Wednesday, December 1, 2010

September 11, 2001 Was "An Inside Job"?

See debate above. Subsequent parts at YouTube

Many who hold it ("inside job")  as slam-dunk dogma in my experience hardly even consider the responses to legitimate questions, regardless that the WTC was apparently targeted by Islamic radicals as early as 1993. It is one thing for some to label an event suspicious. It is another to declare it a fact.

--->See also an additional comprehensive debate on Loose Change 9-11 here... I found this one particularly interesting. Follow subsequent parts at YouTube; you can opt to play it all automatically.

Secondary explosions, if they actually occurred (most think not)----could just as readily have been planted by crafty cannot simply leap from anecdotal accounts of "secondary explosions" to the conclusion that it must have been an inside job, especially when demolition experts see substantial differences in the way WTC 1&2 fell and ordinary demolition jobs.

It is important to be fair. Suspicious? Maybe. Fact? No way. True "researchers" knows the difference between a hunch and a fact. It's the first rule when it comes to reporting. That we exploited the tragic events of 9-11 for 'our' own interests in many ways seems to me an undeniable fact; but that is a different matter. I think we must beware radio barkers who push their hunches while selling gold and silver and many other commodities.

--->Target 1993: World Trade Center bombing terrorises New York...A suspected car bomb exploded underneath the World Trade Center in New York killing at least five people and injuring scores more. What didn't work when logically targeting the bottom infrastructure in 1993, succeeded evidently in 2001 by aiming and redoubling at the top levels ...More

Some say that while the some in US government did not directly do the awful deed, they knew what was coming and did not stop it. The burden of proof for such an assertion is on those who make it. Berkley's Dr. Peter Dale Scott seems to make this case, or something similar to it, with erudition, but his analysis, it seems to me, being circumstantial, is based on many leaps. It would take a credible whistleblower to come forth to prove any of the above. No real "deep throat" has been found. In the case of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, CIA asset E. Howard Hunt, in a taped testimony while dying, admitted Kennedy was assassinated by insiders. There was also the conclusion of the 1978-79 United States House Select Committee on Assassinations that likely more than one gunman felled the President.

--->The BBC ---and Its Reporter Jane Standley, who appeared to predict the fall of Bulding 7 before it actually fell on 9/11/01---says it was all based on an erroneous Reuters report...

No comments:

Post a Comment