Who put all those bombs in the WTC? - Democratic Underground

Dancing_Dave

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Aug-21-03 01:02 AM
Original message

Who put all those bombs in the WTC?

From scientific analysis of both photographic evidence, basic physics of the structures, and hundreds of eye-witness reports, it has become crystal clear that a large number explosives were planted around the whole WTC complex in advance of 9/11. Not only in the Twin Towers and WTC 7, which were demolished in a classic "implosion" style demolition by detonation of many explosives at crucial structural points, in a carefully timed sequence of explosions. German Engineers are also now studying WTC 6, where a bomb went off on the roof almost simultaneously with an aircraft striking WTC 2(South Tower). Another building in the complex actually exploded and collapsed the next day, 9/12. No, this didn't all happen on account of some burning jet fuel.

This was a wide-ranging inside job to spectacularly destroy the whole complex, and blast away the evidence of what really happened. Though explosives can be seen going off in the usual pattern of a controlled demolition, the concrete was pulverized much more finely than usual, creating a deadly PYROCASTIC FLOW of hot concrete dust, just like a Volcanic explosion! The amount of energy required to do this was huge...there had to be many powerful explosives. And indeed we have many witnesses who were in or near the buildings and saw, heard, and felt such explosives. Many more who were near the explosions did not live to tell the tale.

That much should be regarded as settled. The question now is who could have done the dastardly deed. Well, major intelligence agencies like the CIA or the MOSSAD could have done it. But also some corporations could have done or had it done. The Carlyle Group, for example, obviously has the resources. And the way Enron cooked their books, the money could have come from there! The MOTIVE is there and maybe access too (Bush's brother Marvin was involved in WTC security).

This issue should be discussed open mindedly. There are a lot of suspects and leads we should try to check up on. Just because someone thinks the MOSSAD is one definate suspect (they had means, motive, and probably ACCESS) doesn't mean they're anti-semitic. Any more than investigating CIA and DOD links doesn't make one anti-American.

One theory, is that the bombing was not done by the same people who manipulated the planes, but added in by someone else who KNEW about that plan. For example, if the official suicide pilot story is true, we already know that the MOSSAD had foreknowledge and could have jumped in with this terrible add on, and of course the increased distruction made 9/11 so much more in Sharon's interest as in Bush's interest. This sort of theory argues that there were numerous devious contributors to the 9/11 disaster, linked by foreknowledge and interests, and perhaps only facilitated by some "letting it happen on purpose" from high-level neo-cons.

I used to believe in that kind of account, but now lots of evidence brought me to the conclusion that high level crooks like Secretary of Defence Rumsfeld didn't just Let It Happen On Purpose, they Made Sure It All Happened Just The Way They Needed It To. Even if there were some dupes, patsies and unwitting accomplices, this went off as one big plan from the top. Someone recently pointed out that if the aircraft that hit the North and South Towers were not both the passenger planes they are alleged to be, then the Towers would have to be destroyed to destroy the evidence. Planes have hit steel buildings before, the buildings did not collapse and the pieces of the plane remaining were always big enough to be clearly identified. We would have a whole lot more real evidence about the planes and who was on them if the Towers hadn't been so thoroughly blown to smithereens.

At the amazing Serendipity site, Peter Mayer came up with the idea that some demolition bombs could even have been installed as a SAFETY FEATURE. WHAT?! You may ask. The idea is that if an extremely powerful bomb were exploded down by the foundations of the building, a small NUCLEAR weapon for example, it could conceivably topple the structure, which would be a massive disaster for all of lower Manhattan, taking out many other buildings. From an INSURANCE point of view, it would be better if some controlled demolition charges then broke the building into chunks that would fall straight down. The problem on 9/11 could then be that some evil people happened to get hold of that detonation system, and used it to needlessly kill so much of the New York City Fire Department.

But even though this might have been the pretext or official reason why some explosives were installed, the amount of explosives in there was extremely to much of an overkill, creating that deadly PYROCASTIC FLOW of hot concrete dust that did so much damage. That is not done in any ordinary demolition. The only reason for doing it, would be to DESTROY ALL THE EVIDENCE of what had happened.

For now, I'm not going to dismiss any theory as long as it leads to finding and explaining some significant evidence. However you want to bring your speculative flights back to Earth and evidence is fine with me. But I do think we need to mainly think in terms of one big coordinated plan, where each part happens for a reason.