On 9/11 Forensics and Nico Haupt

By Alex Constantine

I've just had an e-mail informing me that the Bali bomb was used on 9/11/01.

A mini-nuke probably WAS used in the Bali bombing. I've posted photos of the blast. There's no mistake about that hot little mushroom.

And the devastation in Manhattan looks to be a controlled demolition - as a Brussell Sprout, though, I'm not so concerned about the means as I am about who was involved, who paid for it, how they moved around that day, who covered it up and their connections, the usual lines we follow.

So I've never written about the means. Seen the debris evidence, however, and there are unexplained scallops along the edges, pillars sliced evenly at an angle, strange things going on that I can't explain - and there is far too much smoke being blown around the issue to nail it down, at least from here.

There has been intense argument about the means for nearly seven years, but little discussion about anything but falling buildings.

Forensics. Researchers stake a position on the means and defend it with teeth bared.

Something very hot was in the basement, according to press reports. Molten steel. That's what they said. But I'd go over and over that one and every other allegation leading to a conclusion. Witnesses said so. Researchers said so. But when it comes to 9/11, impartial witnesses mix with planted ones, and no witnesss' word is gospel.

Who did it? SAIC. NSA, the space mapping agency, certain contractors including CSC, Affiliated Computer Services, AT&T, Pentagon, CIA ... agencies that Nico Haupt has written about.

BUT I'm NOT citing Nico Haupt, in fact - wo years before him, I published some of that information in "Adnan Khashoggi Linked to 9/11 Terrorists." It covers the anthrax attacks, too.

But I didn't mean that Adnan was linked to Saudi terrorists - American ones. If it was American ones, and I know that is so (that's why I defend Haupt's position on these points), then controlled demolition WAS used.

And when Nico Haupt came along expanding on agencies that I'd already written about, I knew that he was on the right track. I can combine that with the Bali bomb or thermate or thermite or whatever, strike out unknowns, and make sense of things.

I'm not so concerned with the means, but who is accountable. Nico Haupt did work on the terror drills that I admire, if you've read that, and deserves credit for the connections he outlined exhaustively. The "Lost Terror Drill" WAS 9/11.

It was the cover for a Bali bomb - or whatever, something hot and explosive.
Not too concerned about that particular because it seems to be a distraction and source of confusion.

It's the Americans involved and their strategies that most matter, who is accountable, what they did that day, not whether thermate was used or a Bali bomb or a Flying Dutchman or even suicide squadron from Mars, IMHO. Space-based weapons? Don't know. No one does but the perpetrators for certain.

But Armitage and Cheney and Rumsfeld and Hayden, CSC, Raytheon, etc. etc., have a lot to explain, and we already know the answers. These are the planks I've been hammering, and they ring clear and loud. I'd like to take Nico Haupt, everyone, lead them back to this line of research, and say "something blew up, you've argued about it, let's move on."

Forensics has its place, I know, but shouldn't monopolize the discussion, or be allowed to cause deep fractures in a movement concerned with the WHOLE truth.