Well… those two (Afghanistan & Iraq) weren’t the only two on [del]Hitler’s[/del] Bush’s menu.
Iran and Syria are, so we could run an oil pipeline all the way to our masters in Isreal.
And if it wasn’t for those meddling kids and their talking dog…
How can one see this information?
My guess:
Left-click on user name, select “view profile”, note “last activity” time.
What mlees said. There’s a user CP option to switch to invisible mode and hide that info if you so choose. I wouldn’t normally post it anyway. I went for it because we’re in sort of a drive-by situation here.
Almost. The main purpose was to destroy the U.S. aircraft carrier group, which, unknown to the Japanese, was at sea on maneuvers the day of the attack.
Aww, I missed a twoofer? Oh well. Hey trumpsahead, we answered you questions, so if you actually bother coming back, here’s a few questions for you.
15 questions 9/11 truthers need to answer.
Go for it.
I do not know about density but this information is factually incorrect. The upper floors collapsed and the building was considered too dangerous to let anybody enter it as it could collapse at any moment. It was impossible to collapse it with explosives as it was surrounded by other buildings and the only thing considered safe was to dismantle it from the outside which was extremely complicated and expensive. Huge cranes were set up and workers hanging from baskets would cut up sections and these would be lowered by another crane. It took months. The crane on top of the building itself was there because the building was undergoing renovations to bring it up to code. Had the fire started a few months later it probably would have been stopped. That crane was the first thing to be dismantled and never used to dismantle the building. The cranes used were quite impressive due to their height. It looked like any wind would topple them. You can see photos I took at the bottom of this page.
Their main purpose was to destroy the US Pacific Fleet, so that they (the Japanese) could run wild in the Southern Resource Area.
They accomplished that.
The damage sustained by the Pacific Fleet was so great (both materially and morale-wise), the U.S.N. did not launch major operations until (arguably) Midway/Guadalcanal, more than 6 months after the attack.
It’s possible that if the Japanese had not attacked Pearl Harbor, Admiral Kimmel might have attempted to launch a hasty relief of the Phillippines with his battlefleet, only to get sunk in deeper water.
Heh.
Although, on the serious side, I would expect him to wait for the US mobilisation to complete itself before he tried that…see War Plan Orange.
I was just trying to think of a consiracy that involved lots of folks that managed to succeed. (Although my analogy fails, because the Japanese did not try to hide their identity during and after the actual attack.)
Yup, I was gonna say . . . there’s a big difference between hiding something until the zero hour and hiding something before during, and 7 years and counting afterwards.
No, the main targets were the battleships. The carriers were considered as secondary targets. It wasn’t until the war was actually fought that the admirals on both sides realized that carriers were now more important than battleships.
The real target should have been the oil tanks and repair facilities in Hawaii. But the Japanese military never really understood the idea of attacking logistics.
Good link, thanks. I’d never seen that before. Too bad questions are like kryptonite to troothers. They get their same 2 or 3 dozen questions answered over and over and over ad nauseum for the last 7 years but they will never answer any in return.
Best quote from the comments section of that page:
Cui bono?
After 9/11, the economy was in a tailspin, Bush was desperately trying to get people to trust air travel and go shopping, companies everywhere were trying out 0% financing just to get buyers back out into the marketplaces. The loss of life, loss of revenue, and loss of business from the 9/11 attacks on the WTC, not to mention the total cost of rescue and cleanup (and rebuilding efforts at the Pentagon), plus the economy…
Who made money on this? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?
Surely a conspiracy this size, of this importance and secrecy, must have cost millions, if not billions. How did they recoup this money? Anyone?
Oh, right, by starting a war. Which we’re losing. Against an enemy we freakin’ conspired with. Riiiiight.
Follow the money, as they say. Except the money doesn’t lead anywhere.
The troothers will tell you Larry Silverstein made out like a bandit but it’s just not true. The guy lost millions and he can’t even walk from his car to his office without security anymore because so many troothers with nothing better to do wait around to harass him every day.
And this I’m less sure about but I had a pretty intelligent / knowledgable person explain to me that even Haliburton has actually lost money in the post 9/11 / Iraq mess.
Made out like a bandit before or after the conspirators were paid off? Because a conspiracy like this would have to cost a packet.
Actually, no comparison can be made to your arm, because your arm is orders of magnitude stronger than a skyscraper. There really isn’t any scalable comparison to a jet liner hitting a skyscraper because no steel-framed building that has ever been, or will ever be, constructed will be nearly as dense or as strong, after adjusting for size, as your arm.
Hold your arm out in front of you. Is it threatening to fall apart? No? Well, a 100-storey building can’t even do that.
Here’s something that I don’t understand about these 9/11 conspiracy theories.
The plan, supposedly, was to frighten the American people into getting behind a war on Afghanistan and eventually Iraq.
If I was putting together such a plan then my cover story would involve hijackers from Afghanistan and Iraq, preferably under the direct orders of both the Taliban and Saddam Hussein.
So why did the official story involve 19 hijackers, none of which were from either Afghanistan or Iraq? Fifteen of the 19 hijackers were Saudis. Of the four others, one was Egyptian, one Lebanese and two were from the UAE.
They had to spin, and even fabricate, facts to justify attacking Iraq. If the whole thing was fake, then why not have a cover story that made attacking Iraq easy to justify?
That’s the bad thing about debating these people. They have nothing to actually counter it with, so all you can do is offer mounds of evidence vs. “No, un-uh.”
Valete,
Vox Imperatoris
We’ll see if this guy even bothers with that much. Right now it’s looking like he was just another foot soldier handing out flyers and never had any intention of engaging in an actual debate.
Because we’d see right through it if the story was too convenient. The subtler plan they went with was better; after all, it worked, didn’t it?
You can’t really even make comparisons to the 32-story hotel in Madrid.
World Trade Center: 110 stories. Footprint of 43,264 ft² (208 ft x 208 ft). Height of 1,368 feet.
Windsor Tower in Madrid: 32 stories. Estimate of footprint 2,925 ft² (about 45 feet by about 65 feet, based on the scale of the remains visible by Google satellite photo). Height of 348 feet.
It should be elementary geometry here, but the World Trade Center was a building with a volume of about 5.9 million ft³. The Windsor Tower had a volume of about 1.01 million ft³.
Difference factor in height: about 3x. Difference factor in volume: about 6x.
You cannot simply scale something up 3x or 6x in height and use the same materials. It would be too heavy.
You can build Devil’s Tower out of mashed potatoes but you can’t build it to life-size scale.