I have been following a lot of the 911 posts over the years and am always struck by the conspiracy theorists who claim that it was all a government set up etc etc etc.
There is a thread going here now that states the video evidence is a lie and it never happened.
If the govt relaly made this happen then why make it so difficult?
Instead of this massive cover up with "fake" planes and mysterious interior explosions of the WTC's why wouldn't they just detonate a "small" briefcase nuke in the center of the WTC's?
This would have the same effect at "probably" bringing down the towers and if the yeild was small enough not radiate to much of the area.
This would be even more terrifying to the general American public as at least with the planes scenario the military would be able to do something about it once alerted.
The "briefcase" nuke would have been just as sinister and there would have been no need to create this "so called" elaborate hoax.
I mean do we really believe that a cover up of this magnitude IN BROAD DAYLIGHT WITH 100's OF WITNESSES is possible?
Hopw easy would it be to link the "briefcase" nuke to some Terrorist group (with supposed ties to Sadam or Osama).
Just my 2 cents but why make it so complicated????
Park a car out the front of the buildings and walk off - no Hollywood production, no cast of thousands of co-conspirators, no doctored footage,
Plant some documents with a trail to the alleged conspirators and sit back and wait for the reprisals.



[edit on 4-6-2007 by Slaine01]

can i give you a hug? I'm right with you on this. I mean 911 planed and excuted by the goverment kind gives them too much credit.

Hugs are always welcome but I am sure someone here on this forum will see it as a covert oppurtunity to whisper state secrets into my ear....

I agree with the OP here. Why have thousands involved (depending on the theory) A quick black ops would have done the trick. Using holograms...then hiding all the planes..and bodies...planting special grade explosives in a building......

your right..one small suitcase nuke....middle of NYC ... that would have done it.

There are problems with the suitcase nuke idea, but before venturing there, I'm left wondering what your own opinion is regarding who in fact were the perpetrator(s) of the carnage on 911.

Are you saying, "Yes the government did it, but in typical civil service fashion they made it way more cost ineffective than they could have?" Or are you saying "No the government didn't do it because they would have done it cheaply and efficiently by simply planting a suitcase nuke in the buildings?"

Assuming that the government didn't do it because they would have used a suitcase nuke leads into the problem area of just who has suitcase nukes? Let's assume for a moment that the US government used one of it's own suitcase nukes. There is a good chance that this device has a signature readable by experts, which would identify it as having originated in the US. (Just as the anthrax in the letter to Tom Daschele could be traced to a US Army lab.) Consequences there, are problems, problems, problems.

Assuming the US government could make a knock off of a Russian suitcase nuke, whose signature would fool the experts into believing that a Russian device had done the damage, consequences again are unpredictable, dragging a very powerful state in as peripherally involved patsy.

Who else has these devices? I would argue nobody. The leading contender for suitcase nuke ownership outside the two above mentioned governments, at least among the hooligan element, would be the Chechen separatists. After Grozny was levelled I would have expected a riposte in Moscow. Nothing comparable was done. A suitcase nuke would have come in handy in such a case. I am certain that they don't have them. If they don't then it is unlikely that any of the other "hooligans" do.

Bottom line, assuming that everybody has suitcase nukes, the fact is that nobody used them. There must be some underlying reason why, that us ordinary folk just don't know about.

If you want to ask a good Occam's razor style question, how about, "Why would a fanatical terrorist outfit out to destroy the US fly their suicide planes right by a nuclear power plant and crash them into an office building instead?"

[edit on 4-6-2007 by ipsedixit]

I believe islamic terror is real, and that islamic people are good and nice, but lack common sense and reality. The extremist in either islam or catholocism/christianity are pulled to extreme action, either because a government through war, or oppresion killed a loved one, or set them dillusionaly on a mission for a cause they invent and join the closest person they find in this psychosis, then the media can use them to justify a stance for a poltician, who the media moguls now all serve at the same time slander. The true intent i think was an artifact that saddam was likely sitting on, that is part a future ritual, perhaps the next event they try to blame on canadians or mexicans after america doesnt beleive these hucksters of murder and armageddon. I for one am serious and dont mess around when some dirtbag comes a stalkin. Not in my country sir.
to continue..
The towers were likely hit by airplanes, the conflict comes from the video apparently, its possible they had to mask one because it wasnt a commercial flight?

Either way it seems fully in house with the use of foreign assets or patsies, who are or arent alive today And in my opinion about us in islamic countries, to bad, they need to be able to see how other people, they think they hate, really live. were clean and dont smell like 5 week old body odor, we brush our teeth, we can eat pork for instance and nothing ever happens, we dont burn people alive and mock there corpses and laugh, we dont chant other than for peaceful truth in our houses of law which we truly attempt to bring to the world, your world.! either way to force me to bow to idealism isnt islam, its insanity and not what any true religion would profess. I think we are dealing with extremism in all religion as it has bred stagnation, but they the extremists are being fueled by the hearts and minds of our highest offices and vice versa and that is tyranny and treason for money, land, profit or magic and a clean get away.

There is information to the effect that some of the Russian suitcase nukes are missing. Suppose for example that the Russian mafia was able to exert pressure on some Russian scientists or military people to obtain a suitcase nuke. The problem the mafia has after that is who to sell the nuke to. The mafia will probably not want to sell to the Chechens, for very obvious reasons. That leaves other extremist groups, Al Qaida for example.

If you are the leader of Al Quaida, do you want a suitcase nuke? Maybe, but there are technical problems associated with ownership. These things have a short shelf life. They need maintenance. It would probably have to be used as soon as obtained. It's not the sort of thing you want lying around. Most of all, using it makes the victim very angry but unfortunately the nuke doesn't deal a killing blow. That's a huge problem that I'm sure everyone in the middle east would be only too aware of.

It would be hard for the Bush administration to sell Al Quaida as suitcase nuke users. The more I hear about suitcase nukes the more convinced I am that they (as a terror threat) are a complete red herring, designed very particularly to appeal to America's personal brand of paranoia. A suitcase nuke explosion in the US might as well carry the credit line "Brought to you by George W. (a terrorist behind every) Bush Productions."

A suitcase nuke and one suicide bomber is the ultomate nightmare for any civilisation.
I take on board all that has been said about their exixtance or not but my original point remains - Why go to the extremes of the 911 planes scenario when any major terrorist act on U.S. soil would have had a catastophic effect on the general public.
My biggest fear would be a bomb on an LPG Supertanker in a harbour anywhere in the world (especially my home -Sydney)
If the 911 attacks were perpetrated by the U.S. govt then how does anyone keep this a secret?
Does anyone really think that there isn't a journalist in the world anywhere that doesn't want to create the next "Watergate" story?

It's a good question when you put it that way. I think the drama as it played out on 911 was carefully calculated and crafted to serve many purposes. The planes and hijack scenario is one that everyone is familiar with. At first glance most Americans would believe the official story of the nineteen hijackers without too much hesitation. That is the principle reason for doing it that way.

A bomb suddenly going off raises a lot of question marks. Nothing is immediately obvious. On 911 the news media had Osama bin Laden fingered immediately, perhaps even before the buildings collapsed. The following day they named the nineteen hijackers. This is the sort of thing that would be an impossible stretch in a half-hour television cop story. I think people were dazed and ready to believe anything. Only a few very cool people, most of them professional journalists, smelled a rat.

It's important to realize that the only thing intended on 911 as far as the two buildings were concerned was to bring them down by a controlled demolition. If you had asked any engineer in the world on 910 what the chances were of bringing down one of the WTC towers with an airliner, the answer would have been unanimous, zero.

In 1993 Arab extremists tried to bring down one of the towers by planting a bomb in the underground parking. That is how one would do it if the intention was to bring the tower down by a terrorist act. In 1993 they didn't choose to use an airplane because they knew what everyone else knew, that the buildings would withstand an airplane hit. If they were just trying to buck the odds in a pig-headed sort of way, they would have sent both airplanes into one tower and hoped for the worst. But something different and very odd happened instead.

You should read as much as you can about this event and think very carefully about the events as they unfolded. If you do, you will know who the perps are. Their fingerprints are all over the events of that day.

Good point,
In keeping with that chain of thought then, the hijackers probably had no idea that their actions would actually "bring the towers down" but instead spread a message of vulnerability to the american populace and its elected officials.
As I am no structural engineer, the point you made about nobody even entertaining the idea of the towers being able to be brought down in this way is even more suspicious - keeping in mind the near uniform way both towers collapsed near completely vertical and with such a small footprint.
Perhaps the option here is not the original attack but what was done inside the towers AFTER the attack to bring about there collapse.

Originally posted by boyester
can i give you a hug? I'm right with you on this. I mean 911 planed and excuted by the goverment kind gives them too much credit.

Because no one believes "the government" itself did it, most people that support 9/11 truth believe criminal elements within the government are orchistrating these plans. The system isn't criminal itself, but people in it are.

I'm tired of the mainstream media blasting 9/11 truth. Every time they interview someone about 9/11, they ask questions like "why do you think bush would perpetrate 9/11?" Of course he couldn't think of a plan like that, he's ignorant. So people then disregard the whole issue because it sounds rediculous due to the fact that the wrong questions are being asked.

I think we give government to little credit. Criminal elements in governments have created false flag terror events for thousands of years, what makes us so special that we are immune?