Terrorism

[Silver Incubus]

http://www.4-freedom-privacy.com/articles/sonic-pulses-afp.html
http://home.debitel.net/user/andreas.bunkahle/defaulte.htm

Exclusive to American Free Press

By Christopher Bollyn



Fire Engineering magazine, the 125-year old journal of record among America’s fire engineers and firefighters, recently blasted the investigation being conducted by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) of the collapsed World Trade Center as a “a half-baked farce.”

Fire Engineering’s editor, William Manning, issued a “call to action” to America’s firefighters and fire engineers in the January issue asking them to contact their representatives in Congress and officials in Washington to demand a blue ribbon panel to thoroughly investigate the collapse of the World Trade Center structures.

Fire Engineering frequently publishes technical studies of major fires and is read in more than 50,000 fire departments and schools of fire engineering across the nation.

Manning challenged the theory that the towers collapsed as a result of the crashed airliners and the subsequent fuel fires, saying, “Respected members of the fire protection engineering community are beginning to raise red flags, and a resonating theory has emerged: The structural damage from the planes and the explosive ignition of jet fuel in themselves were not enough to bring down the towers.”

http://www.americanfreepress.net/Conspiracy/Fire_Engineers_Call_WTC_Probe/fire_engineers_call_wtc_probe.html

some more stuff

 

[speed]

Ok ok Silver Incubus and Iridium, you have both proven your points. Please, please try to have a normal conversation. I know its impossible.

 

[Silver Incubus]

When you make an assertion, you must support it with evidence, moron. That video does not prove your point. It simple displays an explosion in the WTC in slow motion, and I am inclined to believe that it was the plane that caused it.

that was when it was comming down, hours after the plane hit idiot. No more fuel would be left. Who's being illogical here?

nevermind, it's futile at this point.

(I'm referring here to my own participation in this debate against s.i.)

That is because you know that all of this is EVIDENCE and you have not proved that it was in fact Airplanes that made those towers fall. Where is YOUR proof.

 

[Iridium]

The planes did not explode immediately upon impact. However, after they did, enough damage was done to the infrastructure to bring down the towers. The fuel tanks before combustion would have been intact. I don't think I'm accomplishing anything: those willfully blind cannot be made see.

 

[MasterOLightning]

I might be mistaken, but isn't Silver Incubus the one that listed several bullshit uses for hemp, including making material stronger than steel. (Where are you search function?)

EDIT: Actually it was Xorv, but S.I. did imply the government for funneling drugs into the country.

 

[Øjeblikket]

Manning challenged the theory that the towers collapsed as a result of the crashed airliners and the subsequent fuel fires, saying, “Respected members of the fire protection engineering community are beginning to raise red flags, and a resonating theory has emerged: The structural damage from the planes and the explosive ignition of jet fuel in themselves were not enough to bring down the towers.”

what this proves is:

1) someone challenged a theory.

2) someone surmised a new theory.

what this does not prove is:

1) that an explosion from a crashed airplane occuring at the top of a building can not cause enough damage to a building's structure to bring the building down.

instead of asking someone to play chase the links, please post the information that is most pertinent to the proving of your case.

 

[Krilons Resa]

All this shit coming from someone who accuses another of being brainwashed by the "media." Talk about Freudian Projection!

Speed, at this point, you might as well start the topic all over again. Or maybe you should have been prudent enough to know that something like this would have popped up and dragged through the dirt.

 

[Silver Incubus]

what this proves is:

1) someone challenged a theory.

2) someone surmised a new theory.

what this does not prove is:

1) that an explosion from a crashed airplane occuring at the top of a building can not cause enough damage to a building's structure to bring the building down.

instead of asking someone to play chase the links, please post the information that is most pertinent to the proving of your case.

You are so lame, you can't even look at the links, but you can post on a message board?

guh.

well then here is some stuff.

There are quite a few still pictures showing what can only be described as explosive ejections of material from the towers, pulverized concrete and shattered pieces of the steel perimeter columns thrown out even in the early stages of the collapses. Some of these, for example the south tower pictures below, show clear rings of explosions running completely around the building just below the point of collapse. In other pictures we see extremely energetic ejection of debris that simply cannot be accounted for by gravitational forces. The immense volume of pulverized material generated early in the collapse gives rise to a phenomenon usually seen only in volcanoes, a pyroclastic flow that can be seen in some of the videos racing down the surrounding streets.

Many of these images show the explosive nature of the collapses, the violent ejection of large amounts of powdered concrete and shattered steel and the huge pyroclastic clouds formed.

What is especially striking in the collapse of both towers is the enormous volume of material being ejected early in the collapse, and the quantity of shattered steel thrown out ahead of the dust clouds. Much of this broken steel consists of neatly chopped one-story long pieces of the perimeter columns, 14" square steel box columns that are assembled in three-story sections. These columns are also welded to 52" deep plates along each floor, but have somehow been broken free of these at the same time they are chopped up and ejected at high speed. This combination of shattered debris with dust and smoke ejected at high speed makes for a textbook picture of the effects of high explosives.

The above is one of a remarkable series of pictures taken by Bill Biggert, a photographer who was killed by the dust cloud from the WTC-1 collapse. It shows large numbers of 12' sections of perimeter columns flying out ahead of the dust cloud in what is very clearly an explosive event. He got very close to the North Tower just before it fell, and captured some amazing pictures of its collapse and of the previous damage from the WTC-2 collapse. What is clear especially in Biggert's pictures is that the building is turning to dust as or even before it falls, as for example here. Because so much very fine powder is produced very quickly and mixed with air, it becomes a pyroclastic cloud, capable of very rapid and destructive flow after falling from its original height. This earlier article of mine (also referenced below) discusses the issue of pyroclastic flow as it applies to the WTC.

http://digitaljournalist.org/issue0111/images/Biggart5-24.jpg

 

[Silver Incubus]

What i want to add to this disscution was the fact that terroist intentions are not clear cut like we are told. Its the whole lack of evidence, and the changing of stories that makes me question what is really going on. Like why did that bomb on the london bus go off near the same time as the underground ones? was that because he was late, and as a result it blew up on the bus?

 

[speed]

All this shit coming from someone who accuses another of being brainwashed by the "media." Talk about Freudian Projection!

Speed, at this point, you might as well start the topic all over again. Or maybe you should have been prudent enough to know that something like this would have popped up and dragged through the dirt.

yeah, I guess I need to find a new forum all together. But, I dont have high hopes for the maturity and sanity of its members.

 

[Øjeblikket]

speed, sorry for contributing to the topic's digression. I had an idea last night that S.I. was another anus troll, this would seem to be the only explanation I could find for his continued posting of what is obviously crapola.

this:

What is especially striking in the collapse of both towers is the enormous volume of material being ejected early in the collapse, and the quantity of shattered steel thrown out ahead of the dust clouds.

How likely is it that someone can fly an airplane into a building almost exactly where there are bombs (set for a controlled demolition) placed to explode, and if the argument is that the airplanes flew directly into the same floor that had a bomb, and the bomb created the damage, what are the odds of getting such crucial timing down without having labored over such a stunt for at least a dozen takes if not more?

It just keeps getting less and less likely. Though I needn't really answer the charge, no, I did not come to a message board just to go somewhere else at the behest of a madman. what I'm saying there, S.I., is that it's likely that I would read the pages you've linked to, if you would present a better case to begin with. This, for instance:

What i want to add to this disscution was the fact that terroist intentions are not clear cut like we are told. Its the whole lack of evidence, and the changing of stories that makes me question what is really going on. Like why did that bomb on the london bus go off near the same time as the underground ones? was that because he was late, and as a result it blew up on the bus?

Not only does not validate your "hijacking" of this thread and turning it into a circus for your fleas, you really could have stated your ambiguity over the idealogical impetus behind terrorist attacks and cut us all the chase.

I'll go the instinctual route though, and situate S.I. near, with, or ultimately FROM, a bunghole (anus).

 

[no country for old wainds]

SI isn't an Anus troll, he's just shit.

 

[Kenneth R.]

i would believe that there were no bombs within the buildings except the "bombs" created by leaked jet fuel and building materials ignited from the collision.

as for terrorists, there are far more in the world than most people realize. some rule nations. some the media, and some commit suicide bombings. personally i am completely against the bombings, the manipulation of the media to incite fear and hate, and the warmongering dictators.

however, difficult as it might be to admit, i do not oppose some of the middle eastern terrorist's reasons for their crimes. i would even venture to say "we deserved some kind of opposition"... i don't like what my president is doing, nor do i like what the media shows, nor do i support our bombing their homelands in revenge. i think few americans truly understand what terrorism is, and fewer less agree with me.

 

[Silver Incubus]

for trying to be philosophical, you people are a bunch of assholes.

I have not asked to be insulted, I never intended to be insulted, and yet I am still insulted by the members of this so called Philosophy forum.

I figured people with philosophical minds may be open to other possibilities that may exist in the world around you, but instead what I see for the most part, are close minded, hypocritical people, who think everything they know is the ultimate truth of everything and that if 'anyone' decides to deviate from the norm, you sling insults and belittle them. For what reason? I don't know. I have studied philosophy, and as such I figured the people in this forum would be understanding and rational.

 

[Justin S.]

for trying to be philosophical, you people are a bunch of assholes.

I have not asked to be insulted, I never intended to be insulted, and yet I am still insulted by the members of this so called Philosophy forum.

I figured people with philosophical minds may be open to other possibilities that may exist in the world around you, but instead what I see for the most part, are close minded, hypocritical people, who think everything they know is the ultimate truth of everything and that if 'anyone' decides to deviate from the norm, you sling insults and belittle them. For what reason? I don't know. I have studied philosophy, and as such I figured the people in this forum would be understanding and rational.

Mmmm, I love that irony.

 

[metu]

Terrorism today is a subject of utmost importance. Politicians throw around the word to instill fear in the hearts of prospective voters and justify wars, invasive laws, and outrageous government spending. The media exploits the fear--remember the recent second round of london bombings when the media went crazy over almost nothing.

And then, there are the terrorists themselves. What makes a terrorist believe killing infidels will lead to a change in Britain and America's foreign policy? Why kill innocents instead of focusing on previous anarchists and terrorists eventually effective strategy of killing important officials (Russians, Irish, Israelis)?

Do terrorists actuallly believe they will be rewarded in heaven? Are they doing Allah's work? And do the terrorists have a point? Are they the last stand of religion against the secular deified state? By invoking god instead of the even more abstract idea of the secular state, do they have a point? Is a life worth more sacrificed to a God, or to a flag? Or, in the Palestinian case, are they so oppressed and feel they have no future, that their lives mean nothing?

Finally, how about us? How many Americans' have ever ruminated upon the significance of the attacks on the commercial and military centers of our country? Do any of us Americans' realize that most of the world despises our way of life and foreign policy?

Just a few questions I hope are taken seriously, and not in a outrageous foxnews like manner.

----------------------

You're my kind of people Speed.

Step 1 - define terrorism

Step 2 - define enemy

"What makes a terrorist believe killing infidels will lead to a change in Britain and America's foreign policy?"

History, actually. Vietnam was in many ways a vicory of terrorism as the images of war led the American people to a state of panic. In Somolia, the same thing happened. Americans saw the reality of war and freaked out. The movie cameras were the most powerful weapon. Those movie cameras are the real weapons of mass distruction. Those are the strenght of the terrorists. Bin Laden and his crew thinks that they economically destroyed the Soviet Union and that they can do the same to the West.

"Why kill innocents instead of focusing on previous anarchists and terrorists eventually effective strategy of killing important officials (Russians, Irish, Israelis)?"

Economics and democracy. If you kill a leader, the business continues. If you make a democracy panic, business panics. Our long term strength is our short term weakness. Assassinations are not as effective as manipulation of the masses.

"Do terrorists actuallly believe they will be rewarded in heaven? Are they doing Allah's work?"

Some think so. Islam is actually more varried than Christianity. Some are convinced through religious propaganda that dying for Islam is a ticket to heaven. These people are never given a good debate on what is the true path and what does God really want. They have no debate on the subject. They fall into a version full of hatred and revenge. They are the furious youth looking for something in which they can believe. The people leading these kids around by the nose: money, land, guns, and power.

And do the terrorists have a point? Are they the last stand of religion against the secular deified state?

Some terrorists have a point. The people who recruit these kids sure as hell have a whole list of very good points. The ideas of their struggle are completely logical. Honestly, so are their methods. These people are rational: but detatched. They are the global version of isolated extremists. They preach that Brittany Spears will be an icon worshiped by a brainwashed, sex-obsessed society. They argue that everything which is wrong with Vegas will dominate their small towns. They are arguing the exact same thing as small town America. They are not the last stand. The stand is constantly being made.

"Is a life worth more sacrificed to a God, or to a flag?"

This is an easy one. The answer is no.

"Or, in the Palestinian case, are they so oppressed and feel they have no future, that their lives mean nothing?"

If you killed my cousin, I would probably want to kill you. If I grow up thinking that your people have been killing my cousins for decades; grow up believing that the only reason my community is not living on easy street; growing up understanding that the only reason my Father is dead is because those people on the other side of the street considered him less than human....

"Finally, how about us? How many Americans' have ever ruminated upon the significance of the attacks on the commercial and military centers of our country? Do any of us Americans' realize that most of the world despises our way of life and foreign policy? "

I think that you underestimate us.

 

[Silver Incubus]

I like your opinions, but I think it is only fair to ask for your sources, where you got the information that sways your opinion in this fashion. Thanks

 

[RideForVengance]

In regards to Silver Incubus' idea of the US government planning 9-11 attacks: Having the US gov plan and cary out the attacks sounds more than unlikely to me. However, I think theres a chance that they understood that an attack would occur, but did nothing to prevent it because they knew it could gain them support and faith needed to carry out radical policies like the patriot act.

You might be saying: "OMFG tahts bullsiht!" But theres alot of speculation that FDR knew that pearl harbor would be bombed, but did nothing about it, because at that time, the US had an isolationist policy, and the general public didnt support a war.

Now, I have no proof of either of these, Im just saying... think about it. I very well might be completely wrong on both cases. But I think its something to consider. Fox News never really gives you the right story, and most conspiracy theories are bullshit too, so I usually look for the truth somewhere inbetween.


By the way, any American who is really dissapointed with the American media, try going to http://www.bbc.co.uk/

The brits usually arent too biased.

 

[Silver Incubus]

Cover Story
Same-time-as-attack underground bombing exercise in London a chilling coincidence?
By Judi McLeod & David Hawkins
Saturday, July 9, 2005 9:00 p.m.

Toronto-- Chillingly coincidental, the same 9/11 "war games" conducted during the actual tragedy on the morning of September 11, 2001, echo London underground "bombing exercises" which took place at the same time as the real attack, according to Alex Jones’ Prison Planet.com.

What are the odds of both human tragedies having coincidental "drills" going on at the exact same time real life was taking so many human lives in two terrorist attacks?

NORAD was conducting drills of flying hijacked planes into the World Trade Center and Pentagon at 8:30 in the morning, September 11, 2001. A CIA planned exercise on September 11 was built around a plane crashing into a building.

"It is clear that at least five if not six training exercises were in operation in the days leading up to and on the morning of 9/11/2001," Paul Joseph Watson and Alex Jones wrote for Prison Planet.com today.

Basing their information on a BBC Radio 5 interview, Watson and Jones say a consulting agency with government and police connections was running an exercise for an unnamed company that revolved around the London Underground being bombed at the exact times and locations as happened in real life on the morning of July 7th.

"The host interviewed Peter Power, Managing Director of Visor Consultants, which bills itself as a `crisis management advice company’, better known to you and I as a PR firm.

"Power told the host that at the exact same time that the London bombings were taking place, his company was running a 1,000 person strong exercise which drilled the London Underground being bombed at the exact same locations, at the exact same times, as happened in real life.

"Peter Power was a former Scotland Yard official, working at one time with the Anti Terrorist Branch."

Power told BBC that the drill focused around "simultaneous bombings". Originally the London bombings were thought to have been spread over an hour, but BBC reports today say that the bombings were in fact simultaneous.

Watson and Jones say, "The fact that the exercise mirrored the exact locations and times of the bombings is light years ahead beyond a coincidence".

(In the drills on Sept. 11, 2001) "NORAD radar screens showed as many as 22 hijacked airliners at the same time. NORAD had been briefed that this was part of the exercise drill and therefore normal reactive procedure was forestalled and delayed."

And the NORAD and Visor Consultants drills are not the only factors linking the 9/11 and London terrorist attacks.

The British experience is the same play on the market as what happed on 9/11. Advance knowledge of these events could be making someone rich. U.S. treasuries go up. The Pound goes down. The Euro goes up as do gold and the Swiss Franc.

Who is the biggest trader in U.S. treasuries? Cantor Fitzgerald, owner of eSpeed, whose New York offices were on the 101st-105th floors of One World Trade Center.

ESpeed stock was shorted 42 percent of its value from August 7 to September 7, 2001 and no one seems to know why.

Coming Monday: 9/11 and the Mob by Judi McLeod & David Hawkins.

Canada Free Press founding editor Judi McLeod is an award-winning journalist with 30 years experience in the media. A former Toronto Sun and Kingston Whig Standard columnist, she has also appeared on Newsmax.com, the Drudge Report, Foxnews.com, and World Net Daily. Judi can be reached at: letters@canadafreepress.com.
David Hawkins, Foundation Scholar-Cambridge University, and founder of the Citizen's Association of Forensic Economists at Hawks' CAFE

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2005/cover070905a.htm

Here are some things to consider. I mean what are the chances of it being so similar that its almost the same? 2 simulations that end up real?

 

[Kenneth R.]

if in fact the above is true, then the government would have to be involved in both the simulations and actual attacks. highly unlikely, and this is why: the attacks were successful. 9/11's attacks killed civilians, destroyed paperwork, NY's tallest buildings, the american airline industry, law enforcement and firefighters (paid by the government) as well as cost a great deal to clean up and rebuild. why would they bomb the Pentegon? why would they severely damage their own stronghold, destroying more records and employees? if the other planes were successful in destroying the Capitol and the White House, why would they destroy their own icons and leadership? if they were truly behind the attacks, it would be much wiser to have a high profile terrorist attempt that was thwarted by government "heroes". thus they succeed in instilling fear and passing absurd laws, and while maintaining their landmarks, paperwork, and people, at a lower cost. in addition, and perhaps most important, a thwarted attempt would bring confidence from the public that the government is capable of stopping these things, but the danger of a "near miss" would still provide an example to fear. as it is now, many people believe the government incompetent with dealing with terrorism as we have been unable to stop 2 attempts on the WTC. the UK has fared much better in public eyes, with the second attempt failed. whether each of these were caused by conspiracy, i'd bet UK against US. the way 9/11 was carried out does not suggest government involvement.