It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bombs in the WTC? Why not the terrorists?

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 22 2006 @ 12:30 PM
link   
If, hypothetically speaking, there were bombs involved in the collapse of the WTC, why would it have to be the Government, why not the terrorists?
There is at least one eyewitness who said he saw one of the hijackers in the WTC several months before the attacks took place:


"I had just finished cleaning the bathroom and this guy asks me, 'Excuse me, how many public bathrooms are in this area?'" Rodriguez told the Daily News.
www.nydailynews.com...


Seems an odd question to ask too...
If you are a believer of the Mini-Nuke idea, then come right this way! Because there are meant to be plently of mini-nukes which have been smuggled into the United States in the years after the Cold War. We all have concerns as to when these may be used and where, but maybe they already have?

TA-ANALYSIS:"Suitcase Nukes" an Overview

Why would the Government cover this up?

If you cast your mind back to pre 9/11 after Bush was elected into office in January of that year, I remember the a big joke they liked to talk about here in the UK (and I imagine the US) was that the newly elected President seemed to enjoy time vacationing rather than settling into office and doing anything..


Bush to end Texas vacation before Labor Day
August 17, 2001 Posted: 5:05 PM EDT (2105 GMT)

Fleischer said the White House blocked off the entire month of August and Labor Day weekend as available for Bush's extended summer break, but the president never committed to staying at his Crawford ranch the entire time.
archives.cnn.com...



Bush vacation puts spotlight on tiny Crawford
August 7, 2001 Posted: 9:43 PM EDT (0143 GMT)

Crawford -- a one-stoplight town of about 700 -- is now the summer White House. Bush is spending a month's vacation at his ranch here, bringing with him a retinue of aides, Secret Service agents and the White House press corps.
archives.cnn.com...


"Daddy, why was the President having a holiday when the bad men were planning to attack us?"

Amidst accusations of incompetence for 'allowing' 9/11 to happen, being away on vacation within a few months of being elected President and during the entire month prior to 9/11 is pretty damaging.
If there were explosives, or even a mini-nuke if you're a believer of that idea, and they were planted by the enemy operatives, then it would be an even bigger thing to add to the list of blunders!

Maybe they are covering up their incompetence, that in itself is a serious crime, but maybe that's 'all' there is to it?

[edit on 22-5-2006 by AgentSmith]




posted on May, 22 2006 @ 12:34 PM
link   
Actually, this is part of my theory. It would give them incentive to try and hide the truth if this were the case. Thanks for bringing this up Agent Smith.



posted on May, 22 2006 @ 02:02 PM
link   
To answer that question (bombs, why not the terrorists?) you would have to take a long hard look at the company providing security for the WTC. Would they provide the windows of opportunity for a terrorist group to plant the number of explosives needed to bring down the three towers? And if they are complicent, the trail ends at the same place does it not?



posted on May, 22 2006 @ 02:05 PM
link   
Everybody knows he was on vacation and the whole notion of the adminsistration being asleep behind the wheel is the official story.

They want you to believe that our multi-billion dollar defense system was reduced to a bunch of bumbling keystone cops.

This was the conclusion that we paid the 9/11 omission report to come up with even though Michael Moore already told the world the exact same thing.

I'm sorry but that is not reason enough to risk being caught in a cover up of bombs planted by the "terrorists".

Besides....it's ludicrous to suggest that the terrorists would bother rigging building 7 with bombs even though it housed the CIA, the SEC, and many high security banks as well as Rudy Guiliani's command bunker for the entire city!

That sure would have been some operation these rag tag muslim fanatics pulled off!



posted on May, 22 2006 @ 02:46 PM
link   
first post here.
If there were bombs placed by the terrorists then why would the government cover these facts up?



posted on May, 22 2006 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jack Tripper
Besides....it's ludicrous to suggest that the terrorists would bother rigging building 7 with bombs even though it housed the CIA, the SEC, and many high security banks as well as Rudy Guiliani's command bunker for the entire city!

That sure would have been some operation these rag tag muslim fanatics pulled off!


Exactly. Nobody could have rigged Seven unless they were allowed. Wasn't the security fairly tight in the Towers after that Fiasco in the 90's, too?



Originally posted by errorist
first post here.
If there were bombs placed by the terrorists then why would the government cover these facts up?


Agent Smith, no matter how hard you try and combat the 'conspiracy nuts' with these types of alternate theory's, another conspiracy, or hypothetical conspiracy pops it's head right out. When will you realise that there is actually a conspiracy? I think you could use a rest.



posted on May, 22 2006 @ 03:28 PM
link   
I never said their wasn't a conspiracy, I just question what it is. I don't believe in the some of the rather extreme ones.



posted on May, 22 2006 @ 03:29 PM
link   
To get a good grasp of why the US is by far the best bet, you have to look outside of 9/11 to the general scheme of things: corporations and corporatism (fascism), banks, the military industrial complex, al Qaeda, the CIA, the Cold War, the role of fear in propoganda, etc.

Or here's a quick look at a lot of damning material:

Everybody's Gotta Learn Sometime

Watch that. It shows how US factions (FBI heads, military) prevented investigations into and even the arrests of al Qaeda cells that they knew were in the US before 9/11, and how an FBI informant roomed with two of the alleged hijackers, and etc.

It's not a replacement for a good "alternative" history lesson but it should at least serve to offer evidence of US involvement in 9/11 without having to get into huge discussions. Realistically, the only people who would and could pull off such a professionally orchestrated psy-op on US soil, would be US intel/military factions.



posted on May, 22 2006 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Communication_Monster
Agent Smith, no matter how hard you try and combat the 'conspiracy nuts' with these types of alternate theory's, another conspiracy, or hypothetical conspiracy pops it's head right out. When will you realise that there is actually a conspiracy? I think you could use a rest.


HAHAHA! spot on observation.

'occam's razor' is only supposed to shave in one direction, think the protectors of the official power structure(as they are starting to not support the lie, anymore, yet continuing to support the liars)




posted on May, 22 2006 @ 03:34 PM
link   
What if Al Qeada (being a part of the CIA) rigged the building (number 7) behind the CIA's back while "visiting" their (AQ's) parent organization. I know...I'm grasping at straws but..... I guess that would still implicate the US government in the end anyway. Just a thought.



posted on May, 22 2006 @ 03:44 PM
link   
Oh, i see!
The evil-yet-superintelligent muslim extremists rigged those 3 huge NYC skyscrapers, flew planes in 2 of them & blew them all up (even the one that didnt get hit) with explosives, in such a way that could incriminate the governement (or at least their incompetence)...

Does this makes sense to anyone?



posted on May, 22 2006 @ 03:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by AgentSmith
I never said their wasn't a conspiracy, I just question what it is. I don't believe in the some of the rather extreme ones.


Some may consider the theory you have put forward in this thread to be one of 'the rather extreme ones'. Several times have I seen you try and quell, or just outright deny, any wrongdoing by the American Administration. Several times have I seen you snicker and giggle with other posters at people who don't believe the official story. Do you now, in front of everyone, start to modify your opinion?


Griff - I doubt it.



posted on May, 22 2006 @ 03:55 PM
link   
Why is someone not intelligent just because they're evil?
And what's with all the racism, one of the favourite arguments I see on the truthseeker movement side is that they were backward, 'cave dwellers', etc.
It's like some of you think that just because someone is Muslim or comes from a country not as magnificant as yours in your own eyes, they are inferior somehow?



posted on May, 22 2006 @ 04:06 PM
link   
it would be much easier to rig the towers if there is a complicit faction of insiders working with you.
it would be (nearly) IMPOSSIBLE otherwise.
just because there may have been some ACTUAL MIDDLE EASTERN TERRORISTS involved, does NOT mean that they are working for ALLAH. it also does not mean they are working for the CIA, et al.
yet, the fact that they forgot their 'precious, holy' korans, and left a MULTITUDE of them lying all over the place, like hansel and gretel breadcrumbs, and the fact that they were drinking booze in a strip club, and the fact that some of them survived their suicide(lol), indicates that they probably WERE NOT fanatical muslim suicide martyr jihaders.

the ball of YARN is unwinding.



posted on May, 22 2006 @ 04:12 PM
link   
Some critical thinking:


Why would al Qaeda fly planes into buildings just to demolish them with explosives in a fashion that makes the collapses look natural?

For US factions, rigging the towers wasn't supposed to be known. The planes hit the towers, drew media, and then the towers were blown in an intensely emotional pyrotechnics show. All propoganda, a psy-op for kicking off a new set of wars, and the collapses would be shown again and again for weeks.

For al Qaeda to fly planes into buildings just to demolish them, makes little sense, unless they were just drawing attention too. And in that case, why make the collapses look so natural? Why not just rip them from a base like an obvious, in-your-face demolition?

And why such a massive government cover-up of what happened?

Why was FEMA in NYC on 9/10?

Why was the evidence hauled off so quickly?



posted on May, 22 2006 @ 04:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by AgentSmith
And what's with all the racism, one of the favourite arguments I see on the truthseeker movement side is that they were backward, 'cave dwellers', etc.
It's like some of you think that just because someone is Muslim or comes from a country not as magnificant as yours in your own eyes, they are inferior somehow?


I don't think, or have never implied, or said anything of the sort. I don't think these guys were Neanderthals at all, but I do think you seem to be over-estimating their ability to pull this kind of thing off against 'The most powerful nation on Earth'. Do you really think Terrorists could have rigged such high profile buildings so perfectly that they collapse, without getting caught (Remind yourself of Building 7's contents)? And if they were detected, it still implicates certain elements of the Government, and we're right back to square one again. So you are now pretty much of the opinion that the Government was responsible even if Terrorists rigged those building to fall? Is that what you are saying here? Surely you're not going to go with the "Omnipotent Super Terrorist" hypothesis, are you?



posted on May, 22 2006 @ 04:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by AgentSmith
Why is someone not intelligent just because they're evil?
And what's with all the racism, one of the favourite arguments I see on the truthseeker movement side is that they were backward, 'cave dwellers', etc.
It's like some of you think that just because someone is Muslim or comes from a country not as magnificant as yours in your own eyes, they are inferior somehow?


It has nothing to do with racism!

It has to do with the FACT that the 19 hijackers were flight school flunkies and that hani hanjour who supposedly manuevered the jumbo jet into the pentagon could barely fly a cessna.

It has to do with the FACT that mohammad atta was NOT a fudamentalist muslim or hardcore disciplined terrorist but rather was a big fan of pork chops, strip clubs (even lived with a stripper for a couple months), and coc aine! And he was the alleged "ringleader"!

source

These guys had ALL of the characteristics of inept patsies and NONE of the characteristics of terror masterminds so for you to suggest that their "plot" was even MORE involved than the official story is utterly ludicrous.



posted on May, 22 2006 @ 04:20 PM
link   
And what are characteristics of 'terror masterminds' exactly?



posted on May, 22 2006 @ 04:22 PM
link   


Why would al Qaeda fly planes into buildings just to demolish them with explosives in a fashion that makes the collapses look natural?


Why?

Think of the drama that built up from the time of impact to the time of collapse. Think of how many cameras were pointed towards the towers. The planes draw the attention, and with millions of people watching, down come the buildings.

Now I am not saying this is what happened, but surely it makes sense.

Bombs have went off before, but nothing can ever compare to 9/11.

America will never be the same, on one day they lost control their total sense of security. A simple bombing would not have done this, the planes were needed.

Think, if the hijackings failed than they still had the explosives in the buidling. Not exactly how they planned things, but still a success either way.



For al Qaeda to fly planes into buildings just to demolish them, makes little sense, unless they were just drawing attention too. And in that case, why make the collapses look so natural? Why not just rip them from a base like an obvious, in-your-face demolition?


I actually think it makes alot of sence. Drawing attention to the scene did alot for 9/11, everybody has a story where they can remember exactly where they were on this tragic event.



And why such a massive government cover-up of what happened?


Asleep at the wheel?

We let them hijack planes, we let them fly them into the WTC, Petagon.. But wait, we also let them rig the WTC? Lets draw the line somewhere.



Why was the evidence hauled off so quickly?


If your going to cover it up, you better do it right.

The way the evidence was handled at Ground Zero is screaming cover up.

[edit on 22-5-2006 by chissler]



posted on May, 22 2006 @ 04:22 PM
link   
Hey AgentSmith, can you tell me what you think of my post?

I'd like to see what you think about what I just presented before it gets ran over and lost as you respond to some of these other choice postings.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join