I think you’d be hard-pushed to find a situation they are handling particularly well right now…
Well, militant fanatics don’t come any richer than the Neo-Cons.
But really the pertinent questions to ask are with regard the specifics:
-
is it reasonable to assume that the impact of the planes alone can account for the nature of the three collapses?
-
is it reasonable to assume that a newbie pilot could perform manouvres of the kind required at the pentagon?
-
is it reasonable to assume that the two statements ‘President’ George Bush made with regard to seeing the first plane hit were both honest errors? (and why hasnt he been subject to cross-examination with regard those statements by the commission anyway?)
Reason for killing the Americans: to stir up fear/hatred in American populace at large (see: Northwoods, I believe the word used there is “galvanizing”)
Reason to kill Iraqis and Afghans: to gain control of oil supplies for financial gain (see: where troops were first posted to defend in Iraq… and remind me, just what does Iraq have to do with 9/11 anyway? Hasnt Bush recently stated to the press it had nothing to do with it?)
Reason to kill Alex Jones: to provide 9/11 skeptics with further evidence?
Besides, he may still get his, although of course they’ll likely spin it to appear as a suicide due to mental imbalance… but I’m getting ahead of myself now.
(R.I.P Dr David Kelly, Hunter S Thompson and Diana, Princess of Wales)
re: pentagon
This just shows that it was an exceptional manouvre. His goal was not to land the plane safely, his goal was to slam into the pentagon (much lower target than the WTC). It is surprising to me that he attained that goal as perfectly as he did.
But then, if the plane was not a commercial airliner, there is the possibility that the manouvre was quite standard. Which just highlights the urgent need for the government to release some footage.
re: possible squibs
In my post I was referring to the materials ejected from the WTC below the main point of collapse. These are separate from the main collapse and therefore are not at the speed of the collapse and are, in effect, occuring before the building (or at least that part of it) began to fall.
Well ok, but lack of proof for my theory does not prove yours. If the materials ejected are due to compressed air, how do you explain the fact that some of these blasts are occuring at a location considerably lower than the main collapse area? There are also the alleged basement explosions that occur as the planes first hit, which would seem to be another anomally supported by some video evidence (and testimony from Rodriguez, last man out of the towers).
Would you say WTC 7 was more in line with the demolition hypothesis then? That seemed to pretty much give-way all over very, very quickly.
As for the main towers, I appreciate what you’re saying here, and I’m going to give it more thought and research, but the main features of the collapse still don’t fit with the pancake day hypothesis, for me. I don’t think it explains the behaviour of the upper floors (also pulverised into concrete despite not being ‘pancaked’ upon), I don’t think it explains the behaviour of the lower floors (failing in the same way as the damaged upper floors so easily), and I don’t think it explains the previously-mentioned blasts occuring well below the main collapse area (debatably even in the basement).
Jones is working on the thermate hypothesis, and hopefully that will soon be fleshed out into as much detail as the official pancake day theory. But while many details are still missing, what I do know is that, like the intelligence agencies and air defences before them, those buildings failed spectacularly.
Make of that what you will.
Look at that: the eleventh of september re-wrote the way the professionals look at building safety. Who’d have guessed that over-designed buildings like that could spontaneously self-demolish the way they did? (apparently not many)
Me too (thanks Daylight for the linguistic info there)
Really?!
I think it has much more to do with some document declassification act or other (excuse lack of citation, but I have read of it. Might even have been connected to the release of documents following the JFK investigation). Looks like it dodged the shredder to me. Certainly hasnt received anywhere near enough media attention, it’s an absolutely outrageous document. I don’t blame Jones for bringing it up every five minutes.
Where would the world be without em?!
You think? I think he keeps it pretty much out of the way. I only really noticed it during his “new 9/11 prediction” broadcast recently, and even then it was indirect (no mention of the J-man or the Big Book). But he’d gotten himself really, really agitated over the latest “terror alerts” here in the UK so I’m inclined to let it slide.
Hence the aptly chosen title: Dark Secrets of Bohemian Grove. I applaud Jones for making that and it gives me some extra confidence in his work.
And about that “weird stuff” in there: it is important to know what they are doing, and who they are doing it. If Jones is right, and that important, powerful people who effect the lives of millions, are performing “cremation of care” rituals, during which they destroy their guilt and conscience for performing immoral acts, then well…it’s in the public interest to know. It’s like “why are you doing that?!?”
And that sacrifice ritual… Jones actually does them a favour of assuming it was a dummy up there being “sacrificed”. But I’ve read somewhere of dead kids turning up in the woods round that area, and of a cameraman going back to re-investigate being killed. I may be mistaken in the former, or it may be coincidence, but if the latter is true then I definitely think Jones is onto something.