 |
|
 |
|
||||||
|
||||||
Source of Dutch original: Metro
Source of English translation: 911blogger.com (translator unknown)
9/11/2006
For the government and the greater part of the press it’s a done deal: the Twin Towers collapsed due to fire, the perpetrators were 19 suicide terrorists toting box cutters and the brain behind the attacks was Bin Laden.
Yet in the real world the last on 9/11 hasn’t been spoken by a long shot: the call for a reopening of the investigation is getting louder and louder. Tens of bestsellers, thousands of websites, and an immeasurable number of experts claim that the official story makes no sense at all. They want answers to their questions. Those answers haven’t been forthcoming.
Five delicate questions about 9/11:
1. Did the Twin Towers indeed collapse due to fire?
Not very plausible; never in history has a steel-framed building collapsed due to fire. Not even after an airplane crash. In 1945 a stray B25 bomber struck the Empire State Building, but the building remains standing to this day. The Windsor Building in Madrid as well as the Meridian Plaza in Philadelphia survived intense fires which lasted 19 and 24 hours. And even if the heat was the cause, then how is it possible that the South Tower collapsed (after 56 minutes already), even though it was struck 15 minutes after the strike on the North Tower? Added to that, the fires in the Towers didn’t amount to much after 15 minutes. Most of the kerosene exploded outside. Out of the holes came mostly black smoke, and the windows were still intact despite the heat. There were even survivors visible on the targeted floors. In one of the pictures, a woman is visible on the edge of the hole, and she is unhurt. Therefore it couldn’t have been such a hellish inferno up there.
Also, the speed of the collapse is hard to explain. In 10 seconds (free-fall speed), everything came down, and 200,000 cubic meters of concrete was pulverized to fine dust. That’s how condemned buildings implode, being brought down by specialized companies, skeptics say. Were there explosives in the Twin Towers? If so, they remained unnoticed, because coincidentally, the bomb sniffing dogs were pulled away shortly before. The security company active on the WTC was, coincidentally, headed by Marvin Bush, brother of the president. In any case, there were explosions that day. Not only reporters of CNN and Fox News reported this, also the fire fighters. This is revealed by their mobile phone calls, which were released recently. (“We’ve had another explosion… I repeat: another explosion!”)
2. What happened to WTC Building 7?
A completely unsolved mystery. Building 7, a colossal 47-story office building, wasn’t hit by an airliner, nor by falling debris from the Twin Towers. The fires were far less intense than in buildings 5 and 6, which remained standing. Nevertheless, the building collapsed like a house of cards. Whoever watches this on the Internet can’t believe his own eyes: it collapses straight-down in 6 seconds onto the surface. Was this also the work of Bin Laden? For a terrorist, Building 7 was the lion’s den, not a very practical target for a terrorist attack.
It housed, among others, the offices of the CIA and the Department of Defense. And as for the 23rd floor, 15 million dollars had been spent on a hypermodern Emergency Command Center for mayor Giuliani. The government therefore possessed a bomb-proof crisis center at the heart of Ground zero, which could resist every imaginable disaster, with bullet proof glass, and its own air- and water supply. However, it wasn’t used. The entire building was evacuated.
There has not been a single thorough investigation into the enigmatic behavior of Building 7. “Cause unknown”, concluded the 9/11 commission, and left it at that. But according to the landlord of the WTC, Larry Silverstein, the building was “pulled” in deliberation with the fire department, to put down the fires. Who’s lying, the 9/11 commission or Silverstein? Or are they both lying?
3. Where is the wreckage of flight 77?
If it was indeed a jumbo jet, that slammed into the outer wall of the Pentagon, then it must have vaporized entirely. The entry hole made up a mere five meter in diameter, and there is no trace of wreckage of any size. Flight instructors have declared that the hijacker who pulled off this magic trick, had trouble controlling a Cessna. But according to the official story, flight 77 made an acrobatic 330 degree turn, to eventually, soaring inches off the surface, slam into the only section of the Pentagon where no-one was present due to a renovation. And all that without damaging the front lawn.
A dive into the office of Donald Rumsfeld, which was right in the flight path, would have been much easier. Thick books have been written on flight 77. Given the fact that a Boeing, 13 meter in height, 47 in length, with a wing span of 38 meters and a weight of 100 ton could not possibly have vanished into a five meter hole without leaving a trace, critics maintain that it wasn’t a Boeing, but a projectile.
Images from security cameras in the surrounding areas could have cleared this up, but those were confiscated by the government and suppressed. The crash was registered by security cameras at the Sheraton Hotel and a gas station. But minutes after the crash, the tapes were confiscated by the FBI. To debunk all the wild rumors, the Pentagon recently released images from one of its own security cameras. However, those are of such appalling quality that, beside a fireball, almost nothing is visible, let alone a Boeing.
4. Who were the 19 hijackers? Good question.
Three days after the attacks, the government already revealed the names and photos. (One hijacker could even be identified by his passport, which was, if the official story is to be believed, retrieved out of the ruins on Ground Zero. In comparison, the black boxes of the two hijacked airliners were never retrieved, which is highly rare). Yet two weeks after the attacks, the BBC already managed to report that Waleed al Shari couldn’t have done it, because he was alive and well and located in Casablanca.
Since then, eight other “hijackers” (Abdul Aziz al Amari, Wail al Sheri, Mohand al Sheri, Kalid Almidar, Salem al Hazmi, Saheed al Ghamdi and Ahmed Alnami) were traced alive and well in Mecca, Tunis and Saudi Arabia. The investigation with regard to the perpetrators wasn’t quite meticulous, to put it mildly. But if there is no proof who the hijackers were, let alone if they were a part of Al Qaeda then what justification is there for invading Afghanistan and Iraq?
5. Prior Knowledge? It appears that way.
According to Newsweek, several top Pentagon officials canceled their flight plans for the next day. Also, Willy Brown, the mayor of San Francisco, received a warning not to fly on September 11, identified by Pacifica Radio as originating from Condoleezza Rice herself. And then there is the phenomenon of the put-options; investments amounting to a bet that shares will fall. In the days preceding the attacks there was a genuine run on shares of Boeing, United Airlines and American Airlines. On September 6, there was 3.150 put-options placed on United Airlines, four times the average. On September 7: 27.294 put-options on Boeing shares, 5 times the average. And on September 10 1516 put-options on American Airlines, or 11 times the average.
The Financial Times concluded that there had been insider trading, and the Justice Department promised a thorough investigation. However, this hasn’t happened five years after the fact.
List of Members
Log in