Kevin Ryan Jumps the Shark - Lands in Steaming Pile of LIHOP
Kevin R. Ryan: Demolition access to the WTC Towers
Saturday, 11 July 2009, 7:03 pm
Opinion: www.UnansweredQuestions.org
Distribution via the Unanswered Questions Wire
http://www.unansweredquestions.org/ .
********************
Demolition access to the World Trade Center towers: Part one - tenants
Kevin R. Ryan, 7-09-09
Note: The author is indebted to a few particularly useful sources of information and inspiration, including Russ Baker’s book “Family of Secrets”, the websites nndb.com, sourcewatch.org and secinfo.com, and Richard Gage.
On occasion, the public has been asked by George W. Bush to refrain from considering certain conspiracy theories. Bush has made such requests when people were looking into crimes in which he might be culpable. For example, when in 1994 Bush’s former company Harken Energy was linked to the fraudulent Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI) through several investors, Bush’s spokeswoman, Karen Hughes, shut down the inquiry by telling the Associated Press -- “We have no response to silly conspiracy theories.” On another occasion, Bush said in a televised speech -- “Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September the 11th.”
But paradoxically, we have also been asked to believe Bush’s own outrageous conspiracy theory about 9/11, one that has proven to be false in many ways. One important way to see the false nature of Bush’s conspiracy theory is to note the fact that the World Trade Center buildings could only have fallen as they did through the use of explosives. A number of independent scientific studies have pointed out this fact [1, 2, 3, 4], but it was Bush’s own scientists at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), through their inability to provide a convincing defense of the official line, who ultimately proved that explosives were necessary.[2, 5, 6, 7]
This leads us to ask the obvious question -- Who could have placed explosives in the World Trade Center towers? To answer that question, we should first consider who had access to the buildings, specifically the areas of the buildings that would be relevant to a demolition operation. We should also consider the time periods of interest. Those who had access at the necessary times should be further considered in terms of their ability to obtain the necessary explosive technologies and expertise, their ability to be secretive, and the possibility that they could have benefited from the destruction of the WTC buildings or from the resulting War on Terror. But one thing is certain, unless it was done by one person acting alone, it must have been a conspiracy.
The Twin Towers and WTC 7, all highly secure buildings, were most readily accessed by tenants, security and building management staff, and construction-related contractors.
Evidence suggests that the period of interest should include the years between the 1993 WTC bombing and September 11th, 2001. This evidence includes the warning from 1993 bombing conspirator Nidal Ayyad, who reportedly wrote -- “next time it will be more precise.”[8] Additionally, evidence of a multi-year plot included the detailed information that FBI informant and mafia kingpin Gregory Scarpa Jr. received while in jail, as early as 1996, from Al-Qaeda operative Ramzi Yousef, while imprisoned in the adjacent cell. Yousef described plans to “bring New York to its knees” by blowing up the World Trade Center with American-owned “flying massive bombs.” Scarpa Jr. provided this information to Assistant US Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald and FBI Counsel Valerie Caproni, who were apparently not interested.[9] Another example is the recorded conversation between FBI informant Randy Glass and Pakistani ISI agent Raja Gulum Abbas, in which Abbas claimed “Those towers are coming down”, indicating that a plan was in progress as of July 1999.[10]
Throughout the life of the WTC buildings, modifications were made to each structure. The modifications included upgrades to electrical, fire protection, and elevator systems, as well as general construction activities. As a rule, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ) was responsible for initiating the modifications in the public access areas, and the tenants were responsible for completing the modifications throughout the leased spaces.[11] For this reason, the tenant companies would have been capable of coordinating the installation of explosive materials and other devices with reasonable certainty that those materials would not be detected by others. For a demolition plan to work, however, such tenants would need to be managed as a group, and explosives would need to be placed on enough floors to ensure the fall of each building through what would otherwise have been the path of most resistance.
While examining the tenants in each critical area, we should ask – Cui Bono? That is, who benefited from the destruction of the WTC buildings, and the resulting War on Terror? The obvious answer includes, primarily, the Bush Administration and its friends. It also includes overlapping groups of oil and gas companies, defense contractors, and those who desired to wield undue influence on international policies related to a wide number of issues from civil rights to space domination.
- gretavo's blog
- Login to post comments
what an a-hole.
cui bono... hmmmm certainly not Silverstein, eh Kevin?
left out obvious suspects
the article mentions so many WTC tenants who were construction related yet missed out Turner Contruction which has a more obvious link to demolitions and even to nano thermite.
http://www.wtcdemolition.com/blog/node/2208
Kevin Ryan, LIHOP mole, shame on you!
no surprises in the cheering section that cropped up at 911B
http://www.911blogger.com/node/20609
Let us never tolerate
outrageous leaders. Who try to shift the blame away from the guilty.
Nice piece.
Much, if not all, of what Kevin Ryan writes here can be easily publicly verified, which makes it very useful.
Several points in this article have been independently raised and verified by a user at DemocraticUnderground.com;
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/DrDebug
older posts;
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/?az=archives&j=1964&page=1
Debug's journal is worth a quick scan if you haven't seen it before.
well done!
This is detailed, patient research, which is moving us ever closer to the perpetrators.
Well done Kevin
Well done to Kevin for putting in the effort to produce such a sophisticated and careful piece of research. I'm sure this extensive analysis will be a most valuable resource for other researchers to make use of.
------------------------------------------------------
http://www.shoestring911.blogspot.com
Good job...
Kevin.
Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?
Nice detective work
..showing some very strange coincidences and chilling facts like this one:
Jim Pierce [the cousin of George W. Bush] was managing director of AON [floor 83, south tower] on 9/11, and he had arranged a meeting on the 105th floor of the south tower for that morning. Pierce survived that day, despite the fact that twelve people came to the meeting in the south tower, and eleven of them died. The location of the meeting had been changed, the night before, to the Millenium Hotel, where Pierce watched the south tower as it was hit by the aircraft. Apparently the meeting attendees were not all notified of the change in location.
incidentally, what is up with "The Ameros", aka Vendetta911?
This is some weird code associated with their everpresent advertising logo (I've changed it around a bit to quote it safely, replacing < with [SNIP]):
Also no surprise that simultaneously the no-no planers
aka Church of the Pentagram Boeing, are steadily chipping at the thread on CIT again.
it's actually really exciting to see...
...them getting so sloppy and desperate. Yet another sign that we are making real progress!
Finally, a CD theory that even Jon Gold can endorse?
Uh huh. If Jon Gold likes it then it is definitely fishy...
Oh yea, now I remember...
Anything that preserves the islamofascist menace is endorsed by Gold. So, I bet that if somebody came out with a no-plane or space beam theory involving Al-Queda, Jon would no doubt support it enthusiastically. It's really hard to think of anyone who is more of a pathetically transparent shill than Gold.
oops, double post
quick, Casseia, we need another pootie pic!
So, Is Kevin Ryan suggesting...
A) That Al-Queda flew the bombs into the buildings with planes?
or
B) The Bush Administration and its friends, oil and gas companies, defense contractors, etc., conspired with Al-Queda to plant bombs in the buildings?
I think Kevin really needs to clarify what he is implying here. It's almost like he's trying to hedge his bets or something. He has some 'splaining to do, that's for sure.
Lets play with option B for
Lets play with option B for awhile.
The US government, working with AlQuaeda, brought down buildings leased by Larry Silverstein, a close friend of the current Israeli Prime Minister, as Mossad agents watched and filmed the event. So Silverstein, a very prominent figure in Israel was just a victim of the US Government, and their Arab co-conspirator's.
I wonder though why Larry and his Zionist friends haven't joined the 9-11 truth movement to bring the evil George Bush and Muzlim terrorists to justice. Why is that. Yo Larry, I didn't know we were on the same side all the time. Perhaps Larry can sue the US Government for billions in damages for destruction of property. I am sure the US public is just happy to pay that out with their tax dollars.
so the gist of his essay...
is to be found in his conclusion:
So from an introduction which contains all manner of alleged warnings by evil muslims about the towers' inevitable doom, Ryan segues into a list of some of the tenants of the WTC, citing their myriad connections to the "Bush cabal", and suggests in his conclusion merely that some of these companies are suspicious because they would have access to demolition technologies.
One possible tack that this ridiculous alternative truth scenario is going to be spun is to suggest that the evil al Qaeda network, doing the bidding of the CIA, received material assistance from some of the companies who happened to lease space in the WTC, to ensure the total destruction of the towers (whereas previously we have been led to believe that the engineering genius bin Laden knew that the jet fuel would cause a fire so intense that it would lead to total structural failure.)
This is a conspiracy theory that would make David Icke blush, and accomplishes two goals--one, to saddle the truth movement with a ridiculous unprovable and ultimately incorrect case, and two, to pretend that only the rabid anti-semitic jew hating fringe of the truth movement suspects Zionists of agency in the attacks. I mean, so what that Israel has been known to steal or otherwise unethically acquire all manner of US-made technology--if a Bush-connected company is known to have used a thermite igniter in their legitimate business then by god, that's a smoking gun! Or if the nano-thermite discovered in the WTC dust has been produced at Lawrence Livermore National Labs then by Jupiter, we need look no further for the culprits! Or if the anthrax used in the post-9/11 mailings was of US military grade then, by Ivins, the culprit must have been a US bio-weapons researcher! I mean, what are the chances that any of this technology could have fallen into the hands of Zionist tools?!
In a weird coda to this bizarre essay, Ryan's last paragraph strangely echoes part of WTCD's new mission statement:
Gosh, if i was the paranoid type... :) Notice how Ryan says that "conspiracies are not just limited to the powerless people" implying that well, of course those powerless people conspire, they're just not alone!
what was Ryan doing...
...submitting FOIA requests about the pork chop transfer in 2008?
Confirmed: The Pakistani General Who Wired $100,000 to Mohammad Atta Met with Wolfowitz, Feith and Other Neocons the Week of 911
In response to a Freedom of Information Act Request submitted by Kevin Ryan, Mick Harrison and Paul Smith, the government has disclosed documents confirming that Pakistani ISI General Ahmed - the guy who wired 100,000 dollars to lead hijacker Atta -- met with Wolfowitz, Feith, Peter Rodman (PNAC), and others the week of he week of 9/11.
All credit goes to Kevin, Mick and Paul. I'm just reporting on their efforts.
Submitted by GeorgeWashington on Mon, 07/14/2008 - 2:18pm.
Actually, what Ryan does is
Actually, what Ryan does is much worse than you suggest. The quote you give does not suggest that he ever made any FOIA inquiry about the alleged hundred grand transfer. It shoss simply that he verified a meeting between Ahmed, Wolfowitz and some others. But the story of the alleged transfer is simply assumed within this text, without any evidence of investigation either way.
A step back
While 911blogger and any shill obviously deserves to be criticized when disinformation is being disseminated, I would like to caution that perhaps some of the truth is contained within Kevin R's work(cof cof propaganda). I think the more obvious reason for what he put out is to divert attention from real culprits, but that does not mean everyone listed in his research is not connected at all to the conspiracy. There is a danger that in dismissing his work, some of the real culprits get their name sanitized by being listed among a very a long list of innocent companies.
Also, even less likely, but just a possibility, perhaps some of the real perps are being shed off by the higher ups. The Bush family I think has been a useful partner who may now be considered expendable to protect the higher order of the conspiracy.
yep, you're right, juan!
thanks for pointing that out!
I just emailed this
I just emailed this thread(and Lazlos Men Who Wired the Towers piece) to Kevin. Hopefully he'll at least come by and read the comments.
DR Griffin's take on Muslim hijackers
David Ray Griffin is one of those who is very circumspect about Zionist involvement in 9-11, yet he also points out that Muslim involvement in the attacks were not as they are portrayed in the official conspiracy theory and certainly in conflict with Kevin Ryan's research.
http://davidraygriffin.com/articles/was-america-attacked-by-muslims-on-9...
On these points alone I take issue very much with Ryan's LIHOP version.
in NPH revisited
DRG spends half a chapter talking about Saudi Arabia, connections to "alleged hijackers and al qauida" ??!!
why does he never address Silverstein, Lowy, Eisenberg, Lauder, etc... ?Jeffrey Greenberg, AIG, Marsh, Fort Detrick stuff....i am beginning to get a little uneasy and annoyed with him.
Zelikow...yes.
Zakheim...no.
Steven Jones, on the other hand, is not afraid to talk about those who would have had access to the WTC, elevator companies, security companies, etc.
Richard Holbrooke (former AIG), Dennis Ross, and then there's this Yosuf A. Maiman character...yuch! Merdev whatev.
Great question.....
And one I asked Griffin personally. I was pretty sharply rebuked by him. Im not trying to throw DRG under the bus here, I use his work all the time, but I certainly dont trust him.
trust no one but yourselves and your own reason!
is the best advice i can give any truthseeker.
I think that DRG's take...
...is that the alleged hijackers (some of them anyway) were patsies who may or may not have known what they were playing a role in.
Indeed, when you consider that Jiad Zarra's cousin was a Lebanese spy for Israel and that he and Atta star in a couple of videos that seem to be produced to support the OCT, it isn't far-fetched to assume that some of the alleged hiajckers may have been totally unaware (the living ones whose passports were stolen), some may have been involved in what they believed to be (and may well have been) legitimate simulations, and others may have been more in the know as to the real deal, or made aware of it later and agreed to cooperate by making videos, etc.
We can even speculate as to the benefit that the Saudi regime may gain (or factions within it believe they may gain) from helping to build the al Qaeda myth as a way of controlling domestic opposition to their rule. If the regime or a faction within it helped to create the myth of al Qaeda targeting America as well they might now be finding themselves blackmailed into going along with some agenda they had not previously agreed to. To effectively blackmail them with involvement in 9/11, they must be made to fear that the "truth" of their involvement could be made to come out, and if they can be threatened with bogus charges on top of it the blackmail would be that much more effective, which may explain why some of the least creditable people in the movement are so intent on fixing Saudi Arabia in the crosshairs.
Now, suppose that 9/11 was an exercise gone wrong through sabotage. This exercise might well have involved simulated hijackings and those simulated hijackings may well have been hijacked themselves (from the inside) so that two of the planes were flown into the twin towers. At the same time someone on the inside facilitated bombs being planted in a key area at the Pentagon (during the renovation/reinforcement work going on in the affected section?) and arranged for the distraction of the flyover.
Now, SOMEone had to have physically placed the explosives in the Pentagon as well as the twin towers and building 7. In theory that could have been a team of Jihadists 4 Hire, Israeli agents, or the Michigan Militia. A proper investigation without regard to "diplomatic considerations" is needed to resolve that issue, if it can be.
SOMEone also had to have dreamed up the whole scheme and been ready to exploit it to their advantage. The reason I think that these masterminds were most likely Zionists is that without Zionist pressure there is absolutely no reason for any elite to have a problem with Arabs or Muslims, so long as they sell us oil cheap, which they did before 9/11 and have except on the odd occasion usually provoked by our preferential treatment of Israel. Zionism's history of ruthless tactics is well known. And after 9/11 the hew and cry went out that "we can all now understand Israel's pain" and the world became very much more like Israel--security-obsessed when it comes to Arabs and Muslims.
The bottom line is that political Zionism is so unjustifiable that it must find creative and deceptive ways to gain the support it needs to survive. One part of this is the need to scare Jews around the world into thinking their safety depends on the existence of Zionism (the protection racket) another is the need to scare the rest of the world into fearing Israel's natural enemies, the people whose land they stole and whose region they wish to dominate. And of course, the goals of Zionism have nothing to do with the real interests of your everyday Jewish person, but everything to do with the aspirations to global dominance of an elite, wealthy few.
and, and he quotes from
philip shenon alot!
Excuse my paranoid speculation
But check out Gold's thread on the flights for the Saudi Royals who were getting outta Dodge in the days right after 9/11 (on blogger). Not generating any convo except Gold talking to himself until THIS guy shows up and Gold has the opportunity to smack him down.
» login to post comments | -3 points
FBI interviews had to be intercepted
[below viewing threshold, show/hide comment]
Ronald
www.bleiersblog.blogspot.com
http://desip.igc.org
I finally figured out why the WH wanted the Saudis out before they could be interviewed.
It was an inslde job. Duh!
But the interesting thing -- if it's not against the rules for a No-Planer to speculate -- is that there were
no planes and no hijackings on 9/11. In that case there would have been no Saudis -- or any other Muslims
involved in any way and if relatives of those supposedly involved were questioned, it could have been embarrassing because they would have testified for example that some of them were still alive and so on.
Ronald
Submitted by Ronald Bleier on Mon, 07/13/2009 - 2:42pm.
» login to post comments | 2 points
You've been...
A member of 911Blogger.com for "2 years 28 weeks," and your first post ever has to do with "no planes and no hijackings on 9/11?" Sorry Ronald, but the majority of the 9/11 Truth Movement does not support or endorse those theories. Please keep any discussion about said theories out of my blogs. Thank you.
Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?
Submitted by Jon Gold on Mon, 07/13/2009 - 4:35pm.
No planes = no hijackings. Therefore, anyone who is skeptical of the hijackings probably has doubts about the use of planes at all (versus holograms, etc.) This would be ha ha funny except for the way we've seen the "no planes" label morph from referring only to that fringe group who think no planes hit the Towers, to a label eagerly stuck on Pentagon Boeing critics, with no distinction.
as you know, casseia...
the majority of the 9/11 Truth Movement rejects no-plane theories, which means they SUPPORT the theory that flight 77, full of family members' loved ones, was slammed into the Pentagon (also full of family members' loved ones) by Hani Hanjour, which Cheney let him do. Burn any family members' loved ones lately, you heartless conpiracy mongering wench??