Gold9472
11-01-2005, 10:58 PM
The '9/11 Truth Movement' raises questions about 9/11 attacks
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=3407
(Gold9472: THANK YOU STEVE HAMMONS!!!)
By Steve Hammons
November 1, 2005
Some Americans and people around the world are wondering more about the 9/11 attacks. Questions are being asked, information is surfacing and allegations are being made.
The “9/11 Truth Movement” is a phrase being used to describe a wide range of people and organizations in the U.S. and internationally who are asking these questions and digging up information that appears, on the surface, to be quite serious, if true.
Are these people conspiracy nuts? Delusional? Paranoid?
Some of these allegations do include stories of conspiracy, as well as cover-up and a possible “false flag” operation. A false flag action is one in which one party carries out an attack or helps facilitate an attack, but does so in a way so that blame is put on another party or nation.
Researchers within the 9/11 Truth Movement put forth interesting information and hypothesize about possible motivations for some people to want an event like the 9/11 attacks to occur.
One of the major questions being asked is who inside and outside of the U.S. Government had foreknowledge that a terrorist attack was being planned using airliners as weapons, or that such an attack was likely. And if so, did they deliberately allow the attacks to occur so this “new Pearl Harbor” event would create a desired climate in America.
Along this line of thinking is the suspicion that people in and outside the government thought such an attack could happen, and did not try to aggressively prevent it, feeling like a “new Pearl Harbor” would be beneficial in the long run. The benefits of such an attack would be to increase defense spending, take aggressive military action in the Middle East, launch an invasion of Iraq and affect the domestic political situation within the U.S.
The idea that officials within our government would allow innocent Americans to be killed to advance other goals and agendas is difficult for many to believe. Surely this is impossible. Yet, 9/11 investigators keep coming up with information that makes some people wonder. Sending American troops to their deaths is one thing, allowing the killing of innocent civilians seems like quite another.
The investigative reports, facts, theories, allegations and hypotheses are spelled out in several books, films and Web sites. Below are a few of the many pieces of information and allegations being made about the 9/11 attacks:
- Financial investments of various kinds immediately before the 9/11 indicate that there was quite specific pre-knowledge of the attacks and how they would be carried out.
- Intelligence agencies from several countries had specific or more general knowledge about the 9/11 attacks. Some foreign intelligence agencies warned the U.S., and some agencies allowed the attacks to happen to further their own agendas. The hijackers were previously identified and tracked by intelligence personnel from the U.S. and other governments.
- Warnings were given to certain people not to fly around the time frame 9/11, or not to be in the Twin Towers.
- The Twin Towers were brought down by controlled demolition using professionally-placed explosive charges.
- Something happened that interfered with the U.S. Air Force’s ability to scramble fighter jets in a timely manner to respond to the hijacking of the airliners. Multiple air defense “drills” were underway that confused the situation and obscured the nature of the events unfolding on 9/11 for air traffic controllers, NORAD, the Air Force and others.
- The airliner that went down in Pennsylvania was actually shot down by an armed aircraft of some kind.
- The Pentagon was actually hit by a missile or drone of some kind, not a large airliner.
- Certain people and countries wanted the U.S. to suffer a traumatic terror attack to advance their agendas in the Middle East.
- Certain people wanted the U.S. to invade Iraq and realized a “new Pearl Harbor” event would be needed to persuade the American people, Congress, the military and the intelligence community to go along with an invasion.
- The invasion of Iraq was not related to weapons of mass destruction, but rather a complex combination of various factors that included allies in the region, oil, defense industry profits, U.S. domestic politics and other factors.
These allegations, questions and some actual facts surrounding the 9/11 attacks are contributing to the apparent growth of the 9/11 Truth Movement. As investigators continue to look into these matters, more information will undoubtedly surface in the months ahead.
Americans and the international community will certainly continue to wonder about these issues and be curious as to if there is any truth to them. The questions do not seem to be going away.
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=3407
(Gold9472: THANK YOU STEVE HAMMONS!!!)
By Steve Hammons
November 1, 2005
Some Americans and people around the world are wondering more about the 9/11 attacks. Questions are being asked, information is surfacing and allegations are being made.
The “9/11 Truth Movement” is a phrase being used to describe a wide range of people and organizations in the U.S. and internationally who are asking these questions and digging up information that appears, on the surface, to be quite serious, if true.
Are these people conspiracy nuts? Delusional? Paranoid?
Some of these allegations do include stories of conspiracy, as well as cover-up and a possible “false flag” operation. A false flag action is one in which one party carries out an attack or helps facilitate an attack, but does so in a way so that blame is put on another party or nation.
Researchers within the 9/11 Truth Movement put forth interesting information and hypothesize about possible motivations for some people to want an event like the 9/11 attacks to occur.
One of the major questions being asked is who inside and outside of the U.S. Government had foreknowledge that a terrorist attack was being planned using airliners as weapons, or that such an attack was likely. And if so, did they deliberately allow the attacks to occur so this “new Pearl Harbor” event would create a desired climate in America.
Along this line of thinking is the suspicion that people in and outside the government thought such an attack could happen, and did not try to aggressively prevent it, feeling like a “new Pearl Harbor” would be beneficial in the long run. The benefits of such an attack would be to increase defense spending, take aggressive military action in the Middle East, launch an invasion of Iraq and affect the domestic political situation within the U.S.
The idea that officials within our government would allow innocent Americans to be killed to advance other goals and agendas is difficult for many to believe. Surely this is impossible. Yet, 9/11 investigators keep coming up with information that makes some people wonder. Sending American troops to their deaths is one thing, allowing the killing of innocent civilians seems like quite another.
The investigative reports, facts, theories, allegations and hypotheses are spelled out in several books, films and Web sites. Below are a few of the many pieces of information and allegations being made about the 9/11 attacks:
- Financial investments of various kinds immediately before the 9/11 indicate that there was quite specific pre-knowledge of the attacks and how they would be carried out.
- Intelligence agencies from several countries had specific or more general knowledge about the 9/11 attacks. Some foreign intelligence agencies warned the U.S., and some agencies allowed the attacks to happen to further their own agendas. The hijackers were previously identified and tracked by intelligence personnel from the U.S. and other governments.
- Warnings were given to certain people not to fly around the time frame 9/11, or not to be in the Twin Towers.
- The Twin Towers were brought down by controlled demolition using professionally-placed explosive charges.
- Something happened that interfered with the U.S. Air Force’s ability to scramble fighter jets in a timely manner to respond to the hijacking of the airliners. Multiple air defense “drills” were underway that confused the situation and obscured the nature of the events unfolding on 9/11 for air traffic controllers, NORAD, the Air Force and others.
- The airliner that went down in Pennsylvania was actually shot down by an armed aircraft of some kind.
- The Pentagon was actually hit by a missile or drone of some kind, not a large airliner.
- Certain people and countries wanted the U.S. to suffer a traumatic terror attack to advance their agendas in the Middle East.
- Certain people wanted the U.S. to invade Iraq and realized a “new Pearl Harbor” event would be needed to persuade the American people, Congress, the military and the intelligence community to go along with an invasion.
- The invasion of Iraq was not related to weapons of mass destruction, but rather a complex combination of various factors that included allies in the region, oil, defense industry profits, U.S. domestic politics and other factors.
These allegations, questions and some actual facts surrounding the 9/11 attacks are contributing to the apparent growth of the 9/11 Truth Movement. As investigators continue to look into these matters, more information will undoubtedly surface in the months ahead.
Americans and the international community will certainly continue to wonder about these issues and be curious as to if there is any truth to them. The questions do not seem to be going away.