Par
Master Poster
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2007
- Messages
- 2,768
In retrospect, I don’t think Apollo20 actually believes what he’s saying. He’s trolling.
9/11: How would you have done it?
- Thread starter Fifediesel
- Start date
-
- Tags
- conspiracy rube goldberg
In retrospect, I don’t think Apollo20 actually believes what he’s saying. He’s trolling.
Viper Daimao
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2007
- Messages
- 496
btw, I just noticed the rube goldberg tag. 
Anyway, I will drop my beef on this issue to return to the topic at hand:
How to demolish WTC 1 & 2 with minimum chance of detection:
I would add the pyrotechnic agent ammonium perchlorate, NH4ClO4 (AP), to the thermal insulation/fire-protective coating used on the upper floors of WTC 1 & 2.
Ammonium perchlorate, NH4ClO4, is a colorless, odorless, compound that is stable at room temperature. However, when heated to above 300 °C, or subjected to friction or impact, it becomes violently reactive. In fact, ammonium perchlorate is a much-used ingredient in explosives, pyrothechnics and solid propellants such as those used in the space shuttle booster rockets.
The decomposition reactions of ammonium perchlorate are complex and variable: Cl2, HCl, NH3, N2O, NO, N2, H2O and O2 have been consistently observed as major products. The decomposition reaction is highly exothermic, releasing about 2 MJ/kg of heat energy, and is accompanied by the production of about 800 liters/kg of gases. The combustion of ammonium perchlorate in oxygen-rich atmospheres produces a diffusion flame at about 3200 °C
The decomposition of samples of pure ammonium perchlorate at 225 °C is 25 % complete after 4 hours. However, if the ammonium perchlorate is mixed with suitable metal oxide catalysts the decomposition is accelerated. Among the large number of metal oxides that have been investigated as AP decomposition catalysts, such as Al2O3, CaO, Fe2O3 and MnO2, manganese dioxide is found to be by far the most effective.
To complete the set-up of the Towers I would proceed as follows:
Ammonium perchlorate powder, probably containing manganese dioxide and other additives (e.g. Al, HMX, etc.), would be prepared and mixed with a polysulfide binding agent and one or more of the five spray-on fire resistive (thermal insulation) materials used in WTC 1 & 2. These materials are identified in NIST NCSTAR 1-6A as: (1) Blaze-shield Type D, (2) Blaze-shield Type DC/F, (3) Blaze-shield Type II, (4) Monokote MK-5, and (5) Vermiculite aggregate plaster. In order to determine where and when these material could have been applied to surfaces in the Twin Towers we need to consider the history of the “passive fire protection” practices employed by the New York Port Authority during and after the construction of the towers, starting in 1970 and ending in 2001.
On April 13, 1970, New York City issued a ban on the use of all sprayed on thermal insulations containing asbestos, the notorious fibrous silicate mineral that was a major component of Blaze-shield Type D. The use of asbestos-containing insulation was discontinued at this time at the 38th floor of WTC 1. In February 1975, a fire occurred in WTC 1 that affected floors 9 to 19 and led to a review of the adequacy of the existing thermal insulation in the entire WTC. The need to upgrade the passive fire protection in the Twin Towers was finally addressed in 1995 when, after yet another study, it was decided to apply a 1½ inch thickness of an asbestos-free spray-on mineral fiber fire protection material to selected steel surfaces. Thus, between 1995 and 2001, thermal protection was upgraded specifically on 18 floors in WTC 1, including floors 92 to 100 and 102; and on 13 floors in WTC 2 including floors 77, 78, 88, 89, 92 and 97. (See NIST NCSTAR 1-6A page xxxvii). This is when the AP-spiked insulation could have been substituted for the authentic material. Very few people would need to be "in the know". The guys doing the spraying could be quite unaware of what they were really doing!
A reasonable estimate of how much insulation was applied in the late 1990s would be be a thickness of 2 cm over an effective area of 2500 m2 or 50 m3 per floor. If we assume the material had a density of 400 kg/m3 there would have been 20 tonnes of thermal protection per floor.
It should be noted that the specific floor selection was made on the basis of the need to apply fire protection material to a particular area. Thus protection would have been sprayed on areas that were known to be vulnerable to fire damage. However, in my dastardly plan, the fire protector would be, in fact, a fire accelerant or pyrotechnic. Given the fact that upgrading of the passive fire protection of WTC 1 & 2 was an on-going project throughout the late 1990s, a deadly pyrotechnic coating could have been applied almost anywhere and at any time during this period. If we assume that the normal cement-based material was “spiked” with 25 wt.% of our pyrotechnic mixture, up to 5 tonnes of ammonium perchlorate could have been sprayed onto a designated floor. Furthermore, once applied to a particular floor, the coating would have remained undisturbed, unnoticed, and with no loss of potency, until it was triggered by the events of September 11th 2001.
After the aircraft hit the towers, and started jet fuel fires, the exothermic decomposition of an AP “spiked” coating, initiated at ~ 300 °C, would have had catastrophic consequences to the integrity of the buildings at or above the impact zones in each tower. The most detrimental consequences of the presence of kilogram quantities of the energy-rich oxidizing agent ammonium perchlorate would have been in fire-ravaged areas of WTC 1 & 2 where rapid “shock-heating” of floor assemblies would have lead to:
(i) Differential thermal expansion causing buckling or fracture of floor elements
(ii) Complete collapse of entire floor sections
(iii) Explosive spalling and “powderizing” of the concrete.
(iv) Melting of the corrugated steel floor pans
The Towers would have collapsed pretty much "as observed" leaving no residues, wiring, fuses, etc. NIST would have completed its study pretty much as it did, and no one would be any the wiser....
How to demolish WTC 1 & 2 with minimum chance of detection:
I would add the pyrotechnic agent ammonium perchlorate, NH4ClO4 (AP), to the thermal insulation/fire-protective coating used on the upper floors of WTC 1 & 2.
Ammonium perchlorate, NH4ClO4, is a colorless, odorless, compound that is stable at room temperature. However, when heated to above 300 °C, or subjected to friction or impact, it becomes violently reactive. In fact, ammonium perchlorate is a much-used ingredient in explosives, pyrothechnics and solid propellants such as those used in the space shuttle booster rockets.
The decomposition reactions of ammonium perchlorate are complex and variable: Cl2, HCl, NH3, N2O, NO, N2, H2O and O2 have been consistently observed as major products. The decomposition reaction is highly exothermic, releasing about 2 MJ/kg of heat energy, and is accompanied by the production of about 800 liters/kg of gases. The combustion of ammonium perchlorate in oxygen-rich atmospheres produces a diffusion flame at about 3200 °C
The decomposition of samples of pure ammonium perchlorate at 225 °C is 25 % complete after 4 hours. However, if the ammonium perchlorate is mixed with suitable metal oxide catalysts the decomposition is accelerated. Among the large number of metal oxides that have been investigated as AP decomposition catalysts, such as Al2O3, CaO, Fe2O3 and MnO2, manganese dioxide is found to be by far the most effective.
To complete the set-up of the Towers I would proceed as follows:
Ammonium perchlorate powder, probably containing manganese dioxide and other additives (e.g. Al, HMX, etc.), would be prepared and mixed with a polysulfide binding agent and one or more of the five spray-on fire resistive (thermal insulation) materials used in WTC 1 & 2. These materials are identified in NIST NCSTAR 1-6A as: (1) Blaze-shield Type D, (2) Blaze-shield Type DC/F, (3) Blaze-shield Type II, (4) Monokote MK-5, and (5) Vermiculite aggregate plaster. In order to determine where and when these material could have been applied to surfaces in the Twin Towers we need to consider the history of the “passive fire protection” practices employed by the New York Port Authority during and after the construction of the towers, starting in 1970 and ending in 2001.
On April 13, 1970, New York City issued a ban on the use of all sprayed on thermal insulations containing asbestos, the notorious fibrous silicate mineral that was a major component of Blaze-shield Type D. The use of asbestos-containing insulation was discontinued at this time at the 38th floor of WTC 1. In February 1975, a fire occurred in WTC 1 that affected floors 9 to 19 and led to a review of the adequacy of the existing thermal insulation in the entire WTC. The need to upgrade the passive fire protection in the Twin Towers was finally addressed in 1995 when, after yet another study, it was decided to apply a 1½ inch thickness of an asbestos-free spray-on mineral fiber fire protection material to selected steel surfaces. Thus, between 1995 and 2001, thermal protection was upgraded specifically on 18 floors in WTC 1, including floors 92 to 100 and 102; and on 13 floors in WTC 2 including floors 77, 78, 88, 89, 92 and 97. (See NIST NCSTAR 1-6A page xxxvii). This is when the AP-spiked insulation could have been substituted for the authentic material. Very few people would need to be "in the know". The guys doing the spraying could be quite unaware of what they were really doing!
A reasonable estimate of how much insulation was applied in the late 1990s would be be a thickness of 2 cm over an effective area of 2500 m2 or 50 m3 per floor. If we assume the material had a density of 400 kg/m3 there would have been 20 tonnes of thermal protection per floor.
It should be noted that the specific floor selection was made on the basis of the need to apply fire protection material to a particular area. Thus protection would have been sprayed on areas that were known to be vulnerable to fire damage. However, in my dastardly plan, the fire protector would be, in fact, a fire accelerant or pyrotechnic. Given the fact that upgrading of the passive fire protection of WTC 1 & 2 was an on-going project throughout the late 1990s, a deadly pyrotechnic coating could have been applied almost anywhere and at any time during this period. If we assume that the normal cement-based material was “spiked” with 25 wt.% of our pyrotechnic mixture, up to 5 tonnes of ammonium perchlorate could have been sprayed onto a designated floor. Furthermore, once applied to a particular floor, the coating would have remained undisturbed, unnoticed, and with no loss of potency, until it was triggered by the events of September 11th 2001.
After the aircraft hit the towers, and started jet fuel fires, the exothermic decomposition of an AP “spiked” coating, initiated at ~ 300 °C, would have had catastrophic consequences to the integrity of the buildings at or above the impact zones in each tower. The most detrimental consequences of the presence of kilogram quantities of the energy-rich oxidizing agent ammonium perchlorate would have been in fire-ravaged areas of WTC 1 & 2 where rapid “shock-heating” of floor assemblies would have lead to:
(i) Differential thermal expansion causing buckling or fracture of floor elements
(ii) Complete collapse of entire floor sections
(iii) Explosive spalling and “powderizing” of the concrete.
(iv) Melting of the corrugated steel floor pans
The Towers would have collapsed pretty much "as observed" leaving no residues, wiring, fuses, etc. NIST would have completed its study pretty much as it did, and no one would be any the wiser....
Sword_Of_Truth
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- May 8, 2006
- Messages
- 11,494
His extended quote was as follows:
Reading this as a whole, it is clear to me that he was tongue in cheek with this, and likely was making comments as if he were the "super evil neocon cabal" planning the event, as the CTists would have you believe they do things...I think he was trying to show how callous and heartless the Neocon cabal is from the truther perspective...
TAM
Nice to see that SOMEBODY gets it.
defaultdotxbe
Drunken Shikigami
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2006
- Messages
- 7,474
naturally i would talk it over with a few advisors
additionally, in the weeks and months after the attack arrange to "capture" several terrorist cells within the US, along with weapons, explosives, perhaps chemical and bilogical agents, also find several abandoned hideouts and stockpiles (the messege being "the new laws are helping us catch the bad guys, but there are still a few out there")
arrange to have a bunch of spent reactor fuel stolen from a nuclear power plant, then recover about half of it (same messege as above, "we are protecting you, but the threat still exists")
i can keep throwing out ideas, but you get the gist of it, the most important thing is basically whatever you want you say happened needs to be what does happen (so no controlled demolition of the WTC unless you can pin that on the patsy, if a missile hits the pentagon say a missile hit the pentagon, if you say a plane hit the WTC make sure you hit it with a plane and so forth)
Sword_Of_Truth
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- May 8, 2006
- Messages
- 11,494
Given the overwhelming consensus by the scientific and engineering communities on how and why the twin towers collapsed, I would simply convince 19 horny arabs that they would be rolling in virgins in heaven if they flew fully fueled wide-body jets into the towers.
Viper Daimao
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2007
- Messages
- 496
Apollo,
Very interesting idea there, showing your immense knowledge of the subject. Kudos.
However, wouldn't any accidental fire (pre-attack) in the areas sprayed leave your scheme, up in smoke, to pardon the pun?
Very interesting idea there, showing your immense knowledge of the subject. Kudos.
However, wouldn't any accidental fire (pre-attack) in the areas sprayed leave your scheme, up in smoke, to pardon the pun?
Personally, I wouldn't have bothered with the twin towers, pentagon or any washington buildings. They're symbolic for the terrorists, but to the public at large your talking about hitting the 'fat cats' of wall street, the politicos of washington and the obvious but pointless target of the military hq (pointless because there was no way sifficient damage could be done to cripple the military and they're military, they're supposed to get attacked by enemies).
If you wanted to instill fear and justify some foreign wars it would be simpler and more effective to hit the population at play (or shopping) or, if you wanted a symbolic target which would tug the heartstrings more, then aim for hollywood.
Car bombs, chemical and/or biological weapons or dirty bombs would cause the most panic and would have the greater chance of success without all these complicated hijackings, remote controlled planes, drones, awkward witnesses and never seen before demolition of tall structures.
You want some bus bombs or an attack on a stadium during a major sporting event. Maybe even shopping malls or theme parks.
The actual targets on 911 and the complex method of attack is way over the top to achieve an angry, compliant populace, and there's too many risks involved if any of the plots actually failed and too many people need to be involved in the set up in the first place.
If you wanted to instill fear and justify some foreign wars it would be simpler and more effective to hit the population at play (or shopping) or, if you wanted a symbolic target which would tug the heartstrings more, then aim for hollywood.
Car bombs, chemical and/or biological weapons or dirty bombs would cause the most panic and would have the greater chance of success without all these complicated hijackings, remote controlled planes, drones, awkward witnesses and never seen before demolition of tall structures.
You want some bus bombs or an attack on a stadium during a major sporting event. Maybe even shopping malls or theme parks.
The actual targets on 911 and the complex method of attack is way over the top to achieve an angry, compliant populace, and there's too many risks involved if any of the plots actually failed and too many people need to be involved in the set up in the first place.
Wartrac
Thinker
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2007
- Messages
- 165
This is almost pointless. If you show how simple something could have been to gain the same effect you get the "well it had to be crazy so people wouldn't think it was the gubmint" arguement.
I think I made this statement on the LCF a ways back before getting booted. If you are going to plan an Op you want to do so with minimal risk to exposure. Meaning, leaving any form of evidence that you were there behind. Regardless if it is a round casing, paper trail, or anything that can tie you into you being there or the person organizing it.
The idea of "the more insane the idea the less they will suspect us" doesn't fly. The way 9/11 was carried out would have left way too many loose ends. Physical evidence aside (if there was any), people are the worst loose ends imaginable. The amount of people needed to carry out 9/11 and cover it up is staggering. It's possible to have a minimal amount actually carry out the acts themselves. But the logistics needed to plan, carry out and cover it up involves many more people. You (the truthers) can stop with the "well if it was only 19 muslims why does it have to be hundreds or thousands involved in the conspiracy?" It simply is a weak arguement and shows how lacking your depth of thought really is.
We are a nation that does not need much of a reason to go to war. Any attack on our soil will cause us to be knocking on your door within days. Frankly other forms of attacks would have been more effective from a terror standpoint. 9/11 was meant to effect our economy not just inflict "terror".
Here is how you get into the minds of the people you target, much like Sabrina stated. You attack places that your average person visits. The WTC is a place where only few people go to. I mean few meaning specific types of people (tourists, business people, people working in the buildings itself etc). Your average person living in Montana or someplace removed from a big city cannot relate to this at all, I'll explain.
I am not saying it doesn't hurt or effect them. I am talking about in their sub-conscious. Once they walk away from the TV, and stop watching the event unfold they go to the store, mall, school, park etc almost as if their lives are unchanged. Not that they want to think it but it's the "well I'm way over here and safe from any real targets" thought process.
Now if you were to attack more public and common places such as the places I listed, you now effect everyone. Carbombs/bombs placed at highly public places, schools/colleges, malls, stores, parks, churches, bus stations, commuter rails etc would be far more effective.
Imagine the 19 hijackers splitting up and hitting 9-19 targets of these types at the sametime all over the nation. Hitting in large as well as small town USA, this would effect people longer than 9/11. Why? Because it's hard to stop. People after 9/11 saw the changes in security regarind flying etc. So again, back in the sub-conscious they know they are safer and life goes back to normal. With random bombing of public places, how do you stop that 100%. You really can't, and hitting in a large scale would keep everyone on edge for a long time, more so by following it up with a few smaller attacks.
I'll make my point now since I'm more than likely on the FBI list now after all that lol. Is that if the gubmint was going to do 9/11 they would have taken a simpler approach to cover their tracks and not left room for exposure. Even on a small scale, one or two carbombs at the right places with planted evidence showing it was by people we wanted to go to war with has the same effect. Again, we are a simple people and like to fight, it wouldn't have taken much.
I think I made this statement on the LCF a ways back before getting booted. If you are going to plan an Op you want to do so with minimal risk to exposure. Meaning, leaving any form of evidence that you were there behind. Regardless if it is a round casing, paper trail, or anything that can tie you into you being there or the person organizing it.
The idea of "the more insane the idea the less they will suspect us" doesn't fly. The way 9/11 was carried out would have left way too many loose ends. Physical evidence aside (if there was any), people are the worst loose ends imaginable. The amount of people needed to carry out 9/11 and cover it up is staggering. It's possible to have a minimal amount actually carry out the acts themselves. But the logistics needed to plan, carry out and cover it up involves many more people. You (the truthers) can stop with the "well if it was only 19 muslims why does it have to be hundreds or thousands involved in the conspiracy?" It simply is a weak arguement and shows how lacking your depth of thought really is.
We are a nation that does not need much of a reason to go to war. Any attack on our soil will cause us to be knocking on your door within days. Frankly other forms of attacks would have been more effective from a terror standpoint. 9/11 was meant to effect our economy not just inflict "terror".
Here is how you get into the minds of the people you target, much like Sabrina stated. You attack places that your average person visits. The WTC is a place where only few people go to. I mean few meaning specific types of people (tourists, business people, people working in the buildings itself etc). Your average person living in Montana or someplace removed from a big city cannot relate to this at all, I'll explain.
I am not saying it doesn't hurt or effect them. I am talking about in their sub-conscious. Once they walk away from the TV, and stop watching the event unfold they go to the store, mall, school, park etc almost as if their lives are unchanged. Not that they want to think it but it's the "well I'm way over here and safe from any real targets" thought process.
Now if you were to attack more public and common places such as the places I listed, you now effect everyone. Carbombs/bombs placed at highly public places, schools/colleges, malls, stores, parks, churches, bus stations, commuter rails etc would be far more effective.
Imagine the 19 hijackers splitting up and hitting 9-19 targets of these types at the sametime all over the nation. Hitting in large as well as small town USA, this would effect people longer than 9/11. Why? Because it's hard to stop. People after 9/11 saw the changes in security regarind flying etc. So again, back in the sub-conscious they know they are safer and life goes back to normal. With random bombing of public places, how do you stop that 100%. You really can't, and hitting in a large scale would keep everyone on edge for a long time, more so by following it up with a few smaller attacks.
I'll make my point now since I'm more than likely on the FBI list now after all that lol. Is that if the gubmint was going to do 9/11 they would have taken a simpler approach to cover their tracks and not left room for exposure. Even on a small scale, one or two carbombs at the right places with planted evidence showing it was by people we wanted to go to war with has the same effect. Again, we are a simple people and like to fight, it wouldn't have taken much.
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2007
- Messages
- 21,203
Well I have to agree that going after the towers would not have been my choice. Sure it's symbolic, and gradios, but if you really want to scare Americans you have to hit them where they are, and most of them aren't in NY office buildings or the Pentagon. I'd almost say that it was obvious that the US Government wasn't behind the attacks because if they really wanted to scare the US population, they'd know exactly how to do it. The 9/11 attacks were done by people that don't understand the US mindset.
I'd do the same as has been mentioned a few times, hit Malls. I'd pick places like small town Indiana, Ohio, Minesota, and Iowa. I'd make the US population scared to go shopping, something they do every day of the week, because they'd never know if their town was next.
Okay, so I'm the head of the NWO black ops and have lots of money to spend. Picking about 6 towns scattered across the US, I'd get my muslim NWO agents to recruit some young Iraqi, Iranian, or Afghani men who want to join a terrorist cell and wage Jihad against the US. Bring them in as students and equip them with chlorine gas and explosives. Have them plant the explosives about the Mall and then release the gas into the middle of the crowd of shoppers all at the same time across all 6 targets. The explosives would be set to go off about 15-20 minutes after the initial attacks.
If they were still alive and caught, then they'd only know that they were part of a terrorist cell, so they wouldn't be able to lead back to me and the NWO. If they died in the attacks, well so much the better because dead people can't talk.
Just to have a bit of fun, I'd follow up the mall attacks about a week later with a second wave, but this time, I'd get some other recruits to fire a stinger missile at planes taking off from 4-5 major US airline hubs all at about the same time of day (within a minute or so of each other,) probably about 9am or so so the news can be full of it all day.
Phase three of the deal would occur about a week later. Dirty bombs set off in 4 US schools across the country. Simple, direct and if that doesn't have the population quaking in their boots, nothing will.
I'd also make sure that my "terrorist group" claimed responsibility each time, make a lot of impossible demands and stated that the attacks will continue until those demands are met.
With a terror group apparently able to strike at will, in random places in ordinary small town USA, with their daily lives, their transportation, and their kids under threat, I'd predict that most Americans would be willing to give their Government whatever it said it needed to stop the attacks.
I'd do the same as has been mentioned a few times, hit Malls. I'd pick places like small town Indiana, Ohio, Minesota, and Iowa. I'd make the US population scared to go shopping, something they do every day of the week, because they'd never know if their town was next.
Okay, so I'm the head of the NWO black ops and have lots of money to spend. Picking about 6 towns scattered across the US, I'd get my muslim NWO agents to recruit some young Iraqi, Iranian, or Afghani men who want to join a terrorist cell and wage Jihad against the US. Bring them in as students and equip them with chlorine gas and explosives. Have them plant the explosives about the Mall and then release the gas into the middle of the crowd of shoppers all at the same time across all 6 targets. The explosives would be set to go off about 15-20 minutes after the initial attacks.
If they were still alive and caught, then they'd only know that they were part of a terrorist cell, so they wouldn't be able to lead back to me and the NWO. If they died in the attacks, well so much the better because dead people can't talk.
Just to have a bit of fun, I'd follow up the mall attacks about a week later with a second wave, but this time, I'd get some other recruits to fire a stinger missile at planes taking off from 4-5 major US airline hubs all at about the same time of day (within a minute or so of each other,) probably about 9am or so so the news can be full of it all day.
Phase three of the deal would occur about a week later. Dirty bombs set off in 4 US schools across the country. Simple, direct and if that doesn't have the population quaking in their boots, nothing will.
I'd also make sure that my "terrorist group" claimed responsibility each time, make a lot of impossible demands and stated that the attacks will continue until those demands are met.
With a terror group apparently able to strike at will, in random places in ordinary small town USA, with their daily lives, their transportation, and their kids under threat, I'd predict that most Americans would be willing to give their Government whatever it said it needed to stop the attacks.
ZENSMACK89
Banned
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2007
- Messages
- 2,068
It depends on who you are and what you have access to.
Kroll Inc., is a private investigation and security firm founded by Jules B. Kroll in 1972. The US government and the weapons industry is a major permanent contractor of the company. Kroll was responsible for security of the entire WTC site until it went down in the 9/11 attacks.
Defence Systems Limited was one of the earliest PMCs, formed in 1981 by a group of ex-SAS officials. Kroll has military team in their company and merged with Armor Holdings on August 23rd 2001 thus adding Defence Systems Limited, another Private Military Corporation, to their operations. An ex-KGB team called Alpha Firm was earlier acquired by Defence Systems Limited.
On September 11, 2001, in addition to his job with the NIH, Jerome Hauer was also Managing Director of Kroll Associates
“Jerome Hauer 9/11/2001 : No, I, uh, my sense is just the velocity of the plane and the fact that you have a plane filled with fuel hitting that building, uh, that burned, uh, the velocity of that plane, uh, certainly, uh, uh, had an impact on the structure itself, and then the fact that it burned and you had that intense heat, uh, probably weakened the structure as well, uh, and I think it, uh, was, uh, simply the, uh, the planes hitting the buildings, and, and causing the collapse.”
“Jerome Hauer 9/11/2001: Yeah, well I’m not sure I agree that, umm, this is necessarily state-sponsored. Umm, it, as I mentioned earlier, certainly has, umm, the, uh, fingerprints of somebody like Bin Laden.”
Stephen Hatfill, at one time considered a prime suspect in this still-unsolved case, had worked for USAMRIID at Fort Detrick. Strangely, perhaps, he had also worked with Jerome Hauer, for Scientific Applications International Corporation, at the Center for Counterterrorism Technology and Analysis.
On September 11, 2001, Jerome Hauer advised the White House to begin taking Cipro, an antibiotic which is effective against anthrax.
Jerome Hauer, the former head of HHS's [Health and Human Services] biodefense program, is now on the Board of Emergent Biosolutions, Bioport's parent company. Bioport is an extremely controversial pharmaceutical company that manufactures a despicable anthrax vaccine linked to deaths and injuries in the U.S. military.
Kroll Inc., is a private investigation and security firm founded by Jules B. Kroll in 1972. The US government and the weapons industry is a major permanent contractor of the company. Kroll was responsible for security of the entire WTC site until it went down in the 9/11 attacks.
Defence Systems Limited was one of the earliest PMCs, formed in 1981 by a group of ex-SAS officials. Kroll has military team in their company and merged with Armor Holdings on August 23rd 2001 thus adding Defence Systems Limited, another Private Military Corporation, to their operations. An ex-KGB team called Alpha Firm was earlier acquired by Defence Systems Limited.
On September 11, 2001, in addition to his job with the NIH, Jerome Hauer was also Managing Director of Kroll Associates
“Jerome Hauer 9/11/2001 : No, I, uh, my sense is just the velocity of the plane and the fact that you have a plane filled with fuel hitting that building, uh, that burned, uh, the velocity of that plane, uh, certainly, uh, uh, had an impact on the structure itself, and then the fact that it burned and you had that intense heat, uh, probably weakened the structure as well, uh, and I think it, uh, was, uh, simply the, uh, the planes hitting the buildings, and, and causing the collapse.”
“Jerome Hauer 9/11/2001: Yeah, well I’m not sure I agree that, umm, this is necessarily state-sponsored. Umm, it, as I mentioned earlier, certainly has, umm, the, uh, fingerprints of somebody like Bin Laden.”
Stephen Hatfill, at one time considered a prime suspect in this still-unsolved case, had worked for USAMRIID at Fort Detrick. Strangely, perhaps, he had also worked with Jerome Hauer, for Scientific Applications International Corporation, at the Center for Counterterrorism Technology and Analysis.
On September 11, 2001, Jerome Hauer advised the White House to begin taking Cipro, an antibiotic which is effective against anthrax.
Jerome Hauer, the former head of HHS's [Health and Human Services] biodefense program, is now on the Board of Emergent Biosolutions, Bioport's parent company. Bioport is an extremely controversial pharmaceutical company that manufactures a despicable anthrax vaccine linked to deaths and injuries in the U.S. military.
Par
Master Poster
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2007
- Messages
- 2,768
Fifediesel
Student
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2007
- Messages
- 33
ZENSMACK89, I'm not quite sure I follow.
ZENSMACK89
Banned
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2007
- Messages
- 2,068
9/11: How would you have done it?
As far as Kroll is concerned they could have done it however they wanted.
All things 9-11 and the Anthrax attacks they had direct access to.
It’s not only the “how” it’s the is it capability and who had it.
Par
Master Poster
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2007
- Messages
- 2,768
Fifediesel
Student
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2007
- Messages
- 33
Agreed. If the intent is to implicate a specific company, or any party for that matter, in the actual 9/11 plot then please create another thread.
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2007
- Messages
- 21,203
This is his quote that described exactly how the buildings collapsed? How does it do that, it's exactly the same as 5,000 other people, probably more, were saying. One of the engineers I speak to regularly was telling people this exact thing that day when they asked, does that mean he was involved too? Heck who didn't realise that the fires and impact had weakened the structure causing them to collapse? That was blatently obvious to a blindman.
And you do realise that right after the second plane hit that 99% of the world's media was speculating that it was Osama behind it? You do realise that previous to 9/11 the major attacks against the US had been done by OBL? (Embasy Bombings, USS Cole) and that he'd released several declarations of Jihad against the US? You do realise that he was the prime suspect because he was the obvious suspect? You also are aware that Bush wanted to blame Iraq and tried very hard to convince his whitehouse team to pin it on Iraq?
Wow, so after a terrorist attack occurs, the top government officals are warned that it might be an idea to take a wide spectrum antibotic which is effective against most forms of biological attack. Amazing, I mean who would have thought that there was any possibility of a follow up attack with a biological agent after a terrorist attack. I mean that'd be totally unheard of.....
ZENSMACK89
Banned
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2007
- Messages
- 2,068
Kroll Inc. 900 THIRD AVE., New York, NY 10022 (212) 593-1000
http://www.kroll.com/
Ticker: KROL Exchange: NASDAQ Employees: 1,520
You can find most of it in Hauers bio on Wiki as well as John O'Neill’s, and Krolls history.
The Quotes are from CBS the morning of 9-11 when he was interviewed by Dan Rather.
Besides 9-11 and the Anthrax attacks they are also all things Iraq...
Iraqi Premier Calls Bush to Discuss Obstacles to Election
New York Times
By RICHARD A. OPPEL Jr. and DAVID E. SANGER.
Published: January 4, 2005
The attack on a car carrying employees of Kroll Inc., the New York-based risk consulting and security firm, occurred at 3:45 p.m. at a checkpoint where people leave Baghdad's fortified Green Zone to get onto the road to the airport.
A Kroll official said that four people were killed when a suicide bomber rammed into their car, including two British employees of Kroll. "It was a suicide attack on a convoy coming from the airport," said Pat Wood, Kroll's vice president for corporate communications.