Today on Blogcritics
Home » Painful 9/11 Truth

Painful 9/11 Truth

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Many technical analyses cast doubt on the official explanation of the collapse of three World Trade Center buildings, including those presented by an impressive new group: Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. More difficult than discovering the truth, however, is convincing most of the public to accept the bitter truth.

Americans easily block out painful truths. Powerful societal forces keep much of the population distracted and uninterested in complex issues. Entertainment-oriented mainstream media contribute to mass ignorance. And the political establishment often buries the truth, uses propaganda and manipulates citizens. Intelligent, strong-willed people can fight all these.

But on a deeper level, many truths are blocked psychologically, because they produce too much pain. This results when truths sharply disagree with strongly held beliefs. The conflict produces cognitive dissonance that can block full acceptance of the disturbing truth. People fall victim to self-manipulation and self-delusion. Truths are dismissed and false beliefs remain embedded.

When it comes to 9/11, we face the strong belief that only al-Qaeda caused 9/11. But analyses by many experts reveal the collapse of the three WTC buildings was not caused by the two airplanes exploding into the twin towers. Without getting into details that one can spend many hours examining on a number of websites, the general view is that the buildings were brought down by controlled demolition.

If correct, the immediate reaction is like a cosmic big bang. It would have taken considerable effort by a number of people with expertise and access to the buildings to rig them so that they could be intentionally collapsed when the two jets hit the towers. Tough questions flood in: Who could have engineered all this? Could foreign agents accomplish such complex actions – and if they did, why not take credit for it? If Americans did it, why would they intentionally inflict inevitable mass death and devastation? Worse, they seemingly knew about the plan to fly the jets into the towers.

Post-9/11, why have the government and official investigations not come to the same controlled demolition conclusion? This makes sense if the government was involved.

Pull one string and the whole 9/11 story unravels as your imagination triggers unending questions. Can Americans support a reinvestigation and rethinking of the 9/11 event? Or would they rather avoid even more pain and preserve the official account that places all blame on al-Qaeda?

After all, the new truth would be so shocking that we would have to question our political and government system. Could there have been such malevolence somewhere in our government? Did a monumental conspiracy push us into attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq? Did petroleum and corporate interests shape 9/11?

Like other groups, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth wants a new, honest and comprehensive study that considers all the evidence for controlled demolition. As a former engineering professor with growing skepticism about the official WTC story I share their concerns. First, let the technical truth emerge. Then, if necessary, cope with the inevitable political, conspiracy and other questions. But let us not allow a possible painful truth block the primary task of determining once and for all what caused the collapse of the WTC towers and building no. 7.

If there were non-Muslim forces – possibly U.S. government ones – that played a major role in the WTC catastrophe, then let us have the courage to face the truth. Suppose some element of our government played a secret, awful role. If we do not uncover it, then we are vulnerable to repeat nefarious and unimaginable activity in the future – possibly to impact the 2008 presidential election. Discovering 9/11 truth would enshrine the wisdom of the old adage: the truth hurts. That means suffering the pain of revealing lies and cover-ups. Mourning over the deaths of building victims and heroic first responders would expand with new anger. And another reason to hate and oppose the Iraq war would surface.

If those that believe the official 9/11 story – especially elected officials – trust their views, then let them support a serious effort to test the validity of the controlled demolition hypothesis. If they fear and reject doing so, then let us see that as suspicious and unacceptable.

To sum up, horrific possible answers can cause us to shun a question. But clearing our minds of the fear of painful truths is essential to clearing our nation of destructive lies. Otherwise, we stay stuck in a delusional democracy.

Powered by

About Joel S. Hirschhorn

Formerly full professor Univ. of Wisconsin, Madison, and senior official Congressional Office of Technology Assessment and National Governors Association. Author of four nonfiction books and hundreds of articles.
  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Painful truth? More like painfully delusional. For those not eager to prove themselves as gullible as the author of this piece I’d recommend some reading at Debunking 911.

    Dave

  • JustOneMan

    oh no….not this crap again!!!!

  • John

    Dude that debunking page has been debunked so many times, it’s silly.. Me, like MANY others, will never go back to believing the “Official 911 story” which you guys ALWAYS try and shove down our throats.

    Buildings made of concrete and steel can’t just pulverize to dust from a fire burning in less then in hour. Use common sense.

    And why did NORAD stand down?

    Face it.. 9/11 was a false flag attack.

  • http://parodieslost.typepad.com Mark Schannon

    I think you need more evidence to support your theory than a “trust me, there’s lots of stuff on other websites.” A claim this unusual (like the JFK conspiracy theorists) needs substantiation.

    In Jameson Veritas

  • moonraven

    As proof that the OP is correct about the unwillingness of the folks in the US to face the truth: the firestorm that has occurred every time I have indicated that only Dick Cheney had motive, opportunity and means to coordinate 9/11–not any foreigner and certainly not a foreigner living supposedly in a cave in Afghanistan with a dialysis machine.

    Cheney had perhaps a little help from George Bush Padre–who also raked in big bucks because of 9/11.

    It’s so obvious anyone living outside the US saw it on 9/11 itself.

    So why is everyone hiding his head in the sand and demanding evidence, when simple logic indicates who did it, why and how?

    You tell me–never had my head there for one moment. Nor in my ass….

  • http://www.truthcult.com E Ryno

    There is tons of evidence that the towers were brought down with controlled demolition and zero evidence that fire brought them down.

    As far as JFK, guess you missed E Howard Hunt’s death bed confession in Rolling Stone’s April 07 edition. Google it and read it.

    How anyone can believe anything that the bush cabal pushes at us through their billion dollar pr expenditures is beyond me.

  • http://www.robot-of-the-week.com Christopher Rose

    My understanding is that a controlled demolition of three such large buildings would have taken several weeks of work to install enough explosives.

    Hmm, what to believe? A bunch of terrorists made a daring attack on the USA or there was a conspiracy at the highest level of the US Government to stage an atrocity against their own people for commercial motives without anybody noticing a thing and managing to keep it a secret too?

    I’m no fan of the Bush 2 administration and would be very surprised, in a sick way rather impressed, if anybody associated with it had either the brains or the balls to pull off such a thing. Lacking any inside knowledge, I’m not saying categorically that they didn’t but it sure seems implausible.

  • moonraven

    What you fail to get is that it is the ONLY plausible scenario.

    Besides, the CIA has had LOTS of experience doing those controlled demolitions. And they had an office in the WTC–until a few days before 9/11. It doesn’t take that much intelligence–pun intended–when you have all the time in the world and experts in the task on the payroll.

  • lLumpy

    Do the 911 loonies never give up? The fact that supposedly educated people continue to believe and perpetuate this crap is a aad commentary on our education system and general lack of common sense in our population.

    Have these people never even seen a controlled demolition? There’s video of the towers going down and it bears no resemblance at all to controlled demo.

    And here’s another hint. demolition explosives don’t generate enough heat by themselves to melt steel any more than jet fuel fires do. And the magnesium residue is consistent with the level in concrete not what would be there if thermite were used.

    Here’s an experiment for u to try. Take a small steel rod and start bending it back and forth until it breaks. Did u use thermite or bombs to do it? No. Torsion pressure was enough to break it and to generate enough heat to soften it substantially. +hat do u think happens when all the potential energy of a 767 moving at over 300mph is transfered into some steel beams and then fire causes more and more loose material to start sliding down them. Friction and tortion are more than enough to soften the metal.

  • Doug Hunter

    “The fact that supposedly educated people continue to believe and perpetuate this crap”

    Many conspiracy theorists I know in person seem to be rather proud of their intellect. I think believing a conspiracy enables to them to think they’re smarter, that they can see things that others can’t. Basically it’s an ego trip for them.

    Others just spread the lies for propaganda purposes, scaring the sheeple over to their side. Take your pick on the poster of this article.

  • Clavos

    From the author’s bio at the bottom of the article:

    “Author of Delusional Democracy…”

    Good enough for me.

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    Christopher gets to the heart of it. I’d believe that someone in the Bush administration might suggest something like the WTC attack, but pulling it off would be completely beyond them, and pulling it off AND keeping the hundreds involved in it silent all this time. Utterly impossible.

    Dave

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    Bah, humbug!

  • http://www.futonreport.net/ Matthew T. Sussman

    We may need a garbage bag of popcorn to see how the comments unfold here.

    Butter, anyone?

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    I think excessive butter residue from microwaved popcorn is what weakened the columns in the WTC.

    Dave

  • Clavos

    That’s why you never want to yell “Butter!!” in a crowded theater.

  • http://www.futonreport.net/ Matthew T. Sussman

    Descendants of Orville Reddenbacher have just been put on the No Fly list.

  • http://www.morethings.com/log Al Barger

    Yes, a classic dilemna: who am I gonna believe, Joel Hirschorn or my own lying eyes. The conspiracy theories here are six kinds of stupid right on the face. We KNOW exactly the names of those who did the deed and where they came from. We know HOW they did it. We got it on VIDEO.

    Yet, polls seem to indicate that something like 25% of the American public believe some form of an inside job conspiracy theory. Yet they are allowed to vote, and influence public policy. And their votes count as much as mine.

    Parker and Stone summed it up nicely on South Park by concluding that, yes, 25% of the country are retarded.

  • Polly

    The Bush gang doesn’t have the organizational skills to have had anything to do with bringing down the twin towers. They even faked their role in the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. Every move made by the US since Clinton left office has been orchestrated by 10 Downing Street. There’s a sucker born every minute in the US.

  • Polly

    Parker and Stone are way off the mark. 90% of the population is low fuctioning and 7% are just getting by.

  • http://911movement.org CB_Brooklyn

    A 9/11 lawsuit is being filed by former Chief Economist of the US Dept of Labor, Dr Morgan Reynolds. The US District Court in Southern NY recently unsealed the case and Reynolds’ attorney, Jerry Leaphart, is now notifying the Defendants.

    Some of the Defendants include Boeing, American Airlines, and United Airlines.

    See here for unsealed case PDF:
    Click here

  • Doug Hunter

    Another reason we seriously need reform of our legal system. Regulation by litigation is getting very old and extremely intrusive.

  • medicis

    It is interesting that so many who attack the folks who believe 9/11 was a false flag characteristically rely upon ridicule, derision and ad hominem attacks. It is also interesting that failing to achieve credibility using the former, they then utilize (well-bunked) pseudo-scientific criticisms if they attempt any arguments at all.

    The U.S. as well as other nations have a long history of using false flag attacks to compel their populaces into wars – typically for the financial benefit of an elite few. At the expense of the people in terms of money, resources and dead sons and daughters. Unwittingly, citizens make such sacrifices over and over again because they are so easily manipulated by fear. And it is also the fear engendered by having to confront the possibility that much of everything they thought they ‘knew’ about their country and government is also a lie that sends them retreating back into their safe consensus trance. That perpetuates the lie. And they will do everything they can to protect it.

    The approximate 33% of Americans who have been courgeous enough to confront the lie have awakened to the realization that Americans have been duped into supporting wars in two countries for the theft of oil resources in service of the neocon dreams of global hegemony; i.e., the “unipolar world”. That the next illegal war of aggression for resources will be directed against Iran. That they have been duped and terrified into giving up essential Constitutional rights in service of the false and endless ‘war on terror’. None of this would have been possible without the psyop event known as 9/11.

    There was a good reason why Orwell had the ‘people’ in Animal Farm represented by Sheep. “The farm animals who inhabit the Manor Farm are mistreated and abused by Farmer Jones. The animals rebel, expel Jones, and take over the farm, which they rename Animal Farm. Soon, however, the pigs (who represent the party bosses) begin to take special privileges for themselves, e.g. extra food. They enlist the farm’s dogs as enforcers to put down any dissent, and they teach the sheep (rank and file) to speak the party line on demand. ”

    ‘Sheep’ is indeed an apt descriptor for those who can’t find the courage to honestly examine the events of 9/11 and who can only endlessly repeat the ‘party line’. Of course, it is not entirely the sheep’s fault. They have been endlessly indoctrinated by a main stream media that endlessly parrots the Pigs’ official line or otherwise distracts them with pablum about Paris Hilton, the girl in Aruba and Michael Jackson; i.e., the created ‘sensation’ of the moment.

    To see a listing of courageous Americans – Senior Military, Intelligence Service, Law Enforcement, and Government Officials; Engineers and Architects; Pilots and Aviation Professionals; University Professors; Survivors and Family Members; Entertainment and Media Professionals who have been courageous enough to voice their criticisms of the ‘Official Government Conspiracy Theory’ go to Patriots Question 9/11

    And remember, 33% equals about 100 million of us.
    dr rdw
    forensic neuropsychologist

  • Clavos

    Oy, these people are tiresome.

  • http://www.robot-of-the-week.com Christopher Rose

    Not only tiresome but speaking with forked tongues.

    I don’t think it would have been possible for a major project as the deliberate blowing up of three buildings with explosives would have been possible to achieve without anybody noticing. Nor do I believe it would have been possible to maintain a secret of such enormity.

    So what if 100 million Americans believe it? Even more of them believe in imaginary superbeings! Americans spend too long working to habe enough time to think about anything. Productivity is the enemy of the people!

    Mwuahahahahahahaa

  • Nancy

    Thank you, Medicis. My take is, if there is no conspiracy, then why should anyone balk at a real, unbiased investigation by non-partisan, non-administration-appointed experts with no political or financial axes to grind? Furthermore, if there were no conspiracy, then why did Bush & Cheney refuse to be interviewed, except together, and not under oath – if they didn’t have to coordinate stories & didn’t intend to lie thru their teeth? There’s a whole book of unanswered questions & iffy conditions that basically rendered the “official” 9/11 investigation report suspect & invalid to say the least. If, as they claim, there is nothing awry with 9/11 as reported, then do those who don’t believe there’s a problem with the original report kick up such a fuss? Wouldn’t a second, more thorough & independent investigation – enforced by subpoenas, lawsuits, impeachment, or jail time if necessary against certain administration holdouts – wouldn’t that just prove them right, & silence the conspiracy nuts once & for all? That alone, I should think, would be worth it.

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    Stephen Colbert was a rerun last night where he had on the editor of The Skeptic who in about 30 seconds managed to lay out the essence of why these conspiracy freaks are so nutty and he did it quite effectively. In particular he pointed to one consistent lie they base a lot of their arguments on, which somneone on here mentioned earlier, the idea that it was a controlled demolition because the towers fell from the top down, but of course if you go and look at films of controlled demolitions they look nothing like the WTC collapse and they all fall from the bottom up, not the top down.

    Dave

  • http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com Pat Curley

    Isn’t there some sort of “full disclosure” required at Blog Critics? You know, some sort of “By the way, I belong to this crackpot group which I am praising so profusely.”

    AE911Truth

    I’d love to see your response to NIST, Joel, but you seem to have decided that you’d rather talk about cognitive dissonance and how hard it is to get other folks to join the nutter parade. No surprise there, though; nobody in the 9-11 Denial Movement ever ends up dealing in their specialty.

    Ask Richard Gage for me if he requires that the steel in the buildings he designs be fireproofed, and if he does, ask him why? After all, we all know fire can’t bring down a structural steel building (never mind that Kader Toy Factory or the Enigma Business Park). So why would he require fireproofing?

    The truth hurts, indeed.

  • Nancy

    The point is, this administration more than other other in the past 100 years has lied, cheated, & otherwise misled so consistently about so much so often, that even if they ARE completely innocent, at least half the population can’t or won’t believe anything they say. 33% believe the administration did it. Over 50% think the administration may not have done it themselves, but did know about it beforehand & failed or refused to do anything to prevent it. Their only defenders are the usual hard-core tiny minority of right-wing BushCo apologists. Even people like my neighbor – a staunch GOP conservative – think there’s something rotten in DC/Denmark & that the 9/11 Commission report is not telling the truth. If HE is doubtful, then the entire thing is doubtful, since he’s usually one of the Faithful.

    As I said, I should think the detractors would support such a re-investigation if only for once & for all to shut up those who think BushCo did it.

    And…why would it have been difficult to plant explosives as needed? No one but those involved would have known it was being done. They had all the time in the world to get it done without anyone being the wiser. When you see maintenance teams working in a large building, do you stop & analyze what they’re doing & why? Or do you just go on your way, assuming they’re there for valid reasons? Or do you even notice them to begin with? For most, such people simply fade into the walls, as not being a detail worth noticing. Again, some of the more recent accelerants can & do produce those kinds of extreme reactions, and are remarkably compact. No one need be seen trundling huge kegs of chemicals around – and again, if they are, who’s going to stop & wonder at it, if a maintenance worker is seen wheeling a 55-gal. drum of some unknown substance down a corridor? Do you? I don’t, & I doubt I ever would. My point being, you don’t need an army to have set up the situation, nor would there have been any need for secrecy, for that matter. In fact, the more openly it was done, the better. Where else can you better hide a leaf than in a forest?

    In any event, I think a second, more thorough & independent investigation couldn’t hurt, & might be inestimably valuable as much for what it didn’t find as for what it might.

  • http://pleasestopstampingonmyhead.blogspot.com/ Colin Ricketts

    I’ve been amazed that someone is that bothered by the conspiracy theories that they’ve been spraypainting the web adress of 911thetruth all over Cardiff! (Capital of Wales in the United Kingdom)… Which was enough to make me take a squint at it and the linked Loose Change film… All the evidence I saw seemed pretty circumstantial and, to be honest, so far beyond my knowledge of building collapse, aviation etc as to be SOMETHING I AM NOT QUALIFIED TO JUDGE. Is a reinvestigation a campaign issue in the US? Perhaps it should be if Nancy’s figures are correct.

  • Nancy

    It’s an issue only among those who find the Commission report upsetting enough to want to know the truth, as the author says. Most people don’t seem to want to know, but would rather go on suspecting the worst but unable to definitively prove it, which to my mind is inconsistant as well as illogical. As for the politicians, they don’t want to talk about anything that isn’t about themselves and/or aggrandizing themselves or their respective parties, while the administration would prefer to deep-6 the entire issue, & then some, for obvious reasons.

    I suspect the truth lies somewhere in between the two camps, & that a more thorough & impartial investigation will never happen, because too many rich & powerful people would be implicated or at least exposed as being incompetent if not criminally complicit. But at least, as I say, it might put paid to the rampant sublevel rumormongering among the majority. As it is, it’s already assumed urban myth proportions that, unlike most urban myths, does have a serious & adverse effect on citizens views of government & its trustworthiness as well as ability to protect them.

  • http://www.robot-of-the-week.com Christopher Rose

    If anyone has ever seen a demolition on TV, the explosives strapped onto or drilled into the buildings support columns are pretty hard to miss. To say nothing of the miles of cabling. C’mon folks, let’s try and use a little common sense here…

  • http://pleasestopstampingonmyhead.blogspot.com/ Colin Ricketts

    And how do you sleep at night Dave, Polly and Christopher? Believing your Government is well-capable of dreaming of a massive attack on its own civilians but too dim to organise it! ;O)

    Has it reached Kennedy proportions yet? And, it would be interesting to know how many Americans believe what about that granddaddy of conspiracy theories… The CIA in the billiards room with the mafia’s lead pipe?

    Princess Diana’s death remains a magnet for conspiracy theorists too – killed by MI5 or 6 at the behest (or at least a “Who will rid me of this turbulent Princess” type outburst from someone) of the royal family to stop her marrying a Muslim is one popular one.

  • Nancy

    Actually, I could well believe that some newspaper set it up (Diana’s demise, that is, not 9/11 … well, on second thought, maybe that too) in order to have something to make journalistic/sensationalistic hay out of for a long, long, loooooong time. There’s some people I wouldn’t put ANYTHING past.

  • http://www.robot-of-the-week.com Christopher Rose

    Oi, Ricketts, no! Ain’t my bleeding government.

  • http://pleasestopstampingonmyhead.blogspot.com/ Colin Ricketts

    Sorry Christopher but I do not consider Red Scum fans to be citizens of the United Kingdom, I am sure you understand ;o) (We’ve got minus three!)

    British newspaper The Daily Express, over which Dodi Al Fayed’s father Mohamedd seems to have some sway runs a Diana front page what seems like every day – usually concerning some new revelation… Still, we are due to get an inquest soonish – although the fact that two judges have already stood down from that onerous duty will no doubt fuel even more craziness…

  • Kurzberg

    The towers were demolished from the top down. The outer core columns were blown near the welds by rc, accessed from the elevator shafts under cover of the ACE elevator renovation project.

    Mossad was the contractor, not CIA. Urban Moving Systems handled the explosives. The George Washington Bridge was not a target. The UMS van was relocating RDX when it was stopped. Dan Rather reported this.

  • Doug Plumb

    I hope that 9 11 wakes more people up to the eminent peril we face. 9 11 is only the tip of a huge iceberg of crimes and acts that could only be considered as “beyond the pale”.

    When you learn about DU, the UN sex slave operation, fluorinated water, the secretive North American Union (fascism), Agenda 21 (human sacrafices for entertainment), banks breaking 3rd world countries, war crimes the drug dealing & money laundering, the 911 criminal act pales in comparison.

    All of these weeds have one common root. Private banks print our money then lend it to governments at face value. Their profits from this fund the think tanks & focus groups that direct government and create culture.

    Monetary reform is the true cause we must all embrace. We can have things much better and much easier than times before this neoliberal agenda became obvious.

    Watch “The Money Masters” free on google video.

  • Clavos

    “As I said, I should think the detractors would support such a re-investigation if only for once & for all to shut up those who think BushCo did it.”

    You’re kidding, right Nancy??

    Have the Kennedy conspiracists shut up yet???

  • moonraven

    As the 6th anniversary of the US Reichstag Fire bears down on folks in the US, questioning that official version is simply IN THE AIR (pax, Phil Collins).

    There are a number of reasons, but the primary one is that most folks are now finally waking up to how they have been suckered out of their basic rights by a criminal regime.

    I would like to hope that the Long Weekend of the Deliberately Brain-dead Mall Rats in over. But, as a character in the latest Paul Auster novel, The Brooklyn Follies, said: “I will see it when I believe it”.

    And that quote, from the novel that I haven’t finished yet but which I assume will end more or less on 9/11, is the heart of the issue.

    As the OP indicated, folks simply don’t want to believe that THEIR government–the one THEY put in office and CONTINUE to support (although I think probably the last rats on the sinking ship of belief may well be confined to this and other rightwing redneck beer and belch sites)–would do such a heinous caper.

    Then there are the folks such as the comments editor (what a laugh) whose reason for believing such absolute nonsense is that the Bush Gang simply are not capable of executing such a caper.

    Wrong–on both counts.

    A. It’s obvious that the Bush Gang WOULD (AND DID) commit that crime against humanity:

    1. How many hundreds of thousands are dead in Iraq and Afghanistan?

    2. The number of US soldiers killed in both places far exceeds the number of deaths on 9/11.

    3. And what about the folks that they let die without a sniff of remorse in the wake of Katrina?

    4. They are threatening and itching to raise the number of dead and the number of crimes against humanity by dropping nuclear weapons on Iran.

    Get real. These guys have really raked it in thanks to 9/11–and they want to keep that rake moving.

    B. That the Bush Gang is so incompetent that they could not have pulled off 9/11 was the topic of a good article in this morning’s La Jornada here in Mexico, “Robert Fisk y la conspiración del 9/11″ (Fisk recently promoted the Incompetent Theory in a piece of his own in The Independent, indicating that the Bush Gang has made a mess out of everything else, so they couldn’t have pulled off 9/11.)

    Here are some of the things they have NOT messed up on:

    1. The continued development of a nuclear arsenal

    2. The destruction of the Geneva Conventions in regard to torture

    3. The severe limitation of civil liberties in the US

    4. The SUCCESSFUL MANIPULATION of US public OPINION in regard to 9/11

    5. The SUPPORTED invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq and the control of the resources of Iraq

    6. The so far successful manipulation of US public opinion in regard to the necessity to invade Iran (and control the petroleum and gas of the Persian Gulf)

    7. A number of etceteras of which even the most blind among you are very well aware.

    In the face of such an obvious fairy tale by the Bush Gang, it is simply astounding that there are ANY folks who still believe that a small group of forfeign fanatics bought some box cutters at WalMart, hijacked without any trouble at all several passenger jets and drove them into the walls of the WTC and the Pentagon–and that the impact and the fire caused the collapse of the buildings and the deaths of more than 3,000 people.

    Absolutely amazing! If it were a made-for-tv movie you would say, “Nah, couldn’t happen that way!”

    Yet you believe it if someone who has NEVER in his 7 years in office told the truth even ONCE tells you it’s true?

    I have a number of propositions involving my Nebraska oceanfront property that I am sure you will be interested in….

  • JustOneMan

    Nancy,

    By your comments its obvious that you are in the 25th percentile….

    (Parker and Stone summed it up nicely on South Park by concluding that, yes, 25% of the country are retarded)

    JOM

  • Nancy

    Very likely. Well – move over, then, JOM; we’ll be company.

  • Baronius

    When did the supposed explosives get into the buildings? Before or after the impact?

    If before, what do you think would happen if you flew a plane into a building lined with thermite? (Not a “controlled” demolition, I’d bet.) If after, how much time and personnel would it take to load up two of the world’s biggest buildings with explosives? Unnoticed? During an evacuation? Without accident?

  • moonraven

    Just keep jerking yourself off about the mechanics of how it was done–exactly what you good little sheep are SUPPOSED to do.

    There is not a single person on this site who is an expert on demoltion of buildings–so stop diddling yourself–and others–and start your BRAIN working.

    You’ve been spending way too much time–6 years, in fact, down there in the Nether Regions.

  • http://www.futonreport.net/ Matthew T. Sussman

    “When did the supposed explosives get into the buildings? Before or after the impact?”

    They were built into the structure in the early 70s. Nixon caused 9/11 posthumously.

  • moonraven

    The best reason for flushing the US and its people down the toilet of history is the sheer number of trivial-minded simpletons who would rather shop at WalMart than be FREE.

    Therefore, you deserve to be slaves.

  • http://www.robot-of-the-week.com Christopher Rose

    So the birdbrain who spends half their time complaining about discrimination tars 302,791,106 people with the same brush.

  • moonraven

    birdbrain (singular)
    their (plural)

    You have not communicated.

    Learn English.

  • Clavos

    “They were built into the structure in the early 70s. Nixon caused 9/11 posthumously.”

    What a pity he didn’t live to see it.

  • http://www.robot-of-the-week.com Christopher Rose

    To judge from the squawking, I guess my comment was a painful 9/5 truth. Learn anything!

  • moonraven

    I am labeling every person in the US with the tag of unmitigated stupidity. So what?

  • http://www.robot-of-the-week.com Christopher Rose

    I would have thought stating such a thing was the epitome of discrimination and unmitigatedly stupid, that’s what.

  • moonraven

    Wrong again.

    Just the facts, m’am.

  • moonraven

    chris, I have an idea: find another site to post on so that you are not monopolizing this one when you are supposed to be looking at the comments of OTHERS.

  • http://www.futonreport.net/ Matthew T. Sussman

    “I am labeling every person in the US with the tag of unmitigated stupidity”

    You’re a Bill Engvall fan? You do love redneck humor!

  • http://www.robot-of-the-week.com Christopher Rose

    You don’t deal in facts, moonraven, just prejudice and stupid remarks that undermine your own position.

    You do your own causes a greater disservice than the majority of your opponents could manage. That you do it with such considerable energy and persistence only reinforces the conjecture that you are nothing but a trojan mule.

  • Clavos

    “…only reinforces the conjecture that you are nothing but a trojan mule.”

    And not a very smart one, at that.

  • moonraven

    I only need to be smarter than the rest of you dimwits.

    And I clearly am.

    Chris, your concern for my shooting myself in the foot is admirable–but it is unwanted–and your hysterical dedication to personal attacks against me on this site would SEEM to be against the rules.

    [Gratuitous vulgarity deleted by Comments Editor.]

  • http://www.robot-of-the-week.com Christopher Rose

    Moonraven, there’s only one place where you are always right and smarter than the rest of us and that’s in the safety of your own imagination. Out in the rest of the world you just sound silly.

    As to hysteria, I reckon you are generating. Mind you, you sure are good at projecting, whether it’s hysteria or vomit!

    If you paid closer attention, I think you’d find that I am not making personal attacks on you, I am very accurately calling your moves and you just don’t like it.

    Furthermore, you have long since forfeited your right to make any kind of complaint due to your determined refusal to refrain from making personal attacks yourself.

  • http://www.futonreport.net/ Matthew T. Sussman

    Chris, try to download the Aqua Teen Hunger Force episode with the Mooninites. Watch it. Come back, and re-read some of Moonraven’s comments. You’ll be amazed.

  • http://www.robot-of-the-week.com Christopher Rose

    Suss, I must admit I have no fucking idea what the Aqua Teen Hunger Force is. I have felt like that when stoned though!

  • Dr Dreadful

    I would just observe that even if the Bush admin didn’t plan and execute 9/11 themselves, they sure as hell extracted maximum political advantage from it afterwards. And then some.

    Now – was that a conspiracy? Which seems to be a question more worth our attention, since the number of armed services personnel killed in Iraq and Afghanistan (Incidentally, I’m trying to steer us back on topic on some of the threads where it has changed to MR. Why should we encourage her?) now exceeds the number of those who died on 9/11.

  • http://www.robot-of-the-week.com Christopher Rose

    Doc, I could easily believe that the Bush administration used the events of 9/11 for their own advantage but I’d tag it as what passes for politics these days rather than a conspiracy as such.

  • moonraven

    It is ALWAYS about me, doc.

    Nobody else posting here has even a clue about any of the topics, so all I have to do is post something–anything–and it becomes all about me.

    Sometimes, in fact, I do not even have to post anything.

    I didn’t realize Playboy mags had become so expensive that you can’t afford them anymore and have to masturbate to my virtual image on blogcritics.

  • moonraven

    Back, ONCE AGAIN, to the TOPIC, here’s another one of the supposed messes which the Bush Gang counts as a success, and which, from their point of view, IS:

    “Two years after Katrina, as Bush flew from the bayou to Baghdad, a People’s Hurricane tribunal-putting every level of government on trial-was wrapping up in New Orleans. A group was selling T-shirts there that reads: “Don’t believe the hype. Gulf Coast recovery is not ‘slow’-it is a privatization scheme that takes away our homes, schools, hospitals and human rights.” Mission accomplished?” Amy Goodman, CommonDreams, today.

  • Dr Dreadful

    True enough, Chris. My point is more that rather than obsess about how the Towers came down, we should pay more attention to what happened afterwards.

  • Lumpy

    That slogan is way too long and uncatchy to sell many t-shirts.

  • Baronius

    But Doc, don’t you think it’s important to take a stand against falsehoods?

  • Dr Dreadful

    Most assuredly: by calling out the most amateurish ones for the crap that they are and moving on to something more worthwhile.

    The alleged 9/11 conspiracy is a minority fantasy cooked up by a few crackpots who’ve watched one too many episodes of The X Files. Like the JFK assassination theories, it’s not worth one’s time.

    In contrast, there are ideas like creationism, which is equally extravagantly false but is sincerely believed by a significant number of people.

  • http://musical-guru.blogspot.com/ Michael J. West

    As proof that the OP is correct about the unwillingness of the folks in the US to face the truth: the firestorm that has occurred every time I have indicated that only Dick Cheney had motive, opportunity and means to coordinate 9/11

    Yes. Motive, opportunity, and means have all been presented over and over and over again. The one thing that has not been presented is: any concrete, or in any way discernable, evidence of a government collusion or of demolition or of anything and anyone else besides a group of Islamic extremists who conspired to attack the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

    Not only has no credible evidence surfaced to support the notion that “9/11 was an inside job”/”The WTC was brought down by controlled demolition”/”A missile hit the Pentagon”/”There was no crash of Flight 93,” I’ve not even seen any incredible evidence to support that theory. Well, unless you count Loose Change as evidence – which you shouldn’t – since that film is only slightly more credible than the notion of an Easter Bunny.

    Plus, as Chris notes, the idea of a Bush Administration conspiracy to perpetrate the 9/11 attacks requires me to believe that the Bush Administration has some level of competence. And that is an inhuman stretch.

  • http://www.truthring.org Zlaya

    Hah, all you ‘debunkers’ who call us ‘troofer nutcases’, really need to stop using http://www.debunking911.com as an ‘end all’ source of information.

    That anonymous site has more holes than the Kean Hamilton report.

    If you ‘debunkers’ are right, and buildings can collapse straight down into their footprint at near free fall speed (WTC7), from some fires and damage on one side, then the Controlled Demolition companies are charging waaaaaay to much, and are spending Wwaaaaay too much time researching how to bring some building down.

    Next time we need to take down a Vegas tower, lets just create some external wall damage, and plant a few fires, and stand back and watch the tower collapse neatly into a pile, with walls caving in onto themselves.

    Really, snap out of it.

    Great article by the way, it’s good to see some people still have their thinking cap on.

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    Zlaya have you SEEN the photos of WTC7? I’m guessing not. Your ‘some damage on one side’ is one of the huge steel retaining pylons from the tower next to it slicing right through the building and totally destroying its structural integrity. It was so unsound they wouldn’t even send firemen in.

    And for that matter the walls of the two towers did NOT ‘cave in’. Take a look at the diagrams of the damage from the walls buckling outwards sometime. Buildings for hundreds of yards were hit with parts of the walls – that’s not what happens in a controlled demolition.

    Oh, and they didn’t fall at the speed you suggest. It took upwards of 30 minutes for each of them to fall, it just appeared to be faster because of the more dramatic and rapid final collapse.

    Dave

  • 75%

    will the 75% of the sane people here say “I” if you sick of being told to “wake up” or “check the facts, 9/11 was an inside job”. it seems to me the only argument CT’s have left is that NORAD stood down, which is not true and can be thouroghly debunked. then theres the pentagon missile theory that fails so miserably compared to the real facts. the missile theory can get absolutely crushed. hers how it stands. over 100 saw a large airliner, 26 specifically saw an AA plane, 0 saw a missile. there was recognizable debris from an AA plane at the crash site, including peices with the AA logo on it. no missile debris. then theres is grandaddy conspiracy smasher of them all. ALL THE BODIES FROM FLIGHT 77 WERE IDENTIFIED. and the videos cant be released because they are still owned by the people at the road station, gas station, etc. then theres the flight 93 never crashed theory. all the bodies from UA 93 were identified, including the terrorists, and recognizable luggage was sent back to the families of victims. phone calls were made from passengers to family saying there were terrorists,done. about new york. there were no explosives in the buildings obviously. u have to rip off drywall to put explosives in and the port authority is patrolling those buildings 24/7 that means they would have to be in on it. along with half the world aqccording to CT’s. and flight 177 175 did hit the wtc. plane victims were identified. an AA stewardess was found on a manhattan street bound and gagged. the black box recordings clearly says no allah no allah right before the plane crashed. plane parts were found. building 7 was pelted with flying debris from the two largest buildings in the world. had intense fires. was missing 30% of its southwest corner. so it collapsed. i guess the only thing conspiracy theorists can hold onto now is misqouting people and coincidences. but no real evidence.

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    Not only did over 100 see the pentagon plane, but there is video tape of it which when slowed down and analyzed clearly shows the plane. The only missile anywhere near that large is a Polaris or a Triton and you can’t launch them horizontally.

    Dave

  • Dr Dreadful

    Do you have a link to that tape, Dave? From what I’ve seen and read, the frame rate from the one camera that actually filmed the impact was too slow to capture a Boeing 767 traveling at 500 m.p.h. So in one frame you see a peaceful September morning in Virginia; the next is the side of the Pentagon erupting in flames.

    Not that I’m going over to the conspiracists’ side, you understand: that plane-shaped hole in the building afterwards was pretty convincing.

  • Hemroid

    Anything is possible. We have the proof LBJ planed the death of JFK and then gave his body to bigfoot who is really just a large hairy space creature from the planet Elvis. Im sure you have seen the pictures of many UFO’s over NY prior to 9/11. Dont forget to vote for the gay toilet-seat sitter.

  • Dr Dreadful

    SR. Back from the dead. And I see that you too have contracted Duplicate Comment Disease.

  • Hemroid

    Hey Doc. How large can hemroids grow and what do you use to help them grow larger. I plan to enter the 2008 world,s largest hemroid contest.

    Thanks

  • Dr Dreadful

    Well, SR, the tried and tested method used to be sitting in a World Trade Center restroom with Larry Craig whilst texting Mark Foley. Sadly, of course, that became unavailable after September 11th 2001. The conspiracy theorists have it that George W. Bush orchestrated 9/11 in order to prevent you from winning the 2008 Largest Hemorrhoid Championship. Rumor has it he’s got his eye on the title himself. He wants it to be his lasting legacy as President.

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    Doc, there are several different tapes, at least three of which show some sign of the plane. One shows the nosecone, one shows a reflection off the tail plus another part of the plane quite clearly and one shows the full body sliding along the ground and very blurred. The crash site suggests the plane hit the ground before hitting the building, so it may have hit the building in pieces.

    One of the constant claims of the conspiracists is that the plane made only a 16ft wide hole, too small for a plane, but if you look at this picture, you can clearly see that the impact area is larger than the length of the nearby 18 wheeler trailers which are 48 feet long. So another theory exploded.

    As for the videos, you can find several of them on WizBang.

    Dave

  • Dr Dreadful

    (Tried to post this earlier but Akismet was having a nervous breakdown)

    Dave, thanks for the links to the Pentagon tapes. You can definitely see the plane skidding across the lawn and into the building. I don’t remember seeing that before: I think perhaps the first version of the video that was released had those frames omitted for some reason.

    No, it’s not a missile: would have been too small and fast to be seen by a camera from that distance away.

    Apparently, the conspiracists’ beloved 16-foot hole was actually only 12 feet and was made by the plane’s nose landing gear, not the whole plane.

  • will

    I don’t think the idea that it’s beyond the Bush administration’s abilities is logical – you need to realign with the thought pattern of “all I know is I know nothing”, clearing out any ideas of what highly dynamic systems (humans) would or would not do.. you couldn’t possibly know who’s capable of what.

    If you do that you might start looking at the evidence objectively – and if you do, I think you’ll see why so many believe it was an inside job..

    Seriously look at it like a detective and start with ae911truth.org – they present some excellent talks about the funky actions of that day.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    What they present is some bizarre and paranoid assumptions and misinterpretations of events which have much simpler and more logical explanations.

    Ever heard of Occam’s Razor? Clearly 911 fanatics haven’t.

    And IMO it’s not convincing that government insiders were too incompetent to pull it off, but it IS absolutely true that there’s no way the number of people involved could keep it secret for so long.

    Dave

  • http://pleasestopstampingonmyhead.blogspot.com/ Colin Ricketts

    Just to throw a little kerosene on your bonfires… I’ve just been sent a bulletin through my myspace site where a chap called Alex Jones is predicting a new 9/11 soon.
    I’ve never heard of him, he’s a radio host and runs a site called prisonplanet with a “July 2001″ video claiming to predict Bin Laden would be blamed for a Government attack. It’s a conglomeration of conspiracy theories – Hunter S Thompson was murdered! Apparently, because he was working on a 9/11 story – Princess Diana’s there too and Doctor David Kelly, the UK weapons inspector at the heart of the storm over the “dodgy dossier” on WMD in Iraq, and, who committed suicide (or according to the site was murdered). I make no comment but people may wish to have a look at it, it’s a huge archive of related material about a ‘globalist’ conspiracy.

  • Nancy

    As to conspiracy being too fanciful to be true, who would ever have believed Watergate if it hadn’t been proven true? There’s always some idiot out there with a megalomaniac complex who believes they can do anything they want, & is willing to try.

    Speaking of megalomaniac complexes, MR is getting worse in her various delusions of omniscience & sexual attractiveness, doncha think?

  • Dr Dreadful

    Nancy, Watergate consisted of Nixon sending a few guys to bug a hotel room.

    That’s a considerably easier conspiracy to execute than crashing two tanker planes into the WTC (claiming that they were passenger planes), rigging two of the biggest buildings in the world with explosives (without anyone noticing), firing a missile into the Pentagon (while somehow convincing hundreds of eyewitnesses that it was a plane), shooting down yet another plane, faking wreckage, disposing of four civilian planes that never crashed, murdering hundreds of passengers and hiding the bodies (or possibly not murdering them but convincing each and every one of them, and all their families and friends, to keep quiet forever)… and doing all of this without anyone finding out about it or blowing the whistle?

    Come on.

  • medicis

    years ago when I got my MA in philosophy of science I and my fellow students learned well that Occam’s so called razor – the law parsimony – was actually false way more times than right. So when I see some sophomoric statement touting it, I know that person is probably, indeed, a sophomore.

    Also when they use the hackneyed argument about sooo many people had to be involved,,, surrrrely somebody would talk… blah blah. Go study a little bit sophomore. Compartmental organization and hierarchy of organization structure means very few people would need to know the score. The rest are simply doing their jobs. That’s why false flag ops usually occur within the context of on-going similar war games. How many were occurring on 9/11? Between 10 and 15 (depending upon your criteria) with some -exactly duplicating – the actual ‘terrorist’ (so called) attack. And what about the few who actually know? You really think they are going to come out and tell anything when it is so obvious against their interests (personal and financial) to so do. Only a cretin would believe that.

    oh, and as an aside to #75 above… frankly, I’ve haven’t seen so many untruths strung together with such apalling lack of syntax in quite a long time. You should be congratualted.

  • http://elvirablack.blogspot.com Elvira Black

    To me, what seems suspect is the consistent level of gross “incompetence” in this administration. Are they really this inept, or is it a ploy serving their own agenda? There were serious red flags prior to 9/11 that seem in retrospect to be almost(?) deliberately ignored. And look at all the sheeple who voted Bush in for another four years. Many of them have finally woken up and realized they’ve been had, despite their earlier skepticism.

    Not to mention the debate over the validity of the first election of Bush. We have become so jaded and cynical that this kind of thing is just par for the course. Mass protests and outrage are so 60s….

    Even if the conspiracy theorists are totally wrong, the fact that this debacle was allowed to happen by sins of omission and/or commission is what amazes me no end. How could our President continue to read “My Little Pony” while Rome burned?

    Isn’t it horrifying enough to realize that 9/11 was a perfect excuse for an invasion based on special interests rather than the facts?

    Easy to say “oops–we didnt’ see it coming”–but that in itself is what seems unbelievable to me–and very convenient. Bush doesn’t give a hoot if the whole country sees him as a clown. In his mind, greed, as the Michael Douglas character said in Wall Street, is good.

  • http://www.morethings.com/log Al Barger

    See Medicin has an MA in philosophy of science, so he knows better than just to believe stuff he sees with his eyes. He didn’t go to school and learn all them big words just so he could believe the same stuff as the rabble, even if it is blindingly obvious.

    Of course, someone who is truly educated and thoughtful might reach the conclusion that knowing exactly who was on which planes and thousands of eyewitnesses is a more imperative reason to believe than is the desire of a faux-intellectual to congratulate himself on his supposedly superior mind.

  • Dr Dreadful

    Medicis is arguing from authority (his own) – the same fallacy that a certain Mexican resident uses constantly as she reminds us that she is more highly educated… than everyone else on the planet, apparently.

    He apparently ditched school the day they mentioned that Occam’s razor is a useful tool – if you know when and how to use it.

    And if seamlessly covering up the supposed 9/11 conspiracy is not incredible to him, then Bush should have been able to proceed to frame Saddam for stashing WMDs without the entire world being able to see that he was full of it… no?

  • Nancy

    Elvira – haven’t seen you in awhile. Howyadoin’?

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    Regarding #86, don’t forget that just in the incredibly simple Watergate conspiracy it was only a matter of weeks before someone ratted them out and within a year numerous participants were eager to tell their stories.

    Dave

  • http://elvirablack.blogspot.com Elvira Black

    Hey Nancy–greetings from da beautiful Bronx…

  • halleos

    [Entire comment deleted]

    As you are an anonymous commenter and had, until I deleted three of them, made a total of five comments to this site, I will assume you are unfamiliar with the requirements of this site. Among other things we require you to use just one identity and NEVER post under another person’s name. Any repetition of this will lead to an immediate banning.

    The Comments Editor

  • http://911booger.blogspot.com b. j. edwards

    I really don’t know why the author of this silly article decided to plagiarize debunked nonsense from several different 9/11 Denial sites.

    It is really quite silly and transparent and shows the desperation of the 9/11 Denial Movement of not being able to come up with one single piece of physical evidence to support “controlled demolition.”

    The first mistake is for the author to regurgitate the canard that there is some mystical “official story.” As if the fact that the evidence of the 9/11 attacks didn’t come from hundreds of independent sources!

    Listen, 9/11 Truth Kiddies, you’re so sadly ignorant and have not a clue that you don’t know what you don’t know. It is really gotten pathetic listening to the EXACT SAME debunked nonsense for 6 years. Please go get yourselves an education in critical thinking so that we don’t have to support you on welfare in the future, ok?

    Get a life, for God’s sake.

  • Polly

    There was no Watergate conspiracy. It was a SNL skit originally submitted for publication in National Lampoon. It became an Off Broadway sensation with Howard Cosell playing trombone and Richard Nixon. The troops loved it when opened in the Bay of Pigs and it got rave reviews in the Gulf of Tonkin. The soundtrack went Platinum because of the screams of the dying and wounded from the self cleaning ovens.

  • CR

    geez a troll right off the bat, are you guys robotic?

  • http://www.thefishshow.com Theodore Trout

    - The company which had the contract for security in the WTC for the two years prior to the attacks was called Securacom.
    CEO: Wirt Walker III, cousin of GW Bush. On his board of Directors sat one Marvin Bush, younger brother of GW Bush.
    Securacom only existed for these two years.

    – The 9-11 cover-up is incredibly sloppy and incompetent. That’s why it’s falling apart.

    – Blow out the foundation, then do half a dozen or so bottom-up demolitions right on top of each other in one huge top-down sequence.

    – America shot itself in the foot and cried wolf to start an illegal war because it’s out of oil and now must live within its means or conquer the Middle East.
    Meanwhile the gov’ts of Canada and Mexico are bought and fixed to consolidate access to their neighbours’ reserves.
    Soon there will be another 9-11 which they will blame on Hugo Chavez.

    – The last seven years have been depressing in the extreme, as if one suddenly awoke the only adult in a world full of five-year-olds, all screaming,”because BECAUSE!”
    How could anyone witness the bizarre mid-air self-pulverisation of the WTC and not think “WTF? Who the Hell do they think is gonna buy this?”
    My God… it’s a planet of apes.
    And now: the spectacle of over-educated idiots decrying the obvious truth more and more loudly, trying to deny the onset of reality like Pincher Martin hallucinating his way around the grim spectre of Death.
    The fact is that these chimpanzees, typing away in an almost infinite number, missed the boat to begin with and have since magnified their uselessness to society exponentially with each passing day.
    They will all soon be out of work, perhaps even treading lava in the Lake of Sulphur, if Biblical prophecy is any guide.
    “Revolt, you thick-skulled idiots!” – Fritz the Cat

  • Fred

    Know other idiots like this? See sendahole.com.

  • Nancy

    Hey, Elvira, Glad to hear from you. Where ya been? Glad you’re back. As you can read, nothing’s new: same old same old slinging insults at each other. Jump right in!

  • CBW

    Mr Hirschorn, plese provide links to the ” many technical analyses” you refer to.

  • CBW

    The company which had the contract for security in the WTC for the two years prior to the attacks was called Securacom.

    Wrong. Securacoms contract ended in 1998.

    CEO: Wirt Walker III, cousin of GW Bush. On his board of Directors sat one Marvin Bush, younger brother of GW Bush.

    Wrong. Wirt Walker III is almost certainly no relation to Bush. Marvin Bush left the board in 2000.

    Securacom only existed for these two years.

    Wrong. It existed from at least 1995.

  • Carroll D. Sanders

    I would like to know when the author is going to write a Peer Reviewed paper on this subject, so I can at least see if he actually knows what he is referring to!

    IT seems now like it is just a call to authority, to sell a book!

  • http://www.thefishshow.com Theodore Trout

    Wirt D. Walker III, a distant relative “in the Walker branch of the Bush family,” according to a former colleague, and Mishal Yousef Saud Al Sabah of the Kuwaiti ruling family. Walker and Al Sabah also headed KuwAm, the backer of Stratesec and Aviation General.

    Stratesec was founded as Securacom (formerly the engineering firm Burns and Roe Securacom). It was reinvented shortly after the first Gulf War, and thereafter marketed large security contracts to big clients, including the World Trade Center, Washington’s Reagan National Airport and Dulles International Airport, various municipalities and airlines.

    Marvin Bush and Wirt Walker Chairman and CEO of Stratesec from 1999 to the company’s liquidation in 2003. Walker had served as a director of the company since 1987.

    Securacom did security detailing for the World Trade Center. In 1992 Burns & Roe became Securacom: its management changed hands accompanying an infusion of capital from the ruling family of Kuwait, the Al Sabahs, two of whom joined its board.

    At this time Marvin Bush also joined the board, clearly connecting family and Al Sabah interests and presumably part of a bigger package of Bush family rewards after the U.S. kicked Iraq out of Kuwait.

    Marvin was a director of Securacom a.k.a. Stratesec from 1993 until fiscal year 2000.

  • moonraven

    Security of the buildings was not the issue.

    They had just been leased by a new company a few days before 9/11–a company which literally raked in billions in insurance claims.

    Follow the money and you will see why folks keep their mouths shut.

    One of Mexico’s well-forgotten presidents, Alvaro Obregon, said something on the order of “Nobody resists down a cannonblast of 50 thousands pesos”. That was in 1920 in Mexico–you can figure out what it took to buy folks off in 2001.

    But the real point is: AS USUAL YOU MORONS HAVE ALL THE CARS OFF ON THE SIDINGS AND NOTHING GOING DOWN THE MAIN TRACK.

    (Hint: You don’t have to prove how somebody pulled the trigger and how the bullet shot out of the barrel–the single bullet theory my ass–if it is patently obvious that only one person could have done it.)

  • http://elvirablack.blogspot.com Elvira Black

    Hey Nancy, great to see you. I’ve been busy with my new Bronx digs.

    Maybe I’ve had a personality transplant in the interim, but Moonraven is almost starting to make a bit of sense to me. In any case, she certainly is the Don Rickles of the internet. Her insults are actually pretty funny.

  • moonraven

    You now have dated everyone with the Don Rickles comment. Is he still alive?

  • Nancy

    Elvira, get thee to a shrink – or a bar ;)

  • moonraven

    Nancy, I believe I indicated yesterday that YOU should be going to a shrink–one specialized in early childhood sexual abuse. If not, you will be right back up there to 500 pounds in less thgan 18 months.

    Trust me on this one.

  • Nancy

    Elvira – are you still with the same guy?

    MR – Actually, I don’t believe you did mention a shrink, but sometimes very severely formerly obese patients do indeed benefit from it, yes. You’re right on that. BTW, it was pretty astute of you to pick up on still carrying the fat around in my head. I give credit where credit is due on that one, even if it was meant as a dagger instead of a help. However….

  • moonraven

    You take every comment I make as a dagger because you have low self-esteem and believe you deserve to be picked on in order to replicate the bad feelings from the days of abuse.

    When I tell someone that he or she needs to get to a good therapist, I am not just blowing it out my ass. It means I have seen what the problem is from the posts and am suggesting a solution.

    If you prefer to court abuse and rejection on this site just because your employer is paying you to play in the internet you may get the satisfaction of ripping off him or her, but you won’t get better.

  • http://www.delusionaldemocracy.com Joel S. Hirschhorn

    For the many who have demonstrated considerable ignorance and closed-mindedness consider this:

    Nationally Recognized Engineers and Scientist Call for New 9/11 Investigation

    Over the last 8 weeks a world renowned scientist and three nationally recognized engineers have called for a new investigation of 9/11, yet none of these have been reported in the mainstream media.

    Most recently, on Sept. 4, Joel S. Hirschhorn, Ph.D., who served for 12 years as a Senior Staff Member of the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment and later as Director of Environment, Energy and Natural Resources for the National Governors Association, called for a new investigation of 9/11, saying “First, let the technical truth emerge. Then, if necessary, cope with the inevitable political, conspiracy and other questions.” Former Congressional Office of Technology Assessment Senior Staff Member Calls for New Investigation of 9/11

    On Aug. 27, Lynn Margulis, Ph.D., member of the National Academy of Sciences and world renowned scientist, characterized the official account of 9/11 as “a fraud” and called for a new investigation, “I suggest that those of us aware and concerned demand that the glaringly erroneous official account of 9/11 be dismissed as a fraud and a new, thorough, and impartial investigation be undertaken.” National Academy of Sciences Member Calls for New 9/11 Investigation

    An Aug. 21 article reported that James Quintiere, Ph.D., former Chief of NIST’s Fire Science Division, called for an independent review of the World Trade Center Twin Tower collapse investigation. “I wish that there would be a peer review of this,” he said, referring to the NIST investigation. “I think all the records that NIST has assembled should be archived. I would really like to see someone else take a look at what they’ve done; both structurally and from a fire point of view. … I think the official conclusion that NIST arrived at is questionable.” Former Chief of NIST’s Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

    On July 16, J. Marx Ayres, former member of the National Institute of Sciences Building Safety Council and former member of the California Seismic Safety Commission called for a new investigation of 9/11, “Steven Jones’ call for a serious investigation of the hypothesis that the WTC 7 and the Twin Towers were brought down, not just by impact damage and fire, but through the use of pre-positioned ‘cutter-charges’ must be the rallying cry for all building design experts to speak out.” Former California Seismic Safety Commissioner Endorses 9/11 Truth Movement

    Additionally, this week, Commander Ralph Kolstad, U.S. Navy ‘Top Gun’ pilot, questioned the official account of 9/11 and called for a new investigation. “When one starts using his own mind, and not what one was told, there is very little to believe in the official story.” U.S. Navy ‘Top Gun’ Pilot Questions 9/11

    The mainstream media has not covered any of these stories. Please help disseminate this critically important information.

  • frydfr

    9/11 conspiracy’s are horrible and full of holes. You CT’s talking about securacom have dropped to the lowest level of CT, using coincidences as if they were fact. you all realize that if there were bombs in the towers, then they would have had to place them exactly where the planes hit. but o no the towers colapsed fromb ombs, no evidence, maybe we should push aside the fact that the towers collapsed right where the plne hit. and the fact that putting explosives in a building means ripping off drywall and that the whole port authority would be in on it.

  • Shawn

    Have people heard of Operation Northwoods. People in our goverment drew up plans to kill americans and blam Cuba, as a pretext to invade. So if they thought about doing that kind of operation then, not hard to believe it could of happened in ragards to 911.

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    I don’t know how much of what Hirschorn posts in #112 is just straight lies and distortion, but I do know that he totally misrepresents Quintiere, who does not believe there is a 9/11 conspiracy, but only thinks that the mechanisms by which the towers came down need to be further studied.

    Dave

  • Lester

    This is hilarious. One guy says: “Here’s an experiment for u to try. Take a small steel rod and start bending it back and forth until it breaks. Did u use thermite or bombs to do it? No. Torsion pressure was enough to break it and to generate enough heat to soften it substantially. +hat do u think happens when all the potential energy of a 767 moving at over 300mph is transfered into some steel beams and then fire causes more and more loose material to start sliding down them. Friction and tortion are more than enough to soften the metal.”

    He’s trying to use this to counter Dr. Hirschborn. Dude, are you serious? Do you know this guy has a PhD in material engineering? A master’s and a bachelor’s in metallurgy? Face it, you’re in way over your head. You’re bringing a pea shooter to a gunfight. If you can’t figure it out on your own (they say only about 20% of the population, maybe less than that, are even capable of learning calculus), help is available.

    or, if you prefer a musical

  • http://praxeology.net/anarchist-jesus.pdf James Redford

    For the irrefragable proof (including videographic evidence of the moten metal and also chemical analysis) that large quantities of thermite analogs (such as thermate) were used in the destruction of the World Trade Center towers, scroll down to the bottom post on the below page: Documentation on Government-Staged Terrorism

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    Lester, how do you know that the guy with the metal rod doesn’t have a degree in metallurgy or mechanical engineering as well? Did you ask him?

    Admittedly, he did misspell ‘torsion’ once but then you misspelled Hirschhorn’s name.

    As for Hirschhorn, he does have great credentials. No question. But I’m sorry to say that he would not be the first example of someone with academic qualifications whose judgement was warped by political partisanship or just pure nuttiness.

    Dave

  • http://www.delusionaldemocracy.com Joel S. Hirschhorn

    As to Dave Nalle’s comments – someone I believe is on the management side of this site – I am disappointed. “Personal attacks on are not allowed.” Really. But explaining my views on the basis of my “nuttiness” is not a personal attack???? Dave, if you have the brain power, spend a few dozen hours seriously reading the many technical analyses on alternative theories of the WTC buildings collapse. Those scientists and engineers seeking the truth about the mechanism of collapse do not have to speak about a conspiracy (people like you have made others fearful of being called conspiracy nuts), but as I explained in my article: first must come the scientific/technical truth, and then everything else. BUT, if the two planes do NOT explain the collapse of THREE buildings, then logically there sure as hell has been a conspiracy. Here is a posted comment from Opednews that I found especially interesting and informative:

    New 9/11 Investigation & Second American Revolution

    The latter will need to take place first. But what will cause a “second American revolution”? Answer: anger. Enough angry Americans demanding the media cover the facts. What will anger Americans enough to make such demands? Answer: The complete and real truth of the media’s direct involvement in the 9/11 attacks. When the American public learns that the orchestration of 9/11 goes down to the TV newscaster level, something is going to happen.

    The best evidence of TV newscaster involvement is this 10 minute analysis video: 911 Octopus 8: Media Perps Unmasked. This amazing video reveals newscasters on different NYC TV stations reading from a script – the same script – on a developing story on live TV.

    After our second American revolution we shall have our new 9/11 Investigation.

    In the meantime, everyone should learn of the current legal proceedings already taking place:

    Attorney Jerry Leaphart represents Dr Morgan Reynolds and Dr Judy Wood.

    Dr Morgan Reynolds, the former Chief Economist of the US Department of Labor, filed a lawsuit against the private contractors hired by the government. Reynolds claims the contractors supplied bogus analysis of an aluminum airplane with a plastic nosecone gliding into a steel/concrete building. (See this animated gif for illustration.) The original Court document can be downloaded in PDF format on this page.

    As Mr Leaphart explains in this interview, when a frivolous claim is filed with a governmental agency or a court, the governmental agency or court will respond stating the claim is frivolous.

    But, as we see from Dr Reynolds site, the court did not dismiss the case. Instead, they unsealed it and Mr Leaphart is now notifying the Defendants in the case.

    Dr Judy Wood, a former Professor of Mechanical Engineering from Clemson University, recently filed an appeal to the government for its refusal to retract their report on the WTC destruction. All documentation can be downloaded here. Dr Wood’s hypothesis that the WTC was destroyed by directed energy weapons not only stands up to the evidence, but also ties the WTC destruction directly to the Military Industrial Complex.

    According to trial attorney Jerry Leaphart, the directed energy weapon evidence is admissible in a Court of Law. Here’s his quote from an interview with Kevin Barrett, and MP3 clip link:

    “What I can tell you and the listeners, Kevin, is this. There is more admissible evidence associated with the theory that the World Trade Center was destroyed by directed energy weapons than there is admissible evidence for any single other theory out there that has been promulgated.”

    The directed energy weapon evidence is much more solid than thermite or explosives:

    Thermite can be purchased on Ebay… hardly traceable to prove an inside job.

    The perps plan to blame Al Qaeda for planting explosives. Here’s a video of George W Bush doing exactly that!

    by CB_Brooklyn (0 articles, 93 comments) on Saturday, September 8, 2007 at 5:34:00 AM

  • moonraven

    Dave ALWAYS posts personal attacks–at least he has since Sept. 21, 2006–when I first visited this site and he immediately posted personal attacks against me.

    [Edited]

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    As to Dave Nalle’s comments – someone I believe is on the management side of this site – I am disappointed. “Personal attacks on are not allowed.” Really. But explaining my views on the basis of my “nuttiness” is not a personal attack????

    Not really, no. It’s actually rather nicer than some of the other explanations.

    When someone with your credentials and academic training holds a belief so completely at odds with obvious reality and every element of logic, it is irrational and yes, nutty.

    Dave, if you have the brain power, spend a few dozen hours seriously reading the many technical analyses on alternative theories of the WTC buildings collapse. Those scientists and engineers seeking the truth about the mechanism of collapse do not have to speak about a conspiracy (people like you have made others fearful of being called conspiracy nuts), but as I explained in my article: first must come the scientific/technical truth, and then everything else.

    I have read scores of studies and absorbed as much as I can understand. As I pointed out in my last comment, there are many different possible theories about the exact mechanism of how the towers came down. However, what hundreds of scientists who have actually studied the wreckage and have degrees as impressive as yours, seem to agree on is that while the exact reasons why the towers collapsed as they did have not been fully identified, all of the actual evidence indicates that the planes hitting the towers was the primary cause of the collapse.

    Evidence exists to support a variety of theories on the collapse of the towers and how it happened. None of that evidence supports a conspiracy or controlled demolition.

    BUT, if the two planes do NOT explain the collapse of THREE buildings, then logically there sure as hell has been a conspiracy.

    The absence of a definitive proof of the mechanism of collapse is NOT the same as proof of a conspiracy. Did you not take some sort of course in logic in your academic career? That there are still questions about the collapse does not in any way validate wild alternative theories which don’t have real evidence to back them up.

    And BTW, I did some more research on the torsion business mentioned earlier, and although the example was inept, there does seem to be substantial evidence that a major factor of the collapse was not heat from the fire, but torsion causing the bolts holding together sections of the supporting columns to snap, a fact for which there is ample physical evidence and some very good computer modeling done by a Japanese study group.

    The best evidence of TV newscaster involvement is this 10 minute analysis video: 911 Octopus 8: Media Perps Unmasked. This amazing video reveals newscasters on different NYC TV stations reading from a script – the same script – on a developing story on live TV.

    This is a GREAT example of the irrational credulity which you and the other conspiracy believers exhibit. It’s like you have a complete disconnect from reality or a lack of basic awareness of how the world works, or any common sense for that matter. Local TV newscasters largely report news by essentially repeating public statements and official reports, especially when dealing with emergent news. So FEMA or the mayor’s office or the FDNY sends out a fax and then all the stations basically read it over the air, and that becomes the basis for another silly conspiracy theory that the media is ‘reading from a script’.

    This kind of example is what makes people like me skeptical. It’s like you have no rational discrimination whatsoever.

    Dr Wood’s hypothesis that the WTC was destroyed by directed energy weapons not only stands up to the evidence, but also ties the WTC destruction directly to the Military Industrial Complex.

    Are you SERIOUS? The WTC was destroyed by ‘death rays’? This is actually something I’m fairly familiar with. I assume this is part of the greater conspiracy theory that the government launched CPBW platforms into space during the Reagan administration? There’s no evidence to support that it ever happened, plus for the conspiracy to actually work you have to assume the cooperation of both the old Soviet Union government AND the current Russian government who monitor orbital space SPECIFICALLY looking for weapons platforms.

    Man, stick to thermite, at least it’s halfway believable and there’s even some data you can bogus up into evidence since the building materials of the towers included all the chemical elements necessary to make thermite.

    Dave

  • moonraven

    Laugh of the day: Dave Nalle asking SOMEONE ELSE if he took a logic course!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • http://www.delusionaldemocracy.com Joel S. Hirschhorn

    As long as we are being logical and honest, Dave Nalle has all the appearances of a truly closed-minded, ignorant, nasty and prejudiced a-hole — in fact, about the worst that I have seen on the Internet. That I post materials that others have said does not, logically, mean that I embrace them. I believe in examining all kinds of information. Now he also acuses me of lacking common sense as well as nuttiness. Well Dave I know nothing about your background except what I have seen here and you have nothing to be proud of. I have observed incredible evils perpetrated by the federal government, and how anyone can watch all the crap done by the Bush administration and not consider the plausibility of a massive conspiracy about 9/11 is beyond me. Maybe all your shameful behavior can be explained by your being a Republican. But for tecord, what I and others stress is the need for a new investigation on the cause of the collapse of the three WTC buildings — and feel free to let everyone wasting their time on this site know about your explanation for the destruction of building no.7.

  • Lumpy

    Joel. I don’t see anyone here being nearly as nasty to you as you deserve. You deliberately spread propaganda and disinformation which supports a destructive and divisive neoanarchist agenda. That people react to you negatively should be no surprise. That you are even allowed to post your garbage on this otherwise pretty decent site surprises me.

  • Lumpy

    Oh and sorry about my earlier example being simplistic. The point is still valid that a huge jet hitting a building at hundreds of miles an hour causes huge structural stress.

    BTW I think Doug Hunter hit the nail on the head in no. 10. Belief in these conspiracies satisfies some deep feeling of intellectual inadequacy in the believers.

  • Kildar

    Why is Dr. Hirschorn so defensive on this issue? It looks like Nalle just tried to engage him in reasonable if challenging discussion. I’d be interested to hear more about his experiences as a government worker which made him so paranoid. IF he’s willing to come forward maybe some of the 911 conspirators will follow his lead and turn against their masters. After all, out of the hundreds who must have been involved surely a few have a conscience.

    TomT

  • douglas gray

    The F.B.I. says that they have insufficient evidence linking Bin Laden to the attacks to put him on a wanted poster. The also say that the evidence linking Israel’s Intel service, MOSSAD, is “classified.”

    Several foreign intel officials say the evidence points conclusively to a MOSSAD operation, using Muslim hired guns as patsies. Certainly it is obvious that the Koran in the white van was placed for political purposes, by those who wanted the U.S. at war with the Muslim world.

    In Oct. 2001, two terrorist tried to enter the Parliament Building in Mexico with c-4 Explosives, but were caught. CNN mentioned a breaking story, but dropped it. Turns out the two terrorists were MOSSAD!

  • daryl d

    As much as I would like to believe in the 911 conspiracy theory, I have to say it is utter BS. It is possible that people in the administration knew about the attacks and did nothing because they knew afterwards the American public could be manipulated so well.

  • http://www.libertyrepublican.com Dave Nalle

    Bingo, Daryl. A conspiracy to take advantage of the situation is entirely believable. A conspiracy to cause the situation involves too many variables and too many people to ever be undertaken at all much less pulled off.

    Dave

  • Alessandro

    #23 – Reason has not work. Name calling is the next best thing. And their mother’s wear construction boots – to boot.

    #7 and #10 – Yes. Yes indeed. A+

    Matt, or if we’re to follow (oh, I dunno, let’s say Moonraven), there is no reason to stop at Nixon. The Founding Fathers set the chain of events for 9/11 posthumously. America is pure evil – as pure as tupelo honey. Idiot. Duh.

    Now, if you don’t mind, I’m packing for British Columbia. Gonna bag me Big Foot.

  • http://www.libertyrepublican.com Dave Nalle

    As long as we are being logical and honest, Dave Nalle has all the appearances of a truly closed-minded, ignorant, nasty and prejudiced a-hole — in fact, about the worst that I have seen on the Internet.

    So anyone who doesn’t roll over and accept a ludicrous conspiracy theory is an asshole in your view?

    Sorry, Joel. I believe in standing up for the truth, and what you’re pushing here just doesn’t ring right.

    Look, I’m with you for a further investigation of 9/11, especially on an engineering/scientific basis. I’d also like better answers on the causes of the collapse, because I’d hate to see it happen again.

    But what I don’t want to see is a partisan witchhunt or a lot more federal dollars spent on it. A non-partisan, independent and privately funded investigation sounds good, though.

    My problem with you, in specific, promoting the conspiracy theories, is that I’m pretty well convinced from your other writing that your purpose in doing it is NOT honest inquiry, but using the issue and the gullibility of the believers to advance your political agenda. That makes you the equivalent in many ways of those who might launch the kind of conspiracy you’re so concerned about.

    That I post materials that others have said does not, logically, mean that I embrace them.

    Then you ought to say that when you post the materials with no quotes or a link or anything. You sure made it look like you shared those beliefs.

    I believe in examining all kinds of information. Now he also acuses me of lacking common sense as well as nuttiness. Well Dave I know nothing about your background except what I have seen here and you have nothing to be proud of.

    What the hell does pride have to do with it? This isn’t about egos, it’s about fearmongering and abuse of the truth for political gain.

    I have observed incredible evils perpetrated by the federal government, and how anyone can watch all the crap done by the Bush administration and not consider the plausibility of a massive conspiracy about 9/11 is beyond me.

    It helps not to start from a position of irrational hatred of the Bush administration. Looked at more objectively you get responses more like those on this thread who find it inconceivable that such blunderers could pull such a thing off.

    Maybe all your shameful behavior can be explained by your being a Republican.

    That would be the shameful behavior of challenging you on your illogic? Oddly, I’m not at all ashamed. But then I’m not the kind of person who assumes that someone is shameful becuase of some political label attached to them.

    But for tecord, what I and others stress is the need for a new investigation on the cause of the collapse of the three WTC buildings

    As I said above, I’m not necessarily against such an investigation. Of course dozens of indepnedent groups have already been doing investigations for all the RIGHT reasons, like future safety concerns. Do their efforts not satisfy you because they aren’t looking for conspiracies?

    and feel free to let everyone wasting their time on this site know about your explanation for the destruction of building no.7.

    I’ve seen the photos of the damage done to the building from debris and from what appears to have been one of the pylons plunging straight through it. I find the idea that it collapsed from that damage fairly believable, and it seemed to satisfy investigators. On the other hand, demolition does make sense in that one case. They would have had to demolish it for safety reasons given the level of damage anyway. The problem is that there’s zero evidence that charges were planted or triggered or that there was any kind of explosion in bldg 7. In fact, the only evidence for the demolition of the building is a misunderstanding of the word ‘pull’ in that context.

    Dave

  • REMF

    “Oddly, I’m not at all ashamed.”
    – Dave Nalle

    Some people have no shame.
    (MCH)

  • http://elvirablack.blogspot.com Elvira Black

    Hi Nancy–yep, with the same guy!

    Isn’t it nice that one can get free psych screening services on this site from MR?

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    A maxim you prove again and again, Emmy.

    Dave

  • CBW

    Mr Hirschhorn,

    In your post #119, you mentioned “many technical analyses” again. I request again that you name these analyses and, where possible, provide a link.

    Thank you.

  • http://www.delusionaldemocracy.com Joel S. Hirschhorn

    To CBW: in my article there is a link to the group I joined; on that site and the other sites it links to you can track many technical analyses.

    To the others insulting me and my work: it has become clear to me that the politics part of this site is being managed by Nalle – a self-righteous right-winger and that is a mistake by this site; no such political editor should be so prejudiced and partisan. The only reason I will continue to submit articles is that there are a few intelligent people, such as medicis, nancy, Theodore Trout, that can appreciate my work; for the others that find my writings repulsive – don’t read them, or better yet, read them and get pissed off. But after all this back and forth I suspect that Nalle will keep me off this site; he clearly does not like opposing thought. And anyone with real intelligence who practices logical reasoning would not have to resort to personal attacks. By the way, my only political agenda is this: help restore American democracy, reduce the stranglehold on our political system by the Democraps and Republicrooks, and get the nation’s first Article V convention.

  • Clavos

    “But after all this back and forth I suspect that Nalle will keep me off this site; he clearly does not like opposing thought.”

    Nalle doesn’t have the power to keep you or anyone else off this site. That power belongs only to the owner, Mr. Eric Olsen, whose policy is not to keep anyone off the site simply because of their views.

    So, no matter how extreme or wacky your opinions, you can be secure in the knowledge that you’ll be allowed to publish them and amuse the rest of us.

  • freer

    im going to go with dave nalle on this one, u nuts are constantly insulting him because he doesn’t beleive thousands of people and the U.S. government orchestrated 9/11. there are answers out there, look beyond the conspiracy sites. and guys, don’t isten to joel.

  • Zedd

    In the interest of contributing to future architectural and contraction know-how, increasing the general knowledge base of the public, enhancing trust in our governmental structure, and strengthening our security, there should be a thorough investigation of how the towers collapsed in such a way, as if they imploded.

    I was intrigued by the comprehensive report and well illustrated explanation which came very soon after the tragedy. I was perplexed and “impressed?” by the quick conclusion as to what had taken place structurally, all based on simulations without the benefit of physical and “forensic” evidence.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    there should be a thorough investigation of how the towers collapsed in such a way, as if they imploded.

    Zedd, they didn’t collapse in a way as if they imploded. Debris hit buildings miles away and large amounts fell well outside the safety radius you would have in a controlled demolition. Check out some of the photos of surrounding buildings after the incident some time. Not pretty.

    dave

  • Nick

    Great article Joel. I myself was convinced by the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth websites, particularly Richard Gage’s presentation at the University of Manitoba. Support for the demolition theory is growing!

  • Alessandro

    #136 – I don’t understand. I have to wait until Dave says so.

    And Dave, can you restore some oxygen to my house? I can’t seem to wake me wife.

  • Lester

    Dave? Are you serious? “In fact, the only evidence for the demolition of the building is a misunderstanding of the word ‘pull’ in that context.” You’ve not seen the WTC 7 collapse videos? I mean, isn’t that ‘evidence’? Especially considering no steel framed skyscraper has ever, before or since, collapsed in that manner unless it was a controlled demolition? You know, kind of like, if it looks like an orange…or, a picture is worth a thousand words. At 30FPS, 6.9 seconds, you’ve got yourself 207 thousand words.

    Also, how do you know there was a misunderstanding of the word ‘pull’? Silverstein says on the PBS documentary, “…maybe the smartest thing to do is, is ‘pull’ it. Uh, and they made that decision to ‘pull’ and then we watched the building collapse.” Now, interestingly enough, on that very same PBS documentary, there is an employee of a company named *Controlled Demolitions, Inc. I’m pretty sure you can infer what exactly their specialty is. This employee is filmed saying, “They’re getting ready to ‘pull’ building 6.” This was during the clean up operation and, from the video, obviously meant they were going to complete the demolition in a controlled manner (bldg. 6 had been damaged, but not completely demolished, by the collapse of WTC1&2). I’d have to say that this is, in itself, pretty damn convincing evidence that the word ‘pull’, in this context, is a demolition term, used in the controlled demolition industry (much like ‘cut’, or ‘action’, is used in the film industry), meaning to ‘pull’ the switch, or otherwise start the sequence of events leading to the controlled demolition of a building.

    The alternative, which really makes no sense to me, but which has been spun by the Silverstein camp and others, is that Silverstein really meant to ‘pull’ the firemen out of the building. Hmmmm, let’s think about this. I don’t know, but would a building’s owner, or leaseholder, have any control over what a city fire department was doing? Especially on a day like 9/11? Also, it’s been pretty well established there were no firemen in Bldg. 7 past 11:00am (it didn’t collapse until 5:20pm). But, let’s say for the arguments sake that he would. Would he say to the fire chief, okay, let’s ‘pull’ it? We know from the PBS video that ‘pull’ is definitely a term used by Controlled Demolitions, Inc. (CDI) and has some relationship to the controlled demolition of a building. We also know Silverstein and CDI were seen together on a documentary film so, I think we can probably conclude that they had at least the opportunity to exchange some vocabulary. Does it make any sense that Silverstein would tell FDNY ‘pull it’ on 9/11 and they would know then that the order, or okay, had been given by the buildings owner to remove the firemen from building 7? It just doesn’t seem likely to me. Is ‘pull’, used all alone, by itself, also a common term used in the firefighting field? And how in the world, considering no tall building had ever before in history collapsed, would they know to watch it collapse? He says, very plainly, ‘they made that decision to pull, and then we watched the building collapse.’ Inferring that, very soon after the decision was made to ‘pull’, the building collapsed. So they give the order to ‘pull’ at 11:00am and then stand around watching for 6 and a half hours until it collapsed?

    I call bullshit. From the PBS documentary ‘pull’ is without a doubt a controlled demolition term, whether it means to pull down a building with a cable, or blow it up with dynamite, it’s still, at the very least, a CDI term. No way in hell, on 9/11 or any other, is the FDNY going to give a rat’s ass what the owner of building 7 has to say. And especially not with 200 or so of their brothers buried under buildings 1 & 2. Their first priority is to save lives, not property. Bldg. 7 had been evacuated by 11am, FDNY made certain of that, and then they were just gonna let it burn until every last one of their brothers had been located. I seriously doubt whether FDNY and Silverstein even had any communication at all on that day. What you see on the PBS video is a confession by Silverstein. A vestigial conscience, as someone has said. I didn’t come up with this idea, but one of the quickest ways to 9/11 truth would be to get Silverstein on a midnight flight to Guantanamo in the back of an Air Force cargo plane. He’ll tell you the truth.

    If you ever need a quick reference to what is, or isn’t, included in the 9/11 Commission Report (‘Let’s Roll’, ‘WTC 7′, ‘Put Options’, ‘Anthrax’, etc.), start here

    *Very odd coincidence that this particular company should get the largest (probably no bid, cost plus) contract for the sight cleanup. Also, the president of this company, I think his name is Mark Loizeaux, is one of the many first responders who are on record testifying to the presence of molten metal (glowing red/orange, iron or steel, not lead, aluminum, tin, etc.) at the WTC complex (in the immediate aftermath and then days or weeks post 9/11).

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    To the others insulting me and my work:

    Are you SURE you have a PhD? Part of the process for my PhD was extensive critique by a review committee. When they raised questions about my work I didn’t take it as an insult.

    it has become clear to me that the politics part of this site is being managed by Nalle – a ‘self-righteous right-winger’ and that is a mistake by this site;

    Well, it’s a mistake by someone – likely you. That you can classify me as a self-righteous right-winger shows that you have a great, yawning ignorance of my politics or my behavior on this site. Like so many you make assumptions based on your own prejudices. You’re left-wing. I disagree with you. Therefore I must be some Bush-worshipping rightwing flack.

    Your belief in conspiracies demonstrated your lack of rational capacity. Your leaping to conclusions about me confirms it. Pretty soon I imagine you’ll be calling me a ‘neocon’.

    I am a minarchist/libertarian who is nominally Republican and working actively to purge and/or reform that party. Most of what I believe in you would consider ‘liberal’, though that term has lost most of its meaning.

    Among my beliefs is an absolute devotion to free speech. I may not agree with anything you say, but I would defend to the death your right to say it. I have found this belief justified over and over again, especially here at BC, because when fools and dastards get to air their views they are exposed for what they are.

    Yes, I do challenge article authors in the comments section. Did you expect to post here to nothing but fawning praise? Go back to your diary at DailyKos if that’s what you want. Check past articles. I challenge the writings of many of our more conservative posters too. One of the reasons I do this is to generate discussion. Discussion draws attention to your articles. I assume you want attention, right?

    no such political editor should be so prejudiced and partisan.

    I’ve worked as an editor off and on for almost 30 years. I’ve never censored a word for political reasons. Ask anyone on this site if I’ve ever supported censorship for political reasons. As for my partisanship, I’m a supporter of reason and discourse. You apparently are not.

    The only reason I will continue to submit articles is that there are a few intelligent people, such as medicis, nancy, Theodore Trout, that can appreciate my work; for the others that find my writings repulsive – don’t read them, or better yet, read them and get pissed off.

    I read them and got pissed off, yet you seem to object. Typical echochamber mentality.

    But after all this back and forth I suspect that Nalle will keep me off this site; he clearly does not like opposing thought.

    Of course I’m not going to try to keep you off, even if I could. I love opposing thought. That’s why I’m here on BC and not writing on some libertarian back-patting society blog. If you’re not posting here I can’t point out your fallacious reasoning. That’s what makes BC so great, it allows open discourse. If you were posting on the leftist sites you usually frequent no one would be allowed to challenge you. I’d much rather see you exposed than silenced.

    And anyone with real intelligence who practices logical reasoning would not have to resort to personal attacks.

    Describing your beliefs accurately as ‘nutty’ isn’t a personal attack, it’s a description. Perhaps a bit informal.

    By the way, my only political agenda is this: help restore American democracy, reduce the stranglehold on our political system by the Democraps and Republicrooks, and get the nation’s first Article V convention.

    And there’s another point where we differ. I think the Constitution is important, oppose mob rule, and am not so naive as to think that an Article V convention would not lead directly to utter chaos and ultimately tyrrany.

    You know, I suspect that our goals are probably similar. We just disagree radically on how to reach them.

    Dave

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Dave? Are you serious? “In fact, the only evidence for the demolition of the building is a misunderstanding of the word ‘pull’ in that context.” You’ve not seen the WTC 7 collapse videos? I mean, isn’t that ‘evidence’? Especially considering no steel framed skyscraper has ever, before or since, collapsed in that manner unless it was a controlled demolition? You know, kind of like, if it looks like an orange…or, a picture is worth a thousand words. At 30FPS, 6.9 seconds, you’ve got yourself 207 thousand words.

    I’ve seen a bunch of videos of the WTC7 collapse. I’ve also seen still photographs of the site after the collapse and most importantly of the side of the building NOT shown in the videos. The videos are incredibly deceptive, because for safety reasons they are all shot from the side away from the main towers. From that angle the building looks intact, but aerial photos from the other side show that it was essentially gutted by falling wreckage and was totally structurally unsound.

    Also, how do you know there was a misunderstanding of the word ‘pull’?

    Because everyone who used the term stated afterwards that they meant pull the people out of the building because it was unsafe.

    I’m perfectly willing to believe that WTC7 was demolished, or that there was an intention to demolish it. That’s why the CDI had people there. The building was unsafe. The story from those involved is that it was too unsafe to even place charges so they ‘pulled’ their people out.

    What doesn’t make sense to me is why anyone would attempt to cover up the demolition of WTC7. It’s a standard way of dealing with unsafe buildings. If they demolished it they could just come out and say so and there would be no controversy. The conspiracy theory here makes no sense, because those who are supposedly the beneficiaries of the conspiracy don’t actually benefit from it in any way.

    The alternative, which really makes no sense to me, but which has been spun by the Silverstein camp and others, is that Silverstein really meant to ‘pull’ the firemen out of the building. Hmmmm, let’s think about this. I don’t know, but would a building’s owner, or leaseholder, have any control over what a city fire department was doing? Especially on a day like 9/11? Also, it’s been pretty well established there were no firemen in Bldg. 7 past 11:00am (it didn’t collapse until 5:20pm). But, let’s say for the arguments sake that he would. Would he say to the fire chief, okay, let’s ‘pull’ it? We know from the PBS video that ‘pull’ is definitely a term used by Controlled Demolitions, Inc. (CDI) and has some relationship to the controlled demolition of a building. We also know Silverstein and CDI were seen together on a documentary film so, I think we can probably conclude that they had at least the opportunity to exchange some vocabulary. Does it make any sense that Silverstein would tell FDNY ‘pull it’ on 9/11 and they would know then that the order, or okay, had been given by the buildings owner to remove the firemen from building 7? It just doesn’t seem likely to me. Is ‘pull’, used all alone, by itself, also a common term used in the firefighting field? And how in the world, considering no tall building had ever before in history collapsed, would they know to watch it collapse? He says, very plainly, ‘they made that decision to pull, and then we watched the building collapse.’ Inferring that, very soon after the decision was made to ‘pull’, the building collapsed. So they give the order to ‘pull’ at 11:00am and then stand around watching for 6 and a half hours until it collapsed?

    Every neutral source I’ve been able to check says that the term ‘pull’ is not used in controlled demolitions. But even if it were, it doesn’t take 6 and a half hours, as you point out, for a controlled demolition. It takes a matter of minutes. The scenario that they pulled people out because the building was falling down still makes more sense, even if those people who were pulled out were private contractors who were there to blow it up.

    But again, even if they blew it up, where’s the controversy that requires a cover-up?

    I call bullshit. From the PBS documentary ‘pull’ is without a doubt a controlled demolition term, whether it means to pull down a building with a cable, or blow it up with dynamite, it’s still, at the very least, a CDI term.

    Pull may be a term used by CDI, but it was used by Silverstein to the FDNY, not by CDI in this case. And the full quote (the first clause is usually cut off) is that Silverstein said “We’ve had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.” Clearly this suggests that they intended to pull people out of the building to prevent further loss of the lives of FDNY personnel.

    No way in hell, on 9/11 or any other, is the FDNY going to give a rat’s ass what the owner of building 7 has to say. And especially not with 200 or so of their brothers buried under buildings 1 & 2. Their first priority is to save lives, not property. Bldg. 7 had been evacuated by 11am, FDNY made certain of that, and then they were just gonna let it burn until every last one of their brothers had been located.

    As I understand it WTC7 wasn’t burning. But it had taken substantial damage and there were certainly injured people and dead bodies to look for, which is part of the fire department’s job.

    But still, the key thing is that even if your scenario is true, what reason does Silverstein have to lie?

    Dave

  • Lumpy

    Dr.. Joel. As a reader here I’d be interested to see an article about how u think u could improve our current constitution through an article V convention.

  • Clavos

    It was I who specifically said I have been to Venezuela several times, but not since El Chango took office.

  • Alessandro

    I asked terrorism expert and journalist J.M. Berger in an interview for BC his thoughts on the conspiracy theories surrounding 9/11. Here’s his answer:

    I think the official story is essentially correct. The alternative accounts of that day proffered by some are a) far more complicated and unlikely than the official account, and b) predicated on some highly questionable leaps of “logic.” I’ve seen too much “investigative” reporting that is predicated on “logic.” Logic is the opposite of investigation even when the logic is sound, which is almost never the case in 9/11 conspiracy theories.

    Have U.S. authorities exaggerated the threat of terrorism? The answer to this is both yes and no. I don’t think they understand the threat of terrorism. They’re happy enough to use fear as a political tool, and they have taken draconian measures that encroach on basic American values while often ignoring basic, common-sense steps that would actually make us safer. But to say there is no real threat from al Qaeda and groups inspired by al Queda is foolish. An attempt at nuclear terrorism is virtually inevitable. The question is whether it will happen sooner or later; and whether it will come in the U.S., or abroad; whether it *can* be prevented and whether it *will* be prevented.

  • http://stevemoyer.us Steve Moyer

    Let’s do a deeper analysis. Let’s look into the mind of whoever is responsible for 9-11.

    Why did they do it? It obviously took more than one person to accomplish all the feats so we know there is a group of people. What were their motivations?

    Then do an analysis of “What needs to be done?” as a general question. How did the people who did the deeds answer this question? What were their perceptions of reality? How do we know that our conclusions about their motives and perceptions are correct? Is there any way to confirm our conclusions?

    One conclusion everyone who examines these questions reaches, whether they go down the path of “Osama and his supporters did it” or the path of “it was an inside job,” is that there is great harmony between the answers.

    It is about money, government and the projection of military and economic power in the Middle East by the United States. You can easily perceive the domination of the Middle East as a motive, either to increase the domination ( “Inside Job” ) or to decrease it (“Osama” ). In both scenarios it is about domination through “economic and military” means. There is a “convergence of motivation” between the two theories.

    Now look at the facts of what targets were selected by this group of people … WTC ( money ) and the Pentagon ( military ).

    Do you see the congruence between the two theories? They are both addressing the same “perceptions of necessity” but from opposite political points of view?

    What’s the conclusion? 9-11 was a political act regarding the economic and military domination of the Middle East based on false perceptions.

    Why do I say “false perceptions?” Because domination of the Middle East “doesn’t need to be done” and isn’t the correct focus. Our correct focus should be virtue, human rights and the welfare of the people in the Middle East … all of them. Domination is not a virtue or a human right and it is not concerned with the welfare of the people… all of them. Therefore, our focus is wrong regardless of which theory is correct. Our attention has been shifted from “what is necessary” to “what is NOT necessary.”

    You can continue the analysis with the events which followed 9-11: the “War on Terror”, Patriot Act, Abu Grahib, a “hands-off” policy in regards to Saudi Arabia because of the “love of money,” the attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq, the rise in the price of oil, the increased military spending, the political division of America, and now the rejection of the war in Iraq by the majority of the world.

    You can see how these events are all directly connected to the events of 9-11. You can see how the focus of American foreign policy has been changed by 9-11. Judge by the fruits.

    In other words, you can look for the convergence of understanding from BOTH perspectives and how they are BOTH WRONG. This is the “unity perspective” and the one based on consensual understanding.

    You can go even deeper in your analysis and try to ascertain WHY we are trying to “prosecute our way to the truth.” Whether we want to “prosecute the terrorists” in court or “prosecute terrorists in war” you are still “stuck in prosecution mode.”

    Does prosecution need to be done? What about prevention of terrorism? Does a “war on terror” need to be done?” What about a “quest for justice?” That’s where our focus should be in my opinion. 9-11 has served to divert our focus towards “conflict and domination” from “consensus and cooperation.” This is true regardless of which theory you believe is true.

    Our focus on “this theory or that theory” is a flawed approach. It’s the “either/or” mental trap.
    WHAT MAKES SENSE IN EITHER THEORY?

    There were a large number of people involved in the events of 9-11. But will prosecution help us formulate a healthy, virtuous response and a construct a successful foreign policy? Will prosecution help us advance social and political justice in the Middle East?

    Judge by the fruits.

    It appears that prosecution does not do so, as evidenced by the comments on this page. We seem quite divided 6 years later. Unity is a virtue. What is keeping us from achieving unity? We have chosen the wrong focus … domination.

    What should U.S. foreign policy be in the Middle East? That’s the right question for us to focus upon. 9-11 has muddled our thinking about it and introduced controversy when we need clarity, conflict when we need consensus, and domination when we need cooperation.

    Unity is a virtue. We are going the wrong direction. Stop! Reverse course. Go the other way. This approach of “prosecuting the truth” has failed us. Seek unity around the truth. It isn’t about one view or another but both views. Where is the convergence of truth in both theories?

    What needs to be done? That’s the right question for us to focus upon. Consensus needs to be done. Keep your eye on the right focus and the events of 9-11 will take their proper place in time.

    That’s the right thing to do.

  • moonraven

    Apparently blogcritics is not the microcosm of opinion (and plurality) that it says its is.

    The latest Zogby International poll (google it or do a Yahoo search) indicates that 51% of folks in the US want a new 9/11 investigation focused on Bush and Cheney role in it, and that over two thirds say the 9/11 Commission should have investigated the collapse of Building 7.

    Seems pretty conclusive that the stupid, gullible last-ditch-standers are by FAR the majority on this site.

    Despite Nalle’s claim that everyone on this site but he is a left-winger. Wrong again, Dave.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Does prosecution need to be done? What about prevention of terrorism?

    The problem with preventing terrorism is that it’s difficult out of proportion to the benefits and the price paid for doing it effectively is often a substantial loss of rights for the general population. IMO it’s probably better to accept the fact that we will be hit by terrorists again and not resort to extreme measures like the PATRIOT act and the loss of rights and false sense of security they produce.

    And MR, if 51% of the public said it was a good idea to jump off a cliff, would you do it?

    Dave

  • http://www.robot-of-the-week.com Christopher Rose

    Dave,

    Wasn’t it only this very weekend you were enthusiastically quoting a different survey yourself? I rather think it was. See you on the cliff edge!

  • moonraven

    The major difference between Dave Nalle and me–besides the fact that I have BALLS–is that I actually post REAL stuff, while Dave just makes it all up.

    As, of course, he deliberately–or stupidly–missed the point I was making that THIS SITE’S POSTERS ARE IN NO WAY REPRESENTATIVE OF THE MAJORITY VIEW. They are, in the main, a bunch of ring-wing misfits who still believe that the world is flat.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Wasn’t it only this very weekend you were enthusiastically quoting a different survey yourself? I rather think it was. See you on the cliff edge!

    There’s a big difference between quoting surveys and suggesting that policy should be based on them, Christopher. You have to admit that I have never been an advocate of setting policy based on questions asked of 1000 random idiots.

    Dave

  • Clavos

    “The major difference between Dave Nalle and me–besides the fact that I have BALLS…”

    mr, when did you become a transsexual?

    “…is that I actually post REAL stuff…”

    “Real stuff” (showing off your vocabulary again?), huh?

    Like the nutty idea that 9/11 was a government conspiracy??

  • moonraven

    right-wing.

  • moonraven

    Like the 100% correct idea that 9/11 WAS a government conspiracy.

    Yep, ole Dave doesn’t want to hear shit about democracy–the concept that the majority decides is as much as an anathema to him as it is to the Texas Twostep Decider.

  • http://www.delusionaldemocracy.com Joel S. Hirschhorn

    Thank you moonraven for the new Zogby information, though fascist right-wingers expose their anti-democracy thinking in dismissing data about what the American public thinks. Anyone who disagrees with these right-wing fanatics is dismissed, attacked and insulted.

    Here is the full paragraph from Zogby on the critical issue of building no.7:

    WTC 7 housed the mayor’s emergency bunker and offices of the SEC, IRS, CIA and Secret Service and was not hit by any planes but still completely collapsed into its own footprint nearly eight hours after the Twin Tower attacks. FEMA did not explain this collapse, the 911 Commission ignored it, and the promised official study by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is now 2 years overdue.

  • Clavos

    “Like the 100% correct idea that 9/11 WAS a government conspiracy.”

    Oh sorry, I withdraw my statement in the face of all that overwhelming, incontrovertible evidence you just presented to support your hare-brained hypothesis. Not.

  • moonraven

    Joel,

    I am actually encouraged. Now that it has been handily demonstrated that the slimeballs on this site–Dave and Clones, etc.–are AT LAST the minority, perhaps the US public is starting to dust off its brain cells.

    Considering the enormous damage the moronic posture of the US has done to the rest of the planet, you folks may be waking up too fucking late.

  • troll

    (#158…and for a moment there I thought that you meant ‘ring-wormed misfits’ )

  • http://myspace.com/killtheenemy1 anonymous

    A plea for sanity…

    Dear “truthers”,

    You are a cult. You are NOT any smarter, more informed, or superior in any way to the rest of us.

    This rant is typical of how you all have been brought into this and how you attempt to draw in others. You use the most intolerant, hateful, insulting emotionally charged tone to your preaching, making every attempt to belittle and shame people into believing exactly as you do.

    This is how cultists operate.

    I know by posting this, every one of you so-called “truthers” will post responses attacking me, probably without even reading all of this, claiming I’m blind, ignorant, or somehow in on this conspiracy, just as you do with anyone who says anything to disagree with you.

    I’ve tried time and again to have rational discussions with you people and it always yields bitter results. I’m always mocked and ridiculed, which does nothing but makes me angry, and the opposing party is always frustrated that I never cave in and agree.

    Most of the “truthers” that I’ve debated claim they want to “take our country and our freedom back”, but I see no evidence that you encourage freedom of speech at all. This is where you might attempt to turn it around on me and call me a hypocrite for trying to suppress your opinions, but unlike you I have no problem with someone expressing a different point of view. Fanatical devotion to your belief is what I have a problem with.

    What’s really sad is the fact that I write all this knowing full well I will not get through to a single person, but I can always hope. I can hope that at least one person will wake up and realize they have been brainwashed. I can hope that at least one person will decide that maybe the people who are selling these theories don’t really have the best interests of the country in mind. I can hope that at least one person will decide that those who continue to push their version of the events of 9/11 don’t care about anything but their own agenda.

    And that will continue to be my hope.

    You have no proof of any of the claims you make and you never will.

  • moonraven

    Uh, something is wrong with this picture.

    Someone walking around in the street with duct tape over his eyes is complaining about folks who are interested in the truth.

    If it’s raining outside, single digit IQ person, you don’t need proof of what CAUSES rain to get wet.

    In the case of 9/11, what was needed was motive (primarily money), means (Cheney was in his bunker calling the shots the whole time) and opportunity (you elected the asshole).

    We can all see exazctly what the results were: MONEY MONEY MONEY for the Bush Gang and slaughter slaughter slaughter to get their fat hands on petroleum and major damage to the planet.

    As for the damage to US credibility, I don’t give a fuck.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    The reason you name something a ‘truth’ movement is that you know right fromt he start that the veracity of what you’re promoting will be questioned and with good reason. The left wingers ought to be familiar with that idea. Remember the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth?

    dave

  • Silver Surfer

    I find it totally bizarre that some Americans can continue to believe that their own government had some DIRECT role to play in the 9/11 attacks.

    What bollocks. All the evidence points solidly to the real truth: that a bunch of lunatics with very strong religious views turned jets into missiles. Period.

    If the US govt had a role to play in this, it is that some islamists and left-wingers around the world blame the US for the ills of their own countries. While there might be grain of truth in this argument – and I do mean a grain, in most cases – it doesn’t justify what was done.

    Perhaps Bush Co should rethink their intransigent position in relation to )not) dealing with terrorists – just like the British did in Northern Ireland, where the result turned out to be worthwhile in the long run.

    Dialogue at least clears the air in some cases, possibly in relation to issues like Palestine, about which the west underestimates or fails to understand the extent of Arab anger, although psychopaths like Bin Laden and co are on thre fringes and really don’t want to talk – they just want to take us back to the 8th century.

    However, having other Arab nations and organisations on side helps. One day the US administration will wake up to it, hopefully.

    Don’t hold your breath though.

  • http://vitalityusa.com ChrisParks

    We have to come together on this issue. Even an idiot knows that a plane cannot “pulverize” a skyscraper into dust – PULVERIZE!

    Does the term Hydrogen Bomb (albeit mini) come to mind?

    The more I dig, the more the bejeebers is being scared out of me. The gov’t is supposed to protect us from all attacks – foreign and domestic. There is no way this could have happened and the gov’t had no part in it!!

    We’ve got to get Bush/Cheney out of office before they nuke a city … and it’s gonna be soon if we can’t get the truth out … call me what you want – but with todays technology they can show you anything on television and make you believe it – do some independent research and you will begin to understand.

    Believe the laws of physics, and nature … planes don’t disappear and leave a hole … not in the ground – and you surely can’t get one in a 15′ wide space and not find one plane seat … let’s use common sense people — why are they resisting a true, non-partisan investigation? What are they afraid of?

    For the good of our country – no matter how bad it is going to be to learn the truth, it must come out!! Amateurs cannot precision fly planes (if planes even hit the towers) — find independent raw footage of 9/11 — you’ll see the difference.

    The media is bought and paid for. Thank God for the internet!!!

    Peace to you all!!!

  • Lester

    Very well said Chris Parks. Amen to all. This is certainly the scariest, and like the article’s name, most painful, issue I’ve ever had to face in my half century as an American.

    If there is a bright side, it is that (within the truth movement at least) it’s also one of the most unifying. Before 9/11, I could never have imagined finding myself in such complete agreement with so many right wing republicans as I have in the past few years. Alas, some of the largest and loudest voices in the truth movement are just that; conservative, right wing, republicans. Col. Bob Bowman, Paul Craig Roberts, Prof. Steven Earl Jones, and, most probably, David Ray Griffin are some of the names that come to mind.

    The point is, this is definitely not a partisan issue. Actually, it’s not an issue with just this administration either. When you start to research it, you realize the foundations go back at least to the prior, democratic, administration. The Patriot Act was most certainly authored during the Clinton administration. At least the meat of it, it had to be. It’s much too long and complex to have been written even during the first 7 months of Bush’s tenure. You dig a little deeper, a little further back in the past to 1995, and then up pops that name: Controlled Demolition, Inc. Who do you think was awarded the contract (probably no bid, cost+) for the clean-up of the federal building sight in Oklahoma City?

    Anyway Chris, take heart that you’re not alone. There are millions of us now, scattered throughout American society and around the world. We’re in the police, the military, the govt., everywhere. Whether they know it or not, the perps are surrounded. I seriously doubt they’d be stupid enough to try and pull off act II but, either way, they’re going down. It’s just a matter of time.

  • Clavos

    What’s scary to me is that the authors of #s 166 and 167 are apparently running around loose with no supervision.

    I rue the day the courts decided to close down the asylums.

  • http://www.delusionaldemocracy.com Joel S. Hirschhorn

    Thank you Chris Parks and Lester; sanity is its own reward. The defensive delusional thinking of Nalle and his crowd is a mental illness with no known cure. Communicating with them is a waste of time because logic and facts cannot penetrate their mental walls. Worst of all, is their obvious rude and tasteless behavior and verbal garbage.

    The rest of us truth-seekers can and must persevere for the good of our nation.

  • moonraven

    I couldn’t possibly give a shit about what ultimately happens to the USA–but I would sure like to see you guys [Gratuitous vulgarity deleted by Comments Editor.] put Bush and Cheney where they belong for their crimes against humanity–in the same chair that Milosevic sat in.

    Or, even better: in front of a firing squad.

  • Nancy

    Amen & second that, MR-!!!!!

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Joel, I tried to meet you halfway up in #144, but you don’t seem interested in discussion. You just want to lecture us on your twisted delusion of reality and assume we’ll sit still and accept it. Sorry, Joel. This site attracts thinking people and we’re not going to accept ridiculous claims just on your say-so.

    Dave

  • STM

    Chris, I watched those towers burning for some time before they collapsed. I also watched jets fly into them. The force of the collapse is what pulverised them.

    Mini H-bomb … yeah mate, keep smokin’

    You guys just love yer conspiracy theories, don’cha?

  • http://VitalityUSA.com ChrisParks

    To STM: You watched the jet fuel damn near burn out. Why not just google 911 and hydrogen and start doing a little research. Have anyone ever seen a concrete building turn to dust – or have floors pancake and there are no floors left when it’s over … get real. This is not rocket science – I don’t know who’s paying you, but you need to give a refund. (puff puff pass …)

  • http://VitalityUSA.com ChrisParks

    Open your eyes Clavos, if all you have is insults – stay off the playing field.

  • Clavos

    @# 175:

    Nah.

    It’s not that easy, mate.

  • http://VitalityUSA.com ChrisParks

    Something for you Clavos and STM.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Chris is apparently unfamiliar with the effects of gravity on large concrete structures whose supporting members no longer have integrity. Oh, and you want to see pulverized? Try dropping a pallet of cinder blocks on one lone cinderblock and then remove the pallet to see what something looks like when it’s been pulverized.

    Dave

  • STM

    Yeah, it’s just gibber. I wonder how people can be so deluded. A lack of understanding of physics might be key here. These folks just don’t want to know the truth – for whatever reason – and yet they call themselves truthers.

    So bizarre, so indicative of the madness that is tearing America apart from within.

    I would have thought that the one thing on which Americans could remain bipartisan would be the need to track down the people who thought flying jets into skyscrapers was a really fun idea.

    And where does the mini-H-bomb stuff come from? That’s right out of left field – the youtube generation strikes again.

  • STM

    The other thing of course is that the WTC was a very high building, and so falling from a very great height at high speed. And it actually wasn’t totally pulverised – there was still plenty of twisted metal left (saw it with my own eyes). Metal is vapourised at ground zero in an H-bomb/A-bomb blast. The effects are well documented in the British atomic tests at Maralinga in South Australia. In New York, the steel structure of the WTC remained in part, despite some of it melting under the intense heat of the fire.

    Such nonsense, so little brain, such reluctance to actually seek the truth …

    Hearsay and absurd conspiracy theory dressed up as “truth” doesn’t equal truth. I say, Chris, just make sure you’ve got the tinfoil hat at the ready just in case the US government gets its death ray out again.

  • http://www.libertyrepublican.com Dave Nalle

    You joke about Death Rays, Stan, but earlier in the thread someone was actually talking about them. Was it Chris?

    Dave

  • STM

    Why doesn’t that surprise me Dave??

    You must have been near choking on your cornflakes when this was posted.

    Don’t you love it, though, when all the evidence is ignored in favour of some half-arsed theory that someone’s grandmother’s cat discovered on a website hosted by someone who now has a doctor’s certificate to prove they’re sane but prefers to keep the tinfoil hat handy just in case?

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Sadly, even a doctoral degree doesn’t prove you’re sane these days. I certainly ran into plenty of people when I was in grad school and teaching college who seemed to have found their degrees in boxes of cornflakes or at least in their box of crunchy Lefty-Os ™.

    But be warned. The tinfoil hats only protect from the orbital mind control lasers. The orbital energy beams will still fry the rest of your body to a crisp.

    Dave

  • troll

    (students – note the use of the standard Nalle-esque propaganda technique: conflate the *left* with all things crazy (in this case with the tin foilers) – while ‘perfectly innocent’ in context it contains the devil’s seed of non-productive partisan divisiveness

    …not surprising coming from Mr socialist-under-the-bed his-self

    this will be on the test)

  • http://VitalityUSA.com ChrisParks

    I will ignore your obvious lack of civility and address your statement regarding the discussion.

    STM writes: the steel structure of the WTC remained in part, despite some of it melting under the intense heat of the fire. INTENSE HEAT OF THE FIRE!!??!

    Response: The fire was so intense that survivors of the crash are seen trying to flag down the helicopters before they were vaporised.

    It is you guys who need your head examined. And if you think for one minute that I am going to believe that a jet-liner disappeared into a 10 foot hole in PA – without so much as a trace or a part found — something really stinks to high heaven, and it’s the stuff you’re pushin!

    You cannot stop the truth. As we mend from the shock of the initial event 6 years ago – we open our eyes and stop believing the gov’t story — the “Omission Report” was just that.

    You have no explanation for how PA and the Pentagon got “hit” by planes – that totally vanished!! You really can’t be this stupid.

    They show you one piece of metal being picked up and you are satisfied? Duuuhhhh …

  • ChrisParks

    I firmly believe that America really needs to come together. It doesn’t matter what “party” you belong to – as long as we are divided we are at risk.

    We need to come together the way we did on 9/11. When the bickering stopped and cooperating began. While it didn’t last long, it is what is needed.

    If we are to be safe from all actions against us, we must unite, communicate, and work together.

    So please stop the personal attacks on my character and convince me that planes do disappear, that crumbling buildings do fall as fast as gravity will allow them in a vacuum, that the pilots, engineers and architects who dispute the official version are all wrong, that my eyes aren’t seeing what they saw …

    If I’m wrong then fine. But there was a reason that they changed the name of the Iraq “Invasion” from Operation Iraqi Liberation (OIL) to Operation Iraqi Freedom … it is painfully obvious.

    It will be a sad day in America when the truth does come out – but I pray that the true perpetrators are around to get their true just reward. Every last one of them.

  • Clavos

    If you want us to “unite, communicate, and work together” with you, you’ve got to come back to the same planet we’re on first.

    Seriously,Chris, perhaps comments like that one are insulting and somewhat over the top, but you invite them when you publicly espouse theories that are so far out and over the top as to defy credulity.

    I actually agree with you about the working together and uniting point. I believe that the greatest danger facing us these days is not OBL and his merry band of raghead cavemen, not the federal government (though they are more dangerous than the Wogs), but our extremely divided state as a nation.

    For, divided we fall.

    But I doubt you’ll ever get unity (of the entire country) around an idea like that; at least not without real, verifiable “smoking gun” evidence, instead of theories.

  • Joel S. Hirschhorn

    For those that find other peoples’ opinions, analyses and interpretations worth attention, take the time to read the following set of excerpts regarding 9/11:

    Senator Max Cleland – Former member of the 9/11 Commission, resigned in December 2003 “I, as a member of the [9/11] Commission, cannot look any American in the eye… It is a national scandal… this White House wants to cover [9/11] up.”

    Senator Mark Dayton – Member, Senate Committee on Armed Services and Homeland Security “[NORAD] lied to the American people, they lied to Congress and they lied to your 9/11 Commission…the most gross incompetence and dereliction of responsibility and negligence”

    Congressman Ron Paul – Vice Chairman of the Oversight and Investigations subcommittee “the [9/11] investigations that have been done so far as more or less cover-up and no real explanation”

    Congressman Curt Weldon – “[9/11 Commission] there’s something very sinister going on here… something desperately wrong… This involved what is right now the covering up of information that led to the deaths of 3,000 people”

    Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney – Member of the House Armed Services Committee “the [9/11] Commission ran up against obstruction by the administration and non-cooperation from government agencies… the errors and omissions immediately jumped out at us”

    Director of the FBI, Louis Freeh – “[9/11 Commission] findings–raises serious challenges to the commission’s credibility and, if the facts prove out, might just render the commission historically insignificant itself”

    Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury, Paul Craig Roberts, PhD – “Distinguished national and international scientists and scholars present massive evidence that the 9/11 Commission Report is a hoax and that the 9/11 “terrorist attack” has been manipulated to serve a hegemonic agenda in the Middle East… We know that it is strictly impossible for any building, much less steel columned buildings, to “pancake” at free fall speed. Therefore, it is a non-controversial fact that the official explanation of the collapse of the WTC buildings is false”

    Assistant Secretary of Housing, Catherine Austin Fitts – “Regarding 9/11 “The official story could not possibly have happened… It’s not possible. It’s not operationally feasible… The Commission was a whitewash. ”

    U.S. Army Intelligence officer, Federal Prosecutor, Office of Special Investigations, U.S. Department of Justice, John Loftus ~ “The information provided by European intelligence services prior to 9/11 was so extensive that it is no longer possible for either the CIA or FBI to assert a defence of incompetence”

    Foreign Service Officer, George Kenney – ” I cannot believe, much as I might like to, the standard account of 9/11″

    Foreign Service Officer, J. Michael Springman – “Fifteen of the nineteen people who allegedly flew airplanes into buildings in the United States got their visas from the same CIA Consulate at Jeddah”

    Deputy Attorney General, State of Pennsylvania, Philip J. Berg, Esquire – “The official story of what actually took place on 9/11 is a lie. ”

    Major General U.S. Army, Commanding General of U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command, Albert Stubblebine ~ “I look at the hole in the Pentagon and I look at the size of an airplane that was supposed to have hit the Pentagon. And I said, ‘The plane does not fit in that hole’. So what did hit the Pentagon?”

    Col. Ronald D. Ray, U.S. Marine Corps – Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense, Deputy Director of Field Operations for the U.S. Marine Corps Historical Center – “I’m astounded that the conspiracy theory advanced by the administration could in fact be true and the evidence does not seem to suggest that’s accurate”

    Col. Robert Bowman, U.S. Air Force, Director of Advanced Space Programs, PhD Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering – ” the official 9/11 story is impossible .. There is a cover up .. high levels of our government don’t want us to know what happened .. highly placed individuals in the administration .. Dick Cheney .. the very kindest thing we can say about George W Bush .. is high treason and cospiracy to commit murder ”

    Col. George Nelson, U.S. Air Force, aircraft accident investigator ~ “I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft — and in most cases the precise cause of the accident… The government alleges that four wide-body airliners crashed on the morning of September 11, 2001, resulting in the deaths of more than 3,000 human beings, yet not one piece of hard aircraft evidence has been produced in an attempt to positively identify any of the four aircraft. On the contrary, it seems only that all potential evidence was deliberately kept hidden from view .. with all the evidence readilty available at the pentagon crash site, any unbiased rational investigator could only conclude that a Boeing 757 did not fly into the Pentagon as alleged. Similarly, with all the evidence available at the Pennsylvania crash site, it was most doubtful that a passenger airliner caused the obvious hole in the ground and certainly not the Boeing 757 as alleged .. the most heinous conspiracy in our country’s history ”

    Major Douglas Rokke, PhD, U.S. Army ~ “Regarding the impact at the Pentagon on 9/11/2001 “when you look at the damage, it was obviously a missile.”

    Capt. Russ Wittenberg, U.S. Air Force, fighter pilot, commercial pilot flying 707, 720, 727, 737, 747, 757, 767, and 777 ‘s. Had previously flown Flight 93, which impacted in Pennsylvania, and Flight 175, the second plane to hit the WTC ~”The government story they handed us about 9/11 is total B.S. plain and simple…[Regarding Flight 77]”The airplane could not have flown at those speeds which they said it did without going into what they call a high speed stall. The airplane won’t go that fast if you start pulling those high G maneuvers at those bank angles… The vehicle that hit the Pentagon was not Flight 77″

    Lt. Col. Karen U. Kwiatkowski, PhD, U.S. Air Force, Office of the Secretary of Defense, staff of the Director of the National Security Agency ~ “It is as a scientist that I have the most trouble with the official government conspiracy theory, mainly because it does not satisfy the rules of probability or physics. The collapses of the World Trade Center buildings clearly violate the laws of probability and physics…There was a derth of visible debris on the relatively unmarked Pentagon, where I stood only minutes after the impact. Beyond this strange absence of airliner debris, there was no sign of the kind of damage one would expect from the impact of a large airliner… this visible evidence or lack thereof may also have been apparent to the Sec of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, who in an unfortunate slip of the tongue referred to the aircraft that slamed into the Pentagon as a ‘ missile ‘ … I saw nothing of significance at the point of contact ~ no airplane metal or cargo debris was blowing on the lawn in front of the damaged building as smoke billowed from within the Pentagon .. all of us staring at the Pentagon that morning were indeed looking for such debris, but what we expected was not evident .. the same is true with regard to the damage we expected .. but I did not see this kind of damage. Rather, the facade had a rather small hole, no larger than 20 feet in diameter. Although this facade later collapsed, it remained standing for 30 0r 40 minutes, with the roof remaining relatively straight .. The scene, in short, was not what I would have expected from a strike by a large jetliner. It was, however, exactly what one would have expected if a missile had struck the Pentagon ”

    Senior Military Affairs Journalist at the Naval Postgraduate School, Barbara Honegger, MS ~ “The US military, not al Qaeda, had the sustained access weeks before 9/11 to also plant controlled demolition charges throughout the superstructures of WTC 1 and WTC 2, and in WTC 7, which brought down all three buildings on 9/11…A US military plane, not one piloted by al Qaeda, performed the highly skilled, high−speed 270−degree dive towards the Pentagon that Air Traffic Controllers on 9/11 were sure was a military plane as they watched it on their screens. Only a military aircraft, not a civilian plane flown by al Qaeda, would have given off the “Friendly” signal needed to disable the Pentagon’s anti−aircraft missile batteries as it approached the building…Only the US military, not al Qaeda, had the ability to break all of its Standard Operating Procedures to paralyze its own emergency response system”

    Capt. Gregory M. Zeigler, PhD, U.S. Army, U.S. Army Intelligence Officer ~ “I knew from September 18, 2001, that the official story about 9/11 was false. … [A]nomalies poured in rapidly: the hijackers’ names appearing in none of the published flight passenger lists, BBC reports of stolen identities of the alleged hijackers or the alleged hijackers being found alive, the obvious demolitions of WTC 1 and 2…and WTC7…not hit by an airplane…the lack of identifiable Boeing 757 wreckage at the Pentagon”

    Capt. Eric H. May, U.S. Army, Intelligence officer ~ “I view the 911 event …as a matter that implies either…A) passive participation by the Bush White House through a deliberate stand-down or B) active execution of a plot by rogue elements of government, starting with the White House itself, in creating a spectacle of destruction that would lead the United States into an invasion of the Middle East”

    Former Chairman, National Intelligence Estimates, CIA, responsible for preparing the President’ Daily Brief, U.S. Army Intelligence Officer, Raymond L. McGovern ~ ” I think at simplest terms, there’s a cover-up. The 9/11 report is a joke…just as Hitler in 1933 cynically exploited the burning of the parliament building, the Reichstag, this is exactly what our President did in exploiting 9/11…making a war of aggression on a country that he knew had nothing to do with 9/11…that’s certainly an impeachable offense…But compelling evidence for an even more disturbing conclusion: that the 9/11 attacks were themselves orchestrated by this administration precisely so they could be thus exploited.”

    Nationnal Intelligence Officer and Director of the CIA’s Office of Regional and Political Analysis, William Christison ~ “there is persuasive evidence that the events of September did not unfold as the Bush administration and the 9/11 Commission would have us believe. … An airliner almost certainly did not hit The Pentagon. … The North and South Towers of the World Trade Center almost certainly did not collapse and fall to earth because hijacked aircraft hit them…this all was totally an inside job… I have since decided that….at least some elements in this US government had contributed in some way or other to causing 9/11 to happen or at least allowing it to happen… The reason that the two towers in New York actually collapsed and fell all the way to the ground was controlled explosions rather than just being hit by two airplanes. … All of the characteristics of these demolitions show that they almost had to have been controlled explosions… I think you almost have to look at the 9/11 Commission Report as a joke and not a serious piece of analysis at all… It’s a monstrous crime”

    U.S. Marine Corps intelligence officer, case officer CIA. Robert David Steele ~ “I am forced to conclude that there is sufficient evidence to indict (not necessarily convict) Dick Cheney, Karl Rove and others…This is, without question, the most important modern reference on state-sponsored terrorism, and also the reference that most pointedly suggests that select rogue elements within the US Government, most likely led by Dick Cheney with the assistance of George Tenet, Buzzy Kronguard, and others close to the Wall Street gangs, are the most guilty of state-sponsored terrorism…I’m absolutely certain that WTC 7 was brought down by controlled demolition and that as far as I’m concerned means that this case has not been properly investigated. There’s no way that building could have come down without controlled demolition”
    CIA Case Officer, Specialist in the Middle East, Directorate of Operations, Awarded Career Intelligence Medal, Robert Baer ~ ” Regarding the opinion there was an aspect of ‘inside job’ to 9/11 within the U.S. government, “There is that possibility, the evidence points at it.”

    Counter-terrorism expert in the Security Division of the federal Aviation Administration. Team leader of the FAA’s Red ( Terrorism ) Team in the Federal Air Marshall program, Coast Guard officer, Bogdan Dzakovic ~ “At worst, I think the 9/11 Commission Report is treasonous.”

    Minister of Justice, West Germany, Horst Ehmke, PhD – “Terrorists could not have carried out such an operation with four hijacked planes without the support of a secret service.”

    State Secretary, Federal Ministry of Defense, West Germany, Andreas von Buelow, PhD – “The official story is so inadequate and far-fetched that there must be another one…This is unthinkable, without years-long support from secret apparatuses of the state and industry.”

    President of Italy, Francesco Cossiga ~ “[9/11] could not be accomplished without infiltrations in the radar and flight security personnel.”

    General Leonid Ivashov, Chief of Staff, Russian armed forces, Ministry of Defense ~ “Only secret services and their current chiefs – or those retired but still having influence inside the state organizations – have the ability to plan, organize and conduct an operation [9/11] of such magnitude…Osama bin Laden and “Al Qaeda” cannot be the organizers nor the performers of the September 11 attacks. They do not have the necessary organization, resources or leaders.”

    Foreign Minister of Egypt, Mohamed Hassanein Heikal ~ “Bin Laden does not have the capabilities for an operation [9/11] of this magnitude. When I hear Bush talking about al-Qaida as if it was Nazi Germany or the communist party of the Soviet Union, I laugh because I know what is there. Bin Laden has been under surveillance for years: every telephone call was monitored and al-Qaida has been penetrated by American intelligence, Pakistani intelligence, Saudi intelligence, Egyptian intelligence. They could not have kept secret an operation that required such a degree of organisation and sophistication.”

    Chief of Staff, Pakistani Army, General Mirza Aslam Beg ~ “The information which is now coming up, goes to prove that involvement by the ‘rogue elements’ of the U.S. military and intelligence organization is getting more obvious. Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda definitely do not have the knowhow and the capability to launch such operations involving such high precision coordination, based on information and expertise.”

    European Parliament, Committee on Security and Defense, Giulietto Chiesa ~ regarding 9-11 “Billions of people were given only one explanation….which is entirely false….everyone who dares to question it is treated as if he was a fool.”

    French Army Intelligence and artillery officer, Col. Pierre-Henri Bunel, Expert in the effects of artillery weapons and explosives ~ Regarding Department of Defense photos of the Pentagon on 9/11 “Image of the impact on the Pentagon is very instructive as to the nature of the explosion. … It corresponds to a detonation of an explosive with high energetic power. The explosion does not correspond to a deflagration of kerosene…suggests a single engine flying vehicle much smaller in size than an airliner…resembles the effects of anti-concrete hollow charges that I have been able to observe on a number of battlefields…lead me therefore to think that the detonation that struck the building was that of a high-powered hollow charge used to destroy hardened buildings and carried by an aerial vehicle, a missile.”

    Safety Engineer and accident Analyst, National Safety
    Technology Authority, Finland, Heikki Kurttila, PhD ~ “Conclusion: The observed collapse time of WTC 7 was 6.5 seconds. That is only half a second longer than it would have taken for the top of the building to fall to the ground in a vacuum, and half a second shorter than the falling time of an apple when air resistance is taken into account. … The great speed of the collapse and the low value of the resistance factor strongly suggest controlled demolition.”

    Counter-Terrorism Officer, MI5 (Britain), David Shayler – regarding 9-11 “The available evidence indicates that people in key positions in the FBI, the State Department, the CIA and so on were not loyal to the Constitution; that they saw an opportunity in plans laid down by genuine Islamic terrorists to carry out an operation that would shock the world and would therefore justify U.S. adventurism in the middle East, particularly in Afghanistan and Iraq.”

    Chairman, 9/11 Commission, Thomas H. Kean, Former Governor of New Jersey – “FAA and NORAD officials advanced an account of 9/11 that was untrue…We, to this day, don’t know why NORAD told us what they told us…It was just so far from the truth.”

    Vice Chairman, 9/11 Commission, Lee Hamilton, Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Homeland Security Advisory Council ~ “we got started late; we had a very short time frame…we did not have enough money…We had a lot of people strongly opposed to what we did. We had a lot of trouble getting access to documents and to people. … So there were all kinds of reasons we thought we were set up to fail”

    9/11 Commissioner, Timothy J. Roemer, PhD, Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence – “that panel members so distrusted testimony from Pentagon officials that they referred their concerns to the Pentagon’s inspector general…We were extremely frustrated with the false statements we were getting”

    Senior Counsel, 9/11 Commission, John J. Farmer, Jr., Former Attorney General, NJ, Former Commissioner of the State Commission of Investigations ~ Some staff members and commissioners of the Sept. 11 panel concluded that the Pentagon’s initial story of how it reacted to the 2001 terrorist attacks may have been part of a deliberate effort to mislead the commission and the public “I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described…The tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years”

  • moonraven

    Thanks for posting those comments, Joel.

    Each and every one of those folks has a thousand times more credibility than the likes of Dave Nalle [Personal attack deleted by Comments Editor].

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Joel, do I really have to go through each of those loonies and provide links to sites which thoroughly discredit them? I mean come on – Barbara Honegger who used a psychic medium to commune with self aware psychic computers a century in the future? Robert Steele, the guy who thinks Google is a CIA front group? Give me a break.

    All you’ve proven with your list is that people who once worked for the government can go insane just like anyone else.

    Dave

  • moonraven

    And they ALL have more credibility than you, Nalle.

  • ChrisParks

    High-5 MR!!!

  • Lumpy

    Having worked for the DOD I’m intimately familiar with the personality type of the semi-schizo borderline paranoid who ends up as a bureaucrat. Too unstable to make it in business and often highly egotistical they find a safe place in some government office to make a little domain and terrorize flunkies. Early retirement was invented for these people.

  • Lester

    I would just like to say thank you to Dr. Joel S. Hirschhorn for having the courage and righteousness to speak out on this matter. You are a patriot and a true American. I am confident that, sooner or later, you will be rewarded for your efforts with the truth, no matter how painful, because none of us are going to give up on this until you are.

    My personal favorite of the people on your list is Col. George Nelson, U.S. Air Force, aircraft accident investigator. I don’t know what kind of dirt Dave has on him, but if you read some of the articles he has written regarding 9/11, he lays it out plain and simple. Modern aircraft are constructed from hundreds of sub-assemblies and components which are virtually indestructible. Each of these are stamped, etched, engraved, whatever, with unique serial numbers which are meticulously recorded and make them specific to that particular aircraft. No matter how horrific the crash, at least a few of these should be found at the crash sight and, up until 9/11, always have been. This allows for a positive ID of the aircraft. Why on 9/11, with the crash of 4 commercial airliners, are not a single one of these uniquely identifying parts to be found and displayed publicly?

  • Lumpy

    I’d like to say thanks too. For showing us who the delusional idiots are all around us. And I hope Dr. Joel will be rewarded with a nice rubber room where he can talk with the gremlins all night long.

  • Clavos

    “Why on 9/11, with the crash of 4 commercial airliners, are not a single one of these uniquely identifying parts to be found and displayed publicly?”

    Because the government doesn’t want you to know that the planes were never crashed, they were whisked away to John F. Kennedy’s secret compound at Area 52, and all the passengers have been lobotomized on his orders and sent back out all over the country to spread the lie that Al-Qaeda was behind the 9/11 attack?

  • Peter

    911 was an inside job.Those who claim otherwise are either liars,ignorant or complicit in some way.Combination of the above are of course possible.The mountain range of evidence towers over us (pun intended) and I consider those who deny it’s existence guilty of incitement to mass murder.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    I’m in the middle of setting up and running our annual town festival, so I’m too swamped to read and respond to some of the silliness posted here today, but I did come on one little tidbit of information I thought I ought to share.

    There’s this Zogby poll the ‘truthers’ are fond of pointing to and saying that 51% of Americans think 9/11 was an inside job. Turns out I discovered there’s a little more to the story than they let on.

    First off, the poll in question was sponsored by their own organization 911truth.org and then carried out to their specifications with their incredibly loaded questions designed to produce the results they wanted. And even so, most of the results were exactly opposite of what the truthers were looking for. Here are some results from the poll which they DON’T like to talk about.

    57% of those polled said that the WTC attack had been thoroughly investigated and no further investigation was needed.

    When asked whether they believed the administration was involved in the 9/11 attacks, 64% responded that they believed the official story, 26% said that the administration may have known what was happening and not acted, and less than 5% believed that the administration was actively involved in the attacks.

    When asked if Congress ought to impeach Bush and Cheney 67% said no and less than 2% thought President Bush ought to be impeached.

    Strangely these results from the poll never get quoted by the ‘truthers’, only the figure of 51% who think further investigation of 9/11 is a good idea – and they often misquote that figure as saying that 51% think 9/11 was an inside job, when in fact almost no one (less than 5%) shares that belief, even according to their own poll.

    I think it’s about time for them to change their name to 911 ‘liars’ rather than ‘truthers’.

    You can see the poll questions and results in this PDF.

    Dave

  • Joel S. Hirschhorn

    Statement of Lt. Col. Shelton F. Lankford, US Marine Corps (ret)
    Retired US Marine Corps Fighter Pilot
    February 20, 2007

    This isn’t about party, it isn’t about Bush Bashing. It about our country. The following is not a great analogy, but it will have to do.

    Suppose you went on vacation and asked your neighbor to watch your house – gave him a key. You get a call while away and it’s your neighbor describing how some burglers were seen going through your house. You rush home find your house ransacked with lots of breakage, and go next door to talk to the neighbor. He tells you that he called the police that night but it took them an hour and 1/2 to get there, even though the police station is a couple of blocks away. You notice some objects in his living room that look like stuff you had. In fact his kids are wearing clothes you swear were in your children’s closets. You quiz him closer and ask him to describe the thieves. They are all 5’10” and have beards, and were wearing black masks, and there were 19 of them. Nobody else saw them. You notice your neighbor has a new TV – he has often admired your set – and it is just like yours that was taken. The police don’t have any record of any calls at the time the burglers were allegedly there. Your front door has no damage and they can’t find out how the thieves could have got in. Then after a while you notice little lies being told by the neighbor, about other things. He claims that he returned all the tools he borrowed from you and bought some just like them, but you can’t find yours.

    Are you suspicious yet?

    You just check the serial numbers of the TV to match against your paper records and find they have been filed off. Is it worth investigating?

    Are you a conspiracy theorist if you want to know more about what went on while you were away? Is it unreasonable to ask for explanations of the false statements? If your neighbor won’t look you in the eye, and won’t talk to you without his lawyer (or his vice president), is that anything to worry about? If you notice the local police chief wearing a suit just like you used to have, right down to the loose inside button, are you paranoid?

    The circumstances above would produce confusion and doubts in the best of us. Who can you trust? What if the cops are just part of a crime ring? Then imagine that it isn’t your neighborhood, but it’s your country. A place you thought you knew and in which you felt safe. Your countrymen have been murdered and the more you delve into it the more it looks as though they were murdered by our government, who used it as an excuse to murder other people thousands of miles away.

    If you ridicule others who have sincere doubts and who know factual information that directly contradicts the official report and who want explanations from those who hold the keys to our government, and have motive, means, and opportunity to pull off a 9/11, but you are too lazy or fearful, or … to check into the facts yourself, what does that make you? Scholars for 9/11 truth have developed reams of scientific data. Michael Ruppert published an exhaustive account of the case from the viewpoint of a trained investigator. David Ray Griffin provides a context for the unanswered or badly answered questions that should nag at anyone who pretends to love this country.

    Are you afraid that you will learn the truth and you can’t handle it? I think I know some people in that category. Are you afraid you will draw the attention of thugs who could do the things that were done that day? Do you believe your fellow man is just not capable of that degree of evil? I would not have believed that my country would ever become a torture state and have the Congress arguing with the executive about it. I thought that Habaes Corpus was fundamental to our civil rights, and now I find that it is not. I thought my country stood for honorable dealings with other nations, then watch a jingoistic cheerleading orgy on TV, composed like Oscar night, with the centerpiece a campaign of “Shock and Awe” as our armed forces invade a practically defenseless nation, without provocation, while considerable doubt of the validity of the reasons for that invasion exists. Our fearless leader clings to lies until they are untenable and then disowns them as though he never spoke them. We, who can pillory a president of one party for lying about sex cannot call to account a repeated and habitual liar of another who sends more than 3100 of our soldiers to their deaths – for what?

    Some point at the fact that the “Scientific Community” is largely silent. There apparently is no “scientific community”. We have lots of scientists who work in government-funded research institutes and who work for universities funded by government money – mostly defense related. Do a little research project and see how well whistle-blowers have prospered since the Boy King ascended the throne. Look at how Professor Stephen Jones’ career went after he challenged openly the collapse of the WTC buildings in peer-reviewed articles. Listen to his lecture on Google video, then read the accounts of how Brigham Young University ran for cover by putting him on leave and kowtowing to those who questioned his qualifications. Look up Sibel Edmonds, check into John M. Cole. Then, look at how Coleen Rowley has made out after putting it all on the line for her country. Look up Mike Ruppert, a gutsy cop who never blinked as he exposed CIA crime has fled the country after having the type of tactics that might make Tony Soprano ashamed used against him and his “From the Wilderness website. Then look at the fortunes of David Frasca and Spike Bowman two FBI supervisors who stonewalled the intelligence that might have exposed the 9/11 plotters, who were then promoted and rewarded. Compare and contrast the fortunes of those who come out with factual information unfavorable to the administration with those who play ball and make the right noises on the Sunday morning shows.

    Do a little research. Google is a wonderful tool.

    What does it all add up to? The Commission was, as was the Warren Commission before it, a dog and pony show for the amusement of the flock who might have accidently looked up from American Idol for a moment and caught a glimpse of it, but then saw that the other sheeple were quietly grazing. Then they went back to munching while the wolves, who cannot eat the entire flock at once, circle and stalk their next victim.

  • Nancy

    Thank you, Joel. As usual, Dave picks the two most spurious (in his mind) persons quoted & uses his distrust of them to trash all of them by extension. Not so fast, Dave – & other non-conspiracists. What about Cleland, Paul, Weldon, Freeh, Roberts? Are THEY all wild-eyed ‘lefties’ & tin-hat maniacs, too, in your opinion, so unstable that they’d rather state publicly their distrust of NORAD & BushCo, and/or resign their 9/11 commission positions or disavow them, in order to smear Dubya? Cleland I could understand, but the others? Or do you think perhaps they might have conspired to get together & condemn the 9/11 commission, its circumstances, & the administration?

    The whole point those of us who have the pointy tinfoil hats are trying to make is that there are way too many credible, knowledgeable, “inside” people who don’t buy the explanations, stonewalling, & excuses, to make swallowing the BushCo lies whole an option – especially given this administration/president’s PROVEN and ON RECORD prediliction for lies, as Joel has pointed out. The true scandal is that no one in congress has had the balls or spine to call him, Cheney, or anyone else in the WH administration on it, to this day, or force a proper, unbiased, uncrippled investigation such as it deserves, and which would certainly go a long way (unless sabotaged again by BushCo) towards allaying rumors & suspicions of conspiracy & even murder by an administration which already carries so little credibility members of its own party don’t trust it? However, you are, IMO, a near-professional-level BushCo apologist, & talking to you about logic & common sense on this subject or anything having to do with real-world economics is like trying to talk sense to MR or JOM: a lost cause.

    Only the most extreme are saying it’s a proven BushCo did it; what most of us are saying is, the ‘official’ storyline stinks, too many people in positions to know have condemned the entire commission report, it’s on record that the WH & Bush/Cheney stonewalled, tried to pull the plug on such a commission to begin with, & once they couldn’t derail it, set it up for failure, then refused to testify themselves unless they could do it together at the same time in the same room, and NOT under oath (?!?!) – which by itself says volumes & shreds their testimony of any credibility, postulating it had any to begin with.

  • moonraven

    Let’s look at the obvious, Nancy: If BushCo. did NOT do it, why have they stonewalled, dragged their feet, LIED, refused to testify under oath, etc.?

    All you have to do is look at WHAT HAPPENED to know THEY did it.

    You don’t have to know the ins and outs of HOW they did it.

    Some truths are simply self-evident–and this is one of them.

    [Personal attack deleted by Comments Editor]

  • http://handyfilm.blogspot.com handyguy

    I don’t buy any of this ‘the US govt did it’ stuff. But there are things the US government has done that are plenty disturbing.

    Here’s an awful enough ‘conspiracy': the Bush administration and its allies have used 9/11 as an excuse to stretch and distort and gut the Bill of Rights and the Geneva Conventions, all in the name of preserving and spreading ‘Democracy’ and ‘Freedom.’ And they have just about decimated the ability of our armed forces to respond to any real threats, by instead creating false ones.

    In other words, you don’t need the equivalents of a Grassy Knoll in Dallas or an Area 51 to come to some very scary conclusions.

  • moonraven

    If you don’t buy that BushCo did 9/11, show me who ELSE had motive. opportunity, means and benefited from it enormously.

  • troll

    moonraven – there are a couple of possible answers to your #201:

    – because They can…it’s an executive power thing

    – because there is other dirt that They don’t want exposed

  • http://handyfilm.blogspot.com handyguy

    “If you don’t buy that BushCo did 9/11, show me who ELSE had motive. opportunity, means and benefited from it enormously.”

    Um, I would say…
    19 young Arabs who were brainwashed into thinking they would be martyrs. Financed and trained by a small, twisted, desperate group of Islamists that had failed to get much traction in the Arab world by trying to incite revolutions in Saudi Arabia, Egypt and elsewhere. So they put everything they had into one last desperate act, and succeeded beyond their dreams.

    It’s true that both Islamists and neoconservatives gained influence and power afterward. I believe the enormity of the aftermath may have actually taken both these groups by surprise.

    See the absolutely brilliant movie The Power of Nightmares [it’s on Google Video and elsewhere] for the main source of my thinking on 9/11 and the mythical “War on Terror.” I differ both from your conspiracy theory, which I think is simply bonkers, and the official line, which I think is self-serving propaganda.

  • moonraven

    Sorry, troll–I don’t see any sense in your reply.

  • fryit

    moonraven, u r pathetic, do you have anything besides bushco. would have benefited from it as evidence. i mean real evidence. u too joel, u dont state any evidence. just say it was bvious that 9/11 was an inside job. and dont bring up steven jones. 99% of ll architects and engineers agre the planes and fire collapsed the building. it so obvious explosivs weren t used. just before the collaps u can see the building bowing, then it collapses exactly where the plane hit and fires melted it. if there were bombs it would have collapsed from the bottom. do any CT’s have any real evidence im serious. because theres is plenty of evidence terrorists did it. id u knw on the black box at the wtc site u can hear the words no allah no allah allah no just before the hit. did u know a AA stewardess was found on a manhattn street bound and gagged. more to come.

  • moonraven

    handyguy,

    I am a little more familiar with young Arabs than you are, and I can tell you that they would not have even gotten through security in the airports in question–much less would they have been able to put all the pieces of the puzzle together and pull it off. They had zero controlk over the variables that were necessary to pull it off.

    They, in short, are NOT the vice-president of the US.

  • moonraven

    You don’t need EVIDENCE to know if its raining or not [Gratuitous vulgarity deleted by Comments Editor.]

  • http://handyfilm.blogspot.com handyguy

    Screaming and calling people names serves no purpose and does not further this discussion or help people understand your ‘argument.’

    So have fun. I shouldn’t have tried to answer, and I won’t make the mistake again.

  • troll

    moonraven –

    *Sorry, troll–I don’t see any sense in your reply.*…that’s ok as long as I do

    *they would not have even gotten through security in the airports in question–much less would they have been able to put all the pieces of the puzzle together and pull it off. They had zero controlk over the variables that were necessary to pull it off.*…truely Allah was with them

    *You don’t need EVIDENCE to know if its raining or not*…of course you do

  • moonraven

    All you have to do it walk out into the rain, troll–all the evidence you need.

    And calling it something else doesn’t change the reality that it is raining.

    I seem to remember the saying, If it walks like a duck, quacks….

    Allah is also not the vice-president of the US.

  • http://www.robot-of-the-week.com Christopher Rose

    moonraven, surely you need rain as evidence that it is raining?

    Maybe you need a little more reason and a little less spontaneous certainty despite the lack of evidence, that’s what faithists do and I thought you were a fan of reason.

  • troll

    moonraven…again you seem to imply that you have some empirical evidence of Cheney’s involvement

    …and having made too many interpretive errors in my time I don’t go for that whole duck argument

  • moonraven

    troll,

    You are perfectly welcome to believe any fairy tale you want to believe about 9/11.

    Since I don’t live in the US and run on a platform of anti-US I do not have any obligation or inclination to believe anything but the obvious in regard to the US government.

    If you decide you don’t want to believe the OBVIOUS–that NO ONE ELSE had motive, means and opportunity and the enormous finanical benefit, that is of course your choice.

    Back in the day I remember that one of our logical issues in Ordinary Language Philosophy was expressed in the following way: Mushrooms are poisonous, but I don’t believe it.

    Have fun poisoning yourself.

  • moonraven

    Chris disappeared my response to troll without its even posting!

    Nice censorship there, scissorhands.

    [Wrong again, bird. The spam tool blocked your comment and I liberated it. Good luck with your commitment to presumptive thinking. Your Comments Editor]

  • troll

    pretty sorry when we can’t even beat each other up huh moonraven…the slasher gets more pushy all the time

    maybe your comment is just ‘hung up’ in the alleged anti-spam system

  • moonraven

    Naw. It’s been over an hour now and it has not been released.

    Basically, I simply indicated that of course you are free to believe whatever you choose in regard to 9/11.

    As the OP pointed out, folks in the US have a really hard time facing the reality that 9/11 was pulled off by the very folks they voted into office–and then kept there.

    Cognitive dissonance cannot be underestimated as a big factor when it comes to folks’ behaviors.

    However, since the Bush/Cheney Gang is the ONLY possibility with motive, means, opportunity and the ability to control all the necessary variables, it is obvious to this poster that–since it happened–they had to have done it.

    Back in the days when I was studying Ordinary Language Philosophy, one of the issues was expressed this way: Mushrooms are poisonous, but I don’t believe it.

    Call it cognitive dissonance, call it a serious logical flaw–or call it just plain stupidity; the result is the same.

    I don’t give a fuck about the US, but it IS sad to see folks wolfing down that poison when they really DO NOT HAVE TO.

    Cheers!

  • ChrisParks

    There’s lots of EVIDENCE. Some of it was quickly carted overseas to be disposed of (the steel from the WTC) – God forbid someone found all those clean cut edges!

  • Clavos

    And none of those people who handled all that steel each of the several times it was handled on its way to the ships that transported it, nor any of those that handled it at its destination ever said anything?

    They all must have either been incredibly stupid and unobservant, or (and this is more likely, given: 1. The overall superior intelligence of American blue collar workers, and 2. The enormous deficit the government is running) they were all paid a fuck of a lot of money.

    Sure wish I could have had a piece of THAT action!

  • bliffle

    Joel,

    Tsk, tsk, tsk. Don’t you realize that the opinions of mere scientists, military officers, government executives, etc., are as nothing against the sacred pronouncements of our Beloved Leader George Bush?

    After all, he’s the man who meets all his committments, like a TANG contract (oops, never mind).

    Wouldn’t leave a Texas oil business in the lurch (oops, never mind).

    Made the superb decision to fire a deadbeat Sammy Sosa (oops, never mind).

    Carried out his vow to chase down OBL (oops, never mind).

    Knew that Saddam was harboring WMD (oops, never mind).

    Quickly finished the Iraq Invasion (oops, never mind).

    Carried out his promise to fire whoever leaked Plames name (oops, never mind).

    Oh well, NEVER MIND.

  • fryit

    moponraven u need to get a life. and no u dont need evidence to say its raining. but u do need evidence to sat the U.S. gov. killed 3000 americans for oil profit. im gonna let u in on some news the U.S. is a great country. i live here and i am perfectly happy, no truck bombs, no violence, ur free to go where ever you want to go. our gov. hasn’t taken over our lives like u say they have. go ahead and call me one of the sheeple. and saying arabs couldnt have pulled of 9/11 is clearly racist. arabs can do any thing that americans do. u have no evidence just that the gov. profited from 9/11. which they didnt. the arab hijacker bodies were identified at the pentagon, shanksville, and wtc. id love for u to explain that. if ur saying that the american gvt did this, then lets see who’d be in on it.

    the whole gov.
    AA airlines
    UA airlines.
    the people that would have faked the phone calls to loved ones on flight 93 saying there were terrorists.
    the firefighters,
    the policemen
    the port authority
    basically everyone

    but everyone keeps there mouth shut. even a simple watergate scandal involving few people got out. moonraven give me real evidence, and not retard hanging Q’s like the hole in the pentagon wasnt big enough. which are easily answered. just like the ones in loose change.

  • HATCH

    i agree with fryit. ive seen the pop. mechanics loose change debate. mechanics put out facts proving loose change wrong again and again. loose change just leave little hanging questions. saying things dont add up, but not defending there otherworldy claims with evidence. loose change would say “phone calls from plane altitude couldnt be made in 2001″ which they couldve. mechanics would say all the bodies from 93 were identified (huge evidence), AA planes parts found, and identifiable luggage was sent back to families. but loose change can never come up with somthing as good as a military plane parts were found. or somthing like that. o and fryit too add to ur list of people that would be on the conspiracy, the hundrds of witnesses that say they saw a AA plane hit the pentagon (none saw a missile)

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    And none of those people who handled all that steel each of the several times it was handled on its way to the ships that transported it, nor any of those that handled it at its destination ever said anything?

    Not to mention that there are numerous photos of bent supporting column sections, twisted bolts, partially melted supporting structures and metal pieces showing stress marks and fractures. Plus someone earlier said there was no wreckage at the Pentagon when in fact there are photos of the wreckage, including pieces with identifying marks on them and part of the tail with the AA logo on it.

    A good conspiracy theory never lets facts or evidence stand in its way.

    Dave

  • STM

    Chris says: “There’s lots of EVIDENCE. Some of it was quickly carted overseas to be disposed of (the steel from the WTC) – God forbid someone found all those clean cut edges.”

    Chris, grow a brain mate. Firemen and rescue workers cut those beams looking for body parts. It just gets better, this. I watched the whole thing unfold – as did many of your countrymen – over a period of months. There’s plenty of footage and stills pictures of the beams being cut AFTER the collapse. That’s why your mini H-bomb theory is bollocks: metal is vapourised in an atomic blast at ground zero.

    There IS NO conspiracy. Umm … fanatical muslim hijackers took control of the planes and flew them into the towers because America wasn’t ready or prepared for the kind of thing they might do.

    It’s all been debunked, every last bollocky word of this nonsense put forward by the so-called “truthers”. Did someone open the asylum door and let everyone out? Like I say, the only involvement of the US govt was indirect – their failure over the years to interact and negotiate with the kinds of people who are a) capable of doing this stuff, or b) are quite happy someone else did. While such a thing might be unpalatable to administrations, on reflection it might have been worth a shot.

    Keep the tinfoil hat handy, though, Chris – you never know when them radio waves are getting beamed in by the secret US thought police.

  • fryit

    i agree with nalle if you watch the towers collapse close up, right where the plane hit and heated the building the buildings started bowing and you clearly see them collapse. exactly where the plane. that throws away any bomb in the basement theory

  • Cindy D

    Those on the left (who find reasons to believe in 911 conspiracy theories) might appreciate Noam Chomsky’s take on 911:

    Noam Chomsky: 911 Conspiracy Part I

    Noam Chomsky: 911 Conspiracy Part II

  • Clavos

    Only those on the left would appreciate Noam Chomsky’s take on anything.

    And, thankfully, not even all of them.

  • moonraven

    Clavos, how would a rednecked swamp creature like YOU know anything about the Left?

    Ridiculous.

    As for the folks who believe that I am the one indicated to give evidence–and who subsequently claim that no one in the government of the US profited from the aftermath of 9/11: You are full of shit.

    Who is the fatass snarling coward whose balance sheet has benefited to the tune of hundreds of millions from all those contracts given without bid to Halliburton and Minions?

    I believe his name is Dick Cheney.

    And the US is not a great country [Edited].

    You are despicable parasites bleeding the planet dry.

  • Clavos

    STM sez:

    “Chris, grow a brain mate. Firemen and rescue workers cut those beams looking for body parts. It just gets better, this. I watched the whole thing unfold – as did many of your countrymen – over a period of months. There’s plenty of footage and stills pictures of the beams being cut AFTER the collapse. That’s why your mini H-bomb theory is bollocks: metal is vapourised in an atomic blast at ground zero.”

    Mate, who we gonna believe? The CTs or our lyin’ eyes?

  • ChrisParks

    Nalle, Clavos and STM: The truth hurts, doesn’t it? The pain will subside and you will begin the slow process of acceptance as you learn more.

    Then the anger and frustration will set in. Yet, we will welcome your energy for the cause. Just be patient “Mate”.

  • Clavos

    Don’t hold yer breath, mate.

  • Cindy D

    Clavos,

    You know, you yourself might appreciate Noam Chomsky’s take on this. Come on now, are you really willing to say such things without looking at the information presented? I would have thought better of you.

  • tree

    omg ive been a little into 9/11 conspiracy’s, until i just watched in plane site. that film had to be the most biased, misqouting people, only look at one side of the story film i have ever seen. ive turned away from conspiracy’s forever. also, loose change is just pathetic. it doesnt give any evidence of an inside job, it just leaves hanging Q’s accompanied by scary music. Q’s that can actually be answered. then theres september clues, the most pathetic of them all, bases everything on grainy footage

  • ChrisParks

    If there’s something out there to explain the other side of the story – point it out! I’d love to see it! Usually there is only one side to a story, Tree. That’s the truth.

  • tree

    what do u mean chrisP, that there was a conspiracy ??

  • STM

    Chris: “Then the anger and frustration will set in. Yet, we will welcome your energy for the cause. Just be patient “Mate”.”

    Umm, it won’t, and you won’t. See, I just don’t believe bollocks. I know what I saw. Some conspiracy theories might – might – hold a bit of water. This one doesn’t, and nearly every issue raised by the CTers has been debunked. Anyone who thinks it does is seriously deluded.

    Like Clav says, don’t hold yer breath mate. Yours is one cause I won’t be joining.

  • STM

    “Only those on the left would appreciate Noam Chomsky’s take on anything.”

    I have a plaster garden gnome named Chompsky (Gnome Chompsky) who lives, appropriately, near my garbage bin right down the end of the yard where no one goes. He makes more sense than Noam, and he doesn’t actually say anything at all – which might be the clue.

    The real Chomsky would be better off keeping his gob shut most of the time too, although the positive side of that is that hardly anyone’s listening anymore.

  • STM

    Dave: “A good conspiracy theory never lets facts or evidence stand in its way.”

    Nor does a bad one.

  • tree

    im with STM, 9/11 conspiracy’s dont hold up standing up to real facts, nowadays truthers dont even put out evidence of an inside job (there is none), they just talk about the New world order (there is none) and the new 9/11 the gov. is planning (there is none). the only time they actually do talk about 9/11 is when they say “check the facts”. O wat, the old lack of plane debris at the pentagon question (there was plenty).

  • Dr Dreadful

    STM reports: I have a plaster garden gnome named Chompsky

    Does he make a pair with your other garden gnome called Howard?

    :-)

  • STM

    They do look similar, Doc, I must say. But yes, I do have one whose name is – you guessed it – Howard. I inherited them when I bought my house and they now all live down the back of the yard where they aren’t visible to the average punter. Which is really good :) Howard, however, seems to be quite productive: he serves as a popular toileting spot for the dog next door. I just love it when I spot the dog cocking its leg.

    Another was stolen by a mate, unbeknownst to me, who later took him overseas and kept sending back photos of said gnome in front of the Eiffel tower, at the Vatican, in New York, etc, along with ransom notes.

  • Cindy D

    I wouldn’t expect anyone whose heroes I imagine to be Bob Grant and Rush Limbaugh to care much for Noam Chomsky.

    And as far as how many people are listening to whom, a brief survey of our talk radio hosts and popular television shows reminds me that I’m in good company.

  • google

    Noam chomsky is such a loser.

  • STM

    Wrong Cindy, those two clowns aren’t my heroes. Not even close.

    I just think Noam doesn’t make any sense. Sorry, but that’s my view.

    I am what you would describe in the US a liberal, I suppose, but I like to choose the liberals I listen to.

    Too many of ‘em in the US are like blind lemmings rushing towards the edge of a very steep cliff.

  • Cindy D

    Ironically, if Chomsky is to be believed, his ideas are quite likely to have the impact on you, which they seem to have had. There is nothing amiss.

  • dread

    why are are you arguing about chompsky, seriously.

  • ChrisParks

    No evidence of an inside job? And just where were our defenses during this time? I’ll tell you where … shooting those planes down at other locations! Yes, there were bodies accounted for – but they didn’t come from the stated locations.

    It’s time to take the blinders off guys … the party will be over soon enough.

    “In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned.
    When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot.” ~ Mark Twain

  • Clavos

    “Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.”

    Samuel Johnson, 1775

  • ChrisParks

    The Twin Towers’ destruction exhibited all the characteristics of destruction by explosions:

    1. extremely rapid onset of “collapse”

    2. Sounds of explosions at plane impact zone — a full second prior to collapse (heard by 118 first responders as well as by media reporters)

    3. Observations of flashes (seen by numerous professionals)

    4. Squibs, or “mistimed” explosions, 40 floors below the “collapsing” building seen in all the videos

    5. Mid-air pulverization of all the 90,000 tons of concrete and steel decking, filing cabinets & 1000 people – mostly to dust

    6. Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic dust clouds

    7. Vertical progression of full building perimeter demolition waves

    8. Symmetrical collapse – through the path of greatest resistance – at free-fall speed — the columns gave no resistance

    9. 1,400 foot diameter field of equally distributed debris – outside of building footprint

    10. Blast waves blew out windows in buildings 400 feet away

    11. Lateral ejection of thousands of individual 20 – 50 ton steel beams up to 500 feet

    12. Total destruction of the building down to individual structural steel elements – obliterating the steel core structure.

    13. Tons of molten Metal found by FDNY under all 3 high-rises (no other possible source other than an incendiary cutting charge such as Thermate)

    14. Chemical signature of Thermate (high tech incendiary) found in slag, solidified molten metal, and dust samples by Physics professor Steven Jones, PhD.

    15. FEMA finds rapid oxidation and intergranular melting on structural steel samples

    16. More than 1000 Bodies are unaccounted for — 700 tiny bone fragments found on top of nearby buildings

    And exhibited NONE of the characteristics of destruction by fire, i.e.

    1. Slow onset with large visible deformations

    2. Asymmetrical collapse which follows the path of least resistance (laws of conservation of momentum would cause a falling, intact, from the point of plane impact, to the side most damaged by the fires)

    3. Evidence of fire temperatures capable of softening steel

    4. High-rise buildings with much larger, hotter, and longer lasting fires have never “collapsed”

    Data shared from ae911truth.org

    It’s Ms. Scoundrel to you Clavos. I eagerly await your 16 rebuttals “Oh enlightened one”.

  • ChrisParks

    I do believe the Scoundrels are on Pennsylvania Ave.

  • Clavos

    “It’s Ms. Scoundrel to you Clavos. I eagerly await your 16 rebuttals “Oh enlightened one”.

    Don’t hold your breath, O scoundrelly One; I don’t have to prove a negative.

    So,if you want me to believe you, keep posting your “proofs.” I’ll tell you when you’ve convinced me.

    Otherwise, I’m secure in my belief that it was a bunch of A-Rabs, though I don’t think any of ‘em had “rings on their fingers and bells on their toes and a bone in their nose.”

    Nor was any of ‘em named Ahab (or Fatima), to my knowledge.

  • Cindy D
  • Joel S. Hirschhorn

    Here is a remarkably good article worth your time:

    9/11 – the big cover-up?
    Peter Tatchell

    Even the chair of the 9/11 Commission now admits that the official evidence they were given was ‘far from the truth’.

    Six years after 9/11, the American public have still not been provided with a full and truthful account of the single greatest terror attack in US history.

    What they got was a turkey. The 9/11 Commission was hamstrung by official obstruction. It never managed to ascertain the whole truth of what happened on September 11 2001.

    The chair and vice chair of the 9/11 Commission, respectively Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, assert in their book, Without Precedent, that they were “set up to fail” and were starved of funds to do a proper investigation. They also confirm that they were denied access to the truth and misled by senior officials in the Pentagon and the federal aviation authority; and that this obstruction and deception led them to contemplate slapping officials with criminal charges.

    Despite the many public statements by 9/11 commissioners and staff members acknowledging they were repeatedly lied to, not a single person has ever been charged, tried, or even reprimanded, for lying to the 9/11 Commission.

    From the outset, the commission seemed to be hobbled. It did not start work until over a year after the attacks. Even then, its terms of reference were suspiciously narrow, its powers of investigation curiously limited and its time-frame for producing a report unhelpfully short – barely a year to sift through millions of pages of evidence and to interview hundreds of key witnesses.

    The final report did not examine key evidence, and neglected serious anomalies in the various accounts of what happened. The commissioners admit their report was incomplete and flawed, and that many questions about the terror attacks remain unanswered. Nevertheless, the 9/11 Commission was swiftly closed down on August 21 2004.

    I do not believe in conspiracy theories. I prefer rigorous, evidence-based analysis that sifts through the known facts and utilises expert opinion to draw conclusions that stand up to critical scrutiny. In other words, I believe in everything the 9/11 Commission was not.

    The failings of the official investigation have fuelled too many half-baked conspiracy theories. Some of the 9/11 “truth” groups promote speculative hypotheses, ignore innocent explanations, cite non-expert sources and jump to conclusions that are not proven by the known facts. They convert mere coincidence and circumstantial evidence into cast-iron proof. This is no way to debunk the obfuscations and evasions of the 9/11 report.

    But even amid the hype, some of these 9/11 groups raise valid and important questions that were never even considered, let alone answered, by the official investigation. The American public has not been told the complete truth about the events of that fateful autumn morning six years ago.

    What happened on 9/11 is fundamentally important in its own right. But equally important is the way the 9/11 cover-up signifies an absence of democratic, transparent and accountable government. Establishing the truth is, in part, about restoring honesty, trust and confidence in American politics.

    There are dozens of 9/11 “truth” websites and campaign groups. I cannot vouch for the veracity or credibility of any of them. But what I can say is that as well as making plenty of seemingly outrageous claims; a few of them raise legitimate questions that demand answers.

    Four of these well known “tell the truth” 9/11 websites are:

    1) Scholars for 9/11 Truth, which includes academics and intellectuals from many disciplines.

    2) 250+ 9/11 ‘Smoking Guns’ a website that cites over 250 pieces of evidence that allegedly contradict, or were omitted from, the 9/11 Commission report.

    3) The 911 Truth Campaign that, as well as offering its own evidence and theories, includes links to more than 20 similar websites.

    4) Patriots Question 9/11, perhaps the most plausible array of distinguished US citizens who question the official account of 9/11, including General Wesley Clark, former Nato commander in Europe, and seven members and staffers of the official 9/11 Commission, including the chair and vice chair. In all, this website documents the doubts of 110+ senior military, intelligence service, law enforcement and government officials; 200+ engineers and architects; 50+ pilots and aviation professionals; 150+ professors; 90+ entertainment and media people; and 190+ 9/11 survivors and family members. Although this is an impressive roll call, it doesn’t necessarily mean that these expert professionals are right. Nevertheless, their scepticism of the official version of events is reason to pause and reflect.

    More and more US citizens are critical of the official account. The respected Zogby polling organisation last week found that 51% of Americans want Congress to probe President Bush and Vice-President Cheney regarding the truth about the 9/11 attacks; 67% are also critical of the 9/11 Commission for not investigating the bizarre, unexplained collapse of the 47-storey World Trade Centre building 7 (WTC7). This building was not hit by any planes. Unlike WTC3, which was badly damaged by falling debris from the Twin Towers but which remained standing, WTC7 suffered minor damage but suddenly collapsed in a neat pile, as happens in a controlled demolition.

    In a 2006 interview with anchorman Evan Soloman of CBC’s Sunday programme, the vice chair of the 9/11 Commission, Lee Hamilton, was reminded that the commission report failed to even mention the collapse of WTC7 or the suspicious hurried removal of the building debris from the site – before there could be a proper forensic investigation of what was a crime scene. Hamilton could only offer the lame excuse that the commissioners did not have “unlimited time” and could not be expected to answer “every question” the public asks.

    There are many, many more strange unexplained facts concerning the events of 9/11. You don’t have to be a conspiracy theorist to be puzzled and want an explanation, or to be sceptical concerning the official version of events.

    Six years on from those terrible events, the survivors, and the friends and families of those who died, deserve to know the truth. Is honesty and transparency concerning 9/11 too much to ask of the president and Congress?

    What is needed is a new and truly independent commission of inquiry to sort coincidence and conjecture from fact, and to provide answers to the unsolved anomalies in the evidence available concerning the attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon. Unlike the often-stymied first investigation, this new commission should be granted wide-ranging subpoena powers and unfettered access to government files and officials. George Bush should be called to testify, without his minders at hand to brief and prompt him. America – and the world – has a right to know the truth.

  • tree

    chris parks, if u say the towers were a controlled demo, u do realize that it would be the first one ever happening from top to bottom. and the building just happened to collapse right where the plane hit and heated the building. if you look at a close-up of a collapse, you can clearly see the building bowing and then collapse. one video is even zoomed in to the corner of the building that the plane hit, and u can clearly see teh collumns twist an d fall. if it was a controlled demo it would have collapsed from the bottom. o and you say no evidence of an inside job with sarcasm, then u say those planes were shot down in different locations, but do you have any evidence, i mean any for that. lets look at the facts. pro teams identified the bodies at the flight 93 site. theyd all be in on the conspiracy if that were true. pro teams identified all the bodies at the pentagon, theyd have to be in on it too. how do you account for the witnnesses at the pentagon. over 100 saw a commercial airliner, over 20 saw an AA plane, none saw a missile, none saw a military plane. chris parks u r pathetic.

  • ChrisParks

    Hi Tree:

    The demo didn’t happen from top to bottom. The foundation was definitely taken care of … You will have no further doubts if you honestly take a look at this.

    I saw the top topple, and expected it to fall to the ground – then it DISENTEGRATED! If this doesn’t prove it to you, nothing will!

    Print it out, put on a pot of coffee, pull out a highlighter and have-at-it. The evidence speaks volumes.

  • ChrisParks

    U don’t get it Tree … the bodies ARE evidence. They were not at those sites!!! How DID they get them?

  • ChrisParks

    By the way – they recovered the bodies from a hole in the ground? O-kayyyyy … one more tin hat coming up!!! Talk about pathetic!!! Save the insults for someone who cares about your opinions a lot more than I!

  • ChrisParks

    Cindy D, Re: #253 – I saw the pancake theory – I thought that was what happened, and it would’ve made sense if there were floors pancaked at the end of the event!!!

    I recall those “ash snakes” we used to light when we were kids, remember how as it burned everything turned to ash in a snakelike fashion … that’s what the towers did … in a matter of seconds. I am fascinated by controlled demos and I’ve seen quite a few — and that is what I watched on 9/11.

    They got really greedy and had the ballz to do that not once, or twice, but three times within hours … geez, are we really that gullible?

    I will trust you until you prove you can’t be trusted. This administration can’t be trusted!

    Keep digging Cindy – you’re getting closer …

  • tree

    chrisP, have u been watching loose change telling u that none of the bodies were identified at those sites. it took months but almost all the plane victims at those sites were identified. if the bottom was taken care of, it would collapsed from the bottom. have u seen a real controlled demo, huge flashes, loud bangs. what do u expect the top to fall to the side. no it fell on the rest of the building. how can possibly say the collapse wasnt from top to bottom. the last part of the building still intact was the bottom. unlike a controllled demo, debris was flying outward. and the squib theory is bad. real squibs are not thick with debris like the ones at the wtc. and please explain the pentagon eyewitnesses. and the fact that the black boxes were found at all four crash sites. and thAT a AA stewardess was found bound and gagged on a manhattan street.

  • ChrisParks

    How could bodies be found when the planes disentegrated? Make up your mind, Tree! 77 disentegrated (into a small hole), 93 disentegrated (into a small hole) — hmmm … I think your thinking has a small hole …

  • ChrisParks

    If you listen to the audio you will hear the explosions …

  • Cindy D

    Chris Parks,

    Could you post a link of audio that includes explosions for me? The only sound I heard in any audio I’ve listened to, is the womp, womp, womp of the pancaking floors. It is a much softer sound than the loud sound of explosions (that would be heard for miles) that would necessarily accompany a controlled demolition.

    How do you account for the fact that there were no remnants of a controlled demolition found in the debris pile?

    9/11 Debunked: Controlled Demolition Not Possible

    Brent Blanchard makes a statement toward the end if this video. He states that neither he nor any of his team ever found a single remnant of a controlled demolition. And that no photos taken after the event indicate any remnants. (The debris of the collapse encompassed 16 acres.)

    So, will you add him, and his entire team to tree’s list of those who are keeping the conspiracy secret?

  • Cindy D

    Joel,

    I am curious if you were interested in the Noam Chomsky links I posted. You can hardly get more “left” than Noam Chomsky.

    “…fascist right-wingers expose their anti-democracy thinking in dismissing data about what the American public thinks…”

  • Cindy D

    You can also hardly get more dismissive than he does n those videos.

  • http://www.robot-of-the-week.com Christopher Rose

    Cindy. I read the Andrew Marr – Noam Chomsky related piece you linked to. I’ve read a few other bits and pieces about Chomsky, who seems to have some interesting ideas, but I don’t understand how they can be categorised as being on the left of the political spectrum.

  • ChrisParks

    Cindy – check out the link on #256

  • ChrisParks

    Cindy – You can watch the video online about the explosions.

  • Cindy D

    I was being a bit sloppy Chris. I put the “left” in quotes. But, that isn’t really accurate. Some of the left identify with Chomsky, so I figured it was fair enough for the point I was aiming at.

    The muddier truth is:

    CHOMSKY: If I understand what you mean by established left-wing circles, there is not too much surprise about my views on anarchism, because very little is known about my views on anything. These are not the circles I deal with. You’ll rarely find a reference to anything I say or write. That’s not completely true of course. Thus in the US (but less commonly in the UK or elsewhere), you’d find some familiarity with what I do in certain of the more critical and independent sectors of what might be called established left-wing circles, and I have personal friends and associates scattered here and there. But have a look at the books and journals, and you’ll see what I mean. I don’t expect what I write and say to be any more welcome in these circles than in the faculty club or editorial board room – again, with exceptions.”

  • Cindy D

    Chris Parks,

    I watched a couple videos on the site you posted. While I can see that people are describing what they think sound like explosions, and while I can see the videos I watched say that explosions are “indicated.” I don’t actually hear actual sounds of a magnitude that would indicate demolition explosions. Did you hear what the demolition explosions sounded like in the last video link I posted?

    From this video: Evidence of Explosives
    30 floors below collapse

    “…proves without a doubt…”

    Do you have any problem with the use of this language in evidence you accept?

  • ChrisParks

    Re: #255 … TREE you say what about the witnesses at the Pentagon … there were plenty!! Did anyone see any bodies from the planes??? How about any gashes on the lawn from the plane? How about a wing or tail section? How about an engine? Computers and books were visible in the opening that weren’t even scarred – how could the plane just disappear?

    Remember the big box with the tarp on it that those men (they were not laborers either — they were in suits) … were carrying away — have you ever heard the term “drone” … or “missile” … what could possible have fit in a box that small and light enough to have pallbearers carrying it away?

    Why the immediate seizure of any video tapes in the neighborhood surrounding the Pentagon?

    Why did they systematically comb the area for even the minutest pieces of evidence … because evidence of anything other than that so-called Airliner would blow their explanation wide-open.

    I say we create a reward fund and give $1M or more of our tax dollars to the first person providing information that leads to blowing this thing wide open!!! If we can’t use tax dollars, then we use our own post-tax dollars!!! By Any Means Necessary !!! (BAMN!!!)

    We want the perpetrators of 9-1-1 dead or alive, right? If they can spend it for Saddam, who they can’t even connect to these events – they can spend it on the true perpetrators behind this tragedy!!!

    The gov’t can’t do it because it goes against their explanation, but the citizens can. A dollar a head should be more than enough to get the tongues wagging!!!

    Turn up the heat!!! I’ve got the first $100 for the cause …

    If you really want answers, put your money where your mouth is … what’s stopping you???

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    I’ve read a few other bits and pieces about Chomsky, who seems to have some interesting ideas, but I don’t understand how they can be categorised as being on the left of the political spectrum.

    Those particular links may not have displayed it particularly, but in general Chomsky would be considered on the far left of US politics. He’s a socialist and an internationalist, and that’s on the left for us. In Europe he might be seen differently.

    Dave

  • Cindy D

    Thank you Dave.

    I thought Christopher was alluding to the “popular left”. I hope the link with the comment I posted has a better flavor of his position–libertarian socialism–as opposed to other things called socialism.

  • Tree

    yes chris the people on the plane were identified at the crash site including the terrorists. the tapes were seized for evidence. they cant be released because they are still owned by the gas station, road crew, etc. maybe if CT’s did a little more research they would know that. and they know they are hiding nothing. second the plane didnt vaporize, this is what first thouht to have happened. but it was proven untrue. chris P i dont answer little hanging questions like the Why was the lawn was unscathed at the pentagon , and all those loose change Q’s. i look at the facts, hundreds of people saw an AA plane hit the pentagon, none saw a missile or drone, there was identifiable wreckage of an AA plane at the crash site, none of a missile or drone, the bodies were identified at the pentgon including the terrorists, airphone calls were made, saying there were terrorists. everyone on flight 77 happens to be dead, indicating flight 77 hit the pentagon, or else they’d be alive. these are the facts i look at, and i think its conclusive 77 hit the pentagon.

  • ChrisParks

    Tree, An unscathed lawn isn’t a FACT? Show me one outline of a body from the plane at #77 or #93 crash site. You won’t find any. The terrorists weren’t even listed on the manifests – and then almost half of them were determined to be alive in othe parts of the world! How could vaporization be “first thought to have happened?” … if it was gone – it obviously vaporized. What? It reappeared when the vaporization story didn’t wash??? People were TOLD an AA plane hit the Pentagon … magicians make people think they saw something that they didn’t all the time! One piece of metal does not an airplane make!!! Were those airphone calls or if I remember correctly, cell phone calls?

    You are very selective in what you are calling facts – and the FACT that you are steadfast in agreement with the official “story” and refuses to digest and process additional information as it becomes available makes me well aware that even further discussion with you is futile.

    Tree, I didn’t originally believe what I do now … I believed the official “story” for years – was mad as hell and scared … I wanted our guys to secure those WMD’s … then I, like most folks got on with my life.

    But something changed … my curiosity was peaked and I am now digesting more and more info everyday now … reading the books – finding new sites … constantly feeding myself the bits and pieces of this event – trying to make sense out of it.

    The fact that you see no need to look any further shows me that your mind is closed. Shut. Unreachable. Unteachable.

    You are the one who is not doing your research. The more I learn, the more questions I have … hell, if you go to youtube and search for 911 – the floodgates open … its tough sorting through the hoaxes and true material — but we take it in and process it and if it’s garbage – out it goes.

    YOU DON’T HAVE ONE QUESTION?

    When is the last time you took something in Tree? Have you stopped seeking answers? Seek out the brightest and most intelligent professionals out there and absorb and digest their logic, their reasoning, the science, the facts.

    It all adds up … and there is something very foul going on and if we walk around with closed minds – history will again repeat itself … and
    I am sure 9/11 is a cakewalk compared to what this administration has lined up for us in the very near future. They want to go into Iran, and aim to do so … we have the power to stop this!

    Open your eyes Tree. Ask more questions instead of disputing everything I write …

    For the record, I am not a CT – the government story is the conspiracy theory … I am a fact finder … and conscientious American … who actually believes that to remain silent makes me complicit in the cover-up. To not seek the truth makes me a part of the problem.

    Stop dropping the CT and get into the FF. It’s all at your fingertips. Check what’s really in your heart and quit “going along to get along”.

  • ChrisParks

    By the way Tree, the planes that hit the towers should have been pretty much on top of the heap. Did you see any plane wreckage from passenger jets? Can you please point me to an engine or tail section, something??

    I’m looking, and just can’t seem to find any. But there is lots of prrof that the media is up to their azz involved in this thing.

    I can’t find ANY planes – even at the towers. I’ll keep looking … they’ve got to be there!! They said they were there!! They showed them to us over and over again. I’m finding people screaming at the explosion, but no one’s talking about seeing a plane!!!

    I find the videos – but the plane on the videos is halfway into the tower and the tower isn’t touched … maybe it’s a trick, hunh? Yeah, I’d better keep digging on this one.

  • http://maturin42.blogspot.com maturin42

    You folk who ridicule those who believe the evidence of their own eyes and their own research over the prepackaged propaganda that increasingly flows out of the lame-stream media and our sorry excuse for a government, would have us suspend our own judgement and accept your ridicule as an argument. We can’t possibly believe this stuff because some mook who has not taken the time to study anything beyond maybe Popular Mechanics says so. You are too lazy to read the books of those, like David Ray Griffin, who have painstakingly documented the case and proven that the government story is impossible. Sit back, smug, while your government is seized by corrupt thugs using your own credulity against you.

  • Clavos

    “Sit back, smug, while your government is seized by corrupt thugs using your own credulity against you.”

    OK.

  • http://www.libertyrepublican.com Dave Nalle

    Maturin, we DO believe our own eyes and the research. We just can’t believe that you conspiracy freaks are so easily deceived by the propaganda spewing out of Alex Jones’ blowhole.

    Dave

  • moonraven

    Nalle, I cannot believe that this utter nonsense is stilgoing!

    You do NOT believe the evidence of your eyes and ears: In fact, that is the most distinctive thing about you.

    You are a prime example of the logic-challenged person who says: Mushrooms are poisoneous, but I don’t believe it.

    Happy munching.

  • tree

    moonraven, u are calling dave nalle a logic-challenged person because he doesnt beleive the U.S. government orchestrated attacks of 9/11 and killed thousands of U.S. citizens to go to middle east and fight a war. ur insane. chrisp stop asking half-ass questions. point to a plane part in the wtc wreckage. point to a body part in the pentagon debris. u keep asking these hanging questions, its like loose change all over again. put some evidence out there. is there more evidence that a 767 hit the wtc than any military plane, yes. is there more evidence that a 757 hit the pentagon than a missile, hell of alot more. is there more evidence that flight 93 crashed in pennsylvania than something else, yes. is there more evidence blding. 7 came down with explosives than something else. actually yes. engineers have come out and said its impossible fr everythng from explosives to be vaccumed up. the closer buildings to the wtc 1 and 2 didnt collapse because they were hit from the top not knocking out important columns for the building. the debris from wtc 1 and 2 knocked out lower columns in wtc 7 because the debris was falling farther down the building, not just hitting the top. it also started fires lower in the building. this caused it to fall from bottom to top like a controlled demo. there is one high def video of wtc 7 thats pretty close up to wtc 7. it starts before the collapse there were people walking around, a couple policemen. this video has sound. when the building collapses there were no loud flashes or bangs like every other demo. the columns just crumpled. all the people quip there necks around, including the policemen, no one knew that building was going to fall. chris p also id like for u to spread the word about why the pentagon tapes arent being released, about how they are still owned by the people they were confiscated frrom for evidence, so they cant release them. i harte wen CT’s ask that question, why are the pentagon tapes being held, without any real evidence of a missile hit. on a final note, Chrisp ask urself this, is there more evidence terrorists did this, or that the U.S. gov. did this, i think we all know that.

  • ChrisParks

    Here’s your answer Tree.

    There is MORE evidence of an inside job than not. Why do you think they are hiding the evidence?

    I don’t see you questioning anything Tree. (And since you don’t have to prove a negative, whoever got their explanation out first is right, right?)

    Tree, them saying so does not make it so. We are not children. It’s not “because I said so” with us. We are just asking for an unbiased, nonpartisan, fully funded, unimpeded investigation.

    What are you afraid of Tree? You already know the truth so you should welcome the expert investigation that was never allowed to happen.

    But then again – you have all the answers. You are probably a politician – or some home-based hack being paid minimum wage to hit the blogs and keep the ruckus down.

    Good job, my man … good job. I am thoroughly convinced of the official story now.

    Maybe you’ll get promoted to assistant manager now. I’d like a side-salad with extra dressing please. Keep the change. Thanks.

  • ChrisParks

    A freudian slip, Tree?

    “is there more evidence blding. 7 came down with explosives than something else. actually yes.”

    Just when were the explosives planted Tree – they didn’t have time to rig the building that day!!! (Oooohhhh, it was tooo dangerous).

  • ChrisParks

    Tree – it’s impossible to “fall from bottom to top” – ever hear of gravity?

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    I thought Christopher was alluding to the “popular left”. I hope the link with the comment I posted has a better flavor of his position–libertarian socialism–as opposed to other things called socialism.

    He’s what I’d call a socialist/anarchist, because he evinces little of the concern for protecting the rights of individuals, particlarly property rights, which are characteristic of libertarians.

    Dave

  • tree

    there is not more evidence pointing to an inside job. CT’s dont come up with solid to argue the gov. did it. ya a little evidence of controlled demo there, a little evidence of there of flight 93 not crashing in pennsylvania here. but no real evidence of the gov. having anything to do with the planning of 9/11. none. really. terrorist bodies identified, osama bin laden admitting to it on tape, in 2006, not the 2001 tape. videos of arabs getting onto the planes. on all the black boxes you hear the arabs talking, on one you can clearly hear one yelling no allah no allah. calls from flight 93 saying there were terrorists, which were not faked, ok retard. wats the point of having a new 9/11 investigation everyone in the gov. knows what happened. im a politician, i know what happened. and i did slip up with the wtc 7 qoute. look man i love america, go ahead and call me one sheeple.

  • tree

    its sad these days with conspiracy theorists, if anyone loves america, they are a pawn of the evil empire of bankers, or just one of the sheeple. o but im sure u dont love america, im sure ur u think the gov. is run by super secret operations of terrorism, which, i know, is not true.

  • ChrisParks

    I can tell from your command of the English language that you were a politician … but before this is all said and done, I may just become one too!!

    Tree, there are bad people in America too — and not just in the “hoods”.

  • ChrisParks

    No evidence of gov’t involvement, Tree?

    Who else can have our air defenses stand down, and hit the pentagon at the one spot where it’s undergoing renovations to reduce casualties?

    Who else can feed the media the “official story” so they are repeating the same thing and showing the same video on whatever channel you watched?

    Who else can warn Congress not to fly on that day – so they conveniently cancelled their plans?

    Who else can conveniently set up beforehand a few blocks away and have everyone in place to deal with the aftermath?

    Who else can silence the first responders and keep them from talking about the explosions they heard all around them?

    Again, we are just asking for a true accounting of the events of that day. I ask you again Tree, what are you afraid of?

  • http://musical-guru.blogspot.com/ Michael J. West

    No evidence of gov’t involvement, Tree?

    Who else can have our air defenses stand down, and hit the pentagon at the one spot where it’s undergoing renovations to reduce casualties?

    That’s not evidence of government involvement. Evidence would be some documentation that they deliberately planned and executed these things.

    Who else can feed the media the “official story” so they are repeating the same thing and showing the same video on whatever channel you watched?

    That’s not evidence of government involvement. Evidence would be some proof that an “official story” was concocted by the government. For example, a draft of the “official story” that was written by a government conspirator before September 11, 2001.

    Who else can warn Congress not to fly on that day – so they conveniently cancelled their plans?

    That’s not evidence of government involvement. Evidence would be some Congressman who offers testimony that he/she was warned not to fly that day. Or a person who offers testimony that he/she warned members of Congress not to fly on that day. Or a documented warning to a member of Congress not to fly on that day – a document that was written before September 11, 2001.

    Who else can conveniently set up beforehand a few blocks away and have everyone in place to deal with the aftermath?

    That’s not evidence of government involvement. Evidence would be a document that proves that anything was deliberately set up beforehand, a few blocks away. Or a person who offers testimony that they were put in place to deal with the aftermath. Or a person who offers testimony that they put someone in place to deal with the aftermath. Or a document containing instructions to anyone to either (a) set up beforehand, a few blocks away, or (b) to be in place to deal with the aftermath – a document that was written before September 11, 2001.

    Who else can silence the first responders and keep them from talking about the explosions they heard all around them?

    That’s not evidence of government involvement. Evidence would be a first responder who offers testimony that they heard explosions all around them, and were silenced. Or, a person who offers testimony that they silenced the first responders and kept them from talking about the explosions they heard all around them.

    Not being Tree, I wouldn’t know what he’s afraid of. But I would guess that he’s afraid of irrational people who’ve abandoned their faculties for critical thinking for the sake of paranoid theories that have no evidence to back them up, despite those people’s suggestions that those theories are, in themselves, evidence.

  • Clavos

    …I would guess that he’s afraid of irrational people who’ve abandoned their faculties for critical thinking for the sake of paranoid theories that have no evidence to back them up, despite those people’s suggestions that those theories are, in themselves, evidence.” (emphasis added)

    Which, of course, is a circular argument.

    Damn good comment, MJW.

  • ChrisParks

    I see Tree had to summon his handler …

  • STM

    Joel writes: “9/11 – the big cover-up?
    Peter Tatchell”

    Anything Peter Tatchell says should be considered with less than a grain of salt. Do your own homework and see for yourselves. If you are basing your opinions on Peter Tatchell’s skewed view of world affairs, that’ll do me I’m afraid. He’s entitled to his views, of course, but they are usually really out of left field. Any credibility you might have had is now gone in my eyes.

  • STM

    And as for ChrisP, well, I simply can’t be bothered wasting any more energy on this lunacy.

    Watch out Chris … you keep posting this stuff, and they might be coming to get yer.

    I’m sure they know who you are :)

  • Dr Dreadful

    When Peter Tatchell ran for Parliament in the hardcore Labour seat of Bermondsey, the voters actually elected a Liberal rather than have him as their MP. In fact, so traumatized by his candidacy were the good citizens of Bermondsey that the seat’s been safe Liberal ever since.

  • STM

    I can’t believe anyone would post a Peter Tatchell story and expect anyone who knows anything about him to take it seriously. Perhaps that’s the problem with the CTers … the poor buggers will believe anything, as long as it supports their, ah, point of view.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    #290 is just golden, Michael. Pity it will fly right in one ear and out the other with nothing inbetween for it to lodge in.

    Dave

  • http://www.robot-of-the-week.com Christopher Rose

    Dave, re your #285, it really does get tiresome correcting all the bullshit you make up, particularly when you do it in the entirely false context of your pretension to being objective.

    I am entirely in favour of protecting individual rights, including property rights, and it is impossible for you to support your statement because it is simply untrue and you made it up.

    It is true that there are some individual rights that have to be limited for the greater good, such as the slight limits of total freedom of speech we have on this site, the right not to wear a seat belt or a crash helmet, that kind of thing. I also don’t think it is a good idea to allow or encourage people to arm themselves in response to the failings of the police.

  • troll

    (geeze…touchy touchy: if I’m not mistaken Dave was talking about Chomsky)

  • Clavos

    What troll said….

    Though Christopher and Chomsky DO both begin with Ch.

  • Cindy D

    Ooops. Christopher, Dave is referring to Chomsky. I’d like to disagree with him about that now. But, I am off to work. Maybe later.

  • Cindy D

    we seem to have reached agreement on something (smile)

  • http://www.robot-of-the-week.com Christopher Rose

    Yikes! Maybe he was. But please forgive my apparent over-reaction as Dave does indeed do all those things.

    Curiously, based on the little I’ve read about Chomsky and the far too much I’ve read from the republic of Dave, I would have thought they had a fair bit in common…

  • ChrisParks

    Re: #294 STM

    You’re right dude. I totally agree w/ you guys now. I know the govt had nothing to do with 9/11.

    So now they can leave me alone. Good job.

  • tree

    thats not evidence, i said put evidence out there about how the gov. was directly involved and planned, those are just the same questions Ct’s are asking over and over again, and they do get answered. jesus, u ask for evidence with CT;s, and they just ask questions about the day, its exactly wat loose change does, they dont put out any evidence of gov. involvement they just ask hanging questions. i won listen to chrisP until he puts real evidencer out there. thers plenty of eidence arabs did it.

  • Tree

    I am cally all 9/11 troofers to at least give me ne shred of evidence the gov. planned 9/11. im about to get bombarded with questions im sure there will be a ccouple where were the bodies at the pentagon. this is about Chrisparks 289 post, i asked for evidence that the gov. planned 9/11, and i was bombarded with hanging questions, that were probably copied from loose change. he gave no evidence. thats all CT’s do, ask hanging Q’s, that do get answered by deebunkers, all of them.it was pathetic. theres evidence arabs did this, tons of it. i applaud micheal j west for putting the CT in his rightful place. look at post 290.

  • Cindy D

    Re: #285

    When is an anarchist not an anarchist a socialist not a socialist, a Libertarian not a Libertarian?

    Short answer: When they disagree with each other.

    …he [Chomsky] evinces little of the concern for protecting the rights of individuals, particlarly [sic]property rights, which are characteristic of libertarians. (DN)

    Dave, I am assuming you are talking about the contemporary American Libertarian. (Libertarian Party founded 1971).

    Libertarian Socialists, predate these “Libertarians.”

    Noam Chomsky: “The individualistic anarchism that you are talking about, Stirner and others, is one of the roots of — among other things — the so-called ‘libertarian’ movement in the US. This means dedication to free market capitalism, and has no connection with the rest of the international anarchist movement. In the European tradition, anarchists commonly called themselves libertarian socialists, in a very different sense of the term ‘libertarian.'”

    Noam Chomsky clearly points out that we don’t have capitalism, we have “state capitalism.”

  • Cindy D

    American Libertarians, in general, support what Chomsky (and others*) would call “state capitalism.” This is diametrically opposed to individual liberty and freedom.

    *Free Market Anti-Capitalism

  • Cindy D

    “…the Left was identified with the liberation of workers (broadly defined). Today we don’t associate libertarians with such a notion, but it was at the heart of the libertarian vision.” (see my url for link, as i got a forbidden word)

    A quote from: Land, Liberty, and Economy : The System of Unequal Rights to Land and Its Incompatibility With Human Natural History: “Libertarians believe each individual has the right to life, liberty, and property. Yet, we cannot truly have these without an equal access to natural resources. Government since its earliest beginnings has prevented equal access. We agree with Thomas Paine and others that the government system of unequal rights to land has distorted the equity of opportunity in the state of nature and the unearned value from land should be returned to all as just compensation for their loss of opportunity to share in the bounty of nature, because of the landownership system established by the State.”

    Rather than subject you to my crude analysis, I will just present this question:

    Are you a Real Libertarian, or a ROYAL Libertarian?”

  • Cindy D
  • tree

    damn good comment micheal J. west, putting chris parks in his place. chris parks read comment 290 and so on until this. Questioning things that dont make sense to ur small brain isnt evidence, not even close.

  • zingzing

    i just moved cities and found out that a good friend of mine from years back who lives here is a 9/11 conspiracy monster. what do i do? eh? aww gawd… i had to sit there as he explained why the govt was involved… for a good 20 minutes… over a very expensive beer that i bought him… i could have been alone with my dark, dark soul and my expensive beer, but no! no… i had to sit there and listen to a friend of mine ruin my estimation of him…

    to the 9/11 freaks… look: you’re nuts. nuts. shut up. please. now. before someone hits you in the face. it won’t be the government. it will be your friends. shut. the. fuck. up. we don’t give a fuck. thanks.

    i can’t go for that (no can do).

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Good job making a paranoid fool of yourself up there in #298, CR.

    Now how about giving me an example of some of the ‘bullshit’ which I ‘make up’, because from what I’ve seen you wouldn’t know bullshit from fine corinthian leather.

    Don’t worry, I won’t hold my breath for you to back up your insults.

    As to all this back and forth about what kind of ‘libertarian’ everyone is or isn’t, perhaps the term is becoming diluted and meaningless just like liberal has. We’ve now even got people who are calling themselves ‘neo-libertarian’ because they’re libertarians who believe in military interventionism.

    Labels are unreliable because they don’t mean the same thing to everyone. It’s why I object so much to the common usage of the term ‘liberal’, because it really doesn’t apply to the American left any more than it does to the ‘Liberal’ party in England. They’ve just held on to the term because it has a positive reputation from the time 150 years ago when liberalism meant something.

    ‘Libertarian’ is a newish term, designed to replace ‘liberal’ for those who believed in liberalism but didn’t like the American left. It’s kind of scary to see it already getting fractured into all these variations after only 35 years or so.

    Dave

  • STM

    On that note, what about the “Liberal” Party in Australia. Most of the time, it’s just a tad to the right of Attila the Hun.

  • http://www.robot-of-the-week.com Christopher Rose

    Cindy, part of your url features on the stoplist so I have swapped it for a tinyurl.

    Dave, I didn’t make a paranoid fool of myself, I made a mistake, which I’ve already admitted to. It’s a perfectly understandable error as you consistently make an even bigger fool of yourself every week here by pretending to be objective when you’re at least as bigoted and prejudiced as the next person. In your case it’s worse though because you do indeed know better but you just can’t help yourself.

    I do know bullshit because you write it here every single week; it’s usually signified by your laughable claims of being objective and informed. However, I must confess I have no idea what “fine corinthian leather” is. Is it made from the hide of an elitist pig?

  • Cindy D

    Dave,

    Labels are unreliable because they don’t mean the same thing to everyone.(DN)

    I agree. But, these labels have been changing for as long as there has been history. It’s inescapable. Because thought changes and people align themselves with a variety of ideas. Look at early American history. We have the Democratic-Republican Party (1792–c.1824).

    It is confusing. Similar to your example of classical liberalism, most Americans identify socialism with oppressive government states. This is a sad fact. But, what is one to do?

    ‘Libertarian’ is a newish term, designed to replace ‘liberal’ for those who believed in liberalism but didn’t like the American left. It’s kind of scary to see it already getting fractured into all these variations after only 35 years or so. (DN)

    Dave, I am surprised. There was enough reference in some of my links to show you that it isn’t a newish term. If you scroll through this page even briefly you can see date citations that demonstrate this:

    “There is ample proof from writings from the mid-1800s that indicate that before the capitalists borrowed the term “libertarian”, it was already in use in a political context that one could loosely describe as “pro-socialist”. It was not until the 1950’s that the capitalistic use of the term came into vogue.”

    I have no problem with this as long as the distinctions are made.

  • moonraven

    Fine corinthian leather–I believe that was a popular misconception of a statement made by Ricardo Montalban when he was shilling for one of the US car companies–he fondled the seat of a 1976 Chrysler Cordoba and said with a more than usually heavy “hispanic” accent: “…soft corinthian leather”.

    The leather was actually produced in Newark, New Jersey–maybe by the Soprano grandfather….

    Nalle ripped out the seats from a Cordoba he bought at the junkyard in Two Yellow Dogs Fucking, Texas, and uses them as sofas in his trailer.

  • tnene

    conspiracy theorists are so stupid. OK lets watch a bunch of 9/11 conspiracy videos made by kids based on misqouting people and ignoring all major evidence pointing to terrorists. CT’s dont even have evidence that 9/11 was an inside job, they just ask retard Q’s, get a life CT’s seriously get off the computer.

  • aufderjagd

    It’s not difficult to construct a theory about what happened on 9/11. There is a lot of information floating around about it. I suppose there are three ways you can move on with your life.

    1) Take a huge gulp of Koolaide and believe the official story, part and parcel. If that allows you to sleep well, then that’s what works for you.

    2) Dismiss any official reports about it and rail against the machinery of the military-industrial complex until your dying day. If you have the time to do that, have at it.

    3) Realize that six years have passed, information keeps surfacing and eventually there will be another look at all of it. As they say in China….’the oxen are slow, but the earth is patient’

    The British government is re-opening the investigation into Princess Diana’s death. Talk about a waste of time. But, it does point to the fact that eventually, the public will know the truth or at least part of it. There is an old saying, “love and murder will out” which means that you can’t hide either forever. In 1978, Congress found, officially, that the assassination of JFK was likely a conspiracy and that it probably involved a second gunman, based on the scientific evidence available. Here’s the relevant summation, “the committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that President John F. Kennedy was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy. The committee is unable to identify the other gunman or the extent of the conspiracy”

    Was a huge story made of it? No, but that is a pretty damning finding, considering the previous ‘official’ story. Think of all the hype surrounding Oswald. The point is that it was rammed down the throats of the public and into their psychology. That’s what governments do to stay afloat. Leaks happen and were it not for the Zapruder film, we’d all believe it was Oswald without question. Fortunately, we all don’t–largely because of a continued outcry for an investigation and release of records.

    A lot of media is around from 9/11–video of the actual crashes, recordings, interviews, reaction, etc, etc, etc. If you read the 9/11 Commissions report, you will soon discover that it is incomplete. For whatever reason, huge gaps exist and there is reliable information that can fill them. But, it wasn’t included. There may be official reasons for that, but eventually it will be re-opened. What that will find is difficult to say, but on a purely forensic level, even the most unenlightened CSI junkie knows that the 9/11 Commission gets an F on it’s report card for thoroughness.

    So, whatever you think about people that question everything, don’t think too badly of them. People that ask questions are the same types of people that asked questions of King George when he decided to tax them into poverty in the new world. You know what happened after that…

  • Silver Surfer

    Bollocks

  • Lumpy

    It’s great to ask questions but it helps if they are not incredibly stupid questions.

  • SelmaGoods

    The poster that began his rant with “Do the 911 loonies never give up? The fact that supposedly educated people continue to believe and perpetuate this crap. . .“ has two major problems with his argument. Here is the first:
    “Have these people never even seen a controlled demolition? There’s video of the towers going down and it bears no resemblance at all to controlled demo.”
    I’ve seen controlled demolitions many times and the collapse of the WTC was IDENTICAL to any controlled demolition that I have witnessed. The second comment is laughable. Here it is: “demolition explosives don’t generate enough heat by themselves to melt steel any more than jet fuel fires do.” This is totally FALSE. Controlled demolitions are meant to CUT steel columns. Jet fuel would never get hot enough to EVEN MELT steel.

  • SelmaGoods

    In response to post #306, it is not our job to provide “evidence” of the government’s involvedment in 911. We ASK QUESTIONS that have not been answered or the answers that have been provided are not logical. Here are a few:
    1. Why did the FAA and NORAD fail to follow standard operating procedures in responding to the hijacking of the four planes on 9/11?
    2. Why did three buildings (Bldg 7 was not even hit by a plane) collapse symmetrically at near free-fall speed-about 10 seconds for WTC Buildings 1 & 2; less than 7 seconds for WTC Bldg. 7?
    3. What is the hard evidence that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon (serial numbers matched to serial numbers in aircraft maintenance logs), what explains the “strange absence of airliner debris”, & what caused the exit hole in C Ring?
    4. Why was there “nothing larger than a phone book” at the crash site, & debris from the plane spread over a few miles?
    5. Why does the FBI’s Most Wanted for Bin Laden not charge him with 9/11 while British media claim that some of the hijackers are alive, & there are no Arab names on the 9/11 passenger lists available to the public?
    6. Who arranged the charter flights to take 140 prominent US-resident Saudis, including two dozen members of the bin Laden clan, out of the country when nothing else was allowed to fly?
    7. Why did the jets wait so long to scramble with four hijacked planes running amok over the eastern seaboard?
    8. As Commander-in-Chief on the morning of 9/11, why didn’t Bush return immediately to Washington, D.C. or the National Military Command Center once he became aware that America was under attack? At specifically what time did he become aware that America was under attack? Who informed him of this fact?
    9. Bush’s schedule for September 11, 2001 was in the public domain since September 7, 2001. The Emma E. Booker School is only five miles from the Bradenton Airport, so he, and therefore the children in the classroom, might have been a target for the terrorists on 9/11. What was the intention of the Secret Service in allowing him to remain in the Emma E. Booker Elementary School, even though they were aware America was under attack?
    10. Bush-Who approved the flight of the bin Laden family out of the U.S. when all commercial flights were grounded, when there was time for only minimal questioning by the FBI. Why were bin Laden family members granted that special privilege not available to American families whose loved ones were killed on 9/11?
    11. Bush needs to explain his 14 month opposition to the creation of an independent commission to investigate 9/11 and his request to Senator Daschle to quash such an investigation
    12. Cheney-On the morning of September 11th, when did you first become aware that America was under attack? Who informed you? Besides ensuring the succession to the Presidency, is there a defense protocol to follow in the event our nation is attacked? Was it followed? When did you arrive at the secured bunker? In reference to Norm Mineta’s testimony, when asked if the “order still stands” what order was that?
    13. Why did Condi Rice say “No one could have imagined them taking a plane, slamming it into the Pentagon” 2 years NORAD ran drills in which the Pentagon & the WTC were targets of planes & FEMA had the towers as a target on the cover of their 1999 study on terrorism, Justice Dept. depicted the towers as a target on the cover of their 2000 manual.
    14. If the WTC towers were designed to withstand multiple impacts by Boeing 707 aircraft, why did the impact of individual 767s cause so much damage?
    15. Why did NIST not consider a “controlled demolition” hypothesis with matching computer modeling & explanation as it did for the “pancake theory” hypothesis? A key critique of NIST’s work lies in the complete lack of analysis supporting a “progressive collapse” after the point of collapse initiation & the lack of consideration given to a controlled demolition hypothesis.
    16. How could the WTC towers have collapsed without a controlled demolition since no steel-frame, high-rise buildings have ever before or since been brought down due to fires? Temperatures due to fire don’t get hot enough for buildings to collapse.
    17. How could the WTC towers collapse in only 11 seconds (WTC 1) and 9 seconds (WTC 2)—speeds that approximate that of a ball dropped from similar height in a vacuum (with no air resistance)?
    18. Why were people seen in the gaps left by the plane impacts if the heat from the fires behind them was so excessive?
    19. Why do some photographs show a yellow stream of molten metal pouring down the side of WTC2 that NIST claims was aluminum from the crashed plane although aluminum burns with a white glow? Why did the NIST investigation not consider reports of molten steel in the wreckage from the WTC towers?
    20. Did the NIST investigation look for evidence of the WTC towers being brought down by controlled demolition? Was the steel tested for explosives or thermite residues? The combination of thermite and sulfur (called thermate) “slices through steel like a hot knife through butter.”
    21. How could cell phone calls be made from the flights when the technology was not yet available for making calls from that altitude?
    22.Why did Bush say that he saw the FIRST plane crash into the WTC on TV before he entered the classroom when there was NO video of that crash available until the following day?
    23. Who placed the enormous amount of put options on stocks for American Airlines, United Airlines and several insurance companies on September 10th ?
    24. Which hijackers have been positively identified by DNA? Is the FBI in possession of DNA samples for all of the hijackers?
    25. Silverstein’s comment “pull it” referring to building 7, defies common sense. He later attempts to clarify this by saying that he meant “get the firefighters out of the building”. There were NO firemen in building 7 at that time since they had abandoned that building hours earlier. So what did Silverstein mean when he said “pull it and we watched the building collapse?”

  • Clavos

    Yaaaaawwwwn.

    What a tiresome lot….

  • Andrew David Taylor

    You said you wanted to know the truth. I wasn’t invited to the 9/11 Commission Hearings in Congress. There is a reason why I wasn’t invited. The CIA didn’t notify the FBI that Al Qaeda had threatened to bring down the World Trade Center in 1992 and he left a deadly calling card. He (Atta or someone) killed half of my family.

    I believe the CIA took biological samples and they likely learn that the USA had produced the anthrax through ATCC located in Manassas, Virginia and kept quiet about it and didn’t have a manhunt for Al Qaeda. If you’re really smart then you can ask for e-mails taken off the computers of my workplace that Al Qaeda sent while they were there in 1992, I think they had an ISP connection. The NSA or the NSC is the one that is in charge of messages that are data encrypted. So get your Freedom of Information Documents ready. And you might find shipping orders and bills of sale for the anthrax sent to Saddam when he was a friend Iraq nation. Check with the Dept of Commerce because they keep the records. They (Saddam) were likely supposed to use it on Iran. Sounds like a deal gone bad. Doesn’t blame the bush boys (father and son) remember that the anthrax was shipped during the Reagan Administration and I think former President George H.W. Bush was CIA director at the time of Reagan. The same Bush who’s life was threatened by Al Qaeda at my workplace. My employer had to translate for me so I had to report to the Secret Service because of my high school teacher Mr. Chewey said I had to under U.S.C. and my call got transfer to the CIA when I told them it was a Foreign Agent (Al Qaeda) speaking in a foreign tongue. Read below for further details and feel free to contact me; I’m still look for a sharp lawyer. Read.

    To. Congressman Bob Goodlatte
    From: Andrew David Taylor, [Personal contact info deleted]

    I would like to be compensated by the United States Federal Government for their failure and liability to carefully screen the national borders from terrorists. The United States Government is supposed to protect its borders from foreign agents. The United States Government did compensate the loved ones of the victims of the 911 tragedy but the scope of the document that compensated them didn’t take into account those who got in the way of the terrorists as the terrorists were preparing to take the four airplanes.

    I would like to be compensated for the loss of my mother Mary Ann Taylor, my friend Gene E. Blair and the attempt on my life as well. My residence at the time at 4501 West Ox Road had to be destroyed because of the anthrax that was used. Can you initiate a bill in the House of Representatives to see that I am compensated for the losses? Below is a witness statement that I have constructed that recounts the deadly events of 1992 that greatly influenced me. I have searched for an attorney or a lawyer that will address the facts and take a deposition.

    Witness Statement

    I don’t work for the Federal Government. I’m a private citizen. I’ve never been trained by the military. I was in the employ of Mounir Murad in 1992 at a place that is known as The Publisher’s Service Bureau.

    About 2 or 3 Islamic Jihadists (Al Qaeda) came in to our offices and printed out 50 copies of an airport security map that was designed in a desktop publishing package called Illustrator. The terrorists made a mistake and tried to spool the (native) Postscript® file from their removable Syquest drive and ran out of disk space on that drive. They had to move the Illustrator file over to the native (resident) Macintosh IIci hard disk drive.

    As they left they tried to kill me with anthrax and they left a computer virus on the Mac IIci. My employer Mr. Murad is very knowledgeable about computers and he saw the virus eating away the bits and pixels on the screen so he automatically reached for his Norton Utilities and killed the computer virus. He was able to extract the file that was thrown in the trashcan of the Mac’s Graphical User Interface and the file revealed the map of airport security. He imaged a map on a Canon 500 copier and then noticed a terrible smell. The Jihadists had not only thrown anthrax in my face, but they had laced the rollers of his Canon 500 with anthrax.

    Mr. Murad was very disappointed but he said that the copier was insured and that it would be easily replaced. I noticed that he was still under their psychological control and I asked him a few technical questions to wake him up and then I asked him if he was ok. He stated to me that he did what he did in protecting them while they were in his establishment since they had ‘drafted him’ to be their cousin.

    He said he knew that they were Jihadists because they were reading the book (The Koran) wrong and they were going to kill the people in New York at the World Trade Center. I went home, but I took the issue seriously and called for help from the police. I called 911. The call was eventually transferred to the Central Intelligence Agency only because I had noticed that I could not understand the conversation between Mr. Murad and the Jihadists clients and it was derived that they were foreign agents on a mission to bring down the World Trade Center.

    I became very sick from the anthrax and I couldn’t go back to work for a few days. My roommate Gene Elwood Blair became sick as well and died. It was a very slow process. We had to unplug the phone from the wall because we were getting really strange calls from the mental health wards that are located in Fairfax, Virginia.

    When I tried to report the death of Reverend Doctor Gene Elwood Blair the 911 operator kept transferring my calls to the mental health wards suicide hotlines until I finally had to state to the 911 operated that she MUST NOT transfer me to them again that in fact I had a dead body to report and that it was a murder (homicide) and that the police need to take a statement about the death. The authorities sent someone from the Virginia Department of Health that is behind the Commonwealth of Virginia Police Station on Braddock road.

    The CSI fellow took biological samples of the top of Gene’s upper plate that revealed a grayish mold. I told him that I had been assaulted by anthrax, and I was given permission to take care of the body for burial. I’m mildly speech impaired and there were not enough funds in Mr. Blair’s account, so I had an unknown and new friend help me sell his car and those funds were used to bury his body in Ashland, Kentucky using Laser Funeral Home.

    Gene’s son Michael and Gene’s grandson Jason showed up at his funeral. I was listed as Mr. Blair’s caretaker with the Veterans Administration and I thought that meant that I was responsible for his person (to watch him in his blind condition) and that I was to show interest in his homicide case but the police informed me that I was allegedly only responsible for his burial.

    They essentially redefined my position from being his caretaking in life and guarding his condition of visual impairment or blindness with Pars Plantitis to limit my ability to sue the Commonwealth of Virginia State Police or the Federal Bureau of Investigation for their failure to take a written report and prosecute the homicide by redefining the word ‘caretaker’.

    Mr. Blair was a guest in my mother’s home because he was providing the essential services of caring for my mother in her diabetic (Type I) condition. Mr. Blair was Type 2 diabetic. I also had my sister Monica (who is mentally retarded) to worry about. Mary (my mother) was apparently stricken by the anthrax as well because Gene didn’t know how contagious it was. The effects appear as a cold and he identified it as something that they call ‘The Croup’ that you get in the countryside working on a farm with animals.

    I believe Mary Ann Taylor was euthanized by the state but the family is saying that she didn’t die at home, but instead died at INOVA Fairfax Hospital under the supervision of Dr. Cleary her cardio-pulmonary specialist. After burying the bodies I tried to go back to work only because the Virginia Employment Commission instructed me that I had to be standing on the ground at my place of work rather than being fired over the phone.

    Mr. Murad was afraid of a courthouse hearing where he would be called to testify. The real problem is the County of Fairfax and the way that they don’t like you to report wrongful death. I even got an attorney called Candice McCall because I was receiving so much static from everyone. She wouldn’t address the issue of the ‘wrongful death’ in civil court explaining to me that you have to be immediate kinship to the deceased to file a suit.

  • http://jetssciencepage.blogspot.com/ Jet

    Dear God! I can’t believe I have to post this again… Now pay attention kids.

    For the world trade center to have been imploded, explosives would’ve had to have been planted on the infrastructure of one of the tallest and most well-guarded buildings in the world. Security was beefed up drastically after the 1993 failed attempt to un-precidented levels… (which is why aircraft were used instead). It would have to be done without the hundreds of guards and monitor cameras noticing. walls would’ve been torn out to expose girders, structural steel would’ve had to have been cut or weakened without any one noticing.

    On top of that, two planes just happened to crash into the buildings on the very day they were imploded.

    What are you smoking???

    To implode those building would’ve required a minimum of 20-50 workers working around the clock, then multiply that by two buildings. The detinations would have to be done by wire to protect against stray radio signals from a police car, firetruck or cab from setting it off, and there weren’t any noticible wires running into the buildings from outside or the parking structure beneath. There were no wires running along the floors of offices.

    That many people all kept quiet and didn’t brag to anyone???

    what are you smoking?

  • http://jetssciencepage.blogspot.com/ Jet

    I AM ashamed. It was silly of me to try to talk common sense to these people; wasn’t it? One last point of interest.

    A big deal has been made of the WTC being designed to withstand multiple strikes from commercial jet liners.

    The buildings were designed to withstand hits from Boeing 707s which is what was in commercial use at the time they were built. NOT 767s and 777s with the increased weight and capacity for fuel.

    The buildings didn’t fall because of the impacts ON THE OUTER STRUCTURAL STEEL-which is what was holding the building up, in fact they absorbed them rather well, the buildings came down because the explosion and resulting fire caused by the jet fuel softened, not the OUTER structural steel, but the light weight INTERNAL girders holding the floor joysts up because the fire proofing was blown off of them by the fuel explosions.

    as they heated (the thin steel zig zagged floor joysts) they expanded then sagged, causing one floor to drop to another below increasing the weight on each succeeding floor, until it was impossible to stop the chain reactions.

  • bliffle

    Jet is right.

    Incidentally, Jet goes under the knife today, so wish him well.

  • http://www.EurocriticsMagazine.com Christopher Rose

    I think the op started at 7.30 this morning Ohio time, bliffle. I’m thinking good thoughts and hoping for the best.

  • paulwhoispablo

    Jet

    Good luck brother, I say a prayer to the almighty too for you.

  • American Citizen

    I think we have all seen enough real bad B-rated documentaries surrounding 911. I partially think that could be why some Americans don’t want to believe that our gov’t could commit such a hanis crime.

    What shocks the hell out me is that finally someone of significance finally came out and told the truth (this is what we have needed all along to state a case against our gov’t)and we still have done nothing about 911. It’s sad to think that Americans have forgotten about our constitution. I bet if you asked 100 adults what democracy means – less than half of them could give you the correct definition.

    At any rate – I had the pleasure of watching a documentary tonight called 9/11 -Press for the truth – and all though this sounds like every other hokey 9/11 documentary that has been made – it contains no hype, no unproven theorys, just the struggle of the 9/11 survivors to get reasonable answers from our government. It is touching, and at the same time shocking as actual film clips connect the dots in a way that our media should have, but didn’t. Every citizen of the US should see this film.

  • American Citizen

    One more thing (after reading some of your Posts)…
    Forget about terroists, and the pentagon, and if a building can withstand that type of impact for a few moments – Americans have completely missed the point.

    I’ll give you one keyword…PAKISTAN and our partnership with them.

    9/11 goes alot deeper than conspiracy theories – so much that the average american simply has no idea unless they have conducted extensive research as well as paid attention – and not to the media because the media has just confused the hell out of us. Take it from someone who has worked for The Times.

    Watch the documentary I mentioned in my first post – AND PAY ATTENTION! It states only the facts.

    9/11: Press for the Truth – 2006
    Director: Ray Nowosielski