Skip to content or view screen version

911 – the need for an independent investigation

Keith Parkins | 17.01.2006 16:07 | Analysis | Repression | Social Struggles

11 September 2001, the day the world changed forever. If ever there was a time of innocence it was no longer.

' ... we already know that the official account of 9/11 cannot possibly be correct. That account contends that 19 Arabs, with feeble ability to pilot aircraft, hijacked four airliners and then executed demanding maneuvers in order to impact the World Trade Center and the Pentagon; that the damage created by their impact combined with the heat from burning jet fuel brought down WTC1 and WTC2; that WTC7 was the first building in history to be brought down by fire alone; and that the Pentagon was struck by United Flight 77, which was a Boeing 757. The basic problem with this "conspiracy theory", as in the case of JFK, is that its truth would violate laws of physics and engineering that cannot be transgressed.' -- James H Fetzer, McKnight Professor, University of Minnesota

'This is total war. We are fighting a variety of enemies. There are lots of them out there. All this talk about first we are going to do Afghanistan, then we will do Iraq ... This is entirely the wrong way to go about it. If we just let our vision of the world go forth, and ... just wage a total war ... our children will sing great songs about us years from now.' -- Richard Perle

11 September 2001, the day the world changed forever. If ever there was a time of innocence it was no longer.

On the day it happened, 11 September 2001, when it flashed across our TV screens on every single news channel, it all seemed plausible enough what we were told: a bunch of hate-filled Muslim terrorists hijacked four commercial aircraft with the intention of slamming them into high profile buildings on a suicide mission.

That is what we were told, that is what became the official story (with a few variations), it got the official seal of approval from the 9/11 Commission reluctantly established by George W Bush, it became accepted wisdom. Only .... only if we start to ask searching questions, we find nothing adds up, it is all smoke and mirrors, one huge big con trick.

Four planes hijacked on a single day, but not a single one intercepted.

No steel-framed building has before collapsed, and yet in a single day three collapsed.

The Twin Towers were designed to withstand a crash by a Boeing 707. The fires from the aviation fuel were not hot enough or of sufficient duration to bring down the Twin Towers.

A third tower, two blocks away, the 47-storey WTC 7, also collapsed that day.

The hole in the Pentagon is not of sufficient size to accommodate a Boeing 757. There was no wreckage of a Boeing 757 outside the Pentagon.

When we examine what flowed from 911 – illegal wars against both Afghanistan and Iraq, the carve-up of Iraq to benefit oil companies and other multinationals and global corporations, massive military expenditure to benefit arms contractors, clampdown on civil liberties – then we begin to get suspicious.

When we learn that the Project for the New American Century, the neo-cons who now surround George W Bush, called for a new Pearl Harbor

'The process of [ military] transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.''

then the alarm bells start ringing.

Extremist Muslim terrorists, wishing to kill the maximum number of the hated infidel, filled with rage and malice without limit, would one would imagine, have gone for the maximum death toll.

Ramsi Yousef, convicted of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, had hoped to kill 250,000 people. Had the hijackers struck the Twin Towers later in the day, they would have killed many more people, as not everyone had yet got in to work. The Pentagon attack, after executing a near-impossible maneuver hit the one part of the Pentagon that was under renovation. Had it hit the Pentagon on approach, it would have taken out Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and the Pentagon top brass.

There were plans in place before 911 to invade both Afghanistan and Iraq. Afghanistan is of strategic importance for oil and gas pipeline routes. Iraq is of strategic importance for its oil reserves and for control of the Middle East.

A writer in an Israeli newspaper commented:

'If one looks at a map of the big American bases created, one is struck by the fact that they are completely identical to the route of the projected oil pipeline to the Indian Ocean ... If I were a believer in conspiracy theory, I would think that bin Laden is an American agent.'

As early as 10 October 2001, the US State Department had advised the Pakistani Minister of Oil that 'in view of recent geopolitical developments', Unocal was ready to go ahead with the pipeline project..

Plans were in place to invade Afghanistan before the winter snow came. Pakistani officials were aware of plans to invade Afghanistan before 911.

The Taliban, as with Al-Qaeda, were a creation of the American CIA and Pakistani ISI, financed with Saudi money. When the Taliban refused to play ball, they had to go.

The Taliban were warned, either play ball, behave as you should or the military option would be exercised. They were given a choice: 'Either you accept our offer of a carpet of gold, or we bury you under a carpet of bombs.'

The new Afghan Prime Minister Hamid Karzai and Bush's special envoy to Afghanistan Zalamy Zhalilzad were both previously on the Unocal payroll. Unocal being the key player in pipeline routes through Afghanistan.

Project for the New American Century:

'The United States has for decades sought to play a more permanent role in in Gulf regional security. While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein.' -- Project for the New American Century.

Dick Cheney, when he moved into his new office when the Bush administration took office, had a map of Iraq neatly carved up.

Stephen Gowans writing on ZNet commented:

'... the top item on the Pentagon's agenda, once it gave the order for the jackboots to begin marching on Baghdad, was to secure the oil fields in southern Iraq. And when chaos broke out in Baghdad, US forces let gangs of looters and arsonists run riot through “the Ministry of Planning, the Ministry of Education, the Ministry of Irrigation, the Ministry of Trade, the Ministry of Industry, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Culture and the Ministry of Information.” ... But at the Ministry of Oil, where archives and files related to all the oil wealth Washington had been itching to get its hands on, all was calm, for ringing the Ministry was a phalanx of tanks and arnoured personnel carriers.'

A key US military document Vision 2020 recognises:

'The globalization of the world economy ... will continue with a widening between 'haves' and 'have-nots''

In other words, the rich will continue to get richer and the poor poorer under neo-liberal globalisation.

The same document, Vision 2020, is equally explicit in its mission statement: 'US Space Command – dominating the space dimension of military operations to protect US interests and investment.'

In other words, the role of the US military is not to defend democracy, to protect the American people, but to protect American corporate interests.

A key question to ask when any crime has been committed is who benefits? A question that investigative reporter Patrick Martin asked:

'In examining any crime, a central question must be “who benefits?” The principle beneficiaries of the destruction of the World Trade Center are in the United Sates: the Bush administration, the Pentagon, the CIA and FBI, the weapons industry, the oil industry. It is reasonable to ask whether those who have profited to such an extent from this tragedy contributed to bringing it about.'

Walden Bello, an expert on Third World affairs and leading critic of globalisation, commented:

'The Al Qaeda New York mission was the best possible gift to the US and the the global establishment. ... As for the crisis of political governance in the US, September 11 has turned George W Bush from a minority president whose party lost control of the Senate into arguably the most powerful US president in modern times.'

Karen Talbot, Director of the International Center for Peace and Justice, echoed a similar sentiment:

'The September 11th terrorist attacks have provided a qualitatively new opportunity for the US, acting particularly on behalf of giant oil companies, to permanently entrench its military in the former Soviet Republics of Central Asia, and the Transcaucusus where there are vast oil reserves – the second largest in the world. The way is now open to jump start projects for oil and gas pipelines through Afghanistan and Pakistan ... The big payoff for the US is the golden opportunity to establish a permanent military presence in oil-rich Central Asia.'

John Pilger simply noted that: 'Time and again, 11 September is described as an “opportunity.”'

Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein provided the necessary bogey-men. Was 911 the 'catastrophic and catalyzing event', the 'new Pearl Harbor'?

It was with reluctance that George W Bush launched the 9/11 Commission, now seen as a cover-up, not an investigation. The 9/11 commission was flawed from the start, it was starved of funds, lacked sufficient time for a proper investigation, many of its members had strong connections to the airline industry, oil industry, or companies on the Afghanistan or Iraq gravy train, the executive director of the commission Philip Zelikow was a Bush insider, the commission was denied access to sensitive documents, there was intimidation of commission members by the FBI, testimony and evidence that did not fit the 'official' story was either ignored or relegated to footnotes. For example, Sibel Edmonds, who gave over three hours of testimony behind closed doors on FBI corruption and cover-up was relegated to a footnote. Sibel Edmonds has since been gagged by Attorney General John Ashcroft.

There is now the need for a fully independent investigation, under the auspices of the UN.



Zbigniew Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives, Basic Books, 1997

Noam Chomsky, 9-11, Seven Stories Press, 2001

Noam Chomsky, Hegemony or Survival, Hamish Hamilton, 2003

Noam Chomsky and David Barsamian, Imperial Ambitions, Hamish Hamilton, 2005

David Corn, Probing 9/11, Nation, 7 July 2003

David Ray Griffin, The New Pearl Harbor, Arris Books, 2004

David Ray Griffin, The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions, Interlink Books, 2005

Ian Henshall and Rowland Morgan, 9-11 Revealed: Challenging the facts behind the War on Terror, Robinson, 2005

Seymour M Hersch, Chain of Command: The Road from 9/11 to Abu Ghraib, HarperCollins, 2004

Edward Herman, The Manufactured and Real Iraq Crisis, Znet Commentary, 3 February 2003

Eric Hufschmid Painful Deceptions, Endpoint Software, 2002

Steven E Jones, Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Collapse?, unpublished draft

Michael Meacher, The war on terrorism is bogus, The Guardian, 5 September 2003

Keith Parkins, 911 – a route to war or an excuse for war?, 8 December 2005

Keith Parkins, Death of free speech in Blair's Britain, Indymedia UK, 13 December 2005

Keith Parkins, CIA extraordinary rendition, Indymedia UK, 15 December 2005

Keith Parkins, MI5 to bug MPs, Indymedia UK, 17 January 2005

Keith Parkins, 911 – Sibel Edmonds, to be published

Keith Parkins, 911 – a fortuitous occasion for the Bush administration, to be published

Keith Parkins, 911 – The New Pearl Harbor, to be published

Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse, Bush to criminalize protesters under Patriot Act as "disruptors", Indymedia UK, 15 December 2005

Philip Shenon, 9/11 Commission could subpoena Oval Office files, New York Times, 26 October 2003

Philip Shanon, Deal on 9/11 lets White House edit papers, New York Times, 14 November 2003

Philip Shanon, Terrorism panel issues subpoena to city for tapes, New York Times, 21 November 2003

White House accused of stalling 9-11 panel, Associated Press, 26 October 2003

Keith Parkins
- Homepage:


Hide the following 18 comments

Debunking the 9/11 conspiracy theories

18.01.2006 10:21

All of the 9/11 conspiracy theories can easily be debunked. See this webpage:


Tired old rehash

18.01.2006 19:31

Oh no, not again - yet another rehash! This has been done to death about 4 times in the last 3 months; at the last count, there were 90+ comments on one thread.

In what meaningful way is this news?


You're Tired, Spook. Take A Rest.

18.01.2006 19:45

Every time you post that one article, Troll, I point out that it was so thoroughly debunked itself after printing, that the magazine was forced to pull its "comments" section regarding the article from the site. It's nothing but a rehash of the official propaganda, by people paid by the Administration, which ignores glaring factual errors and contradictions - not to mention the Natural Laws violated by the Official "let us kill Arabs with impunity" Conspiracy Theory.

More importantly, the people who've used their Conspiracy Theory to "justify" their wanton aggression - planned long before this False Flag numbed the rational minds of a nation - have been completely unable, in well over four years, to present key pieces of compelling evidence which would exist if their Theory was true, simple things such as airport surveillance stills of "ze terrorists" boarding the planes that day. If they wanted to "debunk" anything, all they'd have to do is make a clear case. The fact is that they cannot, because their story is utter BS.

Now, we come to find out that Jack Abramoff played host to Atta and several of the 911 patsies, in his casino and yacht. Just one more smoking gun in the case against the Fascist Extremists in DC ...

911 = PNAC, CIA, Mossad

911 - which conspiracy theory do you believe?

18.01.2006 23:00

The media is not telling us the truth. Iraq did have a weapon of mass destruction. Iran does have a weapon of mass destruction. The US does have enemies. It is being threatened by terror. But the weapon of mass destruction is no anthrax or sarin or a dirty nuclear bomb, it’s the EURO. And it’s enough for the US elite to do desperate things.

After 1945, the US economy was the biggest, the US had trade surpluses, the US had lots of gold and the US dollar was the world currency. Everyone had to have it to buy oil. Then Vietnam happened. Surplus turned into deficit. Western Europe became an economic rival. The dollar didn’t look so good. And when France demanded their dollars should be converted to gold in the early 1970s, the US almost defaulted on their trade debts.

So, US stops fixing the dollar to gold. The US makes deal with Saudi Arabia. The Saudis continue trading oil in dollars. Everyone still has to have dollars. It’s value skyrockets. US global position preserved! But in the 1980s, they realise that US consumption is outpacing US production. But hell, they can still get the rest of the world to pay for that when they buy dollars. But now, that won’t work anymore. The US trade deficit is in the trillions. And it get worse – in comes the Euro. The rest of the world starts thinking: ‘we’re losing all this money because we have to buy deadbeat dollars, so let’s buy Euros instead. But do it quietly so the US won’t get upset.’

But the US does get upset. No dollar hegemony means economic disaster in the US, the US loses its economic superpower position, it stops maintaining a superpower military. This buying Euro stuff has got to stop. To the rescue comes the neo-cons. They say a pre-emptive war on terror is needed. We need a big military to stop any rival. And before we can do that, we need an event like Pearl Harbour. And then 9/11 happened. And by magic, the US can invade Iraq after they deployed their WMD – selling oil in Euros from 2000. The US doesn’t want a new world order. They’re too busy preserving the old world order.

But no, all this just a silly conspiracy theory. The US didn’t organise 9/11. Osama bin Laden from his bat cave did with the help of the secret services of an enemy Middle Eastern state. They were so dastardly they managed to do the terror on the same day that most of the US air defences were too busy with drills and exercises to do anything about it. And Donald Rumsfeld said that so it can’t be a ridiculous conspiracy theory.

The Dollar May Fall This March, Pravda

Money Week warns of global crash, November 2005

Alan Greenspan on the dollar as reserve currency,

The Iranian Threat: The Bomb Or The Euro?,,


mail e-mail:

I did it.

19.01.2006 09:54

Concerened is unhinged, but frightfully amusing where and whenever [he] pops up.

We are thinking of using him in the next phase, 'the mindless nonsense' plan (sshhh!).

Architect only uses this site to 'comment' (ahmm!) on 911 issues - which are clear cut and without mystery or loose ends, right?

Perhaps [he] uses other names elsewhere.

I'm afraid [he] cannot be used for any of our devious plots, as [his] dogmatic mind and constant need to evoke 'expert' magic status, rules him out of our evolving designs. We need doubt not certainty, a receptive mind, not a hive one already pre-filled with opinion.

Sorry lad. Perhaps we might find you a position as a third rate hack on some outer fringe publication for refuseniks, subverts and [new]heritics - plus all the other detritus from our new world order.

The Bavarian Illuminati

Have you read this website article all the way through though?

19.01.2006 10:01

Have you read this website article all the way through though?
It seemed convincing enough for me. Remember the condpiracy theories about there being no planes and it being missiles that hit the WTC and Pentagon. That website clearly shows photos of aircraft parts! Remember the conspiracy theory about WTC building seven collapsing despite not being hit by a plane. That building collapse was easily explained by the fact that WTC 7 was hit by hundreds of tons of falling debris from the other two towers which gouged out huge section of the building and led to its eventual collapse.

I suggest this to you if you are still not convinced. Why don't all you September 11th conspiracy theorists join together and take out a private prosecution against the US government for murder if you think they did it. Then see you conspiracy theories ripped to shreds by US government lawyers. If you were really confident that you were correct then that is exactly what you would do - take out a private prosecution against the US government!


Keep up the good work!

19.01.2006 13:23

Another 911 post = a new set of golf clubs for me.

Bauxite Investor

Commonsense or conspiracy?

19.01.2006 16:41

We don’t need conspiracy theories, we need commonsense, don’t we? No need to look at the evidence and be remain critical of what the authorities say. Those conspiracy theories are just ridiculous.The people who promote they should be laughed at.After all common sense tells you that the official explanation is perfectly credible, doesn’t it?

Over four years after “the biggest terrorist outrage in history” no one has been prosecuted for it. But Mr Bush and Mr Rumsfeld say Al Queda did it so it must be true.

If you’ve got commonsense you wouldn’t believe in conspiracy theories. Dr Evil, who is based in a bat cave somewhere in Afghanistan and Pakistan, heads a Muslim Spectre that outwits the most powerful nation on Earth and commits the “biggest terrorist outrage in history”. Dr Evil is motivated by a fundamentalist Islam that has existed for decades. But the mad Muslims wait until after the Cold War before working out that “they hate our freedom”. That’s not a conspiracy theory, is it?

Mr Rumsfeld wasn’t being a conspiracy theorist when he said that Dr Evil was supported by some shadowy Middle Eastern state, was he? A lot of Americans believed that state was Iraq, so that must be right then, mustn’t it? And if it was the same Iraq that the US and UK invaded, that was just a useful coincidence. And that same Iraq had weapons of mass destruction that they were going to use to “destroy civilisation”, weren’t they? The fact that it was the West that gave him WMD, doesn’t make any of that suspicious, does it?

But oh no, Blair-Bush did lie to us. Iraq had no WMD. They killed thousands of innocent Iraqis for nothing. But hell, why should we be suspicious of them, it’s commonsense, isn’t it? (Afterall, it wasn’t them who died.)

Of couse, we know that Dr Evil is dastardly because he convinced 19 people to blow themselves up for no identifiable objective. Of course, they did it because “they are mad, Muslims fundamentalist” and because “they hate our freedom”. Clearly, the more devout a Muslim you are, the more likely you’re going to hijack a couple of planes and fly them into building owned by the most powerful nation on Earth. It’s in the Koran, isn’t it?

The US has the most sophisticated defence (and attack) system in the world. They spend billions on the CIA, DIA, NSA, FBI, military etc, etc, etc. But hell, 19 ordinary folk who are mad Muslims and have a bit of inspiration from Dr Evil can get pass them, no problem. Just give a few of them some hours on a bi-plane and computer simulation and they can fly passenger jet planes like professionals, or in fact better than professionals. Just goes to show what wonders Dr Evil can perform, eh? No steel framed building has ever collapsed because of fire, but for Dr Evil, no problem.

The Dr Evil who carried out “the biggest terrorist act in history” comes from the same family that has been in business with the same family from which the US President has come from. Just a coincidence, right? Members of the family are involved in a big US defence contractor that the Bush family is involved in. Another coincidence, eh? And so what if Dr Evil had been supported by the CIA for years, that’s just a coincidence.

Of course, Bush-Blair, and their secret services would never contemplate doing a 9/11. They never tell a lie. They never break the law. They have been and always will be fine, upstanding folk. It’s just those dark-skinned, uncivilised politicians from the Third World who do evil, isn't it? And if Bush-Blair they did some bad things, it would only be for the most moral of reasons. And OK, the politicians and secret services got 50,000 US military killed in Vietnam and over 1 million Vietnamese for no good reason and lied to the US people about it, but why on earth should anyone be suspicious about UW politicians’ wars because of that?

Afterall, if you have commonsense, you know that the secret services would do anything really bad, don’t you? This must be because commonsense people get a daily report of what they do. They get told everything that would cause concern, don’t they? They were open about how much support they’ve given to Al Queda in the past. They told you that Pakistan intelligence used to meet with bin Laden on a monthly basis and must know where he is, haven’t they? They told you the CIA and ISI (Pakistan intelligence) work hand in glove, don’t they? And we know the head of the ISI was meeting with Washington intelligence bigwigs at the same time the mad Muslims flew into the Twin Towers, don’t we? And we know all about the £100,000 that ISI transferred to Mohammed Atta a month before the hijacking, don’t we? But oh come on, you’ve got to be a conspiracy nut to take that one seriously because Indian intelligence came up with it and they’re full of conspiracy nuts, aren’t they?

Our secret services are not like that. OK, so them and the military, who've received billions from the US taxpayer, messed things up big time on 9/11, but these things happen, don't they? No one should get punished for it (apart from one or two). Nothing should happen to anyone in the military. Nothing should happen to anyone in the FAA. Nothing should happen to anyone in the FBI, especially those who had a spy who hung out with some hijackers. There's no conspiracy. These things happen.

And when Blair tells you that the 7/7 suicide bombers learned their terror skills in a militant Pakistani madrass, he told you that the militant ones are run by the ISI, didn’t he? And he told you that all the mad Muslim clerics in the UK, including the ‘voice of bin Laden’ worked with MI6, CIA and ISI during the Bosnia-Serbia conflict, didn’t he? And just because Richard Reid and his shoe bomb sounds like something out of 'Man from Uncle', shouldn’t make anyone believe in conspiracy theories, should it?

And so what if MI5 tracked two of the 7/7 bombers and let them go. And a good mate of the mad Muslim clerics, Raroon Aswat, telephoned the 7/7 bombers before they blew them up and no one in the police wanted to talk to him about it. Nothing suspicious about that, is there?

So, there you have it. There is nothing to be suspicious about. There is nothing to worry about. Conspiracy theories are crap and it's all commonsense, isn’t it? And as for those ridiculous conspiracy theorists...

mail e-mail:

Here We Go Round Again...

19.01.2006 22:57

Osama Bin Laden a cave dwelling troll? Incapable of organising a conspiracy?

You know, I love the inherrent racist assumption there - after all, how could this man who lives in a cave engineer the jihadist (is that a real word?) hijackings? He's just another damned raghead...bunch of nomads, still live on camels and sit on one hand when eating.

This is a highly educated man, from an extremely well-off family (mysteriously spirited out of the US after 11/9, so there might be something you should look at there). He's no fool. Why is organising the hijakings so impossible? Is there some sort of selection criteria which we should be aware of?

Oh, and inside job et all (aka Jordon) stop bleating about the steel stuff unless you can come up with a cogent response to my admittednly lengthy response above. Steel DOES fail in normal fire loadings and I'd love to see proof to the contrary. I'll be able to miss out all that pesky expensive fire proofing in my own projects.


Dr Evil should have a Nobel Prize - for mad Muslims

20.01.2006 12:03

Silly me, of course Dr Evil did it.

And course it’s racist to think that Dr Evil’s bat cave couldn’t be pretty sophisticated. US intelligence experts said it was. They said that his bat cave had multiple floors and could store big lorries and all kinds of James Bond stuff (according to the Sunday Times). So, his sophisticated bat cave was, no doubt, stuffed full of computers that had all kinds of simulation programmes that could work out if a certain amount of jet fuel burned it would reach a particular temperature that would mean the steel structures would weaken and a floor or two of the WTC building which would then give in causing the whole building to pancake. And to work this all out, he got his mad Muslims either to steal all the relevant plans of the two WTC buildings in secret so nobody would know or he got them to do their own survey of both buildings without anyone noticing. No, no, course not. He got his mad Muslims to survey the building by remote viewing!!! There's method in their madness!!

And it was just fortunate for the evil Dr Evil that lots of debris fell on the third building, WTC7, causing fuel pipes inside to crack and cause a fire so hot it also weaken the steel structure, so that it collapsed exactly like the other buildings, even though, WTC7 didn’t have a plane fly into it. Or so The Federal Emergency Management Agency think, or guess, or…oh well, they don’t know why WTC7 collapsed. No one does. But the fact that the way all the building collapsed looked like controlled demolitions just goes to show what an evil genius Dr Evil in his bat cave is and what suckers these conspiracy theorists are!!!

And, of course, this hot fire thing happened at the Pentagon. Just because reporters at the scene said that they could see no plane wreckage and there’s not much visible in photographs, those silly conspiracy theorists take it all out of context and say there wasn’t a plane at all. A blazing fire melted most of the plane, and its engines. Happens all the time. And if fire did not affect a computer terminal, a wooden stool with book on it in offices that felt the plane’s impact site and that can be seen clearly in photographs after the fire had died down, that proves nothing. And there’s no conspiracy if the FBI and all made damn sure no one was able to see any of the footage of the CCTVs because they confiscated them all – apart from the footage that shows an explosion and very little else.

And Dr Evil’s ESP meant that he knew that the multi-million dollar US air defence systems were too busy to do anything about these hijacked planes because Cheney had insisted they all do drills at the very same time of the attack no one knew about - apart from the Israelis, who were tailing the mad Muslims, the British, the Germans, the Egyptians and god knows who else. Of course, those silly conspiracy theorists would have you believe that none of this could have happened without support form people on the inside. What nutters, eh? No, Dr Evil is an evil genius. All those mad fundamentalists are not going to call him a terrorist? They are going to give him their very own mad, fundamentalist, evil Nobel Prize! But those silly conspiracy theorist are too stupid to work that out.



20.01.2006 14:16

I haven't heard this so-called tape but the cave acoustics could affect the quality if it were recorded inexpertly even on the best equipment. If the recording wash washed out with ambience (reverb) and brutal denoising was needed to make it intelligible it would compromise the quality severely.

Apart from that, does it really matter if Bin Laden is dead or alive? It matters that for some odd reason the US never tried to capture or kill him... and have still delegated this task to the dubious dictatorship of Pakistan (riddled with sympathisers). THAT speaks volumes.

It matters more that we have been sold a bullshit war that is still killing for the rich, no?

M (another recordist)


20.01.2006 14:22

It was pretty stunning how the Grand Zionist Conspiracy managed to silence all structural engineers, ATC staff... and pretty much everybody with an ounce of grey matter on this big dungball we live on. That's what I call tyranny!

Get a bloody grip, you are saying that everyone with a professional opinion has been silenced!


Quite Simple, Their Theory Has No Support

21.01.2006 04:57

Wow, the "it would take too many people" defense again. How original.

Chain of Command refutes that one.


The people who've used their Conspiracy Theory to "justify" their wanton aggression - planned long before this False Flag numbed the rational minds of a nation - have been completely unable, in well over four years, to present key pieces of compelling evidence which would exist if their Theory was true, simple things such as airport surveillance stills of "ze terrorists" boarding the planes that day. If they wanted to "debunk" anything, all they'd have to do is make a clear case. The fact is that they cannot, because their story is utter BS.

Now, we come to find out that Jack Abramoff played host to Atta and several of the 911 patsies, in his casino and yacht. Just one more smoking gun in the case against the Fascist Extremists in DC ...

911 = PNAC, CIA, Mossad

Shut those conspiracy nuts up!

21.01.2006 16:08

Yeh, outsourcejob, the reasons why no one does contradict the official explanation for why the buildings collapsed is because it's obvious why they did. There’s no mystery. No confusion. No one scratching their heads. Plane flies into tall building – tall building collapses. Obvious. Any architect or engineer with a bit of knowledge about the buildings could explain how they collapsed. Everyone knows. Local authority, police, insurance, everyone - except those conspiracy nuts.

It was an oversight that that fire officers were allowed in the building when everyone knew it was due to collapse. It was an oversight that people were still around the building and had to flee for their lives when they collapsed. And the fact that one insurance company rejected the explanations for the collapse of WTC7 and refused to pay any money out, just goes to show how unpatriotic and selfish people can be.

And clearly, when Frank A. De Martini, Manager of WTC Construction and Project Management, said in a documentary, World Trade Center - A Modern Marvel, 25/01/01, that the WTC twin towers were designed to withstand a crash from a fully loaded Boeing 707, the largest aircraft at the time, and believes it could sustain multiple hits from jetliners, comparing it to poking a pencil through mosquito netting, he was talking crap.

And when Van Romero, a vice president at the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology retracted his early claim that explosives brought down the buildings, there was nothing funny about that.

That Kevin Ryan of Underwriters Laboratories, who certified the buildings steel components, in responding to the official collapse explanation says:

“This story just does not add up. If steel from those buildings did soften or melt, I’m sure we can all agree that this was certainly not due to jet fuel fires of any kind, let alone the briefly burning fires in those towers.” - just proves what an incompetent he is.

And when the New York Times wrote on 29 November 2001: “But experts said no building like it, a modern, steel-reinforced high-rise, had ever collapsed because of an uncontrolled fire...”, they were only joking.

So, it obvious that when Professor Steven Jones, Brigham Young University physics professor, that former Treasury economist under Reagan, Paul Craig Roberts and former economist under Reagan and now academic Morgan Reynolds says that the collapse explanations are bogus, they must be conspiracy nuts.

In fact anyone who suggests the Bush was involved with 911 are conspiracy nuts! They should be ignored by the media. And the rest of us should laugh at ‘em, and insult ‘em. And they should have their jobs threatened. Bullying them is right, 'cos it’ll teach ‘em to keep their stupid, offensive mouths shut!!!



21.01.2006 16:32

Oh joy, another toys out the pram argument. Listen lads/ladies, this isn't a conspiracy theory site and your meanderings aren't news. It's not even sensible debate - just the equivalent of you all shouting at each other.

To make it easy, consider this each of you:

Architect, etc - there's plenty of evidence to back up your case, you are part of the overwehlming majority of people, and the conspiracy nuts aren't going to get anywhere because they're, well, nuts

911 and the other conspiracist nuts - yes, you're right, everyone else is blind no matter how well educated. Patsies the lot of them. The American fascist state is here and thank goodness you spotted it.

Everyone happy?


Yer Beam End, Pal

21.01.2006 18:16

Okay Inside/Outside Job....let me answer your diatribe with a simple question, which I'm sure you can answer:

If steel doesn't fail under fire loadings, then why does every set of building regulations in the world recognise the risk and require protection against even normal fires in order to prevent structural collapse?

Hint: It's nothing to with smoke spread and breathing - fire regulations in most of the world are designed to get people out of buildings and to safety in a matter of a few minutes.



22.01.2006 10:56

The building regulations (designed to protect innocent humans and not data-machine-corporation beings) are so strict in fact, that up until this point they had succeeded in protecting many many fire ridden buildings from collapsing on their organic componants.

It is a shame that this heavily insured, recently paid for steel framed building let the side down. If only they had kept up with the maintainance, it might never had happened.

And fancy storing all that fuel oil in WTC7? You would have thought that the strategic controll centre for emergency response in NY city would have been better planned - what with all those documents related to the securities and exchange commmision, FBI investigations, ilegal and insider stock trading etc etc being inside the building.

Oh, and the coincidence that this building to, was so poorly maintained that the stringent regulations covering the delicate structual steel were ignored, say like worse than a third world country already (where such things have never even occured).

Its a shame that controlled demolitions (a company specialising in, ermm, controlled demolitions) hauled all the evidence out to sea to dump, or shipped it to china without prior forensic investigation - an action diametrically opposite to strict and stringent regulations covering the treatment of criminal investigations - darn it, there is that incompentent coincince again. Gee, I guess all these coincidences are sycronisity an that?!?

Architect, we have told you that you are not useful to our plans, please stop using your massive brain power to blow our idiot conspiracy cover - get religion already.

The Bavarian Illuminati

With answers like that you should consider politics...

22.01.2006 18:29

Sorry, my Bavarian Illuminati friend, but what has maintenance got to do with it? The fire protection on the WTC was a no-maintenance intert blown coating. And are you indeed conceding that fire can cause structural failure in steel framed components?

Can I ask one other question of our friends who suggest controlled demolition of the main towers? How much explosive do you think it would take and where would it have to be placed to bring down such large structures?