Research 9/11

[Theif of Time]

please respond to the other comments that people post, not just one.
EDIT: 1/6 of the people online are watching this thread.

[Tone]

Here you can read the transcript of the interview of stanley hilton

http://www.rense.com/general57/aale.htm

here you can listen to it

http://www.prisonplanet.tv/audio/091004hilton.mp3

Stanley Hilton was a senior advisor to Sen Bob Dole (R) and has personally known Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz for decades. This courageous man has risked his professional reputation, and possibly his life, to get this information out to people.

The following is from his latest visit to Alex Jones' radio show.

Click first link for more

[Kolar]

Both planes were full of fuel, and the "little fires blah blah blah" crap is bullshit. The fuel was burning well above 1000C, the fire fighters didn't understand why the fires looked weird at the time. All it took was one upper level to falter and the rest is gravity. I'm sure they were designed for an impact but not everything else. We saw it happen on film from so many different views, there were thousands of people who were there and saw it happen, we saw it looped on CNN for 5 months 24/7 and we still have retards that want to refute the facts.

[Tone]

First of all,



Ask an engineer for your facts. I don't see any reason that the trade centre would be designed for impact by a 707, show me some schematics please? It is true that it had been designed to withstand large wind loads- but there is a great difference between a wind load and a aircraft impact.

"I DESIGNED IT FOR A 707 HIT"
DETROIT, Sept. 11 (UPI) -- Lee Robertson, the project's structural engineer, addressed the problem of terrorism on high-rises at a conference in Frankfurt, Germany, LAST WEEK (!!!), Chicago engineer Joseph Burns told the Chicago Tribune. Burns said Robertson told the conference, "I designed it for a (Boeing)707 to hit it."
UPI REPORT

http://www.public-action.com/911/psy...lot_part1.html


you think i sit here and make this shit up?

Edit: it is taking me a while to respond because i lost all my notes on 9/11 in a hard drive failure, i have researched 9/11 countless hours since it happened

[ConcreteSchlyrd]

First off,

http://www.snopes2.com/rumors/pentagon.htm

...I knew I'd find it somewhere.

Secondly: Okay, let's assume for a second that you're right. 9/11 was all a government posed attempt at justifying war. We blew up the buildings in a controlled fashion.

So wait a second... you're saying that towers 1 and 2 were wired for explosives beforehand? If that's the case, why not just blow the fuckers up and say that a terrorist did that? Is the drama of flying planes into the buildings really that important in the grand scheme of things? It's a retarded assumption.

Secondly, where are all the people who were on the planes? Have they been whisked away to live on a desert island with no further contact with any of their families? Damn, that's posh.

Third, THERE ARE SURVEILLANCE VIDEOS OF SOME OF THE HIJACKERS BOARDING THE PLANES.

Fourth: Burning 767 != normal 707. Hell, NORMAL 767 != normal 707. The 767 is substantially bigger, and has a larger range (meaning a greater fuel capacity). As Sarien put it so nicely: burning JP4 is not a good thing. Plus, even listening to Frank DeMartini (WTC Construction & Project Manager) describe how the towers were meant to sustain impact, it doesn't even sound like he's taking the burning fuel into account--only the actual physical impact. And as many studies have found, it was actually the burning fuel that did the building in. It stood strong upon impact.

I feel like I'm actually getting dumber debating this.

[Tone]

Heres an older version of one of my notes i just got off one of my webspaces

I. Operation Northwoods - For anyone who doubts the US government could have such devious plans, the government has already in the past, see Operation Northwoods document (3)

A. Operation Northwoods was a plan in 1962 by joint chiefs of staff to stage phoney terror attacks on American cities in order to gain public support for war on Cuba (1),(2),(3)

1. Was never executed, denied by Kennedy

2. Declassified under freedom of info act in early 90s

B. Details in Operation Northwoods (1),(2),(3)

1. Hijacking planes

2. Sniper attacks

3. Bomb US Navy boats

II. Twin Tower Collapse

A. Evidence of explosives (4)

1. Seismograph detected explosions at moment of collapses (5)

2. Witnesses heard explosions (6)

3. Both the tower collapses clearly look like controlled demolitions (28)

4. The tower's structural engineer designed them to take a hit by a 707 (7)

B.South tower falls first (4)

1. South tower took very indirect hit, missing steel frame in center, and spilling most the jet fuel outside the tower on impact (7)

2. North tower took direct hit, and most jet fuel stayed within it. It collapsed well after south (7)

C. Security lightened and bomb sniffing dogs removed from WTC just days before 9/11 (57)

III. World Trade Center 7

A. On 5:20PM, 9/11, WTC 7, 47 story steel frame, imploded and collapsed. the official explanation was from fires (8)

1. Wreckage evidence hulled away to be burned in furnaces over seas (8)

2. No steel frame building has ever collapsed from fires, not even the massive interstate bank building fire of 1988, L.A., CA (38)

3. In mid 90s scientific experiments were conducted in simulated 8 story steel frame building. No collapse was observed in temps. of up to 900 C (39)

B. Larry Siliverstein, the leaseholder of the WTC Complex, stated on a PBS documentry that WTC building 7 was demolished with explosives by the fire department (54),(55)

IV. Pentagon Concerns

A. World's most watched and filmed building, provides 5 blurry frames from a considerable distance. No clear pics (11)

B. After impact, no hole in pentagon until some time later. see pic taking directly after impact, no specific impact point can be noted, just building charred all over (9)

C. No wreckage, no bodies (10),(9)

D. Eyewitness accounts conflict (22)

1. One man sees two planes, "one veered away as the other crashed"

2. Witness in pentagon listened to what sounded like a missile, then loud boom

3. One man claims was not commercial jet other accounts vary

V. Flight 93 concerns

A. Wreckage spread over 8 miles, unlikely in crash landing (12)

B. Alleged cell phone calls from flight 93, 30,000 feet up: "Hi mom, this is Mark Bingham", "lets roll", "My God, my God, I see buildings....water!" (4)

C. Eyewitness accounts point to shoot down (19),(20),(21)

VI. Failure of NORAD

A. NORAD has never before been such a failure

1. NORAD has immediately scrambled jets 67 times between Sept 2000 - June 2001 (26)

2. In the case of Payne Stewart's lear jet, NORAD functioned fine and military jets had intercepted him within 20 minutes of lost contact with gound control. (27)

3. 83 minutes elapsed between the time flight 11 went off course and the pentagon was hit (26)

VII. Alive Hijackers, inconsistencies in government's 19 list

A. Several hijackers are reported by many main stream news sources to be alive (16)

B. Hijackers not listed and other inconsistencies with passenger lists (23),(24),(25)

VIII. Evidence of Prior Knowledge

A. CIA and military drills mirroring 9/11 attacks

1. CIA drill of hijacked planes flying into buildings held on 9-11-01 (13),(14)

2. Pentagon Runs Drills Oct 24th - Oct 26th 2000 of Planes Flying into Pentagon (15),(18)

B. Larry Silverstein, who already owned WTC 7, took out a lease on the twin towers just 7 weeks before 9/11 (29)

C. CIA and FBI clearly had prior knowledge (33)

1. FBI Ignored warnings from Zacarias Moussaoui's flight trainer (33)

2. Ashcroft Was Flying on Private Jets Prior to 9-11 Due to "Threat Assessment" by the FBI (33)

3. US Agents were told to 'back off' of the bin Ladens (34)

4. see source for more examples (33)

D. Bush Administration

1. Bush's exhibits strange behavior following 'learning' that America is under attack: "Yet there sits Bush, seemingly unconcerned. His Chief of Staff likewise doesn't think that America in flames warrants the President's immediate attention" (41)

2. Bush names war criminal Henry Kissinger to oversee the 9/11 investigation (43)

3. Bush senior was meeting with bin Laden's brother during the 9/11 attacks (42)

4. Donald Rumsfeld sat at his desk until Flight 77 hit the Pentagon—well over an hour after the military had learned about the multiple hijacking in progress (56)

IX. Numerical and Symbolic Synchronicities, Occultism, and 9/11

[DELTETED - Tone]

X. Motivation, Who Benefits, The Post 9/11 Era and Problem-Reaction-Solution method of manipulation to alter public opinion

A. 9/11 as a pretext for The Patriot Acts

1. Patriot Act is a threat to civil liberties and with total disregard for the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights (35),(36)

2. Patriot Act I was signed into law 6 weeks after 9/11 (37)

B. The War on Afghanistan and benefits

1. Oil pipeline (44),(45)

C. The War on Iraq

1. More oil (46)

2. Bush on oil (47)

3. It is obvious that Americans would be much more tolerant of going back to war with Iraq in a post 9/11 world

D. Political benefits to the Bush Administration

1. It is obvious now that Americans certainly would trust Bush more than any democrat to handle "terrorist threats", especially of more occurred before the election

XI. Cover Up: Is it possible to cover up something of such a magnitude?

A. Two examples show it is possible

1. The manhattan project employed 50,000, the installation of large new facilities, and cost $2 Billion; yet no one found out about the atomic bomb until after Hiroshima (40)

2. The breaking of Japanese and German codes during WWII involved at least 10,000 people, yet public was not aware of this till 25 years later (40)

B. Mainstream media - 3 Examples of bias

1. Media fails to report on major Bush treason lawsuit, doing so would get public reiterating the questions about 9/11 that are in the lawsuit (48),(49),(51)

2. Fox canceled columnist John Kaminski's Appearance to talk about 9/11. Kaminski has many good points about 9/11 that are difficult to refute (50)

3. Important 9/11 info from media comes in bits and pieces, but fails to reach wide audience, is not followed up on, or is misplaced in context (52)



Above is an older version of my 9/11 notes i just DLed off webspace

many of your points are addressed in it (continued in next thread with references

[Tone]

References

(1) ABC News

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/Da...fs_010501.html

(2) WRH shows p.82 of Body of Secrets by James Bamford

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/northwoods.html

(3) The Actual Operation Northwoods Document from George Washington University

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20...northwoods.pdf

(4) The World Trade Center Demolition and the So Called War On Terrorism

http://www.serendipity.li/wtc.html

(5) The Earth Institute, Columbia University

http://www.earthinstitute.columbia.e...y11_16_01.html

(6) American Free Press article, reprinted on Rense

http://www.rense.com/general17/eyewi...rtspersist.htm

(7) The Split Second Error, PsyOpNews, reprinted on Serendipity

http://www.serendipity.li/wot/psyopnews1.htm

(8) World Trade Center 7 dot net

http://www.wtc7.net

(9) Hunt The Boeing, n 7

http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero...erreurs_en.htm

(10) Physical and Mathematical Analysis of the Pentagon Crash, by Gerard Holmgren.

http://www.serendipity.li/wot/holmgren/08.htm

(11) Orlando Sentinel, Associated Press

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/...anim-gif.photo

(12) 'Crash Debris Found 8 Miles Away' Debra, Erdley. MYPittsburghLIVE, reprinted in flight93crash.

http://www.flight93crash.com/MyPittsburghLIVE.htm

(13) Memory Hole, Associated Press

http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/cia-simulation.htm

(14) Associated Press

http://www.boston.com/news/packages/...e_exercise.htm

(15) What Smells

http://www.whatsmells.com/oldqs.html

(16) Tracking the 19 Hijackers (compilation of over 20 news sources showing that at least 9 are still alive

http://www.welfarestate.com/911

(17) 5 minute video of George W Bush on 911

http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/bush-911.htm

(18) Military District of Washington Website

http://www.mdw.army.mil/news/Contingency_Planning.html

(19) Flight 93 Eyewitness Accounts

http://www.flight93crash.com/flight93_eyewitness.html

(20) Hijacked United flight 93 shot down by USAF

http://www.geocities.com/united_airlines_flight_93/

(21) Many Eyewitness Saw Flight 93 - 9-11 Research

http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/e...yewitness.html

(22) 9-11 research: Pentagon Witnesses

http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon...witnesses.html

(23) The Perplexing Puzzle of the Published Passenger Lists by Gary North Ph.D

http://www.rense.com/general15/perplexingpuzzle.htm

(24) 911 encyclopedia

http://911review.org/Sept11Wiki/PassengerList.shtml

(25) Even Bigger Mystery of the Passenger Lists by Frank Levi

http://www.totse.com/en/conspiracy/i...is/168124.html

(26) NORAD Stand Down

http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/analysis/norad/#ref1

(27) Dallas Morning News

http://www.wanttoknow.info/991026dallasmorningnews

(28) Visual Evidence of Controlled Demolition

http://thewebfairy.com/911/demolition/controlled.htm

(29) Part II, The Blockbuster -PsyOpNews

http://www.serendipity.li/wot/psyopnews2.htm

(30) 11 13 33 and the Illuminati

http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/111333/111333.htm

(31) Who's the Enemy? - Enterprisemission

http://www.enterprisemission.com/tower2.htm

(32) AC and 911

http://pub6.ezboard.com/fthestylesne...picID=48.topic

(33) CIA, FAA, FBI Prior Knowledge: A Compilation of News Links

http://infowars.com/resources.html#PRIOR_CIA

(34) Ananova

http://infowars.com/saved%20pages/Pr...IA_backoff.htm

(35) Star Tribune - Victory Act (Patriot II) would be no victory for public

http://www.casperstartribune.net/art...2ce550a758.txt

(36) Alex Jones' Brief Analysis of Patriot Act II

http://www.infowars.com/print/patrio...s_analysis.htm

(37) USA Today, Reprinted on UCSD.edu

http://communication.ucsd.edu/911/howlett.debbie.html

(38) Interstate Bank Building Fire Los Angeles, CA May 4 1988

http://www.iklimnet.com/hotelfires/interstatebank.html

(39) Appendix A of The World Trade Center Building Performance Study on wtc7.net with working link to original source, a .PDF

http://www.wtc7.net/buildingfires.html

(40) Top Secret/Majic by Stanton T Friedman. p.185 - 186

(41) Memory Hole - 5 Minute Video of Bush on Morning of 911

http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/bush-911.htm

(42) Bush Senior met with bin Laden's Brother on 911, reported by CBC and London Observer

http://www.prisonplanet.com/120503metwithbinladen.html

(43) Henry Kissinger, 'The Accidental 911 Appointment'

http://www.media-criticism.com/Kissi..._Accident.html

(44) Is An Oil Pipeline Behind The War in Afghanistan?

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/sardi7.html

(45) A pipeline project, aimed at exploiting massive natural gas reserves along the Caspian Sea in Turkmenistan, was revived by the Bush administration when it arrived in Washington in January of 2001

http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/042203A.shtml

(46) Oil in Iraq - Globalpolicy.org

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/oil/irqindx.htm

(47) Bush comes clean: It was for oil

http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/042603I.shtml

(48) Press Ignores 9/11 Widow's Bush Treason Suit

http://www.infowars.com/print/Sept11/widow_lawsuit.htm

(49) US Media Suppresses Major Bush Lawsuit

http://www.voxfux.com/archives/00000099.htm

(50) Fox Cancels John Kaminski Appearance

http://www.rense.com/general37/foxsp.htm

(51) 911 Widow's Bush Treason Suit Vanishes

http://www.rense.com/general45/vanishes.htm

(52) The Complete 911 Timeline

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/

(53) About the exact date jesus was born

http://members.tripod.com/~PetraGrail/page5.html

(54) On PBS documentry, Owner of WTC reveals WTC7 was demolished with explosives

http://www.infowars.com/print/Sept11/FDNY.htm

(55) Analysis of silverstein's statement [refer to (54)]

http://www.infowars.com/print/Sept11/pp_fdny.htm

(56) Paranoid Shift

http://www.onlinejournal.com/Comment...1004hasty.html

(57) Another Ignored 9/11 Clue: Bomb Sniffing Dogs Removed From WTC Days Before Attack

http://www.infowars.com/print/Sept11/dogs_removed.htm

Above is an older version of my 9/11 notes i just DLed off webspace

many of your points are addressed in it

[Jerome Scuggs]

Your coverup examples assume a different America. Of course they could cover up the atom bomb - like enemies had spy satellites. The press was much more mild, as well, and leaks didn't occur half as much. Lack of telecommunications, etc.

The funny thing is the same people who call Bush incompetent and stupid are the ones also saying he somehow orchestrated a huge successful operation on his own soil.

[Tone]

The funny thing is the same people who call Bush incompetent and stupid are the ones also saying he somehow orchestrated a huge successful operation on his own soil.

what? you crazy? HAH!

[Theif of Time]

No. But is suspect your sources may be less than credible.
Take those engineers, for example. Now, why on earth would a literal minded engineer design a building to withstand a hit from an aircraft? Earthquakes, sure. Hurricanes, even. Lightning Strikes. But an airplane? Forgive me if I don't see any reason at all to spend large amounts of money on designing a building for a contingency that is unlikely to happen.
Assuming he did design it to be hit by an aircraft. Would he have designed it to withstand large amounts of burning fuel? Would he have designed it to take the stress side on, or on an angle? Undoubtably the terrorists (If they were terrorists) would have acquired the blueprints for the trade centre. They could do their own calculations, find the weak points. They may indeed have even planted bombs inside of their own. This does not prove, however, that there is some larger conspiracy.

EDIT: My god those two posts are huge. and double posted. and possibly bordering on spam.

[Kolar]

I. Operation Northwoods

Different Admin, means nothing at all.

2:Jet Fuel exploding and the impact would sound something like an explosion. Have a 110 level super structure falling onto the ground would do something to a seismograph.

3:Conjecture.

4: Both were designed to take an impact, multiple times probably. Jet Fuel burning at around 1900C on 1 level of the structure caused it to fail, there's no way to design for this, if one level fails and falls into the next the structure is not designed nor is it possiable to design for that posibility.




2: To the best of my knowledge, no one has hijacked 2 jetliners and flown them into a skyscraper until Sept 11. The jet fuel and the impact on 1 level is enough to do the building in for good. I dont think anyone here's a structural engineer so until you want to find one or quote from many about the effects of 1900+ burning fuel over a few hours on a steel struture, shut it.


Everything else you've offered up is just random, unfounded crack pot bullshit from conspiracy websites. Even if in 20-30 years we find out that you're not so crazy you're still using fear tactics and 1970 science to trash the current USA Admin. Really, stop looking so deep, there's more blood on the surface and more to aim at when it comes to Republicans.

Edit: You need to learn about proper sourcing here Tone. Sites that promote an idea or view point of a story or event generally are only intresting in finding the correct facts to fit their views and beliefs.

[ConcreteSchlyrd]

Seriously, if you guys want a good laugh at some people who'd look really stylish in tinfoil hats, check out some of 70n3z l1nkz. Pretty fucking ridiculous.

[Jerome Scuggs]

Take those engineers, for example. Now, why on earth would a literal minded engineer design a building to withstand a hit from an aircraft? Earthquakes, sure. Hurricanes, even. Lightning Strikes. But an airplane? Forgive me if I don't see any reason at all to spend large amounts of money on designing a building for a contingency that is unlikely to happen.

I can see why he might do that: it's government mandated

[Tone]

[QUOTE=Theif of Time]No. But is suspect your sources may be less than credible.
Take those engineers, for example. Now, why on earth would a literal minded engineer design a building to withstand a hit from an aircraft? Earthquakes, sure. Hurricanes, even. Lightning Strikes. But an airplane? Forgive me if I don't see any reason at all to spend large amounts of money on designing a building for a contingency that is unlikely to happen.
Assuming he did design it to be hit by an aircraft. Would he have designed it to withstand large amounts of burning fuel? Would he have designed it to take the stress side on, or on an angle? Undoubtably the terrorists (If they were terrorists) would have acquired the blueprints for the trade centre. They could do their own calculations, find the weak points. They may indeed have even planted bombs inside of their own. This does not prove, however, that there is some larger conspiracy.

go research other sources, take his name and put it in a search along with the string '707'. that is what he said. that he designed it to take a hit from a 707.

[ConcreteSchlyrd]

Fourth: Burning 767 != normal 707. Hell, NORMAL 767 != normal 707. The 767 is substantially bigger, and has a larger range (meaning a greater fuel capacity). As Sarien put it so nicely: burning JP4 is not a good thing. Plus, even listening to Frank DeMartini (WTC Construction & Project Manager) describe how the towers were meant to sustain impact, it doesn't even sound like he's taking the burning fuel into account--only the actual physical impact. And as many studies have found, it was actually the burning fuel that did the building in. It stood strong upon impact.

HI. REMEMBER THIS POINT?