False-Flag: 2001. 9-11


“We are literally treating the steel removed from the site like garbage, not like crucial fire scene evidence.… The destruction and removal of evidence must stop immediately.” (Fire Engineering Editor in Chief Bill Manning, WTC “INVESTIGATION”?: A CALL TO ACTION, Fire Engineering Magazine, December 17, 2001.)

“The decision to rapidly recycle the steel columns, beams and trusses from the WTC in the days immediately after 9/11 means definitive answers may never be known.” (A NATION CHALLENGED: THE TOWERS; Experts Urging Broader Inquiry In Towers' Fall, New York Times, December 25, 2001.)

“If you want to take a look at the construction methods and the design, that's in this day and age what computers do. Just looking at a piece of metal generally doesn't tell you anything.” (Mayor Bloomberg Baosteel Will Recycle World Trade Center Debris, January 24, 2002.)

“The structural damage from the planes and the explosive ignition of jet fuel in themselves were not enough to bring down the towers. Fire Engineering has good reason to believe that the ‘official investigation’ blessed by FEMA… is a half-baked farce that may already have been commandeered by political forces whose primary interests, to put it mildly, lie far afield of full disclosure. Except for the marginal benefit obtained from a three-day, visual walk-through of evidence sites conducted by ASCE investigation committee members — described by one close source as a ‘tourist trip’ — no one's checking the evidence for anything” (Fire Engineering Editor in Chief Bill Manning, Burning Questions...Need Answers, Fire Engineering, January 4, 2002.)

“I find the speed with which potentially important evidence has been removed and recycled to be appalling.” (Dr. Frederick W. Mowrer, an associate professor in the fire protection engineering department at the University of Maryland. A NATION CHALLENGED: THE TOWERS; Experts Urging Broader Inquiry In Towers' Fall, New York Times, December 25, 2001.)

“Extensive media reporting confirms that investors at Deutschebank-Alex Brown [a banking conglomerate including Brown Brothers Harriman] and other global financial entities may have profited from prior knowledge of the attacks while purchasing disproportionate pre-attack put option contracts on targeted U.S. airlines and related insurance or investment firms.” (Tom Flocco Profits of Death — Insider Trading and 9-11)

“In the days following the terror attacks, suspicious and unusual stock trading activity indicated that people used inside information to make huge profits. The money made from the trades done with apparent inside information has been estimated at up to $15 billion worldwide.” (Christopher Bollyn Revealing 9-11 Stock Trades Could Expose The Terrorist Masterminds, American Free Press, April 2004.)

“Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co., which occupied twenty-two floors of the WTC, witnessed the purchase of 2,157 put options during the three trading days before 9/11 attacks as compared to 27 per day prior to September 6. Merrill Lynch & Co., which also had office in twenty-two floors of the WTC, had 12,215 one-month put options bought during four trading days prior to 9/11 compared to the normal 252 contracts per day.” (Jim Marrs Inside Job: Unmasking the 9/11 Conspiracies)

“The stock tradings are…clear links to families and banks in question. The demonstrate without question that knowledge of the WTC attacks were known in the highest circles on a worldwide scale and that the events of 9/11 would include the use of airplanes from American Airlines and United Airlines.” (Dr. Jack Monnett, Awakening to Our Awful Situation, 2006.)

“There is no excuse at this stage of American development for a posture of political innocence, including an unquestioning acceptance of the good faith of our government. After all, there has been a long history of manipulated public beliefs in high-profile situations, especially bearing on matters of war and peace. Historians are in increasing agreement that the facts were manipulated (1) in the explosion of USS Maine to justify the start of the Spanish-American War (1898), (2) with respect to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor to justify the previously unpopular entry into World War II, (3) in relation to the Gulf of Tonkin incident of 1964 that was used by the White House to justify the dramatic extension of the Vietnam War to North Vietnam, and, of course, most recently (4) to portray Iraq as harboring a menacing arsenal of weaponry of mass destruction justifying recourse to a war defying international law and the United Nations. The official explanations of such historic events as the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the assassination of President Kennedy have also not stood up to scrutiny by objective scholars. In these respects, the breaking of trust between government and citizenry in the United States has deep historical roots, and is not at all merely a partisan indictment of the current leadership associated with the right wing of the Republican Party. But it does pose for all of us a fundamental, haunting question. Why should the official account of 9/11 be treated as sacrosanct and accepted at face value, especially as it is the rationale for some of the most dangerous undertakings in the whole history of the world?” (Richard Falk, Professor emeritus, Princeton University Foreword to, June 16, 2004.)

“Every collectivist revolution rides in on a Trojan horse of ‘Emergency’. It was a tactic of Lenin, Hitler and Mussolini.” (President Herbert Hoover, The Memoirs of Herbert Hoover, 1952.)