Hunter Thompson was working on WTC collapse story before mysterious sudden death.....

[meleusis]

Hunter Thompson was working on WTC collapse story before mysterious sudden death, warned he'd be 'suicided'

Total 9-11 Info / Prison Planet | March 2, 2005

Toronto Globe and Mail | February 26, 2005:

Paul William Roberts in his Globe and mail article of Saturday, February 26, 2005 wrote the following:

Hunter telephoned me on Feb. 19, the night before his death. He sounded scared. It wasn't always easy to understand what he said, particularly over the phone, he mumbled, yet when there was something he really wanted you to understand, you did. He'd been working on a story about the World Trade Center attacks and had stumbled across what he felt was hard evidence showing the towers had been brought down not by the airplanes that flew into them but by explosive charges set off in their foundations. Now he thought someone was out to stop him publishing it: "They're gonna make it look like suicide," he said. "I know how these bastards think . . ."




Hunter S. Thompson ... was indeed working on such a story.

Now check out this February 25 Associated Press story about Thompson's death. Sounds a lot like a professional hit with a silencer:

"I was on the phone with him, he set the receiver down and he did it. I heard the clicking of the gun," Anita Thompson told the Aspen Daily News in Friday's editions.

She said her husband had asked her to come home from a health club so they could work on his weekly ESPN column...

Thompson said she heard a loud, muffled noise, but didn't know what had happened. "I was waiting for him to get back on the phone," she said. (Her account to Rocky Mountain News reporter Jeff Kass is slightly different: "I did not hear any bang," she told Kass. She added that Thompson's son, who was in the house at the time, believed that a book had fallen when he heard the shot, according to Kass' report.)

Mack White sums up the questions well:
Thompson's family says he was not depressed, nor was he in enough to pain to kill himself. In fact, by all reports, he was quite happy. He was talking on the phone to his wife, getting ready to work on his column, when he decided it would be wise to kill himself, so that he could go out (we are told) while "still at the top of his form," even though this would mean not finishing his column or his expose on 9/11 (potentially the most important thing he would ever write) (?)...

RELATED: Hunter S. Thompson Suicide Story Changes

This account says Thompson killed himself while sitting in a chair on his typewriter and yet the original account tells us that Thompson shot himself while talking to his wife on the phone in the kitchen. Why has the story changed andwhat is the significance of the word typed on the paper in light of the fact that Thompson said he would be 'suicided' before being able to release a major story on explosives bringing down the twin towers?

[meleusis]

Hunter S. Thompson thought 9/11 an inside job

Indybay | September 3, 2004

Check out this clip of an August 2002 interview with the late Hunter S. Thompson, wherein he expounds on the likelihood 9/11 was an inside job.

Here's a partial transcript courtesy of Indybay.org :

Mick O'Regan: Could I take you back to September 11th. What I'd really like to know is your reactions. And I know you said you were writing a sports column for ESPN when the planes hit the towers, but could I get you to tell that story of when you found out about it and what you were doing and what your reaction was?

Hunter S. Thompson: I had in fact just finished a sports column for ESPN. Here it is: "It was just after dawn in Woody Creek, Colorado when the first plane hit the World Trade Center in New York City on Tuesday morning. And as usual I was writing about sports. But not for long. Football suddenly seemed irrelevant compared to the scenes of destruction and other devastation coming out of New York on TV."

Mick O'Regan: You went on to say in that article, which I have in front of me, that "even ESPN was broadcasting war news. It was the worst disaster in the history of the United States." Do you think that the event completely transformed the way in which Americans see themselves and their own vulnerability?

Hunter S. Thompson: No, the event by itself wouldn't have done that. But it was the way the Administration was able to use that event. Even use it as a springboard for everything they wanted to do. And that might tell you something. I remember when I was writing that column you sort of wonder when something like that happens, Well who stands to benefit? Who had the opportunity and the motive? You just kind of look at these basic things, and I don?t know if I want to go into this on worldwide radio here, but ...

Mick O'Regan: You may as well.

Hunter S. Thompson: All right. Well I saw that the US government was going to benefit, and the White House people, the republican administration to take the mind of the public off of the crashing economy. Now you want to keep in mind that every time a person named Bush gets into office, the nation goes into a drastic recession they call it.

Mick O'Regan: It seems a very long bow to me, but are you sort of suggesting that this worked in the favour of the Bush Administration?

Hunter S. Thompson: Oh, absolutely. Absolutely. And I have spent enough time on the inside of, well in the White House and you know, campaigns and I've known enough people who do these things, think this way, to know that the public version of the news or whatever event, is never really what happened.

[meleusis]

To hear the clip, which is in RealAudio, go here, where the original article is, and click the "this link" in the text.

http://www.infowars.com/articles/sep...inside_job.htm

[vrooota]

oh boy...here we go...

[muffy]

hmm.... interesting

i wonder how far along he was on that wtc book

[Lefty]

I'm not sure he would have wrote a note, but if he did it would have been wild. He didn't always hit the nail on the head but when he did it tore right to the soul. If CNN was on at the time, I can see him jamming a fork through his leg, but the sudden end seems fishy...

[nerve]

I'd say its suicide, and he wanted to stir up some
controversy right before he planned on doing it

[Lefty]

I'm not sure. If he wanted controversy he might have escorted his arsenal to Fat City. Or fed a bear a bucket of acid & backed the van up to the city council meeting. Either way he is missed, & I think there was a lot more to 9/11 than hit the papers.

[Hippie3]

no way to ascertain the truth here

[Lefty]

It may come out yet, but for the moment you are absolutely correct.

[Hippie3]

how can a dead man tells us what he was really thinking ?

[Lefty]

Through text

[Hippie3]

forgery

[Sweetness]

Originally Posted by lefty

If CNN was on at the time, I can see him jamming a fork through his leg, but the sudden end seems fishy...

[Lefty]

Prove it

Sad either way!! Would suck if it is true! We may never know...

[Hippie3]

Originally Posted by lefty

Prove it

you're the one with the documents,
it's your job to prove them to be authentic
else they must be assumed to be fakes,
it's pretty obvious that there are
strong political overtones to this story
and thus plenty of incentive
for forgers and hoaxes.

If you look at the video of the towers falling, they started falling at the spot where the fires were burning and melted the structure. The top floors then fell, and the inertia from that, kept dominoing from floor to floor as the building collapsed. It did not collapse from the base. Look at the videos. The base is the last thing to go. That's not consistant with a theory of explosives in the foundation.

[Hippie3]

It did not collapse from the base. Look at the videos. The base is the last thing to go. That's not consistant with a theory of explosives in the foundation.

very true,
we all saw that...

[Hippie3]

hard evidence showing the towers had been brought down not by the airplanes that flew into them but by explosive charges set off in their foundations

the first liar never has a chance...

[Lefty]

Who's a liar? I understand your take on documents but we've been through this.

[Hippie3]

the guy who claims the foundations were blown up
is the liar.
we all saw the towers collapse high up while the base was still intact.

[taoistshredder]

True or not, hats off to Soliver, our resident psychic.

[Lefty]

Your right Hip, they definately didn't blow from the base.

[amateurmushmaker]

i think the theory about explosives is that they were set up in a way to create the implosion. if you have ever watched video of large demolitions of stadiums or buildings it is difficult to tell where the explosives are placed. i think one of the weirdest parts of the collapse is how perfectly the buildings went down. i know that demolition experts spend a lot of time figuring out how to get buildings to collapse just like the wtc did. i really find it hard to believe that an airplane and fire could have caused such a perfect collapse. just my 2 cents

quote:
"i really find it hard to believe that an airplane and fire could have caused such a perfect collapse"

Gravity.

[Hippie3]

people believe
what they want to believe.
nevermind the facts.

[troutlips]

Paul is dead....

[Lefty]

From the Beatles? I can find the website dedicated to him becoming an alien quite a while ago. . They got soooo high they let Ringo sing, I trust no info from any of them.

[Raptor]

To say that bombs were planted is outrageous and unfounded; to say that he was offed by the government is even more so. The towers falling did so gently, explosives would have definately showed up in the form of puffs, bangs, sounds, whatever. Anyone who is suggesting that is suggesting that the government or more importantly our president, premeditated to killing thousands for some political gain... wow. Framework collapsing due to high incendiary explosions involving tons of jet fuel is physics.
And as well on the "changed stories"; his wife talking to him on the phone 'in the kitchen' and him being found by the typewriter does not suggest anything was changed. The media never said any story was changed, just some conspiracy theorist website suggesting it. The second story clearly says "typewriter IN THE KITCHEN" as the previous story mentions him being... wha? ... in the kitchen. Is this idiot suggesting that typewriters cannot be placed in or around the kitchen area, that Thompson did not have the technology of cordless phones, or that there is not enough time to sit down (even assuming he was standing in the kitchen) after placing the phone down. C'mon.

[Hippie3]

agreed.
just political hate speech.

Dubya's dumbfounded look for seven minutes after being informed of the towers being hit gets him off the hook for any conspiricy theory. It's pretty obvious he was in shock.

[shobimono]

Nova did a special about why the towers collapsed.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/collapse.html

[smegma]

Originally Posted by shobimono

Nova did a special about why the towers collapsed.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/collapse.html

I do not think the base+explosives theory holds any water, BUT:

1. Why can a person be seen standing in the hole of WTC2 if there was a fire hot enough to melt fire retardant coated structural steel burning in the same area?

2. What hit the pentagon? If you say a large airplane, I challenge you to explain where the engines/wings went. It is a VERY coommon tactic for an attacker to "attack" themselves to conceal the fact that they are the attacker.

3. When the buildings collapse, apparently the timing is almost exactly a free fall. Also, the acceleration is recorded at almost EXACTLY G = 9.8m/sec2. This should not be the case if the falling debris were encountering resistance with each collapsing floor.

4. Look at the pentagon pictures, specifically the engine turbine that is shown in the "hole". There is a man standing next to it so one can ascertain the turbine diameter is aprox. 3', well a 757/767 turbine is closer to 7' in diameter. What gives? is the guy 13' tall?

5. Supposedly, the pentagon fie burned hot enough to COMPLETELY oblitherate any evicence of a 767, but if you look at the pictures of the hole, there is unburned WOODEN furniture RIGHT there.

6. Where is the plane that hit the pentagon?


What I think, just a stupid opinion so please do not attack me.

1. WTC was taken down on purpose by "the powers that be"... that is "the one party system" not the Republicans... ALL OF THEM. They got justification to do ANYTHING and EVERYTHING they have ever wnted to do: Free access to ALL of my and your personal informaion, justification to attcak ANYwhere at any time.

2. It WAS taken down with explosives, but not from the base. Floor by floor just like ANY OTHER demolition. Starting high ending low.

3. the planes involved 757/767 WILL NOT make the manuvers that they made to hit the towers unless the flight software is overridden. It WILL NOT allow a 4g 60degree bank (example only) to occur. These planes are also the ONLY FULLY REMOTECONTROLLABLE jet liners made by Boeing. That is why they were selected.

4. Whatever hit the pentagon WAS NOT a jetliner. There is not one sred of evidence pictoral or otherwise that proves it was a 757 that hit the pentagon. There is pictoral evidence to show it could have been a Predator, cruise missile or small trainer jet. AGAIN the manuvers this craft made to hit the pentagon would have been impossible for even the most experienced pilot to make much less someone who had 3 lessons in a cessna.

5. Pennsylvania: NEWS FLASH: CELL PHONES DO NOT WORK AT 525 MPH. PERIOD. END OF DISCUSSION. You would be switching towers so fast your phone couldn't do it. Those calls are fabrications.

6. I do not remember if it was WTC7 or which other one fell, but WTF happened there? BUILDINGS DO NOT JUST COLLAPSE. When the detonated the largest building ever to be detonated, I was there, there was NO DAMAGE tyo the surrounding builings except some window damage. Also, why did this building have a fortified floor for the NSA?

Just some points to ponder.

[vrooota]

I smelled a rat too...but...insufficient data....not to mention just how dangerous this particular collection of suppressed info prolly is