SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the it's-"talk-softly-and-CARRY-a-big-stick" dept.
Oder Aderet reports at Haaretz that the United States considered using nuclear weapons against Afghanistan in response to the September 11 attack according to Michael Steiner, who served as a political advisor to then-German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder, as reported in Der Spiegel. "The papers were written," Steiner said when asked whether the U.S. had considered using nuclear weapons in response to the attacks orchestrated by Al-Qaida's Osama bin Laden, in which almost 3,000 people were killed. "They had really played through all possibilities." Steiner added that Schröder feared that the US, which was in a state of shock following the attacks, would overreact. "After Sept. 11, the entire administration positively dug in. We no longer had access to Rice, much less to the president. It wasn't just our experience, but also that of the French and British as well. Of course that made us enormously worried."
Original Submission
(Score: 4, Interesting) by VortexCortex on Tuesday September 01 2015, @12:54PM
Also, did we ever get answers to the strange behaviour of the buildings?
On September 10, 2001, US Secretary of Defence, Donald Rumsfeld, gave a speech covering plans to privatize much of the US Military:
"The topic today is an adversary that posses a threat. A serious threat to the security of the Unite States of America. This adversary is one of the world's last bastions of central planning. It governs by dictating 5 year plans. Perhaps this adversary sounds like the former Soviet Union, but that enemy is gone. This adversary is closer to home. It's the Pentagon bureaucracy. Today we declare war on bureaucracy."
The following day there was a large military training exercise which occupied US fighter jets. At 9:37 A.M., the Pentagon was attacked. This was 51 minutes after the first plane struck the World Trade Center on 9/11.
The controlled demolition of the WTC probably had something to do with the elevator modernization that went on for quite some time. There were no permits produced for the modernization and the government denies the elevators were updated, yet many workers there remember the armed guards posted for the "construction" effort. The new elevators and sky lobbies of the Twin Towers were featured in Elevator World magazine. So, if they say there was no modernization, then the government is either delusional or covering something up.
NYC building inspectors / engineers petitioned the government to reinspect every building in NY because there is no way they should have just collapsed like that. The petition was denied. Of course every building didn't need reinspection because they weren't rigged to blow like the WTC buildings were. These structures are designed to burn to a husk and remain standing in hurricane force winds. In the entire history of mankind only three such concrete and steel buildings have ever "self-demolished" like this: The Twin Towers and WTC building 7 -- The latter was not hit by a plane; Sorry "super jet fuel" apologists.
Though the US government remains aloof, independent researchers essentially know what happened. The elevator modernization efforts were apparently cover for weakening the primary structures of the towers (which were designed to be able accessible demolished via elevator access only). During the fire thermite seems to have been used to finish weakening the structures (hence the molten steel seen in the videos dripping from the side prior to the collapse). This also explains the abnormally intense heat, twisted steel and melting of bumpers nearby (rather than outlandish claims of space based energy weapons). The secondary explosion heard by witnesses was likely the final demolition charges which brought the buildings down on themselves -- note, they didn't tip over, or face any resistance from lower floors that weren't on fire yet, the tops were practically in free-fall all the way to the ground as they crashed through the remaining weakened structure of the buildings. People should really just go watch the videos again rather than dismissing the controlled demolition claims out of hand. Two planes took out three buildings via textbook building implosion, not once, not twice, but three times in a row? Yeah, right.
That 9/11 was a conspiracy is not surprising to anyone who's really studied recent history. Just look the sacrifice at Pearl Harbor which polarized Americans into being pro-war. Likely to privatize the economy, CIA staged a covert military coup in Chile on September 11, 1973, and US involvement was similarly covered up for decades (but revealed in FOIA requests today). These sorts of large scale coverups are normal in today's shadow wars. The real question is "why", and the answer is likely not what you think. Allegedly, the only records of the ongoing misappropriation of funds investigation into the Pentagon were stored in the Pentagon and Wold Trade Center building 7 (which inexplicably caught fire and collapsed on 9/11). Prior to 9/11 there was an interesting insurance policy taken out by the then recent purchaser of the WTC real estate (which was foretasted to continue depreciating in value). Some point to the fact that the events are still being used in media to manufacture consent for war and increased surveillance state powers.
However, despite the US's historical propensity for subterfuge and all the evidence available of the strange surrounding circumstances, I think it's safe to dismiss all of these grand conspiratorial claims. Clearly there is "NOTHING TO SEE HERE FOLKS!" Instead, I'd like to present a different, more mundane, picture: Flying a plane into a building and blaming terrorists for it was such a well known covert operation scenario (initially to be used against Cuba) that 9/11 is basically playing out the plot to The Lone Gunman's "Pilot" episode [youtube.com] (a spinoff of The X Files involving its conspiracy theorist hackers):
While The Lone Gunmen are thwarted in their attempt to steal a computer chip by Yves Adele Harlow, John Fitzgerald Byers receives news of his father's death and the trio soon find themselves unravelling a government conspiracy concerning an attempt to fly a commercial aircraft into the Twin Towers
The fictitious plot to fly the passenger jet by remote control into the World Trade Center aired on March 4, 2001, 6 (months prior to the plot being carried out IRL).
I think it's plainly obvious to everyone that 9/11 was just a building demolition PR stunt to bolster viewership for the failing X Files spinoff, and things got a little out of hand. That the post-9/11 power grabs and scaremongering are still effective today is simply a testament to the power of TV advertising and state control of the mainstream news media.
"You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it's an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before."
- Rahm Israel Emanuel, 55th Mayor of Chicago.
(Score: 2) by turgid on Tuesday September 01 2015, @02:32PM
There was a really good documentary on British TV that explained everything rationally using scientific evidence. Occam's razor and everything!
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 01 2015, @02:54PM
> On September 10, 2001, US Secretary of Defence, Donald Rumsfeld, gave a speech covering plans to privatize much of the US Military
Publicly announcing your plans for a conspiracy and then implementing it the very next day in the biggest, most attention getting way the world has seen since Hiroshima would be the course of idiots. So criminal masterminds who planned for months, if not years, just decided to risk it all with a completely unnecessary public declaration of their plans right before the most critical step. Right.
The thing about conspiracy theorists is that everything can be twisted to 'prove' the conspiracy because its all just back-fitting.
(Score: 2) by zugedneb on Tuesday September 01 2015, @03:08PM
When I was a teen, I was immature. Nobody wanted to have sex with me.
The ones that had sex, behaved in a very mature way.
Even today, I believe that those who have sex, are very mature and responsible people.
Since the population is growing, a lot of people have sex.
But that means, there are a lot of responsible, mature people around.
Then, who is doing all the bad things, and how can they get away with it?
old saying: "a troll is a window into the soul of humanity" + also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ajax
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 01 2015, @04:25PM
Watch an episode of Teen Moms and tell us about sex and maturity
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 02 2015, @07:59PM
Fascist religions that stigmatise sex and reduce women to baby factories have a lot to do with the world's problems.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 02 2015, @03:32AM
Meh. There was a Tom Clancy novel where an airline pilot crashed his plane into the Capitol building, during the State of the Union or something. Of course it was a setup for Clancy's protagonist to become president.
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Thursday September 03 2015, @01:48AM
and then they put together an "unbiased" 'Warren Commission' to put forward the 'evidence' that supports what Bush, etc, wanted.
You americans have been scammed again (and again) and you will again if you keep eating this sh*t.
Stand up and be heard: don't let (strike> your government /strike) people in your government get away with killing people in order to fulfill their agendas.
(Damn... bring back the strike HTML!)
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---