It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Reasons for 9/11

page: 1

log in


posted on Oct, 25 2006 @ 09:41 AM
9/11 is a fcininating subect and I'm sure it will be continued to be discused for years to come. But one area that does not seem to generate much attention is what were the reasons behind the 9/11 attacks.

If we take at face value that terrorists wanted to get back at America for its actions in the Middle East or its impact on the world the attacks appear to make no sense and would achive the opposite of what the terrorists wanted.

Iraq1 was fought and won in the early 1990's, with two no fly zones placed over the country, and the imposition of US/UK troops in the region. During the time between Iraq1-2 was on the whole rather uneventful other than the odd bombing of radar/missle sites.

Also absent during this time was any real threat posed by terrorists towards the US/UK forces stationed in the region. If there were such groups within the region ou troops would have been an ideal target yet nothing happened of any real consequence. From this relatively quite period the only major event was the 93 bombing of the WTC. While this type of attack was the kind that was well known method used by terrorist it dosent explain why the WTC was picked. The WTC buildings were just a group of office blocks of no real significance at the end of the day and one would assume that a more high value target would of been picked.

Which brings me to the question did this bomb explode prematurely, was WTC the intended target. The terrorists would of known that a large bomb placed deep in the the bowels of the building would not have brought the building down, would also control the blast effects of the bomb in part of the building that was at its most strong. Also the bombers would know that there would be a limited number of people around in a car park as against the bomb going off in packed streets and buildings where the loss of life would be much greater, which is the main object of terrorist activity.

I can only conclude that the bomb went off prematurely or it was a dry run for 9/11, I believe that this event, Waco, and the Oklahoma bombing were all connected. That these events were a dress rehersal for the big event, that although seperated by time they were not seperated by design. The outcome of such events give the would be plotters much imformation, how do the public react, how does the media deal with it, do the systems work, can we get away with it, does time between events have an effect on people, does it achieve the spread of fear and panic that is required etc.

To the big question, how and why do 19 alleged highjackers fly large modern aircraft into buildings. Who supported them, where did they get the training required, certainly not in a cessna. Who bankrolled them, who were their handlers, who supplied them with the means to fly modern jet aircraft just hundreds of feet off the ground and in the case of the Pentagon literaly several feet off the ground and hundred of MPH something a fighter pilot could not do. Just who were these amazing aviators.

But back to the question why, why pick such targets, why pick this mode of attack, surely the terrorists would know that America would attack whomever they thought was responsible. To take planes off their known routes for so long would alert the authorities would it not, fighters would be sent up to make contact with the planes and shadow them. The terrorist would know this, thats whats happens when you lose contact with planes so why did they embark on such a highly risky gamble that might not play out. Did the terrorists know that Norad was having a day off, did they know that there was only 2 fighters available. If they had all this knowledge who gave it to them. How did they know they would be able to achieve their objective without challenge.

Or were the highjackers part of a master plan, one that would create shock and awe, one that would give the Neocons an excuse to wage war in the ME, to futher its material gains, to be able to introduce draconian legislation on the people of America, to remove their rights, freedoms and liberties or most important of all to spread such fear and panic that anything could be done and the people would believe it. I think we all know the answer that deep in our minds we know the truth but many cannot bring themselves to think that thier own goverment could of colluded with or orchestrated such events, well my answer to that is your Goverment shot, gassed and burnt to death women and Children at Waco, not muslims, not terrorists, not insurgents, fellow Americans that just had different views and idea's. That is the question you have to ask yourself if they can do this what else can they do?

posted on Oct, 25 2006 @ 11:08 AM
Dear magicmushroom:

Our paths have crossed before here on ATS. Which is why I am honored to be one of the first to respond to your new thread.

There is one main reason for 9-11. There is a second less important reason as well, but it alone would not have sufficed as an impetus for the 9-11 operation.

Reason No. 1: The world is running out of oil. E.g. we’ve already pumped Alaska dry. And we are now squabbling more desperately that ever before over the last remainders of petroleum reserves —which happen to be in the Middle East. The quest for oil has always driven our policies — ever since we started using the stuff. But we’ve reached a point where we are starting to apply drastic measures “to get what we need”. Of course there would have been other ways to address this problem — but that doesn’t appear to be in line with the current way of thinking.

Reason No. 2: We have an “ally” in the Middle East that wants us to neutralize — for them — in advance countries before they become military challenges. This motive by itself however is too weak to have caused the 9-11 events. Only rationale no.1 (oil) is powerful enough to get us to do what we did.

Why the WTC? It had to be something “big”. And they were having difficulties finding tenants for the offices at the twin towers. And, it’s depressing to believe one would stoop so low, but there was a lot of money (insurance settlements) to be made by choosing these buildings.

The Wizard In The Woods

[edit on 10/25/2006 by Wizard_In_The_Woods]

posted on Oct, 25 2006 @ 01:57 PM

Originally posted by magicmushroom

..... But one area that does not seem to generate much attention is what were the reasons behind the 9/11 attacks.

If we take at face value that terrorists wanted to get back at America for its actions in the Middle East or its impact on the world the attacks appear to make no sense and would achive the opposite of what the terrorists wanted.

the question you have to ask yourself if they can do this what else can they do?

the 9/11 operation was the climax of the desire & dedication of Zealots.

the later 9/11 event was probably created/inspired & improved upon
from the accidently discovered & thus thwarted, Bojinka plot.

Another path to 9/11, is that it was concocted by a couple of Arab men attending
flight schools here in the USA, most likely under
State Dept. /CIA/FBI/CounterIntelligence oversight or authority.
Also, the pilot candidates were probably VISA'd & paid to train as pilots,
for future service to either the Intel Agencies themselves
or for the pilots to return to their native countries with career training,
as potential future-assets to the CIA, StateDept, or as the Muslim world sees;
the US Empire.

contrary to the official explaination, only the 8 pilots/ co-pilots of the
hijacked and commandeered passenger jets involved in 9/11 were
anything akin to "sleeper cells"...they were a small cadre of Zealots
(the 19 hijackers story infers a wrong character to the 9/11 event)

the 9/11 zealots should be looked at as a group of independent contractors
who got a bit of operating money & an 'atta boy' from the AQ, Jihad, & all those other political groups of (what we call) terrorists/ terror orgs.
None of those political-militaristic groups called the shots for that 9/11 group of Zealots....neither did they send or create or direct the 9/11 zealots, all AQ
& the lot did was to help enable the zealots & their wild-daring & highly improbable adventure.

as far as achieving the goal...the zealots did what they intended,
the creation of a epic turning point in history.
It didn't matter that the USA would wreak destruction on various Muslim nations for the next decade or more...the overarching tent of Islam would enbolden & enable the servents to carry forth their resistance to the western empire.
In the eyes of the Zealots, A moment or day of 'glory' would be worth the suppression that was expected,
and the USA did exactly the reaction which would solidify the Muslim world....
& it continues to unfold...Afghanistan, Iraq, ?Iran?Syria? etc etc etc

gotta go,
i typed what i typed, i just hope it doesn't get me on the neocon's 'terror sympathizer' list, because it wasn't to sound like a defensive message

posted on Oct, 25 2006 @ 02:01 PM
Other reasons:

A lot of loyal secret society and cult followers were to be paid off.

Bodies for the cult sacrifice.

Mass event for global mind programming and influence.

Testing of secret military tech in the open for effectiveness.

A way to test spook agencies and gov agencies for the coming police state.

hey add your own there must be dozens more...

posted on Oct, 25 2006 @ 02:29 PM
I suggest reading the 9/11 commission report with an open mind, while making no prejudged decisions. There are ALOT of facts within the book and if nothing else it will show that an organization known as Al-qeada is in fact real, and they were behind the 9/11 attacks.

This would be a good place to start and will help you sort through many of the internet postings that twist fact and blend fiction with reality. They finished what they did not complete during the 93 bombing of the WTC. The placement of the truck during that attack was such that they intended on tower to topple into the other, which did not happen.

posted on Oct, 25 2006 @ 03:01 PM
Thanks for the replies, I know there is far more to this than I suggested but more will follow. E71 there's a problem with your suggestion if I dont believe the cover story why would I believe the 9/11 commision report, a report that Bush and Co had control over. Its hardly going to be an unbiased read is it.

If I could make a genuine suggestion, maybe you could do some research into the the US Goverments connections with known terrorist groups and despots around the world over the last 25 years, i think you will find it very illuminating.

posted on Oct, 25 2006 @ 03:03 PM
Open mind....have an open mind. You do not need to beleive the official story to learn the answers to many of your questions that you posted. The why, the who and the bacnkroll. People dismiss the 9/11 comission when they should not, they pointed out the faults of our government, it did not support it.

[edit on 25-10-2006 by esdad71]

posted on Oct, 25 2006 @ 04:04 PM
Actually. In the words of the chairmen of the 9/11 Commission the 9/11 commission was designed to fail. that it was a first draft (CBC the passionate eye and 9/11 conspiracies)

They only got 3 million dollars afterall when much more was spent on Clinton's blowjob affair.

I find 9/11 and the "official" story to be highly suspect simiply because with all the testimony (Volumes worth) was excluded and lots of people including 9/11 families being shutdown, having mircophones turned off the second the commission heard something that contradicted the BS story we were given.

the Bush story is just absolutely filled with inconsistencies.

For anyone here who still believes the al-queda myth you are being taken for a ride.

Second. Half of the 9/11 families are now engaged in a lawsuit saying 9/11 was an inside job and that the nation was lied to.

When 9/11 families even join the conspiracy team you really can't go against them.

As for reasons for 9/11?

What was the reason for the Reichstag?

The SS was ordered to conduct a false flag terrorist attack, Hitler introduces the Enabling Act, starts building a gestapo and before you know it he has a police state and all the power around his finger.

When you put 9/11 in this historical context you can't ignore that Bush has everything to gain by ordering a small rogue faction to attack it's own country. Possibly even the Mossad. I wouldn't put it past those baby killers that they were the demolitionists of 9/.11

[edit on 25-10-2006 by soundaddicted]

posted on Oct, 25 2006 @ 04:08 PM
Cause and Effect. With 9/11 we can't put cause and effect together. We're not meant to.

When you can't put cause and effect together something is definately amiss.

posted on Oct, 25 2006 @ 04:36 PM
my only problem with this is that i don't think Bush had anything to do with it first hand. the guy is a moron...this would be wayyyy to complicated for a simpleton like him to put together. He has an IQ of a 10 year old, and gives speeches worse than Helen Keller.

now with that said, i'm sure he knew it was going to happen.

posted on Oct, 25 2006 @ 04:39 PM
911 was allowed to happen, because they saw the potential on controlling oilfields, rather than relying on rebel type countries to dictate how your fuel was going to be aquired.

IF the US hawks control it they make they money, instead of the country where the oil is.

The security contracts for the presidents family, and friends that were awarded due to an increase in defense needs.

The savings they made in bringing the towers down in a terrorist act, compared to dismantling them as was required.

Ensuring a bush man got 8yrs instead of 4yrs...

911 was one big economic payoff for all the corporate entites invovled with the bush family.

The public were just dumb enough to listen to there bs when it happened.

posted on Oct, 25 2006 @ 04:45 PM

Originally posted by psilogod
my only problem with this is that i don't think Bush had anything to do with it first hand. the guy is a moron...this would be wayyyy to complicated for a simpleton like him to put together. He has an IQ of a 10 year old, and gives speeches worse than Helen Keller.

Ask yourself who is really going to benefit in the long run?
Is it coincidence that the only western friendly nation in the region is Israel? Is not Israel lusting after the control of all the oil wealth in the middle east?

Even if they just wholesale all that oil, look at the massive profits possible.

posted on Oct, 25 2006 @ 04:50 PM
E71 I know you desperately want to believe that 9/11 was the result of external terrorists with no connections to the Goverment but history will prove you wrong every time. As I have mentioned Waco, American men, women and children, shot gassed and burnt ot death by their own authorities. I cannot think of any other Democracy that has commited such an act against its own people in modern times.

If you do not want to discuss 9/11 perhaps you may want to give your views on Waco, or Ruby Ridge, Oklahoma Bombing. The US has an history of killing its own people you cannot deny that, from presidents to innocent civillians. Bush has now had laws passed that will make it even easier to commit such crimes and they will be labelled terrorist actions.

If you have not read this book already please get hold of a copy, its not a book of fiction its a true story, it was televised some years back by the BBC its called, the Nazis A Warning From History by Laurence Rees published by BBC books.

posted on Oct, 25 2006 @ 10:20 PM
Waco- a cluster f***, but nothing was gained...they should have arrested the pedophile when he was off his compound

Oklahoma city- domestic terrorism with outside support and funding by islamic terrorists. Who was the John Doe???

Ruby Ridge- They should have left him alone, but they did not and he lsot family because of overzealous agents....

As far as Nazi connections, how many people do you know driving a Chrysler or a VW? Business is business, and war is war. always has been, alwasy will be, and the government cannot change that.

posted on Oct, 26 2006 @ 07:36 AM
Even if 9/11 was allowed to happen that still makes Bush a traitor and technically speaking can be up for public hanging where old laws are concerned.

new topics

top topics


log in