It has been a while since I posted a new article in this series on 9/11. Recent terror events have made it unpalatable to dwell on the 9/11 conspiracy theme. Nietemin, one has stand up for what one believes to be true, even when the stance is unpopular. So I will press on with the series, and wrap it up with two more articles, despite the warning from a friend that I will never be able to visit the US again without risking a lengthy interview at the airport. Or worse. Egter, some truths have to be told, even when they are too true.
What is lacking in 9/11 conspiracy theories is an overarching theme, a big picture, about what exactly the conspiracy was. This fact became clear to me while writing this series, and doing the Internet research behind it. Various videos point out inconsistencies in the official explanations (like lack of signage on WTC planes, implausible trajectory of the Pentagon plane, lack of wreckage at the Pentagon and Shanksville crash sites etc.). Maar, what exactly do these inconsistencies point to? What does it all mean? These questions are not answered at all. In this post, I will attempt to put together my understanding of what the answers could be.
Eerste, let me summarize the events as the conspiracy theorists (including me) see them:
- The planes that hit the twin towers were not the ones hijacked. They were remote controlled drones flying at speeds and accuracies impossible to achieve by human pilots.
- The attack on the Pentagon was not a plane. The maneuver, the impact footprint, video evidence, the debris field all point to it being a missile capable of penetrating large quantities of concrete. (More details.)
- Nothing akin to a passenger plane ever crashed in Shanksville. Look at these beelde and judge for yourself.
- The impact of the planes was not strong enough to bring down the buildings. They were brought down by controlled demolition.
- Destruction of evidence was rampant and obvious immediately following the 9/11 events.
Most people who watch the video, and follow the official investigation, will have to come to the same conclusions as to the chain of events. There is what one might call a preponderance of evidence in the pictures and video. Once you accept this chain of events as what really transpired that day, then you will have to accept that there was a conspiracy behind the whole 9/11.
What is far less clear are the motives behind the conspiracy. As far as I can see, they are a confluence of multiple motives and evil rationales.
- Financial. WTC buildings were not financially viable. Demolishing them was also prohibitively expensive because of the amount of asbestos they contained.
- Military. In a time when the military budgets were getting slashed, they needed a catastrophic even to ensure continued funding.
- Geopolitical. Certain neo-conservative elements wanted to have a new world order with the kind of polarization and mistrust that we see now, with the Arab world in shambles, endless wars on terror and internal conflicts.
- Gierigheid. Starting wars is a sound and lucrative revenue model for a large number of companies, some of which were closely connected to the administration at that time.
Looking at how everything played out in the post-911 era, we can see that the conspiracy was an unqualified success.
If I weren’t fair-minded, this post would have been the last post in the series. But there will be one more — pointing out why the conspiracy theory could be mistaken.