I was bored the other day and started bashing truthers on Blogger, and my words seem to have incited one truther to respond to my post... or well, snippets from various posts in no particular order, but more on that later.
1) The identities are in doubt, yet the government refused to correct them, or to admit they were unsure.
People whose photos appeared as the FBI's hijackers turned up alive. This is very strange.
Most "truthers" agree they existed, at least some number of them anyway. The "turning up alive" reports aren't all "debunked." Some had their identities stolen. So they actually were alive, so who was it that was supposed to be on the plane?
The other difficult part about the "hijackers" is that NONE OF THEM WERE RELIGIOUS. Why kill yourself "for Islam" if you're not even religious, and you ignore all your religious customs and dictates?
And yet another difficult problem about the hijackers is the drug smuggling that Daniel Hopsicker reported on at Huffman Aviation. Hopsicker ties Huffman aircraft back to the CIA, and to other aircraft used smuggling narcotics that met up with truncated flight plans in Mexico.
Yeah, and all your "proof" involves one or two articles that came out in the weeks immediately after the attacks. Turns out the name Mohammed and various surnames are pretty common in the Muslim world? Identities stolen? Ha, show me your "proof."
Same goes for your "explosive evidence" that they weren't religious. The only link you do provide is for this Hopsicker guy, who has nothing to do with the topic at hand. And your link doesn't even go to a direct post, but rather the main page of what looks to be another truther website. So much for your "research" and "evidence."
Well, I certainly believe all those eye witnesses talking about "explosions", "bombs in the buildings", "secondary devices" and other euphamisms. See this video:
Eyewitness & Media Accounts Of Bombs At The WTC on 9/11.
Why would all those people lie? Or, conversely, what exploded? (There was no natural gas in the towers.)
Most of your "witnesses" had their quotes taken out of context and completely misrepresented to fit your little theory. What about all the witnesses who claim these quotes were taken out of context? And even if witnesses do stick by the fact they heard explosions, so be it. Sure, someone can hear what they think is an explosion, but does that prove it to be so?
What exploded? Perhaps your ADHD is at it again, and you forgot that a commercial jetliner crashed through the building at 500 miles an hour! What about the raging inferno, caused by the jet fuel, which fell down the elevator shaft? Could it be that blazing elevator cars were falling from 1,000 feet and made a loud boom sound? I guess that wouldn't fit your little theory, so like every other fact in the world, its ignored.
"[Silverstein] got paid. It probably went into his company, for which he is a major shareholder. What's the point of that one?"
I love you truthers. Again, you take a quote out of context and make it seem like the point I'm arguing is that Larry got all the money for himself. OF COURSE, the payout went to his company... you know, to REBUILD. But again, you leave that point out. Again, in perhaps a language you can understand, SILVERSTEIN LOST MON$$$$EY ON THE DEALIOLOLOLOL!1!1!
As for BBC, they covered it up for five years, remember. Then they pretended they never knew about it (lie), which is impossible because as soon as their transmission mysteriously was cut over the satellite, the real building 7 went down in a blaze of glory. This was noticed immediately by BBC's reporter. They then -- when finally confronted over it -- said "We're not part of the conspiracy" in addition to claiming they lost the tapes (so they wouldn't have to apologize for it on the air). I do not trust the BBC. They doth protest too much.
They didn't cover anything up for 5 years. This video only surfaced among truthers this past February. You guys are so desperate to cherrypick and find any "evidence," that it seems like you searched the archives for months and found something you could come up with an elaborate explanation for.
Perhaps it was just the fact that it was fucking 9/11 and utter chaos in newsrooms throughout the world. You know, occam's razor-- the reporter was human and made a mistake in the confusion of the day? Could you identify Building 7 before you became a truther? If anything, the BBC report just confirms the fact that it was popular belief that the building was obviously unstable and in danger of coming down.
Dr. Steven Jones certainly has not ignored science or logic.
Dr. Jones' hard evidence of microscopic "steel spherules" in the dust of the WTC event is powerful stuff. Spheres like that could only have been formed in a molten state. They are corroborated by a US Geological Survey report.
Too bad Jones is a physicist, and not a structural engineer. You also mentioned Kevin Ryan, but I won't even quote that because he's just a lowly water tester. If Jones' work is 100% scientific, why won't any other structural engineer in the world back up his claims and, you know, peer-review his findings?
Yes, and the spheres... Wow, they're both round! Groundbreaking stuff. Molten state? Yeah, there were molten metals, but that doesn't mean it was molten steel. Planes are made of aluminum, you know.
As for demolition, there are strong grounds for suspecting it, including Griffin's "10 features" of controlled demolition. Couple that with the inverse, that these 10 features have NEVER been seen in any case other than a controlled demolition, never in history. That is at least enough to make it possible, if not proven.
Yes, but Griffin's 10 features all take place in the wrong order and over 90 minutes. The aspects all occur within a few seconds during a CD. Already brought it up here, but I guess you didn't read my blog as thoroughly as you thought.
And just because something is probable does not make it proven. You and Mike Ruppert would make good friends. Maybe you didn't know that, and that's why you're still wrapped up in all these conspiracy theories.
Danny Jowenko, who owns a controlled demolition company, looked at WTC7 and said, "This is controlled demolition." "It's been imploded." "A team of experts did this."
Is this the Dutch guy who watched it on TV? What about all the experts who actually had pieces of debris to analyze? What about every American engineer who has seen the collapse in the proper context who disagrees with you?
Alright, I'm getting tired of this...
You really do ramble around mentally.
Yes, as you cherrypick random quotes from different blog entries and post them in a rambling style all your own. Responding to your post has been extremely tedious, and I have a finance exam to study for. Because, you know, some of us have lives of our own and the ambition to excel(and not just panic about doomsday). You, my friend, are stuck in a lost cause.
So make your own pamphlet. Why is this such a difficult solution for you to come up with? Make your own movie. You already made your own blog. It doesn't enlighten, however.
You forget that I'm co-founder of 9/11 Truth UAlbany, the first 9/11 truth campus group to be officially recognized and funded by the university. What are your credentials?
How many anomalies do I need to type (yet again) to make this clear?
This is exactly my problem with the "truth" movement. You guys pile on so much BS like all the long-debunked claims in this very response and add it in with one or two legitimate facts like "bin Laden is not wanted for 9/11" and you think your case is astronomical. If it was, it'd be brought to trial right now by one of the victims. You guys can't even agree on anything within your movement! Unfortunately your theories are unfounded, your experts are nowhere to be found, and all that's left is a group of un-American narcissistic kooks who can agree on nothing but the "fact" that the government did it.
76 comments:
It frightens me a bit how easily we human beings can let irrational paranoia (and there really is no other word for it) cloud our judgment. We want to
As I've read others say on the subject of truthers, "everyone's an engineer" or an expert. But nobody in the movement apparently wants to seek out actual civil/structural engineers or peer reviewed papers.
I have some experience in the field, before leaving it for another more personally fulfilling one, and from that time, I know that nothing about the explanation offered for the structural collapse violates any laws of physics or materials science, but it does offers the most probable explanation of structural failure. And I can't say that of any explanation offered by the truther movement.
NIST did not examine the Tower’s collapses after the point of collapse initiation because after the exterior walls began buckling and the top of the buildings began tilting when the buckling spread to the core and remaining perimeter columns allowing the building top to begin falling straight down, the chaotic impacts of heavy floors and walls colliding could not possibly have been accurately predicted by even the most powerful computers. NIST only examined the collapses to the point where progressive collapse would have been inevitable and this took intense computer work.
Those WTC Tower buildings were built with long span, bar joist floor trusses which can collapse into catenaries (cables in suspension) from the expansion effects of heat on the steel truss components. Steel expands immediately when heated. NIST found that the differential expansion effects between the composite steel and concrete in the floors causes separation of the concrete and steel trusses and buckling of the diagonal struts in the trusses. This catenary effect starts at low temperatures of 4000 C to 5000 C before the steel itself even begins to weaken. This collapse the trusses into catenaries over several floors along with the additional ‘thermal bowing’ effect in some of the trusses, caused ‘pull-in’ forces on the exterior wall columns. Thermal bowing is caused by the bottom chords of the trusses expanding faster than the top. This allows the top chord to go into suspension exerting immediate increasing ‘pull-in’ forces on the exterior walls. Photos taken by the Police helicopters showed the exterior column walls in the Towers to be bowing inward, on the long span sides of both buildings well before the buildings started to collapse.
Added to the thermal weakness of the ‘long span’ trusses present in the Tower’s design was the absence of diagonal bracing in the core, the weak column splices in both the perimeter and core columns, one bolt connections of the truss to core columns, missing bolts in the exterior column splices, large open areas allowing extensive fire growth and enabling large areas of the buildings to be affected by heat, weak plaster board enclosures for stairways and elevator shafts, etc., etc.
Building 7 had all the same deficiencies present in the Towers except that the bar joist, trusses were replaced with long span I beams. There were large growing fires on several floors as well as damage from the exterior columns of Tower 1 which pealed away during its collapse and hit the southwest corner and the middle of the south side of building 7, gouging out large sections. In addition to this damage, there were problems with water supply and the Fire Department decided not to fight these fires and ordered every one out of the building and out of the collapse zone (which was a large area including buildings and streets around building 7) as is the procedure when discontinuing interior firefighting operations at an uncontrolled fire. The anticipation of collapse was a brilliant conclusion and no lives were lost when the 47 story building collapsed about an hour and a half after the evacuation order was given. The BBC somehow misheard the orders to evacuate the collapse zone and reported the building had already collapsed well before it actually did.
If you want to know how and why the WTC buildings collapsed read my book “Fire in the Skyscraper” available at Amazon.com.
Arthur Scheuerman,
Retired Battalion Chief, FDNY
I find it funny that Avery is starting to ban the no plane believers from his forum, even though at one point he was a no planer for the Pentagon. Now he says "Whatever hit the Pentagon is irrelevant."
I hope LCFC completely busts.
And look at that. A Batallion Chief, a guy that gives the orders and helps organize the operations, says that 9/11 isn't an inside job. And as the first post reads, structural/civil engineers all over the world support the fact that it wasn't CD.
But as one truther I heard argue "The experts don't know everything."
The Truth Movement is slowly fading into oblivion.
Here is mister Scheuermans paper he sent to NIST btw.
http://wtc.nist.gov/media/ScheuermanStatementDec2006.pdf
Its on WTC7.
You debunkers are guilty of everything you acuse truthers of and vice versa.
In addition, let me remind you that the track record of the consensus is nothing to be proud of. Let's review a few cases.
In past centuries, the greatest killer of women was fever following childbirth. One woman in six died of this fever.
In 1795, Alexander Gordon of Aberdeen suggested that the fevers were infectious processes, and he was able to cure them. The consensus said no.
In 1843, Oliver Wendell Holmes claimed puerperal fever was contagious, and presented compelling evidence. The consensus said no.
In 1849, Semmelweiss demonstrated that sanitary techniques virtually eliminated puerperal fever in hospitals under his management. The consensus said he was a Jew, ignored him, and dismissed him from his post. There was in fact no agreement on puerperal fever until the start of the twentieth century. Thus the consensus took one hundred and twenty five years to arrive at the right conclusion despite the efforts of the prominent "skeptics" around the world, skeptics who were demeaned and ignored. And despite the constant ongoing deaths of women.
There is no shortage of other examples. In the 1920s in America, tens of thousands of people, mostly poor, were dying of a disease called pellagra. The consensus of scientists said it was infectious, and what was necessary was to find the "pellagra germ." The US government asked a brilliant young investigator, Dr. Joseph Goldberger, to find the cause. Goldberger concluded that diet was the crucial factor. The consensus remained wedded to the germ theory.
Goldberger demonstrated that he could induce the disease through diet. He demonstrated that the disease was not infectious by injecting the blood of a pellagra patient into himself, and his assistant. They and other volunteers swabbed their noses with swabs from pellagra patients, and swallowed capsules containing scabs from pellagra rashes in what were called "Goldberger's filth parties." Nobody contracted pellagra.
The consensus continued to disagree with him. There was, in addition, a social factor-southern States disliked the idea of poor diet as the cause, because it meant that social reform was required. They continued to deny it until the 1920s. Result-despite a twentieth century epidemic, the consensus took years to see the light.
Probably every schoolchild notices that South America and Africa seem to fit together rather snugly, and Alfred Wegener proposed, in 1912, that the continents had in fact drifted apart. The consensus sneered at continental drift for fifty years. The theory was most vigorously denied by the great names of geology-until 1961, when it began to seem as if the sea floors were spreading. The result: it took the consensus fifty years to acknowledge what any schoolchild sees.
And shall we go on? The examples can be multiplied endlessly. Jenner and smallpox, Pasteur and germ theory. Saccharine, margarine, repressed memory, fiber and colon cancer, hormone replacement therapy. The list of consensus errors goes on and on.
Finally, I would remind you to notice where the claim of consensus is invoked. Consensus is invoked only in situations where the science is not solid enough.
Nobody says the consensus of scientists agrees that E=mc2. Nobody says the consensus is that the sun is 93 million miles away. It would never occur to anyone to speak that way.
Patrick,
In this instance, the paradigms of science are not what is being challenged, it is the results of a forensic scientific inquiry into a historical event. The nature of science isn't being questioned by truthers, it's the application of it, mostly without any competent understanding of the mechanics and nuances that only come with in depth study.
You're basically saying that the words of professionals should never be regarded with more clout than the theories of oh, I don't know, a theologian or the guy in the street shouting "9-11 was an inside job".
If I stated a claim that the JFK assassination was a holographic projection and that aliens abducted him in the moments before the incident, because he himself was an alien who was recalled to his homeworld, would you say that it deserves equal consideration with all other possibilities?
I'm not arguing for blindly following anyone, but when a reasonable and probable account has been rendered by studied professionals (and from my own understanding gleaned from 4 years of engineering school, and 5 years of practical application leads me to concur with them) the bar has effectively been elevated for those wishing to illustrate a more probable explanation.
Thus far, the truther movement has been very light on providing a coherent, consistent, and illustrative scenario that even attempts to meet the bar. Nobody on the other side of this argument is providing a logical narrative of events followed by a listing of hard evidence to support it, only bits and pieces of evidence that often turns out not to be evidence at all and holes in the official narrative often aren't holes at all, given a better understanding of the material.
Mickey,
Just one question, if I may - what is it you believe at the moment? Do you believe the official version of the events?
Justin Miller,
What you say is not true. If it was, there wouldn't be so many truthers.
Patrick,
Need I remind you that you've just relied upon the authority of numbers ("x" is false because many people are truthers) after arguing against the authority of numbers (one lone voice being right when many were wrong).
Simply having the numbers doesn't automatically make one right or wrong, but when sound reasoning is combined with numbers, then siding with the majority is not unwarranted.
If you can actually refute the sound engineering reasoning as to why the official explanation of how the towers fell while providing a more plausible scenario, I'm all ears. But until that time I accept the analysis of the professionals, not only because they are professionals, but because besides the fact that it demonstrates an understanding of materials science, it also has the fewest holes when lined up with the visual evidence of any theory yet presented.
Justin you said
Nobody on the other side of this argument is providing a logical narrative of events followed by a listing of hard evidence to support it, only bits and pieces of evidence that often turns out not to be evidence at all and holes in the official narrative often aren't holes at all, given a better understanding of the material.
That's not true, people aren't so stupid as to believe in something like 9/11 truth for no reason.
I am not interested in how the towers fell. Think what you want, I don't mind , just don't make shit up to refute people you disagree with.
Patrick,
I don't believe the people in the truth movement are stupid, but they are often misinformed, and their passion, and overzealous attachment to the argument they hold prevents them from calmly listening and absorbing information to the contrary.
Do you believe that people can't be taken in by poor reasoning? All conspiracy theorists believe in what they believe in for a reason.
People who don't believe in conspiracy theories don't believe in them for a reason and there are even more of them. I believe in what I believe in for a reason. Everybody believes in what they believe in for a reason. Besides being a rather unhelpful observation, the fact that a number of people believe something does not in fact make it true because as we see here, people have often have competing and mutually exclusive beliefs.
This is why we have forensic engineers and other relevant experts to (among other things) 1)give peer review and 2) inform the general public.
This group has analyzed the events of 9/11, and while there remain a few unanswered questions, they pale against the number of unanswered questions raised by the competing theories of the truth movement.
I find it odd that debunkers are always bringing up "peer-review", given the fact that the final NIST report wasn't peer-reviewed.
In fact, one of the former NIST members who contributed to the report has even publicly stated that he wishes someone would peer-review their work. The standard debunker response to that is, "well, yes, but he also said that he doesn't believe any of the CTs", as if that magically reverses the need for peer-review (it doesn't).
Scientists like Dr. Frank Greening have analyzed the NIST report and listed out the numerous errors & omissions. Dr. Greening has stated repeatedly that these are not minor errors or loose-ends - they are major problems that invalidate the conclusions published by NIST.
Had the NIST report been peer-reviewed using the same standards the debunkers demand from others, these problems could have potentially been ironed out prior to publication. Instead, their published report is essentially worthless from a scientific point of view, and the debunkers are holding everybody else to a "peer-review" double standard.
justin miller,
WHat you say of the truth movement can be said of the debunking movement.
I think you need to look deeper into things because you are showing a lack of understanding of your enviroment in your comments.
I mean, governments stage attacks similar to 9/11 all the time. Those same governments have a bunch of experts at their disposal to convince you of whatever.
And the ASCE paper, and the Cambridge University paper?
It's a bit bold, if I may say, to cry foul over one paper that wasn't peer reviewed when 1) you're ignoring other papers that were peer reviewed (the two above) that corroborate progressive dynamic collapse, and 2) there aren't any papers that have passed peer review by P.E. journals or communities in favor of the alternative theories.
Which scientific journal(s) published the paper(s) you're referring to (ASCE & Cambridge)?
For the Cambridge study, it's referenced as the Journal of Engineering Mechanics
Link:
BBC article referencing the upcoming journal publication.
The other publication can be searched for in the ASCE site.
There are other articles there that shed light on the mechanics of failure as well.
The Journal of Engineering Mechanics is also an ASCE publication.
Can a world that contains so much intelligence be so blind that it cannot see the wizard hiding behind the curtain manipulating events in the world today? A modern day horror version of Oz! Do we need a Dorothy, a scarecrow, a woodcutter, and a cowardly lion to expose the sham because our so-called mainstream media cannot?
Is the War on Terror so one-dimensional that we all have to swallow the official version of events like some brain dead zombie? Wake up humans! Things are going on right under your nose and you cannot even see it.
It appears that “rituals”, based on ancient knowledge, are being carried out and they are being carried out by powerful people.
The “slick” and manipulative use of words is also being used to deceive the masses and at the same time actually announce that a ritual is taking place. Apparently, ancient rituals have to be publicly announced for the “heavens” to react.
First of all, before I go on, I would like to remind you that the USA & England use symbolism in all parts of their established systems. Indeed the USA was built on “Freemasonry” which actually exists in its symbolism and cryptic messages.
I start with the term M.O.A.B (as used by Bush and company). Allegedly, we are supposed to assume that this means “Mother Of All Bombs” in response to Saddam’s cry for a “Mother of All Battles”. Bush & Co. then told us to be amazed at what was to happen in “Operation Shock and Awe”, the bombing of Baghdad and other parts of Iraq. The fact is “Operation Shock and Awe” was just the same as any other cowardly bombing operation. It did not live up to the hype and was not given much attention by the main media. This indicates the announcement was far more important than the event
I ask you to consider that the term MOAB was not really meant to mean “Mother of All Bombs” and “Shock and Awe” was not a military operation. Indeed we never saw any “Mother of all Bombs” and there was no more “Shock and Awe” than there was in Afghanistan.
The play with words is very interesting.
MOAB is an ancient country that was next to present day Israel and Palestine (Jordan).
“Shock and Awe” can easily sound like Shekinah and in ancient rituals it is the sound vibration that matters not spelling.
SHEKINAH -Shakinah -Shakan. The return of the Shekinah is ancient prophecy. The word Shekinah is derived from the word Shakan. The return of the Shekinah is “Mystical Presence in the Tabernacle”. Tabernacle simply means “tent”. The Shekinah is to guide and protect Israel. It should also be noted that a symbolic be-heading of Saddam took place when the staged pulling down of his statue took place.
Before you decide this is just coincidence, I ask you to read the following and then do your own research to confirm the facts I give you.
On the 16th of April, 2003, a meeting took place in Ur, in southern Iraq, to discuss the “Future of Iraq”. Mainstream media reported this meeting worldwide. It was held in a gold and white “tent” (tabernacle). Ur was the birthplace of Abraham. One of the “Ziggurat” buildings is also at Ur. There are many occult connections to the meeting but I only want to focus on basic facts for now.
I ask anyone to come up with a reasonable explanation as to why a tent was erected in Ur by Western forces just to hold a meeting in?
It is also wide spread knowledge that the Iraqi museums were (conveniently) “looted” around the same time that the tent was erected. Ancient Sumerian, Assyrian and Babylonian relics were “stolen”.
Hang on a minute here readers- let us re-cap:
1 .We have the invasion of a country by dubious means (WMD’s and false claims of connection to 9/1l)
2. We have silly verbal phrases being used such as “Moab” and “Shock and Awe”, not by third-rate journalists but by presidents and generals.
3. Silly tents are built on ancient biblical sites.
4. Ancient relics disappear from the museums.
5. The President of the USA, leader of invading forces, is a self-confessed member of the “Skull and Bones”, the secret society that operates entirely on a system of rituals.
Lets put it together. Ancient relics. Ancient biblical sites. Tabernacles-tents. Ancient buildings (ziggurat). Members of occult, ritual practices. Secret societies. Silly announcements. Death and destruction (er... excuse me, but is the penny dropping yet?)
There is even a connection to reptilian alien gods as the ancient Sumerians/Assyrians/Babylonians were controlled by them. Babylon is supposed to be the gateway to the Gods. Could this be the place where rituals are to take place to bring about ancient prophecies? It would certainly explain the rush by Bush and his string-pullers to get territorial control of the area, sadly by deception and fear. Are modern day political leaders just pawns in a reptilian game of chess? Do the same receive their tremendous material wealth, their 30 pieces of silver, for betrayal? Are our souls sold, without our knowledge, and our spiritual futures blocked?
Does this information indicate too many coincidences? Obviously, to those with no knowledge of rituals and ancient scriptures, it may sound too silly to be real. But, where are the experts that do know what rituals and ancient scriptures mean? Have they all gone blind and dumb? Surely some of them have the slightest suspicion? If so, why are no mainstream media involved?
Have the experts and mainstream journalists closed the curtain hiding the Wizard again? Do they allow him to show images of “liberation” in Iraq yet blind us from what really is going on?
Is Dorothy, the only one with magic shoes, to take us down the coward’s road of deception, along with the heartless, the brainless, and the cowardly?
The wizard needs his curtain opened; we need to expose to all what is going on. When we go down the “Yellow Brick Road to Ur” and reveal the wizard for what he is, just like the scarecrow, the woodcutter, and the cowardly lion did, then we will find, like Dorothy’s pals did, that we are not heartless, brainless and cowardly after all.
I do not seek to influence anybody’s opinion of events currently going on in the world. I seek to encourage people to research things for themselves. The only advice I wish to give is for people to follow their intuition. The “gut feeling” is the most truthful informer you could wish for.
Take your intuition with you down the yellow brick road to Ur and you won’t need the ruby red slippers.
Patrick,
Because I care, I'd like to inform you that my earlier example with JFK being an alien was hyperbole and not to be regarded as fact.
Just wanted that on the record. Seems prudent in retrospect.
"It's kind of a natural human thing to hope and pray that the world is dumb enough that even "I" can understand it. That's at the root of all conspiracy theories is (sic):
'I get it!'
Well, you don't."
- P.J. O'Rourke
Oh, so neither of those papers have been peer-reviewed using the traditional method of peer-review that you demand CT-related research go through?
That would be a "double-standard".
Anonymous,
What do you think separates the peer review process for these articles and what you think I was asking from the truth movement? On what, exactly, are you basing this accusation?
Lol Justin,
So that's not a fact that Bush is practicing ancient rituals in front of our face?
"It's kind of a natural human thing to hope and pray that the world is dumb enough that even "I" can understand it. That's at the root of all conspiracy theories is (sic):
'I get it!'
Well, you don't."
- P.J. O'Rourke
What in the fuck is this?
First of all please explain to me what makes the world so complicated that it's impossible to be able to understand what's going on.
This quote is just wrong. That is not the root of all conspiracy theories.
The root of all conspiracy theories which the media will never talk about is class warfare. It's just the rich vs the poor.
Hylan's most famous words against "the interests" was the following speech, made in 1922, while he was the sitting Mayor of New York City:
"...The real menace of our republic is this invisible government which like a giant octopus sprawls its slimy length over City, State, and nation... It seizes in its long and powerful tentacles our executive officers, our legislative bodies, our schools, our courts, our newspapers, and every agency created for the public protection..."
"To depart from mere generalisations, let me say that at the head of this octopus are the Rockefeller-Standard Oil interest and a small group of powerful banking houses generally referred to as the international bankers. The little coterie of powerful international bankers virtually run the United States government for their own selfish purposes."
"They practically control both parties, write political platforms, make catspaws of party leaders, use the leading men of private organisations, and resort to every device to place in nomination for high public office only such candidates as will be amenable to the dictates of corrupt big business..."
"These international bankers and Rockefeller-Standard Oil interests control the majority of the newspapers and magazines in this country. They use the columns of these papers to club into submission or drive out of office public officials who refuse to do the bidding of the powerful corrupt cliques which compose the invisible government...."
This "invisible government", Hylan and others argued, exercised its control of the US Government through the Federal Reserve.
"For more than a century, ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents such as my encounter with Castro to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that is the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it," Rockefeller writes on page 405.
Without getting even further away from the topic at hand, let me explain the quote.
People who do not understand nor who seem to have any inclination to understand the cause of failure of the twin towers, etc., are picking up on the conspiracy angle because it's easier for them to understand then having a forensic engineer sit down and talk about dry technical stuff like the temperature steel loses half its strength, combined effect, testing for residual capacity, etc.
It is the lack of specific scientific training and understanding combined with a powerful drive to make sense of the senseless that fuels many such conspiracy theories regarding 9/11.
That is what I used the quote in reference to. Because people want to understand, but have little patience when the answer isn't understood, or is misunderstood. The science angle is something I do have experience in, which is why I chime in every now and again on boards like this.
I'm not even going to touch the rest of your argument (which is so far off topic for what was being discussed, it's got "non-sequitor" written all over it). The intricacies of the politics of conspiracies are not my forte, nor am I inclined to obsess over them the way some do. I choose to continue living my life instead and make my small part of the world around me better.
My part on this thread is finished. I've spent enough time debating here.
No Justin Miller
It's just not that simple.
You accuse other people of not understanding yet you have a lack of understanding yourself.
You have a huge gap of information as to why people believe that 9/11 was a fraud and any conclusion you reach is partial.
ANd another thing
why is it people can recite the statistics of sports games, and tell me every little detail about a celebrity but still have a lack of specific scientific training and understanding. We could be an educated public but someone obviously would rather us talk about britney spears and the patriots.
I mean I know shit about britney and it's not like i activly seek this information, this shit just seeps into my counsiousness. Well someone should use this power for good and we could have an educated public. But then they wouldn't be able to pull of a 9/11.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer_review
The papers you referenced have no appeared in any reputable scientific journals.
If we're only talking about peer-review (in the literal sense), then you can find peer-reviewed 9/11 research here:
http://journalof911studies.com
The papers published in that journal have been peer-reviewed (in the literal sense), and explain quite clearly why the official story is physically impossible.
Anon,
This is my last post for your branch of this thread.
What, the Journal of Engineering Mechanics and ASCE publications are disreputable? To be placed on a shelf next to the National Enquirer and the Weekly World News, now? The article mentioned that it's going to be published in an upcoming edition of that journal.
The "peer review" at the "journal of 9/11 studies" appears to consist of Steven Jones (physicist, not a Civil P.E.), Kevin Ryan (Former Site Manager for Environmental Health Laboratories, a division of Underwriters Laboratories - not a Civil P.E.) and Frank Legge (also apparently not a Civil or structural P.E.)
Why on earth should this be considered with the same weight as a journal whose editors are composed of actual Structural and Civl P.E.'s?
In the real world, would you take the advice of two doctors of psychology and a dentist to treat you for a heart condition - no matter how sincere they seemed to be? We do have specialists for a reason, don't we?
All these are (or should be at least) rhetorical questions. I have now concluded both threads I've been involved with on this post.
Right justin so why don't you leave the psychology of the truther mindset to the "experts" you dumb bitch.
And the truther, being frustrated at being defeated in a battle of wits, results to insults, the mark of a desperate man...
The dominant issue of the 9/11 Falser Movement is -- like all conspiracy theories -- the inability to distinguish between evidence and all kinds of nosense.
THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH ASKING QUESTIONS. Entire television networks, magazines, encyclopedias, exist to respond to people's curiosity about things including "how did it happen."
But a QUESTION is not evidence of anything.
The fact that you cannot see how something fits together is not evidence of an alternate theory.
The fact that YOU believe, subjectively, that the odds of something happening are low is not evidence of something else happening instead.
The fact that you -- knowing absolutely nothing about the subject matter -- are unfamiliar with how things work is not evidence that something else happened.
And the fact that you systematically suppress and ignore evidence that proves you wrong -- and you provide a false and biased presentation -- is not evidence.
What is astonishing is that the 9/11 Falsers have never come up with even their first scrap of "Evidence" -- not one.
And yet they claim they have mountains of evidence. That is becuase they do not know what evidence is.
PATRICK: YOU WROTE:
Can a world that contains so much intelligence be so blind that it cannot see the wizard hiding behind the curtain manipulating events in the world today?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
What about when we look at the same facts and say you are hallucinating? It is not that we fail to look. WE LOOK... and what you claim is simply not there.
If you claim that there is a giant 6 foot invisible rabbit named Harvey who follows you around, I think any decent person would take a look. But when no evidence is found that any such giant talking rabbit ever existed, we are not compelled to buy your fantasies.
Indeed, you admit too much. You have unzipped your fly. You admit that YOU ARE NOT DRIVEN BY FACTS -- BUT BY POLICY AND POLITICAL DISAGREEMENTS with people you don't like.
Hardly an unbiased, impartial observer of science, would you agree?
could you guys do me a favor and put information into your comments.
no evidence
Hylan's most famous words against "the interests" was the following speech, made in 1922, while he was the sitting Mayor of New York City:
"...The real menace of our republic is this invisible government which like a giant octopus sprawls its slimy length over City, State, and nation... It seizes in its long and powerful tentacles our executive officers, our legislative bodies, our schools, our courts, our newspapers, and every agency created for the public protection..."
"To depart from mere generalizations, let me say that at the head of this octopus are the Rockefeller-Standard Oil interest and a small group of powerful banking houses generally referred to as the international bankers. The little coterie of powerful international bankers virtually run the United States government for their own selfish purposes."
"They practically control both parties, write political platforms, make catspaws of party leaders, use the leading men of private organizations, and resort to every device to place in nomination for high public office only such candidates as will be amenable to the dictates of corrupt big business..."
"These international bankers and Rockefeller-Standard Oil interests control the majority of the newspapers and magazines in this country. They use the columns of these papers to club into submission or drive out of office public officials who refuse to do the bidding of the powerful corrupt cliques which compose the invisible government...."
This "invisible government", Hylan and others argued, exercised its control of the US Government through the Federal Reserve.
David Rockefeller
"For more than a century, ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents such as my encounter with Castro to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that is the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it," Rockefeller writes on page 405.
The world trade center was initiated in 1960 by a Lower Manhattan Association created and chaired by David Rockefeller, who had the original idea of building the Center, with strong backing from the then-New York governor, his brother Nelson Rockefeller.
Leon Trotsky, said, “War is utilized by the imperialists, first and foremost, to crush internal enemies.”
This isn’t just a war on Iraqis or Afghanis or even Arabs or Muslims. It is ultimately a war on us all. That’s because the billions and billions of dollars that are being spent on this war—the cost of tanks, rocketry, bullets, and yes, even salaries for the 125,000-plus troops—is money that will never be spent on education, on health care, on the reconstruction of crumbling public housing, or to train and place the millions of workers who have lost manufacturing jobs in the past three years alone.
The war in Iraq is, in reality, a war against the nation’s workers and the poor who are getting less and less while the big defense industries are making a killing—literally
Where's your evidence jack?
You really don't understand that NONE of your conspiracy theory comments are (a) REMOTELY relevant to anything we are talking about, or (b) "EVIDENCE" in any sense.
The brain damage of the 9/11 Falsers spouts out the following nonsense:
Because we think shadowy people invisible from sight are bad people, therefore 9/11 COULD HAVE BEEN an inside job.
Even that part of the argument is absurd.
But the fact that something COULD HAVE HAPPENED -- does not mean it DID.
Your entire argument is purely ad hominem. You are saying "because I don't like certain people" (for reasons that are themselves rather absurd) THEREFORE THEY MUST BE GUILTY OF SOMETHING.
And then you go searching for something that they MIGHT be guilty of -- simply because you didn't like them to start with.
The 9/11 Falsers represents the WORST, most despicable fascism of human history -- like the Star Chambers of England.
YOU WANT people you do not like to be guilty of something... therefore you twist and warp reality to make it so.
well you said there was no evidence, clearly there is.
Um, you can keep making yourself look stupid though.
There is absolutely NO evidence that anyone other than Al Qaeda planned, implemented, and/or caused the 9/11 attacks on the United States or added in any way (other than through incompetence) to the resulting damage.
QUESTIONS are not evidence.
Saying "I am ignorant and I don't know how XYZ happened" is not evidence that XYZ happened some other way.
Saying (untruthfully) "Some details about XYZ seem unusual" is not evidence that XYZ happened in some other way.
Coincidences are not evidence of anything. You paint your house and then it rains. Does painting your house cause rain? NO!
lol
jack you are stupid.
There is lots of evidence. There wouldn't be so many truthers for no reason.
That's fine if you disagree but to say there is no evidence is pretty childish.
I have been debating this issue for more than 2 years. I have been a guest on Alex Jones radio show. I am still waiting to see the very first piece of evidence that anyone other than Al Qaeda planned, caused, and executed the 9/11 attacks on the United States, or increased its damage in any way (other than through incompetence).
As I have already said, you do not comprehend what "evidence" is.
Why are there so many 9/11 FALSERS out there? SIMPLE:
9/11 exposed the entire philosophy of the liberal movement in foreign policy as being a total failure. 9/11 was a 100% complete repudiation of liberalism. In order to salvage your failed beliefs, you have to pretend that 9/11 did not happen.
Your political beliefs are a failure, from the fall of the Soviet Union to 9/11, the world keeps screaming at you "You are wrong!" and yet you refuse to listen. So you have to fabricate fairy tales in order to shut out reality.
Jack-
While agree with you that 9/11 Conspiracy Theories deal in complete self-delusional, fallacy and lunacy, 9/11 was not a complete repudiation of the liberal movement in foriegn policy. If you look at from the perspective that U.S. imperialist goals helps foster and create terrorists abroad than it actually repudiates conservatism. The truth actually lies somewhere in the middle. I mean if you are going to apply imperialist goals than you probably ought to have a conservative outlook to defense because if you are going to stir up a hornets nest, you should be at least wearing a bee keeper suit but we wouldn't have these problems if we just leave the Middle East alone to their own bidding.
If anything the Iraq War is repudiation of conversatism as it completely destroyed our credibility abroad and has made us massively unsafe.
As for 9/11 Truthers, its completely bat shit crazy to say the Bush Administration or the CIA could have carefully orchestrated a conspiracy that would have literally taken hundreds to thousands of people to be implicit in and then remain completely quiet. As Bush has proven that is beyond the competency of this government.
Right, jack blames liberals, Zeus blames conservatives, meanwhile people in power keep on doing what they like.
Divide and conquer anyone?
No, 9/11 was a complete repudiation of liberal foreign policy. Terrorists continually attacked the United States, such as the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center -- FORGOT ABOUT THAT ONE, DIDN'T YOU -- which damaged the foundation and structure of the twin towers (the terrorists thought the bombs in the garage were going to bring the entire buildings down... not quite, but enough to cause lasting structural damage that played a role in 2001.
Again and again and again the terrorists attacked the United States. WHY? Because we are not Muslim. Same reason they attacked US commerce ships 200 years ago. They TOLD us why 200 years ago: Because you are Christian and as Muslims we have a right to attack you and confiscate anything we want from you because you are not Muslim.
And what did Bill Clinton do? He tried to " U N D E R S T A N D " them and REASON with them.
Somalia, Khobar Towers, the USS Cole, the Embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania (which killed massive numbers of AFRICANS, not Americans).
Again and again liberal leadership in the White House showed WEAKNESS and indecision. This only emboldened Al Qaeda. In their own rhetoric they told each other that our lack of response shows we are a weak "paper tiger" ready to fall, and all they have to do is push one more time, and the USA will collapse.
Instead, the USA has utterly smashed Jihadi strongholds in Afghanistan, scared the pants of Moammar Khadafi in Libya, and is creating a democracy in Iraq.
The Jihadis NO LONGER believe that we are a paper tiger or that they have any hope of defeating us. What they are wondering is what hole to hide under to stay alive eating bugs for another day.
Now, I do not reflexively defend anyone. Bush has been incompetent on issues like illegal immigration, port security, border security, etc., etc. The war was badly handled.
But to engage in an anti-American fantasy simply because you hate your country is not factually correct. During the Battle of the Bulge in 1944/1945 things looked grim. And yet the USA was actually winning all the marbles once and for all in that last desperate battle. The fact is that the USA has won Iraq for the Iraqi people. When the Iraqi people are now fighting against Al Qaeda, and former Jihadi insurgents are now turning on Al Qaeda -- as is happening -- you have to be blind not to see that the USA has completely transformed the Middle East in a positive direction.
There's an overwhelming psychological component to this "9-11 skeptic" vs. "official story believer" dichotomy (I refuse to acknowledge the term "truther" because it's obviously meant to be derogatory) that results in a giant discontinuity of logic on both sides, and that is "black and white" thinking.
That is to say, everything is either 100% one way or 100% its opposite. There is no recognizance by the people flinging the insults that sometimes it's 64% one way, and 36% the other way - SIMULTANEOUSLY. Both A and B are true. It's "a little of both," etc. It's amazing how few people are able to wrap their head around this, but if they could, they would gain a few I.Q. points instantly.
Let me cite a perfect example from the original post above. Justin says:
"Yes, but Griffin's 10 features [of controlled demolition] all take place in the wrong order and over 90 minutes. The aspects all occur within a few seconds during a CD. Already brought it up here, but I guess you didn't read my blog as thoroughly as you thought."
To your credit, you honestly believe you're stating a fact when you say "The aspects all occur within a few seconds during a CD." Oh really, you mean it's set in stone that the only way to demolish a building is in a few seconds? There's no possiblity of setting off the charges gradually if the job requires it?
Justin, have you considered the possibility that the WTC buildings could have been demolished with explosives using methods that are different from your standard, commercial, controlled demolition? I have yet to hear anyone make this distinction in any forum. Have you considered that there might be quite a few differences between a commercial controlled demolition, and a clandestine, military style controlled demolition?
In the commercial variety, the building is abandoned, the interior of the building has been stripped, blueprints are available, and they have weeks available for planning. Since it's a commercial operation and profit the motive, the lower the cost of bringing down the building, the more profit for the business. In other words, there is every incentive to do the job in the most efficient, speedy way using the fewest pounds of explosives.
Now consider a scenario where there is very little prep time, the operation has to be done in secret, the budget is for all intents and purposes unlimited, and the final result has to appear to be something else. For example, perhaps instead of 2000 strategically placed, small charges over a few weeks, this operation uses 20 very large explosive charges placed over a couple of nights? What kind of access would be required, under what pretense, and how long would it take to place, say, 20 really powerful charges in the elevator shafts of the buildings, spaced every 100 ft apart going all the way up the buildings? I would add that my scenario perfectly jibes with the eyewitness accounts and the recorded radio transmissions by FDNY firefighers who were in the building and heard explosions.
I can't see any reason why your neat little list of "criteria for controlled demolition" has to take place in a specific order and within any particular time frame in the case of what is clearly a military-style operation (whether that be 19 stupid arabs, or some other actor). To think the way you do shows a lack of creatvity at best and is intellectually lazy at worst.
It also seems that few people in these debates are able to admit that the towers could have come down as a result of BOTH the plane impacts AND assistance from explosives (the aforementioned "black and white" logic). What an amazing thought: It's not one or the other, it's 36% plane impacts and fire, and 64% explosive charges.
You know there's something very, very wrong with this country when the word "truth" becomes a bad word and a form of insult. Think about that.
"this operation uses 20 very large explosive charges placed over a couple of nights"
Why not just 1 very, very, very large explosive charge?
You fucking idiot!
id say the only real hard evidence the truth movement has is Steven jones' analysis of the dust. i also havent found a plausible refutation of it either. Yours 'there was aluminium in the planes' is rather laughable, seeing as, if i remember correctly, it was mainly iron. Also, saying it was molten aluminium from the plane doesnt explain how it melted, or how there was so much of it....(im not a truther btw, just someone that has vaguely followed the whole debate as i am a bit of an internet junkie...)
btw; that whole MOAB etc post is just bloodly hilarious... he even goes into the reptilian alien god thing... wow, just wow...
You have not seen a refutation of Steven Jones' fraud, because you refuse to look for it. Steven Jones' analysis tests for the presence of SULFUR, and fraudulently concludes that if there is sulfur, therefore there must have been thermate.
Steven Jones is a liar. Steven Jones KNOWS -- because I told him -- that the gypsum used in drywall contains SULFUR.
So, what Steven Jones has detected is DRYWALL.
One of the most abundant building materials in any modern office building is DRYWALL..... a component of which is gypsum containing sulfur. So Steven Jones has detected DRYWALL.
Jack Stone
Anonymous: Modern aircraft are not constructed with iron. Look it up. Go to Boeing's website. The aircraft were made of alumnium, not iron. This is not a matter of opinion.
This is the problem with the 9/11 FALSER movement. You jump to conclusions BEFORE you do your homework.
How hard is it to get on the internet and discover that the aircraft were made of alumninum, not iron? HINT: Go to authoritative websites, like BOEING, not to kook websites.
You don't understand how aluminum melted in the middle of a raging fire? Are you kidding? You seriously want an answer to this? Look up the melting temperature of aluminum?
How much? Approximately 90 tons of aluminum per aircraft. The Boeing aircraft were 140 tons fully loaded, 30 tons of which was jet fuel. The aircraft was 110 tons without fuel. Most of the aircraft is aluminum.
Concerning the number of explosive devices required, this is another example of the insanity of the 9/11 Falser Movement.
THE ENTIRE STARTING POINT of the 9/11 Falser Movement is the alleged SMOOTH collapse of the WTC twin towers -- allegedly FASTER than the speed of gravity.
Steven Jones and Jim Fetzer others have explicitly said that the twin towers fell FASTER than the speed of free fall -- that is FASTER than gravity itself.
While this idea is patently absurd -- nothing can make buildings fall faster, particularly faster than gravity -- the only way that explosives could make the twin towers collapse SMOOTHLY and EVENLY is for explosives to be set at ALL 265 steel supports around the perimeter of the building, plus on the 47 internal supports.
That is on EACH FLOOR. So there would have to be more than 20,000 explosive devices on EACH of the twin towers.
If there were a single explosive or a few, then the explosion would cause the tower to TOPPLE OVER instead of falling smoothly down.
Could anyone please address the molten steel issue? Thx.
We can rip open every issue mentioned here. Let's start with collecting all mainstream newsreports over the last 30 years and see how much of them 1. corroborate over the years and 2. involve involvement of EXECUTED actions blaimed on terrorist who apparently were secret service employees. If you don't want to know then don't learn about what Gene Dois (Chip) Tatum has to say. Don't learn about what John Perkins has to say about being an Economic Hitman over decades and having stepped out. Don't learn about Victor Ostrovsky (figure it out yourselves who and what they were). Inslaw's PROMIS. Danny Casolaro. Bill Clinton's hitlist. I say, ignore all this and view 911 as an isolated issue. They, the real perpetrators, just love that.
"involvement of EXECUTED actions blaimed on terrorist who apparently were secret service employees" None. Zero.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
There was no molten steel. Steel loses 50% of its strength at 1000 degrees Fahrenheit and 80% of its strength at 1800 degrees Fahrenheit. Therefore ordinary fire would cause the collapse of the WTC -- as it has often done before in many other steel buildings. Moreover, steel grows when heated, causing the structure to warp and bend or shatter.
However, the aircraft was made up mostly of aluminum, and a large amount of the WTC twin towers was also aluminum. (A big part of the design of the WTC was extremely light weight to allow them to build it 110 feet high.)
Aluminum melts as low as 650 degrees Fahrenheit.
I meant 110 floors high, 1000 feet high.
Have any of you people checked out the site http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html? I highly recommend anyone seeking realistic theories to go and read what 'Ol Chris Brown has to say about this subject.
Why are you intereted in "realistic theories" instead of the truth? This dominates the 9/11 conspiracy nuts. They are not interested in what actually happened. They are interested in "realistic theories" of what COULD have happened (but didn't). "Realistic theories" is just another way of saying "FANTASY." You want to imagine a world in which the people you hate must be guilty of something. I am amazed at how often when I have shot down the "arguments" of 9/11 Falsers, they respond with some variation of "You don't think the government is capable of something like that?" As if the mere possibility is proof.
Wow! This Jack dude thinks like a Masonic plant...or an idiot. I worked for a demolition company. Building burned. Remove extraneous components. Steel frame intact. Reuse frame.
Hey, was that a human female I saw leaning against the superheated steel (aluminum?) column in that famous photograph of the WTC hole in the wall? Aluminum vs steel. Hmmm...shredded steel...hmmm.
Four...count 'em...four planes totally vaporized but for possibilities and innuendo.
Hey this is fun! Too bad all those dead people had to spoil it. Not too much fun for their families was it...or ever will be?
So your theory amounts to... "Yeah...so our security people (Marvin Bush anyone?) really fucked up so we should give them all a promotion for...uh...just doing their jobs...uh...the way they were told to do them."
Does Jack know he's a total idiot? Or is he just an ass licker trying to confuse the issue?
Patrick cm did his homework. Jack and anonymous...who do you think you're kidding...but yourselves? I'm a Canadian...not an anti-American. My father's parents came from the states. My mother is German. Her people have been used and abused enough too. I'm part aboriginal and concerned for the welfare of the poor and put upon.
It's rich against poor and 9-11 was just another excuse to tighten the chains. Calling down people like David Ray Griffins and Stephen Jones who saw it for what it actually was..."...uh...we...we had a bad day..." is tantamount to screaming "HEEL SLAVE! HEEL!"
God is watching, whether or not you want to believe. I can prove this for a fact. Have you seen the images in the stills of the falling ruins of WTC...in the smoke and dust? The fallen angels are not a myth, as I once thought. They're real! And they're laughing at suckers like you. Pat cm? Saved! Even if he never believed in God...God knows what's in his heart. He will fly!
Call me nuts. Whatever! I saw the light dude. And I didn't have to die to see it!
God knew what was in my heart and showed me the truth. So, patrick cm, even if you don't agree with me, or think I'm crazy for it, the goodness and wisdom of your heart will set you free. I know it!
Jack, wake up, please. Oh, yeah and mister anusonomous...it's not too late for you, either. Such is the forgiving nature of God. He forgave me because I chose the right path. The hard path.
But what about all the disease and war and death and suffering and misery and oh me oh my...what do I care when I know he's there and Heaven is a place more real than this! Years of suffering will be replaced with..."Oh God you card...you really had me going! I thought I was going to be in that wheelchair forever!"
Believe me, I wish it wasn't so. I don't want people to suffer. I don't want over-population to destroy us. I DON'T WANT AN ASTEROID TO WIPE US OUT BECAUSE WE'RE NOT PREPARED FOR IT!
This place is an illusion within an illusion within an illusion. It's just a movie...a play...a story. None of it is real. It's just a test. I know it for a fact.
Accept it or deny it. You have that choice. God gave you that.
Just a game, dudes. It's all just a game. The stakes are high...and the rewards are...yeaahgghh!...or...yeeehaw!
My friends believe me because I show them proof in the form of photographic evidence and music...my music. James Randi doesn't want anyone to see or hear that proof. That would cost him (his backer) a million bucks. Can't have that now, can we?
Your legal system is an extortion racket. Nobody should have to pay anyone to defend him or herself. Have you ever thought of that? If you are found guilty...then you should pay! No doubt! Your legal system (government) is as guilty as sin (busted). Jack, you like seeing innocent people jailed on trumped up charges? You like seeing the guilty get off scott free?
Jack's thinking, "...well...that's the price of freedom..."
Kevin's thinking, (name's Kevin, by the way) "No...that's the price of jumping to conclusions...or outright lying...if you know something that less gullible people don't. What do you know Jack. And anusonymous...what do you know?
This is what I know.
I saw a spotlight in the sky,
Now cross my heart and hope to die,
For I only witnessed this unique anomaly,
Because it illuminated the area around me,
A circle of light lit a small patch of ground,
Encompassing me without making a sound,
Yet authorities won't allow me to explain,
Because from the truth they have nothing to gain,
It's torture to not let me prove that I'm right,
When I can convince anyone that I saw the light,
But the ones who've abused their positions can't cope,
With the truth that will fill all of the poor people with hope.
If you think I made this poem up out of my little head without anything to inspire me to do so because many people have done so through the centuries to attempt to gain control over people and because you hate the idea of God and would prefer that...well I don't really care what you think if you think it's okay to hurt people.
If you think that God sucks even if he does exist because he created all of humanity's problems, et al, so he must've known that 9-11 was going to happen and why did he let it and who'll really give a shit a hundred years later and blah-blah blah-blah blah-blah blah...
Jack and anusonomous...and James Randi...you can choose not to suck...so why do you? Pat cm...you rule...along with those other wise people (Sybel Edmonds anyone?) and will definitely find out what reality truly is.
Can we hope to save some more?
I've been ill. I feel pain.
I suffer still. I am still sane.
Why show me? Why should I care? I know I'm free! I want to share!
Don't believe in God? Well, neither did I.
Think I'm very odd? It makes me want to cry.
I really don't care if you believe me or not, if you believe someone whose already been bought.
Here's reality. WTC 7. It collapsed because...uh...you choose to believe bullshit? "Oh no, it was seriously damaged!"
That's what I said. "YOU CHOOSE...TO BELIEVE...BULL...SHIT!"
Thank you.
MyMy...Busy aren't we. Has the idea ever crossed your collective
mind that you should be applying your energies toward finding
the physical evidence that might have escaped the smelters and
putting together an investigtion that is done in a legal manner
with real evidence and certified documentation. These are the
things that count when you get down to the nuts and bolts of it.
You know as well as I do that the NIST report is a distraction.
About 10,000,000 pages of irrelevent information for the most
part. How about it, You Debummers, do something real, a no pay
job that does the right thing. An open and independent
investigation is needed for this once great country to move on &
be recognised for being a shining example of Democracy instead
of a unilateral corporation ran by neo conservative idiologues.
To the guy who never worked at a demolition company, or he wouldn't be so dumb.... He wrote:
Wow! This Jack dude thinks like a Masonic plant...or an idiot. I worked for a demolition company. Building burned. Remove extraneous components. Steel frame intact. Reuse frame.
[CAPS USED TO DISTINGUISH WHO IS TALKING, NOT MEANT AS ANYTHING ELSE]
DID YOU TRY HITTING IT WITH 140 TONS FLYING AT 540 MILES PER HOUR? NO, DIDN'T THINK SO.
ARE YOU AWARE THAT KINETIC ENERGY INCREASES WITH THE SQUARE OF THE SPEED, SO AN AIRPLANE TRAVELING AT 540 MILES PER HOUR CONTAINS MORE ENERGY THAN ANY NON-NUCLEAR BOMB?
DID YOU SET OF A FUEL-AIR BOMB FROM 30 TONS OF JET FUEL INSIDE THE BUILDING? NO, DIDN'T THINK SO.
ARE YOU AWARE THAT THE FUEL-AIR BOMB IS THE MOST POWERFUL NON-NUCLEAR BOMB IN EXISTENCE, AND THE UN AND OTHERS ARE TRYING TO GET IT BANNED?
AND THAT IS WHAT RIPPED THE INTERIOR OF THE WORLD TRADE CENTER TO SHREDS.
Go back to your fantasy land.
TO GEEZER POWER:
Should we consider your fantasies, or reality?
The reality is that the local NYC firefighters and police, and medical personnel, scoured every scrap of rubble from the World Trade Center looking for even the smallest body part that might represent their buddie killed in the attack that Al Qaeada has repeatedly admitted planning and carrying out.
Body parts as small as 1/10th of a finger were combed out of the rubble, identified by DNA, and reassembled as much as possible to allow what was left of human beings to be given something approaching a burial.
The remains of the hijackers were found in the WTC rubble, prompting a huge protest from the 9/11 families. They were outraged at the possiblity that a piece of a hijacker who killed their loved ones might spend eternity buried with their victims. There were meticulous efforts to separate out the body parts of the hijackers to protect the sensibilities of the grieving families.
Even the tiniest momentos of lost victims were combed out of the rubble and, as much as possible, reunited with the families fothose who had been lost.
The rubble pile was owned by the NYC firefighters and police who refused to give up hope of finding at first a survivor and later a body they could identify and bury.
6 weeks later when they began to clear the site, debris was taken to a secure area made available, where medical personnel painstakingly examined every bit of rubble in search of even so much as a fingernail that might be used to identify the fate of those still missing and presumed dead (but whose fate was still unknown).
No evidence of anything was found other than the monstrous evil of your Islamic paymasters.
Jack said :"involvement of EXECUTED actions blaimed on terrorist who apparently were secret service employees" None. Zero."
What newspapers do you read?
How many independent analysis of all terror events have you seen? FOOL ME TWICE, 7/7 Ripple Effect, Oaklahoma Bombing three of them.
How many arrests of terrorists happened to be on secret sevice payroll (mainstream media reports!)?
What is your comment on the 1993 WTC attack and reports of FBI involvement in which real bombs were delivered instead of false for the puprose of red-hand arrests.
In how much could all truth movements be considered one organized conspiracy against the US government? How well would you consider its organization?
Your rambling comment proves my point. I DO NOT SAY THAT TO BE UNKIND OR AD HOMINEM. But conspiracy theories are the product of confused thinking. Precision exposes the absurdity of conspiracy theories. Conspiracy theories require muddled thinking and a jumbled mess of ideas in order to exist. Logic clearly shows the conspiracy theories to be nuts. You ask: "How many arrests of terrorists happened to be on secret sevice payroll (mainstream media reports!)?" I am not sure what you are getting at, but the answer is NONE.
What is happening is that you are a victim of the "KOOK-GO-ROUND" One silly comment is posted on a website dressed up to look like a newsletter or newsoutlet, written by a conspiracy theorist. Then all the other conspiracy theorists cite to one another as if they are authoritative. But when you track it back to the beginning there is no one there. There is NO original source. It is all just made up out of hot air.
I think I understand why there is a need to believe the US Government was responsible for the 9-11 attacks.
Senario 1: The US Government is complicit in the destruction of the WTC killing thousands of civilians, restricted civil liberties, declared war on Iraq.
US Government is sinister but intelligent and well organised.
Senario 2: A bunch of well funded, fanatical Islamic fundamentalists who are willing to sacrifice themselves in a global jihad to kill as many non-muslim infidels as they can, in the name of Allah anywhere, anytime, by any means, and a US Government that is slow, disorganised and incompetent enough to allow them to do it again.
Scenario 1, quite possibly is a one time deal - once the government gets what it wants, it's pretty much over. There is no need for another 9-11. All we got is a bunch of conspiry theories and eroded civil rights.
Scenario 2 is INFINITELY more scary. There is every possibility that another 9-11 may happen and the government is too incompetent to stop it from happenning.
I know which scenario would help me sleep better.
I don't understand why people even take a side on issues such as these. To me, it could have gone either way. Any evidence suggesting what happened in either scenario can be manipulated to fit that sides agenda. It really just boils down to a particular persons beliefs. And what happens when you challenge beliefs? Hostility and violence. FACTS are universally accepted. Facts such as the sky is blue, 2+2 is 4. There is no FACT as to what happened on 9/11. If there was, there wouldn't be opposing viewpoints. This isn't much different than a Christian saying God exists and an atheist saying he doesn't.
To Outside Observer, BINGO! Well said! (That is, well explained.) It is far less scary to criticize people like Bush & Cheney whom you KNOW deep down are not going to hurt you, than to face up to real dangers and real threats. Someone once said (actually said it often) that the greatest proof that there was no government conspiracy around 9/11 (other than to cover up their incompetence as bureaucrats) is the fact that Dylan Avery is still alive. And not just tht he wasn't killed NOW that people know who he is. But if there was a conspiracy, his video would have been deleted within seconds after first appearing and he would have vanished, while he was still a nobody. Yet, there he is, untouched. Truth is we know that Bush and Cheney are not going to do anything to you, no matter what names you call them or what outrageous accusations you make against them. On the other hand, draw a cartoon of Mohammed, and you may end up with your throat slit.
To Anonymous May 29: You are on several different levels at once, really: Yes, you are right, in general. But there is a lot more evidence of the public (not government, but highly public) experience of what happened on 9/11 than you suggest. However, there is also a deep desire here to know the unknowable. Perhaps we all want to LIVE an INdiana Jones movie or CSI episode. Everyone hungers for the drama and importance of discovering that one tidbit that proves that the entire system is false. A need for meaning and for importance. So it is indeed a bit of a search for what can never be known. But I firmly believe that the burden of proof is on those who argue for a secret, hidden conspiracy different from what we all saw. Remember that WE TOLD THE GOVERNMENT WHAT HAPPENED, not the other way around. Stewardesses, newsmen, firefighters, police (local govt, but not the type the conspiracy theorists have in mind), airport crews and radar operators, airline counter clerks who checked the terrorists in, hotel managers, rental car clerks, flight instructors, and on and on. We the public told the Federal government what happened on 9/11.... not the other way around.
Good job. I thought I was the only one out there who saw holes in their analysis.
Well...Nevermind the fact that I was supposed to be on the plane that augered into the pentagon (a nightmare and financial reasons being the reasons for my change of plans). A major hole to the missile theory.
Our govt has done shady things in the past. Iran contra and the Bay of Pigs being two examples. But this wasn't one of them.
Maybe I'm a bit daft and ignorant, but doesn't everyone want the same thing? Let me exemplify it with a question about a small 9-11 issue; "The Pentagon videos":
Someone states:
- "We want all the videos showing the Pentagon crash to be released!"
[A valid opinion for a citizen, to want to know as much as there is to know.]
The common responce however, is:
- "Oh, you are one of those nutcases...?!"
[In rethoric, this is a non-valid response, called Ad Hominem, (ie an attack on the person). Which has no true or false value. It is something that can well be left at the gossip-parties for old ladies and at kindergarten.]
Why people has not risen up and stated this little sentence in one Voice, is amazing. The people were fed 5 frames, showing just about nothing and that should be enough?
Stop the slandering and work together...
It's not about "Truthers" versus "Sheeple".
It is about the PEOPLE making sure the GOVERNMENT does what it should.
Make sure YOU are not being led astray.
(I'm not a truther, nor a sheeple... I just look at all the different stories... and there are as many coming from the US government, as there are coming from the people. This says NOTHING more, than that there is an URGENT need for a REAL investigation.)
Anonymous wrote: Someone states:
- "We want all the videos showing the Pentagon crash to be released!"
[A valid opinion for a citizen, to want to know as much as there is to know.]
ME: Well, it is only a valid opinion if the person DOES NOT KNOW that all of the videos have already been released. Of the videos that were grabbed by the FBI, almost none of them were from cameras pointed at the Pentagon. People do not install security cameras to take random views of the neighborhood, but to view THEIR OWN property. It is also illegal to have a camera permanently pointed at a military installation, including the Pentagon. All videos have been released. And everyone who specializes in 9/11 issues knows this, and is probably lying to you if they don't admit it.
LARRY, my sister also had a nightmare the night before 9/11. Her husband was in D.C. and she woke him up and insisted that he NOT fly. But she did not know that her friend Barbara Olson was going to be flying that day, and had no way of knowing to warn her.
By the way, people also have difficulty in this discussion because they are ignorant of te semi-URBAN environment around the Pentagon. Across I-395, there is massive development, office buildings, high-rise apartment complexes, shopping centers, etc.
However, these are separated from the Pentagon by I-395 which is RAISED UP on a massive earth berm.
So ground-level security cameras at the entrances of these buildings (even if they were pointed in the right direction) cannot see the Pentagon. They cannot see through I-395, which blocks the view from ground level. And there are no such cameras on upper level floors.
However, THOUSANDS of people watched live, with their own eyeballs, as Flight 77 flew into the Pentagon. 4 major highways wrap around the Pentagon, with traffic moving very SLOWLY during rush hour at that time.
Journalists in the (then) USA TODAY building watched live, with their own eyes, as Flight 77 flew into and hit the Pentagon.
People in Crystal City watched Flight 77 fly past their high-rise apartment complex windows and then crash into the Pentagon.
People need to go visit Crystal City near the Pentagon, and take a look around, before saying stupid things.
So you don't "believe" that Clinton had "sexual relations" with "that woman"?
You believe everything in the 9/11 comission report?.
Just sit down on your couch, worship your government, and watch your TV. Everything will be fine for you. Those black uniformed thugs on the streets are there for your safety.
Since you posted as "Anonymous" I don't know if you will even see my reply. I hope you do.
I sincerely hope that you can learn what is defective about your thinking...
What the HECK do these things have to do with each other? Somehow you have fallen into a culture where you have mashed a bunch of unrelated issues together in a ball.
I sincerely hope you can see your way out of this mess.
Your argument is that if one thing happened therefore another thing happened? What's up with that? What does Clinton having sex have to do with 9/11?
Oh, I see what's going on in your mind. But do you? You are arguing the entirely crazy philosophy "IF IT COULD HAVE HAPPENED, THEREFORE IT DID HAPPEN."
That is crazy. A man could have robbed the bank on the corner. BUT HE DIDN'T. Someone else did. A husband could have cheated on his wife... but he didn't.
The mere possibility that something might have happened is not proof that it did.
No, I don't believe that the government has told us everything about 9/11, NOR SHOULD IT. There are lots of things that we do not want our enemies to know.
DO you realize that we were listening to Osama Bin Laden's telephone calls until the New York Times blew the secret and reported it? As soon as it was publicly reported, Bin Laden stopped using his satellite phone.
So the government had BETTER NOT tell us everything it knows, or our enemies will have too much information.
Also, the bureaucrats of course are covering their own behinds to hide their failures. But no one but Al Qaeda (and Saddam Hussein's hijack-training airplane center in Iraq) had anything to do with 9/11.
But why is it that you are incapable of (1) disliking your government while (2) realizing that they did not cause 9/11?
Why do you assume that the government must be guilty of 9/11 simply because you don't like the government?
The fact that you don't like them does not mean they are guilty of anything.
FACTS ARE FACTS. You confuse facts with EMOTIONS.
lol.. the Muslims wanted to attack the US because the US isn't Muslim?!
Guys.. give it up.. you're never going to "catch Osama".. because there is no Osama.. he's sitting in a luxury hotel paid for by the US and CIA, along with the rest of this wealthy family.
It's too bad you people have to live off such fantasy garbage, spoon fed by your government-- the rest of the world groans every time we hear another "Bush speech".
I can understand why though.. since now you need something to live for, since your money has been squandered on "wars on terror" and other such nonsense.. trillions of dollars wasted on bullets with no results to show (you're at the same security level as day 1).
Oil is at an all time high, your mortgage binge over, the credit feast is also bust, and apart from an imaginary enemy to keep things going, what else is there for you??
Take a deep breath, and take a long long break.. besides, before you know it, China will be stomping on face, and you will need to invent a new myth to keep the wheels of society turning.
Talk about someone who lives in a fantasy world, you have a rich fantasy life indeed.
Why do you question why Al Qaeda did what they did, when they admit that they did it? We have the DNA of the body parts of all 19 hijackers recovered from the WTC and the Pentagon. We have their hotel reservations and car rentals as they moved around the country. Their rental car was still in the parking lot at the airport, with their extra luggage inside, containing martial arts manuals, hand-held GPS manuals, how to fly a Boeing 757 manuals and Islamic terrorist literature. Mohammad Atta's checked luggage on the plane missed the connection in Boston and turned up to be examined.
We know 1000 times more about the hijackers than we know about your life.
Why do you ignore hard facts to engage in your own fantasies about "why?"
Yes, Islam commands Muslims to force all people on Earth to convert to Islam or to kill them. IF ONE PERSON ON EARTH IS NOT A MUSLIM ALLAH IS OFFENDED. Islam commands Muslims to kill or convert every last human being on Earth. If they miss just one, Allah will punish them. If they kill or convert people to Islam, Allah will reward them with 72 virgins in paradise for all eternity.
If you really believed that God would reward you for killing God's enemies with eternity in paradise, you wouldn't be tempted?
Those 19 hijackers expected to be rewarded with an eternity in paradise.
But more important, they wanted to convince fools like you that America should pull out of the Middle East and abandon those millions of poor people to the ruthless and vicious dictatorship of Islamic Jihad.
And they wanted to show that hardcore Wahabbi Islamic terror can defeat the USA, to rally other Jihadis to rise up and take control of the world.
Can they succeed? NO! But that won't stop them from trying. The fact that they have no hope of achieving their goal, changes nothing. They are still going to try.
Boy do these speculators have a hunger for acceptance. Or maybe just the need to be in the right on everything.
Anyway, I remember a quote (from X-Files no less) saying "Truth is as subjective as reality."
Truth can be manipulated in many ways, That's why the CTs are so adamant of there positions, no matter how fantastical others find it.
Guess what I'm saying is that the "Truth" of what happened on 9/11 is irrelevant. The facts and data collected are whats important.
I love this. First the buildings can fall all on their own in a pancake (or whatever) fashion -- BUT WAIT -- they couldn't have been brought down by demolition because that would require SO MUCH EXPLOSIVES all up and down the core and perimeter of the building that it could not go unnoticed!
Anyone else see a problem with this 'logic'?
Jon Moseley said "Islam commands Muslims to kill or convert every last human being on Earth."
This is not quite true. There are religious leaders of Islam that teach these things, just as there were Christian leaders that taught these things. Only back then, just after the first mellinium, the pope told the christian world that if one fought in the Crusades, all your sins were forgiven.
True Islam embraces secularism. When Saladin captured Jerusalem from the Christians, he opened up the places of worship for all faiths.
The Koran shares the same origins as the Bible and the Torah. Jesus is a phophet in Islamic teachings. The Koran shares the same stories about Abraham, Noah, Moses and the 10 commandments as the Bible.
Religious leaders in Europe and the rest of the modern "1st world" no longer has much political clout and power. In the "3rd world", where people have not the benefit of an education, religious leaders still teach their fundamentalist brand of "Islam" to stir hatred for their own ambitions. Ultimately, it is about power, control and possession of land - not Islam.
On Sept 11 2001, 4 planes were hijacked. Long before that day, a Islam was too.
Just for the record, I am a Christian.
Congratulations!
I too wasted a year or so of my life in league with the tinfoil hat brigade. Then I got better.
Speculation and suggestion will always take a back seat to real science though. Just look at the thriving homeopathy swindle.
Post a Comment