Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Did Neo-Cons Gone Wild Make a Propaganda Spectacle of the WTC?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU
 
Dancing_Dave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-22-03 11:13 PM
Original message
Did Neo-Cons Gone Wild Make a Propaganda Spectacle of the WTC?
"Dissent is the highest form of Patriotism"-Thomas Jefferson



Let's try to be well-informed, open-minded to a variety of possible theories and scenarios, and good-humored enough disagree agreeably!
Being an informed independent-minded citizen can be fun. :)

The map and chronology above gives us all a frame of reference denoting some major strange explosive events on 9/11 and 9/12. But it doesn't mention the explosive events in the WTC Towers that started before the buildings were even pulverized. There was a major explosion in the basement of the North Tower about the same time as the building was hit by a plane far above, and other strange explosive events on various floors leading into the collapse

The map is brought to us by German Engineers Help USA - Your Government Bush is lying to you!

WHO COULD HAVE DONE ALL THIS? WHY DID THEY DO IT? Let's explore some possible aswers to those questions.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Dancing_Dave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-22-03 11:47 PM
Response to Original message
1. Only Buildings Belonging to WTC were severly damagaed.
Edited on Sat Aug-23-03 12:02 AM by Dancing_Dave
Notice in the map that all the buildings belonging to the World Trade Center were at least severely damaged. No buildings that didn't belong to the World Trade Center were so severely damaged -- even buildings belonging to someone else right accross the street from the Twin Towers! The only place explosions were reported, were in buildings belonging to the World Trade Center. That may be an important clue to consider.

Some researchers think that Lary Silverstein, who took over managing ownership (on a long-term lease) of the Twin Towers and WTC 7 just months before 9/11, actually had enough insurance that he'll come out way a head on this! He certainly had a lot of insurance from a lot of different insurance carriers, but whether he's going to come out ahead of this, depends on claim cases that are still in court. Though all the WTC buildings were severely damaged, only the Twin Towers and WTC 7 were pulverized unto dust in a very thorough demolition style --you might say, they took their secrets with them.

I don't know if or how Silverstein may be connected with other buidings of the WTC. The land on which they all are built belongings to the Port Authority of Manhattan, which issues long-term leases on the buildings. These "renters" have to come up with their own insurance, as Silverstein Associates did. The Port Authority has sometimes been accused of corruption and Mafia ties.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QuietStorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-03 01:59 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. that is interesting that only WTC buildings were damaged.

even across the street. Did anything more come of guiliani with his bunker and the fueltanks that he had stored there in I believe it was WTC7 - it seems I also remember a bit of finagling involved with some of his documenation and storage or destruction of them I can't remember now. Any more sniffing around guiliani since the beginning of the year?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeadBroke Donating Member (173 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-26-03 09:50 PM
Response to Reply #1
18. Question for Dave
I'm very confused by some of your statements, such as; "... all the buildings belonging to the World Trade Center ... " and "Though all the WTC buildings were severly damaged, ... "

What do you mean by WTC buildings?

Do you mean those owned by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey? Or are you including other structures that used a "World Trade Center" address but were not Port Authority property?

Lots of property owners "steal" a nearby famous landmark's name in naming their building or property. A perfect example, also in NYC is Penn Plaza. It's one of the buildings that was built when the old Pennsylvannia Station was razed and stands next to Madison Square Garden. As time went by more old buildings in that area were razed for new towers, and even though they were unassociated with the original nearby Penn Plaza they used it's name to attract a better class of tenant. There are now 5 or 6 Penn Plazas. None of them have anything to do with the original. They just swiped the name, mostly for prestige. When CNN moved into an old building with an 8th Avenue address, (two blocks from the original Penn Plaza) the building's name was changed to a Penn Plaza too.

Much of the same has happened with buildings in the Rockefeller Center area of Manhattan.

So I'm confused by your statement and referances to WTC buildings.

My old (1984) blueprints from 7 World Trade Center list "Seven World Trade Center Company" as owners, not the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. It's name is another example of swiping the name of a famous local landmark for a prestigous address.

The damaged and destroyed overpasses connecting the Trade Center to Battery Park City are Olympia and York Properties, as are the Battery Park buildings that were heavily damaged.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dancing_Dave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-26-03 10:13 PM
Response to Reply #18
20. Interesting issue...
I was going by all the maps which show us 7 numbered WTC buildings. And I know Larry Silverstein was in control of the Twin Towers and and 7, and he had a long term lease with the Port Authority. Were some of those 7 buildings NOT ultimately owned by the Port Authority? I think I know someone who could give me a certain answer on that, but it might not be right away. But I do know that in all the discussion of what happened to that complex, I haven't ever come accross anyone mentioning that one or two of them were NOT ultimately owned by the Port Authority.

The Twin Towers and (WTC 1 and 2) and WTC 7 were the three most clearly demolished by multiple timed explosives, and Silverstein is connected to those, which puts him on the suspect list, though we don't yet have clear indications that he was directly involved. Obviously, we need to do some more detective work here.

WTC 6 had a major explosion on it's roof on 9/11. Some kind of an explosion on 9/12 did severe damage to WTC3. I haven't heard of a connection between WTC 3 and Larry Silverstein...well, there's plenty of research to do here! :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dancing_Dave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 02:51 PM
Response to Reply #18
24. Yes, Port Authority owns the whole WTC site
Edited on Wed Aug-27-03 03:25 PM by Dancing_Dave
From the Port Authority Website http://www.panynj.com/ it's pretty clear that the Port Authority does own the whole WTC site where the 7 WTC buildings stood. Their rebuilding plan covers that whole area.

But they typically granted long-term leases to firms like Silverstein Associates. Silverstein had put together a great collection of insurance policies from many different insurance carriers for the buildings when he took over the Twin Towers (WTC1&WTC2)just a few months before 9/11. But he'd taken over WTC 7 earlier, and that's the place that had Enron prosecution papers that could have been used against Vice President Cheney, secretive CIA and Department of Defence offices and other interesting features. Then on 9/11, all three of these Silverstein buildings were thoroughly demolished -- and the court cases over the insurance began. If Silverstein wins all his insurance cases he could actually come out way a head on this.

Silverstein clearly has a huge vested interest in people believing that the WTC 1,2,and 7 all disintigrated and collapsed because buildings 1 and 2 were hit by planes. As soon as explosives and demolition come into the picture, he could have a lot more trouble collecting on his insurance...for some insurance complany lawyer could argue that Silverstein was liable for failing to take what ever steps were needed to prevent so many bombs from being put in these buildings. That probably explains why Silverstein has been so slow to give the the official NIST investigation some basic information about the buildings and RECENT CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS THERE. It could be worth millions of dollars to Silverstein to keep that covered-up!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dancing_Dave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-03 12:16 AM
Response to Original message
2. More clues for the curious...
Edited on Sat Aug-23-03 12:22 AM by Dancing_Dave
WTC 7, which was demolished throughly like the Twin Towers, housed the legal papers of Federal Corruption case against Enron, including now VICE President Cheney, a case which had been begun during the Clinton Administration. Much of the evidence which could have been used against Dick Cheney and other corporate crooks at Enron was lost.

The CIA and Department of Defence had secretive research offices in WTC 7. All evidence of what they were up to was disintigrated along with the building.

Mayor Rudolf Giuliani had a mutli-million dollar "Bunker" in there, from where he could supposedly run the city in some kind of a major emergency. It's a good thing he didn't go there when he heard some kind of a plane had hit the North Tower....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QuietStorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-03 02:06 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. yes the bunker is what i was referring to in my other post

he had also allowed fuel tanks be stored there which is interesting considering other research offices there. If there was foul play blowing the building up would certainly be a way to also destroy any give away documentation. It is so hard for me to entertain the WTC because if it really was an inside job like this... How could guiliani masquerade the way he did that day. It is hard for me to fathom that kind of deceit unless I thing about nazi's which is one of the reason that it is the german's that are being so helpful, not that germans as a whole are to be = to nazi's please don't misunderstand but it is somewhat ironic... when WWII history comes to mind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dancing_Dave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-03 02:25 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. I don't know whether Guiliani was in the loop on this....
Edited on Sat Aug-23-03 02:26 AM by Dancing_Dave
And he's not someone who benefited from it to the extent that neo-cons like Dick Cheney, Condoleeza Rice and Donald Rumsfeld did. But if there's a lead there, pursue it and see where it goes.

The strange thing about those fuel tanks, is that they seem to have provided a kind of pretext for demolishing the building. Fire inspectors had said before they might be unsafe and cause a deadly fire, but of course they didn't mean they would thoroughly demolish and pulverize the building, which has never happened to any steel buidling as a result of fire. One of the Twin Towers suffered a fire in the '70's which was actually much worse than that caused by the aircraft on 9/11, but there was no basic structural collapse at all and everyone who was working above the ten floors or so that caught fire came out just fine. So the idea that those diesel fuel tanks caused the demolition of WTC 7 doesn't hold up any better than the idea that the plane impacts and jet fuel fires caused such a thorough demolition of the Twim Towers. And at least FEMA admitted it had no real explanation for what happened to WTC 7!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demodewd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-24-03 12:03 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. 70s fire
I'd like to know more about that 70s fire. Really?? Do you have a reference that includes the specifics?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dancing_Dave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-24-03 12:55 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. This is a good place to start....
http://www.indyhawaii.org/news/2003/07/3257_comment.php

I'm trying to find a link which deals well with earlier WTC fire history in more than a few lines...I'll give you something enlightening as soon as I find it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeadBroke Donating Member (173 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-26-03 09:03 PM
Response to Reply #9
16. Working Fires
There have been a number of working fires - several multiple alarms extinguished at the Trade Center, even before it opened; but none of them, especially not the fire event of the 70s you have refered to on more than one occasion, were of any major consequence.

http;//www.unc.edu/courses/2001fall/plan/006e/001/project/chap1.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dancing_Dave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-26-03 09:49 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Thanks for link-- indeed they weren't of major consequence!
Edited on Tue Aug-26-03 09:58 PM by Dancing_Dave
The fires didn't have any major consquences such as melting steel to collapse the basic stucture, and indeed no fire in a steel building anywhere has had that consequence! That's my point.

Actually, this very interesting link covers some explosions and fires during the time when the buildings were first constructed, but doesn't have any comrehensive account of the fire history between when the buildings were completed and 2001. No doubt, I'll run back across a more complete account one of these days. The key thing is that office fires don't cause ANY steel framed building to collapse, but the official version of 9/11 asks us to believe that on 9/11/2001 it suddenly happened to 3 buildings, WTC 1,2, and 7. And they all disintigrated and collapsed in exactly the pattern of a controlled demolition by numerous timed explosives...definately NOT a pattern ever seen as a result of any fire.

I think the best site for recognizing that pattern of disintigration and collapse due to multiple explosions is
http://home.comcast.net/~jeffrey.king2/wsb/html/view.cgi-home.html-.html

There are other sites showing the same thing, some more specialized an some less so, but I think that's best one for getting the basic point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dancing_Dave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-03 10:09 PM
Response to Original message
6. WTC 7 site enlightens masses about official 9/11 fraud
Edited on Sat Aug-23-03 10:10 PM by Dancing_Dave
Something about the pulverized buidling WTC 7 has caught the interest of many people who doubt the Bush Regimes official 9/11 myth. It was demolished as throughly as the Twin Towers even though it was hit by no plane! And over 300 people at DU recently commented on all the issues here...clearly the official myth about what happened on 9/11 has begun to lose hearts and minds. Here's a whole site about it, with links to what it means in the total plan...http://www.wtc7.net/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QuietStorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-24-03 12:16 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. fema

is in on the coverup. and there are people here quoting from fema. there were very early comments made by nist that were much more interesting which suggested (beside the demolition issue) there was some kind of high tech laser testing going on. Something about a hose like sound. which they said some audio wits had heard. At the time I encountered that the info was already old and needed to be updated. Do you know if it has?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jenm Donating Member (189 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-24-03 10:14 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. sunshine is a disinfectant
Fema rep was quoted saying he got there the night before.
We all know the whole thing stinks, with the lack of military
response and the scurrilious behaviour of the current
administration in every dealing they have with anybody.
I mean, how can you not suspect this group? Geez.
I think it'd be a shame if we look back two years from
now and we blew the chance to get them out of office.
http://frame21.cjb.net/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dancing_Dave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-24-03 10:33 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. Thanks for the enlightning link!
We could use more fine sites like that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dancing_Dave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-26-03 07:37 PM
Response to Original message
12. Did Marvin Bush let those bombers in?
Edited on Tue Aug-26-03 07:45 PM by Dancing_Dave
Bush was involved in WTC security at a time when quite a bit of "construction" work seemed to be going on....we're getting a little close to explaining how all those bombs were planted around the WTC complex, including enough to thoroghly demolish WTC buildings 1,2, and 7, and inflict catastrophic damage and some major explosions in the other four buildings:

SECRECY SURROUNDS A BUSH BROTHER'S ROLE IN 9/11 SECURITY
by Margie Burns

Washington, D.C. WASHINGTON, Jan 19, 2003 -- A company that provided security at New York City's World Trade Center, Dulles International Airport in Washington, D.C., and to United Airlines between 1995 and 2001, was backed by a private Kuwaiti-American investment firm with ties to a brother of President Bush and the Bush family, according to records obtained by the American Reporter.

Two planes hijacked on Sept. 11, 2001 were United Airlines planes, and another took off from Dulles International Airport; two, of course, slammed into the World Trade Center. But the Bush Administration has never disclosed the ties of a presidential brother and the Bush family with the firm that intersected the weapons and targets on a day of national tragedy.

Marvin P. Bush, a younger brother of George W. Bush, was a principal in the company from 1993 to 2000, when most of the work on the big projects was done. But White House responses to 9/11 have not publicly disclosed the company's part in providing security to any of the named facilities, and many of the public records revealing the relationships are not public.

READ MORE:
http://www.911dossier.co.uk/ :think:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Abe Linkman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-26-03 07:58 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. Notice how quiet the "Choir" is here?
The defenders of the Official Story Conspiracy spend most of their time and energy on matters related to the Pentagon. They must feel the whole conspiracy they're defending will come unraveled if the wheels come off the Pentagon-related lies. They're right, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RH Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-26-03 08:30 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. Notice how Linkman never does anything but uselessly heckle.

:boring:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dancing_Dave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-26-03 08:36 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. Pentagon Secrecy Favors Cover-ups
Edited on Tue Aug-26-03 08:38 PM by Dancing_Dave
I've always though it was more likely that the cover-up would break down in NYC around the WTC disaster, than in Washington around the Pentagon disaster. In New York there were thousands of witnesses who do not consider it part of their job to lie, conceal and dissimulate. Of course, there were some of those in powerful positions which kept the cover-up going as long as it did, but they were outnumbered by more honest people who were sure to come out of the closet sooner or later! It tends to take decades for historians to finally figure out what really happened at the Pentagon, and even then some mysteries and disputes remain. But I think we have a good shot at completely breaking down the WTC cover-up much quicker than that. And we have so much more real EVIDENCE about what happened in New York, so many photo's and videos and recordings of firemen who heard explosions or who reached the not-to-hot point of plane impact and internet posts from a wide variety of people who were there...even if some of that testimony is bogus when it seems to appear in a forum, there's enough left to facilitate strong analysis at a growing number of sites.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Abe Linkman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-26-03 10:12 PM
Response to Reply #15
19. Phone call records are the key to breaking down the cover-up
Since the alleged Olson calls are the basis for so much of what we've been told about 9/11; getting access to Justice Dept. phone records would go a long way towards getting the truth out about 9/11.

But, if it can be done easier (better) in NYC, that's fine by me.

What do you think, Ron Harvey and boloboffin (which sorta sounds like anablep --- do you two know each other? just curious.)?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dancing_Dave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-26-03 10:25 PM
Response to Reply #19
21. All this stuff is worth investigating
And there's no way to know in advance what leads will prove most helpful. Actually, people are tracking quite a few leads these days which have led to some interesting discoveries. :think: :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Abe Linkman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-26-03 10:51 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. Yes, indeedy.
Having a good memory helps, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dancing_Dave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 01:37 AM
Response to Original message
23. WTC Cover-Up Begins to Crack in New York City
Judge orders release of 9-11 transcripts
Update: Port Authority, decided Monday not to appeal (Newsday, 08/26)

Newsday/AP -August 22, 2003, 5:33 PM EDT

By JEFFREY GOLD



NEWARK, N.J. -- A state judge on Friday ordered that transcripts of World Trade Center emergency calls on Sept. 11, 2001, must be released.

The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey is bound by an agreement it made last month with The New York Times, state Superior Court Judge Sybil R. Moses ruled, a newspaper lawyer said.

The transcripts must be released by 5 p.m. Thursday, said Moses, who sits in Hackensack.

READ MORE AT:
http://news.globalfreepress.com/article.pl?sid=03/08/22/2359221
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
plaguepuppy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:12 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. More puzzling evidence
Remember how long they managed to keep the firefighter tapes bottled up? But ultimately they were released and raised some serious problems for the official story, as these no doubt will as well.

Some PAX/NBC footage has recently become available thanks to Christian Czech that shows the collapse of the spire in better detail than previously seen. This anomalous structure was a portion of the North Tower core that remained standing for ~15 seconds after the rest of the collapse, and appears to disintegrate into dust. The clarity of this footage leaves no wiggle room for claiming that the columns were covered with dust that "fell off" as they started to fall:


http://www.plaguepuppy.net/public_html/New_Spire/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QuietStorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-28-03 11:03 AM
Response to Original message
26. I don't know the answer to the original posts question but STAY TUNE

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=86856

I CAN NOT get involved in the WTC - ex NYer I still can not look at the pictures. But those transcripts might prove helpful if THEY HAVEN'T BEEN DOCTORED that is.

KEEP AN EYE OUT FOR THEM.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 27th 2022, 01:54 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC