Calling Out Demolition Deniers

[Doubting Thomas]

Actually that's probably not far off. "Just say that the hijackers were brown people from somewhere in the Middle East. Most Americans won't know the difference anyway." So the entire school system is also part of the 9/11 conspiracy.

Face it, most Americans don't know where a country is on a map until our military starts dropping bombs on it.

[StuW]

And people wonder why there's a conspiracy about whether Americans went to the moon :/

[Rayaan]

CIA Guy One: Hey, shouldn't we make at least some of the hijackers Afghanis and Iraqis, since that's who we're drumming up war against?

CIA Guy Two: Nah, save all your attention to detail for blowing up the buildings, whatevs will work for the hijackers.

Well, now I guess it's time for me to reveal ... another whistleblower. Keep counting, by the way.


9-11 Hijackers Passports were issued by the CIA – US Consulate Whistleblower Michael Springmann

http://uncensored.co.nz/2013/06/29/9-11-...pringmann/

http://www.geekation.com/911-hijackers-p...tleblower/

An interview with Michael Springman exposes the CIA's links with the terrorist attacks on September 11

Straight Goods reader Ken MacAllister of Vancouver, BC writes:

Michael Springmann worked for the US government for 20 years with the foreign service and consulate. He just went public with the story of his involvement in a large scale CIA operation that brought hundreds of people from the middle east to the US, issued them passports and trained them to be terrorists. Springmann says that the CIA is working closely with Bin Laden and his operatives in Jeddah and has been since 1987. The most haunting implication from this interview is that all of the terrorist acts of late were planned and paid for by the CIA with US taxpayers money so that the US could legitimately bomb the hell out of Afghanistan -- not to "get the Taliban" as the official party line states, but to erase all of the evidence of the US's secret operations in Afghanistan left over from its 10 year war with the Soviet Union in that country.

Based on the new information from Mr. Springmann, it is likely that most of those 600+ people who were "rounded up" within days of the September 11 attacks were actually in the US because the CIA brought them there. It lends credence to the idea that the CIA was also behind the anthrax letters and that is why there was weapons-grade anthrax and why the perpetrator will never be caught.

http://web.archive.org/web/2002021402291...m?REF=1267


A few more articles about the CIA's deep-running, enigmatic involvement with the 9/11 hijackers:

Hijackers Lived With FBI Informant
Congress Seeks F.B.I. Data On Informer; F.B.I. Resists
C.I.A. Was Tracking Hijacker Months Earlier Than It Had Said
PBS: NSA could have prevented 9/11 hijackings
CIA Didn't Share Info About 9/11 Hijackers

Plus, another chilling tale.

Because the United States itself has a long record of supporting terrorists and using terrorist tactics, the slogans of today’s war on terrorism merely makes the United States look hypocritical to the rest of the world.

[Dragonetti]

As a government paid lacky, and someone who knows the red tape. The buildings were not demo down. Also, I cannot believe people still believe this.

The criminals were led by a Islamic Nut Job, who hated America because we had planes in Saudi. Remember when the Russians was attacking the Afghanistan, we trained those freedom fighters. They then turn on USA, why, because of a stupid religious reason.

[Aractus]

Aractus,

---

I've already typed out my responses to two other members (Creed of Heresy and Tiberius) and I will post them in the next couple of replies, and those are pretty much the same things I would have wrote to you also in response to some of your comments.

So, just read the next couple of replies and then you might get a better understanding of my arguments for the conspiracy theory of 9/11.

---

Ok mate, but again, the evidence for a government conspiracy simply isn't there. There are not unexplained coincidences, etc, and there isn't any evidence for explosives being planted in the towers prior to the planes hitting them. If there were, then their presence would have been found in the wreckage. So there's no physical evidence for explosives being planted in the towers. Furthermore, what you probably don't realise, and what most people don't realise about 7WTC is that the south side of the building gives way and collapses a full 10 seconds before the north side does. The collapse of the south side of the building is what causes catastrophic damage to the lower floors of the north side and triggers the full collapse. It is pretty much fully understood how and why the building collapsed, despite not being directly hit by a passenger jet.

I don't know anything about this Susan Lindauer, but all she seems to be talking about is intelligence being kept from the public, not a conspiracy.

[LastPoet]

Aractus,

---

I've already typed out my responses to two other members (Creed of Heresy and Tiberius) and I will post them in the next couple of replies, and those are pretty much the same things I would have wrote to you also in response to some of your comments.

So, just read the next couple of replies and then you might get a better understanding of my arguments for the conspiracy theory of 9/11.

---

Ok mate, but again, the evidence for a government conspiracy simply isn't there. There are not unexplained coincidences, etc, and there isn't any evidence for explosives being planted in the towers prior to the planes hitting them.

Well, seeing how hard and precise the wiring to do a controlled demolition is, I think that even if someone placed bombs before, how can they account for all the variables from the impact of the planes?. Not even mentioning that no charges blew up from the impacts. How godlike was their plan to be so much precise?

[LastPoet]

The criminals were led by a Islamic Nut Job, who hated America because we had planes in Saudi. Remember when the Russians was attacking the Afghanistan, we trained those freedom fighters. They then turn on USA, why, because of a stupid religious reason.

Rambo 3, despite all the fiction, was made with a dedication at the end to the valiant people of Afhanistan IIRC. Ironic how a few years later the tables turned.

[Aractus]

Well, seeing how hard and precise the wiring to do a controlled demolition is, I think that even if someone placed bombs before, how can they account for all the variables from the impact of the planes?. Not even mentioning that no charges blew up from the impacts. How godlike was their plan to be so much precise?

Not to mention that a 47 storey building has never in history been CD'd. No one is arguing, I think, that it can't be done - of course it can be done, but you would have ample evidence of the explosives in the wreckage.

I actually don't think that Al Qaeda ever imagined that the towers would actually collapse. They just wanted to see them both burning furiously and out of control on page 1. They had no way of knowing in advance that 7WTC would catch alight, or for that matter that any of the other buildings would sustain any significant damage.

I agree, there's no way to know these variables in advance.

[Doubting Thomas]

I actually don't think that Al Qaeda ever imagined that the towers would actually collapse. They just wanted to see them both burning furiously and out of control on page 1.

I agree. I think they just wanted to strike a blow at the Great Satan and were wildly successful beyond their imaginations.

I believe that if the WTC towers had been constructed with an interior steel girder frame like most buildings, they probably wouldn't have come down. But cutting most of the exterior support and much of the interior support with two large aircraft, then heating the remaining supports enough to compromise their integrity was the fatal blow.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

Proud to say I'm a demolition denier.

Better to be proud than to be ungrateful, though of course that doesn't mean that you are right in being a demolition denier.

None of the evidence presented convinces me that my own research is wrong. FYI, I did an MA thesis that led and concluded with the 9/11 attacks, specifically how extreme ideologies can supplant more moderate ones and begin to enact changes in behavior relatively quickly (drawing a parallel between, say, the ideologies of AQ and that of the communist anarchist Georges Sorel, a surprising synthesis I found).

Claiming demolition, or CIA led false flag attacks, tends to completely ignore the other factors that led to the "official" story, namely years of alienation, resentment, ideological development and the changes that occur in people's outlook on life and their current situation.

AQ is most definitely not a creation of the CIA, at least not directly. Of course, AQ also bombed embassies and military vessels (USS Cole) way before it attacked the US directly using 4 planes as delivery devices for carnage. The US also bombed Afghanistan way before 9/11 in retaliation to some of these (tomahawk attacks in the 90s). Just part of the very complex and interwoven context that gets completely ignored when someone says 'the us government did it. Is a false flag to get resources (or whatever)". It actually makes light of what is a very devastating and era defining moment in time.

The evidence doesn't add up, and neither does the logic of such a move.

And that's all I have to say. The 9/11 attacks will forever be debated by people who refuse to accept the evidence. It's the same with the 7/7 attacks or the JFK assassination. People want to be right and, more importantly, they want to be contrarian on such issues because, should it ever come to light that they were right, they can stand there and say "look, I told you! I was right and you were wrong"

Not accusing you of doing this, but almost every interaction I've had with truthers has led me to this conclusion.