Jesus none of you have any facts straight
Here are some key points to help you
So, 19 guys, 12 who were on a terrorist watchlist just strolled through security and managed to take over 4 planes with boxcutters. Ok, I guess that could happen. I guess it could also be possible for Norad to hold large scale military exercises on the West coast at the same time. I suppose it could take 2 hours to get shoot down orders from a president slowly reading a story of a goat to school children because clearly we know which was more pressing. I suppose that the jets scrambled to take out the planes could have been mistakenly sent 1100 miles south of their target. I suppose all that COULD have happened. If it did though, what the 9/11 debunkers are suggesting is that the US Government is the most inept agency in the history of the world, perhaps, after all the had a cocktail party when they were warned of the attack on Pearl Harbor. Here's where things get a bit fuzzy for me. Hey that plane coming to hit tower 2, how come it has no windows? How come the nose flew right through the building in tact? Aren't those noses made of NOTHING on commercial jets? What are those sparks coming out of South tower just before it fell? What could cause that? Thermate perhaps? Why was building 7 allowed to burn for 9 hours unchecked? Do you think it had something to do with all that evidence against Wall Street corruption that went up in flames? And speaking of Wall Street, why were put options being placed on American Airlines and United stock just days before the 11th? Why was security changed and all bomb sniffing dogs removed from the building just weeks before the 11th? Why did the owner sign a 99 year insurance policy on the World Trade Center a week before it collapsed?
and finally
A steel building has never collapsed because of fire in history. How did it happen 3 times in one day?
Even if you believe the government didn't deliberately bring down the buildings themselves, it's clear from all evidence that they knew it would happen and did nothing. This is your government.
The
Project for the New American Century (
PNAC) was an
American think tank based in
Washington, D.C. that lasted from early 1997 to 2006. It was co-founded as a non-profit educational organization by
neoconservatives William Kristol and
Robert Kagan. The PNAC's stated goal was "to promote American global leadership."
[1] Fundamental to the PNAC were the view that "American leadership is both good for America and good for the world" and support for "a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity."
[2] The PNAC exerted influence on high-level U.S. government officials in the administration of
U.S. President George W. Bush and affected the Bush Administration's development of
military and
foreign policies, especially involving
national security and the
Iraq War.
[3][4]
"New Pearl Harbor"
Section V of
Rebuilding America's Defenses, entitled "Creating Tomorrow's Dominant Force", includes the sentence:
"Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event––like a new Pearl Harbor" (51).
[13]
In his appearance on
Democracy Now!, theologian
David Ray Griffin, author of
The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions about the Bush Administration and 9/11, explains the allusion to "the New Pearl Harbor" from the PNAC report in the title of his book, which argues that PNAC members within the Bush Administration were complicit in the
9/11 terrorist attacks.
[37]
Further information:
9/11 truth movement and
Controlled demolition hypothesis for the collapse of the World Trade Center
Though not arguing that Bush administration PNAC members were complicit in those attacks, other social critics such as commentator
Manuel Valenzuela and journalist
Mark Danner,
[38][39][40] investigative journalist
John Pilger, in
The New Statesman,
[41] and former editor of
The San Francisco Chronicle Bernard Weiner, in
CounterPunch,
[42] all argue that PNAC members used the events as the "Pearl Harbor" that they needed––that is, as an "opportunity" to "capitalize on" (in Pilger's words), in order to enact long-desired plans.
[43]
"When the Towers came down,"
William Rivers Pitt writes in his editorial in
Truthout.org, "these men saw, at long last, their chance to turn their White Papers into substantive policy."
[32]
