George Bush mentions explosives in buildings - 'A VERY Curious Remark'

Devar

Devar

Jedi
http://urbansurvival.com/week.htm

A VERY Curious Remark

In his press conference yesterday, George Bush said something about terrorist attacks that made us sit up and take notice. Check this out, especially at the emphasis added point:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/09/20060915-2.html
"The bill I have proposed will ensure that suspected terrorists will receive full and fair trials, without revealing to them our nation's sensitive intelligence secrets. As soon as Congress acts on this bill, the man our intelligence agencies believe helped orchestrate the 9/11 attacks can face justice.

The bill would also provide clear rules for our personnel involved in detaining and questioning captured terrorists. The information that the Central Intelligence Agency has obtained by questioning men like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed has provided valuable information and has helped disrupt terrorist plots, including strikes within the United States.

For example, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed described the design of planned attacks of buildings inside the U.S. and how operatives were directed to carry them out. That is valuable information for those of us who have the responsibility to protect the American people. He told us the operatives had been instructed to ensure that the explosives went off at a high -- a point that was high enough to prevent people trapped above from escaping."
Click to expand...
Bush talking about terrorist instructions on placing explosives in buildings? Placing explosives in buildings? Now think back about buildings that have fallen - in demolition-like fashion - and tell me what comes to mind. I think you'll see why several readers flagged this as curious - perhaps darned curious.
Click to expand...
 
this IS interesting. especially as it comes at a time when the 'planned demolition' theory is being rapidly popularised - it's everywhere - I've even seen it discussed on TV in an almost 'rational and unhysterical' manner. that would never happen with the 'no plane at the pentagon' theory.

It's almost as if the COINTELPRO conductors are actually pushing this theory for some reason. what have they got up their sleeves?
 
sleepyvinny said:
It's almost as if the COINTELPRO conductors are actually pushing this theory for some reason. what have they got up their sleeves?
Click to expand...
I'm thinking they could be pushing it into the limelight to divert everyones attention from the 'no 757 at the pentagon'. In a few months time, they can always say the explosives were planted by terrorists, and the gov were keeping it secret so as not to 'make the terrorists be seen as heroes'.

Make everyone think the truth is coming out in the media while the real smoking gun that can't be explained on terrorists is hopefully forgotten for a while.
 
sleepyvinny said:
that would never happen with the 'no plane at the pentagon' theory.
Click to expand...
If something happens with this demolition theory that is starting to come to public domain, I am certain the Pentagon Strike will have it's place too: It is just impossible to hide.

It will happen! :)
 
Peam said:
sleepyvinny said:
It's almost as if the COINTELPRO conductors are actually pushing this theory for some reason. what have they got up their sleeves?
Click to expand...
I'm thinking they could be pushing it into the limelight to divert everyones attention from the 'no 757 at the pentagon'. In a few months time, they can always say the explosives were planted by terrorists, and the gov were keeping it secret so as not to 'make the terrorists be seen as heroes'.

Make everyone think the truth is coming out in the media while the real smoking gun that can't be explained on terrorists is hopefully forgotten for a while.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Imagine if they got their brainwashed patsy to testify that explosives were planted by the fabricated "terrorists"? A lot of people might not believe it, but "plausible lies" are what the pathocracy depends upon to prevent the conscience of humanity from being galvanised against them. It would definitely be a setback for the Truth movement.

And perhaps this is how it's been planned all along by the PTB?
 
Could be a setback, could also blow up in their faces. I think good chance the latter would happen if they tried that, considering how it's a real stretch from the official version. Might be a little too far this time for people to swallow, since they are hanging on a thin thread as it is with the current version. Maybe too far of a change from the official version a little too late. Dunno..
 
I'd just like to add something that has been on my mind that has something to do with this post.
First I also noticed this new interest by the mainstream media, I was astonished to see the Loose Change documentary aired in the Portuguese public/state channel, and the official version of the 9/11 events being questioned in some points by a well respected magazine. Maybe this pushing for this theory (that the towers had bombs in them) as something to do with what I read some time ago here in the forum, about the Zionist wanting to create some kind of revolution in the USA. What better way than to show the truth but blame it on someone else.
It is also possible that they are in damage control mode, finding an excuse to the overwhelming evidence that there were bombs planted in the towers, blaming it on their usual suspects.

About this slips, I remembered the one were Donald Rumsfeld said something in the lines of "the plane over Pennsylvania was shot down", and has the evidence seems to show the plane didn't even crash. I sometimes find it hard to believe that this educated psychopaths make mistakes like this, they know they are being seen and heard by one of their most powerful weapons (the mass media). It's possible that there are intentional and non-intentional slips, maybe.
 
It strikes me that most of the american public does not want to know the truth about 911. So, if they are offered an 'explanation' by the administration that, from day one, it was known internally that the terrorists had planted bombs in the building to bring it down - but that the administration was keeping this information classified for whatever reason, then the majority of americans very well may buy that with a huge sigh of relief. A plausible lie (to those who are asleep and hypnotised) that would be accepted because it's easier to accept that lie than it is to really face what happened.

With the increased exposure of the controlled demolition probability - it does make me wonder if this is not how it will eventually be explained - and why Georgie added these specific lines to this speech.
 
anart said:
It strikes me that most of the american public does not want to know the truth about 911. So, if they are offered an 'explanation' by the administration that, from day one, it was known internally that the terrorists had planted bombs in the building to bring it down - but that the administration was keeping this information classified for whatever reason, then the majority of americans very well may buy that with a huge sigh of relief. A plausible lie (to those who are asleep and hypnotised) that would be accepted because it's easier to accept that lie than it is to really face what happened.

With the increased exposure of the controlled demolition probability - it does make me wonder if this is not how it will eventually be explained - and why Georgie added these specific lines to this speech.
Click to expand...
This is a most likely scenario. They are finding it hard to deny any longer that the buildings were taken down by explosives. The evidence seems to point that way. Either that or American engineers are the only ones in the World who cannot construct buildings to withstand fires, while everyone else seems capable.

If we accept the "new" proposed party line, then one must wonder how the "terrorists" had unfettered access to plant all the explosives.

Who was in charge of security for the WTC? This question will be the next one in line, followed by why the "terrorists perfectly planted bombs" to bring the towers down in a way to limit damage to surrounding buildings. How mindful of them to do such a great job.
 
Anart said:
It strikes me that most of the american public does not want to know the truth about 911. So, if they are offered an 'explanation' by the administration that, from day one, it was known internally that the terrorists had planted bombs in the building to bring it down - but that the administration was keeping this information classified for whatever reason, then the majority of americans very well may buy that with a huge sigh of relief. A plausible lie (to those who are asleep and hypnotised) that would be accepted because it's easier to accept that lie than it is to really face what happened.
Click to expand...
It's what Lobaczweski calls in his book Information Selection and Substitution, a tendency to block out of consciousness what is felt as unpleasant, what bursts the "all is well" bubble we live in.

Lobaczweski said:
[...]Unconscious psychological phenomena outstrip conscious reasoning, both in time and in scope, which makes many psychological phenomena possible: including those generally described as conversive, such as subconscious blocking out of conclusions, the selection and also, substitution of seemingly uncomfortable premises.
We speak of blocking out conclusions if the inferential process was proper in principle and has almost arrived at a conclusion and final comprehension within the act of internal projection, but becomes stymied by a preceding directive from the subconscious, which considers it inexpedient or disturbing.
This is primitive prevention of personality disintegration which may seem advantageous; however, it also prevents all the advantages which could be derived from consciously elaborated conclusion and reintegration.
Click to expand...
HE goes on to say that is a phenomenon found especially in societies living in Happy Times. And the US has not had many significant problems before 911. I lived in the US for 5 years and i remember the "Do not Disturb" sign on most people's foreheads, especially regarding 911, the wars on Afganistan and Iraq. But of what i understand, despite the majority being asleep, things have changed a bit. More and more people everyday want to know. PTB must be working hard to find something to give them, when the people ask "how, why, what, who?" Is this what Bush is doing now? Backing another cake to feed the masses? Things do not usually slip off machines accidentally. The robotoid atters only what is programmed to atter.
 
I think they're going to start the full-bore spin of the controlled demolitions now.
That being, the "Arabs" did it.
This serves to divert any attention AWAY from Israeli involvement in 9-11 if they point the finger of blame on the "Arab" element.
Since they have thus far been unsuccessful in keeping the WTC controlled demolition info OUT of the public arena, and now it has been given mainstream media attention (by design), then naturally they will use it to forward their own agenda.

They aren't going to allow us to point any fingers at Israel without throwing out the Arab spin.

What will be interesting to see is how the official entities like FEMA, NIST, the alphabet soup agencies, and the 9-11 Whitewash Committee intend to or attempt to reverse themselves now, after 5 years of blowing smoke up all our butts and denying any use of explosives at all.

Poor Popular Mechanics. LOLOLOLOLOL... What WILL they do?

Lisa
 
Lisa, that's why I think it has a good chance to blow up in their faces if they try that. They spent so much effort convincing us that it was NOTHING more than just fuel fire that brought down the buildings, so to suddenly do a total about-face now might be very risky. Because if this was the case all along, why did they spend so much time and effort arguing for something that was a complete lie? I mean if they didn't know, why did they argue so loudly for something they didn't even know was the case? The question that naturally follows, what else are they adamantly supporting that may easily be just another lie that they will later say "oh yeah, sorry, we were totally wrong, please ignore all those heated arguments and attempts at convincing you to support the other version..."

I know their arrogance has no bounds, but are they so self-assured and arrogant to try to actually pull this one off? Well, let's hope so! Nothing better than watching STS shoot itself in the foot with its own wishful thinking! :D
 
SAO said:
Lisa, that's why I think it has a good chance to blow up in their faces if they try that. They spent so much effort convincing us that it was NOTHING more than just fuel fire that brought down the buildings, so to suddenly do a total about-face now might be very risky.
Click to expand...
Not to be a wet blanket here, but I think you might be overestimating the attentiveness of the american public, and also underestimating the power of sleep and the acceptence of the plausible lie. Now, what you've said is completely true for those people in the '911 truth' arena and also for a small percentage who have followed the alternative media, but it's been my experience that while the average american may be vaguely aware that there is some controversy about how the towers fell, they haven't been reading reports about the weakening of steel by fire - they don't have the time, they don't have the interest and they get the majority of their information from the main stream media.

This is an administration that has admitted to the existence of secret CIA prisons - to no response from the public. As long as they frame everything they've said before in an 'it was for national security that we could not reveal the truth' framework - the majority simply will not question it.

I know it's sick - I know it's insane, but it is very likely the truth - the general public does NOT want to know. Not to mention that just last week a University professor I know made the astonishing statement that, "I could even see them explaining that those demolition charges were placed in the towers after the 1993 attacks, in order to pull the buildings straight down in case they were damaged, so they would not topple and kill even more people around them." Yep - an educated person put this forward because - no matter what - accepting the reality that their own government murdered innocent civilians to further it's own selfish agenda, is just too much - it's too big.
 
Lisa, I finally got your Monday show to download and I just want to mention that when you made this comment, regarding the war chimp's comments on 'explosives',

Lisa said:
What he is doing is letting us know that now the spin begins concerning the controlled demolitions"
Click to expand...
- that I could not agree with you more - he sent a message directly to those people who SEE what happened. His handlers know very well that they are watched very closely, so the message has been sent - now we watch it all unfold.
 
I think I'm missing something obvious here. If, as a terrorist, you're going to go thru all the trouble of planting explosives in the WTC ... why then *also* fly planes into it? Why not just drive a U-Haul into the parking structure (like they tried the first time), set the fuse and escape to fight another day? Casualties would be higher too because there would be no reason to flee right up to the detonation. Save the hijack piece for a building that you couldnt possibly put explosives into... like CIA headquarters or something. Maybe this was added as a jihadist tribute to Tom Clancy! Spin if they want to, the whole idea is just stupid.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom