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).
Forgiven.
But: “whereas media is the furthest remove”
What do you mean?
“Exexpat, you may also be interested to know that I actively seek meetings with commenters at this site. I have met a dozen or more, and remain in contact with several of them.”
Yes I am familiar with this.
Indeed one of the founders of cluesforum does this too.
http://www.septclues.com/SIMON%20SHACK%20PICS/SeptCluesPARTYsept11_2011_B.JPG
I am awaiting plan(e)ing permission.
Fwl, “capial C” – quite.
Exexpat – there’s a term for it, I forget. Something like custody or security of evidence. How many hands has it passed through? Who did what to the evidence while they were in possession of it.
So it starts with a camera operator, handled by a telecoms company to pass to a news agency, the more telecoms to multiple media corporations, who broadcast it as TV. Recorded in someone’s home, posted onto YouTube, snaffled by a website and re-posted – countless people in that chain, and at each step it can be modified. Who are all these people?
Hey don’t eat that you don’t know where it’s been!
Exexpat, 10:47 pm; reminds me of Cowgate, Edinburgh:
http://www.killick1.plus.com/pictures/golden-cow-at-cowgate.jpg
My typing is deteriorating. I’ll get to bed early to make up for last night. Exexpat, I’ll put that media fakery through the mill sometime in the future. Thanks for the chat.
Goodnight Exepat. Goodnight Fwl.
Chain of Custody is the term. I have experience with digital forensics within ISIT.
But if the live feed is switched and supposedly competing TV channels broadcast the same “live” images what difference does it make?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DQOVrMzr6g
– again, why is the video quality so poor from the video broadcast that day?
– and again my mid-range camcorder in 1996 had better quality – why would this be?
Clark: “Glenn, finally, and sorry to post four comments in reply to just one of yours, you’ve again chosen to disagree with me but not with Exexpat. Does that indicate that you’re more in agreement with his hypotheses than with mine? Because that’s how it could look to casual readers.”
Clark, I can barely keep up with all your direct points to me – should I devote yet more time to Exexpat, who has not addressed me personally at all recently (as far as I can tell)? I looked at a couple of his references and didn’t find them very convincing, and said so a little while back. Why someone would invent animated planes or pixels pretending to be falling bodies is beyond me. I do agree with Exexpat that you seem rather rushed about all this, and share his or her general doubt about a natural collapse.
Am I obliged to argue with every poster, just to keep you happy? Frankly, I’m more interested in arguing against that section of the Official Narrative you’re happily championing here.
C: “Glenn, seeing as the wreckage has long since been disposed of, how can we prove that the angle clips complied with their original specification? How can we even tell that they were all fitted in the first place?”
Since the evidence was rushed off to China for disposal, we – very conveniently – will never know. Astonishing way to treat a crime scene, less still a crashed aircraft investigation – which applies to all crashed aircraft that day as it happens. But since building codes are obviously so lax, and construction so shoddy, it’s rather surprising that these skyscrapers don’t come collapsing down a lot more often, wouldn’t you say? Indeed, I can’t think of another example. Can you?
*
C: “Lysias, I know it’s unlikely, but if the core of a building were to begin collapsing first, it could drag the visible exterior down even faster than free-fall.”
Indeed. If the core disappeared altogether, and imagination were allowed free reign, I’m surprised the buildings didn’t instantly turn into dust. Plus other buildings in the immediate vicinity (although I’m not supposed to talk about that, sorry, I forgot).
I have pondered various analogies that could be expressed – more of my “cartoon physics” in your pejorative view, no doubt – but what’s the point? You’re the only person who announces here his is the only mind still open, after all. Even when you demand and receive a concession (such as my admission that I don’t _know_ what happened), that’s ignored, and your correspondent treated the same.
I dunno, Clark. This is not uplifting at all. As you probably know by now, perusing an argument overly long is a fault of mine, rather than something I shy away from. However, I do not want a rancourous discussion with _you_, and that definitely seems to be the way this is going.
Exexpat, yes, “chain of custody”. Thanks.
Glenn, I’m sorry you’re not finding this uplifting, but we are discussing a criminal atrocity. I don’t know what more I can say without upsetting you further. Unfortunately you seem to have misrepresented my position somewhat and I wish to defend it, since this argument is occurring in public.
Thanks for confirming that it isn’t just my arguments that you disagree with.
I’m not “happily championing” an aspect of the official narrative, except by coincidence. So far, I don’t think that the Twin Towers were demolished deliberately, and I don’t think that a fifth aircraft was flown into into a nuclear power station, either. You don’t assert the latter either, but I wouldn’t accuse you of “happily championing” that aspect of the official narrative if you were arguing against such an assertion.
It isn’t “convenient” to me that the crime scenes were cleared so quickly. I’d rather that this matter had been resolved long since, so that discussion of it had ceased to drown out all other aspects of 9/11.
I did not assert that building codes were lax. On the contrary, I think they might have been disregarded, and NIST might be covering that up. And no, that doesn’t make it surprising that skyscrapers don’t collapse, because hardly any of them suffer such catastrophic damage; this is what such fraudsters rely upon.
Glenn, this comparison is most unfair. My suggestion is an unlikely possibility but within the bounds of physical law. Your comparison insinuates that I’m proposing a physical impossibility.
It was Exexpat who introduced the term “cartoon physics”, not me. Since I was the only commenter doing some physics with actual numbers and formulae, and since everyone arguing was arguing against me only, I misinterpreted it as ridicule directed at me and defended myself.
Glenn, I’d like you to cut me some slack. Arguing against deliberate demolition has sparked much opposition here at Craig’s blog and elsewhere, to the point that some dismiss Noam Chomsky, Sibel Edmonds and Wikileaks; some commenters even at this site have directed suspicion at Craig for limiting discussion to this thread. Decent people who oppose torture and illegal war, including commenters at this site, get ridiculed and classed as “shills for the establishment” just because they don’t accept deliberate demolition of the Twin Towers. I’m defending a lot more than just myself here, and until Fwl’s comment, I was doing it essentially alone.
Dear Reader,
Cass Sunstein and his “Cognitive infiltration”
This is the guy who infamously coined the term “cognitive infiltration” in regards to neutralizing online discussions on media fakery and conspiracies – though the concept itself has been part of public relations for a century.
“the best response consists in cognitive infiltration of extremist groups”, where they suggest, among other tactics, “Government agents (and their allies) might enter chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine percolating conspiracy theories by raising doubts about their factual premises, causal logic or implications for political action.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cass_Sunstein#.22Conspiracy_Theories.22_and_government_infiltration
Exexpat, yes I know about Sunstein, and JTRIG, and Squeaky Dolphin, and PRISM, and the US Navy commissioning software that enables a single operative can run ten on-line identities. And I know about the Chinese ’50 Cent Trolls’, and the Russian trolling operations and Hasbara. I’ve been doing this a while, Exexpat. I’ve moderated here and spoken to site admin when the server’s been under attack, which happened quite frequently.
Your point, caller?
A rough match of a few grainy pixels still isn’t evidence. I’ll contact my friend Miles Ashton and find out his friend’s name, the one who watched the 9/11 attacks from his apartment window. But not tonight; I need sleep.
Exexpat, if you’re insinuating I’m a paid government agent infiltrating this forum, take a look at what I’d just posted before I posted here:
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/01/feminism-a-neo-con-tool/comment-page-24/#comment-575889
I fight the propaganda, thank you, and you have some growing up to do.
Clark
Man alive – Does everything in this thread have to be about you? Why you getting personal about “growing up”?
“Dear Reader” is addressed to all readers – some of which may be unaware of the MASSIVE effort by various three letter intelligence agencies and other big players both in this and other forums to slide the forum. This is a public service announcement for the reader to be wary of ALL posts here and other sites.
“I’ll contact my friend Miles Ashton and find out his friend’s name, the one who watched the 9/11 attacks from his apartment window.”
Allegedly watched the attacks at this stage please. Please bear in my mind what we already discussed re the reliability of witness statements and that there is a large percentage of americans who have witnessed aliens/ufo’s and abductions 🙂
—
Exexpat, in your opinion, on this forum, what has been slid, and who has slid it?
Morning Clark
I’d be much more interested in your opinion on this matter – especially with your experience moderating the site.
You know as well as I do that (and without naming names) that hasbara are obviously present on this forum. One of our best posters had to leave due to daily bullying and harassment she endured from these entities. Pretty much anywhere on the internet if you say anything critical of Israel – usually you will be tagged team attacked – sometimes within minutes.
*tag team. My excuse is it’s early 🙂
Exexpat, if you search back for the threads concerning the Israeli attacks on the Mavi Marmara, you will see that we had a great influx of critical commenters. That seemed very likely to have been prompted by Hasbara. I choose this as the clearest example.
Of course there’s a respectable side to Hasbara, too. “Israeli Public Diplomacy”. People are entitled to argue legitimately for their country, or for any group of which they are a part.
Yes, we keep coming back to what YOU want, Exexpat, don’t we? Does anyone else matter?
Clark,
I’m not attacking you, other posters or the forum but you seem to be being defensive again with me?
As stated before I’m not here to argue or cause arguments.
—
OK, if you’re here to cooperate, please answer my question of 10:02.
I thought I already answered that – but see below:
“You know as well as I do that (and without naming names) that hasbara are obviously present on this forum. One of our best posters had to leave due to daily bullying and harassment she endured from these entities. Pretty much anywhere on the internet if you say anything critical of Israel – usually you will be tagged team attacked – sometimes within minutes.
“Cooperate”? Can you explain what you mean?
I’m posting in this particular thread to (try to) inform readers that media fakery was used in 9/11 and continues to be used (sadly extremely effectively) with military precision, for other so called terrorist attacks too.
Clark,
I have to go out now to the outlaws… or the twilight zone as I like to call their place!
I’ll try and catch up with you later. I read on the other thread that you’re not feeling great – dose up and rest up.
Cheers
Exexpat, if we’re equals, the best we can do is cooperate.
I have no in-laws; no one has chosen me to be that close to. I have no one to bring me comfort in the night. I hope your visit goes OK. I’ll go back to bed.
How are you feeling Clark?
I saw you posted Burial – come down to us. Became hypnotised with that track after hearing it on an adam curtis doc. Beautiful.
A young (and hip) colleague loved the fact that an old fart (me) had burial on his playlist!
He’s just done me a lovely mix – do you have spotify? I could send the link if you like.
One stand out track is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NZdggNUvq0
I’m grateful everyday for my partner. But took decades and crossing several oceans to find… Time not up for you yet 🙂
Hello Exexpat. I’m still feeling rough, but a lot less rough than I was earlier. I’ve been writing a long e-mail to a friend about perception and how we interpret the world. I’ll put the non-personal part up on my server later and post a link to it. Thanks for your kind thoughts and for the link to the lovely track.
Back in a bit – I’m about to have my dinner.
Exexpat, I miss Mary too, but it’s not as clear-cut as you think. Mary was indeed hounded, but it seems she stopped posting over a mistake, and it was partly Macky’s fault. Mary posted three comments making similar points:
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2015/12/coe-better-protected-than-blatter-by-corrupt-national-authorities/comment-page-13/#comment-571828
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2015/12/coe-better-protected-than-blatter-by-corrupt-national-authorities/comment-page-13/#comment-571826
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2015/12/carmichael-an-extraordinary-lack-of-humility/#comment-568243
But the comments Mary was upset about were not deleted:
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2015/12/henry-jackson-society-as-bad-as-donald-trump/comment-page-2/#comment-567981
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2015/12/henry-jackson-society-as-bad-as-donald-trump/comment-page-2/#comment-567979
Probably Mary was looking for the comments on a different thread. But why do I say it is partly Macky’s fault? Well, you yourself have pointed out how susceptible to suggestion people are. Macky had been aggressively asserting for months that this site’s moderation was biased against the likes of Macky and Mary. Macky was always supporting Mary, so despite much troll-like behaviour from Macky towards others including myself, Mary came to accept Macky’s assertion that site moderation was biased against her, and left.
It’s terribly unfortunate.
You’ve accused me of writing like a lawyer or a politician. I don’t think I write like a politician at all – I avoid sound-bites and catch-phrases, and I consciously try to avoid all “spin” and distortion. The matters we discuss on this forum are highly emotive already, without adding to the problem. My style could be criticised as ‘pedantic’, I suppose.
At the risk of appearing to slide the forum, I have another example to follow in my next comment; it concerns seeing media fakery where there is none.
Please look through the following thread, from Mary’s comment at 1:50 pm:
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2015/01/terrorism-and-nuance/comment-page-9/#comment-503858
paying particular attention to my comment at 3:47 pm:
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2015/01/terrorism-and-nuance/comment-page-9/#comment-503872
and following points I make up to and including my comment on the subsequent page, 22 Jan, 2015 at 10:05 am:
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2015/01/terrorism-and-nuance/comment-page-10/#comment-504428
Mary linked to an article that linked videos of the Paris supermarket siege. One of those videos alleged media fakery. Mary became wrongly convinced by this, and I tried to correct the matter. Note that Macky supported Mary (criticising me), encouraging her in her error – that is, Macky’s reflexive and unthinking “support” for Mary helped an Internet charlatan to mislead Mary, damaging Mary’s credibility.
Note that the whole incident helped to draw attention away from the role of the Saudi royal family’s promotion of Wahabbism, which has probably done more to damage the reputation of Islam and all Muslims than just about anything else in existence.
Without truth, we are lost. This is one reason I’m so motivated to keep things as factual as possible, and insist upon the highest standards of evidence and reasoning.
Thanks for the explanation re Mary. But would you agree that Mary was hounded by Hasbara for years on this forum? It was relentless… and too awful to read sometimes.
Anyway I’m glad we’re back on the debate. But difficult to discuss media fakery here as we can’t attach pictures 🙂
Have a look at this picture
http://s8.postimg.org/rx4rxa2sl/ARMAGEDDONvs911_NBCBROADCASTcomparedjpg.jpg
Tell me which one is more photo-realistic.
Exexpat, warning. My next comment will be a deconstruction of the video montage “Synched Out”. Unless you’re prepared to be open-minded about what you’ve apparently already decided, this might upset you. Sorry, but I’m not going to misrepresent my own thoughts just because they might be unpopular.
“Mary became wrongly convinced by this, and I tried to correct the matter”
Like your trying to correct me now?! 🙂
But I haven’t researched the “paris supermarket” operation so couldn’t comment.
Permalink for the photo-realistic picture question.
http://www.septclues.com/HOLLYWOODpropaganda/ARMAGEDDONvs911NBCBROADCASTcomparedjpg.jpg