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).
“why the fuck worry bout our 9/11 shit”
Because it was a defining moment in modern history and because the perpetrators left enough clues at the crime scene to make it interesting.
You said something in an earlier post that intrigued me, undercover_agent. You said:
“That’s why they fucked up the Pentagon strike because their hard planned thought out fucking decoy plot was compromized”
Could you elaborate on that?
So you don’t understand maths, but you know Chandler’s maths are wrong because someone who has never heard of Newton’s Third law told you so? If you are going to surrender your judgement to authority, you might at least try to select more respectable authorities.
And this thread is not about crop circles, homeopathy or mind control – on those matters you can nourish your infantile need to feel superior over at Randi’s. And read a few more of the posts on that thread you linked to – they’re the best argument against intelligent design I’ve seen in a while.
“but you know Chandler’s maths are wrong because someone who has never heard of Newton’s Third law told you so?”
Right, so if someone does not support what high school teacher David Chandler writes down on a vanity journal / website, it must mean that they’ve never heard of Newton’s Third Law.
Why doesn’t David Chandler submit his paper to proper peer review? If his conclusions are so obvious, wouldn’t the many journals who publish such subject matter be happy to entertain such ground-breaking work?
But that will never happen. He’ll continue to teach high school and otherwise help fools like you in reinforcing your beliefs.
I also don’t believe David Chandler because he’s lied in the past. There are various videos of Building 7 falling. He chose a video that supports his conclusions. He ignored all the other videos.
I see Larry has changed his name. What next.
It seemed such a simple and obvious question.
What are the two best pieces of evidence supporting the official account of 911, I wanted to know.
I thought “we’re taught to demand evidence before we believe in silly conspiracy theories” Larry would leap at the opportunity to pull out a couple of aces and trump all us nuts once and for all.
I thought “Truthers will fall for anything” would be all too eager to demonstrate that his handle is not self-deprecatingly ironic and that the evidence he finds so convincing is as solid as a rock.
Yet so far there is only silence. This reluctance to make your case is making you look increasingly flaky.
Let me repeat the question:
What are the two best pieces of evidence supporting the official account of 911?
Come on chaps, spit it out. Cat got your tongue?
Listen up you Brits – Look, you like America don’t you?? – Hollywood – Disney for the kids. Leave this shit alone – you’all wasting your fucking lives – go do some gardening – thats what Brits like yeh?
Heads up Brits I told you enough – fucking law enforcement were shut down onall this – we knew what was going down – it stinks
but after 9years no fucker here in the States will touch it.
So 19 terrorist screwed us – we knew – but were stuffed with a fucking branch down our gobs – for the greater good.
FOR THE GREATER GOOD – so go some place else and shut this house down. forget it – go plant vegetables of make bacon – yeh make bacon we love it – the shit from canada aint nothing like the Brit bacon – forget 911.
Agent Coulson
undercover_agent,
Let me give you some advice on sounding like an American, so you can, next time, sound like a better secret agent American.
We don’t write “compromized” – we write “compromised”!
BWWWAAAAHHHHHAHHHHHHAHHHHHHAHHHHHHAAAAAAAAA!
We certainly don’t write “the White-house”.
And your vocabulary is way off, as often happens when Brits try to imitate Americans. Your crazy text reads like movie dialogue from the 1950s (What are our gobs? Our mouths?).
Tremendous fail. But all that we can expect from a truther attempting to use a new tactic.
Hey Larry, why don’t you try a new tactic and state the evidence that supports your case?
Truthers will fall for anything!
They will apparently believe anything that Steven Jones writes, because Steven Jones is a scientist so his opinion about super-thermite being at the WTC site is sacrosanct.
Do they also believe that Jesus was an American who came to America on a wooden submarine?
tinyurl.com/2qp23k
Steven Jones wrote a paper about it!
Also, Dr. Jones is now talking about his theory that the U.S. created the Haiti earthquake to exploit their abiotic oil!
When he publishes his “paper” at his website, will the truthers believe that too!
Yes! Because truthers will fall for anything!
Hey amish mennonite – I suggest you read James Kirkpatrick Davis. you on the pad here?
What you doing in a engine-powered vehicle, ran a red light eh? you better hit the mattress.
Go raise cattle and grew soybeans in the Everton area.
undercover_agent, please keep ranting on like a typical truther.
I think you’ve still got MJ intrigued – he thinks it’s quite possible that you are a secret agent man.
Keep ranting. Do no compromize the integrity of the mission.
dreoilin, I’m still waiting on you to substantiate your claim that there were 83 cameras around the Pentagon.
Was your source a right-wing American troofer website? Sounds about right.
Was this your source?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtliol7kU4Q
I think I’ll leave larry/undercover/truthers talking to himself, and tiptoe quietly from the room…
Vronsky, you’re a moron who believes what he believes because some nut American high school teacher non-published a non-paper in a non-journal.
No wonder the truth movement is an abject failure.
Hey Larry, why don’t you try a new tactic and state the evidence that supports your case?
Posted by: MJ
dreoilin – this is the sort of dumbass American that you take your cues from:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhKiAUkw7SY&feature=related
And dreoilin – you are pretty pathetic, aren’t you?
You spend way too much time in your life making fun of Americans. You search out reasons to make yourself feel superior to them.
And then you allow the verifiably most stupid Americans guide you down the path of thoroughly debunked conspiracy theory.
What’s your source on the 83 cameras?
“I think you’ve still got MJ intrigued”
You’ve got me intrigued Larry because you won’t respond to my simple request to tell me the two strongest pieces of evidence supporting the official account.
The same goes for ‘Truthers will fall for anything’. It’s like you’re both avoiding the question. Why is that?
Come on guys. Chop chop. Take a few moments off from vacuous abuse and stun us with your evidence. Your coyness is getting a little tiresome.
Larry is a bot who asks questions. He then misquotes the answers.
He doesn’t answer any himself.
Larry,
I have to agree with MJ a true debunker at least answers questions with some evidence; to illustrate this point it is well known that implosionworld.com
has a paper that tries to explain the collapses although fails to explain the collapse of 7WTC and interesting goes on to agree that their own seismographic traces do not prove or disprove any explosion activity.
The scientific paper that found ‘volatile’ substances in G0 dust, or, in other words particles that display high energy levels when exposed to heat,
is interesting because to date this evidence has stood up to debunking in that only the publishers have been derided not, repeat not, the analysis.
So Larry I ask you again, explain to me, or point me to some evidence that this analysis is a
sham, wrong, misinterpreted, false or a natural phenomena.
Mark,
But you’ll believe anything!
You believe that bin Laden was buzzing the WTC prior to 911 in a black helicopter!
Do you also believe that the Haiti earthquake was caused by the U.S.? Steven Jones wants you to believe that!
A declassified ‘top secret’ report reveals that as many as 60 CIA employees knew 18 months ahead of the 9/11 attacks about two Al Qaeda operatives who later became hijackers of the flight that crashed into the Pentagon.
The two men lived in San Diego, California, but the CIA only notified the FBI in late August, 2001.
?What this demonstrates is how large the problem was in terms of information-sharing and the willingness to overcome the culture of secrecy,? said Rand Beers, a Former National Security Council official.
http://www.fas.org/irp/cia/product/oig-911.pdf
Dubai was the backdrop of a secret meeting between Osama bin Laden and the local CIA agent in July [2001].
A partner of the administration of the American Hospital in Dubai claims that public enemy number one stayed at this hospital between the 4th and 14th of July.
While he was hospitalized, bin Laden received visits from many members of his family as well as prominent Saudis and Emiratis.
During the hospital stay, the local CIA agent, known to many in Dubai, was seen
taking the main elevator of the hospital to go [up] to bin Laden hospital room.
A few days later, the CIA man bragged to a few friends about having visited bin Laden.
Authorized sources say that on July 15th, the day after bin Laden returned to Quetta [Pakistan], the CIA agent was called back to headquarters.
In the pursuit of its investigations, the FBI discovered financing agreements that the CIA had been developing with its Arab friends for years.
The Dubai meeting is, so it would seem, within the logic of certain American policy.
The CIA would have us believe Tenet and other CIA leaders were clueless and maybe they were.
However, as Chossudovsky noted in November, 2003, the hospital mentioned above directly under the
jurisdiction of the Pakistani Armed Forces, which has close links to the Pentagon. U.S. military advisers
based in Rawalpindi. work closely with the Pakistani Armed Forces. Again, no attempt was made to arrest America’s best known fugitive,
but then maybe bin Laden was serving another better purpose.
Rumsfeld claimed at the time that he had no knowledge regarding Osama’s health. Needless to say, the CBS report is a crucial piece of information in the 9/11 jigsaw.
It refutes the Bush administration’s claim that the whereabouts of bin Laden were unknown.
It points to a Pakistan connection, it suggests a cover-up at the highest levels of the Bush administration.
But, for the neocons, ever aware of the feeblemindedness of the average American (except when it comes to football scores),
such refutations are less than meaningless, as such a report can be splashed across corporate media headlines and
few challenge the bankrupt and wholly transparent premise that the CIA was out to lunch on September 11, 2001.
In fact, the CIA was squarely in the driver’s seat.
Moreover, if the CIA was indeed interested in hunting down and smoking out Osama and his dour cave-dwelling patsy terrorists,
they may have asked General Mahmoud Ahmad, head of Pakistan’s military intelligence, the “ISI? responsible,
at the behest of the CIA, for creating al-Qaeda in the first place as he was in Washington at the time of the attacks,
brunching it up with then Republican Congress critter Porter Goss and Democratic critter Bob Graham.
It is said they were discussing Osama. In fact, as the Guardian reported at the time,
Ahmad had a bagman, one Omar Sheikh, deliver $100,000 to Mohammed Atta, or somebody who claimed to be Atta.
Times – London
Larry,
You have proved to everyone here you are a strawman or in my words “a two bit lawyer”
incapable of serious debate, incapable of even asking questions.
Without prejudice and with apologies I think it better you inane comments are totally ignored,
in fact, it is only Craig’s ardent hospitality, grace and freedom of expression,
I believe, you are still invited to this place.
“A few days later, the CIA man bragged to a few friends about having visited bin Laden.”
You are so full of shit it’s still very hilarious.
Now what is the source on this.
It is almost equally valid for me to write that bin Laden is actually Zorg from Planet X.
Do you remotely understand how to parse through claims to find out what is based on evidence and what is based on make-believe?
“Mark, But you’ll believe anything!”
is Larry’s daft explanation for not providing any evidence whatsoever.
He still won’t reply to MJ.
He’s busy now trying to drag the topic off elsewhere. As he has done a dozen times before. Straight out of that 9/11 Debunking for Dummies vid.
Answer MJ, Lar. Assuming you can.
“Do you remotely understand how to parse through claims to find out what is based on evidence”
Precisely what’s been done with you. You’ve provided none. So far.
Answer MJ.
“In fact, as the Guardian reported at the time,
Ahmad had a bagman, one Omar Sheikh, deliver $100,000 to Mohammed Atta, or somebody who claimed to be Atta.”
Now, Mark and your fellow trooofers, your lies are out of hand. YOU REALLY WILL BELIEVE ANYTHING! The original claim on the $100,000/Atta issue was that the ISI wired $100,000 to Atta just prior to the 911 attacks. It was completely made up – and, just think for a second – what was Atta gonna do with the $100,000 after 911? In any event, the claim is now being twisted into what Mark wrote.
And, pathetically, trooofers like dreoilin will believe that some “bagman” delivered $100,000 to Atta. Just because an insane person like Mark mentioned it.
Heh Mark, and new news with respect to your acquaintance and bin Laden in a helicopter buzzing around the WTC?
dreoilin,
83 cameras.
Pentagon.
Source?
Still distracting, Larry.
Answer MJ.
I found it quite funny that Michael Lind has written extensively about the silly New World Order / Rothschild / Jew conspiracy theory. And then you quote Michael Lind as if he would look favorably upon your nutty conspiracy theories.
dreoilin, have you seen The Men Who Stare at Goats? What’s it feel like to be on the side of the guy who ran into a wall thinking he could go through it?