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.

 

9/11: The Way It Could Have Happened

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 08:48 AM
link   
Here is a theory, and just a theory for your consideration.

Main defining statements:

WHO

o 16 religious fanatics from a terrorist organization like Al-Qaeda

How could they do it in the best defended country in the world?


CONSPIRACY

o Certain cells in the U.S. Intelligence community knew the attacks were coming
o These cells collaborated and shared this intel with powerful organizations like P.N.A.C.
o It was decided in the backrooms to allow this attack to create a "New Pearl Harbour"
o It was known to this group that the towers would sustain direct hits from (even multiple) airplanes


INSIDERS: POSSIBLE PLAYERS IN THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION

o Bush + Sr
o Cheney
o Rumsfeld
o Rice
o A few select members of the intel community


INSIDERS: OTHERS

o PNAC, including Silverstein and Wolfowitz
o Certain specialized employees in the demolition business, likely from a single company


DEMOLITION

o It was decided it was imperative the towers MUST fall to maximize the traumatic effect

o To that end a company like "Controlled Demolitions, Inc" is approached, and a few of their specialist were sworn in and asked to work closely together with specialists from the Intel Community to ensure the towers would fall after the attacks. One way to ensure cooperation is plain threats or threatening/holding relatives hostage

o This joint service-intel crew placed thermite shape charges in WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 over a period of 7 days during security shadow time (see below)


SECURITY CONTROL: WTC

o Security at the WTC complex was handed over to a P.N.A.C. insider some time before the attacks with the specific goal of allowing the joint crew to place the charges w/o detection

SECURITY CONTROL: AIRFORCE & NORAD

o An extensive smoke screen is put into place by ordering a massive training exercise for 9/11 well in advance of the real attacks to confuse both ATC and NORAD

o Control of S.A.C. on 9/11 is handed from the President to the Vice President Dick Cheney, who also is founder and prominent member of the P.N.A.C.

o Cheney ensures that the regular response to hijacked planes is delayed, ensuring the set goals of complete WTC demolition are met without show stopping interference from the U.S. Airforce


WHY: IN RANDOM ORDER

o Establish a permanent military presence in the oil-rich Middle East with the specific purpose of acquiring the oil reserves and thus guarantee sufficient oil for the American market for the next 20 to 30 years

o Raise popularity of the current administration and support for the President

o Monetary gains, and a whole lot of them by securing no contest orders for large defense contractors with ties and kickbacks to the current administration

o Establish America as a military giant, according to the manefesto of P.N.A.C.

o Get more hegemonic control in the United States by passing laws which pre-9/11 would be rigerously refused like the Patriot Act I and II and the firm establishment of Home Land Security


HOW TO KEEP IT A SECRET

o All non U.S. Government insiders who were involved are under surveillance

o Some have been eliminated or are to be eliminated

o A mood is created that any opposition to the official explanation is regarded "un-patriotic"

o The mainstream media is "coached" to follow this mood

o Any information which could lead to exposing the plot is "Classified" for sake of National Security

o Any hard evidence like fragments of the WTC buildings are quickly disposed of and the site cleaned at once


This completes the circle.


Is this reaching to much or would it be feasible?

Key is the attack was done by terrorists, but certain elements knew in advance and let it happen, and aided in the destruction to maximize the effect of the attack for future political and monetary gains.

I would like to hear your comments and additions, thanks.

[edit on 25-9-2006 by Truth4hire]




posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 08:56 AM
link   


Is this reaching to much or would it be feasible?


No because thats what happened,IMO.




Key is the attack was done by terrorists, but certain elements knew in advance and let it happen, and aided in the destruction to maximize the effect of the attack for future political and monetary


It was the Government, IMO.

[edit on 25-9-2006 by marcopolo]



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 08:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by marcopolo
It was the Government, IMO.



To be honest, that would be a logistical nightmare. It seems so much easier to let the actual bombers do the field work, and simply pave the way for them.

Thanks for your reply.



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 09:31 AM
link   
I agree, ensure a few security personelll soften up especially on arab looking men, put the right people in customs to just accidently let them in... then sit back and ensure no other agency intervenes...

But it doesnt explain why... The pentagon got hit, or how the USA can find itself with a leader... whom doesnt flush at the thought, of allowing 3000 of your own citizens to perish...

Maybe he didnt know, someone bellow him managed to keep it hidden from the public face of the whitehouse, so who's manipulating the US government?

What strikes me as funny, Is that bushes brother was in charge of electronic security, for Dulles Airports, the Trade Centres and United Airlines.
Dulles airports is where the supposid Pentagon flight took off from.
United Airlines was supposidly the airport where flight 93 took off from.
Both of these concepts, have failed to carragotically prove the events that we have been led to believe
We all saw the towers, but we were told about the other two crashes.

As much of a lemon the Towers were becoming in terms of declining tenants, power and maintence.. and the asbestos problem.. they were doomed, the cost of removing the towers with scaffolding, and labour cost a few billion, the towers were bought for millions..... and over 7 billion was paid out on insurance.
Thats to much of a co-incidence, considering the towers were KNOWN to be getting worse by the year, yet you buy them for 35million, and take out insurance covering terrorism? Granted they had been attacked before.. but forgive me if the timing seems spot on.

But honestly, what can we do about it ?
We're being watched, and listened too.
How do you think they know what to put on the TV, at the right time... with the right results?



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 09:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
As much of a lemon the Towers were becoming in terms of declining tenants, power and maintence.. and the asbestos problem.. they were doomed, the cost of removing the towers with scaffolding, and labour cost a few billion, the towers were bought for millions..... and over 7 billion was paid out on insurance.
Thats to much of a co-incidence, considering the towers were KNOWN to be getting worse by the year, yet you buy them for 35million, and take out insurance covering terrorism? Granted they had been attacked before.. but forgive me if the timing seems spot on.


That´s another good supportive reason for complete demolition right there.

I´m quite sure Silverstein will put the 7BN US$ to good use and make even more money by building and leasing out the replacement WTC complex. With kickbacks going to a few select parties naturally.

Thanks Agit8dChop.



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 03:13 PM
link   
One way of "proving" this would be to see who is or was considered specialists in the demolition field, and of those persons who were in or around New York up to ten days before the attacks.



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 03:46 PM
link   
Don't forget the Anthrax Attacks as a follow-on to subtly encourage those who might take a different tack in the investigation of 9/11 (Daschle, Brokaw) to toe the line and go along with the 'official' version of things.



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 03:56 PM
link   
Exactly, I forgot about that. The Anthrax attacks ensured a continued instilling of fear into the U.S. population and made it much easier to accept the "War on terror".

Makes sense...



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 06:17 PM
link   
I picture George Bush sitting at a bar with Bin Laden saying:

George: "Nice job Bin man. Your home videos for the news where simply superb. These "simple life" minded citizens still think that terrorists helped us get an excuse to conquer Iraq and Afghanistan for our oil for dollars/money driven agendas. They still know that we have recovered advanced anti-gravity alien spacecraft but still can not figure out that we do have free energy technology in our possession. This is great, not only the trading currency for oil is still the dollar instead of the Euro, but we are now able to use oil as a world tax!

Bin Laden: "Quite true. These "simple minded" nine to fivers actually believe that you keep catching these top terrorist leaders alive and without a fight. But, I must say that your "9-11 attack show" was very sloppy. Despite only a small hole in the side of the Pentagon, bombs going off at the bottom of the Trade Center, a completely untouched building 7 becoming completely demolished about 7 hours after the 2 major buildings fell to the ground, the plane over Pennsylvania being shot down and the ground being missiled to indicate a crash, your people skills still seemed to hypnotize the people like a herd of sheep. Ha, ha, hah... You're still the man...Bush man!"

George Bush: "No, you da man!.....Bin Man!"

George Bush and Bin Laden: "Ha, Ha, Ha, Hah......"



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 08:29 PM
link   
Theoretically though, if the towers were brought down on purpose, what use did they have in bringing down the pensylvanian flight, and hitting the pentagon.. surely the towers being hit would of been enough?
For what purpose is the big question...



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 08:35 PM
link   
To give it the appearance of an attack on our military's headquarters, further justifying the military response. The area of the Pentagon hit had also just undergone a $multi-million renovation, something that made me curious about the coincidence of that area being struck. The Penn. crash of Flight 93 with the cell phone calls and the "let's roll" tag brought the patriotic, man on the street, visceral level into play, completely galvanizing the nation, more than any other facet of the attacks, behind the overwhelming, ongoing response.



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 08:41 PM
link   
Granted, but i mean.. surely striking the towers in the heart of nyc.. and bringing them down was ample... did they think the public would need another hit before they blindly followed?

Im about to download a complete listing of the passengers of all the flights... Im curious as to what all there occupations were, there residence states... and so forth..

They only reason I can think off to have 2x extra planes go down would be 2 hide... 2 x planes and there contents.



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 09:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Icarus Rising
Don't forget the Anthrax Attacks as a follow-on to subtly encourage those who might take a different tack in the investigation of 9/11 (Daschle, Brokaw) to toe the line and go along with the 'official' version of things.
Very keen observation on the anthrax.Living in n.y.@the time we had mailroom guys wearing gloves.We felt under siege...



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 09:53 PM
link   
My post on the purpose behind the other two flights, one supposedly striking the Pentagon (I still believe it was a cruise missile, and I have no idea what happened to Flt. 77), the other supposedly going down in that field in Penn.(remember, the Mayor of Cleveland said Flt. 93 landed there), was pure speculation. There may very well have been other motivations, such as destruction of evidence and silencing of witnesses. The other two flights lost that day could have ended up virtually anywhere.

I have said again and again on this site that the Anthrax Attacks were the signature on the deal with respect to 9/11. The targets, the timing, the terror generated, all point to a purposely conceived and concerted effort to control the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, and direct the country accordingly. Potential critics were put on immediate notice that a new paradigm was going to be enforced and dissension would not be tolerated.



posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 06:51 AM
link   
I agree that bringing down the towers in itself would be an act to invoke a response by going to war and the two other flights where one attacked the Pentagon and the other the capitol would be unneccesary, BUT let´s not forget according to this theory, the bad guys were allowed to carry out their plan, their full plan.

I´m quite sure that plan included at least the White House (which was prevented ofcourse) and the Pentagon (Which according to me was prevented too). The only buildings the shadow players were willing to completely sacrifice were WTC1,2 & 7, for the previously mentioned reasons.

The Pentagon was discussed, and a way was found to simulate the planned attack in such a way that a) a section that was almost empty was destroyed and b) a device or plane was used which could be fully controlled by the players to ensure an exact strike with fully predictable damage.

This too, and the fact that flying and manouvering a regular airliner in the way the official explanation tells us is quite impossible, makes me believe that a drone caused the damage at the Pentagon, hidden by a bunch of smoke and mirrors on the day of the attack.

Bottom line is, the original plan by Al-Qaeda was flying jets into WTC1,2, White House and Pentagon. Only WTC1,2 were allowed, with WTC7 as a bonus (let´s not forget what housed WTC7 - there might have been further pressing reasons to demolish WTC 7). The Pentagon was almost fully staged and the White House attack was fully suppressed.



posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 07:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
Theoretically though, if the towers were brought down on purpose, what use did they have in bringing down the pensylvanian flight, and hitting the pentagon.. surely the towers being hit would of been enough?
For what purpose is the big question...


Hitting the Pentagon deflects blame from the military... "LOOK, it couldn't have been us, we got hit TOO!" It is one of the oldest criminal tricks in the book.

As for PA... who knows what happened there.



posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 11:02 AM
link   
I´m seriously starting to wonder, now with military staff coming forward about what they saw and did on that day, the nice exercise and the order by Dick Cheney for NORAD to stand down (reasons discussed above), will mainstream media catch on? Will the domino´s start to fall?

What if the theory is correct? Some individuals will be burned at the stake in public for sure. Man, even a full scale civilian war in the United States cannot be ruled out when this turns out to be true.

Yikes.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join