D.C. Ranked Low for Terror

ABC News says:

"You might think of the District [that is, Washington D.C.] as a likely target for a terrorist attack, but now the Department of Homeland Security ranks it as one of the cities at lowest risk."

TV News Lies has the best comment on this news story:

Duh! Of course the risk is low...they are the ones conducting the terror! They are not going to aim it at themselves and the DHS is clearly admitting this!"

Canadian 'Terror Plot'

Canadian 'Terror Plot' Begins To Unravel
Terrorists set up in sting operation, more on unfounded London raid

Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com | June 6 2006

Just as predicted, the frightening plot to bomb high profile targets in Toronto and the arrest of 17 alleged terror suspects has all the hallmarks of yet another invented nightmare intended to scare western populations into quelling their descent of the empire.

From a manufactured scheme to attack the Library Tower in LA to the British government's hoax Canary Wharf and Ricin terror conspiracies - every major alert or mass arrest since 9/11 has proven to be a fraudulent movie script with no basis in reality.


Framing Patsies in Toronto

Framing Patsies in Toronto and London

Kurt Nimmo | June 6 2006

Not only did the “terrorists” in Canada not have a target for their so-called fertilizer bomb, the fertilizer was delivered by the RCMP as part of a sting operation (i.e., the suspects were framed), according to the Toronto Star. “Sources say investigators who had learned of the group’s alleged plan to build a bomb were controlling the sale and transport of the massive amount of fertilizer, a key component in creating explosives. Once the deal was done, the RCMP-led anti-terrorism task force moved in for the arrests…. At a news conference yesterday morning, the RCMP displayed a sample of ammonium nitrate and a crude cell phone detonator they say was seized in the massive police sweep when the 17 were taken into custody. However, they made no mention of the police force’s involvement in the sale.”


this one is unraveling fast

this one is unraveling fast as hell......

This off AOL's comments

This off AOL's comments section for the news item they've mirrored (the NYTimes one on Chicago)... haven't heard this before, any one want to debunk/elaborate?

..."Because I was personally involved in the insurance litigation over WTC 7, I can tell you the real facts and put these loony theories to rest.

WTC 7 was home to Citibank's stock and bond trading offices. Because a power outage would shut down their computers and interrupt billions of dollars worth of business, the building was equipped with diesel generators on every floor. These diesel generators were fed with fuel via a network of pipes which ran inside all of the exterior walls, and the pipes were full of high-pressure diesel fuel at all times so that the generators could turn on instantly,

Debris from the falling North and South Towers struck and damaged the exterior walls of WTC 7, and in doing so broke some of the fuel pipes, which began to spray diesel fuel at high pressure. The diesel fuel ignited, and the entire tower became essentially a burning fuel dump.

In other words, pipes running throughout the building, filled with diesel fuel at high pressure, and a very large tank of diesel fuel in the basement, caused WTC 7 to become a raging inferno that firemen could not extinguish. The intense heat, fueled by all that diesel, caused WTC 7 to collapse for the same reason the Twin Towers collapsed: structural steel weakens at sustained high temperatures.

Now, the next time some paranoid conspiracy nut tells you his crackpot theories, tell him that the truth is usually more boring than fiction."


jay, that sounds like a huge

jay, that sounds like a huge load of crap to me. all you have to do is watch the tape of it falling. the tape says all that needs to be said really.

the purpose of what that

the purpose of what that douche wrote is to keep people from going any further into researching 9/11. WTC7 is obviously a big issue in the truth movement, so if you can SEEMINGLY debunk it like that assclown above, you get some people to stop in their tracks when it comes to looking closer at 9/11.the agents are gonna REALLY start coming out of the woodwork........

"" ... caused WTC 7 to

... caused WTC 7 to become a raging inferno ...

Except for the small little detail that World Trade Center building number 7 wasn't a "raging inferno." It had a few small fires that appeared to be more or less out by the time it collapsed. Whereas steel-frame skyscrapers that have indeed been raging infernos have never collapsed before or since.

As Chris said, the person that wrote that is likely intentionally telling a whopper of a lie in order to convince others who are not familiar with this subject that they need not look into the matter further.

Yea, either way its good

Yea, either way its good this is hitting bigger press sites. Thanks for the answers guys.

That 'Terror Plot' in my

That 'Terror Plot' in my country is a bit frustrating, i will follow the progress of the trial

LOL, that WTC 7 debunker got

LOL, that WTC 7 debunker got ripped in that thread.

.."Because I was personally

.."Because I was personally involved in the insurance litigation over WTC 7,..."

Involved in committing the insurance fraud, no doubt. Is that you, Mr. Silverstein?

No, he is some lawyer who is

No, he is some lawyer who is watching Silverstein's back.... lying bast@rd :)

Remember what Andrew Grove

Remember what Andrew Grove said in his presentation - that the largest insurance company, Marsh McClellan was in on the fraud?

I often wondered why the litigation case against Silverstein suddenly took an opposite turn and they caved in and paid that crook off. The insurance companies were also compensated for participating in the 9/11 hoax, and Andrew's information showed that.

"jay, that sounds like a

"jay, that sounds like a huge load of crap to me. all you have to do is watch the tape of it falling. the tape says all that needs to be said really."

LOL! That's the stupiest statement I've hear yet. You can't be serious can you?

LOL! That's the stupiest

LOL! That's the stupiest statement I've hear yet. You can't be serious can you?
anonymous | 06.06.06 - 1:22 pm | #
use your name coward. until then im not gonna respond to you coward.your the stupiest coward ive hear yet.moron.