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).
angrysoba: “I?ve not seen the condition his passport was in. Do you have a picture?”
Sounds like glenn hasn’t got past Loose Change! That’s one of my favorite moments in Loose Change – they show a passport that’s clearly in bad shape, and they claim that it’s in “pristine” condition.
You have to have been sucked into 911 religion to regard the passports as pristine.
?You have to have been sucked into 911 religion to regard the passports as pristine.?
That doesn?t surprise me at all.
I no longer trust the interpretation of any aspect of 9/11 from a Truther without being shown the original source of their claim. They have utterly exhausted any right to be trusted on anything at all unless they can back it up with evidence.
THIS is the type of thing that makes me question the mental state of Truthers when they make a claim and use a source that directly contradicts it in support.
Oh, and Mark Golding is definitely a fruitcake:
?Rather than being architects of destruction, perhaps like you we can strive for a higher consciousness that creates a magnificent civilisation synonymous with life, celebration, purity and knowledge.?
Hello Soba,
What exactly were you saying, then, about the bombs people were reporting? I won’t do the dissection bit of your earlier post, but it seemed pretty clear you were making out there was no witness statement concerning bombs which was not _actually_, and disingenuously, in the context of plane crashes.
I was incorrect in saying the passport wasn’t singed in the least, sorry – must have got distracted while writing that. Please allow me to modify the question: how could it have arrived at ground level to be discovered at all? Surely it’s arrival in any semblance of an actual passport, out of a plane that crashed in a mighty fireball, stretches credulity past any reasonable extent – in all honesty, it looks like you’re reaching by fascinating on the ‘completely intact’ hair-split of that question.
I mean – did many passports happily land to identify passengers like this, or did this almost miraculous phenomenon limit itself to the passports of hijackers? Are you seriously buying that story? ( I guess magic Arabs carry magic passports! 🙂
“That sort of thing has happened before”, you say, in reference to the postulated letter of “good luck!” from Bin Laden. Heh, sure it has, Soba, sure it has. Most often with diabolical fiends in cartoons, where the criminals have a big ‘$’ sign on their stolen swag, etc. .
Logic is exactly what we’re talking about here. You have an assumption that the government, through their hand-picked panels, must have provided the truth, because an alternative case has not made to your satisfaction. That is not logical.
You are assuming that a zero sum game between the government’s case and sundry “conspiracy theorist” cases exist, and must exclusively contain the whole truth, albeit with a bit of leeway for the Official Story fudging some responsibility to protect various incompetent officials. That is not logical.
You also assert that Mohammed Atta is more qualified than _any_ (i.e. all) members of AE911. Would you care to expand on this? Was Atta a qualified architect, for example, or are you favouring a more narrow definition of “qualified”?
*
If you feel up to it, have a better go at taking on the points I made in my post of January 28, 2010 11:05 PM.
Last time, you came up with some silliness about bowling balls suspended by pieces of paper, as if that wild analogy had the slightest bearing on the twin towers, no disrespect. Please try having a serious go at it.
“What exactly were you saying, then, about the bombs people were reporting? I won’t do the dissection bit of your earlier post, but it seemed pretty clear you were making out there was no witness statement concerning bombs which was not _actually_, and disingenuously, in the context of plane crashes.”
I was giving examples:
“I get ticked off with those who find a quote ******SUCH AS****** ?There was this big explosion? and use it to support the idea that there were bombs in the buildings. But when you track down the quote find that someone says, immediately after, ?A big plane had slammed into the World Trade Center!? There are countless numbers of these and when I see people, especially those with a supercilious air explaining that I have my head in the sand, telling me that I am ignoring their evidence and yet churning out five, ten then twenty of these dishonest quotes I get annoyed. I especially get annoyed when I track down the original sources of these quotes and show them that the original source directly contradicts their claims and that person waves it away and says, ?What about this then?? and sends me to a link that is a mishmash of many of the same pieces of ?evidence? reassembled.”
“I mean – did many passports happily land to identify passengers like this, or did this almost miraculous phenomenon limit itself to the passports of hijackers?”
They had the manifests to identify who was on board so the passports are irrelevant anyway. But I do NOT have a problem believing that something such as a passport could survive. You’d be utterly mad to bet on one surviving in advance but what Truthers – in their willfully fuckheaded way – fail to get is that some things DO survive crashes while other apparently more durable things DON’T. There is no way of knowing for sure what will survive a crash.
Here’s an example. Please actually read throught this including the bit about the suicide note and the bit about how many bodies couldn’t be identified because they were completely consumed, like the rest of the plane, in the fireball from the crash:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Southwest_Airlines_Flight_1771
“”That sort of thing has happened before”, you say, in reference to the postulated letter of “good luck!” from Bin Laden.”
No, I wasn’t talking about that letter from Bin Laden. Could you show me what you’re talking about as I’ve not heard of any letter from bin Laden. I do know that the hijackers were issued instructions on preparing for martyrdom which included the shaving of their body hair etc… but these were written by Abdulaziz al-Omari, one of the hijackers, as far as I know. Al-Omari also made a martyrdom video too. Look him up!
“Logic is exactly what we’re talking about here. You have an assumption that the government, through their hand-picked panels, must have provided the truth, because an alternative case has not made to your satisfaction. That is not logical.”
Glenn, you keep on parrotting this Trutherbabble about it all being the “Gubmint story” when there have been plenty of non-government connected investigations into these attacks and they essentially all agree that 19 guys hijacked planes and flew them into buildings.
What do you have trouble understanding?
That Muslims can hijack planes? There have been plenty of occasions when this has happened before. Don’t be silly.
That Muslims can fly? Plenty can. Don’t be silly.
If you would stop making up what you think the Gubmint story is and stop flitting from one aspect of the incident to the next we might make progress but I think you are doing what you accuse me of doing and that is sitting back and saying, “Yeah riiiiiiight! Like, I sooooo believe that!”
Do you believe that there were any Arabs, magic or otherwise on those flights, Glenn?
Do you believe anyone actually hijacked those planes or do you think they were remote-controlled into the buildings?
Do you think there were any planes?
Now, I have patiently tried to answer your questions. It’s about time you actually answered some of my questions.
RE: Atta
“In 1985, Atta entered Cairo University, where he studied engineering. As one of the highest-scoring students, Atta was admitted into the very selective architecture program during his senior year. In addition to his regular courses, Atta studied English at the American University in Cairo.[11] In 1990, Atta graduated with a degree in architecture.[12] For several months after graduating, Atta worked at the Urban Development Center in Cairo, where he worked on architectural, planning, and building design.[13]”
He then went on to do a graduate thesis in architecture at Hamburg University on Alleppo in Syria.
“I was incorrect in saying the passport wasn’t singed in the least, sorry – must have got distracted while writing that.”
OK, fuck off, you weren’t distracted – you made a claim that is made quite often by truthers, and then you got called out on it. Full stop. And now you want to weasel out of it by claiming “distraction” while you move on in your Gish gallop.
And about the passports – some of the hijackers were in the cockpits of the airplanes. It’s plausible that they had their documents with them. Significant portions of the cockpits were ejected from the other side of the Towers.
So:
If passports had not been found, it’s evidence of a conspiracy.
If passports had been found, it’s evidence of a conspiracy.
1) Do you hold neoconservative beliefs, Larry?
2)Would you describe yourself politically as a neoconservative?
3)What is your definition of ‘neoconservatism’?
4)What do you think of paleoconservatism?
5) a) What do you think of the current coup overcoming the Republican Party and where will it end?
b) Is the Tea Party related to the Religious Right, a unification personified in defeated Vice-Presidential candidate and former Governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin?
c) Who, or what, is behind the phenomenon of the Tea Party?
d)Do you think it likely that Sarah Palin will be the next President of the USA?
6) Do you think President Obama is doing a good job?
7)What are your views on the US Administration’s current domestic policies?
8)What do you think about New York City? Does it appeal to you, or do you prefer small towns?
9)Were you once a left-winger, Larry?
Did you believe in world revolution?
10) What do you think will happen to the world, and to the USA, in the next 100 years?
Suhayl, you’ve already accused me multiple times of being a Secret Agent Man, so I’m going to have to take you as seriously as I would take a crazy person that I’m forced to sit next to on a bus.
I am impressed Suhayl at your stamina – Larry is only seems interested in a tiny subset of issues.
Maybe it’s a bit like Obsessive Compulsive Disorder; the longer it goes on
the more he’s like a stuck record.
with acknowledgement to ‘Clark.’
“I am impressed Suhayl at your stamina”
You’re impressed with someone’s ability to cut and paste? It really takes like 4 seconds.
And I’m the one with OCD?
You truthtards can so easily turn things around in your minds.
Hi Larry
you anywhere near Forest Park Pkwy – Sheraton?
Angrysoba – this you!
http://www.coia.org.uk/angry.jpg
Mark, sure. Why do you ask?
“Angrysoba – this you!”
Certainly is.
Who feeds you, Larry?
Who needs you?
Are you a neoconservative, Larry?
Define ‘neoconservative’, in your terms.
Do you believe that the USA should rule the world, Larry?
Tell the readers the going rate…
For a soul
You’re not on the bus, Larry, you never were.
Jesus, Suhayl, were you waiting on my response for an hour? I was certainly asleep! You’ve heard of time zones, haven’t you?
And do you believe that 911 was an inside job?
Do you deny that your pathetic Muslim friends committed such an atrocity?
Larry, which of these Vice-Presidents of the USA was the best, in your view? Please rate them in descending order of preference [There is no negative marking]:
1. Spiro Agnew
2. Dan Quayle
3. Richard Nixon
4. Dick Cheney
Suhayl, do you believe in veiling women by force? Do you believe that if you commit an act of homicidal martyrdom, 72 virgins will be waiting for you in the afterlife? Do you believe that the Holocaust was a fabrication? Do you believe that Bush and Cheney did 911, and that the Muslims had nothing to do with it, because Islam is a religion of peace?
Are you reimbursed in dollars, Larry, or pounds sterling? Do you have to keep time-sheets? Are you allowed to claim for lunch, or just breakfast and dinner, when you’re ‘on the job’? How does the sub-contract work?
Is it GCHQ or the SIS? If the former, give my regards to Cheltenham, it’s a very elegant Georgian town – I love the fountains at the town centre. If the latter, say hi to Vauxhall, it’s an imposing piece of architecture and I love the mini-supermarket nearby outside of which the ‘Big Issue’ seller stands. Very handy.
That goes for anyone else, anywhere on this blog who might be operating on behalf of our delightful hard state.
‘ave a banana on me.
Suhayl, are you in favor of establishing the Sharia in Scotland? And what are you prepared to do to advance that cause? Blow yourself up?
Do you believe in beating women when they talk back?
Larry, are you being paid by the UK state to infiltrate oppositional websites and sow disruption? Are you attempting also to associate these critical websites with words and phrases that would be likely to draw down opprobrium upon them? Would you like a dictionary, Larry? Is English your mother-tongue? Are you a neoconservative, Larry?
Suhayl, you really should use the brain that took millions and millions of years of evolution to develop (Allah or Mohammed didn’t give you that brain, btw).
What words and phrases? I don’t use any words and phrases other than what are already used here.
In the run-up to the election, I refrained from goading Craig’s silly commenters, such as yourself. Use your brain.
Yes, I am a native speaker.
Now tell me about the 72 virgins your fellow Muslims get when they blow themselves up. Doesn’t that just mean 72 mothers-in-law? And isn’t that true that a correct translation is 72 raisins?
And why do you spend so much time on the Internet? In Scotland, isn’t there now a Danish embassy for you to set fire to?
You like raisins, Larry? Are you anti-Scottish, Larry?
I like raisins and Scots, but I’m not a big fan of virgins in the afterlife.
What happened to my reply to AS yesterday? It was there earlier, where has it gone? How are posts before and after it intact?
glenn, because the government is after you.
Glenn, thanks for that music link a some post back, btw, I forgot to say – it’s totally fab!
I suspect that for anyone who is a virgin (or indeed, anyone who is not a virgin), Drambuie may be the beverage of the beforelife.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drambuie
* Re-entered, due to the last one disappearing *
Hello Soba,
I do actually appreciate your willingness to talk about this, and perhaps we can change the tone and still do so usefully, in view of our rather more open exchange last weekend.
Let me offer, I do respect your intelligence and consistency. These are not back-handed complements, I disagree with you a lot of the time, but recognise your integrity.
*
In the first point – (I wondered while writing it, actually) I wasn’t saying _you_ were being disingenuous. You might re-read to see I actually was highlighting your suggestion, that Truthers were disingenuously proposing “bombs in the basement” etc., while omitting the witnesses’ concluding statements about said detonations actually being from the plane.? My ambiguity sorry, asking you about your assertion about _their_ disingenuousness, rather ?than yours. Jeez, that looks tangled, but I hope you get the point.
But all this is by-the-by. I get as ticked as yourself when led on worthless pursuits.
The passport was really an aside, I referred to it as both “pristine” and then later as “singed”, my point was not about its condition. It really doesn’t matter, it wasn’t my case – if you look back, that whole business is just a distracting sideline. It simply illustrates how easily such ludicrous lies for the ?Official Position are accepted by the True Believer, and there is enough silliness on both sides for that.
I’m surprised you believe that could happen, reading on. Nothing hinges on that, and I’d personally dismissed it as some stupidly eager FBI agent or whatnot trying to support what was already the official story, it really didn’t matter.
The “Good luck!” note from Bin Laden was actually a joke. But if you are taking that sort of thing so seriously, with body hair being shaven for such an event, perhaps you could explain how the alleged hijackers would maintain such a high profile, in a most un-Muslim like way, entertaining strip dancers at boozy establishments, just before their most important mission off their lives that would actually end it? All in the name of Allah (pbuh!)?
This is the sort of thing that puzzles me. How is it logically consistent that one would ?conclude it _totally_ obvious that Muslims would have a pattern of quite serious non ?observance, just before performing a crucial act they thought would bring them rather ?rapidly to God. Hmm. But I guess only a stupid person would wonder about stuff like ?that. And you’re trying to scare me off the usage of the term “logic”, after all.
*
Anyway, let’s press on.
By “Gubmint” do you mean your Official Story ? Perhaps I’m not as well up on colloqualisms as I had hoped, despite a number of years spent in the US. Maybe the wrong places?
Let’s help out your incredulity that anyone could be as stupid as myself yet still operate a keyboard, by deflating that bubble of preposterousness somewhat, with direct answers to your quesions but with side-comments ?(with your permission):
AS Q: (paraphrase)… do you believe “That Muslims can hijack planes? ”
– Yes, Muslims can hijack planes
?A: But it isn’t Standard Procedure to hand over the controls
– [Does glenn believe that there were Muslims on the planes] ?
– Can Muslims fly??
A: Yes, but only competent ones. Particularly when it comes to aerobatics.
– Do I believe in Magic Arabs??
A: No. But it appears you do.
– Do I believe there were any planes?
A: If you’re talking about were planes flown into the buildings, of course!
Are you asking whether planes can be remotely controlled – well, of course. They have been even flown from one continent to another without anyone on board. Were such planes flown that day? I don’t know!
I’ve answered all your questions readily. You have no reason to imply otherwise.
*
That’s it again, unfortunately, Soba – you want to tease from me a story so you can rubbish it. I don’t have the luxury of faith that you most clearly bask in. I’d like to know what happened. You’re obviously content in the satisfaction of enlightenment.
So why are you on this thread?
*
I note – very clearly – that you and nobody else. I repeat that, _nobody else_ , has gone anywhere near challenging my most important point about this.
I’ll concede this whole debate to you, just deal with my post of Jan 28 2010, 11:05, concerning momentum. Do you have much of an understanding about physics, Soba?