So Let's Say You Have Two Huge Aging Skyscrapers That Have An Asbestos Problem....
it will take BILLIONS to clean the towers of asbestos, and even worse, the towers aren't real good money-makers.
Wouldn't it be great to blow them up and start over? But blowing up these huge structures and building new ones would take BILLIONS as well.
Perhaps the buildings could have an accident, and you could collect the insurance money!
Wait a minute-- previously, terrorists tried to blow up the buildings. Maybe you can take advantage of that!
So you get the buildings wired-up for demolition, hoping to blow them up and blame it on the terrorists.
But there's another problem. How are you going to explain terrorists being able to wire up the towers for complete demolition? You can't just say they drove a massive truck bomb under each tower, can you? That just won't fly.
Fly, fly... wait a minute... that's it! Airplanes!
Terrorists these days are always talking about crashing airplanes into buildings. You'll get some terrorists to fly airplanes into each tower. That will be JUST the excuse you need for blowing up the buildings. Even better, the terrorist act will be the perfect event the Bush administration has been looking for to invade the middle east, so they'll help you and cover for you. Moreover, you can destroy a LOT of shady financial transactions when you take down the towers, so other people will be happy about that.
But how exactly will your friends set this up? It's not so easy getting planes with terrorists on them, and making them fly precisely where you want. And even if you did get the planes to hit the towers, is there any guarantee the planes will crash in such a way as to make the subsequent demolition believable?
Hmmm. It's a problem.
Here's an idea though. The buildings ALREADY have bombs in them. Why don't you just set off some of the bombs in such a way as to make it look like a plane crashed into the towers! And then you can simply have some VIDEOS made that show planes crashing into the towers. You know your friends in the media will go a long with it, because they always love a new war, and many of them are secretly in the government anyway. All you have to do is make sure that LOTS of videos get made and that they get shown over and OVER on TV. The Bush administration will set up an attack on the military, to make sure the armed services are motivated, and then they will cap it off with a heroic feel-good story about passengers fighting off the terrorists (or that the plane is shot down by the heroic military; some kinks need to be worked out still). In any case, the people will eat it up! The people LOVE big tragedies, and the country needs something to bring them together after that nasty impeachment business and after that election fiasco in Florida.
What could go wrong?
Wouldn't it be great to blow them up and start over? But blowing up these huge structures and building new ones would take BILLIONS as well.
Perhaps the buildings could have an accident, and you could collect the insurance money!
Wait a minute-- previously, terrorists tried to blow up the buildings. Maybe you can take advantage of that!
So you get the buildings wired-up for demolition, hoping to blow them up and blame it on the terrorists.
But there's another problem. How are you going to explain terrorists being able to wire up the towers for complete demolition? You can't just say they drove a massive truck bomb under each tower, can you? That just won't fly.
Fly, fly... wait a minute... that's it! Airplanes!
Terrorists these days are always talking about crashing airplanes into buildings. You'll get some terrorists to fly airplanes into each tower. That will be JUST the excuse you need for blowing up the buildings. Even better, the terrorist act will be the perfect event the Bush administration has been looking for to invade the middle east, so they'll help you and cover for you. Moreover, you can destroy a LOT of shady financial transactions when you take down the towers, so other people will be happy about that.
But how exactly will your friends set this up? It's not so easy getting planes with terrorists on them, and making them fly precisely where you want. And even if you did get the planes to hit the towers, is there any guarantee the planes will crash in such a way as to make the subsequent demolition believable?
Hmmm. It's a problem.
Here's an idea though. The buildings ALREADY have bombs in them. Why don't you just set off some of the bombs in such a way as to make it look like a plane crashed into the towers! And then you can simply have some VIDEOS made that show planes crashing into the towers. You know your friends in the media will go a long with it, because they always love a new war, and many of them are secretly in the government anyway. All you have to do is make sure that LOTS of videos get made and that they get shown over and OVER on TV. The Bush administration will set up an attack on the military, to make sure the armed services are motivated, and then they will cap it off with a heroic feel-good story about passengers fighting off the terrorists (or that the plane is shot down by the heroic military; some kinks need to be worked out still). In any case, the people will eat it up! The people LOVE big tragedies, and the country needs something to bring them together after that nasty impeachment business and after that election fiasco in Florida.
What could go wrong?
posted by spooked at 11:27 PM
10 Comments:
wow nothing could possibly go wrong with a plan like that! and if most if not all of it ends up looking phony or just a little too coincidental or some aspects of it are obvious lies, outfits like popular mechanics, ASCE, and 911myths will be right there to "explain" it all.
The scenario has a lot to recommend it, except that I think two planes did crash into the towers. The interviews with members of the NY Fire Dept. include many witnesses to the second crash, and some witnesses or near-witnesses to the first (saw and heard the low-flying plane, were wondering what it was doing so low and soon after heard or saw the explosion at WTC 1). I've found these interviews and witnesses credible.
Opps. Someone forgot to tell the demolitions team that it was supposed to be a gradual collapse not a freaking near freefall speed collapse! Darn now we have video, seismic and our own investigations are showing 10-11 second collapses with freefall at 9.22 seconds.
Lets pay off, threaten and ridicule anyone who points this out and hope the population doesn't know high school math and that 9.81 meters per second squared business.
looking at footage of wtc1 & 2, it looks more like they disintegrated from the top down rather than merely collapsing -
----------
anon, i think there were as many witnesses who claimed to see a small plane or even no plane, as there were claiming to see 767's. and looking at analyses of the images of 175, it would appear that those images don't accurately portray a 767 either. who knows. it all looks mighty fishy to me.
some witnesses saw no plane, some witnesses said they saw a missile, some witnesses said they saw a plane and maybe they did-- on TV or a flyby that occurred before the south tower was hit. Basically the witnesses contradict each other-- AS DOES THE VIDEO EVIDENCE. Some videos show a plane swooping down from the south, other videos show a plane swerving in from the west. How can this be?
Just to clarify my comments about the two planes. I'm not saying they were Boeings, I'm simply saying I think there were planes. (Yes, there are lots of witnesses saying different things about the planes.) Here are two examples from the NY Firefighters' testimony:
1. We heard the plane, we looked up. It was low enough that it rattled the buildings we were standing at. We saw it come out from behind the buildings and hit tower one and like I said, fireball, looked like 10 or 20 stories big, shot out the south side of the tower and then out the hole that the plane made going in."
(James Curran)
2. "About when we got to Chambers Street, by the college, we saw the second plane hit the World Trade Center." (Charles Gschleht)
There are lots of reports from these guys of plane parts, including tires and what look like engine pieces on the street. There's also luggage and strewn body parts amongst the plane parts.
Return of Anon
Yes, I've seen those reports, anon. They do support the idea there was at least one plane. This held me up for a little while, actually. But there are two issues:
1) where are the pictures of all these plane parts and pieces of luggage?
2) the firemen may well have been coerced into supporting the official story about planes, and it is known that firemen were warned not to mention demolition or they risked their jobs and pensions.
I'm saying that I don't trust the fireman reports completely, and I'd like to see pictures of all this plane debris. The debris I've seen is pretty minimal, much like at every 9/11 crash site.
Finally, the killer facts are:
1) plane videos contradict each other, suggesting they are forgeries
2) planes, no matter how fast they are going, don't vanish into steel columned buildings leaving cartoon-like silhouettes of themselves
3) no black boxes were found at ground zero
Spooked:
I share most of your scepticism. Where are the pictures and where are the plane parts themselves? Some of these parts were quite large, according to the firefighters' reports--crushing the trunks of cars, etc. Also, there is reference to stencilled markings on some of the plane parts. Where are these parts? Why aren't we shown them?
As for the reliability of the firefighter interviews (I'm speaking of the 503 interviews finally released last August) I do tend to have a lot of faith in them. They are moving, non-heroic statements by confused, very traumatized people. Many, many of them mention explosions in the towers just prior to collapse even though it wasn't "correct" to say this at the time. So I've concluded when they say there were two planes there probably were.
On the other hand, I've not yet studied the video footage of the planes as you have, and perhaps that will make me change my mind.
Anon
here's a view of part of an engine: big junk, which jon carlson claimed was from a 737: street engine, but that would seem to be irrelevent, as that engine was already waiting under a scaffold with yellow caution tape around it as the 1st plane hit the 1st tower: brave new world - see it? look carefully in the background, it seems to be already there on the sidewalk.
Mmmm all very interesting, but were any of you there? Probably not. I too believe that the buildings came down due to controled demolition, but hundreds of New Yorkers saw the planes going into the buildings. Lets not get distracted from what really happened, and in the process make the 911 truth movement look silly. The buildings were intentionally distroyed, but the planes did hit the buildings and were part of the whole coverup. Concentrate on what is scentifically varifiable, and the truth will win.
Post a Comment
<< Home