PDA

View Full Version : @ request of snoopsnuffleopagus - my view of 9/11


adimon
16-09-2007, 10:33 PM
Snoopsnuffleopagus - you gave me the following 5 options:-

I am, 'curious as to your position' on September 11, 2001.

1. 9/11 commission report is accurate

2. 9/11 commission report is deficient yet applicable

3. Governmental, Military, and Business concerns: 'Let it happen on purpose.

4. Governmental, Military, and Business concerns: 'Made it happen on purpose'

5. Other(please expound)

I hope you don't mind me saying so, but 1-4 are kinda quite narrow, so I'll go for 5, and if you don't mind I will split this into two sections:-

1. What I think happened - which is relatively easy to form conclusions, on I think.

2. Why? I'm still in the early stages of making my mind up on this. I think the next term of Government will be critical for the discovery of key information on this.

Throughout, where appropriate, I will quantify my level of belief (in quarters, for simplicity).

1. What happened?

Item. I'm fairly sure WTC 1,2,7 were blown with controlled demolition. 3/4
Item. I'm not sure if the charges were placed upon construction, or in the period leading up to 9/11. 2/4
Item. A jet plane flew into each of the twin towers. FACT
Item. I believe a plane did NOT fly into the Pentagon. 4/4
Item. I believe a missile hit the pentagon. 3/4
Item. I believe Larry Silverstein was NOT involved and no prior knowledge. 4/4
Item. I believe that George W. Bush was NOT involved and had no prior knowledge. 3/4
Item. I believe some persons, within the framework of the US Government, representing commercial interests and secret societies, were involved, and/or had prior knowledge 3/4 (by and/or I mean simply that some knew but did nothing, and some were instrumental in the plot)
Item. I believe that Islamist terrorists were involved, though not on their own. 3/4
Item. I believe that there were warnings, leaks, and calculations that all of the above would happen. 4/4
Item. I believe that some of these warnings were ignored through incompetence, and some of them were covered up and funnelled. 4/4
Item. Someone stopped NORAD from intercepting. 3/4
Item. I believe that the Islamist organisation involved is not DIRECTLY linked to the London attacks. 3/4
Item. For the record, I don't believe that either 9/11 or 7/7 can simply described as inside jobs. That's not to do with stretching my imagination, but a very considered decision, which I will happily expand on.

2. Why?

As I said before, I'm still looking into this all the time, so this is a brief list, and therefore a bit vague. Until I've made up my mind, though, it's brevity can serve as a summary for me, and a discussion point for others.

Greed.
Defense Corporations.
Promotion of War.
Prevention of peace (not the same as Promotion of War).
Oil.
Hegemony (Chomsky's word, but it's a universal one term everyone will know)
Territorial domination.

= MONEY

I'm not so sure on chipping, and all the rest of it. I'm sure my standpoint will definitely change as time goes on.

So there ya go - quite 'mainstream' as far as most of the views here are concerned, I know, and not complete. But at least I don't think a plane hit the Pentagon.

Hope this answers your questions. :)

kblood
16-09-2007, 10:46 PM
I am going for 3 with a few addins:

I am sure they knew of it, since I for one tried to warn them. This leaves to options:

They did not believe me, or already knew about it. Guess they could even be involved. The stuff about a plane hitting pentagon was quite new to me, I only know of 3 planes, and neither of them hitting pentagon. One thing is certain: They knew of the threat, and some told people not to come to work on the day of the attack. So a few knew, but an evatuation did not take place. What else to make of it, I am not sure.

They did use it to start wars, that is for sure. Their reason for these wars are very weak, so I am guessing they would have gone into these wars anyway.

adimon
16-09-2007, 11:13 PM
They did use it to start wars, that is for sure. Their reason for these wars are very weak, so I am guessing they would have gone into these wars anyway.

They would have definitely started the military actions anyway. They had soldiers there for the last 50 years at least.

snoopsnuffleopagus
16-09-2007, 11:31 PM
Cordial Felicitaions! Adimon:

Thank you for your considered reply to my query.

Dr. Ray Griffiths latest opus on: 9/11, is a worthwhile read. The 'Device' of 'Strategy of Tensions' is what the Populace 'needs' to become aware of as this 'drives' much of the Policy Making in our western Techno-Cratic societies.

Kind Regards: Snoopsnuffleopagus