Chomsky dispels 9/11 conspiracies with sheer logic [video]

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
If this logic is sound and it justifies preemptive action then it would seem that we should establish networks to infiltrate Muslim civilizations and get them to blow each other up. And if we really had to, we might sacrifice some of our own people or blow them up in a false flag (as the AIPAC guy was saying) in order to annihilate the other "side."

But the other "side" is not Muslim civilizations. It's the militant jihadist aspects of those civilizations. War does not tend to make people less militant. Nor does annihilating their families.
 

BombDr

Senior Member.
Quite often horrible things, using explosive devices against people being one of them... which is why I truly hope you find another calling. Please, feel free to ignore this question if it's too personal, but I'm curious after your mindset: do you experience guilt in relation to your occupation? How does it effect you to know your work results, at times, in the loss of life?

I am an Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) officer in the Royal Engineers, which means I make bombs safe, be they what the Taliban puts in the ground, AQ when I was in Iraq, mines the Iraqi Army put in the ground, Nazi bombs from WW2 and unexploded ordnance from accidents and ranges or remnants of war. I'm also a combat engineer so I build stuff, destroy stuff, make potable water, increase force protection, build runways and deny the enemy their equipment. Right now I am in working in a Headquarters against the Taliban, and I am proud of what I do and the uniform that I wear.
 

BombDr

Senior Member.
I don't know that it happened anyway. But what would be good and convincing evidence that it was a conspiracy... but not the one that the official story is based on?

You don't believe the testimony of Jennings, the janitor and so forth or you think that they were mistaken. But I'm assuming that you would believe a CIA or FBI whistle blower? Of what sort... and what type of testimony could they give to change your mind?

What would change my mind is a piece of explosive, a cutting charge scorch on some steel, some unfired detcord/shockcord, firing cable, a radio-frequency trace (that means if they were detonated remotely by radio control, it leaves an RF signature, and the added problem that the plotters need to make their frequency choice carefully, with all those people taliking on radios, cell phones and using live TV cameras - All of which are RF hazards to a demolition crew), failed detonator, a chemical trace of explosive, or some witnesses that come forward with testimoney saying they saw some dudes coming into the building in the middle of the night and rigged up several tonnes of explosives which nobody noticed. Out of the thousands of people that evacuated those buildings that day you have TWO that say they heard some noise. what would convince me if someone in the conspiracy came forward and explains how he was involved in it. Right now, you have nothing.
 

BombDr

Senior Member.
I've heard this said often in the media, but with no examples given. Was there any actual documented instances of soldiers/Afghanis being endangered as a direct result of the leak? Or is it just something Pentagon officials and Karzai said loudly?

I'm sure a lot of people will be saying unkind things about Manning and I will not join them. But, if he was so upset about what he was dealing with he had many other avenues of flagging up his objections that did not involve emailing Assange. He had his chain of command, and his Congressman, but instead he chose Wikileaks, which is not a neutral observer.
 

Grieves

Senior Member
Given the obvious and considerable spread of the debris from the WTC towers that was sure to result from their collapses, I fail to understand how, if those collapses were planned, there'd be any doubt about debris hitting building 7. Buildings for several surrounding blocks were heavily damaged, as I understand it.

Originally Posted by Grieves
There was nothing identical about the impacts. They occurred on different floors, in different areas, resulting in entirely and visibly different kinds of damage. That they both collapsed in essentially the same way with neither building left partially intact, and that neither building experienced any gradual deformation or deterioration prior to complete and utter collapse and obliteration, strikes me as suspect. As often mentioned, these buildings were specifically designed to withstand plane impacts. I understand designing something to perform a function doesn't guarantee it's going too, but for both buildings to fail so completely in withstanding the damage dealt to them, and to fail in the same way twice, strikes me as suspect.

I honestly didn't think the matter was so confused. We all saw the collapses, all saw how they happened. It should be pretty evident what we're talking about. If I'm covering someone's false claims, that's their business... I'm expressing my interpretation, and what I believe the general interpretation of 'falling into its footprint' means in this context. No ones suggesting that the buildings collapsed into neat piles. Obviously they didn't. They did, however, fall relatively neatly in a straight-downward direction, with little to no diversion from the 'footprint' of their foundations as they did. I'm not a demolition person, didn't even know 'footprint' was a common term of the trade (is it?). If I've ever used the term, I've used it in the context of the collapses themselves... as I'm pretty sure most everyone else who uses it does. All the buildings fell more or less straight-down.
It seemed as if all the roofs were more or less aligned with their foundations as they came down. The buildings looked very much like they were collapsing down 'into themselves'. Hence 'into their own footprint'.
That's a flexible argument you have there.

lol, what, is it's a contradiction to say that a majority of the mass of each building wound up in the piles of rubble, but that adjacent buildings would certainly have been damaged by flung debris? Reaching, man.
I am an Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) officer in the Royal Engineers, which means I make bombs safe, be they what the Taliban puts in the ground, AQ when I was in Iraq, mines the Iraqi Army put in the ground, Nazi bombs from WW2 and unexploded ordnance from accidents and ranges or remnants of war. I'm also a combat engineer so I build stuff, destroy stuff, make potable water, increase force protection, build runways and deny the enemy their equipment. Right now I am in working in a Headquarters against the Taliban, and I am proud of what I do and the uniform that I wear.
So due to pride in your calling, and with the consideration that it's your career and sanctioned by your authority figures, you don't experience any overwhelming sense of guilt as a result of your involvement in the deaths of other people. This is a reasonable position, and to be expected of those participating in such endeavors. This is why I find the notion that those who may have participated in setting up the buildings for collapse would have been morally overwhelmed by their task and therefor would -have- to have blown the whistle by now a bit nonsensical. With enough pride and motivation in one's calling, and enough personal distance from the results, even the killing of people can be 'just another day on the job'. For some the scale of killing would prove irrelevant.
Understand that I'm by no means comparing you to such a person, simply pointing out that a different sort of authority structure with a different sort of ideals employing a different sort of man could easily produce a person capable of participating in an atrocity without a guilty thought. One sees it all the time, all over the world.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

BombDr

Senior Member.
Thermite could easily have been placed in lift shafts and in the crawlspaces, directly on the columns necessary without any need to disturb cosmetic wallboards etc. Access is achievable through a single ceiling panel on each level. Also the amount of thermite is not an unreasonable amount to be brought in. Plus thermite has to be ignited at extremely high temperatures and cannot be ignited by a building fire because it is not hot enough which is why they use magnesium to ignite it.

Do you ever ask yourself, if it is so easy, why thermite is not used in demolitions? Has ANYONE is the CT world, including the ones that claim immense technical knowledge done the calculations? Please carry on with this thermite avenue for a while, tell me how it was done.

There had already been multiple terrorist attacks with explosives (inc the 93 one) and they are used to having to deal with secondary forms of attack so why not test to make sure that terrorists were not now using thermite.

You might as well opine as to why it has also not been used since, as it does appear to be such a wonder material in the CT world.
 

BombDr

Senior Member.
Assange is under despicable assault on near certain trumped up charges, just so the U.S can get their grimy little mitts on him and subject him to the same draconian repressive and dictatorial regime which is near on par with the dark days of Stalinist Russia and which they impose on anyone that dares to disagree with them. Freedom... Yeah for the psychopaths.

Yes, innocent people run, all the time....
 

Jazzy

Closed Account
In any event, with respect to the whole clash of civilizations idea... isn't it true that the ruling classes and the builders of civilizations might have something to do with that? Or are we really supposed to blame the freedom to connect and Youtube like Hillary tried to and so forth? I wonder, is Youtube and the decentralized media typical to the internet really bringing about a clash of civilizations like the psychopaths and liars within the current power structure insist... or is it bringing about a clash of "We the people..." with their ruling classes?
The Islamic fundamentalism is peasant-originated. It is as Hitchens indicated, medieval. It's not open to persuasion, and needs to be fought and defeated, most likely the hard way.

The "ruling class" likes to use as much peasant thinking as much as they can. It's efficient, and let's lots of things get done, if people are allowed to get on with life the way they want it, with just the right number of tweaks to look after the rulers. Mussolini started life as a left-wing orator. He changed his message to get a good audience response, and when he looked up, he was a fascist, and Hitler was courting him. It's the same with the clerics. Say yes to the fundamentalist claptrap, and the gravy train is yours.

Trouble is, someone somewhere is working on a WMD and praying to Allah.

I don't know of the KONY 2012 experiment. Perhaps you could PM me a link.

In any event, with respect to the whole clash of civilizations idea... isn't it true that the ruling classes and the builders of civilizations might have something to do with that? Or are we really supposed to blame the freedom to connect and Youtube like Hillary tried to and so forth?
The fundamentalism is from the bottom up. There are quite possibly a billion muslims without access to the internet. It travels word-of-mouth. The better for customer sales.
 

SR1419

Senior Member.
The Islamic fundamentalism is peasant-originated. ... It's not open to persuasion, and needs to be fought and defeated, most likely the hard way.

Indeed.

From the dedication to an AQ training manual:


http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/terrorism/alqaida_manual/manualpart1_1.pdf
 

Jazzy

Closed Account
Reaching, man.
Whereas laying charges in WTC7 in case WTC1 struck it isn't?

Understand that I'm simply pointing out that a different sort of authority structure with a different sort of ideals employing a different sort of man could easily produce a person capable of participating in an atrocity without a guilty thought. One sees it all the time, all over the world.
OBL springs to mind. And the hijackers.

I am amazed that you see 'our' side doing it - but not theirs. And it's not as if there isn't a difference between these sides. As Hitch points out, these people don't like anything you represent, and only if you become one of them will they leave you alone. They would if they could see to it that the earth is cleared of non-believers, and women walking free.

But, hey, I'd support Dubya if the alternative were Galloway, any day. What a toad.
 

Trigger Hippie

Senior Member.
I don't see how its remotely possible building 7 would suffer no debris damage. It was a very large building in the immediate area. Can you explain?

Can you explain why the Verizon building just to the left and the post office just to the right of building 7 didn't seem to suffer much damage? Aren't they also in the immediate area? Did the explosive charges fail to detonate in those two building? Have they spent the last 12 years secretly removing nanothermite from their support columns?

aerial6wtc7.jpg
 

mynym

Banned
Banned
What would change my mind is a piece of explosive, a cutting charge scorch on some steel, some unfired detcord/shockcord...

I can see what you're imagining but there are a few problems with it given the evidence that was found as well as that which was not found.

For instance... as I recall, they couldn't find the black boxes but they could find a relatively well preserved passport.

They couldn't test the debris for explosives or search for evidence of that sort but they could simulate what would seem to be an unprecedented event. And at this point, aren't you convinced by the best simulations that money could buy that no actual investigation along the lines you're suggesting is necessary?

I'm also not sure how you're imagining the imaginary scenario or evidence that would convince you being reported so that you'd find out about it and so forth. Imagine this: "CNN reports, explosives were tested for and found on the scene!!!! Everything we previously reported, was wrong!!! Also, the global political order has just been overturned because it wasn't Muslims with Korans, it was Jews with Talmuds... another one of their false flags... just like we've been reporting all along!!! Now reporting from... wait, we just lost our satellite feed." Etc. etc.?

Right.

Imagine that.

...failed detonator, a chemical trace of explosive...

Ironically, Ry Dawson reported in one of his Youtube videos that Israelis were actually found with detonators. I'm just going by memory and I haven't thoroughly vetted that (Maybe it's bunk?) or read all the police reports for myself yet but that's what I remember him claiming. So if that were true, would it be the sort of evidence that would convince you or would you be able to invent a different imaginary scenario... sort of like Chomsky's "sheer logic" in the Youtube video being discussed here? Because then that evidence still wouldn't matter because it would be falsified by the lack of a lot of imaginary whistle blowers and so forth anyway. (By the time Chomsky is done with "sheer logic," almost all the evidence that he's wound up pointing to in reality would seem to be imaginary... which is the way things often are with intellectuals and philosophers. Just saying. But at least it's better than running a simulation and claiming that it's the epistemic equivalent of an investigation... mainly because Chomsky never claimed to be running an actual investigation. A satire: "I'd imagine that there would be whistle blowers. QED!" Side note, I think he's smarter than this.)

or some witnesses that come forward with testimoney saying they saw some dudes coming into the building in the middle of the night

For the sake of argument, let's say that's already happened. Are you sure that's really the evidence that would change your mind, in the imaginary scenario in which your mind would be changed?

I have my doubts.

It seems to me that the main thing that changes people's minds is still the corporate media. In other words, "CNN reports!!!"

So if that was, "CIA reports!!! For the sake of your national $ecurity!!" That would be an interesting way of controlling almost everyone with respect to anything of any significance. Control by a "top secret" type of society and so forth might even be fine for a while, so that everyone could enjoy their all American sports played on the field defined by the compass and square and so forth. But power corrupts and so forth... actually, I'd put that differently. Power draws psychopaths like flies to a corpse, so any "central intelligence" or power structure left sitting around and not split apart based on checks and balances and a balance of power so that cerebral psychopaths have to fight each other and so forth might leave "the base" and the part of the body politic that mass movements sometimes emerge from worse off than it otherwise could have been.

Out of the thousands of people that evacuated those buildings that day you have TWO that say they heard some noise.

That's incorrect:
...implicit in its 2005 report on the Twin Towers, that the FDNY did not report any testimonies about explosions in the towers. NIST’s revised claim seemed to be that, although there were some testimonies about such explosions, there were not enough “to support the contention that explosives played a role in the collapse of the WTC Towers.” This was a significant modification of NIST’s stance, which should have been published as a correction on its website and stated in a press release, not simply put in a letter to a few scholars.
In any case, what exactly NIST meant by this statement is not clear. Did it mean that the oral histories did not provide evidence worth mentioning unless all of the oral histories, or at least a majority of them, mentioned explosions? If so, that would be an incredible response. Almost 25 percent of the members of the FDNY provided testimony suggestive of explosions. This was a very high proportion, especially given the fact that these men and women had not been asked whether explosions had been going off—they had simply volunteered this information.* With regard to NIST’s limited denial—that none of the FDNY testimonials spoke of explosions “in the region below the impact and fire floors”—NIST’s “taken as a whole” statement in this letter seemed to admit that there were some testimonies of this type while claiming, in an attempt to justify its silence about them, that there were not enough of them to be worth mentioning.
NIST, however, had not simply failed to mention them. It had specifically stated that the FDNY collected “no evidence… of any blast or explosions in the region below the impact and fire floors.” No evidence would mean no testimonies of this sort whatsoever. Accordingly, insofar as NIST admitted that the FDNY oral histories did include some testimonies of this sort, it admitted that its limited denial had been false. And yet NIST has never publicly retracted it, so we have here another example of scientific fraud. By admitting, in effect, that there were some testimonies about explosions, including several specifically referring to the region below the fire and impact floors, while claiming that these testimonies “taken as a whole” did not provide evidence that explosives played a role in the collapse of the Twin Towers, NIST demonstrated that it had been determined—whatever the effect on its credibility as a scientific agency—to avoid mentioning evidence for explosives in its report.
(The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7: Why the Final Official Report about 9/11 is Unscientific and False by David Ray Griffin, (2012-12-30))
(I'd imagine that Griffin's name resonates well with a phoenix rising from the ashes. How do they put it in the Cremation of Care ceremony? Oh, that's right... that's all bunk and pseudo-science sort of like alchemy and the Kabbalah of the ancient cabals, I'd imagine. Curious that modern people would be entertaining themselves with ancient forms of bunk, though.)

*This is interesting too because investigators could have planted the idea of explosives in the minds of witnesses and "the base" if the herd of investigators was interested in doing so. And that sometimes leads to people reporting it even when they can't quite remember it... i.e. it might get other parts of the herd moving. So if the investigative part of the herd were interested in "making a case" or heading other parts of the herd in that direction, it's likely that they could have.

And overall... who knows what they would have found if they were running an actual investigation instead of an imaginary simulation or generally looking for evidence and investigating instead of running a PR campaign, etc. (I'm reminded of the pathetic state of "investigative reporting" in the corporate media. NIST's simulations of the official story may as well have been the scripts on their teleprompters, I'd imagine.)

...what would convince me if someone in the conspiracy came forward and explains how he was involved in it.

Seems unlikely, even if there actually were higher conspirators than Al Qaeda/"the base."

And even if they did decide that they had done something wrong instead of being a true believer in the way that they were moving the chess pieces and using their rooks to blow buildings and pawns up and so forth... who would they report their change of heart to and by what imaginary scenario would it be able to turn into: "CNN/CIA reports!!!!"

Again, seems unlikely... so perhaps in the end you can't change your mind the way that you're imagining that you can. I mean... as of right now, I can't really imagine a likely scenario in which you would even if there really was a 30 year conspiracy going on at a higher level due to moves being made on the Grand Chess Board and so forth. (I.e. if 911 actually was another joint operation involving "top secret" Israelis and Americans similar to Iran Contra and so forth it's hard to imagine how and by what evidence someone with the perspective of a rook on the chess board would be able to come to that conclusion. But most pawns look up to rooks, I suppose... so at least there's that.)
 

BombDr

Senior Member.
I can see what you're imagining but there are a few problems with it given the evidence that was found as well as that which was not found.

I'm not imagining anything. After any demolition job my team has to sweep the debris for unfired, uninitiated demolition paraphenalia. You seem untenably hung-up on NIST when they did not clear the site. If is was a controlled demolition you would still have to explain how none of the items I have descibed wer found by the recovery teams / NYPD / FDNY / FBI etc.

For instance... as I recall, they couldn't find the black boxes but they could find a relatively well preserved passport.

I did not discuss black-boxes, of which there would have been four, but I did discuss miles of firing cable, miles of detcord / shock cord, hundreds of detonators, tonnes of explosives and miles and miles of demolition tape and other charge fixtures or which not a single crumb has been found by anyone.

They couldn't test the debris for explosives or search for evidence of that sort but they could simulate what would seem to be an unprecedented event. And at this point, aren't you convinced by the best simulations that money could buy that no actual investigation along the lines you're suggesting is necessary?

I realise you are struggling with this, but why test for explosives if no-one (serious) suspects explosives? Should they test for salt corrosion too?

I'm also not sure how you're imagining the imaginary scenario or evidence that would convince you being reported so that you'd find out about it and so forth. Imagine this: "CNN reports, explosives were tested for and found on the scene!!!! Everything we previously reported, was wrong!!! Also, the global political order has just been overturned because it wasn't Muslims with Korans, it was Jews with Talmuds... another one of their false flags... just like we've been reporting all along!!! Now reporting from... wait, we just lost our satellite feed." Etc. etc.?

Bringing in your personal predjudices adds nothing to a technical discussion.



Ironically, Ry Dawson reported in one of his Youtube videos that Israelis were actually found with detonators. I'm just going by memory and I haven't thoroughly vetted that (Maybe it's bunk?) or read all the police reports for myself yet but that's what I remember him claiming.

I dont care what some guy claim, I only care what he can prove. I have seen no evidence of Israelis with detonators, so please if you must repeat unfounded claims, check them first, Secondly, why are we back to Israelis again?

For the sake of argument, let's say that's already happened. Are you sure that's really the evidence that would change your mind, in the imaginary scenario in which your mind would be changed?

My brain works on facts, so if you have some evidence of something that is solid, I can adjust my view based upon the facts presented, and not on my world view or whether someone is Jewish or not.

That's incorrect: (I'd imagine that Griffin's name resonates well with a phoenix rising from the ashes. How do they put it in the Cremation of Care ceremony? Oh, that's right... that's all bunk and pseudo-science sort of like alchemy and the Kabbalah of the ancient cabals, I'd imagine. Curious that modern people would be entertaining themselves with ancient forms of bunk, though.)

For the sake of clarity, would you please explain your interest in Judaism and I'm struggling to see the connection and you constant referrence to Jewish related themes.
 

mynym

Banned
Banned
The Islamic fundamentalism is peasant-originated. It is as Hitchens indicated, medieval. It's not open to persuasion, and needs to be fought and defeated, most likely the hard way.

I tend to be of the mind of leaving the peasants alone instead of trying to manipulate "the base" in order to establish a global government defined by central banking and so forth. (Why do those who fancy themselves as the ruling class often talk about establishing a new world order? Is it because they've already screwed up the current world order beyond repair?) After all, most of the time peasants will be fine as far as that goes and history shows that it's far, far more likely that our own intelligence services will create terrism than that the peasants will, so no need to go around killing them all.

Let them kill each other and be backward until they're taught by missionaries and true believers in the Golden Rule or some leaders emerging within their own body politics that recognize the best rules for building up civilization and so forth. Even if no one ever tells them the teachings of Jesus directly, they might realize that the best rule for psychopaths is to love each other as you love yourself and so forth. After all... psychopaths seem to love themselves an infinite amount so the Golden Rule is probably the best rule, as far as that goes.

Trouble is, someone somewhere is working on a WMD and praying to Allah.

Not really, trouble is... history shows that you have more to fear from the intelligence services created by oligarchies than the peasants that they exploit. Also, I'm not sure how your fear loop with respect to WMDs would equate to killing a bunch of peasants or creating Team America, World Police to police the world for banksters. It doesn't seem to follow. Probably better to look at our own intelligence services and the oligarchy that they serve.

But as far as a risk of WMDs and trying to find/plant WMDs in Assad's underwear and so forth goes, there's only one rogue nuclear state in the Mid East full of factions that tend to believe in tribalism and possibly a Sampson Option and so forth.

Note, a member of tribal factions talking to a political leader:


But... apparently, same guy:
We therefore ask: Why should a non-Jew be punished if he kills even a non-Jewish embryo while a Jew should not be punished even if he kills a Jewish embryo? The answer can be understood by [considering] the general difference between Jews and non-Jews: A Jew was not created as a means for some [other] purpose; he himself is the purpose, since the substance of all [divine] emanations was created only to serve the Jews."
The Chabad-Lubavitcher Rebbe, Menachem Mendel Schneerson. (Israel Shahak and Norton Mezvinsky. (1999). Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel. Pluto Press, p.58-62)

Apparently the goyim take no note of that:
After Schneerson's death, a bill was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives—sponsored by Congressman Charles Schumer and cosponsored by John Lewis, Newt Gingrich, and Jerry Lewis, as well as 220 other Congressmen—to posthumously bestow upon Schneerson the Congressional Gold Medal.
On November 2, 1994 the bill passed both Houses by unanimous consent, honoring Schneerson for his "outstanding and enduring contributions toward world education, morality, and acts of charity". --Wikipedia

Yet imagine if that was a white supremacist who had engaged in acts of charity, would their tribalism and ideas about supremacy be overlooked? Or imagine if a Muslim faction was proclaiming their supremacy while performing acts of charity as a cover for their organizations and so forth. I can only imagine the corporate media: "Supremacy! Fundamentalists! Danger, danger! Let's make a mass bowel movement!" Etc.

Meanwhile, this doesn't seem to be reported on or entered into the threat disposition matrix that causes "dumb goyim" to assassinate 16 year old Muslim kids without trial and so forth:
"I don't believe in western morality, i.e. don't kill civilians or children, don't destroy holy sites, don't fight during holiday seasons, don't bomb cemeteries, don't shoot until they shoot first because it is immoral. The only way to fight a moral war is the Jewish way: Destroy their holy sites. Kill men, women and children (and cattle)." Chabad "Rabbi" Manis Friedman, Bais Chana Institute of Jewish Studies, St. Paul, MN, USA

Their quotes could be bunk I guess... but I doubt it. Because it accurately represents a mentality that goes way back that seems to have caused "pesky" problems throughout the centuries. And people, just people... not a race taught to have an utterly tribal/familial/mafia mentality have been short of a member of the tribe like Jesus to tell them parables like that of a Good Palestinian. Or someone to tell them about how they may have to be able to hate their family/tribe in order to follow the Golden Rule and so forth. (What an extremist he was! May as well manipulate events to have him killed by some other dumb goyim... etc.)

The fundamentalism is from the bottom up.

If that's the case, then why are you basically ruled from the top and sent to war by factions of "fundamentalists" like Christian and Jewish Zionists? (For people with superstitious and tribal stone age beliefs that go all the way back to a symbolic stone age* and so forth... they sure seem to get a lot done with respect to shaping the world.) In any event, ever wonder why America actually didn't get the oil in Iraq? Ever wonder why the war of civilizations meme usually only pops up when it's caused by and under the control of Al Qaeda/"the base"? (I.e. the intelligence services of oligarchies that use "the base" like their toilet.) Etc.

*Another day, another dollar... and more peasants building monuments to ignorance based on the mythologies created for them.
 

JRBids

Senior Member.
it wasn't Muslims with Korans, it was Jews with Talmuds... another one of their false flags..

Mynym, we get the point. You hate the Jews. No matter how much you hate them, ridiculing, sarcastic remarks, and repeating yourself does not negate the fact that as many posters have pointed out there was no evidence of wires, unexploded items, etc. There was no magical tractor beam that pulled the jets (which may be imaginary jets in some scenarios) into the precise parts of WTC 1 and 2 to have them crumble from exactly where they needed to. BombDr actually has experience working with explosives, he is not making his observations from a comfortable chair in his living room. To those of us within eye witness viewing distance of the attacks, all of these imaginary armchair scenarios you and the other Jew- and/or US- hating truthers come up with are simply absurd. I belong to some truther debunking forums on Facebook, and I occasionally get messages from friends who see the posts go by in the ticker along the lines of "what is WRONG with these people? Are they crazy? I saw the buildings fall with my own eyes!"
 

JRBids

Senior Member.
I tend to be of the mind of leaving the peasants alone instead of trying to manipulate "the base" in order to establish a global government defined by central banking and so forth.

What does what you think have to do with what is actually happening?

(Why do those who fancy themselves as the ruling class often talk about establishing a new world order? Is it because they've already screwed up the current world order beyond repair?)

Straw man. No one is talking about a new world order in the imaginary illuminatti way you are thinking.


Let them kill each other and be backward


...till they kill us first? 9/11? Oh I forgot, that was the jooz.


until they're taught by missionaries and true believers in the Golden Rule or some leaders emerging within their own body politics that recognize the best rules for building up civilization and so forth. Even if no one ever tells them the teachings of Jesus directly, they might realize that the best rule for psychopaths is to love each other as you love yourself and so forth. After all... psychopaths seem to love themselves an infinite amount so the Golden Rule is probably the best rule, as far as that goes.

Makes no sense, but neither has anything else, so why am I surprised?

I'm not sure how your fear loop with respect to WMDs would equate to killing a bunch of peasants or creating Team America, World Police to police the world for banksters.

Oh come on, the "banksters"? You're in the occupy/da jooz did it/annonymous/truther barrel? Why am I not suprised.
 

mynym

Banned
Banned
For the sake of clarity, would you please explain your interest in Judaism and I'm struggling to see the connection and you constant referrence to Jewish related themes.

I'm interested in the tribal mentality that creates tribes/gangs/gangsters/mafias. I would note that you should be too and shouldn't turn a blind eye to it if you have any interest in what is actually going on in the world.

How is it that when I point out Jewish supremacy you seem to want to portray that as taking an unhealthy interest in it but if I was pointing out Islamic supremacy you would probably greet that with a shrug of your shoulders?

People usually know about Sharia and how there are Muslim supremacists and how Korans were found in the cars on 911 and so forth but they usually don't know about the Talmud and how there are Jewish supremacists. Not to mention the history of false flag attacks: (Lavon Affair, King David Hotel, USS Liberty)

If your concern is """"anti-Semitism"""" and mass movements in the bowels of the body politic then think about it this way, if the American people can handle the idea of "Muslims" conspiring to attack them without going out and rounding up "Muslim" suburbanites and soccer moms to intern in camps* then they can probably handle the truth about "Jews" without going crazy too. Not to mention the fact that trying to discuss the full spectrum of what may or may not be true on a small corner of the internet isn't going to change anything either way, so one might as well discuss things based on all the evidence and not turn a blind eye to some of it for the sake of political concerns and the imaginary problems it might create in the body politic, etc.

*Although, there is Gitmo and some of the injustice that goes on. So who knows. It would probably be best to stick with due process and not begin supporting assassinating American citizens without trial. After all, for all the study of it... you still never know with certainty what type of mass movement may emerge from the bowels of the body politic next. You might be in the groups entered into the "threat disposition matrix" and you might need the due process that dual citizens have often seemed to work hard on denying others, etc.
 

mynym

Banned
Banned
...till they kill us first? 9/11? Oh I forgot, that was the jooz.

Was Iran Contra a plot of Jewish suburbanites and "the Jews" in general... or was it a joint operation between intelligence services and an international network of privateers and so forth?

Oh come on, the "banksters"? You're in the occupy/da jooz did it/annonymous/truther barrel? Why am I not suprised.

Sorry. I'm a tribe of one. Alright, my beautiful wife can be incorporated into my tribe too... oh, yeah... it's time to incorporate.

With respect to the banksters and """""conspiracy theories"""""... off topic, but:
"The Illuminati Were Amateurs" - Matt Taibbi Explains How "Everything Is Rigged"

Get real.. and try to study what's actually going on in the world and so forth. Sheesh.
 

mynym

Banned
Banned
Mynym, we get the point. You hate the Jews.

No more than I hate "the Muslims." Any grouping of people in your mind that contains millions of people is always problematic as far as invoking a Jerry Springer show type of argument of: "Don't be hatin'!"

I don't even really hate what I view to be the real source of the problem of terrism usually... the intelligence services of the oligarchies that manipulate "the base" and so forth.

I hate it some but I'm also indifferent to it. Because it seems to be, as it must be. This is the system that people will inevitably build, it would seem. So the poor will be with us always, mainly because the rich will be with us always.

I belong to some truther debunking forums on Facebook...

Which ones are they? I'd like to know their perspective and I probably do have too many "truther" types feeding into my news feed now.

Note how everyone seems to go craaazy when Jewish forms of tribalism are criticized no matter how light the criticism or how extreme the supremacy being criticized, apparently. They go crazy even more than they do when their own forms of tribalism (That they've already been incorporated in, etc.) are criticized.

In any event, for the record... I don't think that "the Jews"* did 911 and so forth. My theory, as of right now would be that it was a joint operation of intelligence services and so forth similar to Iran Contra. That theory seems to have some explanatory power. And it might involve some Jews... but not Jewish suburbanites and soccer moms. Try to focus...

*What a faction that would be...
 

Jazzy

Closed Account
an artist's rendition:
LIES as an art form, you mean.

This material isn't nice because it's the product of idle undisciplined thought. It whines like the thoughts of the real characters who caused it. Whether a "message of Jihad" or the "search for 911 truth", it's a pack of lies and deceits made up for the poor in spirit, the illiterate and innumerate peasants, to comfort them in their miserable state. Neither information base contains any "truth" at all.

Jihadists and "truthers" have a lot in common. They should team up, if they haven't already. There's all those Jooves to kill.

I have nothing against you personally, Mynym. It's just your actions I disapprove of. What's in your head is NOT "evidence", just as it wasn't for the arab "pilot". It's just evidence of your state of mind.
 

BombDr

Senior Member.
I'm interested in the tribal mentality that creates tribes/gangs/gangsters/mafias. I would note that you should be too and shouldn't turn a blind eye to it if you have any interest in what is actually going on in the world.

Respectfully mate. Im not sure you have a good grip on what is happening in the world, if everything is connected to Jews... And Ill be fair and declare that I am Jewish and have duel nationality with Israel and did my service in the 1990s in the IDF, and no-one has yet given me the secret handshake, wink, nod or any other sign that Im in a special club of elites, put here to suppress the goy-cattle...

How is it that when I point out Jewish supremacy you seem to want to portray that as taking an unhealthy interest in it but if I was pointing out Islamic supremacy you would probably greet that with a shrug of your shoulders?

No, I do know some Jewish supremecists, and they are usually sad little men with silly beards living in the West Bank with their Uzis and many, many children. They usually struggle to keep their cars on the road, so not entirely convinced that they can covertly emplace a controlled demolition.

People usually know about Sharia and how there are Muslim supremacists and how Korans were found in the cars on 911 and so forth but they usually don't know about the Talmud and how there are Jewish supremacists. Not to mention the history of false flag attacks: (Lavon Affair, King David Hotel, USS Liberty)

King David Hotel was a false flag? Did some Jews falsely try to make out some other Jews did it? Where is the false flag on the USS Liberty, wheh they admitted their error on the same day to the US? Who were they fitting up that time?

If your concern is """"anti-Semitism"""" and mass movements in the bowels of the body politic then think about it this way, if the American people can handle the idea of "Muslims" conspiring to attack them without going out and rounding up "Muslim" suburbanites and soccer moms to intern in camps* then they can probably handle the truth about "Jews" without going crazy too. Not to mention the fact that trying to discuss the full spectrum of what may or may not be true on a small corner of the internet isn't going to change anything either way, so one might as well discuss things based on all the evidence and not turn a blind eye to some of it for the sake of political concerns and the imaginary problems it might create in the body politic, etc.

No, I have no concernes about you being politically incorrect, but I would like the odd fact brought into your argument, not abstract notions like 'if you read the Talmud, you can see Jews think they are special, therefore they committed 911' and other tenuous links about how a Rabbi was postumously presented with an award which is evidence of......?
 

mynym

Banned
Banned
I dont care what some guy claim, I only care what he can prove. I have seen no evidence of Israelis with detonators, so please if you must repeat unfounded claims, check them first, Secondly, why are we back to Israelis again?

I'll double check his claims sometime and get back to you.

Too be clear, what I'm saying is that I think Ry Dawson's theory of 911 generally has the most explanatory power taking into account all of the evidence. (Joint Israeli/American op, Iran/Contra type of deal... the fact that America and Israel are generally full of different types of Zionist factions is a side issue that plays a part in the success of conspiracies of the Iran Contra sort.)

I may change my mind but that seems unlikely, otherwise I wouldn't have come to that conclusion for now.

With respect to your mind "triggering" on any mention of Jews or Israelis yet again... I mentioned that mainly because that was the evidence that you were imagining would cause you to change your mind. If the Israelis arrested on 911 were successful in saying that Palestinians were our problem or framing them with detonators and so forth I suspect that the idea that "the Muslims" did it would fit into your worldview better. Thus, no trigger... "You're saying that Muslims conspired! Why do you hate all Muslims????" Etc. Would be tiresome, if I couldn't imagine your worldview.

With respect to your claims about being nearly perfectly objective I think you may be underestimating the foundations of mental inertia supporting your worldview and view of the world overall. (At least until the Right and the Left neural nets collapse into a new conclusion in the Center, etc.)

Maybe that's just me... and it's possible that I may not have enough "base" inertia and change my mind about things too much when I think I see a piece of evidence fitting a theory/story regardless of the Right/Left paradigm typical to "the base." That's possible. But overall, it seems to me that it would be best if people could try to hold more than one worldview in their mind at a time and imagine more than one (usually simplistic) story or theory. Because that's the only way to try to verify/falsify a theory... including conspiracy theories (official or not).
 

mynym

Banned
Banned
LIES as an art form, you mean.

It may be.

It should probably be posted in the Youtube section of Metabunk and debunked, if so. There's probably a transcript for it somewhere.

I have nothing against you personally, Mynym. It's just your actions I disapprove of. What's in your head is NOT "evidence", just as it wasn't for the arab "pilot". It's just evidence of your state of mind.

What actions do you disapprove of?

For the record, I don't believe in killing Jews or assassinating 16 year old Muslim kids without trail and generally killing Muslims just because they're uncivilized peasants and so forth either.
 

BombDr

Senior Member.
I'll double check his claims sometime and get back to you.

Too be clear, what I'm saying is that I think Ry Dawson's theory of 911 generally has the most explanatory power taking into account all of the evidence. (Joint Israeli/American op, Iran/Contra type of deal... the fact that America and Israel are generally full of different types of Zionist factions is a side issue that plays a part in the success of conspiracies of the Iran Contra sort.)

I may change my mind but that seems unlikely, otherwise I wouldn't have come to that conclusion for now.

With respect to your mind "triggering" on any mention of Jews or Israelis yet again... I mentioned that mainly because that was the evidence that you were imagining would cause you to change your mind. If the Israelis arrested on 911 were successful in saying that Palestinians were our problem or framing them with detonators and so forth I suspect that the idea that "the Muslims" did it would fit into your worldview better. Thus, no trigger... "You're saying that Muslims conspired! Why do you hate all Muslims????" Etc. Would be tiresome, if I couldn't imagine your worldview.

With respect to your claims about being nearly perfectly objective I think you may be underestimating the foundations of mental inertia supporting your worldview and view of the world overall. (At least until the Right and the Left neural nets collapse into a new conclusion in the Center, etc.)

Maybe that's just me... and it's possible that I may not have enough "base" inertia and change my mind about things too much when I think I see a piece of evidence fitting a theory/story regardless of the Right/Left paradigm typical to "the base." That's possible. But overall, it seems to me that it would be best if people could try to hold more than one worldview in their mind at a time and imagine more than one (usually simplistic) story or theory. Because that's the only way to try to verify/falsify a theory... including conspiracy theories (official or not).

Once again you are making assumptions about what you think my view is. If you could demonstrate that the Chielf Rabbi of NY was arrested in a car with the director of the CIA and Dick Cheney's daughter, which she was on the phone to Natanyahu and hey had a small nuclear device in the boot - IF you could demonstrate it and prove it, I would believe it, because that is what EVIDENCE is.

I do investigations into explosive incidents, and it matters not my personal opinion or my view of the person I am investigating, I only care about facts and evidence. Why is that concept so difficult for you?
 

mynym

Banned
Banned
...not abstract notions like 'if you read the Talmud, you can see Jews think they are special, therefore they committed 911'...

I was just explaining some of the reasons why I would even consider anything other than the official conspiracy theory.

I'm well aware that Muslim peasants may be conspiring and would probably like to cut our heads off and so forth as well.

other tenuous links about how a Rabbi was postumously presented with an award which is evidence of......?

Because his tribal mentality apparently basically led him to create a mafia type organization, yet the Congress unanimously awarded him a medal and so forth. It would be like tribal Muslims with links to money laundering and terrorism being awarded a medal for their charity work and so on. (Note that dealing with the facts about Chabad is actually a stronger form of evidence than all of Chomsky's imaginary whistle blowers.)

Anyway, I think we probably agree on worldview type stuff far more than you probably think we do. But I have to go. I'll try to get back to your comments later.
 

Grieves

Senior Member
From SWEDEN? He is hiding from rape charges from Sweden.
No charges have been filed against him yet actually. An arrest warrant was issued to investigate allegations of sexual assault, but its entirely apparent that if he obliged that warrant, it's likely if not inevitable he'd face extradition to the United States by Sweden, America being a country in which many political figures have referred to him as an enemy/terrorist, some going so far as to suggest he should be assassinated.
The allegations can be read here. http://rixstep.com/1/20110131,00.shtml http://rixstep.com/1/20110204,02.shtml
If they're true they certainly suggest the guy is a prick, but neither testimony suggests a lack of consent.

Can you explain why the Verizon building just to the left and the post office just to the right of building 7 didn't seem to suffer much damage? Aren't they also in the immediate area? Did the explosive charges fail to detonate in those two building? Have they spent the last 12 years secretly removing nanothermite from their support columns?
I see fairly extensive damage to all of those surrounding buildings, windows seemingly shattered, big holes in the facade, even from that photo from a considerable height you chose to present. Both of those buildings were clearly struck by debris from the two towers, leaving plenty of openings where burning coals could have found their way inside. Interesting that they didn't burst into flames and collapse in on themselves, as is apparently to be expected.

Whereas laying charges in WTC7 in case WTC1 struck it isn't?
In case..? Again, can you explain to me, given the nature of the WTC1 WTC2 collapses, how building 7 could possibly have avoided any and all debris damage? Whether likely or not, involvement of explosives was a possibility.
I am amazed that you see 'our' side doing it - but not theirs. And it's not as if there isn't a difference between these sides. As Hitch points out, these people don't like anything you represent, and only if you become one of them will they leave you alone. They would if they could see to it that the earth is cleared of non-believers, and women walking free.
That same mentality I described above runs through this comment. Of course Islamic extremists commit terrible atrocities. I don't deny that for a second. But the notion that people of the west are simply too generally good/wholesome/righteous for anyone on our 'side' to be capable of committing them is wishful thinking at best, dangerously asinine at worst. Apocalyptic ideals of the destruction of all other creeds is by no means unique to Islam, and is in fact a major tenant of the Christian faith, 'the rapture' something extremist Christians look forward too/actively encourage with their actions. There's no shortage of people on all sides willing to do/say crazy things for crazy ideals, and pretending 'we', as in the western world, have somehow evolved beyond this is just flat-out wrong. Islam doesn't have a monopoly on the sick fuck market, as much as we like to advertise that notion. All I'm saying is the west is just as capable of producing soulless, uncaring people willing to kill and risk their own death for money, in service of their ideals (no matter how twisted), and out of pride in their own specific skill-set. To suggest its 'impossible' that, had mercenaries been involved in rigging explosives, they'd not have admitted their crime in guilt-stricken grief by now doesn't make much sense. Remember that poor 19 year old who was shipped off to the middle-east thinking herself a part of a brave enterprise, only to realize she was there for the amusement her male co-workers, who sexually assaulted her, eventually brutally raped her, and then locked her in a shipping container? Those were American military contractors, doing terrible things to an American citizen. One, a guard of the shipping container as I understand it, had the decency and humanity to let her call for help, but has any employee of that contractor, whatever they're calling themselves these days, come forward and testified on her behalf? Has any of the culprits admitted their crime out of guilt? There are people out there who do horrible things and don't feel remotely bad about it. They're not all Islamic, they're not all Christian, but they are all psychopaths for the most part... and some of them are paid to do the horrible things they do.

What would change my mind is a piece of explosive, a cutting charge scorch on some steel,
So then you're as upset as I am they destroyed the evidence, no? Or is that they didn't find such evidence because they didn't look for such evidence conclusive evidence there was no such evidence?

a radio-frequency trace (that means if they were detonated remotely by radio control, it leaves an RF signature, and the added problem that the plotters need to make their frequency choice carefully, with all those people taliking on radios, cell phones and using live TV cameras - All of which are RF hazards to a demolition crew)
Yes, what advanced technology could they have possibly used to transmit a signal that would have been difficult if not impossible to trace in the middle of New York City during a panic?
c139.jpg
I'm reminded of the 'hundreds of pounds' argument. Why, that would take a dolly..! INCONCEIVABLE!
tumblr_lrq5kmwVOp1qfff9p.gif
 

Grieves

Senior Member
And Ill be fair and declare that I am Jewish and have duel nationality with Israel and did my service in the 1990s in the IDF, and no-one has yet given me the secret handshake, wink, nod or any other sign that Im in a special club of elites
No Bar Mitzvah? :p
 

BombDr

Senior Member.
No charges have been filed against him yet actually. An arrest warrant was issued to investigate allegations of sexual assault, but its entirely apparent that if he obliged that warrant, it's likely if not inevitable he'd face extradition to the United States by Sweden, America being a country in which many political figures have referred to him as an enemy/terrorist, some going so far as to suggest he should be assassinated.

It is not apparent that he would be deported to the US, and even if they applied, they would still need to satisfy the Swedish courts that he is eligible. What makes that argument even weaker is that the US made no application for deprotation whilst he was under house arrest in the UK. I'm sure that is an argument he will make in his bid for martyrdom.

The allegations can be read here. http://rixstep.com/1/20110131,00.shtml http://rixstep.com/1/20110204,02.shtml
If they're true they certainly suggest the guy is a prick, but neither testimony suggests a lack of consent.

What he is alledged to have done is illegal in Sweden.

That So then you're as upset as I am they destroyed the evidence, no? Or is that they didn't find such evidence because they didn't look for such evidence conclusive evidence there was no such evidence?

Who destroyed evidence? Cutting scorches would have been obvious to anyone that they did not belong there. There would be straight cuts accross the steel with copper alloy from the CDC embedded in it along the edges. NO one to my knowledge has described seeing any of the steel in such a state, and certainly no-one has ever mentioned the copper alloy being found. It would be visible to the naked eye, and if you can find me some, I can tell you which factory it came from.

Yes, what advanced technology could they have possibly used to transmit a signal that would have been difficult if not impossible to trace in the middle of New York City during a panic?

You have no idea what 'RF hazard' means, do you?
 

Grieves

Senior Member
Who destroyed evidence? Cutting scorches would have been obvious to anyone that they did not belong there. There would be straight cuts accross the steel with copper alloy from the CDC embedded in it along the edges. NO one to my knowledge has described seeing any of the steel in such a state, and certainly no-one has ever mentioned the copper alloy being found. It would be visible to the naked eye, and if you can find me some, I can tell you which factory it came from.
The entire building 7 site was cleared, clearing which started the day of the attack, with all its structural steel being shipped off before anyone had the chance to identify/examine it. Only the WTC1/2 steel underwent any examination, and leading engineers conducting these examinations openly stated they were underfunded/inadequate, covering only a fraction of what was there. Again, the building 7 collapse, six years after the fact, has been diagnosed as resultant of the failure of a single beam of structural steel. If that was in fact the case, and the steel of the building 7 collapse had been examined, that beam could have been found and studied, providing conclusive, physical proof of the catalyst of the collapse and invaluable information to architects/engineers in future construction/fireproofing efforts. It would have also saved NIST six years of trying to conceive a plausible scenario for the collapse. It would also have satisfied the necessity for the preservation of evidence.
You have no idea what 'RF hazard' means, do you?
I've got a decent notion. I'm also aware that sending a signal from one device to another stopped being much of a challenge several decades ago, and certainly wouldn't be an issue for people with the resources to rig the WTC.
Turned it down on the basis that I don't believe in god. I still got the money though...:)
lol, props.
 

BombDr

Senior Member.
The entire building 7 site was cleared, clearing which started the day of the attack, with all its structural steel being shipped off before anyone had the chance to identify/examine it. Only the WTC1/2 steel underwent any examination, and leading engineers conducting these examinations openly stated they were underfunded/inadequate, covering only a fraction of what was there. Again, the building 7 collapse, six years after the fact, has been diagnosed as resultant of the failure of a single beam of structural steel. If that was in fact the case, and the steel of the building 7 collapse had been examined, that beam could have been found and studied, providing conclusive, physical proof of the catalyst of the collapse and invaluable information to architects/engineers in future construction/fireproofing efforts. It would have also saved NIST six years of trying to conceive a plausible scenario for the collapse. It would also have satisfied the necessity for the preservation of evidence.

Ill make the question simpler then: Has a single Policeman, Fireman, truck driver, crane operator, recovery crew, FBI, they guys that recieved the debris, the place wher the debris was stored, and the exosting debris which still exists from ANY of the the buildings - has ANYONE described a straight cut or copper deposits?

I'm not asking "Did NIST check for straight cuts" so you can write yet another essay how NIST failed to do something I'm asking, simply, from the oodles or truther evidence if anyone has seen, ever, a single piece of steel with a straight cut?

I've got a decent notion. I'm also aware that sending a signal from one device to another stopped being much of a challenge several decades ago, and certainly wouldn't be an issue for people with the resources to rig the WTC.

Forgive me, but in a demolition context I dont think you do. If I want to do a remote controlled demolition then I need to isolate several frequencies so that I can send my signal to set off my charges. That is why on a demolition site cell phones and radios are fobidden with a certain range, but I can control this. On 911, I would have no control over the RF band and all those radios and phone could set off my charges by mistake - hence making your RC initiation theory untenable. So CTers would need to explain how this RF band was isolated without confiscating everyone phone in the lower manhatten area.

Even if they used a safe-to-arm technique, the actual electrical detonators themselves are an RF hazard and even when one is not actually hooked up to a power source, they can still be initiated by the 'wrong' frequency.

So, in addition to the exceptionally difficult task of placing the tonnes of explosives in some buildings, wiring them, checking for continuity, then concealing all of the miles of wires behind ceailing panels and along trunking, not to mention they have to survive the fires, and then intitiate hundreds of electrical detonators with 100% reliability (which would be a first), they would also need their own bandwith isolated to do so. The other alternatives are command hardwire, ie you need a wire physically connected to the charges and someone to fire them from a safe enough distance, or secondly, an igniferous intitiation (old fashioned timing fuse), which again I would suggest is hardly practical and would probably degrade after several days to unreliability.

Do you see why, as an explosive engineer I find the whole idea rediculous, and why no explosives engineers agree with the truther community on this?

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/wac/default.aspx?cite=296-52-67060

This does not even scratch the surface of the whole RF hazard, but one wonders why truthers never go there...
 

mynym

Banned
Banned
Found some information on how at least some of the stories about Israelis apparently got started:
The suspects were in a van, and arrested. The bomb-sniffing dogs reacted "as if they had detected explosives", generating an alert that resulted in the road being closed. There was a long delay, while they waited for a warrant to search the van, and the timing could be right. The above report talks of the van being inspected at 10:00 pm; Police Commissioner Kerik said just after 11:30 pm that he'd been told there were no explosives "by phone after I left the last briefing." It seems at least possible that this story played a part in the "truckload of explosives" claim, then. Police had reason to believe that there were explosives in the van, closed a road and evacuated a building as a result. Could a misunderstanding then lead to a jump from "it might" to "it does" contain explosives, and been mixed with another stopped van to produce the reports we've seen? It's hard to see how that can be ruled out, on what must have been one of the busiest news days ever for all involved.

It's also conceivable that there were two vans, in which case it could be argued that Kerik's denial of explosives referred to the second, at George Washington bridge (and that would explain his mention of three men). However, the Bergen Record piece above makes it clear that the Israeli's van was also free of explosives, so again it looks like nothing more than an understandable false alarm.

There will always be those who claim something else: the van really was part of an "inside job" plot, and the story was covered up. But then this idea has problems of its own. Link
Seems to explain some of how the reports got started.

Of course, one can always imagine that there were other vans with explosives that didn't get caught and so forth.

On a side note, sometimes trying to cover things up based on a tribal/team mentality is worse than just letting things be more transparent. (E.g. "disappearing" Carl Cameron's report about the Israeli spy rings and so forth after 911... ultimately, once stuff like that leaks all over the internet it's going to be worse for the "tribe" in the end than if whoever had that mentality had just let things been more transparent. This tribe stuff on all sides, that's not my mentality. I'm just saying that from the perspective of that mentality of "is it good for the tribe" or "is it good for our political team" sometimes transparency and whistle blowing is actually for the best over all. As they say in politics, it's often not the crimes that get people in trouble... it's their attempts at cover up.)
 

mynym

Banned
Banned
Do you see why, as an explosive engineer I find the whole idea rediculous, and why no explosives engineers agree with the truther community on this?

Fair enough. There may not be enough evidence to support a theory of controlled demolition. Although I wouldn't be surprised if someone could provide an explosive engineer that was a truther and you still wouldn't agree anyway. I'm the same way, everyone seems to be. I.e. our mental inertia usually weighs a bit more than we claim it does.

I find it odd that no one has been held accountable. Pretty much, no one. No engineer that should have known about buckling as "basic knowledge" so that WTC 7 wouldn't basically fall in on itself due to some debris and office fires. No engineer that claimed that the Two Towers could withstand airplanes and so forth has been held accountable, as far as I know. Pretty much no one in the intelligence community was held accountable for their billions of dollar a year failures. Instead, no... they need bigger budgets. No general in charge of defenses was demoted or resigned in utter disgrace... weren't they promoted instead? And so forth.

If the official story is true through and through, from top to bottom and back up the chain of command again... then where is the accountability?

Apparently neocons have been more interested in holding Obama Inc. accountable for Benghazi where a few Americans died than the other 911 where thousands did. Would that they had the same zeal for accountability, hearings, investigations and a "safety first" attitude on the original 911, huh?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
jackprune Interesting Chomsky 9/11 video Escaping The Rabbit Hole 18
P Friend has fallen into COVID-conspiracies Coronavirus COVID-19 96
Mick West TFTRH #44 - Steven Hassan: Cults and Conspiracies Tales From the Rabbit Hole Podcast 2
A Why 9/11 Truthers Are Wrong About The Facts | (Part 1 w/ Mick West) 9/11 1
Mick West Coronavis and the Food Supply: News, Rumors, Spin, and Conspiracies Coronavirus COVID-19 5
Mick West TFTRH #11: Jim Lee – Chemtrails, Geoengineering, Conspiracies, and Semantics Tales From the Rabbit Hole Podcast 1
Mick West 2018 Hurricane Season and Weather Control Conspiracies Current Events 16
Mick West Eruption of Kilauea Volcano in Hawaii – Conspiracies and Science Current Events 34
MikeG Claim: DC officials are "flocking" to "Doomsday Camps" Conspiracy Theories 4
MikeG Resilient Cities Contrails and Chemtrails 0
Mick West Cults, Conspiracies, and Addiction - Similarities and Differences in Interaction Approaches Practical Debunking 12
MikeG Everything wrong with Hillary Clinton/Medical Conspiracies Conspiracy Theories 8
MikeG Florida Zika Response a "Martial Law Exercise" Conspiracy Theories 0
MikeG VA Taking Veterans' Guns Conspiracy Theories 0
MikeG Explained: UN Vehicles Spotted (Again) in the US [Delivery from US Manufacturer to Overseas] Conspiracy Theories 13
MikeG Unreported Abuse of US Troops Conspiracy Theories 0
MikeG FBI Spying on School Children Conspiracy Theories 0
MikeG College Course on Conspiracies Practical Debunking 89
Mick West Explained: Why Clouds Appear Behind the Sun and Moon Flat Earth 59
CeruleanBlu Project scientist Eric Korpela talks about SETI, aliens, and government conspiracies. UFOs and Aliens 0
derrick06 Debunked: HAARP ELF waves causing a earthquake Contrails and Chemtrails 12
vooke Need debunking:Ebola conspiracies video Conspiracy Theories 10
MikeC Lorde conspiracies General Discussion 21
BlueCollarCritic Debunked Conspiracies Update - The Government Is Not Confiscating Guns General Discussion 18
Cairenn Washington Post Blog on weather conspiracies Contrails and Chemtrails 11
AluminumTheory Zimmerman Trial Conspiracies..... Conspiracy Theories 12
Cairenn Pres Kennedy on conspiracies Conspiracy Theories 0
B Backpack conspiracies Boston Marathon Bombings 1
Cairenn Debunked: Gulf of Mexico oil spill conspiracies Conspiracy Theories 22
Dan Wilson Why do people believe conspiracies? General Discussion 86
Mick West Election Conspiracies Conspiracy Theories 52
Giuliano Taverna satanic cults/conspiracies Conspiracy Theories 7
Related Articles
































Related Articles

Top