Thursday, November 10, 2005

Bombs in the Towers - Why?

If rogue elements within the U.S. government did cause 9/11, why would they have used bombs to bring down the Twin Towers, when crashing planes into the buildings would have been sufficient to act as a "Pearl Harbor" type justification for war?

Because planes alone would not have scared the American people to the point where we would have relinquished -- for the sake of security -- traditional American ideals of fighting only defensive wars and of having broad personal freedoms (we weren't necessarily following these ideals; but Americans at least believed in them). The war in Iraq and the wholesale suspension of personal liberties -- through the Patriot Acts and secret executive orders -- could not have happened without the "shock and awe" of the collapse of the Twin Towers.

We've all seen images of plane crashes before. While planes crashing into the Twin Towers would have been horrible, that wouldn't have been traumatic enough to cause us to blindly follow power-hungry leaders with an insane agenda spouting obvious lies. Indeed, "only" a few hundred people, at most, would have died from the plane crashes -- a tragedy, but not enough to shake us to the point where we would totally abandon our idea of what it means to be American. Without the trauma of the collapse of the towers, could the vote fraud, WMD hoax, war in Iraq (and perhaps Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia and Venezuela), torture, suspension of legal due process, and patriot acts all have happened within a few short years?

But the collapse of the two tallest buildings in New York, symbols of American business, and the death of close to 3,000 Americans, put us into a state of shock. The controlled demolition of the towers was necessary to instill the degree of fear and confusion required to successfully implement the objectives laid out by Brzezinski in the book "The Grand Chessgame", in the writings of the Project for a New American Century, and in the minds of the other wannabe-conquerors of the Middle East and the larger world.

Modern Americans are jaded by Hollywood special effects, where even everyday TV shows include visually-dazzling images. The original Pearl Harbor may have worked on our grandparents' radio-listening generation using only planes (it is now well-documented that we knew of the Japanese plan of attack, but let it happen in order to justify America's entry into the war). But the "New Pearl Harbor" -- 9/11 -- had to be much more spectacular, and inflict not only tremendous loss of life but also spectacular damage in order to sufficiently terrorize entertainment-overloaded and visually-jaded Americans.

As stated by one writer:

Those two mighty towers came crumbling down in that vast, roiling, near-mushroom cloud of white smoke before the cameras in the fashion of the ultimate Hollywood action film (imagery multiplied in its traumatizing power by thousands of replays over a record-setting more than ninety straight hours of TV coverage)

Indeed, an expert on controlled demolition stated:

The detonation of bombs within the towers is consistent with a common terrorist strategy, Romero said.

"One of the things terrorist events are noted for is a diversionary attack and secondary device," Romero said.

Attackers detonate an initial, diversionary explosion that attracts emergency personnel to the scene, then detonate a second explosion, he said.

Romero said that if his scenario is correct, the diversionary attack would have been the collision of the planes into the towers.

If you learn about the secret history of false flag operations in America and around the world, you will gain a clearer understanding of why the perpetrators of 9/11 thought the demolition of the towers necessary.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

the real perps actually failed. let's do the math. if wtc7 had preplanted explosives and thermite to cut it down, then it too was a target on 911, except it's plane never hit its target. and then remember wtc 1993. elements of the fbi allowed a bomb to be built and planted at the BASE of one of the buildings. they allowed this because they were told of the plan by ahmed salim. when did the bomb go off? 12 Noonish. So everyone was in that tower at that time of day and they meant to kill everyone.

they failed

10:51 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

PS: (append to the above comment) yes, a massive death toll was what was desired to cause the greatest amount of outrage. why else hit the pentagon...but fail to destroy it because it was hit on a wing that was being repaired? hitting the pentagon was neccesary because the pentagon represents the military, so an attack on it would be a clear declaration of war.

mission accomplicated

10:53 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Your all idiots. Think about it a building gets smashed into by a plane this building has been built with counter weights for high amounts of wind the counter weights are nearly 20000 pounds and are located at the top of the building. So the building starts to collapse floor by floor due to the high amount of weight at the top as its coming down large amounts of pressure are being placed on the floors below resulting in explosion of all sorts of things from water pipes, heating, electricals, as well as the the windows smashing out and yes it would sound like bombs going off and the building would crumble to shit taking out the a few buildings around it due to debris and what not and the pentagon makes sense to so many planes flying overtop of that place they wouldnt even see it coming. They meant to kill people they did without the use of bombs and whatever else people think they used no conspiracy theory no nothing.

2:58 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

@ 2:58pm.

that's funny. explosions from water pipes.

11:10 PM  
Blogger B.E. said...

It's also a convenient way to resolve a ginormous asbestos liability.

2:38 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home