Bush admits there were explosives in WTC!

Originally posted by Fifth Horseman

Now, you throw some of the people in these threads into the aviation forum, and I'll sink every freethrow or three pointer you can want to see.

oh so you can't fight em here so you want to fight em over there, sounds just like Dubya!!

Way to COMPLETELY misquote me there. I said that I don't know anything about buildings, but you're saying how great it is to watch them humiliate me when I try to talk about them. What I SAID was that I don't know a lot about buildings, because it's not my subject matter of expertise. Just like if you put some of the folks that know alot about buildings into the aviation forum, it won't be THEIR subject matter of expertise and they'll make the same mistakes I make when I try to get information about buildings. Who said ANYTHING about fighting anyone there?

Are you guys going to fight again?
Please don't. We have too many people fighting nothing as it is.

Oh yeah, btw, BSB2005 or BSB..., won't becoming back again, at least not under that name or any like it. I know her she mentioned it to me a while back. Night all.

one small observation for my part. to those who say that when he said explosives, he actually meant the planes.
that is a BIG difference and bush would know this because he was trained as a pilot and would know flying terminology. he even stated that he thought the pilot was bad, having been a pilot himself. one CRASHES a plane, GUIDES a plane, AIMS a plane, one PLACES explosives. taking into account all the other high rises in new york, the actual target zone for impacts on the towers drops. the planes could only really hit the upper thirds safely. so, if one were to place explosives, it would be in conjunction to have them high enough with the plane impacts for maximum effect.

Okay, I have found a plot in 2002 where KSM is supposed to have been involved in an "aborted plot" to fly a plane into the U.S. Bank Tower in Los Angeles. Right now all I have is the wikipedia entry on it.

en.wikipedia.org...

But this document from the Moussaoui trial states:

www.rcfp.org...

Sheikh Mohammed said that targets that were not included in the 9/11 attacks were to be carried forward to the next operation, and that the original plan called for Moussaoui to lead the next attack operation in the U.S.

In this speech, Bush claims an attack in 2002 was "thwarted", and there is reference to the Library Tower in Los Angeles.

www.washingtonpost.com...

Then later in the article it is stated that

Two sources familiar with intelligence information said the West Coast plot targeted the tallest building in Los Angeles, since renamed the US Bank Tower, and involved Malaysian militants and Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, who was captured in 2003. Previous reports on Mohammed's interrogations in custody said that before Sept. 11 he mapped out an attack on the tower that was later aborted.

So this makes a second "plane in a building" plot that KSM was involved in that Bush could have been referring to in this latest speech.

OK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I have read the whole thread and speech and audio. This what I have to say.


IT'S A CRAPPY SPEECH! He to vague in what he say and other word's it's bad evidence and probable should be put away for now.

Sorry.

Good point, but vaugeness is how to keep his power. That's whole point of political speeches is to gain, maintain, give a developed agenda, and morale to accomplish it.

Dude, I can guarentee you vagueness is not what Bush intends. He is a bad speaker, just watch one of his press conferences. He sucks. And saying he keeps his power through vagueness, that's pretty vague in itself. Do you think by hinting at a government conspiracy he somehow consolidates his voting block? There is absolutely no reason for him to imply anything. If there were terrorist in the tower planting bombs, what is the point of keeping that a secret. It honestly wouldn't have made a difference in anyone's mind.

www.rcfp.org...

KSM denied that Moussaoui ever had a 9/11 role, reiterating his previous statements that Moussaoui was intended for the second wave of attacks. Sheikh Mohammed explained that Moussaoui was preparing for a second wave of attacks which entailed the same steps as the september 11th hijackers:
getting flight lessons, purchasing knives, etc.

Hmm interesting isn't it? If this plot, the second wave of attacks, is the same plot the president is refering too, then why include explosives?
Wouldn't explosives make it significantly different then the 9/11 attacks? There is a reason that bush doesn't make the connection to 9/11 in that paragraph. To say "a plan that is the same as 9/11" would be to admit that explosives were used in the WTC. Bush describes this new plot, but KSM says this plot is the same as the 9/11 plot. Interesting?

Uh, because for the HIJACKERS, it WAS the same as 9/11. They would have knives, and take flight lessons, and crash the planes into buildings. The people with the explosives would be OTHER operatives.

[edit on 9/17/2006 by Zaphod58]

I mean just think if we jump to fast toward this and say this is a fact Bush will say that we "misinterpret" and say exactly what leftbehind said.

It good that we fought to see who right or wrong but after all this reading it bad information and we should just keep for reference. You just in case.

It is also good that we found out the information is flawed so we can't spread it around a say it fact.

I think that what they had in mind with this speech.

Originally posted by gonavy2011
If there were terrorist in the tower planting bombs, what is the point of keeping that a secret. It honestly wouldn't have made a difference in anyone's mind.

I actually think it would make a big difference. In essence, they would have to admit that terrorists were able to plant bombs in a building that had already been hit in the same manner in 1993. I really don't think they would want to admit that.

i like how everyone uses the elevators to say that gas and other stuff went down them and exploded or whatever they say. yet so many people dont realize there isnt one huge elevator that goes from the bottom floor to the top.....its actually split into 3 sections..you ride one up 1/3...get out and get into a diffrent one...ride another 1/3 up and finally get into a diffrent one...so please explain how flammables goes down the elevator to the bottom?

Originally posted by ConfederacyOfUnity
i like how everyone uses the elevators to say that gas and other stuff went down them and exploded or whatever they say. yet so many people dont realize there isnt one huge elevator that goes from the bottom floor to the top.....its actually split into 3 sections..you ride one up 1/3...get out and get into a diffrent one...ride another 1/3 up and finally get into a diffrent one...so please explain how flammables goes down the elevator to the bottom?

Actually there is one elevator (the freight elevator) that goes to all floors. But it was used after the impact, so it wouldn't have had any fireball blowing through it. All the rest of the elevators are as you describe. Broken into three sections with each section isolated from the one above it.

Originally posted by El Che
I mean just think if we jump to fast toward this and say this is a fact Bush will say that we "misinterpret" and say exactly what leftbehind said.

It good that we fought to see who right or wrong but after all this reading it bad information and we should just keep for reference. You just in case.

It is also good that we found out the information is flawed so we can't spread it around a say it fact.

I think that what they had in mind with this speech.

You are not far from the truth....
The more days go by the more the media seems like a lie..fabricated by liars...
then everyone will realize...wtf hapened to comon sense?
then when civil war breaks out, everyone will realize...
wtf is this?..its called common sense kid!....
im just espaculating..and talking to my self....ignore me

I don't know that it made it all the way down, but I know that it got pretty far down the building. There were several survivors that had a "burning liquid" spill over them as they were in elevators going down the building trying to escape.

Right now I'm shock a1ex how everyone is not ever reading my post!!!!!!!!!!

Yeah it should be a least look at.

so what your telling me is that after such a mind blowing event, even in the eyes of the planner who didnt expect such results, they were going to put explosives in the building as well?

after 9/11 I dont see what the point of putting explosives along with the airliner would be, unless 9/11 had explosives to begin with. If there were no explosives in the WTC then I dont think the second wave would include explosives, ESPECIALLY since it is know this guy hated complexity. He wanted things as simple as possible, so why would he make the plot more complicated, when he had results like the WTC collapse (assuming only airliners caused the collapse)

And maybe he looked over his plan for the WTC and revised it later, but too late to change for 9/11. Maybe he realized he should have put them in and he didn't, because he didn't think of it, or didn't like the idea, or because his socks were blue that day. It's entirely possible that 9/11 was a "preliminary" plan, and he came up with better ideas after they gave the go ahead.

There is a big difference between planes and explosives. However the quoted articls says it was part of KSM's plan to plant explosives ... that is nowhere near conclusive proof of a conspiracy of government coverup. If there was a conspiracy and coverup I don't think the president would be going anywhere near the topic in earshot of a journalist.

Originally posted by blackthorne
one small observation for my part. to those who say that when he said explosives, he actually meant the planes.
that is a BIG difference and bush would know this because he was trained as a pilot and would know flying terminology. he even stated that he thought the pilot was bad, having been a pilot himself. one CRASHES a plane, GUIDES a plane, AIMS a plane, one PLACES explosives. taking into account all the other high rises in new york, the actual target zone for impacts on the towers drops. the planes could only really hit the upper thirds safely. so, if one were to place explosives, it would be in conjunction to have them high enough with the plane impacts for maximum effect.

Im going to ask a question:

Leaving all science aside...
Leaving all Religion aside....
Leaving opinions that tell you how to think aside...

What does your common sense tell you?

Is your government looking for your best interest?
or is the government looking afer it's own best interest?...(which is not your best interest.)..unless you're related

This is how things were done millions of years ago and to date hasn't changed...that's why we are still here...

again im talking to my self so ignore me