Thursday, August 13, 2009

9/11 FAQ Part 1

1: how could the government possibly get every one of the thousands of firefighters, FBI agents, demo experts, CIA, majority of the house of reprasentatives, scientists, everybody in the bush admin, major military figures, air traffic controll, rescue workers, pilots, police etc. to keep it a secret?

Threats and bribes. People are scared of losing their jobs, scared of being outcast, scared in a hundred ways. Plus they're on the payroll. The government funds, thus controls about 100% of all scientific research. Look at what has happened to the few academics who have spoken out on 9/11. Fired, every last one.

Don't think large numbers of people can keep secrets for a long time? I'll prove that wrong with 3 letters: N S A. The NSA is a secret government organization with at least 30,000 full time employees, and an unknown black budget. They've been around since . . . well we don't really know exactly, but many decades at least.

What have they done? What are the accomplishments of the NSA? 30,000 working full time for decades on end, and we don't have any idea what they do. Why? BECAUSE IT'S SECRET!

2: why would the government attack the pentagon? theres no point. even if there was info in the pentagon regarding 9/11, its only a small section. theres still 95% percent of the pentagon not destroyed. i doubt highly that only one section of the pentagon has something as important as the BIGGEST TERRORIST ATTACK EVER.

The Pentagon is a military target. They needed to be able to call 9/11 "an act of war", which is exactly what the president called it. Remember that the wall that was blown up (allegedly by flight 77), had recently been renovated for "blast protection", and was far away from the area where the top brass hang out.

3: why would bush invade afghanistan for oil money? the cost would be greater than the profit.

the costs of a possible 9/11 conspiracy: paying off the thousands of major figures that would have had to been in on 9/11 to make it work- around 3 billion dollars AT LEAST.

the cost of freedom tower: estimated around just below a trillion dollars if not more.

cost to carry out the leftover debris: about 10 million.

war costs: trillions of dollars.

the profit of a possible 9/11 conspiracy:

oil: 1.5 trillion.

as you can see, the cost would be greater than the profit.

Other People's Money. The people who wage war are not the people who pay for war. You're right that 9/11 was a net loss, a huge net loss. War is always a net loss. But SOME people can profit immensely from war, such as the government and its military contractors, and that's exactly who did 9/11.

The same is true for the real estate. The insurance companies who paid for the World Trade Center are being greased directly by the Federal Reserve, who simply create money out of thin air. The true cost of all this is being paid by productive citizens in their taxes, and by inflation.

3: why would osama admit to 9/11 if he didnt do it?

Because he's a CIA asset. A paid actor. First, Osama might very well have been dead now for years. We don't know. The various "confession" tapes are a joke, the guys don't look like him. But assume Osama really admits responsibility. So what? What did it cost him? You really think they couldn't go find Osama bin Laden if they wanted to? Please.

And remember, Osama was OUR guy to begin with. "Al Queada" really grew out of Osama's "Freedom Fighters", who were backed by the U.S. government when Afghanistan was fighting the Soviets during the 1980's.

4: if the government really wanted to ensure the success of the conspiracy, why wouldnt they assassinate the big names in the conspiracy buisneess in the most accidental looking way possible?

The "big names" are part of the conspiracy. Vladimir Lenin said "The best way control the opposition is to lead it ourselves". So true.

Steven Jones, Judy Wood, Jim Fetzer, Simon Shack and many others have screwed the case up badly. Fetzer never really says anything. Jones is pushing a thermite hoax that cannot possibly explain what disintegrated the towers, while ignoring the visual evidence. Wood does a great job of examining the visual evidence, but associates it with the ridiculous nonsense about "The Hutchison Effect". Shack has destroyed the case for video fakery, by claiming the 9/11 videos are completely animated.

It would be far too messy to go around killing truthers. The strategy is to flood the internet with nonsense called "9/11 truth". It's worked brilliantly. The "truth" movement is a manifest failure.

5: if the government really did it, why wouldnt they shut down your conspiracy sites minutes after their creation? youre telling me the government can carry out the biggest terrorist attack in history and successfully blame it on someone else, but they somehow dont have the ability to shut down something as simple as "" or some other college student-made site?

Same as #4 - too messy. Instead of shutting down real truth, the drown it with a flood of half-truth, lies posing as truth, nonsense, irrelevancies, and the like. Government agents outnumber real truthers 1000 to 1. They have essentially unlimited funding. Remember how, on the day before 9/11 they announced the Pentagon has misplaced $2.3 trillion? That'll buy you a nice 9/11, plus a whole lot of "truth" sites.


These FAQs by Tyler Hightower.


Anonymous said...

3: why would osama admit to 9/11 if he didnt do it?

Because he's a CIA asset. A paid actor.

This is wrong. Osama was a CIA asset at one point (likely installed in order to control the opium production - CIA is up to its neck in drug smuggling and Skull and Bones has been involved in opium since the 1830s), though he later cut CIA out of the loop, so they turned him into an evil terrorist villain.

Osama never admitted to 9/11. Immediately after 9/11, he denied any involvement, but the media refused to show us these tapes with the excuse that he might be blinking secret messages to al-Qaeda cells around the globe.

The 2001 video is a hoax. Contrary to what is often alleged, the video in all likelihood is actually of bin Laden and not a fake, but the audio and translation have been doctored. Osama died in late 2001. The 2004 video was an outright fake, with an actor made up to look like bin Laden. The few other videos we have been shown of bin Laden are mostly recycled footage from when he was still alive.

These days, we mainly see Zawahiri instead of bin Laden in these terrorist videos. Zawahiri was reported captured in 2002, though only The Guardian reported this fact in the West. These reports are likely correct. The videos of Zawahiri could depict a fake actor, but more likely they depict the real Zawahiri whom the perpetrators have in custody and can force to say whatever they want him to say.

Anonymous said...

While I'm here, it's worth pointing out that 9/11 was fundamentally a collaboration of two groups with different interests:

1) A group of elite CIA and military. This group includes Bush and the Skull and Bones crowd, and is mostly white protestant ethnically. Their main interest was in rolling Osama, their former partner, and restoring their profits from the Afghan opium trade. This group also profits from arms sales and the other things that go along with war.

2) A group of elite Zionists, including the Israeli government, Mossad, the American news media, and Larry Silverstein among others. This group is obviously mostly Jewish ethnically. They wanted to demonize Muslims in general (especially Palestinians, hence we were treated to bogus video of "celebrating Palestinians" on 9/11), they wanted war against Israel's enemies in the Middle East (Iraq so far, others in the future), and they wanted increased surveillance and decreased civil liberties on the domestic front (e.g. the Patriot Act, written by Michael Chertoff).

Of these two groups, the latter is the more important.

These are also the same two groups who conspired to assassinate President Kennedy.