Many people are commenting on Morgan Reynolds's comments that the WTC collapse was controlled demolition and not the planes flying into the towers. Let's take a look at some facts...
Many people are commenting on Morgan Reynolds's comments that the WTC collapse was controlled demolition and not the planes flying into the towers. Let's take a look at some facts...…
Article comments
726 - hdhntr
Peter Power is his name.
Underground Bombing 'Exercises'
A consultancy agency with government and police connections was running an exercise for an unnamed company that revolved around the London Underground being bombed at the exact same times and locations as happened in real life on the morning of July 7th.
On a BBC Radio 5 interview that aired on the evening of the 7th, the host interviewed Peter Power, Managing Director of Visor Consultants, which bills itself as a 'crisis management' advice company, better known to you and I as a PR firm.
Peter Power was a former Scotland Yard official, working at one time with the Anti Terrorist Branch.
Power told the host that at the exact same time that the London bombings were taking place, his company was running a 1,000 person strong exercise which drilled the London Underground being bombed at the exact same locations, at the exact same times, as happened in real life.
The transcript is as follows.
POWER: At half past nine this morning we were actually running an exercise for a company of over a thousand people in London based on simultaneous bombs going off precisely at the railway stations where it happened this morning, so I still have the hairs on the back of my neck standing up right now.
HOST: To get this quite straight, you were running an exercise to see how you would cope with this and it happened while you were running the exercise?
POWER: Precisely, and it was about half past nine this morning, we planned this for a company and for obvious reasons I don't want to reveal their name but they're listening and they'll know it. And we had a room full of crisis managers for the first time they'd met and so within five minutes we made a pretty rapid decision that this is the real one and so we went through the correct drills of activating crisis management procedures to jump from slow time to quick time thinking and so on.
-----------------------------------
This is but one small part of the story which is more than a little suspicious.
Why has this not been reported, at all, on CNN and Fox News???
THAT, is what makes it most suspicious of all!
727 - hdhntr
Looks like a LIHOP (let it happen on purpose) wrapped in a MIHOP (made it happen...) but I'm not about to explain that, nor do I have to justify my 'claims'. If you care to understand these events better, you need to do some research and not simply rely on the US mass media for all your info.
728 - John Bambenek
hdh:
I'll take a look at what you have put here, but I'm not going to sit there and drudge the Internet following every kook conspiracy out there. I have a life and I choose not to spend it following ghosts.
In the end, so what? If Bush & friends did 9/11, what does that change? Precisely jack, because Kerry & friends probably would have had their own scandal. Vietnam was brought to you by the Democrats if you remember.
Honest people don't run for office, I know I won't. I don't want to go out there and offer my time and talents to get raped by the media and the rabies crowd looking for some bit of salacious information. I'm not going to go out there and let everything I say get dissembled until someone can make something sound scandalous. Why would any honest person subject themselves to what is nothing much different than a 24x7 gangbang?
Until that changes, you get what you pay for. And in the end, that's why I'm limited government. Not because everything is all rosy and there aren't problems, but because I have full faith that giving any power to the government to do anything will end up getting abused.
729 - hdhntr
Bambi Neck,
You don't seem to appreciate the full gravity and historical significance at the heart of the matter. This is much much more than a mere "abuse of power". This is mass murder as a pretext to wage an unjustified war, "for a generation" in Dick Cheney's words.
It's an abomination against the principal of truth, justice and civility, of the highest order.
It's Satanic. Evil.
You don't get it.
But if it were revealed for what it is? Well then, that could represent a recovery and a restoration, along the lines which you envision.
You know - swords into plowshares and all of that.
Transformation is not the kind of thing which can be imposed. It comes about through attraction, rather than promotion and most certainly not by force and all forms of overt and covert manipulation. That's been shown simply to be innefective, and therefore without the power to influence mightily, and so something new needs to come in to replace the old.
How can that happen, given the track we are now all, all of which is based, for the most part, on this one, singular, horrific, big lie.
9/11 revealed holds out the prospect of real HOPE.
730 - KYS
My, the hostility!
BTW, soylent green is people.
731 - John Bambenek
I get it... if you are right Bush/Cheney are... no worse than most other world leaders, and quite frankly, pale in comparison to most of the despots in world history. Honest leaders have been an exception (if no oxymoron) since the dawn of man.
732 - splat
You know John My brother and some of his friends reacted the same way you do when someone proves to you something. Most American are that way. To prove them wrong, it just turns their stomach when something that they believe isn't.
733 - splat
Also when explaining to someone that doesn't agree with us either through being misinformed or through a mental problem we should spell their names correctly. Now my name I don't care about. No not speakin to anyone in general.
734 - splat
If you knew the truth about most leaders it would drive you insane. Insane I tell you . Hmmmm. I wonder if there is a web site that proves if your insane or not?
735 - splat
Comment 728 posted by John Bambenek on July 19, 2005 05:28 PM:
In the end, so what? If Bush & friends did 9/11, what does that change? Precisely jack, because Kerry & friends probably would have had their own scandal. Vietnam was brought to you by the Democrats if you remember.
My OH MY what a statement. I guess the three thousand plus people doesn't mean that much to you does it John?
That a government that is believed in and supposedly trusted would do a abominable act as to kill their own people much less anyone else. But you John to say that. If you are afraid of fighting for your freedom and to seek the truth and to stand up against the injustices , then you won't have a damn thing to say when they come for you also.
Did you know that according to the Patoriot Act that saying anything against the Government of the US is almost a treason Act. Read it.
here is just a little of that garbage.
Allows government to operate in secret by authorizing secret arrests (sec. 201), and imposing severe restrictions on the release of information about the hazards to the community posed by chemical and other plants (sec. 202);
Further expands the reach of an already overbroad definition of terrorism so that organizations engaged in civil disobedience are at risk of government wiretapping (secs. 120, 121) asset seizure (secs. 428, 428), and their supporters could even risk losing their citizenship (sec. 501);
Gives foreign dictatorships the power to seek searches and seizures in the United States (sec. 321), and to extradite American citizens to face trial in foreign courts (sec. 322), even if the United States Senate has not approved a treaty with that government; and
Unfairly targets immigrants under the pretext of fighting terrorism by stripping even lawful immigrants of the right to a fair deportation hearing and stripping the federal courts of their power to correct unlawful actions by the immigration authorities (secs. 503, 504).
Welcome my friend to Nazi AMERICA
Where again the SS are legal. Don't believe it look it up. They messed up in the 1940's in Europe the frist time. I guess they'll get it right in the U.S. this time
736 - hdhntr
"I get it... if you are right Bush/Cheney are... no worse than most other world leaders, and quite frankly, pale in comparison to most of the despots in world history. Honest leaders have been an exception (if no oxymoron) since the dawn of man."
Agreeing we might be right, and THEN, after all that - running to attempt to defend the indefensible?
Don't tell me, you must have voted for Bush, and cannot bear to pull your hat from the ring, knowing what you know.
You're really sticking your neck out Bambineck aren't you.
If you had any idea how you sound, you'd just quit while you're an attached head.
737 - John Bambenek
Splat:
I invoke Godwin's law, not only did you use a Nazi reference, you apparently don't know what the Nazis were about.
You lose.
hdh:
I was so disgusted by the state races in 2004 I wanted to vomit on the ballot and hand that in instead. Being this was Illinois, my vote for President doesn't matter, and I treated that vote as such.
738 - John Bambenek
Which reminds me, nice to see that you side with the crowd that likes beheading people, hdh. ;)
739 - J Copeland
Interesting point of view. Not really sure what to make of it, but I think it is one that should be investigated more.
One report made the accusation that the building was purposely "pulled" on the agreement between the head of the fire department and the owner of the building. The theory behind that is the owner of the building put out a huge insurance policy on it with a terrorist attack clause on it. Within minutes of the discussion, the building was "pulled". This seems illogical because such a feat would take days of planning and one would have to prove the building owner had advance warning the terrorists would target his particular building on that particular day in order to plan such a feat.
Others argue it was our own government that had inside knowledge that this particular building would be attacked on that day and would have planted such bombs. One would also have to prove they knew and could maneuver about the building. There was a report that the terrorists were to attack on US soil and details of potential terrorists learning to fly planes and not land them, but that is a far cry from saying they knew the exact date, time and means to put it all together to plant bombs in a specific building to go off before the attack.
And even if pre-knowledge of this attack were known, would it not be more logical to point the fingers at the terrorists themselves? If this indeed were a controlled demolition, the ones who did indeed know of the date, time and location of the attack would have been the terrorists themselves. They had motive, means and opportunity to do it.
I'm not saying our government or even a greedy building owner is not capable of blowing up a building, but that would require a lot more advanced knowledge of the coming event. This is a point not proven by the conspiracy theorists. The only ones that are proven to have advance knowledge of this event were the terrorists themselves.
740 - John Bambenek
That has been exactly my point... BushCo couldn't have set this up in time.
741 - Carmen
Morgan Reynolds is a true patriot, and it's a relief to see the cracks in the sordid damn that is the 9/11 coverup.
It's all or nothing to my mind, if the builiding was brought down with explosives, then it had to be an "inside job" there is no way they could have carried out the required task.
I'm glad the theory of the 'inside job' is getting more coverage in the USA, UK, Australia and elsewhere.
It's about time - shame on the dolts who claim that this is wrong a priori, and there are a lot of them out there.
As David Ray Griffin summed it up nicely in his interview with the LA Times:
"One thing to point out is, the official account itself is a conspiracy theory. It says that 19 Arab Muslims under the influence of Osama bin Laden conspired to pull off this operation. The question is not whether one is a conspiracy theorist about 9/11. It's which conspiracy theory do you find most supported by the evidence?"
Carmen,
concerned citizen
742 - Phillip Winn
People are still reading this, I see -- it's on the popular list -- so I'll just add to the previous discussion that I recently made a flight on which I did try to use my cell phone while in-flight. Guess what? It didn't work when over Oklahoma, but it worked just fine as we neared the city center. I was able to grab a signal and make an outband call.
In fact, I read an article last week that mentioned that somewhat above ten percent of domestic flights involve surreptitious cell phone use while in-flight.
Another lynchpin removed, but I'm sure that won't even slow down the ramblings.
Again: I made a cell phone call while in-flight. Me, myself, personally. I know this to work for a fact.
743 - Brad
curious as to how long your cell call lasted.
flight 93 (where most of the calls came from, ) was at 35000 ft
and some of them lasted a several mins.
i tried it too.
it didnt work for me.
i i made 1 connect over 4,000ft , but it didnt last more than 2-3 seconds...
Brad
744 - Justene
Recently, Charlie Sheen was hawking this theory of controlled demolition. It's a theory that seems destined to resurface regularly.
745 - John Bambenek
Hey, so how about those Flight 93 tapes that supposedly didn't exist?
One more aspect of the conspiracy theory subjected to controlled demolition.
746 - Brian S
I had a recent corespondence with Morgan Reynolds. I intially thought he had some vaild conspiarcy theories from 9/11, however the fact that he dimisses the idea that the South Tower was NOT hit by flight UA 175 is just plain scary. I work at the World Financial Center in downtown NY and I can assure you that myself and 200 of my collegues can cofirm that flight UA 175 hit the South Tower. We were all standing outside and watched this with our own eyes, not to mention the sound it was UNBELIVABLE.. Has anyone ever heard a commercial aircraft going full speed at that altitude? The answer is NO the only way you have is if you were standing there with us that day. I have included a copy of my e-mail corospondence with Morgan, and now that I have his view on this matter (That is indisputable!!) I think this guy is off his rocker! See below:
Morgan, It is not debatable myself and 200 of my colleauges from work were all standing outside the World Financial Center where we work. We watched and (HEARD) the plane come in from the south and the hit the tower. You may have some great consiparcy points on other matters from that day, but I can assure you from my lips to gods ears I saw the plane hit, that is simply an undistbutale fact. Give me a number where I can reach you and would be more than happy to discuss. As I said you raise some very interesting points, but let me ASSURE you that UA 175 hit the tower. I did not watch on TV nor did my colleauges. I can produce 200 + people who worked in that buliding who saw it live!! Thanks,
Brian
-----Original Message-----
From: Morgan Reynolds Sent: Sunday, April 23, 2006 11:39 AM
To: Brian mail
Subject: Re: South Tower
It sure as heck was not hit by UA 175. You saw it live with your own
eyes? Homey don't think so. You saw something on TV, dancing pixels
resembling a plane hitting WTC2. You saw live dinosaurs in Jurassic
Park too, right? But you knew they were faked. OK, now the mainstream
media and gov't tell you the UA 175 hit WTC2 and you believe their
("Spielberg's") stuff? Guess there are WMDs in Iraq too, and Saddam
helped al CIA'da engineer 9/11.
Get any DVD, I said any DVD, with a WTC2 hit and proceed frame by
frame. You will see the fakery, especially the plane just melting into
the steel-and-concrete skyscraper. The building would chew any
aluminum plane to pieces. That plane would crash against the wall, not
neatly park itself inside. No deceleration, you name it, all fake.
And live is baloney. There was only one so-called live and it had a
6-7 second lag. And it's common knowledge that computer graphic
inserts and/or blue screen technology was nicely available to do this
hoax in 2001.
Why the fakery? Because it didn't go down like the media and gov't claim, that's why. For more, go to
Best regards,
Morgan Reynolds
On Apr 23, 2006, at 9:08 AM, Brian mail wrote: Hi Morgan,
I came across your website, and you ceratinly bring up some interesting theories. However, I just felt neccessary to point out to you that there is no doubt that the South Tower was struck by United Airlines Flight 175 @ 9:03 am, because I saw it live with my own 2 eyes. I think that some of your theories are a strectch, but other are very valid. I think you need to reconsider your theory that the South Tower was not hit by an airplane.
Thanks,
Brian
747 - John Bambenek
An interesting e-mail exchange, thanks for sharing.
748 - Galileo
Onward we plunder
H.R. 282, the Iran Freedom Support Act, which tightens sanctions against investment in Iran passed the House just moments ago by a vote of 397 to 21, with 14 abstentions.
749 - Peter
The formula for thin shell buckling indicates the
767 fuselage will crumple at 127 Metric Tonnes.The perimeter columns can take that load.
It's obvious the videos were faked.
750 - Kim
It appears that no matter what really happened and who was really behind this ALL of you are going to waste the rest of your precious lives trying to persuade the other. Eventually becoming so paranoid that you distance the ones who love you and living the remainder of your life in mental isolation. Learn to play guitar or sail or how to use a loom. Some mental relaxation will do all of you some good. Celebrate the life you have.