subscribe to *Restore the Republic*
Keywords: 9-11, Mysteries, Quality
Views: 348
Comments: 28
Just click the link above. Send it to your friends. It's much easier to access than the lower quality divided-into-three-parts version. Subscribe to *Restore the Republic*
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 10.
#10. To: Arator (#0)
Then I got this one: Controlled demolitions? The most interesting aspect I found on the site you referenced was how willing these folks were willing to suspend disbelief of their own pet hypotheses (backed by "reputable scientists" of course), but cannot belief established facts, like there being A BURNING PLANE IN THE SIDE OF A BUILDING! If this is the cutting edge, it seems rather dull to me. Here are a few questions I have that were never really explained in the posts. 1) If this was a case of a controlled demotion, surely there would be residue of some sort. To date, I haven't seen or heard evidence of any being found. Where did it go? 2) If there were bombs placed in the basement of the WTC buildings that came down, why would they need the planes flying into buildings in the first place? Sure, it made for a compelling visual, but the hustle and bustle of the day would have hidden terrorists who wanted put the bombs in place, especially if the security was as lax as the posters on that website claim. 3) What would Bill Clinton and George W. Bush gain by blowing up the WTC? Clinton was no longer in power and was notoriously lax on fighting terrorism, and George W. Bush wouldn't have been able to plot and execute a plan of this magnitude with the few months he was in office. Not to mention, this whole situation could have backfired on Bush from a PR standpoint. 4) To accomplish the goal of a controlled demolition, it would require someone with intimate knowledge of the building's engineering, someone with the explosives know-how to know how much would be needed to accomplish the goal, and the ability to accomplish both without raising questions. Is there someone or two people within the Bush and Clinton Administrations who could meet the criteria? If so, who? And, yes, I'm going to be asking for proof before I believe just the name or names. 5) And with #4, there is another possibility. Let's not forget Al Qaeda hit the WTC in 1993 using a similar approach: explosives near a structural base of one of the Twin Towers. Since it's not possible that the building engineering would not have been changed that much since 1993, isn't it just as plausible that Al Qaeda could have blown up the Twin Towers using information culled from the failed 1993 bombing? 6) To coordinate this kind of operation takes manpower and more than a little paperwork. That means there would be a large number of points of contact that could either go public or would get leaked to the press. Yet, neither one has materialized, in spite of the fact that the Bush Administration has done a poor job of keeping secrets. Given these facts, how could the Bush Administration have kept something this big a secret? That's what I've found with the 9/11 conspiracy folks. They run with a half-thought-out notion without looking at all possibilities or asking critical questions that would make or break their arguments in favor of a conspiracy. They may think the government's explanation is the "Official Fairy Tale," but until they come up with the answers to difficult questions, they have zero room to talk about the lack of credibility in the government's explanation of events. CommConsEditor@aol.com Anyone care to respond to this truth seeker? Maybe we could do it here and send him the thread in a few days.
#11. To: wakeup (#10)
When your dealing with folks, always remember this. By God they want proof!!. They want videos! They want documents!! They want photos!! No they don't. They just want to go round and round on a merry-go-round and protect their donkey or elephant ass. You know how I know this? I went through a remarkable process with the assassination of Ron Brown. "Things" happen for a reason. Think I'm a fan of Ron Brown? I couldn't stand the guy. Everything he stood for, and the people he rubbed shoulders with made me vomit. But all of us should put those feelings aside, and stick with the Constitution and the rule of law. At one time I took the best prints possible of Ron Brown's head wound to several prominent forensic pathologists. The "subject" was not identified, so no political aspirations or fear would enter into the opinions. No, they didn't get to examine the body, but they had several quality photos to examine for an educated opinion. Without exception "all" of them told me that the perfect circular hole in Brown's head was a bullet hole. They didn't even hesitate. They didn't flinch. They didn't go hmmmmmm. Bullet Hole. I already knew it, but I just wanted to hear from so-called experts. Ok, so now we have a Commerce Secretary with a bullet hole in his head. That's a big deal, isn't it? Apparently not. I'm suppose to be gung-ho and patriotic about our military? Ever heard of Kathleen Janoski? Here's our great military: THE BOTCHED RON BROWN INVESTIGATION - Kathleen Janoski Ok, so these folks like to see things, yes?
This is approx. 6 weeks after 9/11. This is normal. Har. Maybe it's jet fuel! LOL!
2) If there were bombs placed in the basement of the WTC buildings that came down, why would they need the planes flying into buildings in the first place? Sure, it made for a compelling visual, but the hustle and bustle of the day would have hidden terrorists who wanted put the bombs in place, especially if the security was as lax as the posters on that website claim. 3) What would Bill Clinton and George W. Bush gain by blowing up the WTC? Clinton was no longer in power and was notoriously lax on fighting terrorism, and George W. Bush wouldn't have been able to plot and execute a plan of this magnitude with the few months he was in office. Not to mention, this whole situation could have backfired on Bush from a PR standpoint. 4) To accomplish the goal of a controlled demolition, it would require someone with intimate knowledge of the building's engineering, someone with the explosives know-how to know how much would be needed to accomplish the goal, and the ability to accomplish both without raising questions. Is there someone or two people within the Bush and Clinton Administrations who could meet the criteria? If so, who? And, yes, I'm going to be asking for proof before I believe just the name or names. 5) And with #4, there is another possibility. Let's not forget Al Qaeda hit the WTC in 1993 using a similar approach: explosives near a structural base of one of the Twin Towers. Since it's not possible that the building engineering would not have been changed that much since 1993, isn't it just as plausible that Al Qaeda could have blown up the Twin Towers using information culled from the failed 1993 bombing? 6) To coordinate this kind of operation takes manpower and more than a little paperwork. That means there would be a large number of points of contact that could either go public or would get leaked to the press. Yet, neither one has materialized, in spite of the fact that the Bush Administration has done a poor job of keeping secrets. Given these facts, how could the Bush Administration have kept something this big a secret? Here's my quick reply: 1) There were tell-tale residues. Among other substances unique to Thermate the steel underwent sulfidization (ie. had a high level of sulfer). The official account calls this a profound mystery, but it is THE SIGNATURE of highly incindiary and explosive Thermate cutting charges. Also, pools of molten iron at the base of the towers that remained molten for weeks after might be considered by some a very significant "residue". 2) Why would they need the planes? How could he even ask this? They needed the planes to: a) distract attention from the massive explosions in the basement and elsewhere b) fix responsibility for the WTC's destruction on a handful of Arab hijackers c) justify the federalization of airport security, which in turn gives them a key police state control node over the entire population and enables them to condition us to accept same as "normal" d) so that brother Marvin Bush and cousin Walker who ran security at the WTC wouldn't have to explain how massive controlled demolition charges got implanted into the WTC on their watch Without the planes, they would have been caught red-handed. They still were caught red-handed, but at least the planes gave them a temporary cover-story and fig leaf. 3) The Bush-Clinton-neocon-globalist cabal hoped to gain world empire, a domestic police-state control grid, a warped populace of willing shock troops and police-state enforcers/enforcees and supreme unchallangable global (and domestic) dominance. Fortunately, their plans didn't quite work out as they had hoped. 4) Controlled Demolition, Inc. did the cover/clean-up work at Oklahoma City. They are married to the Feds and also did the cover/clean-up work at the WTC. They certainly have the expertise to pull this off. 5) The 93 WTC bombing was also an inside job. The FBI provided them the explosives and encouraged the plot. Even had it been successful, it would not have brought down the towers in the manner of 9-11. A complete demolition was needed because the buildings were asbestos-filled half-vacant financial white elephants, but it would have been very costly for the city of New York or Port Authority to do either the asbestos clean-up or the demo. So, the Feds combined the demo with the neo-cons' much desired false-flag fake terror psy-ops. Sacrificing 3000 of their own citizens was the price NYC elite paid to gain federally-subsidized urban renewal. 6) Many have gone public (or tried to) but were silenced. Take the FBI agent who came out early on and said "the Bushes vacation with the Bin Ladins, that's all I'm allowed to say". He said that with tears in his eyes. And FBI whistleblower Sybil Edmonds also tried to speak out, but was gagged as well. Those far enough inside to know the details of what happened are also far enough inside to know what happens to whistleblowers. And they are either too corrupt or too cowardly to make the heroic choice and risk it. Did this guy even watch the video? He sounds too clueless to have done so.
1 NIST never tested for explosive residue and a strange plastic molecule was discovered everywhere by the EPA. Pools of molten iron were found under all 3 WTC buildings. 2 The feds had been running terror drills practicing exactly what happened that day. The gov had to have planes fly into the wtc to match the drills and to have an explanation of how the wtc 1,2 buildings were brought down. The feds could never get away with Al Queada placing bombs in a controlled fashion, and there is the non comment on wtc 7 which inploded and fell in 6.5 sec. 3 The plot was drawn up before Bush was in office, and once in was in, it was put into action. Under Clintons watch, the FBI, BATF, budgets were being reduced and stripped until Waco, Ruby Ridge, WTC , OKC bombing, after all this, the FBI/BATF got there funding and new domistic laws. The Pentagon budget was being reduced and the members of PNAC, which still had great influence had these insiders ears surely told them they would give them their war. The WOT is worth trillions of dollars to the military/intelligence and any corporations tied to it. 4 Marvin Bush running security and Larry Silverstein lease/owner gave access, and either a government agency like CDI, or military opperation placed the explosives. 5 An FBI informant, that was the go between/handler of the first bombing, stated in court and in tape recordings, which, the FBI/CIA never disputed, that the original plan was to use a fake truck bomb, but at the last minute, the FBI switched and gave the informant a live/real bomb. 6 Dozens and dozens have been gagged, threatened, fired, pensions threatened, etc..Little leaks and secrets are one thing, telling on 911, in another.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Replies to Comment # 10. 
"About 6 months after the crash I had a conversation with Jeanmarie Sentell, a naval criminal investigative agent. She told me the first set of head x-rays on Ron Brown were deliberately destroyed because they showed a lead snowstorm. I said, "What are you talking about?" She explained to me what a lead snowstorm is: metal fragments breaking up from a bullet. And she proceeded to tell me that the first set of x-rays was deliberately destroyed and a second set was taken. The exposure was changed in an attempt to eradicate or diminish the metal fragments."
The column directly above the fireman in the middle of the photo shows that it was cut with thermite. There is a substantial amount of hardened molten iron which can be seen on both the inside and outside of the box column. This is precisely what one would expect to find on a column which had been cut with thermite. Or is there a better explanation? 
This eight ton steel I-beam is six inches thick. It was selected to be preserved for future generations for the near perfect horseshoe bend ... it bent without almost a single crack in it. It takes thousands of degrees to bend steel like this.
#12. To: wakeup (#10)
#14. To: wakeup (#10)
(Edited)
1) If this was a case of a controlled demotion, surely there would be residue of some sort. To date, I haven't seen or heard evidence of any being found. Where did it go?
#21. To: wakeup (#10)
End Trace Mode for Comment # 10.