Having complained of people posting off topic, it seems a reasonable solution to give an opportunity for people to discuss the topics I am banning from other threads – of which 9/11 seems the most popular.
I do not believe that the US government, or any of its agencies, were responsible for 9/11. It would just need too many people to be involved. Someone would have objected. There are some strange and dangerous people in America, but not in sufficient concentration for this one. They couldn’t even keep Watergate quiet, and that was a small group. Any group I can think of – even Blackwater – would contain operatives with scruples about blowing up New York. They may be sadly ready to kill people in poor countries, but Americans en masse? Somebody would say it wasn’t a good idea.
I asked a friend in the construction industry what it would take to demolish the twin towers. He replied nine months, 80 men, and 12 miles of cabling. The notion that a small team at night could plant sufficient explosives embedded at key points, is laughable.
The forces of the aircraft impacts must have been amazingly high. I have no difficulty imagining they would bring down the building. As for WTC 7, again the kinetic energy of the collapse of the twin towers must be immense.
I admit to a private speculation about WTC7. Unfortunately in construction it is extremely common for contractors not to fix or install properly all the expensive girders, ties and rebar that are supposed to be enclosed in the concrete. Supervising contractors and municipal inspectors can be corrupt. I recall vividly that in London some years ago a tragedy occurred when a simple gas oven explosion brought down the whole side of a tower block.
The inquiry found that the building contractor had simply omitted the ties that bound the girders at the corners, all encased in concrete. If a gas oven had not blown up, nobody would have found out. Buildings I strongly suspect are very often not as strong as they are supposed to be, with contractors skimping on apparently redundant protection. The sort of sordid thing you might not want too deeply investigated in the event of a national tragedy.
Precisely what happened at the Pentagon I am less sure. There is not the conclusive film and photographic evidence that there is for New York. I am particularly puzzled by the much more skilled feat of flying that would be required to hit a building virtually at ground level, in an urban area, after a lamppost clipping route – very hard to see how a non-professional pilot did that. But I can think of a number of possible scenarios where the official explanation is not quite the whole truth on the Pentagon, but which do not necessitate a belief that the US government or Dick Cheney was behind the attack.
In my view the real scandal of 9/11 was that it was blowback – the product of a malignant terrorist agency whose origins lay in CIA funding and provision. Also blowback in a more general sense that it was spawned in the nasty theocratic dictatorship of Saudi Arabia which is so close to the US and to the Bush dynasty in particular. As with almost all terrorist activity, I do not rule out any point on the whole spectrum of surveillance, penetration and agent provocateur activity by any number of possible actors.
But was 9/11 false flag and controlled demolition? No, I think not.
(Now I have given full opportunity to discuss 9/11 here, any further references on other threads will be instantly deleted).
I’m pretty sure juniper’s making fun of you,Larry!
In his own inimical way he’s also made some telling points re-who you probably are and why you’re here.There’s two vital existential questions you’ve self-evidently not got covered yet!
You appear to want to spend more time evaluating juniper’s satire than responding to any of the points raised by Freeborn re-the fast collapsing edifice of lies that constitute the 911 fairy story you’ve been trying to sell us.
Likewise the question will soon arise as to your position on an attack on Iran.Given the likelihood that this will be triggered by some new synthetic terror attack can we assume you and angri will take the same position as you’ve done on 911?
Doubtless you’ve not bothered to follow Freeborn’s link either which means your contribution to the continuing debate will be another quite pointless polemic against anyone who questions the official 911 account.They will be described as “anti-semites”,”Holocaust-deniers” and “conspiraloons”.While new sources of evidence are likely to be called “murderers” and “terrorists”.
It has to be said as contributions to debate and knowledge these rhetorical feats of yours leave a lot to be desired.
You’d be far better off debating Dubya Bush over some pretzels on which you both manage to choke yourselves.
Getting down to Crawford,Texas might be better for you than going home right now!LOL!
Good new article on globalresearch.ca here:
The Media Response to the Growing Influence of the 9/11 Truth Movement.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=17624
IV. Summary and Concluding Observations
1. In the past year, in response to emerging independent science on the 9/11 attacks, nine corporate, seven public, and two independent media outlets aired examinations of the issue, which were all ?” with the exception of the National Geographic special ?” reasonably objective, examining the issue as a legitimate scientific controversy worthy of debate (not as “conspiracy theorists” vs. science and common sense).
2. Eight countries ?” Britain, Canada, Denmark, France, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, and Russia ?” have allowed their publicly-owned broadcasting stations to air the full spectrum of evidence challenging the truth of the official account of 9/11.
3. These developments may reflect a relaxation in the international media following the change in the US and British leaderships.
4. These developments definitely reflect, in any case, the fact that scientists in the 9/11 Truth Movement have recently succeeded in getting papers, such as the nano-thermite paper, published in peer-reviewed journals.
5. These developments surely also reflect the general professionalism of the 9/11 Truth Movement, as exemplified by the emergence of not only Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth but also Firefighters, Intelligence Officers, Lawyers, Medical Professionals, Pilots, Political Leaders, Religious Leaders, Scholars, and Veterans for 9/11 Truth.
6. These developments seem to reflect, moreover, an increased recognition of the importance of the 9/11 Truth Movement, which is demonstrated by two honors given to its most influential member, Dr. David Ray Griffin, that would have been unthinkable only a few years ago: the choice by Publishers Weekly of one of his books as a “Pick of the Week,” and his inclusion in the New Statesman’s list of the most important people in the world today.
This more open approach taken in the international media ?” I could also have included the Japanese media ?” might be a sign that worldwide public and corporate media organizations are positioning themselves, and preparing their audiences, for a possible revelation of the truth of the claim that forces within the US government were complicit in the attacks ?” a revelation that would call into question the publicly given rationale for the military operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.
The evidence now being explored in the international media may pave the way for the US media to take an in-depth look at the implications of what is now known about 9/11, and to re-examine the country’s foreign and domestic policies in the light of this knowledge.
Elizabeth Woodworth is a retired professional health sciences librarian, and a freelance writer. She is the author of two published books and many articles on political and social justice issues.
“Larry, the towers where about 1350 feet tall. Wtc7 was 750 feet tall. So when you say “a fucking building” fell on top o f it, you are saying some of Wtc1 travelled over 400 feet sideways while “falling” downwards 600 feet.”
BWWWWWAAAAHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!
A building can be damaged without a direct hit on the roof!!!!!! Do you understand that? Do you think all the buildings in Dresden and Hamburg experienced direct hits?
BWWWAHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!
Larry,
You really have got a lot of explaining to do dood. Chapter 11? WTC7 that had a ‘building fall on it’ Oh Larry wot about ypur ‘angel dust’ from 4 different locations at G0 – it sure went poof! when somebody put a light to it! Bit like the stuff Guy Fawkes put in his barrels eh? Wot ’bout that big crater in 6WTC Larry – it wasn’t where a Boeing engine fell – Oh talking ’bout engines have you got any serial numbers from that big engine on the sidewalk? I need to look then up – got a link?
Listen Larry I don’t want the skids you give others here – I want some facts – larry f a c t s – Flight 77 cabin door closed – never opened – how did the ‘hijackers’ get into the cabin Larry with their boxcutters – you know those things that were found when the Israeli/Mossad boys were arrested – remember them do we – some say they made a video laughing at the WTC smoke.
Look Larry to debunk you have to know your stuff and not come here with bullshit – so let people here really see you can answer questions without Googling the debunking debunkers.
crab, i just scanned your last post, and I noticed this:
“These developments definitely reflect, in any case, the fact that scientists in the 9/11 Truth Movement have recently succeeded in getting papers, such as the nano-thermite paper, published in peer-reviewed journals.”
You really are that stupid. You think a vanity publication like Bentham is peer-reviewed. You don’t know how science works. You’ve been manipulated by idiots.
heh, now that is a fun read over at globalresearch.ca
These idiots are still clinging to the notion that the 911 Truth Movement is going anywhere … hope, it’s increasingly losing followers … their numbers on Sept. 11 every year are fewer and fewer … they can’t even get people to attend their silly movies
Do you know that 40,000 – 50,000 people go to that Roswell convention every year?
“Flight 77 cabin door closed”
Lie, you moron.
You’ve been manipulated by the American right wing.
Oh and that Lady you took the piss out of – she is an 86 year old senior who kindly told me her wonderful story, especially flying in a helicopter; she is very dear to me and those Saudi men did spook her, were very abrupt and told her she must wait for their flight before she could take off.
Larry,
See what I mean dood, insults, you are incapable of debate – go back to junior and instead of nuclear fusion start learning how to interact with your peers.
Larry wrote:
“BWWWWWAAAAHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!
A building can be damaged without a direct hit on the roof!!!!!! Do you understand that? Do you think all the buildings in Dresden and Hamburg experienced direct hits?
BWWWAHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!”
Do calm down Larry, your overcompensating screams demean us both.
You said there is lots of evidence of damage to Wtc7 that explain its freak collapse. You havent shown any, just some videos showing a quite unscathed building actualy.
You said “a fucking building fell on it” but now we are just talking about wether some bits managed to glance the side of it. (from 400 feet away)
Try to not clutter the place up with fictional imagery so much.
Mark, let me get this straight. You seriously believe that an octogenarian woman saw bin Laden and some other Saudis at the WTC prior to Sept. 11. And they were very rude to her.
Are you fucking serious?
crab,
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1249885/New-World-Trade-Center-9-11-aerial-images-ABC-News.html
Did you see the new images yet?
You can’t be convinced.
The experts have chimed in, and you still rely on theologians and discredited architects.
You’re afraid of the truth, and a pawn of the American right wing.
Just so we’re clear – the “911 Truth Movement” is a failed group composed of very dumb stragglers. A few smart anti-war people were sympathetic to the idiocy at the start, but they’ve long since abandoned those sympathies. You idiots lose more and more people all the time. The Stop the War Coalition and other anti-war groups want nothing to do with you.
More pictures of DUST larry. Not a single image of damage. Really, wasnt SOME kind of damage photographed to even weakly support your incredible claim?
You must be feeling sheepish now, cant find a single presentable image of this “massive” damage to Wtc7 that youve been cursing about.
Stop hassling Mark about his anecdote you crazy thug. And whats ‘Octogenarian’ got to do with it, you slandering people for being old now too?
“Stop hassling Mark about his anecdote you crazy thug”
so do you think it’s possible that bin Laden was buzzing the WTC in a black helicopter prior to 911?
crab, and so you move the goal posts.
I really really wish you had been standing 400 feet away from the Towers as they fell. In your opinion, it was just dust, so it couldn’t cause any damage.
Didnt cause any photographable damage DID IT dustman?
And yes I fucking do believe Marks anecdote Larry! If mark said that she said, then we all HAVE to believe, that bin laden did actualy survey the scene, in a black helicopter just before it happened. And YOU were in the helicopter too -stroking Bin Ladens beard, asking him if he really loved you. But he didnt, and now you spend your days cursing at people on unmoderated internet forums, because of that fateful day.
Let it go Larry..let.it.go.
So then you do believe Mark’s story, don’t you, crab? As a follow-up question – who do you think is more insane – you or Mark?
Im a crazy crab! Whats your best two peices of evidence that a fucking building fell on wtc7 from 400 feet away crazy bin larry?
there’s plenty of evidence that the collapse of the North Tower caused the collapse of building 7
Do you think Craig Murray is a dumb person for not believing your conspiracies?
“there’s plenty of evidence that the collapse of the North Tower caused the collapse of building 7”
Name one solid piece of evidence Larry. There’s hardly any. The idea doesn’t really stand up to serious scrutiny.
Firstly, the debris from WTC1 that hit WTC7 was mostly dust. That’s what happened. The towers just crumbled to dust. Eyewitness reports from people involved in the clear-up say that’s really all there was. Just dust. They found no pieces of concrete bigger than a house brick.
Secondly, it’s pretty obvious from footage of WTC7 – after the collapse of the twin towers but before its own collapse – that it is undamaged. There isn’t even a broken window.
On the matter of peer review, you may do well to reflect on the fact that NIST’s report has not and cannot be peer reviewed because NIST did not provide computer models for others to test its analysis. That’s just one reason why it’s such a Mickey Mouse report.
Then why do have to make stuff up Larry?
That you cant support?
“a fucking building fell on it”
“theres plenty of evidence”
Where is your evidence for your four hundred foot flying building you fucking octogenarian bashing, terror talking lawschool shit slinging smart ass?
oh, and what MJ said too!!
“Secondly, it’s pretty obvious from footage of WTC7 – after the collapse of the twin towers but before its own collapse – that it is undamaged. There isn’t even a broken window.”
You people are FUCKING MORONS! The firefighters knew that the building was in danger of collapse! They pulled their men out!
I have to give Craig Murray credit for not believing stupid conspiracy theories, especially this one about WTC7.
I just love the idea of old ladies spotting bin Laden at the WTC prior to September 11! And on a black helicopter!
Larry, you referred people to this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_helicopter
Apart from its use to refer to people as conspiracy theorists, the article gives at least four or five legitimate reasons why people WOULD see ‘black helicopters’ in the USA (and in the UK). Your feigned delight is completely overdone.
“They pulled their men out!”
Probably told to. So what.
Larry: the point is that there was no damage to the exterior of the building. That is evident from the pictures.
Whatever caused WTC7 to callopse neatly and symmetrically into its own footprint at freefall speed, it wasn’t due to getting a liberal coating of dust, was it? This is Alice in Wonderland stuff.
No, I didn’t link to that wikipedia article.
I don’t plan on looking at it, but do you believe that people WOULD see black helicopters because bin Laden (who was wanted for the Cole and embassy bombings) was buzzing around the WTC?
Are you people THAT STUPID?