Off Topic · Proof the Bombs not planes took down WTC (page 2)
Allanfan20 wrote:Silverfuel wrote:Marv: I guess this one is on me because I emailed that link to him. I didnt post it here because it is a sensitive topic and its never possible to tell how people will react but it is a credible source. For the record, this is not exactly a conspiracy theory. CNN interviewed several people that were in the WTC towers before the planes hit. They all said they heard bombs going off way before the planes hit.There are a lot of people that share playa's point of view on this including american politicians and scientist. I dont think it is fair to call for someone to be banned because of this thread.
It is a conspiracy theory. What Playa is trying to get to is that Bush's people set up that bomb to make it look like a terrorist attack, which already doesn't make sense. Why not just have one of their own pilots fly into the building, if that were the case. Obviously the planes alone are enough to take the building down.
And don't you think that there would have been MUCH more coverage if their were a bomb? It doesn't make an inkling of sense.
I'm sorry, but playa is just spitting out bullcrap again.
Listen Allan, I was in the military, you don't know what's going on and what we are capable of doing in secrecy.
One popular conspiracy theory suggests there was a suspiciously high volume of put options placed on United Airlines and American Airlines stocks just before 9/11. According to this theory, trading insiders knew in advance of the coming events of 9/11 and placed their bets accordingly. An analysis by Allen M. Poteshman into the possibility of insider trading on 9/11 concludes that:
"A measure of abnormal long put volume was also examined and seen to be at abnormally high levels in the days leading up to the attacks. Consequently, the paper concludes that there is evidence of unusual option market activity in the days leading up to September 11 that is consistent with investors trading on advance knowledge of the attacks." [56]
On the days leading up to 9/11, two airlines saw a rise in their put to call ratio. These two airlines were United Airlines and American Airlines, the two airlines whose planes were hijacked on 9/11. Between 6 and 7 September, the Chicago Board Options Exchange saw purchases of 4,744 "put" option contracts in UAL versus 396 call options. On 10 September, more trading in Chicago saw the purchase of 4,516 put options in American Airlines, the other airline involved in the hijackings. This compares with a mere 748 call options in American purchased that day. No others airline companies saw anomalies in their put to call ratio in the days leading up to the attacks.[57] American Airlines however, had just released a major warning about possible losses.[58]
Insurance companies saw anomalous trading activities as well. Citigroup Inc., which has estimated that its Travelers insurance unit may pay $500 million in claims from the World Trade Center attack, had about 45 times the normal volume during three trading days before the attack for options that profit if the stock falls below $40. Citigroup shares fell $1.25 in late trading to $38.09. Morgan Stanley, which occupied 22 floors at the World Trade Center, experienced bigger-than-normal pre-attack trading of options that profit when stock prices fall. Other companies that were directly affected by the tragedy had similar jumps
Allanfan20 wrote:Silverfuel wrote:Its playa spitting out a youtube link of a CNN video.Yeah well I tend to not go for youtube links like that. I'd need A LOT more evidence to show that this was a bomb. And there's also A LOT of ways to make a video like that, and make it look like a serious CNN report. Who were those people in the interviews? When were the interviews honestly done? Come on, be honest. Who put that youtube video together? Were those clips actually shown on CNN or were they from some computer/video junkie who goes for conspiracys like playa does? To me, it doesn't show anything, and I need A LOT more, and it has to come from someone not named Playa, for a start, for me to start listening.
I'm sorry, but I just tend to look at what Playa says in just about all of his posts, and read bullcrap. They all lack substance, including this one.
Nobody is twisting your arm to view or comment. It's not my intention to try and convince you.
nyk4ever wrote:they decided that they don't need either one of the towers anymore and what better way to get rid of them then by flying planes and exploding bombs into them on purpose. all while killing thousands of people and destroying blocks of NYC.if they wanted to do this on purpose, im pretty sure they would have had a better plan than to lose two of the most iconic buildings in the whole united states of america.
I don't think there is enough evidence that shows the Government's implicit involvement in the 9/11 attacks however there are some valid questions that should have been asked. Ask this question if 9/11 never happens would the American public and the House/Senate have supported a war in Afghanistan/Iraq? So if you follow the logic that Bush and his inner circle went into office with the agenda of invading Iraq/Afghanistan how else would have they drummed up support for invading coutries that most Americans can't even find on a map?
Also just look into the numerous warnings that were given to not only Bush's upper cabinet, but FBI, CIA, FAA all these agencies were aware at some level that an attack was imminent. Is our Government that incomptent are they that cavalier about the safety of American lives?
Allanfan20 wrote:bitty41 wrote:Allanfan20 wrote:Silverfuel wrote:Marv: I guess this one is on me because I emailed that link to him. I didnt post it here because it is a sensitive topic and its never possible to tell how people will react but it is a credible source. For the record, this is not exactly a conspiracy theory. CNN interviewed several people that were in the WTC towers before the planes hit. They all said they heard bombs going off way before the planes hit.There are a lot of people that share playa's point of view on this including american politicians and scientist. I dont think it is fair to call for someone to be banned because of this thread.
It is a conspiracy theory. What Playa is trying to get to is that Bush's people set up that bomb to make it look like a terrorist attack, which already doesn't make sense. Why not just have one of their own pilots fly into the building, if that were the case. Obviously the planes alone are enough to take the building down.
And don't you think that there would have been MUCH more coverage if their were a bomb? It doesn't make an inkling of sense.
I'm sorry, but playa is just spitting out bullcrap again.
There has been some documentation that suggested that President Roosevelt was aware of the Pearl Harbor attack before it occurred and did nothing. The reasoning for why he didn't authorize a preemptive attack is because he knew Americans would never support US involvement in WW2 (this was during the time when the US had a very isolationist Foreign Policy). I reiterate this claim with a heavy heart because Roosevelt imo was one of this country's greatest Presidents.So are you saying that because that is an accusation (Which you never said you believed) then this is a possibility?
I'm just saying that a government cover-up is not beyond the realm of possibility when looking at historical references.
bitty41 wrote:nyk4ever wrote:they decided that they don't need either one of the towers anymore and what better way to get rid of them then by flying planes and exploding bombs into them on purpose. all while killing thousands of people and destroying blocks of NYC.if they wanted to do this on purpose, im pretty sure they would have had a better plan than to lose two of the most iconic buildings in the whole united states of america.
I don't think there is enough evidence that shows the Government's implicit involvement in the 9/11 attacks however there are some valid questions that should have been asked. Ask this question if 9/11 never happens would the American public and the House/Senate have supported a war in Afghanistan/Iraq? So if you follow the logic that Bush and his inner circle went into office with the agenda of invading Iraq/Afghanistan how else would have they drummed up support for invading coutries that most Americans can't even find on a map?
Also just look into the numerous warnings that were given to not only Bush's upper cabinet, but FBI, CIA, FAA all these agencies were aware at some level that an attack was imminent. Is our Government that incomptent are they that cavalier about the safety of American lives?
listen, i'm not trying to say that i don't think things like this happen and believe me, i'm all about the illuminati and conspiracies, but cmon bombs going off? there is no point a friggen jet flies into the WTC and all that gas is going to cause a big enough explosion and heat to do all the damage that was intended to be done.
bitty41 wrote:nyk4ever wrote:they decided that they don't need either one of the towers anymore and what better way to get rid of them then by flying planes and exploding bombs into them on purpose. all while killing thousands of people and destroying blocks of NYC.if they wanted to do this on purpose, im pretty sure they would have had a better plan than to lose two of the most iconic buildings in the whole united states of america.
I don't think there is enough evidence that shows the Government's implicit involvement in the 9/11 attacks however there are some valid questions that should have been asked. Ask this question if 9/11 never happens would the American public and the House/Senate have supported a war in Afghanistan/Iraq? So if you follow the logic that Bush and his inner circle went into office with the agenda of invading Iraq/Afghanistan how else would have they drummed up support for invading coutries that most Americans can't even find on a map?
Also just look into the numerous warnings that were given to not only Bush's upper cabinet, but FBI, CIA, FAA all these agencies were aware at some level that an attack was imminent. Is our Government that incomptent are they that cavalier about the safety of American lives?
Bitty, Halliburton was awarded a contract to rebuild a country for which there was no need to build it. How do you get a contract to rebuild a country BEFORE the country has been destroyed ? I'm just sayin???
Also FEMA just so happen to be in NYC at the time and cleaned UP THE DEBRIS and shipped it out, before anyone could inspect it.
The debris from ground-zero, for example, was removed without a proper forensic investigation, making it very difficult to discover why the World Trade Center buildings collapsed.
A child can figure this out.
The Japanese were invading China and we had enacted an embargo on them blocking Steel and Oil shipments to starve out their efforts. They saw our pacific fleet in Pearl Harbor as a threat and took a preemptive strike to hamper our effort. We used this to garner anger and mobilize our industrial complex to a milatary one. There are lots of evidence to suggest we knew prior. Same for Gulf of Tonkin to anger public to support Vietnam, Sinking of the "Maine" warship in Havana harbor which was the first media freenzy of sorts for us to push the Spanish out of the hemisphere and the sinking of the "Lusitania" passanger ship to get us into WWI.
Our melting pot history of different cultures in the country makes it hard to go to war. We don't have nationalistic tendancies like countries that are dominant on one culture, religion or ethnic background. Being isolated on our continent created as sense of security and ambivilant attitude towards "others continents problems". The threat of an attack here made for great motivation. The Japanese could never mount an occupation of any consequence for any length of time.
Bush history of wealth and politics are generated from the onset of Prescott Bush and his investment banking history with Brown Brothers Harriman. Perhaps more of a shrewd dealer than nazi supporter he made a lot of money financing what was thought to be the new european socialistic power. That power was considered to be a workable partner against the Soviet machine. They at least held their bargain to fight the Reds. Many financil banks profited from such financing besides Bush and this was pre war and it was not considered in the early 30's that the Nazi's would also turn to such sociopath phuchhead like tatics and eventual genecide to fulfil their potential. In any event even Brown Brothers Harriman's connections (thyssen) would be arrested by the Nazis in France. Bush sold his holdings for 1.5mil after wwII. A lot of money back then.
How else could such a Bone Head like "W" ever get into office...............
Twin Towers being the modern motivation to fear our participation is not out of the relm in my opinion. I don't think our entry was all that graceful (weapons of mass destruction)but lets be real, Saddam was trying to get the sanctions lifed to sell oil and free up some impressive cashflow to likley buy and develope new ones so our preemptive strike might be very unpopular but MIGHT have some merit at a level by which the general public might not get.
I also believe Saudi Oil money is in better hands with the monarch buying Gold Plated Roll ROyces then in the hands of radical fundamentalist' who would not build schools, invest in economy or health care but in fundamentalist expansion and maybe be an even bigger threat. We back murderous asses like the Shah of Iran because he was better than having Iran fall into the soviet relm and give them a warm water port and oil at that time. Eventually backing a Murderous Phuch has its downside and eventually Iran fell into the fundmentalist group that hates us for who and what we did.
Our involvment in the middle east post WWII is about keeping the crisis of the day in check and moving forward. The table was long set before we ever got there.
Its sickening to think that 2400 people lost thier lives that day and countless injuries, but maybe they died not in vain but a price paid to put us on guard and take the fight to their soil before they got financially stronger and able to do even worse damage either biological or low sophisticated "nuclear" dirty bomb. That too is plausible.
Im not saying I condone or support such things nor know of anything other than trying to look at the big picture with some clarity. Its ugly at times. Life is too short to worry about conspiricies.
Nalod wrote:Im with bitty here and believe its plausible but can't get my head around who and how.The Japanese were invading China and we had enacted an embargo on them blocking Steel and Oil shipments to starve out their efforts. They saw our pacific fleet in Pearl Harbor as a threat and took a preemptive strike to hamper our effort. We used this to garner anger and mobilize our industrial complex to a milatary one. There are lots of evidence to suggest we knew prior. Same for Gulf of Tonkin to anger public to support Vietnam, Sinking of the "Maine" warship in Havana harbor which was the first media freenzy of sorts for us to push the Spanish out of the hemisphere and the sinking of the "Lusitania" passanger ship to get us into WWI.
Our melting pot history of different cultures in the country makes it hard to go to war. We don't have nationalistic tendancies like countries that are dominant on one culture, religion or ethnic background. Being isolated on our continent created as sense of security and ambivilant attitude towards "others continents problems". The threat of an attack here made for great motivation. The Japanese could never mount an occupation of any consequence for any length of time.
Bush history of wealth and politics are generated from the onset of Prescott Bush and his investment banking history with Brown Brothers Harriman. Perhaps more of a shrewd dealer than nazi supporter he made a lot of money financing what was thought to be the new european socialistic power. That power was considered to be a workable partner against the Soviet machine. They at least held their bargain to fight the Reds. Many financil banks profited from such financing besides Bush and this was pre war and it was not considered in the early 30's that the Nazi's would also turn to such sociopath phuchhead like tatics and eventual genecide to fulfil their potential. In any event even Brown Brothers Harriman's connections (thyssen) would be arrested by the Nazis in France. Bush sold his holdings for 1.5mil after wwII. A lot of money back then.
How else could such a Bone Head like "W" ever get into office...............
Twin Towers being the modern motivation to fear our participation is not out of the relm in my opinion. I don't think our entry was all that graceful (weapons of mass destruction)but lets be real, Saddam was trying to get the sanctions lifed to sell oil and free up some impressive cashflow to likley buy and develope new ones so our preemptive strike might be very unpopular but MIGHT have some merit at a level by which the general public might not get.
I also believe Saudi Oil money is in better hands with the monarch buying Gold Plated Roll ROyces then in the hands of radical fundamentalist' who would not build schools, invest in economy or health care but in fundamentalist expansion and maybe be an even bigger threat. We back murderous asses like the Shah of Iran because he was better than having Iran fall into the soviet relm and give them a warm water port and oil at that time. Eventually backing a Murderous Phuch has its downside and eventually Iran fell into the fundmentalist group that hates us for who and what we did.
Our involvment in the middle east post WWII is about keeping the crisis of the day in check and moving forward. The table was long set before we ever got there.
Its sickening to think that 2400 people lost thier lives that day and countless injuries, but maybe they died not in vain but a price paid to put us on guard and take the fight to their soil before they got financially stronger and able to do even worse damage either biological or low sophisticated "nuclear" dirty bomb. That too is plausible.
Im not saying I condone or support such things nor know of anything other than trying to look at the big picture with some clarity. Its ugly at times. Life is too short to worry about conspiricies.
Yes Nalod, even though we rarely agree i'm with you on this . 911 was the new Pearl Harbor , same motive to start a war.
People who refute this think everything should be laid out and easily figured out. THEY TRIED TO START WAR SOMETHING WITH CUBA WHEN KENNEDY WAS IN OFFICE WITH "operationnorthwoods" Kennedy didn't go along with THE PLAN and eventually got whacked for getting in the way !
1962 Pentagon plan to attack US civilians that would be blamed on Castro's Cuba to "justify" US invasion, made public knowledge four months before 9/11. It is not precisely the same scenario as 9/11, but there are some startling similarities.
www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/
In his new exposé of the National Security Agency entitled Body of Secrets, author James Bamford highlights a set of proposals on Cuba by the Joint Chiefs of Staff codenamed OPERATION NORTHWOODS. This document, titled “Justification for U.S. Military Intervention in Cuba” was provided by the JCS to Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara on March 13, 1962, as the key component of Northwoods. Written in response to a request from the Chief of the Cuba Project, Col. Edward Lansdale, the Top Secret memorandum describes U.S. plans to covertly engineer various pretexts that would justify a U.S. invasion of Cuba. These proposals - part of a secret anti-Castro program known as Operation Mongoose - included staging the assassinations of Cubans living in the United States, developing a fake “Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington,” including “sink[ing] a boatload of Cuban refugees (real or simulated),” faking a Cuban airforce attack on a civilian jetliner, and concocting a “Remember the Maine” incident by blowing up a U.S. ship in Cuban waters and then blaming the incident on Cuban sabotage. Bamford himself writes that Operation Northwoods “may be the most corrupt plan ever created by the U.S. government.”
President Kennedy had changed his mind on the Cold War, had stopped nuclear testing in the atmosphere, and signed an order to start withdrawing troops from Vietnam. Kennedy promised to shatter the CIA into a thousand pieces, and the CIA shattered Kennedy into a thousand pieces.
The assassination was a coup d'etat against democracy.
Who told that young man to not take the place on shielding the president on the back of the car.
Allanfan20 wrote:Silverfuel wrote:Its playa spitting out a youtube link of a CNN video.Yeah well I tend to not go for youtube links like that. I'd need A LOT more evidence to show that this was a bomb. And there's also A LOT of ways to make a video like that, and make it look like a serious CNN report. Who were those people in the interviews? When were the interviews honestly done? Come on, be honest. Who put that youtube video together? Were those clips actually shown on CNN or were they from some computer/video junkie who goes for conspiracys like playa does? To me, it doesn't show anything, and I need A LOT more, and it has to come from someone not named Playa, for a start, for me to start listening.
I'm sorry, but I just tend to look at what Playa says in just about all of his posts, and read bullcrap. They all lack substance, including this one.
9/11 was allowed and assisted to create the pretext for Homeland Security and Peak Oil wars.
Foreknowledge is proven beyond reasonable doubt - the only question is the precise amount of technical assistance from the Cheney administration to ensure that the attacks happened as desired. Why is more important than how.
The Bush regime deliberately allowed 9/11 to happen, suppressed FBI investigations (the agents had figured out what was coming), and ignored warnings from allied countries. A few corporate, military and political elites seem to have been given quiet warnings not to fly that day or to get out of the way (these claims are documented by the mainstream media sources).
Stock trades were placed on United, American and other impacted companies just before 9/11, and large trades like those are monitored by CIA. This scandal was covered widely in the international press until some of the "put options" were linked to a company with CIA connections by Michael Ruppert's publication From the Wilderness about a month after 9/11.
The Air Force and CIA scheduled war game exercises that morning that paralyzed the air defenses.
It is likely that remote control technology was used to "hijack the hijackers" to steer Flight 77 into the nearly empty, recently reconstructed and strengthened sector (instead of the crowded parts of the Pentagon)
TMS wrote:haven't we discussed this topic to death already a few years back? i don't see anything new in this thread that we haven't already covered in previous 9/11 conspiracy discussions.
SO STAY AWAY and talk basketball ! Many have watched our nation turn on it's people and realize that something is indeed wrong. Government turned on the American public yrs ago, so many are opening their eyes and see that what they have been telling us has been a bunch of lies. If Nalod and I agree you know something is up.
TMS wrote:haven't we discussed this topic to death already a few years back? i don't see anything new in this thread that we haven't already covered in previous 9/11 conspiracy discussions.
there is new information coming out almost every month
playa2 wrote:TMS wrote:haven't we discussed this topic to death already a few years back? i don't see anything new in this thread that we haven't already covered in previous 9/11 conspiracy discussions.SO STAY AWAY and talk basketball ! Many have watched our nation turn on it's people and realize that something is indeed wrong. Government turned on the American public yrs ago, so many are opening their eyes and see that what they have been telling us has been a bunch of lies. If Nalod and I agree you know something is up.
I said I can understand the use of such actions to motivate but can't but my head around deliberate instiation by the government. I am not a conspiracy kind of dude. I can understand the need for such things as evil as they may be. Killing Kennedy is kind of accepted don't ya think? Maybe in hindsight some of pre-war antics could be argued as both immoral and at the same time perhaps useful to actually save lives if yup think we were doomed to enter those wars or be victims of terror in a worse way. Food for thought.
playa, this is all so been played out many many times!
Nalod wrote:playa2 wrote:TMS wrote:haven't we discussed this topic to death already a few years back? i don't see anything new in this thread that we haven't already covered in previous 9/11 conspiracy discussions.SO STAY AWAY and talk basketball ! Many have watched our nation turn on it's people and realize that something is indeed wrong. Government turned on the American public yrs ago, so many are opening their eyes and see that what they have been telling us has been a bunch of lies. If Nalod and I agree you know something is up.
I said I can understand the use of such actions to motivate but can't but my head around deliberate instiation by the government. I am not a conspiracy kind of dude. I can understand the need for such things as evil as they may be. Killing Kennedy is kind of accepted don't ya think? Maybe in hindsight some of pre-war antics could be argued as both immoral and at the same time perhaps useful to actually save lives if yup think we were doomed to enter those wars or be victims of terror in a worse way. Food for thought.playa, this is all so been played out many many times!
Nalod,so why did you join in the discussion, JUST CURIOUS ?
playa2 wrote:Nalod wrote:playa2 wrote:TMS wrote:haven't we discussed this topic to death already a few years back? i don't see anything new in this thread that we haven't already covered in previous 9/11 conspiracy discussions.SO STAY AWAY and talk basketball ! Many have watched our nation turn on it's people and realize that something is indeed wrong. Government turned on the American public yrs ago, so many are opening their eyes and see that what they have been telling us has been a bunch of lies. If Nalod and I agree you know something is up.
I said I can understand the use of such actions to motivate but can't but my head around deliberate instiation by the government. I am not a conspiracy kind of dude. I can understand the need for such things as evil as they may be. Killing Kennedy is kind of accepted don't ya think? Maybe in hindsight some of pre-war antics could be argued as both immoral and at the same time perhaps useful to actually save lives if yup think we were doomed to enter those wars or be victims of terror in a worse way. Food for thought.playa, this is all so been played out many many times!
Nalod,so why did you join in the discussion, JUST CURIOUS ?
Playa, its not all black or white. Eyes open or Closed. Lots of gray areas.
Its not like we just wake up from some fairy tale and realize that somehow our governemnt has agenda's and we are shocked. I believe this is true for all countries in history. WE can't handle the truth and for the most part just want to go about our business the best we can. Im speaking for the masses.
Ok, So lets say I believe the intent of SOME "conspiricies" are just a methoed to incite extra motivation. IN WWII we were "isolationists" thinking it was europes problem and was not intersted in joining even thought we had moral obligation. But perhaps it was in our best interests to join beyond reasons the Average person can comprehend.
This may be true with the Trade center. MAY BE TRUE, NOT NALODS BELIEF. But it warrants decusion.
It seems like your looking for some truth and that these things are inheritly evil. Do you sacrifice 2400 people to save 50,000? Its abstract.
So Im ingaging in the conversation not at the level you are which is to post links to try to convince us point by point, but to look at the reasons why such a thing would happen other than pure greed.
WE all know Haliburton is evil and the gov't gonna enrich Bush's and others. What else is new?
playa2 wrote:TMS wrote:haven't we discussed this topic to death already a few years back? i don't see anything new in this thread that we haven't already covered in previous 9/11 conspiracy discussions.SO STAY AWAY and talk basketball ! Many have watched our nation turn on it's people and realize that something is indeed wrong. Government turned on the American public yrs ago, so many are opening their eyes and see that what they have been telling us has been a bunch of lies. If Nalod and I agree you know something is up.
you're not presenting any new evidence, just rehashing the same ol' sheit that was discussed ad nauseum a few years back... that's all i'm sayin... don't shout at me you tired ass biotch.
Its the same old same old. ON the internet does not make ALL THINGS CREDIBLE!
Thats the point.
If your going to use this audiance as your pulpit and rehash old stuff then I suppose its time to back to time out.
If its new, topical, and relevant then its worthy.
WHo decides? Well I guess we all do to some extent. Martin is very lax on most things. I think anyone who does a "Ground Hog Rant", saying the same things over and over but expecting a different result then I suppose it flames out against.
TMS wrote:playa2 wrote:TMS wrote:haven't we discussed this topic to death already a few years back? i don't see anything new in this thread that we haven't already covered in previous 9/11 conspiracy discussions.SO STAY AWAY and talk basketball ! Many have watched our nation turn on it's people and realize that something is indeed wrong. Government turned on the American public yrs ago, so many are opening their eyes and see that what they have been telling us has been a bunch of lies. If Nalod and I agree you know something is up.
you're not presenting any new evidence, just rehashing the same ol' sheit that was discussed ad nauseum a few years back... that's all i'm sayin... don't shout at me you tired ass biotch.
Are you serious ??? Wow
Respected Middle East expert and former BBC presenter Alan Hart has broken his silence on 9/11, by revealing that the world’s most prominent civil engineering company told him directly that the collapse of the twin towers was a controlled demolition.
Speaking on the Kevin Barrett show yesterday, Hart said he thought the 9/11 attack probably started as a Muslim operation headed up by Osama Bin Laden but that the plot was subsequently hijacked and carried out by Mossad agents in collusion with elements of the CIA, adding that since its formation, Israel has penetrated every Arab government and terrorist organization.
“My guess is that at an early point they said to the bad guys in the CIA – hey this operation’s running what do we do, and the zionists and the neo-cons said let’s use it,” said Hart, making reference to how top neo-cons like Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and their fellow Project For a New American Century authors had called for a “catastrophic and catalyzing event––like a new Pearl Harbor,” the year before 9/11.
“The twin towers were brought down by a controlled ground explosion, not the planes,” said Hart, adding that this view was based on his close friendship with consultants who work with the world’s leading civil engineering and construction firm.
Hart asked the company to study the collapse of the twin towers, after which they told him directly, “There’s absolutely no doubt whatsoever that the towers were brought down by a controlled ground explosion.”
Hart then explained how the five dancing Israelis seen celebrating the attack on the World Trade Center in New Jersey as it unfolded, who turned out to be Mossad agents, proves at at a minimum Israel knew the attack was going to happen. Hart went further in speculating that the planes had been fitted with transponders and that the Israelis were guiding them in to the towers.
(ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW)
Top Construction Firm: WTC Destroyed By Controlled Demolition 150410banner1
Host Barrett pointed out that to carry out the successful controlled demolition of three of the biggest buildings in history, the conspirators would have to ensure that they were hit, making the use of remote controlled airliners a distinct possibility. In addition, Barrett mentioned the fact that he had interviewed numerous pilots who dismissed the chances of accurately guiding a huge commercial airliner into a building while flying at sea level at around 600 miles per hour, especially considering the alleged 9/11 hijackers struggled to even fly basic Cessna light aircraft.
“Sounding a chilling note, Hart added that the U.S. is in grave danger of an Israeli-instigated false-flag nuclear attack, perhaps using an American nuclear weapon stolen from Minot Air Force Base during the “loose nukes” rogue operation of August, 2007. The motive would be to trigger a U.S. war with Iran, and perhaps to finish the ethnic cleansing of Palestine under cover of war–which Hart is convinced the Zionists are planning to do as soon as the opportunity presents itself,” writes host Barratt.
Given his biography and standing, Hart’s comments are not to be taken lightly. Hart is a former Middle East Chief Correspondent for ITN News and has also presented for BBC Panorama specializing in the Middle East. He was also a war reporter in Vietnam and the first journalist to reach Suez Canal with the Israeli army in 1967. Over the decades, Hart has developed close relationships with numerous high profile political figures, including the Shah of Iran, Yasser Arafat and Shimon Peres.
Hart has been a successful author for years and has no reason to fabricate the fact that a top construction firm told him point blank that the towers were brought down in a controlled demolition.
In forwarding this information, Hart joins legions of other credible experts who to some extent or other have all publicly challenged the official 9/11 story, with many outright stating that the attacks were an inside job, people like 20-year decorated CIA veteran Robert Baer, who told a radio host that “the evidence points at” 9/11 having had aspects of being an inside job.
In addition, no less than 1198 architectural and engineering specialists have signed a petition demanding Congress re-open an official investigation into the 9/11 attack and the collapse of the twin towers.