See other 9/11 Articles
Title: Confessions Of A 911 Hitman
Source:
www.rense.com
URL Source: http://www.rense.com/general73/confess.htm
Published: Oct 15, 2006
Author: Douglas Herman
Post Date: 2006-10-15 23:45:22 by robin
Ping List: *9-11* Subscribe to *9-11*
Keywords: None
Views: 3152
Comments: 310
Confessions Of A 911 Hitman And are you sorry that all these faked resource wars have to be concocted so that you can get that oil and live comfortably? Didn't think so.
How & Why I Helped Blow Up The World Trade Center
By Douglas Herman
Exclusive to Rense.com
10-13-6 
MY job was to wire explosives inside the various WTC buildings. We wired buildings 1, 2, 6, and 7. We hardwired some areas and attached explosives and electronic detonators to many other key structural joints. We did this weeks in advance. WTC-7 fell in a classic controlled demolition (See example) but the Twin Towers required a lot more ingenuity. The fellow who planned the actual sequence of detonations is a genius. He was rumored to have been paid seven or eight figures and is a fucking master. Almost like a composer of a symphony orchestra but better. Much better. 
Longtime Rense writer, Douglas Herman wrote the suspense novel, The Guns of Dallas, that features a confessed hitman revealing the perfect scenario for the murder of JFK. The above scenario is fiction but probably far closer to the truth than anything yet offered in the so-called fact based media.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 122.
#5. To: robin (#0)
One of the arguments you hear routinely out of the mouths of the official line spewers is that such an operation couldn't be kept secret because of the enormous numbers of people who would need to be involved. Someone would talk- Larry King would interiew the guy. Bull. Yes- several hundred people would be needed to wire the towers, remove the gold- etc, etc. But what would such people really know? Not damn much. Your average bomb laying technician at the WTC would know absolutely nothing about the people who hired him. We have an "intelligence community" that has had 50 years to develop and mature. There are literally thousands upon thousands of contractors, soldiers of fortune, hitmen, free lancers- all in rolodex files that organizations like the CIA, Mossad, MI6, FSB, South African intelligence etc etc have used for thousands of jobs back and forth. There are men who exist in the shadows who have no ideological motivation and no national allegiance (patriotism is for suckers among these types) and who work for money. They are hired by brokers, hired through old contacts in the various official services they at one time worked for- hired through third and fourth parties so that they have no idea who is really hiring them. Money is transfered by wire accounts- again through three or four middlemen. What do they know? Nothing. The teams would be kept in cells- assigned a leader- they wouldn't even know the names of their other team members for the most part or their cell leader. They would use code names. To them- it would be just another black bag job- on a large scale to be sure- but one of many they had particpated in. These people have no scruples. They don't believe in "innocence". They know the dark underbelly of government and what it is capable of doing. But wouldn't one of them do something stupid and take his payments for helping pull off 9/11 and go to Vegas and blow it in a few days and find himself in need of some money- want to write a book- and make a few million? Yes- and that is exactly the sort of person you would have if anyone came forward- a totally impeachable reprobate who gambles, drinks, and otherwise leads a scummy life- in other words totally unbelievable. Wouldn't Larry King and the MSM pay attention to such a person? Please. When people say that 9/11 couldn't have been a conspiracy because the media would report I have to laugh. Do they mean the same MSM that ran with the government lies on Iraq? That ran stories on WMD and nuke programs from anonymous leakers in the government who then cited their own leaks in the papers on the News Shows as proof that they were true while our media didn't think it important that leakers were using their own leaks to spread misinfo? The press contradicted their own archives form just the mid 90's on WMD in spreading these stories. BLOGGERS were pointing this crap out in 2002! Bloggers picked apart Powell's UN speech and exposed it for the sham it was then! Not our MSM! There is an interview with a 9/11 Scholar on Tucker Carlson's show about his "theories". Carlson starts the interview off by saying the man is immoral and reprehensible for even suggesting these things. And that is the attitude of the MSM toward this story- facts be dammed. Even looking into it is "immoral".
your analysis is very sound. americans do some things very very well historically, actually many things. military endeavors and intelligence operations are things that we have historically done very well. of course our people could pull off the 911 events. and of course our media will fail to uncover it, it is their job to fail to uncover it. do you think our intelligence services are incompetent? they would be so if our MSM would uncover it and publicize it.
If they (whoever they are) could have pulled this 9-11 thing off, the Iraqi war would have been better planned and resulting problems dealt with more intelligently, Afghanistan would be applying for statehood, The DPRK would have been dealt with differently and solved long ago, Iran would have already been overthrown from within, (probably the easiest task) and South and Central America would not be in the mess they are with Chavez acting like a kitten or being a really dead former leader of Venezeula. The MSM would love to expose a 9-11 coverup, but it is just too far out there.
well, I appreciate your argument in #32. that is a rational argument. I don't agree with your assessment of the MSM. the MSM is a dishonest propaganda tool IMHO. also, the simple facts of 911 don't jibe with official explanations. But I put it to you that if our only goal was to topple saddam and free Iraq, that it would've been achieved easily. Saddam and his regime were removed very quickly & easily. the thing to do then would be for the US forces to leave the scene and let other isntitutions take over, mostly iraqi institutions and international efforts too, they could've easily transitioned to a democracy. Remember, Iraq had a democracy from 1933 to mid 1950's. the US goal in Iraq is not for Iraq to be free though. the goal is for Iraq to be dominated strongly. this is why we're having so much trouble - it is difficult nation to subjugate, especially with only 150,000 troops on the ground. Don't under-estimate also, that war seems to be the big goal, instigating a wider war seems likely to be part of the real goal. the people who set US policy are not incompetent, they are doing precisely and exactly what they desire.
To my thinking, the real conspiracy is the fact that these 9/11 Muslims had ties with our intel orgs. Now did our pet Muslims - used by the USA via proxies to fight the Russians and Serbs and Chinese and Indians - go rogue and double cross us? Or were they doing what elements within our power structure wanted? Maybe a little of both? That is the question - not how the buildings fell down - which is self evident.
Not so. Believers of the official collapse theory are generally full of contradiction and you seem to be one of them. In one breath you say it would be too difficult to rig the buildings with explosives to take them down, and then in the next breath say that a plane takes out a few columns and a fire weakens a few more and that causes a total collapse to the ground of 2 110 story buildings. It's one or the other. The buildings are easy to take down, or difficult, but not both. I don't believe it was a "controlled" demolition. I think it was an uncontrolled demolition, but a demolition none the less.
I beleive in the official planes hit the building theory. Why do you guys assume that they needed an additional building collapse to make the day more horrible? The WTC was built in a non traditional way. It was not built like the Empire State Building or other previous skyrisers. It was a columnless structure - supported by a core and the outer skin. Thie made for quick construction and an open floor space. So it would be a miracle of the building could stand up with such gashes in its superstructure. But the govt loves people going nuts over this because this becomes the dominant theory that draws peoples attention away from the true murky background of 9/11. I will repeat again, the real conspiracy is the fact that these 9/11 Muslims had ties with our intel orgs. Now did our pet Muslims - used by the USA via proxies to fight the Russians and Serbs and Chinese and Indians - go rogue and double cross us? Or were they doing what elements within our power structure wanted? Maybe a little of both? That is the question - not how the buildings fell down - which is self evident. All coverups regarding 9/11 has had to do with erasing ties that linked America and al-Qaeda - especially into Bosnia-Kosovo-Chechnya. The 9/11 cell was mostly composed of CIA supported jihadi veterans of the Bosnian Muslim jihadi army and vets of Chechnya.
WHAT? The towers were overbuilt by 600%. The inner main core had 47 massive girders that were 36" by 52" and were 4" thick at the base and were rated at 42,000 psi. Then the core was criss crossed with horizonal girders all the way from the bottom to the top. It could stand alone without the floors or the outer girders which were rated at 100,000 psi.
they failed because they were softened by the fire. Steel turns to wet noodles in fire.
So two 110 story towers turned to wet noodles because of a fire on a couple of floors? lmao
What would support the upper floors without the said 2 floors? Angels?
#162. To: Destro (#122)
You act as if the two floor just got pulled out from under the tops of the towers. lol
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#30. To: Burkeman1 (#5)
#32. To: Red Jones (#30)
#38. To: It Is A Republic (#32)
#41. To: Red Jones, It Is A Republic (#38)
I don't agree with your assessment of the MSM. the MSM is a dishonest propaganda tool IMHO. also, the simple facts of 911 don't jibe with official explanations.
#42. To: Destro (#41)
not how the buildings fell down - which is self evident.
#44. To: Critter (#42)
Believers of the official collapse theory are generally full of contradiction and you seem to be one of them.
#102. To: Destro (#44)
...a columnless structure...
#113. To: Kamala (#102)
with horizonal girders
#116. To: Destro (#113)
Steel turns to wet noodles in fire.
#122. To: Critter (#116)
So two 110 story towers turned to wet noodles because of a fire on a couple of floors? lmao
Replies to Comment # 122. What would support the upper floors without the said 2 floors? Angels?
End Trace Mode for Comment # 122.