My Definitive 9/11 Theory.

[James Random]

It's been a while since I posted on here but today a random youtube vid motivated me to create my 9/11 theory. This theory is based on what I know from Uni regarding various aspects of science, architecture and my father's stint in the military.


Well, I have to say I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist. In my life I have seen too much to know that various theories are true or false. But, since the 9/11 issue is still unresolved, here is my take on the matter.

Having some degree of skill in architectural design (something i studied in graphic design) and also being something of a scientist (I studied physics and quantum physics) there are many interesting occurances with the Twin Towers incident.

Firstly, let us examine the compsition of the buildings themselves.
While Manhatten is not know for natural disasters such as earthquake, tornado and hurricanes, the twin towers themselves are built to a 'design spec'. All Skyscrapers above a certain height have to conform to the same design to be deemed safe. No matter where they are to be planted these specs must be met (and usually are without a second thought). Such specs have to include for the highest velocties of wind currently known (the force five hurricane) since windshear is generally greater the the higher the altitude. They also have to have enough tensile strength to bend slightly in the wind (no skyscraper is 100% solid) and to withstand minute changes in the earth's crust that, although undetected by your human senses, have a great impact on high rise structures over the passing of time. Usually when building something inhabited by people designers jump to the extreme and simply find it more cost effective to reproduce earthquake-proof calculations than to spend time going through a new set of calculations for that one specific area. This happens all over the US in particular.
The World Trace Centre itself recieved some special design overhaul upon construction to allow for the possibility that, at some point, the Russians might seek to cripple the US economy by bringing the towers down. During the time the only viable way the russians might have done this was by missile (launched from a ballistic missile submarines that were greatly superior to the US' Trident submarines). So extra care was taken into ensuring a missile attack would not bring down the buildings.

First question. What does a plane crashing into a building have to do with a missile attack?
Actually, everything since, in principle, they are the same thing. We will discuss why later.

Secondly, let us examine flight routes.
I happen to know a bit about flight routing since my father was a bit of a plane spotter and I have always had an interest in the princples of flight since a child.
The World Trade Centres are heavily off the beaten track as far as flight routes go and for exactly the reason to prevent planes or other objects flying into them, either by accident or purpose. Should any plane have flown offcourse and straight toward the World Trade Centre in a domestic circumstance, Air Traffic would have radioed to discover if there was a problem. Upon recieving no reply ATC (air traffic control) would have had more than enough time to radio the military and have a two plane F16 intercept scrambled and those F16's would have arrived on the scene long before the two planes that collided with the towers and would have been driven offcourse or shot down.

Thirdly let us examine the plane itself.
It is pretty much given fact now that the Boeing 767's were not commercial aircraft. All evidence has suggested that they were military aircraft (air force, to be exact) and that these aircraft had 'missiles' beneath them.
I know I'm a know it all, but the workings of the military mind are no mystery. There were NO missiles present on the 767's that attacked the WTC. The artefacts beneath the planes were, in fact, fuel tanks. Why?
A missile launch and guidance system of any calibre from the military would have survived, at least in part, the impact and would have been discovered. This would be unacceptable for any military coverup team. Fitting the 767's with fuel tanks provided the same calibre of explosion with a certain weight of fuel, but also became a means of being a weapon that would erase its own trace of existence. The mass of fuel would burn out and nothing terribly amiss would be discovered from the wreckage.
So, my standpoint on this is that the plane was a bomb itself.
I hear you ask: 'The pilot must have been crazy, right? I mean, to fly a plane into a building knowing he was going to die? How could the military do that to someone?'
I wish to draw your attention to the military application known as a 'Drone.' A drone is a military aircraft design that requires no pilot, it is guided by radio from a remote operator to conduct reconaissance or deliver payloads of explosives during missions where the loss of human life would be 1) damning evidence for some campaign or 2)giving over intelligence to a possible enemy if the pilot of was shot down and interrogated.
It is not terribly difficult to retrofit any aircraft with a remote drone system in the 21st century. Indeed the systems are that advanced that they could probably be packed up in suitcases and installed in any kind of aircraft that has a VHF antenna within just a few hours.
The planes would then only have required a three strategically places operators to guide the drones into the WTC's. The first operator would be the point of origin, probably an air force base reasonably close to new york. An extended radio aerial would be enough to guide the plane to New York where the second operator would then take over the signal and, thus, control of the craft. he would guide the plane to the region of Manhattan where the third operator (situated at a good vantage point to the WTC's) would guide the drone into the structure itself.
This method would be employed by the military for two reasons. 1) Not having to cover up the administration of losing two pilots for seemingly no reason and 2) any possible whistleblowing from any family members from either of the two pilots used.
Neat, tidy, clean, effective.

Of course two drone missile planes would not be enough to bring down the twin towers themselves. They ar, after all, Russian proof (and believe me that is quite robust indeed). A second measure would have had to have been employed.
This is where the Chain Reaction Demolition comes into play. We have all seen evidence of eplosives and textbook demolition at work (and yes, it was - apart from the planes - a by the book demolition).
Measures would have had to have been put in place to reduce the collateral damage to surrounding buildings and people (bearing in mind that the government itself has to pay to clean the city back up again). So, with this in mind, Thermite charges are placed at regular intervals along the outer core of the building (the planes being postions to compromise the inner core).
These were not detonated by a person. They were positioned so that the heat of the fuel from the drones would detonate the first thermite charges, the explosions from those charges would detonate the next set and so on and so forth. (remember it was supposed to use as little manpower as possible to prevent the possibility of whistleblowing.)
It is practically impossible for any other type of charge to have been used. The reason for this is that thermal images taken from orbit of ground zero 7 days later still showed the 'core' area to be white hot. The only material that could still be white hot after 7 days would be Molten Slag and the only explosive that produces molten slag as a byproduct, is thermite (indeed it is very efficient and melting steel and titanium).

So there you have it. That is my official view on the twin tower incident. Planes alone would not have brought down the tower, only some close resemblence to the sequence of events detailed above would have.

[uki]

and now explain why it was done.

[James Random]

That, I do not pretend to know. Why can say why It was done. Who is to know the workings of the governmental mind? Obviously the government had a skeleton in its closet they wanted bin laden to take the fall for (It is no secret that bin laden was a CIA agent between 1978 and 1988). There could be many reasons. But the purpose of this thread was not why but how

[cmar1965]

Originally Posted by uki

and now explain why it was done.

Validation for a pre-planned AND posted invasion of Afghanistan.

[gordon]

Well, I have to say I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist. In my life I have seen too much to know that various theories are true or false. But, since the 9/11 issue is still unresolved, here is my take on the matter.

"James", it is good to know this conspiracy was not base on some "random" theory...Why? You forgotten to write in the first post about BEFORE the war in Afghanistan and... Iraq. About the other Bush, who had the first qulf war, wasn't it? And...the car bombings under the world trade towers. Plus! Wasn't there the poison letters? with some kind of poison powder in them?...

[James Random]

This post was really to detail the possible method of the attack of 9/11 itself. I am aware of much administrative goings on even as early as 1995 that culminated in this attack, but that is detailed better than I could detail it in the movie FABLED ENEMIES. So this was just a depiction of method based on my knowledge and experience.

[uki]

well it seems like those bumper stickers which read... 9-11-2001-NEVER FORGET, are paying off.

[James Random]

Well I don't have one. I live in the UK.

[gordon]

well it seems like those bumper stickers which read... 9-11-2001-NEVER FORGET, are paying off.

Ohh...That quote reminds me...How are the gun laws in America?

[uki]

Originally Posted by gordon

Ohh...That quote reminds me...How are the gun laws in America?

depends on a variety of things... in pennsylvania, it is an open carry state, which means that if you have a permit to carry a handgun, you can do so in public as long as it's clearly visible. shotguns you must be 18 to own, no permit required, cannot transport it loaded. in my county, more than 10,000 residents are permitted to carry a concealed firearm. you can also shoot on your property provided you have a backstop... but god forbid you have a knife longer than 6 inches... i personally own a browning 12 gauge semi-automatic shotgun, 48 inch barrel, holds 8 in the stock and 1 in the chamber... 9... the tigers number.

[James Random]

No offense but can we keep on topic? Thanks.

[gordon]

well it seems like those bumper stickers which read... 9-11-2001-NEVER FORGET, are paying off.

No offense but can we keep on topic? Thanks.

Are you saying that there is no connection with 9/11 and gunlaws? It is all a conspiracy theory? Or is it...

[uki]

Originally Posted by James Random

No offense but can we keep on topic? Thanks.

yeah... i agree. it is much easier to gather evidence along singular trains of thought.

[James Random]

Originally Posted by gordon

Are you saying that there is no connection with 9/11 and gunlaws? It is all a conspiracy theory? Or is it...

I am saying that the reason of 9/11 is much bigger than a simple gun law and has no place in my thread. This is about methodization, not whys and wherefores.

[Goldmoon]

The 9/11 attacks always get people thinking. Most on here have already been made aware of everything, but once you start looking into 9/11, you will find more about the NWO to Freemasonry, and even lead yourself to Nibiru & the Annunaki.

Here is something. The font: "Wingdings" in your wordpad or MS word programs is not completely useless. It is also used as code. You will find many things when you type certain "Keywords" in that font.

Here is an example:

The second plane to hit the towers was called "Q33 NYC" When keyed into wingdings, it comes up as this:
Q33 NYC

Co-incidence? Don't believe me, type it in for yourself...

[Skygirl]

That is not the flight number nor is it the tail number of any of the planes from 9/11.

[Goldmoon]

http://911review.org/Sept11Wiki/Q33ny.shtml

Apparently its a hoax... It was regarded as truth by so many people, and even published in certain places! What a fool the person is who started it. Why would they just make something up that has no truth to it!? The plane didn't even exist!?

[medicvet]

It is pretty much given fact now that the Boeing 767's were not commercial aircraft. All evidence has suggested that they were military aircraft (air force, to be exact) and that these aircraft had 'missiles' beneath them.

A pretty much given fact? I lost my best friend in one of those planes, so don't even try to tell me it was a military craft. what a fucking bunch of bullshit.