posted on Oct, 13 2006 @ 08:43 AM
but wouldn't he take the chance if his family would ask him to attack the by him so much hated USA? Remains the question why the US government would
sacrifice this much lives, and how they can live with it. If we take that George W. Bush used 9/11 as an excuse for his 'war on terror' (on which
the UN veto-ed), then we understand the connection. Bush attacked Iraq without approval of the UN, without any lead except the ridiculous accusation
of murderous weapons being built or bought by Iraq. Kuweit was already friendly with the US, Iraq wasn't because of dictator Saddam Hussein. But with
Saddam gone, the US can create a government there that will be friendly. With it, the power of the US is enlarged, and so is their control over the
local oil wells too. How the government can live with it? Very easy. Think of the lives sacrificed for the crusades, trade, all journeys to enlarge
world power. And the people responsible for the loss of those lives could live with it. And, with this so-called war on terror, weapontrade/building
enlarges and it's been easier to start a war now.
But was it a plane that hit the Pentagon?
Some believe it wasn't a Boeing 757 that hit the Pentagon, but a rocket. Fact is that a rocket, when exploding, creates a bigger hole than what was
created now. Facts also are:
1. One of the hijackers, Hani Hanjour, couldn't fly.
2. First, they thought it was a military plane, that's why no one responded. Hmm, would a rocket appear as a military object on a radar? Maybe...
3. The turn the hijackers have made is physically impossible. Plus, the plane that is supposed to have hit the Pentagon disappeared from the radar
even before the turn.
4. On November 22, 2004 a private jet crashed after having hit a light post. The remnants lay everywhere and the light post was broken. The 757 is
supposed to have hit FIVE light posts, pulling them totally out of the earth, but nowhere lay remnants and none of the light posts were broken.
5. The lawn is hardly burned. If the plane would have hit the ground, like the official report says, then a broad, brown track must be visible. In any
case, the grass had to be burned, even if the plane had hoovered over it instead of 'gliding'. This is visible on security tapes that have been
released by the FBI, but which have been tampered with so no one can see WHAT exactly hit the Pentagon.
6. Pentagon-employees heard a rocketengine coming closer.
7. There are no plane remnants visible on official photos. Statements that these have been totally evaporated by the kerosine have been proven wrong;
burning jet-fuel cannot reach the point on which titanium, of which the engines are built, melts. Even if it was that way, it doesn't explain why
still remains of people have been found. If the remnants have been evaporated by burning jet-fuel, wouldn't the same happen to human remains?
8. The damage on the Pentagon is visibly less than on the Towers, while in both cases a plane of comparable size had been used. Unless it really was a
specially designed rocket...
9. As said before, no one intercepted the plane, while it was possible.
10. Only tampered parts of the footage have been released, and there's pavement on where the grass is supposed to be burned. What are they trying to
And in Pennsylvania?
In any case, it is clear that the remnants were too far apart to be just from a crash. Some say that the plane must have been hit. Maybe it was. Maybe
this last plane, at least, the last plane that did damage on 9/11, hit by the airforce because they eventually withdrew from the plan to hit the White
House. No one will ever know, because the FBI and CIA seem to do everything in their powers to keep things for themselves.
Then I want to talk about the Towers.
Lately, people start to believe the collapsing of the Towers and the WTC7 is the result of controlled imploding. Because it is sure there is not
enough time to install the explosives for controlled imploding between the moment of crash and collapse, the explosives must have been installed
before. How horrifying it sounds, maybe it's true.
1. The US government has for the investigation, or, as DeepJournal calls it, the biggest CSI ever, just 600.000 US dollars. Wouldn't you expect more
of something this size?
2. The remnants have been removed before decent investigation could be performed.
3. The collapsing of the WTC7 hasn't been investigated at all.
4. Many experts on implosions state that they have found clear clues on photos that the Towers were the result of controlled imploding. For example,
the little white clouds underneath the big 'dustcloud' when the Towers collapse. Maybe it's a broken gaspipe, I don't know, I'm no expert, but
even I wonder whether a gaspipe can create a chain of white clouds.
5. Many footage that support this theory has not been broadcasted or just once. Luckily, there is also written Media, like a recent article in Kijk!
(Dutch scientific magazine)
6. The WTC7 is clearly the result of controlled imploding, since it implodes at the bottom and first the center drops, then the outer part, so it all
7. No fire before 9/11 was ever able to destruct the steel frame like in the Twin Towers.
8. The Towers fell down vertically, what points to control - or gravity.
Last, I want to point out the black boxes.
The black boxes (a plane has two of them) of the 'plane' that has hit the Pentage are, according to FBI executive Robert Mueller, found but it seems
nothing of great value can be found. The 'crashed plane' in Pennsylvania; of this 'plane' the black boxes have also been found, but no information
can be found on it. These are also in possession of the FBI. Last, the black boxes of the World Trade Center. These have been found by a few
rescueworkers, but later the FBI told them to shut up. Luckily they didn't. So in fact, all black boxes are in possession of the FBI. Wouldn't it be
interesting to read the transcripts? And then not something that the imagination of the FBI (do they have that?) came up with, but the real deal. Oh,
and if those black boxes have indeed not been found (which I sincerely doubt), doesn't the FBI know you cannot destroy a black box? Hmm. They should
try watching Brainiac some day.
The reason theories about such - controversial, you can't call it that, because everybody has ideas on it - subjects are being called conspiracy
theories in a negative tone is the because arguments are not present or not clear, and because the shock it can be when a theory turns out to be true
- which it can be - is so big we can't even start processing it. The world would be turned up-side-down if it turns out to be correct that the US
government is the director of their own disaster movie. It may be clear that not enough people ask theirselves questions about theories that is this
shaky on every level. And that the Old Media should be more like the New Media, and maybe even melt into the Actual Media (wow. Imagine...). And that
the FBI and CIA should release all footage and information, because we have the right for that information. We have the right for a clear and true
statement of the US government. Just like the civilians in Iraq had the right for freedom and a safe existence. Because that is the only thing good
about the war on terror - more freedom for the Iraqi civilians.