“The 9/11 Solution” Video Removed by Google/YouTube

More accurately, I’m a Constitutionalist.

I’ve not addressed 1993 bombing as it is irrelevant to the censorship topic of this article. However, there is much debate surrounding that first ‘attack.’

There’s a CBS video available here:

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/wtcbomb.html

That indicates that the FBI knew in advance about the 1993 bombing.

But of course, even though the video is from and of CBS it is posted on an off-limits web site whatreallyhappened, so even if it’s a diamond, in the opinion of many here, it came from a donkey, so is worthless.

” [Village Voice, 3/30/1993; US Congress, 2/24/1998] The New York Times later reports on Emad Salem, an undercover agent who will be the key government witness in the trial against Yousef. Salem testifies that the FBI knew about the attack beforehand and told him they would thwart it by substituting a harmless powder for the explosives. However, an FBI supervisor called off this plan, and the bombing was not stopped. [New York Times, 10/28/1993] Other suspects were ineptly investigated before the bombing as early as 1990. Several of the bombers were trained by the CIA to fight in the Afghan war, and the CIA later concludes, in internal documents, that it was “partly culpable” for this bombing. [Independent, 11/1/1998]”
Ever hear of false flag operations?

Wasn’t it you, pseudo-patriot, that said the US government had no idea that planes could be hijacked and flown into the WTC?

Here’s more evidence that that idea is male cow dung:

Following the 1993 World Trade Center bombing (see February 26, 1993), the New York Port Authority asks investigative and security consulting firm Kroll Associates to help design new security measures for the WTC. Kroll’s Deputy Chairman Brian Michael Jenkins leads the analysis of future terrorist threats and how they might be addressed. Assessments conclude that a second terrorist attack against the WTC is probable. Although it is considered unlikely, the possibility of terrorists deliberately flying a plane into the WTC towers is included in the range of possible threats. [Jenkins and Edwards-Winslow, 9/2003, pp. 11]

This was sometime in 1993 eight years before 9/11/01

Ever hear of false flag operations?

“Rick Rescorla, a Vietnam veteran who also previously worked for British intelligence, is vice president for security at Morgan Stanley Dean Witter and has an office in the south WTC tower. Following the 1993 bombing, he believes terrorists will attack the WTC again, this time by flying a cargo plane, maybe loaded with biological or chemical weapons, into it. Fred McBee, a close friend of his, will later say, “He assumed that it would be the terrorists’ mission to bring the Trade Center down.” Rescorla therefore wants his company to leave the WTC and relocate to New Jersey, but their lease doesn’t expire until 2006.”

http://tinyurl.com/yvyach ——http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline

Ever hear of false flag operations?

Which of the facts from the ‘paranoid’ sites did you care to challenge much less refute? patriot behind the pseudonym?

Those aren’t the covers of the FEMA report on terrorism targeting WTC TWin Towers? It wasn’t published in 1998?

“Really? I had no idea of your exstensive military and aviation knowledge. Oh wait, you have none of either.”

Try again, pseudo-patriot, I’m a licensed pilot.

“Congress and the civilian leadership had long ago decided that couldn’t bare the cost of keeping aircraft all over the country on tactical alert.”

And once again, pseudo-Patriot, the facts and you don’t agree. 67 times in the nine months before 9/11, Air force jets were sent to intercept airliners and other planes that were off-course.

Secondly, the air force doesn’t need to be on ‘tactical alert’ to intercept planes that are off course.

“The pilots gave up control to the hijackers because that was standard FAA and company protocol. They were trained to do that. FAA had never imagined that such a kind of attack would happen here.”

Show us where FAA regulations or any major airline has ‘giving up control’ as their standard protocol. You can’t.

Let’s assume you’re right for just a moment. If you are, you’re saying it’s FAA and airline protocol to allow hijackers to take over a plane.

Let’ say I’m on a team of possible hijackers on a commercial flight and I know it’s SOP for the pilots to let me take over the plane. All I would have to do is kindly request the air hostess to inform the pilot that we wish to take over the plane. She, because she has been “trained to do that” would then call the cock-pit and inform the pilot that a team of hijackers has requested a take-over of the plane. The pilots, because they have been “trained to do that” would give their seats over to the new hijacking pilots and take a seat in the body of the plane. The air hostesses would then bring the new pilots coffee or any other drinks and snacks they requested as they flew to their new destination, after informing all the passengers, of course, of the change in plans.

And the hijackers would know they did’t need to worry about air force interception, because they knew that “Congress and civilian leadership decied that the country couldn’t bare the cost of keeping aircraft all over the country on tactical alert.”

“FAA had never imagined that such a kind of attack would happen here.”

Really? Is that why Cheney was running, the very morning of 9/11, a simulated response to just that scenario
called Operation VIGILANT GUARDIAN ?

“3) OPERATION VIGILANT GUARDIAN: This exercise simulated hijacked planes in the north eastern sector and started to coincide with 9/11. Lt. Col. Dawne Deskins, NORAD unit’s airborne control and warning officer, was overseeing the exercise. At 8:40am she took a call from Boston Center which said it had a hijacked airliner. Her first words, as quoted by Newhouse News Service were, “It must be part of the exercise.” This is another example of how the numerous drills on the morning of 9/11 deliberately distracted NORAD so that the real hijacked planes couldn’t be intercepted in time.”

And why FEMA had on the front cover its 1999 ‘terror response information booklet the WTC being targeted?

“I don’t really know anything about building number 7..”

That’s a remarkable fact in and of itself, isn’t it? We’ve all seen the Twin Towers collapse over and over and over again, and told it was the planes and the fires and most importantly – Al Qaeda. [But the FBi can find 'no hard evidence linking bin Laden with 9/11."] No one tells us about WTC 7 in which no plane hit and no significant fires were burning. Put your mind on pause right here and think about it. Why weren’t we shown bldg seven? – 9 out of ten people I ask the question, “How many bldgs collapsed on 9/11″ – say two. We aren’t suppose to think about WTC 7. Think about it.
“Showers of debris which were blown out HORIZONTALLY”

How were ‘showers of debri’ blown out – if not by explosives? A bldg. falling in pancake fashion – as we were told to think is what we see – doesn’t blow out powderized concrete like we see in the WTC bldgs. However, bldgs that are being demolished with explosives, do.

“This does NOT happen in the WTC collapse.”

How do you know? Don’t the video’s only show the top of the Twin Towers? Many experts, including Prof Jones has said thermite was found buring in the basement of the Twin Towers for weeks after 9/11.
“The explosions come BEFORE the building collapses.”

Of course they do. The explosions are what is causing the bldg. to collapse. And now you’re telling us what on-the-scene professional firemen heard? They said they heard – “boom – boom – boom – like bombs going off.” Not concrete slabs emeshed with thousand of tons of rebar holding the concrete together. Bombs. Get over it.

“To open one’s eyes to the reality that the United States government is one of the most corrupt on earth is to risk the anguish of feeling unimaginably violated and used by a government/family (crime family?) which holds only contempt for its citizen/offspring.

“One hallmark of a dysfunctional system is secrecy. The Bush administration has been labeled by some members of the media as the most secretive in the nation’s history. The mind reels at what information it holds on a plethora of issues that it is not disclosing…”

http://tinyurl.com/2qvrzx

“Now, thanks to the magic of video tape and a few people who immediately started taping the news after the attacks, we have this important evidence that at the very least these attacks appear to have been anticipated and prepared for by forces that have the ability to exert strong influence over the output of the newsrooms of major US news networks.”

America is in collective denial that it’s government would do such a thing. Get over it and soon.

The FBI reversed in September a six-year-old position that it never used munitions capable of sparking the blaze that ended a standoff with the Branch Davidian sect near Waco, Tex., and left 76 people dead.

The acknowledgment that FBI agents fired “a very limited number” of potentially incendiary tear gas cartridges on the final day of the 51-day siege contradicts congressional testimony from high-ranking Justice Department officials, such as Attorney General Janet Reno, who said that the tear gas used against the Davidians “could not have caused a fire.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/waco/keystories.htm

I’m curious, why are so many so insistent upon my naming names?

It will be obvious to all who do the research who was involved, so why keep insisting on list of names?

I’m not hiding behind a psedonym like most of you ‘brave’ pariots, but that’s not why I’m not naming names. I want you to do the research.