SSPX and 9/11

[fatima1917]

Into the feverish swamps of conspriacy theory goeth SSPX.

SSPX Catholic bishop: 9-11 was inside job

Matt C. Abbott
November 24, 2007

Bishop Richard Williamson, seemingly the most outspoken and controversial bishop of the Society of St. Pius X, asserted in a recent talk that the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks were committed “to get the American public to accept the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq,” according to a news item by Jack Kenny in the Nov. 15, 2007 issue of The Wanderer.

Bishop Williamson, whose talk was held Nov. 4, 2007 in Bedford, Mass., is quoted as saying:

“Without 9-11, it would have been impossible to attack in Afghanistan or Iraq. The forces inside the United States government and driving the United States government absolutely wanted to attack and destroy Iraq. The destruction wrought upon Iraq is unspeakable. And now the same forces want to do the same thing to Iran . . . They may well be plotting another 9-11.”

The news item continues: “Heat from the burning fuel of the planes that flew into the twin towers of the World Trade Center could not have melted the 47 steel columns in each tower, causing them to collapse, he claimed. And a commercial airliner could not have penetrated six of the ten walls that were breached by ‘whatever hit the Pentagon,’ he said.”

What did hit the Pentagon, according to Bishop Williamson?

“It was a missile that hit the Pentagon. It was a missile that could only have been fired by the American military.”

Just think, he is a metallurgical and mechanical engineer to boot. He must have gotten his degrees at Kabul Tech.

 

[LRThunder]

I can understand why some thing 9/11 was a pretext for Iraq (given the strategic position and oil) and I completely disagree, but what would we have to gain by attacking ourselves in order to attack Afghanistan? What value does that country have in order to “fabricate” 9/11?

On the one hand, people like him are amusing to listen to. On the other hand, it’s sickening that they deny the truth and basically try to belittle anybody who disagrees with their “truth.”

 

[Sure]

I guess this is just one more thing that Bishop Williamson is correct about.

It must be nice for the SSPX to have such a fearless leader among them.

Now, let’s see who was that poster on these forums who insisted that Bishop Williamson was a top-notch intellectual???

Hmmm…

 

[pnewton]

Now, let’s see who was that poster on these forums who insisted that Bishop Williamson was a top-notch intellectual???

That would be GerardP??

 

[I_Believe]

Anyone who believes The US government planned 9/11 is an idiot.

How could something of that magnitude be planned and carried out without someone spilling the beans ? And how would they have gotten the terrorists to go along with it ?

Way too many people would have to know about the plan in order to execute it.

The talibans’ track record was reason enough to go in and take them out of power. And Saddams’ track record speaks for itself.

I have been sympathetic with the SSPX up until now. Williamson makes it easier and easier to hesitate at joinning the local SSPX Chapel.

“Our Country, In Her Intercourse With Foreign Nations, May She Ever Be Right. But Right Or Wrong, Our Country !”
Stephen Decatur

 

[GerardP]

Anyone who believes The US government planned 9/11 is an idiot.

Why? I think only a moron would make a statement like you just made.

How could something of that magnitude be planned and carried out without someone spilling the beans ?

Did you ever hear of D-day? A much bigger operation was kept secret in that. There are plenty of secrets that get carried out.

Also Bishop Williamson believes there is “strong evidence” in his opinion. But he also acknowledges that he could be wrong. In either case, he views the events of 9/11 favorable to those who are interested in establishing an international interdependence. What Malachi Martin called the “community of power.” as opposed to the “balance of power” that had preceded it.

And how would they have gotten the terrorists to go along with it ?

There are many speculations. I believe Bishop W suspects they might have been “patsies.”

Way too many people would have to know about the plan in order to execute it.

Not really. People are often clever in how they keep things secret. Multiple people working on different aspects of the same project. Food recipes for candies are actually made that way.

The talibans’ track record was reason enough to go in and take them out of power. And Saddams’ track record speaks for itself.

By that thinking we should also invade China.

I have been sympathetic with the SSPX up until now. Williamson makes it easier and easier to hesitate at joinning the local SSPX Chapel.

Don’t worry. You’ll make the right decision with your thorough investigation of the situation. A Matt Abbott column referenced on a website about a column by somebody else should give you a solid understanding of what Bishop Williamson thinks and says.

Since you’re not interested, you won’t want to investigate what the bishop said in his interview on the subject with Bernard Janzen in 2003.

“Our Country, In Her Intercourse With Foreign Nations, May She Ever Be Right. But Right Or Wrong, Our Country !”

Yuck. What an immoral sentiment.

 

[GerardP]

I guess this is just one more thing that Bishop Williamson is correct about.

Bishop W is probably following up on Fr. Malachi Martin’s analysis of the world situation prior to his death.

The really interesting thing is how Fr. Martin predicted the 9/11 calamity in 1993 after the first attack. He said, “We’ve only had a foretaste of what’s to come with the World Trade Center. They’re going to blow it up…How easy it is to paralyze a city.”

This is also interesting when you consider Fr. Martin’s “Eternal War” interview in 1991 where he described the invasion of Kuwait as a perfect opportunity for the “community of nations” to start “the leavening of Islam”

Needless to say both Bishop W and Fr. Martin as far as they believe in conspiracies believe that they originate in the mind of Satan and not necessarily are human conspiracies.

It must be nice for the SSPX to have such a fearless leader among them.

He’s a good man. Very much in love with Christ.

Now, let’s see who was that poster on these forums who insisted that Bishop Williamson was a top-notch intellectual???
Hmmm…

That would be me. I’m betting I’m the only one on these forums who’s actually heard Williamson talk about this.

But what would I know compared to someone who read a statement by a reporter about another reporter reporting on what they claim to know about Bishop Williamson?

 

[GerardP]

I can understand why some thing 9/11 was a pretext for Iraq (given the strategic position and oil) and I completely disagree, but what would we have to gain by attacking ourselves in order to attack Afghanistan? What value does that country have in order to “fabricate” 9/11?

The attack on our turf provides a rallying point for the populace to support the military action.

There are people who also claim that Roosevelt knew about the attack on Pearl Harbor but allowed it in order to cultivate the unanimous decision to go to war when the country was divided with Republicans wanting to stay out of it.

It’s also very much believed that Churchill allowed Coventry to be bombed because an evacuation would have tipped off the Nazis that the Brits had broken their codes.

On the one hand, people like him are amusing to listen to. On the other hand, it’s sickening that they deny the truth and basically try to belittle anybody who disagrees with their “truth.”

How sickening for you to belittle him and anybody who disagrees with what you believe is “the truth”.

Face it. You are just giving a pointless, ignorant knee jerk reaction to what you read about Williamson from someone who read something from someone who wrote something about Williamson.

 

[LRThunder]

The attack on our turf provides a rallying point for the populace to support the military action.

There are people who also claim that Roosevelt knew about the attack on Pearl Harbor but allowed it in order to cultivate the unanimous decision to go to war when the country was divided with Republicans wanting to stay out of it.

It’s also very much believed that Churchill allowed Coventry to be bombed because an evacuation would have tipped off the Nazis that the Brits had broken their codes.

How sickening for you to belittle him and anybody who disagrees with what you believe is “the truth”.

Face it. You are just giving a pointless, ignorant knee jerk reaction to what you read about Williamson from someone who read something from someone who wrote something about Williamson.

It’s not a knee jerk reaction. What he said was a lie. Our government was NOT behind 9/11. As pointed above, if it was, how do you think they could’ve pulled it off without someone spilling the beans especially given how many people like to talk about what this President did or that Senator said?

 

[GerardP]

It’s not a knee jerk reaction. What he said was a lie.

How is it a lie? You think Bishop W. knows the whole story but is willfully saying it was something different?

Let’s distinguish this. He admits he may have things wrong in details but he looks at the trend of the world powers and events and sees a dynamic forming that has been predicted for a long time by many philosophers theologians, futurists and others.

He’s said, “if it wasn’t deliberate, it sure was convenient for those wanting to deal with the Mohammedens.”

Our government was NOT behind 9/11.

Maybe not. But also maybe. Not the whole government obviously. Just possibly factions within it.

Go to youtube and look for Eisenhower’s final speech where he warned about the “Military Industrial Complex”

As pointed above, if it was, how do you think they could’ve pulled it off without someone spilling the beans especially given how many people like to talk about what this President did or that Senator said?

I already addressed that above. But do you think there are no secrets in the U.S. that are of such a high level that a Senator or Someone’s life wouldn’t be destroyed if they let it out? Or for that matter secrets that a little senator wouldn’t even know about?

I can only speak anecdotally but I know of several high level government cover-ups. I can’t prove them because I can’t get access to the proper evidence and secondly, who would I take it to? The press wants to keep in tight with the senators and the senators have the judicial system in their pockets.

I know of a former Federal Agent who said that there is simply too much crime and political corruptom for any law enforcement agency to actually change the culture of the Federal and State goverments.

I also know of corporate cover ups from my days of working the medical field. People die all the time due to negligence and corruption without any recourse to real justice.

God spare me from ever having to rely on American Justice.

 

[Patrick2340]

Bishop Williamson’s assertion that “Heat from the burning fuel of the planes that flew into the twin towers of the World Trade Center could not have melted the 47 steel columns in each tower, causing them to collapse,” he claimed. proceeds from a false premise. No one is claiming that the jet fuel melted the steel. Anyone who knows anything about steel and the effects of severe heat upon it knows that substantial heat weakens steel. Steel doesn’t have to be melted to buckle and collapse.

The jet fuel was not the only fuel source in the Twin Towers. Office spaces carry a substantial fire load with paper and plastic alone. Even if the impact of the planes wasn’t enough to disable the sprinkler system, it would not have been designed to handle a fire of that magnitude. Its likely any water dispersed by the sprinklers was vaporized immediately in temperatures that were never envisioned by the designers.

Additionally, the Towers at that level were engineered using extremely light steel. The columns were hollow, and the structural support was engineered similar to the trusses in your roof. Each member alone would be insufficient to support the weight of the building, but put together in a truss system, the steel was capable of supporting enormous weight. The planes appeared to have taken out a number of supports on several floors. The heat of the fire then acted on the remaining supports to eventually cause the collapse.

The heat of the fire would have been incredible. The winds at that level would have fanned the flames and provide significant levels of oxygen necessary to keep the fire burning. As I stated before, the fire load of the offices would have provided sufficient fuel to keep the fire burning for a long period of time. The fire retardant materials and fire protections would have been useless since they were designed for office fires and not the impact and explosion of a jet airliner.

 

[Caesar]

Bishop Williamson see Freemasons under his bed and militant modernists in every shadow. He is not exactly a reliable source.

 

[roanoker]

Patrick is correct. The steel didn’t have to melt. Steel when it is heated starts to soften and lose its rigidity. It doesn’t have to be red hot, either. In a structure like that, only a little softening would start the buckling, and the instant one beam or member began to buckle, all structural integrity would be lost and what would happen is exactly what did happen.
Ask any fireman-they all know this principle.
A lot of people use these wacko conspiracy theories to disguise their hatred of America. And there are a lot of them…

 

[Joey1976]

I still don’t believe a plane hit the Pentagon though. Look at the pictures. There is no debris at all that resembles a plane. No tail, no wings, nothing. Look at the hole in the side of the pentagon. It is in the side of the building and not the top. The Plane would have had to be traveling a couple of feet off the ground at a 45 degree and angle and they said it was traveling at 450 mph and yet the all the grass and trees in front of the Pentagon were untouched. It’s weird stuff. And the hole in the Pentagon is not wide enough for the whole plane to get sucked into, the wings would have extended way past the hole that was in the side of the pentagon, so the wings would have been cut off and laying somewhere.

 

[bear06]

Uh, nevermind the 100+ people who saw it hit and the almost 30 who actually managed to ID it as American Airlines. They’ve all been whammied.:hypno:

 

[I_Believe]

Why? I think only a moron would make a statement like you just made.

Why thank you ! I don’t get that enough

 

[I_Believe]

I still don’t believe a plane hit the Pentagon though. Look at the pictures. There is no debris at all that resembles a plane. No tail, no wings, nothing. Look at the hole in the side of the pentagon. It is in the side of the building and not the top. The Plane would have had to be traveling a couple of feet off the ground at a 45 degree and angle and they said it was traveling at 450 mph and yet the all the grass and trees in front of the Pentagon were untouched. It’s weird stuff. And the hole in the Pentagon is not wide enough for the whole plane to get sucked into, the wings would have extended way past the hole that was in the side of the pentagon, so the wings would have been cut off and laying somewhere.

Where are the fuel tanks on the plane ? Think about it.

 

[pnewton]

Bishop Williamson see Freemasons under his bed and militant modernists in every shadow. He is not exactly a reliable source.

I am glad I’m not the only one to catch the parallel between the two conspiracy theories. Once one bites on one secret conspiracy theory it seems to me like they are vulnerable to the next fad conspiracy. Jack Chick comes to mind.

 

[stmaria]

I_Believe;3013189]Anyone who believes The US government planned 9/11 is an idiot.

.
I agree that the conspiracy theory is wacky, way out there and full of holes. No doubt in my mind it was carried by Islamic terrorists.

I have been sympathetic with the SSPX up until now. Williamson makes it easier and easier to hesitate at joinning the local SSPX Chapel.

Here is where I part ways with you. This has NOTHING to do with the SSPX. These are the views of Bishop Williamson. This thread is nothing but another way to bash the SSPX. The thread should have been “Bishop Williamson and 9-11” not the “SSPX and 9-11”

If someone wants to go after the SSPX, do so on their beliefs on Religious Liberty, False Ecumenism and the New Mass.

 

[GerardP]

Why thank you ! I don’t get that enough

Your welcome. Anytime you spew venom like that, you should expect a good rebuke.