Personal theories

[TimmyG]

Just wondering if people would like to share their thoughts on what might be a likely chain on events with regard to 9/11?

Everybody here has questions and suspects high ranking members of the american government to be responsible.
And i think we all know the official commission report is certainly not a full account for what happened
And i don't think anyone can say that bush and co aren't hiding something.

But does anyone think they have a likely and reasonably specific explanation for what happened?

I myself believe that exposives were used in the buildings.
Real hijackers were most probably used (atta etc)
PNAC or a group closely connected to PNAC (acting with pnacs knowledge) were responsible for initiating plans to do it (probably the CIA).
The pakistani ISI were used to recruit 'terrorists' to hijack planes (i think the mamoud ahmed link is very suspicious)
And more and more i'm coming round to the idea that freemasonry was part of it. With the controlled demolition company being tied into some kind of freemason group.


Obviously I'm not saying that i'm 100% sure this is exactly how it went down. Like the rest of us, I only have info in the public domain to go off. This is just where I'm at with a full theory at the mo.

I think that in order for them to do this they would have had to keep as many people in the dark as possible. It seems that the FBI were not 'in on it' and PNAC and the CIA left them some 'real' looking leads to follow.

One point i'm really torn on (which may swing my opinion and my research if I can be convinced, one way or another) is the planes and hijackings. Did Mohammed Atta actually hijack a plane and fly it into the wtc? or did he hijack it and then it was landed and switched for a drone (to ensure a successful collision). Or is he still alive and the hijacks didn't take place atall. Just because some cell phone calls may have been faked, doesn't prove the hijacks didn't take place atall.

Or were the planes drones from the very beginning? All the official flights grounded and the passengers killed (or were agents)? Is Atta's father bonkers or being truthful when he reported that his son had phoned him after the attacks?


Let me hear other peoples thoughts.
Let me make it clear that I'm not saying that we need to construct a full account with bulletproof documented evidence to suspect the US gov of responsibility... I'm just really curious as to where people have got with their research

[Ian]

hi

I've been giving this some thought recently. If you believe the twin towers were brought down with explosives (and I certainly believe they were) then could whoever masterminded the operation leave to chance the possibility that the 'hijacked' planes might or might not be flown into the buildings? I believe the planes were remotely controlled into the buildings.

What I'm saying is that if you believe the strongest evidence of complicity (controlled demolition of WTC buildings) then can you believe that they'd have left to chance the alleged 'mechanism' of the collapse (planes hitting the buildings)?

Once you go down the route of controlled demolition and remote controlled planes, it becomes much easier to suspect the masterminds of this operation of such deeds as faking phone calls / bin Laden videos etc.

[prole art threat]

Hijackers who were patsies, totally unaware of what would take place on 9/11, their movements that day were directed by something else entirely, some secret meeting, perhaps and this probably just involved Mohammad Atta. Controlled demolitions - Remote controlled planes packed with high explosives smashed into the towers. WTC 7 was more than likely used as the control tower and was also the venue from which higher sections of the U.S. government had a front row seat overlooking the spectacular sacrifice that day and was deliriously feeding off the ultra-negative energy that was being created.

Wtc7 was then demolished to hide evidence of it being the control tower for the atrocity. Why bother about flight 93 or the Pentagon. Who cares? And as for holograms instead of planes theory, forget it. It isnt important.

[TimmyG]

[Wokeman]

The named individuals were "patsies", who were set up (and then not all of those named, some were wholly innocent) to create what's called a "legend" a particular identity and lifestyle to convince public opinion, attending flight school, living it up in bars and strip clubs. According to Webster Tarply's 9/11 Synthetic Terror - Made in USA: Patsies are 'dupes, useful idiots, fanatics, double-agents' who need to be noticed as much as possible. They must attract lots and lots of attention, and most importantly, they must stay out of jail. If the patsies are in jail, they cannot be scapegoated. Finally, the patsies take the blame. Now, does the above fit Mohammed Atta or not? The planes were remotely-controlled, and I am even considering that there might not have been ANY planes at all. But I haven't got there yet.

[scubadiver]

no planes at all? Bit extreme isn't it?

What about all those eye witness? the French documentary makers who filmed the first attack.

[Wokeman]

The Naudet brothers - that's another story!

[TimmyG]

the patsie thing makes sense. the cia seemed to go out of their way to make the alleged terrorsists be noticed. leaving copies of the koran and passports everywhere

Which means the initial hijack reports of flight 77 and 175 were fabricated and the pilots of these flights landed the planes somewhere in secret. do we know who initially made the call to the airports. are there any reports from airport employees of suspicious behaviour regarding 77 and 175?

i've spent so much time looking at the collapse and the us govs failure to investigate it i've neglected this area a bit

[numeral]

[Hazzard]

I dont care about the details. All I know is the culprits and thats good enough for me. I can find the details after the interogations .

[TimmyG]