What the Haiti quake, Gulf oil spill and 9-11 have in common: Pt1

This blog is divided into three parts, this one being part one.  Please note some information may be outdated in some parts as this blog was originally published in August 2010.

Whenever I come across reports of disasters on T.V, I can reassure myself that I will eventually see how it will relate to a completely different one. This is done by observing how these disasters happen and how it is handled. There are three such disasters I wish to make a case study of and that is the earthquake in Haiti, the oil spill in the Gulf and 9-11.

THE DELAYS IN THE RESPONSE

The Oil Spill:

The delays in the response to the Gulf Spill are extremely obvious. It is clear that the lack of transparency was deliberate and so was stalling speedy actions to address the crisis.

President Barrack Obama has come under immense fire for his rather unimpressive and weak approach to this disaster. This disaster was dubbed Obama’s “Katrina” because of the parallels in the belated response to both the oil spill and Hurricane Katrina. One of the gripes the public have with Obama is the fact that he was not tough enough with the oil company, BP (British Petroleum) that is responsible for the oil disaster. The many delays that BP caused could have been prevented if Obama had showed leadership and put more apt companies and individuals to take the lead in addressing the disaster.

So BP was allowed to run the show and employ their delay tactics unchallenged. Fortunately, there are some individuals in power, like Rep. Edward J Markey, who stood up to BP and demanded that a live feed of the BP oil spill be made publicly available on the Internet. Fortunately, BP was forced to comply. Withholding the feed had many motives, one being to avoid revealing the true extent of the spill to thus avoid the appropriate liability. Hiding the spill would also allow them to deal with the spill in the manner they chose and at their own pace because nobody could have any information to challenge them on it.

Previously, independent scientists only saw the oil spill along with the rest of the public through these lives feeds. If the flow rate could probably be determined, then the appropriate action could be taken. This is why BP blocked independent scientists from seeing the spill for themselves. Now that scientists have seen it they rightly deduced that the 5000 barrels a day claim was pure bogus. We now know it was 60 000 barrels a day until recently. BP says finding out the flow rate was irrelevant. Due to this inaccurate information, it can be determined that the “top hat” procedure was a complete waste of time and the pressure of the oil reserves was beyond the threshold for “top kill”. How could relief wells have been built in the meantime without the appropriate information? You don’t send a rocket into space with inaccurate information. Not only was the “top kill” doomed to failure from the start, but BP infuriated local officials and observers when they didn’t inform the public of the 16 hour break in the top kill operation. Obama didn’t seem to be aware of it nor Admiral Thad Allen, leader of the government’s response to the oil. It’s the same silly excuse that BP gives to explain away these delays: “Oh, we have to be careful. Better to be safe than sorry!” A white house official said Obama wasn’t going to micromanage every decision BP made. Isn’t because BP wasn’t watched like a hawk that the oil spill took place? Wasn’t it because the Obama Administration hadn’t monitored the MMS? Maybe it’s because they are all in it together!!

Only deepwater oil skimmer boats were being used and no provision was made for boats that can be used in shallower waters. There are many boats that could have been used for this purpose that were just tied up at port not being considered by BP. There were fishermen, too, who had experience in rescuing sea turtles enmeshed in fishing nets and were not called upon for help in the turtle rescue operations. They would love to have helped because they are now unemployed, but they faced arrest should they even touch one. Those who had been told they would be called when needed by BP were later told they would most likely not be.

Then, of course, there was the complete farce of the supposed workers who had come to clean the beaches, only to appear when Obama was around. When real work was done, they would work twenty minutes then rest forty. The excuse was that the sun was too hot. If one employed more workers, the shorter the amount of time an individual would spend in the sun. The County Commissioner, Sara Comander said there were trained members of the public ready to go to the beach within an hour or two but they had just not been called. Only BP workers could clean up.

The most critical areas that needed addressing were the marshes, yet those remained untouched. It seemed so obvious but BP would do anything to delay progress in addressing this disaster.

The Haiti earthquake:

Belated responses to this disaster were really obvious, too, although logistics was blamed in this case. However, if one examined the facts properly, logistics didn’t seem to be enough of an excuse for the lack of response in aid. It just seemed downright deliberate. In face, six months later, the same problems existing straight after the quake are still around now. It has to be noted that some schools are running and diseases have been stemmed, but the rubble remains mostly untouched. To me this is most astounding because it is not too hard to employ rubble-removing companies to remove the rubble. A World Cup is not too hard to organise but removing the rubble is super duper hard.

In fact, there is a man called Randy Perkins who owns a company called, “The Haiti Recovery Group” that is part of AshBritt, one of the largest disaster recovery contractors in America. He has his equipment, amounting to $25 million, all ready to remove the rubble but grass is growing beneath it because no one wants to award him a contract. He could provide many jobs for the desperate unemployed Haitians which would be good to kick-start the economy again. So what is the problem? There is no master plan for debris removal although the Haiti government says they are working on one. Hundreds and millions have been spent by foreign governments, the United Nations and Non Government Organizations. I believe it is deliberately ignored and if that rubble is not removed, substantial change cannot be made.

There is still aid sitting in warehouses delivered to Haiti a couple of months ago. Starvation is a problem and the aid is just sitting idle in the warehouses. Can this just be a case of logistics? It is amazing how smoothly things go when the powerful want it to go smoothly and when they don’t, aid remains idle in warehouses. The sickening thing is that there are orphanages low on food supplies just minutes away from the aid. In fact, when the aid arrived at the airports soon after the quake, starving people were just two minutes away and did not see that aid.

The Governor of Pennsylvania flew into Haiti on his private jet to pick up a couple of orphans to take back to the United States so they could be adopted. This is all very well but doctors and supplies were not granted permission to land as there was no space at the airport.

One of the most shocking delays is the non payment of money pledged by various countries around the world. Only three countries so far have actually pledged money, including Australia which has paid the full amount pledged, $8.64 million. Clinton is the head of the relief efforts yet how much has America paid of the $1.15 billion pledged? Nothing. The excuse? Slow pace of congress. Everything is just sooooo slow in this world, except when it comes to going to war in the Middle East or something.

The World Bank is the depository of the $5.3 billion, which is the total amount pledged from the various countries. It has pledged $266 million but has not paid a cent. Is this right? What is the hold up? The answer will be made clear further down in the blog.

9-11:

The delay in response to this catastrophe had severe implications because of the lives lost. It is standard procedure that NORAD scramble jets when radio contact gets lost or an airplane goes off course. In fact, around the World Trade Centre, there is a no fly zone whereby a plane will get shot down if warnings to stay clear are not heeded. Not only did one jet manage avoid NORAD’s interception, but another one also. In fact, it was only one and a half hour later that the air defence system reacted at all. The FAA response time for reporting any deviating aircraft was grossly delayed.

They say a disaster is a chain and just one link missing may avert the disaster entirely or partially. It is definite that at least one of the planes going into the twin towers would have been averted if NORAD had done its job like it always did. The reason why these delays happened is because there was a practice drill on what NORAD would do if planes had attempted to crash into the twin towers, the Pentagon and the White House on the very same day as the real attacks. Therefore, the operators were very confused and didn’t know what the drill was and what was real. It didn’t help that Donald Rumsfeld refused to give permission for the jets to scramble in a timely manner. Only one and a half hour later which is like closing the stable doors after the horse has bolted.

What are the chances of a simulated attack practice drill happening on the same day as the real thing?

COVER UPS:

Oil spill:

One can write a tome on the amount of cover ups of these disasters. I’ll start off with the dispersants that BP has been dumping into the Gulf. BP had used the chemical dispersant, Corexit, which has been labelled as highly toxic. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) had told BP to stop using the dispersants, or at least cut down on it, which BP ignored. There are far safer dispersants available. Only weeks into the disaster, the EPA decided to disclose the ingredients of this dispersants to the public because of the outcries of the public. Why had the EPA kept quiet on BP’s use of these dispersants for so long? Why would they protect BP? Why do they pretend to chastise BP while protecting them? Is the Obama Administration, the MMS, the EPA and BP all in on some conspiracy?

The ingredients include detergent chemical found in laxatives. If this ingredient affected the workers cleaning up the oil spill caused by the Exxon Valdez, then what is it busy doing to the wildlife? Who knows what is doing the more damage: the oil or the dispersants?

Congressman Markey cited from documents received from BP, proving that they knew within a week of the explosion, the spill was much greater than just 1000 barrels a day, but for a while, they stuck with that figure. Obviously, they had to agree it was much higher in time because the release of the live feed of the spill proved they were wrong. That is obviously why they didn’t want to release a live feed. We have a lot to thank Congressman Markey for. It is obviously the financial implications that motivated BP to just outright lie about the flow rate. The fine for spills is $1000 per barrel. Imagine what the fine will finally accumulate to considering it was exactly about 60 000 barrels per day spilt.

Nothing screams guilt more than the fact that BP haf barred the media any access to clean up sites on shore and off shore. Wildlife couldn’t be filmed either. In fact, there are claims that BP has been responsible for hiding dead animals. The US coast guard and BP repeatedly say there are no media restrictions, but BP had hired security to kick out journalists to close to the scene.

On the 30th of June, Admiral Thad Allen, the Coast Guard, designated a 65 foot perimeter around booming operations and said anyone caught within that “safety zone”, would be subjected to a fine of up to $48 000 or jail time. The reason? For the public’s safety, of course. BP cares, you know. However, this decision was rescinded because of more public outcries with the result of Thad Allen backtracking: “the press are (sic) to have clear, unfettered access to this event.” Safety suddenly isn’t an issue anymore. Those were mere words because the media was still blocked after that.

On May 26th, the officials with the Coast Guard Research and Development Centre in New London, Connecticut, decided an accurate assessment of the flow rate because BP’s estimations were not corroborating those in the scientific community.

The Coast Guard Centre awarded a sole-source contract worth $191,100 to Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, which would have used advanced sonar systems to measure the flow rate.

However, on the 19th of May, Lamar McKay, president of BP America, told the Senate Transportation and Infrastructure Committee that the leak was not measurable through any technology they knew about. Is that not laughable?

On that same day that Lamar McKay testified this, Richard Camilli, associate scientist for applied ocean physics and engineering at Woods Hole, told the House Subcommittee on Energy and Environment, that an imaging multi-beam sonar to map the seabed to monitor the flow rate could be employed. He also reported that he e-mailed BP officials on May 4th, proposing this technology as well as an acoustic Doppler current profiler to produce maps of particles like oil that may be suspended in water. BP tentatively accepted that the next day then rejected it the day after that. The excuse was that they had already developed an undersea containment structure ahead of schedule. Despite the fact that failed, BP clearly was obfuscating because Camilli was referring to equipment that could measure the flow rate, not any plans to stop the leak itself.

:

Video taken in July 2010

It had been reported that BP was lying again. The oil head was still leaking since it was sealed off on July 15th, it’s just did not leak from the same place it used to. The camera didn't show the parts where it leaked for there is not just one leak, but many and just putting one cap on does nothing but give the impression it has been stopped.

9-11

There are no many cover ups regarding 9-11, that it is hard to know where to start. The government wants the public to buy the claim that the towers collapsed due to the intense heat despite the fact that no building prior to 9-11 ever collapsed due to heat stress. One way to determine if the integrity of the structures were compromised to the extent that it could collapse, the blueprints of the Twin Towers and Building 7 could have been consulted. However, the blueprints of these publics were not made public until five years after the fact. There is no reason for this as the blueprints are supposed to be public domain. Not even the engineers that conducted the only investigation into the collapses before the clean up efforts of Ground Zero saw them until they signed waiver forms that they would not use the information in a lawsuit against the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. It sounds very similar to BP asking scientists employed by them to sign a contract which states any information they find will not be allowed to be released to the public until three year’s time.

It is only thanks to a whistleblower that the blueprints were ever released. The drawings included the dimensions, including those of the core columns.

This is what the official reports were trying to hide: they fact that the towers had massive core columns which insinuate that the towers could not possibly have collapsed due to fire.

The 9/11 Commission Report even denied the existence of these cores.

So if fire did not cause the collapse of the towers, then what did? There have been many eyewitness reports of bombs being detonated. One has clearly been detonated in this video excerpt:

 

It is a scientific fact that thermite is what melted the steel hence the theory that thermite bombs were used. This is the only thing that could have brought down the towers and not fire.

Take this into consideration:

Steel melts at 2750F. Uncontrolled fire with red flames is at 1200F. When thermite is ignited, extreme heat reaction causes molten iron. It can reach 4500 F. That can melt steel. Another product of a thermite reaction is Aluminum Oxide, visible as white smoke. White smoke was seen at the base of the towers.

Therefore, thermite bombs were placed in the towers prior to 9-11 and this has been ignored by the government.

OMISSIONS:

Here is a list of some serious omissions and distortions of the 9/11 Commission Report. The only steel-framed buildings to have ever collapsed due to fire in history happened all on the same day and those were the north tower, south tower and World Trade Center 7. Not even the collapse of World Trade Center 7 at 17:20 pm, which was a 47 story steel-framed skyscraper, was mentioned. No reference is made to the interview in which Larry Silverstein, owner of WTC 7, and the fire department admitted to making the decision to “pull” the building down. “Pulling” means demolishing a building. Nor was there any reference to the many reports of eyewitnesses of hearing explosions before the south tower collapsed.

Coincidentally, Marvin Bush, George W’s brother, and cousin Wirt Walker III were heads of the company that provided the security for the World Trade Center and the mega coincidence of the World Trade Center complex receiving a new lessor, Larry Silverstein, just six weeks prior to the attacks, the buildings being insured for terrorist attacks. It has not been explained why six of the 19 suspected hijackers are still alive today or why there were no Arab names on any of the passenger lists of the doomed planes.

There are serious omissions in the report regarding the Pentagon as well. Anti-aircraft missiles batteries ring the Pentagon yet none were present on 9-11. The FBI also confiscated surveillance footage from nearby businesses of the attack on the Pentagon. In fact, no mention is made why there is no surveillance footage available at all from anywhere.

There were many important people who received warnings of the attacks. Attorney General JohnAshcroft was warned by the FBI to avoid flying on commercial airlines as well as San Francisco Mayor, WillieBrown. Several Pentagon officials abruptly cancelled travel plans the evening prior to the attacks. Even Ariel Sharon cancelled an event he was to attend in New York on September 11th.

Apart from the admissions, there were blatant lies. The SouthTower was reported to have collapsed in 10 seconds when it was actually 15 seconds. If the towers had collapsed due to a compromised structure, there would have been resistance at every floor, slowing down the fall of the structures. So it hardly was in their favour to say it fell faster than it really did.

 

The towers were demolished by explosives

Molten metal coming from one of the towers

Contradiction

The explanation given by the report on why the hijackers decided not to target a nuclear power plant was because they felt it was too heavily guarded increasing the risk of the planes being shot down. However, the Pentagon is one of the most guarded buildings in the United States

OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE:

The chairs of the 9-11 Commission and the Joint Inquiry of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees report that government “minders” obstructed the investigation by intimidating witnesses. It was deduced that the officials from the Pentagon lied to the Commission with the result that the Commission recommended them to be criminally charged. Recorded interviews on tape with traffic controllers working on 9-11 were destroyed by cutting the tape into pieces and tossing it into the trash cans around the building.

It was discovered by the investigators for the Congressional Joint Inquiry that an FBI informant had rented a room for two hijackers back in 2000 and when the Inquiry wanted to question him, the FBI refused and put him into hiding. AN fbi official said the interview was blocked by the White House.

THE DEBRIS FROM THE TOWERS

Structural engineers have pointed out the serious “mistake” of the decision to rapidly recycle the steel columns, beams and trusses that once held up the towers. Without this, some of the most direct evidence to how the towers collapsed was thus destroyed. I don’t know how anyone could see it prudent to destroy evidence in a criminal investigation, because that is what it is, unless they had something to hide.

Matthew G. Monahan, spokesman for the city’s Department of Design and Construction, which was in charge of the debris removal at Ground Zero said, “The city considered it reasonable to have recovered structural steel recycled. Hindsight is always 20-20, but this was a calamity like no other. And I’m not trying to backpedal.”

Okay, if a car is the scene of a crime and has blood in it, I suppose there wouldn’t be anyone harm in me taking it to the scrap heap? Is this how evidence is treated?

However, Monahan pointed out that the members of the investigation team were allowed to visit the scrap-yards and inspect the steel eventually.

A team, which included some of the nation’s most respected engineers, said that there had been complaints of bureaucratic restrictions that prevented them from interviewing witnesses, examining the disaster site and having access to recordings of distress calls made to the police and fire department. Does this not sound familiar to how BP treated the public? BP didn’t allow its workers to be interviewed, bared media access, initially deprived scientists of vital information and initially refused to show a live feed of the oil spill.

The investigation was organized by the American Society of Civil Engineers financed and administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). However, senior engineers had complained that FEMA was being a hindrance to them. In fact, members of the investigation team had been threatened with dismissal if they spoke to the pressed. Many of those who were employed by BP were scared of dismissal if they spoke to the press.

More by this Author


Comments 56 comments

Wesman Todd Shaw profile image

Wesman Todd Shaw 5 years ago from Kaufman, Texas

It's so bad that you wonder why they even pretend that they care. Why Bother? I guess they figure(government and "elite") that they still aren't to where they want to be, that place where they can just let their inner "gods" shine, and display for us all how superior they are. . . ..

http://hubpages.com/politics/The-State-of-Our-Gove...

I'm going to add your link here to the body of the link above.


Claire Evans profile image

Claire Evans 5 years ago from South Africa Author

AS you said, they aren't quite at the place they want to be and they are TERRIFIED of anarchy so they can't piss off people TOO much. They are employing the methods of stealth.

Thanks so much, again, for referring to my blogs. I think everyone should see your blog indicated above. I thought it was brilliant.

I don't know what happened with the comment about Micky Dee, but I agree. I'm glad I came across him.


Wesman Todd Shaw profile image

Wesman Todd Shaw 5 years ago from Kaufman, Texas

Even more worrisome, here in the states, and I'm a small contributor, it's becoming so common to distrust the government completely. . . .that it seems just worrisome! Of course it could be that the folks that I talk to online, and I spend a huge amount of time online, just reinforce my own thoughts, and aren't reflective of the greater country outside of wts land; I dunno. I guess there's still a majority of drones, sucking up the television mass media zombie life.


Claire Evans profile image

Claire Evans 5 years ago from South Africa Author

People are waking up somewhat but you will still get the die-hard zombies who think America can do no wrong and hang onto every word the mainstream media says.


Wesman Todd Shaw profile image

Wesman Todd Shaw 5 years ago from Kaufman, Texas

"America can do no wrong!" LOL!

People DO THINK that, and it's amazing. Those are the patriot zombies. . . .who do not know the meaning of the word "patriot."

Glad to see that you got this one back up :-;


Claire Evans profile image

Claire Evans 5 years ago from South Africa Author

Yes, it's true. If you criticise America, you are with the terrorists. A common tactic by someone who opposes you is to make you feel you are in the wrong and are a bad person for it! For example, if I criticise the war in Aghanistan and Iraq, I'm ungrateful to the troops for fighting the axis of evil. If I say 9-11 is an inside job, I'm insulting the memory of the victims even though a significant percentage of the family of the victims think it is an inside job. And if you believe in conspiracy theories, then you are bound to be the next Jared Lee Loughner. You heard reports that Loughner was "into" the film "Loose Change"?

"Glad to see that you got this one back up?"

After much kicking, screaming and bribing! Lol. I'm going to put the links in my comment sections. I just can't seeing it "sourceless".


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 4 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

It's all very simple...steel does not have to melt to collapse. It begins losing strength rapidly in a fire. That's why it has to be coated with fireproofing by building codes. I know that, because such construction was my business.

In the WTC design, unlike most other steel buildings, the exterior framework was part of the load bearing structure. When the planes hit and destroyed much of the exterior framework, the load was transferred to the remaining structure.

The subsequent fires weakened the remaining supporting members and expanded the trusses, pushing the remaining exterior supporting walls out of vertical. The bulging can clearly be seen in photos. Eventually, the heat weakened and distorted supporting members could no longer support the weight of the stories above the fires and damaged framework, and the buildings simply collapsed.

All of your 'proof' is just silly conjecture.


Claire Evans profile image

Claire Evans 4 years ago from South Africa Author

When steel has melted due to thermite, which makes the temperature much hotter, it produces molten iron. Can fire due to jet fuel turn steel into molten iron? Look at the picture in my blog. You can't just ignore the points in my blog and give one very weak argument. This is just silly conjecture.

If your theory is correct that the steel buckled and could no longer support the weight of the stories above the fire, then why did it fall at free fall speed?

"If the towers had collapsed due to a compromised structure, there would have been resistance at every floor, slowing down the fall of the structures"

So why was there no resistance at each floor? How did the core get destroyed? I want you to back this up with scientific evidence and provide sources. Why haven’t other buildings of steel collapsed due to fire? Only three have. And those were the twin towers and WTC7.

Back to the collapse, the force that the top part of the collapse of the towers must be lower than the down part to which the force is being applied and thus it could not have crushed the lower part. And when the top part met the bottom part, there should be a jolt but there was no resistance. Surely you would know this if you are in construction? Watch the demolition video I posted.

This was not confined to the towers. WTC7 was also destroyed, supposedly just because of an office fire, and that fell at free fall speed. The NIST, initially denying it fell at free fall speed, has now conceded that it did and admitted it in the following report:

“In its final report on WTC 7, which came out in November 2008, NIST – rather amazingly – admitted free fall. Dividing the building’s descent into three stages, NIST described the second phase as “a freefall descent over approximately eight stories at gravitational acceleration for approximately 2.25 s[econds].”56 NIST thereby accepted Chandler’s case – except for maintaining that the building was in absolute free fall for only 2.25, not 2.5, seconds (a trivial difference). NIST thereby affirmed a miracle, meaning a violation of one or more laws of physics.

Why this would be a miracle was explained by Chandler, who said: “Free fall can only be achieved if there is zero resistance to the motion.”57 In other words, the upper portion of Building 7 could have come down in free fall only if something had suddenly removed all the steel and concrete in the lower part of the building, which would have otherwise provided resistance (to make a considerable understatement). If everything had not been removed and the upper floors had come down in free fall anyway, even if for only a fraction of a second, this would have been a miracle – meaning a violation of physical principles. Explaining one of the physical principles involved, Chandler said:”

http://www.darkpolitricks.com/2010/08/nist-admit-t...

Notice the fall of WTC7. It is giving away from the bottom. No office fires there.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zv7BImVvEyk

In order for this to have happened, all the vertical support would have had to have given away at exactly the same time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDvNS9iMjzA

NIST admitting free fall above.

Looking forward to your rebuttal!


Longhunter 4 years ago

Claire, as agreed, I'm here.

I agree with what Will posted above. And, while I don't think the US government is perfect by any stretch of the imagination, I don't believe it had anything to do with 911. I'll also say that I believe that those that do are, frankly, nuts and obviously need help. I suggest you seek help for your delusions.


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 4 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

Just like all other 9-11 conspiracy people, you offer no proof or evidence that the US had anything to do with it. You simply offer conjecture and then ask endless questions about that conjecture, demanding that each be answered to your satisfaction.

It happened just like we all saw...two airliners were flown into the WTC towers, and due to the massive impact damage of huge airplanes slamming unto them at nearly the speed of a bullet, and subsequent fires, they both collapsed.

Let's put the onus where it belongs...on the accuser, which would be you. Since you are accusing the US, prove with HARD EVIDENCE that the US was in any way involved. Anything else is pure conjecture.


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 4 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

BTW, your "molten metal" was long ago identified as aluminum, not steel, and it undoubtedly came from the aircraft itself, much of which ended up in that corner of the building.

http://www.debunking911.com/moltensteel.htm


Claire Evans profile image

Claire Evans 4 years ago from South Africa Author

First of all, WillStarr, I think my three blogs do actually touch on the subject on the US's involvement. Have you read all three? I will post more information that I haven't already posted. I will get back to that. I put a LOT of effort composing these comments, so return the courtesy of actually giving a rebuttal. Even if there was no evidence the US was involved, it doesn't change the fact that the towers were demolished and fell at free fall speed. You can't dispute the science.

I don't appreciate the fact that you chose to ignore most of my argument, just addressing the molten steel. Why did the towers fall at free speed? Why was there no resistance? How did the core fall? Why did the WTC7 fall at free speed? What other buildings made of steel in history have fallen because of fire? This is not conjecture. This is fact.

@Longhunter, I noticed that you had no rebuttal. I suppose members of Congress, the CIA, architects and engineers and those in the military should also check themselves into assylums.


Claire Evans profile image

Claire Evans 4 years ago from South Africa Author

Oh yeah, and refute my "Total Proof that they were bombs in the building" video.

Willstar:

From your page:

http://www.debunking911.com/moltensteel.htm

Let's forget for a moment that thermite doesn't explode so the claims of hearing explosions become meaningless.

Quotes from Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermite

Thermite was also used in both German and Allied incendiary bombs during World War II.[35][36] Incendiary bombs usually consisted of dozens of thin thermite-filled canisters (bomblets) ignited by a magnesium fuse.

Incendiary weapons, incendiary devices or incendiary bombs are bombs designed to start fires or destroy sensitive equipment using materials such as napalm, thermite, chlorine trifluoride, or white phosphorus.

So…thermite can be used in bombs.

Professor Colin Bailey, University of Manchester.

Figure 1 shows the various nominal fire curves for comparison. It can be seen that, over a period of 2 hours, the hydrocarbon fire is the most severe followed by the standard fire, with the external fire being the least severe fire although the slow heating fire represents the lowest temperature up to 30 minutes. It is noteworthy that for standard and smouldering fires, the temperature continuously increases with increasing time. For the external fire, the temperature remains constant at 680°C after approximately 22 minutes. whereas for the hydrocarbon fires, the temperatures remain constant at 1100°C and 1120°C after approximate 40 minutes.

http://www.mace.manchester.ac.uk/project/research/...

performance/fireModelling/nominalFireCurves/default.htm

How could the fire been getting hotter when the fires were almost out? Thick grey and black smoke is indicative of a very weak fire.

“Summary: The flow is not steel because the structural steel would fail well below the melting temperature. The flow is likely to be a mixture of aluminum, aluminum oxides, molten glass and coals of whatever trash the aluminum flowed over as it reached the open window. Such a flow would appear orange and cool to a dark color.”

There is significant rust on this sample collected from the WTC. This is an indication of molten iron and not molten aluminium:

Consult the paper: Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Collapse? On page 9.

Thermite is a compound of iron oxide and aluminium.

“If aluminum (e.g., from the plane) had melted, it would melt and flow away from the heat source at its melting point of about 650 oC and thus would not reach the yellow color observed for this molten metal.”

http://stj911.org/jones/experiments_NIST_orange_gl...

, Dr. Keith Eaton toured Ground Zero and stated in The Structural Engineer,

‘They showed us many fascinating slides’ [Eaton] continued, ‘ranging from molten metal which was still red hot weeks after the event, to 4-inch thick steel plates sheared and bent in the disaster’. (Structural Engineer, September 3, 2002, p. 6; emphasis added.)

The existence of molten metal at Ground Zero was reported by several observers (see first photograph above), including Greg Fuchek:

For six months after Sept. 11, the ground temperature varied between 600 degrees Fahrenheit and 1,500 degrees, sometimes higher. “In the first few weeks, sometimes when a worker would pull a steel beam from the wreckage, the end of the beam would be dripping molten steel,” Fuchek said. (Walsh, 2002)

Why would the molten aluminum still be hot six months later and why was the steel beam dripping of molten steel if the aluminium was supposed to have melted?

FDNY Captain Philip Ruvolo said, “You’d get down below and you’d see molten steel, molten steel running down the channel rails, like you’re in a foundry, like lava.”

Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl, professor of civil engineering at University of California at Berkeley, received a National Science Foundation grant to spend two weeks at Ground Zero studying steel from the buildings. He said he “saw the melting of girders in the World Trade Center.” He described steel flanges that “had been reduced from an inch thick to paper thin.” He said he saw 10-ton steel beams that “looked like giant sticks of twisted licorice.” He said he saw steel that had become smoothly warped at points where beams connected. This he said could only have happened had become yellow or white hot, indicating temperatures “perhaps around 2,000F.”

Professor Alison Geyh of the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health led a scientific team that went to the site shortly after 9/11 on behalf of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences: “In some pockets now being uncovered, they are finding molten steel.”

Joe O’Toole, a Bronx firefighter who worked for months on the rescue and clean-up efforts, was quoted by Knight Ridder journalist Jennifer Lin. She wrote: “Fires raged underground for months. O’Toole remembers in February seeing a crane lift a steel beam vertically from deep within the catacombs of Ground Zero. “It was dripping from the molten steel.”

Dr. Keith Eaton, chief executive of the London-based Institution of Structural Engineers, said that after a tour of the site he was shown slides of “molten metal that was still red hot weeks after the event.”

http://truthandshadows.wordpress.com/2010/12/08/ma...

Molten steel was also found in the debris of WTC7 which was never hit by a plane. Appendix C of the FEMA report stated that there was sulphur residue on the steel. From a normal office fire? Sulphur mixed with thermite produces thermate, which results in a lower melting temperature and accelerated results.

http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_apc.pdf

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIx2CVRxRXg


Claire Evans profile image

Claire Evans 4 years ago from South Africa Author

Let’s start with the Pentagon. It has the most surveillance cameras in the world but not ONE caught the plane going into the Pentagon. Surveillance cameras of nearby businesses were confiscated by the FBI. Why?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDfdOwt2v3Y

Why wasn’t the “plane” that crashed into the Pentagon not intercepted by fighter jets? Two planes had already crashed into the twin towers and nobody thought of intercepting more hijacked planes?

Donald Rumsfeld forbad any evacuation of the Pentagon DESPITE flight controllers calling in warnings of approaching hijacked aircraft nearly 20 minutes before the building was struck.

“On behalf of Spc. April Gallop, who served in the Network Infrastructure Services Agency as an administrative specialist, California attorney William Veale has filed a civil suit against former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Vice President Dick Cheney and former US Air Force General Richard Myers, who was acting chairman of the joint chiefs on 9/11. It alleges they engaged in conspiracy to facilitate the terrorist attacks and purposefully failed to warn those inside the Pentagon, contributing to injuries she and her two-month-old son incurred.

"The ex-G.I. plaintiff alleges she has been denied government support since then, because she raised 'painful questions' about the inexplicable failure of military defenses at the Pentagon that day, and especially the failure of officials to warn and evacuate the occupants of the building when they knew the attack was imminent" said Veale in a media advisory.

Spc. Gallop also says she heard two loud explosions, and does not believe that a Boeing 757 hit the building. Her son sustained a serious brain injury, and Gallop herself was knocked unconscious after the roof collapsed onto her office.”

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/911_survivor_blasts_...

9-11 Secretary of Transport Norman Mineta, who was in Presidential Emergency Operating Centre with Cheney as Flight 77 approached Washington DC, explains in the below video clip that Cheney knew this but allowed the attack to happen and forbade any action to be taken:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDfdOwt2v3Y

The defendants were sued Cheney and Rumsfeld point out the fact that the Project for New Century America, which they participating in composing, exposed their desire to facilitate a “Pearl Harbour”-like event in order to give them an excuse to increase the United State’s military position in the Middle East:

Excerpts:

Yet unless the United States maintains sufficient military strength, this opportunity will be lost. And in fact, over the past decade, the failure to establish a security strategy responsive to new realities and to provide adequate resources for the full range of missions needed to exercise U.S. global leadership has placed the American peace at growing risk. This report attempts to define those requirements.”

“Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.”

And that event was 9-11…

http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmeric...

Let’s turn our attention to the plane that was said to have crashed in Shanksville, Pennsylvania. Not only was there absolutely no evidence a plane crashed there, this was corroborated by Donald Rumsfeld who claimed that there was not a struggle between the hijackers and passengers, but that the plane was shot down.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNuosBnlw5s&feature...

“Coincidentally, Marvin Bush, George W’s brother, and cousin Wirt Walker III were heads of the company that provided the security for the World Trade Center and the mega coincidence of the World Trade Center complex receiving a new lessor, Larry Silverstein, just six weeks prior to the attacks, the buildings being insured for terrorist attacks. It has not been explained why six of the 19 suspected hijackers are still alive today or why there were no Arab names on any of the passenger lists of the doomed planes.”

Coincidence? Especially since Larry Silverstein said the WTC 7 was “pulled”?

Why did the FBI lie and say there were 19 hijackers when 6 are still alive?

What about the practice drill that just happened to occur on 9-11.

On the morning of September 11th, 2001, Dick Cheney was running several war gamesin the north eastern portion of the United States. These drills included many hijacking scenarios, where commercial jets were hijacked and flown into buildings. At the same time Cheney had arranged for a drill involving a bio attack on NY. This resulted in FEMA setting up a command post on pier 29 in New York on September 10th.

Some of these drill were scheduled for later in the year but Dick Cheney rescheduled them and made sure that they all took place on the same day. This was unprecedented.

The war games involved live fly exercises, and electronic drills where fake blips were placed on radar screens. Cheney was in charge of a communications system that superseded those of the FAA, NORAD and NEADS. Some of the drills possibly included remote control planes.

This caused tremendous confusion and that is the partial reason why there was a delay in deploying the fighter jets. Isn’t this too much of a coincidence especially since Bush said no one couldn’t possibly have foreseen such a terrorist attack?

http://tvnewslies.org/html/9_11_facts.html

http://tvnewslies.org/html/refusing_the_9_11_evide...

Now the enemy of the United States and the CIA is supposed to be Al Qaeda, namely Osama bin Laden but it is a known fact that bin Laden is a former CIA agent and that Bush is great friends with the bin Laden family.

On November 2, 2001, the French newspaper Le Figaro reported that while Osama bin Laden was in a Dubai hospital (9) receiving treatment for a chronic kidney infection in July of that year, he was met with a top CIA official, presumably the chief of station. It took place in his private suite at the American hospital in Dubai at the same time Osama was wanted for the bombings of two US embassies and the attack on the USS Cole. He was even eligible for execution according to a 2000 intelligence finding issued by President Bill Clinton before he left office, but on July 14th, 2001, he was allowed to leave Dubai and there was no American resistance to that.

In January of 2001, the Bush Administration had ordered the FBI and intelligence agencies to “back off” investigations involving the bin Laden family, which included two of bin Laden’s relatives, Omar and Abdullah. Those two were living in Falls Church, Va, which happened to be situated right next to CIA headquarters.

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/02_11_02...

This is the stuff I have so far. More later.


Longhunter 4 years ago

You wrote: @Longhunter, I noticed that you had no rebuttal.

There's no rebuttal because I take what the experts say as the truth rather than long winded diatribe of a raving lunatic. This opinion applies to ANYONE who thinks 911 was an inside job in any way, whether they be here on HubPages or anywhere else.

You have a good, Claire. I'm done with you as I don't suffer the fool of the world.


Claire Evans profile image

Claire Evans 4 years ago from South Africa Author

In other words, you have no rebuttal. What about the experts who say the towers were demolished? Are they raving lunatics? The truth of the matter is you CAN'T refute my arguments and you hate that so much. Therefore to counteract your annoyance, you say I'm crazy. You think that makes you right.

Stop living in denial. Evil thrives because people like you turn a blind eye to the obvious truth.


Longhunter 4 years ago

Yes, they're raving lunatics. The U.S. government wasn't involved in crashing those plane or bring down those buildings. There is no Easter Bunny, Tooth Fairy, or Santa. The only conspiracy was among the terrorists and the voices in yours and some other lunatics heads. The sooner you realize that, the sooner you can begin your path to recovery.

I'm not annoyed as I see fools for what they are – FOOLS.

You're gullible and you've allowed yourself to be suckered in. There's no need for me to refute your arguments as none of them are based in true evidence.

You have a good day, Claire. I wish you better mental health for the future.


CMerritt profile image

CMerritt 4 years ago from Pendleton, Indiana

Claire, ask yourself ONE question.

What difference does it make IF the towers fell or was just hit by a plane?

An attack is an attack.

I don't think ANYONE (other than the radical islamic militants)had anything to gain by seeing to it the towers fell.

As an American, be it 30, 3,000 or 30,000 people being killed would NOT have impacted a harsh military strike any less. An outright attack on US citizens on US soil is enough of a blantant reason to respond with a powerful might.

All of this "conspiracy" talk is nothing more than just talk.

The only REAL FACTS remain....that 19 radical islamic militants, known as al-Qaeda, hijacked four passenger jets. Then they intentionally flew two of the planes into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center when they both collapsed. Another plane THEN crashed into the Pentagon. Then the forth one crashed into a field near in Pennsylvania after passengers attempted to take control before it could reach they hit another target Washington, D.C.

When it was all said and done, nearly 3,000 died in these attacks.

Osama bin Laden claimed responsibility for the attacks...and despite the long time it took, we killed him.

Because of this horrible event, the US took action against countries we believed who habored, and trained al-Qaeda and other radical islamic militants who have disdain towards such as the US.

Many other countries felt compelled to support this cause, and aided these efforts.

That is it in a nutshell....I think all of this other talk is nothing more than a ploy to discredit this action.


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 4 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

Hi Claire,

You have have lots of questions, but still not one shred of hard evidence to back your main accusation...that the US was complicit in the attacks of 9-11.

We all saw the buildings collapse exactly where the planes hit them, and when the tremendous weight of the stories above the impact zone began moving, the energy of their moving weight simply crushed the building below it.

Watch this video.You can plainly see the walls suddenly cave in as the tower begins to collapse. You can also plainly see that the free-falling debris is well below the area where the building is collapsing:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-856477210...

So much for the free-fall claim!

I suggest you apply Occam's razor here!


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 4 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

BTW, you obviously don't like the US, so your bias in claiming a conspiracy is clearly coloring your objectivity. If you can't produce solid evidence that the US was involved in 9-11, you simply have no case, and neither does anyone else, which is why most people scoff at this and no prosecutor has brought charges.

We all saw the planes crash into the building at full throttle, and we all saw the buildings collapse at those impact points. We all saw the steel beams and debris free-falling well below the line of collapse, so in the end, all your theories are baseless, especially since there’s no evidence of a US involvement and no reasonable motive.


Claire Evans profile image

Claire Evans 4 years ago from South Africa Author

@Longhunter,

Only a "raving lunatic" cannot realize a demolition when they see one. Al Qaeda is brilliant, I must hand it to them. They can defy the law of physics. Did they hide the molten steel in the basement of the WTCs? And what about WTC7? Why molten steel there.

Your insults indicate a very poor argument. I tell you what. I'll give you the opportunity to prove yourself. What evidence do YOU have Al Qaeda was involved? Or are you gullible?

Not even the FBI could find the evidence so I'm really looking forward to see yours.

Why do you think that Osama bin Laden was never wanted for 9-11?

http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/usama-bin-laden

The FBI replied it is because they didn't have any evidence.

I strongly believe that there were Al Qaeda members who allowed themselves to be the face of 9-11. However, I personally don't think there was anyone in the planes when they smashed into the towers. That is another issue altogether and won't go into further because I feel the other issues are more important.


Claire Evans profile image

Claire Evans 4 years ago from South Africa Author

“Claire, ask yourself ONE question.

What difference does it make IF the towers fell or was just hit by a plane?

An attack is an attack.”

There is a HUGE difference. How would Al Qaeda have put explosives into the twin towers? And in WTC7 without being noticed? It takes time to place explosives in strategic places in the towers. If they are not done accurately, the demolition would have failed. In fact, workers at the twin towers noticed construction in the twin towers a week before the attacks. They even came at night. Here the witnesses:

I’ll tell you who was the director of the company, Securamcom, that provided the electronic security to the WTC. Marvin Bush, younger brother of George Bush Jnr.

One of the witnesses said there was no electronic security the weekend before the attacks so anyone could just walk in. The security cameras were off. They were told that Internet cables were being upgraded. There were numerous evacuations from the towers in the weeks leading up to 9-11. Security alerts were non existent and sniffing dogs removed 5 days prior to the attacks.

I don't think ANYONE (other than the radical islamic militants)had anything to gain by seeing to it the towers fell.

I’ll tell you who had something to gain. The government who know had a pretext to dominate the Middle East (an invasion of Afghanistan was planned months before 9-11) and also the Port Authority who complained that the towers were too expensive to maintain and were making financial losses. When the towers were built, asbestos was coated on the steel. Just before 9-11, an order was issued so that the asbestos had to be removed because it causes cancer. That would have cost over a $1 billion and no insurance company wanted to be responsible for the cost.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHJHAp49Lh8&feature...

There was a man called Larry Silverstein who leased the towers and the WTC7 at the times of the attacks.

“The complex was leased to a partnership of Silverstein Properties and Westfield America. 1 2 The new controllers acquired a handsome insurance policy for the complex including a clause that would prove extremely valuable: in the event of a terrorist attack, the partnership could collect the insured value of the property, and be released from their obligations under the 99-year lease. 3 “

Silverstein made a killing!

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/background/owners....

"“As an American, be it 30, 3,000 or 30,000 people being killed would NOT have impacted a harsh military strike any less. An outright attack on US citizens on US soil is enough of a blantant reason to respond with a powerful might.”"

There is only justification IF there was evidence. The FBI conceded there was none and everybody knows that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and Saddam had no link to Al Qaeda. Despite this, the USA went ahead and attacked Iraq causing the deaths of a million Iraqis.

You are just regurgitating what the media has told you, which they regurgitated dutifully from the government.

"The only REAL FACTS remain....that 19 radical islamic militants, known as al-Qaeda, hijacked four passenger jets. Then they intentionally flew two of the planes into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center when they both collapsed. Another plane THEN crashed into the Pentagon. Then the forth one crashed into a field near in Pennsylvania after passengers attempted to take control before it could reach they hit another target Washington, D.C."

Prove that this happened. What proof do you or the government have of this? How many times has the government been caught on in lies? There WEREN’T 19 hijackers. Five are still alive!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/1559151.stm

"Osama bin Laden claimed responsibility for the attacks...and despite the long time it took, we killed him.

Nonsense, he never claimed responsibility:"

http://articles.cnn.com/2001-09-16/us/inv.binladen...

None of you have attempted to refute my arguments, even the science part. Has it ever occurred to you that the reason you can’t is because I am telling the truth?

Tell me how the core of the towers fell and why they fell in free fall like demolished buildings? Tell me why WTC7 fell from the bottom free fall but WTC5 that sustained worse damage still stood? Why did Rumsfeld not order and evacuation or that fighter jets be scrambled when he knew a hijacked plane was coming to DC? Isn’t it strange that he was one of those who produced a report saying that if America is going to create global dominance, a CATACLYSMIC event, like Pearl Harbour must happen? Then a year later the WTCs were attacked. Why were there practice drills on 9-11 on exactly the same scenario on what happened on 9-11, like the Pentagon and the towers being attacked? Why did Bush say in January 2001 that the FBI must back off investigations into Osama bin Laden? Why did the CIA visit bin Laden in a Dubai hospital months before 9-11?

You have a lot of explaining to do.


Claire Evans profile image

Claire Evans 4 years ago from South Africa Author

Willstar

What on God’s green earth are you talking about? A collapse of one section of a building is not enough to bring the whole building down! Consult my argument on free fall! And that fell due to melted steel. As for the debris falling further than the building…does the debris weigh as much as the towers? Do you know what free fall of a building means? It means there is no resistance at each level of the towers and that is not possible if it is pancaking. The law of conservation of momentum would predict that the buildings would have fallen in 45 seconds. It fell in 15 seconds.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?src_vid=Odp1FO0Vmuw&a...

And pray tell, what other buildings made of steel have fallen in history?

Can you tell me what these explosions are in this video?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8n-nT-luFIw&feature...

There are explosions at the base of the towers. Consult 03:55m. The fire-fighter said there are bombs in the building.

And so I pose again these questions I asked CMerrit:

Tell me how the core of the towers fell and why they fell in free fall like demolished buildings? Tell me why WTC7 fell from the bottom free fall but WTC5 that sustained worse damage still stood? Why did Rumsfeld not order and evacuation or that fighter jets be scrambled when he knew a hijacked plane was coming to DC? Isn’t it strange that he was one of those who produced a report saying that if America is going to create global dominance, a CATACLYSMIC event, like Pearl Harbour must happen? Then a year later the WTCs were attacked. Why were there practice drills on 9-11 on exactly the same scenario on what happened on 9-11, like the Pentagon and the towers being attacked? Why did Bush say in January 2001 that the FBI must back off investigations into Osama bin Laden? Why did the CIA visit bin Laden in a Dubai hospital months before 9-11?


CMerritt profile image

CMerritt 4 years ago from Pendleton, Indiana

Claire,

this one is hard for me to let go....but, when you said "However, I personally don't think there was anyone in the planes when they smashed into the towers. That is another issue altogether and won't go into further because I feel the other issues are more important."

That completely tells me that YOU are not being even close to logical...that one would be easy to prove or disprove...but you choose NOT to go down that road because, and I hate to say this...but you are crazy sister. I try very hard to avoid name-calling, but I really think that you are not thinking logically or with a lick of common sense. Your hatred towards America is allowing you to accept such non-sense as the truth.

With every ounce of respect I can muster right now, I offer you some sincere advice. You should focus this energy on issues with your very own country, and try to make it a better place.


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 4 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

You are accusing America of being complicit in the attacks of 9-11, but you have zero evidence to back it up. All you have is the same old theory and conjecture that has been debunked a thousand time. Get back to me when you actually have solid evidence that America had anything to do with 9-11.


Claire Evans profile image

Claire Evans 4 years ago from South Africa Author

@CMerrit,I will go down that road and I will tell you why I think that the planes were POSSIBLY empty. I never stated it as fact.

Over at your hub, I posted a comment on Operation Northwood:

the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities.

The plans were developed as ways to trick the American public and the international community into supporting a war to oust Cuba's then new leader, communist Fidel Castro.

America's top military brass even contemplated causing U.S. military casualties, writing: "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba," and, "casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation."

Details of the plans are described in Body of Secrets (Doubleday), a new book by investigative reporter James Bamford about the history of America's largest spy agency, the National Security Agency. However, the plans were not connected to the agency, he notes.

So you see that the US had plans to fake hijacking planes and blame it on Cuba. The next part is interesting:

The public learned about Operation Northwoods 35 years later, when the Top Secret document was declassified by the John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Review Board. Among other things, Operation Northwoods proposed:

- Faking the crash of an American passenger plane. The disaster was to be accomplished by faking a commercial flight from the US to Jamaica, and having the plane boarded at a public airport by CIA agents disguised as college students going on vacation. An empty remote-controlled plane would follow the commercial flight as it left Florida. The commercial flight’s pilots would radio for help, mention that they had been attacked by a Cuban fighter, then land in secret at Eglin AFB. The empty remote-controlled plane would then be blown out of the sky and the public would be told all the poor college students aboard were killed.

This is an actual United States plan. I'm not making this up. I also curiously noted a woman who witnessed one of the planes going into one of the tower and yelled, "That is not an American airline plane!" I thought maybe that meant it was a military plane operated by remote control.

So you see, I am not crazy. If anyone is crazy, it is those who concocted Operation Northwood.

http://www.tumblr.com/tagged/operation-northwoods

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662&page=1#.Tv...

I don't think you have any courage. You won't and cannot answer the questions I posed to you. It's like you think I made it up or something.

As I said to Willstarr, evil thrives when good men, and I shall call you one, do nothing and turn a blind eye. Satan just needs those people to look the other way to be successful. He KNOWS many people don't have courage. They don't want to face the truth. It destroys their cosy lives. Well, this world is not cosy. We have to stand up against evil!

9-11 affected me badly. I think those who planned and perpetrated this aren't even human, they are so evil. The US government didn't actually orchestrate the event. People like Cheney and Rumsfeld did. Bush knew about it but did absolutely nothing to stop it. He even barred the FBI from investigating bin Laden.

Start to wake up. Have some courage. I do despise your government, the CIA, the Pentagon, etc. Why? When I see American soldiers brain-damaged and without limbs and hear about those who committed suicide because of the war, it tears me up inside. Anger and devastation. When I see Iraqis crying because they have lost loved ones, it, too, devastates me. The United States is not the only culprit. The UK is, too. France showed its evil in its role in the Libyan war. Ahmedinejad is a bastard. Netanyahu is disgusting. So there is no nation on earth that is pure. If this was a hub on Israel, I would be lambasting Israel. However, I only come across Americans on Hubpages.

May the truth set you free.


Claire Evans profile image

Claire Evans 4 years ago from South Africa Author

At Willstar, can’t you read? I’m not sure what about my comment you don’t understand. I’ll post it again:

“Tell me how the core of the towers fell and why they fell in free fall like demolished buildings? Tell me why WTC7 fell from the bottom free fall but WTC5 that sustained worse damage still stood? Why did Rumsfeld not order and evacuation or that fighter jets be scrambled when he knew a hijacked plane was coming to DC? Isn’t it strange that he was one of those who produced a report saying that if America is going to create global dominance, a CATACLYSMIC event, like Pearl Harbour must happen? Then a year later the WTCs were attacked. Why were there practice drills on 9-11 on exactly the same scenario on what happened on 9-11, like the Pentagon and the towers being attacked? Why did Bush say in January 2001 that the FBI must back off investigations into Osama bin Laden? Why did the CIA visit bin Laden in a Dubai hospital months before 9-11?”

Why must I repeat myself over and over again? Must I post more information just for you to put your head right back in the sand? It’s insulting.

WHERE is your evidence that Al Qaeda was responsible?


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 4 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

Let's begin at the beginning. First, let's see your evidence that the US government had anything to do with the events of 9-11.

Until you produce that, all your other theories are pure conjecture and meaningless.


Claire Evans profile image

Claire Evans 4 years ago from South Africa Author

It’s worth mentioning that the United States was not the only country involved. Pakistan was also:

Excerpt:

In late August 2001, barely a couple of weeks before September 11, Senator Bob Graham, Representative Porter Goss and Senator Jon Kyl were on a top level mission in Islamabad, which was barely mentioned by the US media.

Meetings were held with President Pervez Musharraf and with Pakistan's military and intelligence brass including the head of Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) General Mahmoud Ahmad. Amply documented, the ISI is known to support a number of Islamic terrorist organizations. (See Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) athttp://www.cfrterrorism.org/coalition/pakistan2.ht... )

According to the FBI, Indian Intelligence and several press reports, the ISI Head was instrumental in providing financial support to the 9/11 terrorists. General Mahmoud Ahmad had allegedly ordered the transfer of $100.000 to the presumed 9/11 ring-leader Mohamed Atta.

On the morning of September 11, the three lawmakers Bob Graham, Porter Goss and Jon Kyl (who were part of the Congressional delegation to Pakistan) were having breakfast on Capitol Hill with General Ahmad, the alleged "money-man" (to use the FBI expression) behind the 9/11 hijackers. Also present at this meeting were Pakistan's ambassador to the U.S. Maleeha Lodhi and several members of the Senate and House Intelligence committees. This meeting was described by one press report as a "follow-up meeting" to that held in Pakistan in late August.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO308C.html

Here we have a link between the US, Pakistan and the lead hijacker.

The 9-11 Commission’s Report is also dodgy:

“Former FBI director Louis Freeh criticized the 9/11 Commission for ignoring key evidence from Able Danger, which he alleged resulted in false statements being made in the final 9/11 Commission report. For example, the 9/11 Commission concluded that "American intelligence agencies were unaware of Mr. Atta until the day of the attacks," which Mr. Freeh stated appears to be false. He stated that Able Danger had identified Mohammed Atta, the alleged ring-leader of the 19 hijackers, as an Al Qaeda man active in the United States and was tracking him for many months.

Further, Director Freeh criticized the Commission for allowing the Pentagon to withhold key evidence about the facts found by Able Danger and concluded that these inadequacies raised serious questions about the credibility of the 9/11 Commission.[20]”

There is nothing that smacks of guilt more than lies and cover-ups. If innocent, there would be no need to lie.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_9/11...

Despite Osama bin Laden being the most wanted man alive in America at the time, the US didn’t find it all that important to capture him:

“A senior US general said today that al Qa'eda mastermind Osama bin Laden had "taken himself out of the picture" and that his capture was not essential to winning the "war on terror".

General Peter Pace, vice-chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, said at US military headquarters just north of Kabul that the 11,500-strong US-led force hunting al Qa'eda and Taliban militants was not focusing on individuals.

"He (bin Laden) has taken himself out of the picture," Pace told reporters after visiting US troops serving in Afghanistan.

"It is not an individual that is as important as is the ongoing campaign of the coalition against terrorists," he said.”

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/11/22/10690273...

An FAA official destroyed tapes recording by six traffic controllers on the events regarding two hijacked planes.

“At least six air traffic controllers who dealt with two of the hijacked airliners on Sept. 11, 2001, made a tape recording that same day describing the events, but the tape was destroyed by a supervisor without anyone making a transcript or even listening to it, the Transportation Department said in a report today.

But officials at the center never told higher-ups of the tape's existence, and it was later destroyed by an F.A.A. official described in the report as a quality-assurance manager there. That manager crushed the cassette in his hand, shredded the tape and dropped the pieces into different trash cans around the building, according to a report made public today by the inspector general of the Transportation Department.”

And listen to what a former FBI translator had to say:

Sibel Edmonds is a former FBI translator. She blew the whistle on the cover-up of intelligence that names some of the culprits who orchestrated the 9/11 attacks. These culprits are protected by the Justice Department, the State Department, the FBI, the White House and the Senate Judiciary Committee. They are foreign nationals and Americans. Ms. Edmonds is under two gag orders that forbid her to testify in court or mention the names of the people or the countries involved.

http://baltimorechronicle.com/050704SibelEdmonds.s...

But this is not all surprising since Bush barred FBI agents from investigating bin Laden.

And Rumsfeld is one sick bastard:

“CBS) CBS News has learned that barely five hours after American Airlines Flight 77 plowed into the Pentagon, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld was telling his aides to come up with plans for striking Iraq — even though there was no evidence linking Saddam Hussein to the attacks.

That's according to notes taken by aides who were with Rumsfeld in the National Military Command Center on Sept. 11 – notes that show exactly where the road toward war with Iraq began, reportsCBS News National Security Correspondent David Martin.”

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/09/04/septembe...

3000 Americans have just been killed and Rumsfeld is salivating at the thought of invading Iraq.


Claire Evans profile image

Claire Evans 4 years ago from South Africa Author

Former 9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned from the Commission, stating: “It is a national scandal”; “This investigation is now compromised”; and “One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up”.

The Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission (John Farmer) who led the 9/11 staff’s inquiry, said “I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described …. The tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years…. This is not spin. This is not true.”

According to the Co-Chair of the Congressional Inquiry into 9/11 and former Head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Bob Graham, a U.S. government informant was the landlord to two of the hijackers for over a year (but the White House refused to let the 9/11 inquiry interview him)

Lieutenant colonel, 24-year Air Force career, Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs at the Defense Language Institute (Lt. Colonel Steve Butler) said “Of course Bush knew about the impending attacks on America. He did nothing to warn the American people because he needed this war on terrorism.”

U.S. Air Force fighter pilot, former instructor at the USAF Fighter Weapons School and NATO’s Tactical Leadership Program, with a 20-year Air Force career (Lt. Colonel Guy S. Razer) said the following:

“I am 100% convinced that the attacks of September 11, 2001 were planned, organized, and committed by treasonous perpetrators that have infiltrated the highest levels of our government

U.S. Navy ‘Top Gun’ pilot (Commander Ralph Kolstad) who questions the official account of 9/11 and is calling for a new investigation, says “When one starts using his own mind, and not what one was told, there is very little to believe in the official story”

A 29-year CIA veteran, former National Intelligence Officer (NIO) and former Director of the CIA’s Office of Regional and Political Analysis (William Bill Christison) said “I now think there is persuasive evidence that the events of September did not unfold as the Bush administration and the 9/11 Commission would have us believe. … All three [buildings that were destroyed in the World Trade Center] were most probably destroyed by controlled demolition charges placed in the buildings before 9/11.

And so on…


Claire Evans profile image

Claire Evans 4 years ago from South Africa Author

"Until you produce that, all your other theories are pure conjecture and meaningless."

Even without evidence, and there's a lot of it, you can't deny the science. The onus is on YOU to prove Al Qaeda was behind 9-11. That's YOUR claim.


Longhunter 4 years ago

Claire, some hospitals have a special ward commonly known as the psycho ward. I suggest you check yourself into one.

I have yet to see any of your "evidence" that's anything other than laughable.

I'll leave it up to Mr. Starr and CMerritt. I have a very difficult time not insulting fools, especially those that have stuck their nose in where it doesn't belong. Frankly, you're not worth my time.

Good day and seek help, Claire, to get your life back on track.


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 4 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

"The onus is on YOU to prove Al Qaeda was behind 9-11. That's YOUR claim."

No. I said nothing about Al Qaeda.

This is your Hub, not mine, and it's your accusation, so either prove it or admit that you have no hard evidence that the US was complicit in 9-11.


Claire Evans profile image

Claire Evans 4 years ago from South Africa Author

@WillStar"The onus is on YOU to prove Al Qaeda was behind 9-11. That's YOUR claim."

No. I said nothing about Al Qaeda.”

This is what you wrote at CMerrit’s page:

“On September 11, 2001, 19 radical Islamic terrorists hijacked 4 airliners and flew them into the WTC towers, the Pentagon, and into a Pennsylvania farm, just as we all saw”

So who are those radical Islamic terrorists? If you believe the official story, then it must be Al Qaeda you are referring to. Now prove they are guilty of this.

As for you asking me for evidence of the US’s complicity, I will not repeat myself. I have already provided the evidence above and it is not my fault that you just continuously ignore it. I would love to know what constitutes as hard evidence? Bush confessing?

You are wasting your time and mine. If you cannot provide a rebuttal, then move and continue living in denial and at the same time allowing this evil to thrive. That’s the truth. Sorry.


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 4 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

In other words, you don't have a shred of evidence that the US was in any way involved in the attacks of 9-11, so you try to bluster your way through.

My guess is that anyone who doesn't agree with you is 'wasting your time', since any rebuttal will be dismissed anyway, just as you have dismissed mine.

Asking hundreds of questions as to why why so-and-so did so-and-so is not evidence, Claire. It's the refuge of a conspiracy buff!


Claire Evans profile image

Claire Evans 4 years ago from South Africa Author

You still didn't answer my question what would constitute evidence that the US was involved? I'd like to know. You don't have a shred of evidence Al Qaeda was responsible.

You do not answer any of my questions and that is why I deem it a waste of time. A debate is not one-sided. Each side has to refute the other's argument and you aren't doing that.

So let's put this meaningless sparring to an end. I'm starting to get very irritated now.


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 4 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

“You still didn't answer my question what would constitute evidence that the US was involved?”

Anything that is a direct and provable link to the federal government complicity in the attacks of 9-11.

“You don't have a shred of evidence Al Qaeda was responsible.”

I said: “On September 11, 2001, 19 radical Islamic terrorists hijacked 4 airliners and flew them into the WTC towers, the Pentagon, and into a Pennsylvania farm, just as we all saw”

That has been proved beyond any doubt by hundreds of documents and security camera photos that place them in the airports and on the hijacked airliners, show them in videos committing themselves to the suicide mission, and by those who trained them to fly. We know exactly who they were, so your conspiracy denial of their participation is silly.

"So let's put this meaningless sparring to an end. I'm starting to get very irritated now."

That's because I'm getting the best of you with common sense, and you resent it!


Claire Evans profile image

Claire Evans 4 years ago from South Africa Author

LMAO!! Beating me with commons sense? Yikes, the power of denial.

In late August 2001, barely a couple of weeks before September 11, Senator Bob Graham, Representative Porter Goss and Senator Jon Kyl were on a top level mission in Islamabad, which was barely mentioned by the US media.

Meetings were held with President Pervez Musharraf and with Pakistan's military and intelligence brass including the head of Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) General Mahmoud Ahmad. Amply documented, the ISI is known to support a number of Islamic terrorist organizations. (See Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) athttp://www.cfrterrorism.org/coalition/pakistan2.ht )

According to the FBI, Indian Intelligence and several press reports, the ISI Head was instrumental in providing financial support to the 9/11 terrorists. General Mahmoud Ahmad had allegedly ordered the transfer of $100.000 to the presumed 9/11 ring-leader Mohamed Atta.

On the morning of September 11, the three lawmakers Bob Graham, Porter Goss and Jon Kyl (who were part of the Congressional delegation to Pakistan) were having breakfast on Capitol Hill with General Ahmad, the alleged "money-man" (to use the FBI expression) behind the 9/11 hijackers. Also present at this meeting were Pakistan's ambassador to the U.S. Maleeha Lodhi and several members of the Senate and House Intelligence committees. This meeting was described by one press report as a "follow-up meeting" to that held in Pakistan in late August.

What were these lawmakers and members of Congress doing meeting the financier of Mohammed Atta?

It is utterly unfair of you to completely ignore my comments. A lot of effort goes into it. Why should I then take into consideration your claim that there are hundreds of documents and security camera photos? Give me the proof! You'd be laughed at in a court of law for saying that!!

First of all, Rumsfeld said the plane that supposedly crashed in Pennsylvania was shot down therefore there could not have been a struggle with the passengers and hijackers.

Bush lied and said he saw the first plane go into the towers on TV. Huge fail. The footage of that was only shown the next day and he was in the classroom of an elementary school in Florida reading to some kids.

Plans to invade Afghanistan were made months before 9-11. The US was busy negotiating a pipeline deal with the Taliban but it fell through in August 2001. Please consult my latest blog and wait for Part 2, which will be up shortly. Seems a bit convenient 9-11 came along and made all their dreams come true.

Obviously direct proof that the FBI was lying is the fact that they lied about the hijackers. Five are still alive. Why would they lie?

"It was proved that five of the names included in the FBI list had nothing to do with what happened," Al-Faisal told the Arabic Press in Washington after meeting with U.S. President George W. Bush at the White House

Since then, a 6th man was been identified to be alive in Tunisia and a 7th died after 9-11.

“In an April 19 speech delivered to the Common wealth Club in San

Francisco, Mueller said that the purported hijackers, in his words, “left no paper trial.” The FBI director stated flatly:

“In our investigation, we have not uncovered a single piece of paper—either here in the United States or in the treasure trove of information that has turned up in Afghanistan and elsewhere—that mentioned any aspect of the Sept. 11 plot.”

.

In describing Mueller’s evidence fiasco, Los Angeles Times reporters Erich

Lichtblau and Josh Meyer, whose article was reprinted in The Washington

Law enforcement officials say that while they have been able to reconstruct the movements of the hijackers before the attacks—all legal except for a few speeding tickets—they have found no evidence of their actual plotting.

The Times reporters acknowledge that Mueller’s comments “offer the

FBI’s most comprehensive and detailed assessment to date of its investigation, remarkable as much for what investigators have not found as for what they have.”

The FBI director explained away the absence of evidence by making the disingenuous assertion that the hijackers used “meticulous planning, extraordinary secrecy and extensive knowledge of how America works” to conceal their scheme.

Mueller made this claim despite the fact that in the immediate wake of the

Sept. 11 attacks, a variety of U.S. officials and media sources speciously announced, almost instantaneously, that there was firm evidence not only that these 19 Muslim men were agents of Osama bin Laden’s al Qaeda “network” but that they were indeed the individuals who hijacked the doomed flights on Sept. 11.

Mueller seems to forget that early government and media reports loudly hyped “discoveries”—letters and other documents—in the luggage and personal belongings of the presumed hijackers which “proved” that they were on a “mission for Allah,” etc etc.”

http://www.uncle-scam.com/Breaking/april-04/Binder...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zL-IqWavoAE

So all your documents you speak about actually don’t exist. The FBI has no evidence so I’m pretty sure you don’t.

Another thing: There were no Arab names on the passenger’s list of all 4 flights on 9-11.

It still needs to be explained why no fighter jets were scrambled. There was plenty of time to do that. Any comments to the coincidence that there were practice drills on the same day as 9-11 re-enacting the same scenario of what happened on 9-11?

“Planes that lose contact with control towers are usually intercepted by fighter jets inside of ten minutes, as the incident with the golfer's plane a few months earlier so clearly demonstrated. Yet on 9/11, the jetliners that struck New York were allowed to proceed unmolested for more than a half-hour, and the plane that supposedly crashed in Washington was not intercepted for more than an hour and forty minutes after it was widely known that four planes had been hijacked.”

It also needs to be explained why Bush did everything in his power to try and stop independent investigation into 9-11.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/05/15/attack/m...

Bush censored 28 pages of the Congress’s report on 9-11:

The long-awaited congressional report on 9/11 came with a kicker: 28 redacted pages, deemed too sensitive for the unwashed masses, which have generated more discussion than all the other 800-plus pages put together. The censored section deals with "specific sources of foreign support for some of the September 11 hijackers while they were in the United States," as the non-redacted portion puts it. The blankness of these pages, however, hasn't stopped everyone from talking as if they can read the invisible ink detailing all sorts of accusations aimed squarely at the Saudi government.

http://www.antiwar.com/justin/j080103.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1x4TD0WP3pM

It also appears that the hijackers were trained in the United States:

http://www.wanttoknow.info/010915newsweek

It’s also painstakingly obvious that Saudi Arabia was involved, too.

There's something else I want to show you which is VERY interesting. Watch these two videos, which shows very eerie foreknowledge on the part of America. Note that the first video, in which the Illuminati card game is discussed, was designed in 1990. And it wasn't designed by Al Qaeda.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0ToMcjkivk&feature...

Second video is extremely frightening but should seal my argument:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJ27jBnaRlk&feature...

After watching those two videos, you will realize it's game over.

But if it is any comfort to you, the government didn't orchestrate 9-11. It was the Illuminati.


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 4 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

"It is utterly unfair of you to completely ignore my comments. A lot of effort goes into it."

I don't doubt that you have put a great deal of time in this stuff, judging from the length of your comments. But that does not mean that you are right. When all is said and done, you have zero actual proof that the US was complicit in the attacks of 9-11.

Posting hundreds of questions and creating hundreds of insinuations (as conspiracy buffs always do, because they have no actual proof) would not stand up in any real court as evidence. It would be laughed out of the room.

And, of course, every conspiracy buff love to talk about the "Illuminati".

(sigh)


Claire Evans profile image

Claire Evans 4 years ago from South Africa Author

Zero proof? Oh my course, just goes to show that you can't reason with a brain-washed person.

Let's not forgot. You and the FBI, they have conceded this, have ZERO proof Al Qaeda being involved.

Finally, I want to mention the videos. Did you actually watch it? How do you explain that X Files episode originally aired in March 2001 that is about the government attacking their own people using hijacked planes, also operated by remote control, and ploughing them into the twin towers? How did they know that this was going to happen? Were the script writers in cahoots with Al Qaeda? Answer the question.

How is it that a man who is part of the Illuminati designs a card game in 1990 showing the twin towers being blown up at approximately the same place the planes hit them, and the Pentagon? Answer that.

In light of all the evidence, I'm afraid it has been proven that the government was involved. You have no evidence that Al Qaeda is involved so the defense would have a field day with you.

Sigh.

There is no point in trying to reason with you. At least others who believe the official version I've debated with have at least attempted to address my argument. You haven't. Sad.


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 4 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

"In light of all the evidence, I'm afraid it has been proven that the government was involved."

Then take it to court, where they will laugh at your 'evidence'.

You haven't proved a thing. Asking countless absurd "questions" about inane things like X-Files, is not evidence. It's the refuge of conspiracy buffs who actually have no proof at all. All they have are countless and silly theories.


Claire Evans profile image

Claire Evans 4 years ago from South Africa Author

It's just a bit strange that episode was about the US government committing a terrorist act against the people using a hijacked plan operated by remote control and hitting the twin towers with those planse. Wow, that sure is some coincidence! Someone is telepathic for sure! Actually, it was Osama bin Laden that wrote that script.

Anyhoo, we are going round and round in circles which is somewhat tiresome. I could post a video of Bush confessing to 9-11 and you still would not believe it.

So, end of discussion. Thanks for contributing nothing.


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 4 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

To believe you, we must also believe that the US government somehow planted demolitions in the two towers and WT7 without being detected, replaced the airliners with remote controlled drones, and then flew them into the exact floors where the demolitions were located, WITHOUT SETTING THEM OFF!

Such a precision operation would require hundreds of operatives, and all must be forever silent, including the passengers and crews of the missing airliners.

And then the big question...WHY? What on Earth is to be gained by committing such a mass murder and destruction of buildings at such enormous risk of being caught? To what purpose?

It makes no sense at all. That alone ought to tell you that the whole theory is absurd.


Claire Evans profile image

Claire Evans 4 years ago from South Africa Author

I have a strong suspicion that the wiring for the demolition was done when the WTCs were constructed. These things are thought of decades in advance. Even hundreds of years in the case of the New World Order. I don't know if you were following my conversation with Chris, but a week, or a couple of weeks, before the terrorists attacks, there was a lot of construction going on in the towers. The reason given was that new Internet cables were being installed but the dust was incredible so that clearly was not the reason. There were several evacuations drills in those weeks and the surveillance cameras were switched off and the sniffer dogs removed. The surveillance camera would have given evidence of what happened but they were off. The electronic security company was owned by George Bush's brother, Marvin Bush.

As for the airliners, it is very possible that those planes that were said to be hijacked did not make it off the ground and the passengers taken elsewhere. I cannot bear to speculate what happened to them if this did happen. It's pretty clear that no one of them are around today because they would come forward like 5 of the supposed hijackers did.

I think that the bombs were meant to go off at the same time the plane impacted the buildings. Those were not the only explosives. Firefighters reported bombs going off every 18 minutes. Watch the video of "Total Proof that bombs were planted in the towers".

As for operatives not saying anything, you will keep your mouth shut if your life and the lives of your families are threatened. Also to have your voice heard, the media would have to be involved and the media is controlled by the government. I'm surprised that high level people like those in Congress and the CIA and the military have actually spoken up. I find it incredible.

And what is there to be gained? Well, the United States has usurped the governments of Afghanistan and Iraq and are in possession of the oil, as mentioned in that X-Files, "The Lone Gunmen" series. There is a puppet regime in these countries and they aren't independent of Western influence. They now have permanent bases in these countries. Combat troops may be out of Iraq but those running the government aren't. Western companies have lucrative contracts to rebuild these devastated companies.

A permanent military base in the Middle East has always been the goal. Read the "Project for New Century America", which clearly states that if the United States is to become the global super power and for a New World Order to emerge, a "Pearl-Like harbour event had to happen" that would justify an invasion of the Middle East. Then a year later, 9-11 happened. It's pretty clear that was the motive because Rumsfeld was saying 5 hours after the attacks the United States had to invade Iraq. Threats to invade Afghanistan were made by Bush months before 9-11. The pretext was provided by 9-11.

Continuing with the USA global take-over plan, General Wesley Clark said that at the Pentagon a couple of years after 9-11, he was told that the United States was going to invade the following countries by 2006: Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Sudan and Iran. It has already been established that the West, especially the UK and the USA, are behind the Arab Spring. The terrible thing about what happened in Libya is that Al Qaeda were the rebels and they were being armed and trained by the UK and the USA. The very same Al Qaeda that fought and killed American troops in Afghanistan.

You can listen to General Wesley Clark's speech here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53jbRxHSfj4

I want to believe that the United States is innocent of 9-11 but there is just too much evidence to the contrary. It is utterly impossible that they didn't know. The very least the USA is guilty of is knowing full well that 9-11 was going to happen and let it happen for their gain.


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 4 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

Suspicions, speculations, and conjectures are not facts nor evidence.

BTW, the reason I don't respond to your hundreds of questions and claims is because I seen them all hundreds of times, and I've seen them all debunked hundreds of times.

You have no case, Claire! If this went to court, all your 'evidence' would be tossed as mere speculation.


Claire Evans profile image

Claire Evans 4 years ago from South Africa Author

Sigh.

And you have a multitude of evidence that Al Qaeda is responsible for 9-11, I suppose?

Bye Bye, Willstarr!


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 4 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

We have an abundance of evidence that 19 radical Islamic terrorists carried out the attacks of 9-11 at the direction of Osama bin Laden.

I never said specified Al Qaeda, so don't put words in my mouth.


Claire Evans profile image

Claire Evans 4 years ago from South Africa Author

Do I need to put words in your mouth?? You believe the government don't you? You believe it's Al Qaeda right? Or do you think it's the Taliban?

"We have an abundance of evidence that 19 radical Islamic terrorists carried out the attacks of 9-11 at the direction of Osama bin Laden."

You are joking, right? What are you still doing here, Willstarr? None of us are budging from our viewpoints so you are wasting your time here.


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 4 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

I'm here at your invitation. Did you forget?


Claire Evans profile image

Claire Evans 4 years ago from South Africa Author

Lol. I invited you to have a debate, not to have meaningless sparring. You still didn't answer my question: who are the 19 Islamic radicals? Al Qaeda? No? Then who?


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 4 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

Which particular radical Islamic organization they adhered to is irrelevant.

The point you are trying to avoid is their well-documented presence in the airports and on those four airliners, including calls from the on-board cabin attendants.

There is no doubt that they were on those airliners and flew them into the WTC, the Pentagon, and into the field in Pennsylvania.

We know the names of every passenger who died that day, including the 19 terrorists. All four airplanes were identified by traceable serial numbers found on the surviving parts. DNA identified a body part found in the street as belonging to one of the cabin attendants.

To embrace your theory, requires a faith in the incredible that I simply do not possess.


somethgblue profile image

somethgblue 2 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

While you did a good job researching these three topics the article doesn't flow as well as it could, I know it can be difficult but editing and even deleting some sections would help the over all composition of the piece.

For the most part humans have a limited attention span, so make your main points back them up with research and link them to the research.

I would like to make a few points of my own, personally I don't accept the premise that airliners were used at all on 9/11. For one the videos we all saw on TV showed the planes flying too fast. Both MIT and Boeing published reports in 2006 confirming the fact that it is physically impossible for airliners to achieve the speeds that were shown in the videos.

A Boeing 767 cannot fly 480 and 560 (the speeds of the both aircraft on impact of the Towers respectively) below 30,000 feet. Missiles or drones can and AWACs Military aircraft can project holographic images in flight, so sophisticated they can fool radar, holographic images were used in this manner in the First Gulf War.

It is clear the Pentagon wasn't hit by an airliner, confiscating the video made sure this fact was never made public. The crash site in Shanksville showed no airplane parts, just a hole.

No bodies from any of the crash sites were ever recovered. It is far easier to fake manifests than it is to fake bodies.

The Oil Spill was deliberate, for money and to depopulate the region from food supplies. The U.S. Govt., gave the USGS 40 Billion dollars in 2003 to devise a way to depopulate the Gulf Coast region of the United States and they are well on their way.

The Dead Zone in the Gulf is now bigger than the State of New York and growing from decades of pesticides and now a huge oil spill, why? In a word, Algae. A company in Washington (the state) has created the technology to pull crude oil directly from algae but to make it worth while you need a huge algae farm, now they have one, The Gulf of Mexico.

It does two things, moves the scattered population of the bayou's into denser population centers easier to control, deprives them of their livelihood and food supply and creates the world's biggest algae farm, right next door.

Two years before the Haiti earthquake, a huge underground oil reserve was discovered, along with many other precious gems and gold but invading Haiti would be too obvious. The U,S. Navy is conducting rescue exercises off the coast of Haiti days before the earthquake complete with troops and supplies.

HAARP is used to create the earthquake, which kills a at least 300,000, the U.S. Navy is Johnny on the Spot and sails to the rescue but not enough Haitians are killed so malaria is introduced which kills another 250,000.

U.S. companies are now free to tap the unlimited oil reserves, gold and precious minerals and the public is none the wiser.

For the research go to my profile page and scroll down, you'll find the pertinent articles and I provide links to all my research.

So while you did a good job, the rabbit hole goes much deeper than you suspect, waking up and writing about it is one thing but you must realize there is an agenda behind these crimes that goes far deeper than just money, negligence or censorship, it is called the NWO and it is real.


Bernadete 23 months ago

US wildfires reluagrly melt traffic signs and road delimiters. In this case, could it just have been the battery? Lead has a fairly low melting point. A friends car burned out after an accident and his SCUBA weight belt made of lead completely disappeared in the trunk. (Not to put down the magnitude of the Australian fires. A lot of the remainders will probably be toxic. Not sure what happens with the sulfuric acid etc.)


Claire Evans profile image

Claire Evans 22 months ago from South Africa Author

Hi, somethngblue, this article was written years ago and I promise my writing skills have improved since then!

I have heard of the hologram theory about the planes but I don't quite subscribe to it. There were definitely no commercial planes involved. There were witnesses who said it looked like military planes. My theory is that they were actually nuclear missiles.

Again, I think a missile hit the Pentagon and there was no sign of a plane that supposedly crashed in Pennsylvania. In fact, Rumsfeld let it slip that the plane was shot down. The footage we saw definitely was not the scene of the crash.

Thanks for the update about the Gulf. I agree with you.

It's shocking that Haiti has not changed since 5 years ago. They have been forgotten.

You are right, things go much deeper. Much deeper I've realized since writing this blog. Thanks again.


Claire Evans profile image

Claire Evans 22 months ago from South Africa Author

Could you clarify, please, Bernadete?


somethgblue profile image

somethgblue 22 months ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

I know the 'no plane' theory is a tough one to accept but the biggest piece of info I have found is MIT and Boeing's (2006) internet report detailing the speed of both 'planes' seen on TV. Both of them determined the planes were flying too fast for that altitude, physically impossible to achieve. Neither plane could achieve 480 mph and 565 mph respectively when they hit below thirty thousand feet, so they had to be missiles.

AWACs were seen over NY and DC during the attacks. These planes are designed to guide missiles and fighters to their targets. Holographic technology was used in the first Gulf War, the military bragged about how successful it was, even fooling radar other planes and observers on the ground.

Dan Rather admitted not seeing the second plane hit despite watching a 'live' feed, multiple witness also saw no plane and had to be told. We know no plane hit the Pentagon, we know no plane crashed in PA.

John Greer tells of setting up a simulator and having 10 pilots with 30,000 hours a piece flying experience take ten tries a piece to hit the towers flying at 480 and 565 and none could do it. Why do you think they removed all the little digital readouts from the backs of seats on airliners across the country that showed your speed and altitude right after 9/11, they didn't want people making the connection the way I did.

I'm telling you it all adds up, no bodies, no airplane parts, NO PLANES, missiles were used with holograms covering their flight paths. That is why on the video you see the plane's wings seem to vanish, it was animation on TV holograms in the air.

As far as the nano-thermite explosives, nuclear devices and SDI satellite energy weapons being used WHY NOT ALL THREE? If you microwave the building from a space platform it explains why all the folks were jumping and the drywall turning too dust, they were getting cooked. The thermite weakens the steel beams and nukes gets rid of any remaining evidence.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working