• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

How 9/11 was done

Well whoever did 9/11 I doubt they were much concerned with collateral damage other then wanting a lot of it.

They must have figured flying planes into buildings wouldn't be enough of a shocking impression, so they took additional, more risky chances to ensure the buildings collapsed. This, of course, creating more chances of exposure to getting caught or the plan failing.
Whoever they were....oh wait, who were they?
 
Well whoever did 9/11 I doubt they were much concerned with collateral damage other then wanting a lot of it.

So if it was a CD, why push the button an hour after the crashes? Why not do it immediately on impact then get the paid off engineers at NIST and FEMA to conclude that the planes impact had brought down the buildings?
 
That was the stupidest OP I've read since ULTIMA1's "93's intercept document coming soon" OP.
 
Hey, show some respect. This is the first Truther in a long, long, long time who has actually provided a clear narrative rather than "just asking questions" and making vague, shifty, evasive claims. This is the kind of behavior we want to encourage from them (provided that de-Truthifying them is out of the question).
 
Hey, show some respect. This is the first Truther in a long, long, long time who has actually provided a clear narrative rather than "just asking questions" and making vague, shifty, evasive claims. This is the kind of behavior we want to encourage from them (provided that de-Truthifying them is out of the question).

Perhaps true, but at the same time anyone who has ever flown should instantly recognise the idiocy of such statements as "After check-in they leave the airport through a side exit."
 
Perhaps true, but at the same time anyone who has ever flown should instantly recognise the idiocy of such statements as "After check-in they leave the airport through a side exit."

You are missing the point. The reason they could leave the airport was that airport security from all 9/11 departure airports was controlled by Huntleigh, a subsidiary of ICTS in Holland. ICTS is led by an Israeli fellow named Menahem Atzmon. Atzmon was a collegue of Olmert around 1998, both working for the Likud. Atzmon is a convicted criminal, so not directly a person with high ethical standards. So there you have the link between the highest Israeli political level and the 9/11 operative level (airport). It was Atzmon's job to make sure that the surveillance camera pictures of 'Atta' and friends (read: Israeli stand-ins) where send around the world and that the 'hijackers' could leave the airport through a side entrance. This is not an inplausible story, is it? It is not proof that it happened this way, but the fact that all departures airport security was controlled by one firm, led by a guy with links to the highest level of Israeli politics should make any Sherlock Holmes start to think.

Thanks for the reactions, in particular the non-smearing and sneering ones (not many of them unfortunately).

No, this is not a drive-by shooting op, it is an attempt to you use your brains for my purpose, that is harvesting intelligent comments and interesting links to either strengthen or reject 'my' theory.

I'll come back later to address the 2-3 comments that were somehow interesting.
 
Last edited:
...This is not an inplausible story, is it? It is not proof that it happened this way, but the fact that all departures airport security was controlled by one firm, led by a guy with links to the highest level of Israeli politics should make any Sherlock Holmes start to think.

It is implausible.

But your direct approach is commendable.

Sherlock Holmes is a fictional character, written by a man who also believed in mediums and spirits. No one actually operates like him.

Instead of links, you need evidence.
 
It is not proof that it happened this way, but the fact that all departures airport security was controlled by one firm, led by a guy with links to the highest level of Israeli politics should make any Sherlock Holmes start to think.

And how would Israel benefit from this false-flag operation? Republicans are, for the most part, out of power now primarily due to the war in Iraq and the Democrats aren't nearly as Israel-friendly as the Republicans. 9/11 did not help Israel at all in the long run.

And do you seriously think that the Mossad would have the balls to try to pull off something as big as this, knowing that one mistake could potentially blow the whole operation and bringing the almighty wrath of the world's most powerful military squarely upon their shoulders?

I don't see them chancing it.
 
my friend. its a lovely story. very imaginative. but if you have NO EVIDENCE..it is worthless!!!!

No it is not.

I'll cut and paste a comment I made from another forum

Sure, we all want answers or rather: we want the truth, not just answers. But there is no away around theorizing.

Let's have a comparisson which we can use further on in the discussion:

FBI Commisar Bernard Bully sends his inspector Richard Razorsharp to a crime scene. Razorsharp goes to the apartment were a dead body has been found. He starts with fact finding. He compiles a list just like Jon has made: he collects the victim's mobile phone, his address book, he puts half filled wine glasses in a plastic bag (after emptying them first), collects finger prints, he talks with neighbours to find out if they heard anything yesterday noght, saw visitors, etc. This fact finding stops after 1-2 days. What Razorsharp cannot afford to do is continue fact finding for 7 years! He will get grave problems with Bernard Bully. Bully wants results. Instead of continue fact finding, Razorsharp sits behind his desk and starts to think. Sure, Razorsharp (just like Jon) wants answers. But just wanting answers is not enough. He has to theorize. There is no other way. He has to come up with a list of suspects. And the list of suspects is based on possible MOTIVES. Qui bono. That's the recurring pattern in all these sitcom whodunnits and in real life crime fighting. And there is no other way for us 911-truthers as well.


What I have done is an attempt to reconstruct what happened on 9/11. You cannot hope to find proof at the beginning of the research process, that's the final step. There is no way around narratives. Once you have such a narrative you start testing your narrative and adapting it along the way. That is how all television detectives are structured.
 
Last edited:
Which is why the U.S. promptly went and attacked the Taliban in Afghanistan as a response to 9/11, completely avoiding the portions of the Middle East that are even vaguely close to Israel for at least another year.

The US conquered Iraq some 18 months later.
Israel has peace treaties with Jordan and Egypt. If the war in Iraq had not turned badly as it did they sure would have attacked Syria and maybe Iran.

They had this little 'axis of evil' short list.
 
The US conquered Iraq some 18 months later.
Israel has peace treaties with Jordan and Egypt. If the war in Iraq had not turned badly as it did they sure would have attacked Syria and maybe Iran.

They had this little 'axis of evil' short list.

I assume by "they" you mean the US.

So now you are implying that we would not have been content with just removing Saddam from power so, while we're in the neighborhood and all, we would have also attempted unprovoked invasions of two sovereign nations.

Are you insane? For what possible purpose would we do that knowing the worldwide condemnation we would receive?

You do realize that the decision to invade Iraq was unpopular with a large part of our citizens from the start and would never have received the required support of Congress had it not been for the (erroneous) WMD intelligence reports, don't you? Unlike Afghanistan, there never was any solid evidence linking Iraq to Al-Qaeda and the 9/11 attacks.

There would have been a nationwide clamor for Bush's immediate resignation had he even dared to ask for approval for either a Syrian or Iranian invasion.
 
except that never happened
Refers to power down.

The link in my blog is dead. Try: google '9/11 wtc power cuts' --> more than 100.000 hits.

www investigate911 com/911facts.htm
(had to enter spaces).

FACT: In the weekends prior to 9/11, the Twin Towers were shut down, evacuated and the power cut completely off. Employees complained such has never happened in their twenty years of working in the Twin Towers. Employees witnessed numerous foreign-looking workers carrying heavy bags of equipment into the Twin Towers;

www willthomasonline net/willthomasonline/The_WTC.html

POWER DOWN
Scott Forbes is taking the day off. The senior database administrator has worked all weekend and into Monday morning to shepherd every Fiduciary Trust's computer system safely back online after the WTC's first “power-down” saw the New York Port Authority cut electricity to the South Tower from the 48th floor up. The reason given was to install a fiber optic upgrade to increase the Trade Center's computer bandwidth.

But why only to the upper floors? Forbes wonders. And why power down the upper floors when the announced upgrade involves fiber optic cables that conduct light, not electricity?

As one of the Trade Center's first occupants, Fiduciary Trust spent a great deal of time and money powering down their computer systems prior to the power cut, which began early Saturday, September 8th and continued until mid-afternoon the following day. Computer consultants and their own staffs are still at work this morning in the Fiduciary offices on the 90th and 94th through 97th floors in the South Tower.

For nearly 30-hours, the WTC's upper floor elevators and security systems have been rendered inoperative. Though power remained to the lower floors, Forbes has seen many unfamiliar faces roaming freely through the upper corridors. In an email to journalist John Kaminski, author of The Day America Died and America's Autopsy Report, Forbes wrote, “Without power there were no security cameras, no security locks on doors, and many, many 'engineers' coming in and out of the tower.”


Remember: the security in all departure airports was in one Israeli hand. The same was the case with the 'arrival airport' (i.e. WTC) --> Kroll associates. Now if you open this diagram I made again:
3.bp.blogspot.com/_qhtLksupqDs/SQlwo9U4zuI/AAAAAAAAABA/Cqp3_WOI3TM/s1600-h/911-solution.jpg
You see that Kroll is owned by Maurice Greenberg; yes that very influental fellow that got a taxpayer funded bailout of some 75 billion it was, I believe. Silverstein is a good friend of Netanjahu. So, all the 9/11 players on the operative level have the highest connections. Do you not find this significant? Silverstein via Kroll can do what he wants with the twin towers.

how many charges were planted? how much thermite was in each? how many trucks did this require? how many members in the team? how long would it take to plant each charge? is this feasible in the span of 1 weekend? how did the thermite cut horizontally?

never happened

How many ....? Do not know, I was not there; neither were you to disprove it.
They could do most preparations outside of WTC. In the shabby premisses of Urban Moving Systems they could spend days or weeks making hundreds or thousands of compact packages filled with thermite or other explosives and attach a radiographic controlled detonator to it, fill a couple a vans with these packages, etc (see post 1). And you guys do remember that a van with Israelis was arrested at the Holland tunnel with traces of explosives found in it.

whatreallyhappened com/WRHARTICLES/arrested_israelis2.html

How much proof do you need?

Why this horizontal cut thing? I thought the idea was to cut under an angle to make the building 'walk'/implode?


what voice morphing technology available in 2001 could change a voice in realtime to fool someones own family?

In my blog I have this link:
www brickhousesecurity com / spoofcard-cellphonecallrecorder-voicechanger.html
That's obvious technology available now.

2001 advertisements have gone. Do you have any suggestions that the technology was NOT available? My Commodore64 was able to read aloud typed in sentences. Bad quality OK, but that was 1984.


how did the stand-in callers know to tell their families things only the passengers themselves would know? (IE recognizing family members by voice, instructing someone to retrieve something from a safe, complete with combination to said safe, and so on)

This is the key document to the answer:

www antiwar com/orig/ketcham.php?articleid=13506

Israeli firms like Amdocs and Verint are virtually able to eavesdrop on the entire US. That means, that once the Israeli agents got hold of the/a partial passenger lists (many people book flights weeks in advance) then they could go to their budies at Amdocs and ask them to easvesdrop on 10-20 people and to find out details just as you are suggesting.
 
Last edited:
No, this is not a drive-by shooting op, it is an attempt to you use your brains for my purpose, that is harvesting intelligent comments and interesting links to either strengthen or reject 'my' theory.
Then let's start at the beginning.

"a nearly worthless WTC building complex" - it wasn't worthless, or "nearly". The only solid quote on the only source you provide says the Port Authority were planning to spend $800,000 on a variety of things including asbestos abatement. The Port Authority also said the place was very busy, and making money, and that's backed up by the number of bidders they got. (More thoughts here.) The very first motive you propose doesn't stand up.

"in the weekend before 9/11 cuts off power in all the WTC buildings with 'maintenance' as an excuse, so the buildings are virtually empty" - if this refers to Scott Forbes (the link is dead) then he actually said the power in his floors was cut off, not "all the buildings". Nor did he say the buildings were "virtually empty". Reader's who've encountered him before will now begin to believe that you make things up to help your theory sound impressive, or that you uncritically accept what you read on other truther sites without confirming it's true, neither of which makes you look very good.

"At that moment the coast is clear to let a team of demolition experts from the israeli army led by Peer Segalovitz into the WTC buildings" - the coast was not clear, and there's no evidence for this at all.

"Hamburg 54 Marienstrasse, july 2000, 22:40. Mohamed Atta, Al Shehhi and Jarrah" are supposedly killed and replaced by Israeli operatives. But you don't explain why Ramzi Binalshibh and others wouldn't have noticed this when they met Atta on more than one occasion in 2001, or why Jarrah's girlfriend wouldn't have realised then they met several times pre-9/11. Or why their families wouldn't have noticed (Jarrah's said he called them frequently). Or how this fits in with all three actually arriving in the US in June, so they weren't in Hamburg in July anyway. Or why Jarrah happened to be at 54 Marienstrasse even before this date, as from memory he didn't live there. As you don't answer these questions, or provide the slightest evidence to support your ideas, I think the most likely explanation is probably that your explanation is wrong & that the real Atta, al-Shehhi and Jarrah made it to the US.
 
The US conquered Iraq some 18 months later.

I also resent your use of the term "conquered" like it was some prize territory to be added to the vast growing Empire of the U.S.

Iraq is still a sovereign nation with the added bonus of boasting free and open elections for the first time in many years. The US military even has to obtain permission that it does not always receive from the Iraqi government to operate in sensitive and sacred areas of the country.
 
Just the other evening I watched a show on Discovery Canada about the demolishion of Launch Complex 36. Anyone who thinks that a building can be prepared for demolishion over a weekend are, to put it lightly, not living in this Universe. :boggled:

Unless most of the preparation is done before that weekend. In my theory they had hundresd if not thousands of compact packages with radiographic controlled detonators. All the had to do is to attach them to columns. How? With rubber bands, glue, iron wire, textile, anything. I cannot see why it should be impossible to attach let's say 2000 prepared packages with a crew of 10-20 in 2 days time.
 
I don't get it... how does a Mossad plot qualify as an "inside job"? Doesn't an inside job imply you were attacked by your own people?
 
In my blog I have this link:
www brickhousesecurity com / spoofcard-cellphonecallrecorder-voicechanger.html
That's obvious technology available now.

2001 advertisements have gone. Do you have any suggestions that the technology was NOT available? My Commodore64 was able to read aloud typed in sentences. Bad quality OK, but that was 1984.

This "obvious technology available now" is only capable of shifting a voice to a higher or lower octave. It does not have the effect of altering a person's accent, inflection or other speech patterns. In other words, if a person has a thick southern accent the output from the voice changer will still have a thick southern accent at a higher or lower frequency. And it most certainly does not have the realtime ability to match another person's unique voiceprint.

Israeli firms like Amdocs and Verint are virtually able to eavesdrop on the entire US. That means, that once the Israeli agents got hold of the/a partial passenger lists (many people book flights weeks in advance) then they could go to their budies at Amdocs and ask them to easvesdrop on 10-20 people and to find out details just as you are suggesting.

I find it unlikely that anyone would coincidentally recite the combination to his or her safe so nonchalantly as to be picked up by "virtual" eavesdropping. At any rate, Amdocs is not a service provider here in the US so it is unlikely they can eavesdrop on anything more complicated that 2 tin cans connected by a string. Since AT&T also happens to own a significant portion of Amdocs stock I don't think that they would see it in their best interests to rock the boat here in the US.

You still haven't answered my question on how Israel would have benefitted so greatly from this false-flag that it was worth risking exposure.
 
Last edited:
You are missing the point. The reason they could leave the airport was that airport security from all 9/11 departure airports was controlled by Huntleigh, a subsidiary of ICTS in Holland.


I hate to burst your silly little bubble, but this is false. One is forced to wonder why it is you are so eager to believe the words of a known anti-Semite bigot.
 
we all know the jooz wanna rule the world. Not the Pakistanis or Iranians...or Saudis.

what about the Russians? they pulled 4 false flags in Moscow in 1999...why not in NYC in 2001?

Because nothing is linked to the Russians. And what is the motive? Why would Russia give the US a motive to invade the Middle East which holds 60% of worlds oil reserves. Russia was very weak anno 2001. Fortunately no longer.

Who IS implicated?

Arabs: flight schools, pictures from security camera's, phone calls from airplanes (Arabs with box cutters, let's roll). That's it. I maintain all 3 are fake.

Israelis: Silverstein (WTC, anti-terrorist insurance weeks before 9/11), Odigo, Dancing Israelis and of course Clean Break and PNAC. And Dov Zakheim working 4 years prior to 9/11 for SPC, a company that produces systems to remotely control airplanes. Up to 8 at a time as the brochure informs us.
 
Last edited:
Israelis: Silverstein (WTC, anti-terrorist insurance weeks before 9/11), Odigo, Dancing Israelis and of course Clean Break and PNAC. And Dov Zakheim working 4 years prior to 9/11 for SPC, a company that produces systems to remotely control airplanes. Up to 8 at a time as the brochure informs us.

Yes, but you still haven't answered the all important why.
 

Back
Top Bottom