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).
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/02/assange-a-fundamental-vindication/#comment-576816
“I think they have two main purposes – 1 to Frighten other potential whistleblowers to keep quiet. 2. To maintain the US Government fairy story of 9/11 alive in the minds of vast majority of the General Public (most of who still also believe in Father Christmas (or equivalent))”
Brilliant Tony.
There is definite evidence of enforcement of this “reality” in this thread. Even my comment has been deleted on the main thread.
In fact if you present video evidence to the contrary that clearly demonstrates employed media fakery you will be tag-team trolled, smeared, bullied, abused, ridiculed etc. Funny how quick to defend the official account they are too. Sometimes within minutes.
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2010/01/the_911_post/comment-page-23/#comments
Any reader who wants to find real answers to 9/11 and the obvious media fakery employed need only visit http://septemberclues.info/index.shtml
[mods – this was moved from the “Assange – A Fundamental Vindication” thread to keep that thread on-topic]
“I think they have two main purposes – 1 to Frighten other potential whistleblowers to keep quiet. 2. To maintain the US Government fairy story of 9/11 alive in the minds of vast majority of the General Public (most of who still also believe in Father Christmas (or equivalent))”
Brilliant Tony.
There is definite evidence of enforcement of this “reality” on the 9/11 thread.
In fact if you present video evidence to the contrary that clearly demonstrates employed media fakery you will be tag-team trolled, smeared, bullied, abused, ridiculed etc. Funny how quick to defend the official account they are too. Sometimes within minutes.
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2010/01/the_911_post/comment-page-23/#comments
Any reader who wants to find real answers to 9/11 and the obvious media fakery employed need only visit http://septemberclues.info/index.shtml
For reference:
Tony’s original comment posted here:
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/02/assange-a-fundamental-vindication/#comment-576816
Tony_0pmoc
5 Feb, 2016 – 10:42 am
I just wrote this on ICH as a reply to someone’s comment on an article by John Pilger about Assange.
I agree with everything you wrote except ” that he would release the involvement of Israel and 9/11″. I have followed Assange very closely since before he even went to Sweden. I don’t believe he ever said that. I too believe very little that is in the MSM which has anything whatsoever to do with The War on Terror. I am convinced that the US Government really does want to extradite Assange and bang him up in jail for the rest of his life. I actually think Assange and Snowden are genuine and honest (even though both diss 9/11). I also think they are both on the payroll of a State Intelligence Agency. I do not believe that all State Intelligence Agencies have the same Agenda and same Controllers – even the American ones. I don’t know which Intelligence Agencies Assange and Snowden are working for, but the vast majority of public would never have heard of either of them, without State support. All mainstream media is controlled. We only know about them, because a State Intelligence Agency wants us to know about them.
I think they have two main purposes – 1 to Frighten other potential whistleblowers to keep quiet. 2. To maintain the US Government fairy story of 9/11 alive in the minds of vast majority of the General Public (most of who still also believe in Father Christmas (or equivalent))
Tony
Exexpat, so you do think me and Glenn are establishment stooges after all?
Am I ever likely to meet you on an anti-war demo, or don’t you bother with such trivia?
Sorry to take the piss, like, but really; numerology??
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2010/01/the_911_post/comment-page-23/#comment-576664
My reply, two comments later:
So you can make “blood on hands” comparisons and dismiss me and Glenn as accomplices to mass murder, but if we have a bit of a laugh when you site simple numerical coincidences as “evidence”, that “proves” your point, right?
I think I’d be justified in being VERY offended, but I’ll just laugh it off, OK? Glenn’s not about to defend himself; he mentioned in an earlier comment that he’ll be away for a week – torturing puppies, obviously.
Address this comment “Clark” first.
“I think they have two main purposes – 1 to Frighten other potential whistleblowers to keep quiet. 2. To maintain the US Government fairy story of 9/11 alive in the minds of vast majority of the General Public (most of who still also believe in Father Christmas (or equivalent))”
Brilliant Tony.
There is definite evidence of enforcement of this “reality” on the 9/11 thread.
In fact if you present video evidence to the contrary that clearly demonstrates employed media fakery you will be tag-team trolled, smeared, bullied, abused, ridiculed etc. Funny how quick to defend the official account they are too. Sometimes within minutes.
Am I ever likely to meet you on an anti-war demo, or don’t you bother with such trivia?
Sorry to take the piss, like, but really; numerology??
More smearing.
Exexpat, not “Clark” – Clark Killick is my REAL name; I don’t comment under a pseudonym like you do. You talk about smearing? Anyone can contact me. Doubters can come and check me out; just click on my name on the comment to reach my contact page. I am an UNPAID VOLUNTEER for Craig, and he’s a WHISTLE-BLOWER, also unpaid for his blogging.
We (you and me) are working through your “video evidence” but you haven’t presented anything I find convincing so far. I’m not about to stop; there’s no hurry, it is merely a coincidence that the UN have just ruled in favour of Julian Assange and YOU have decided to jump on that band-wagon.
Today, Assange takes precedence, but I will return to looking through your videos. If I see something that convinces me, I’ll change my mind, BUT maybe not to the opinion you wish to force upon me.
Now get off my case.
Do you think you own this thread Clark?
Why am I not able to reply directly to Glenn without immediately replying back on his behalf (this is before he’s said he has gone away)???
It real does feel like you are “Holding Court” in here.
Even though you bully both myself and other posters (evidence documented btw) I am not afraid of you – or any other bullies for that matter.
I will continue to use my right to post video evidence of media fakery here so that
THE READER MAY SEE FOR THEMSELVES that 9/11 is a lie > http://septemberclues.info/index.shtml
Exexpat, neither of us has any right to post comments on this thread. This blog is privately funded by Craig Murray; it belongs to him. Craig extends us the privilege of commenting here. Do you understand?
These are weasel words from you:
NO ONE has prevented you from replying. I merely replied before Glenn did; it does not prevent him from replying for himself. Are you demanding that I don’t comment on your assertions until after he does? What makes you think you have such a right? You have a sense of entitlement, perhaps?
In fact if you present video evidence to the contrary that clearly demonstrates employed media fakery you will be tag-team trolled, smeared, bullied, abused, ridiculed etc. Funny how quick to defend the official account they are too. Sometimes within minutes.
Exexpat; how often, for how long, and how deeply do you wonder “and what if I’m wrong”?
I try to subject all of my opinions to that test. I look at things from different, even opposing perspectives. I deliberately seek out counter-arguments to the things I believe.
What if you’re wrong, Exexpat? What if the Twin Towers did collapse from damage? What if passengers on aircraft really were crashed into buildings? What knock-on effects might the propagation of your assertions cause? Ever thought it through?
Exexpat, 1:13 pm; we can continue to examine those videos later. How about treating me as an equal? How about addressing points I raise, as I do yours, instead of just ignoring them?
Exexpat, you lie. I do not “defend the official account”. That is EXACTLY what John Goss accused me of because I disputed his assertion of science-fiction holograms.
I call for an independent international investigation. I repeatedly say various US authorities have performed cover-ups.
Another lie: “Funny how quick to defend the official account they are too. Sometimes within minutes”
From August to January you posted your opinions without ANY challenge from me. That was because I was away travelling. In January I got home, I got ill, and since then I have spent a lot of my time on the Internet.
And I think you’re wrong about 9/11, so I have challenged you. Can you conceive of being wrong? Or do you dismiss all challenge as “establishment trolling” as it seems?
Clark, you still haven’t addressed:
In fact if you present video evidence to the contrary that clearly demonstrates employed media fakery you will be tag-team trolled, smeared, bullied, abused, ridiculed etc. Funny how quick to defend the official account they are too. Sometimes within minutes.
I feel sorry for you what a hangover day for you after your troll party last night…
Your a bully Clark.
Exexpat, please retract your lies. You linked to videos, and I watched them closely; is this not so? I posted my reasons for finding them unconvincing so far.
I criricise the 9/11 Commission report as based upon confessions extracted under torture, and as redacted in it’s most important findings. Do you dispute my criticism of the report?
You have not yet responded to a single one of my challenges in nearly a month. You merely dismiss ME as a troll. Is this not ad-hominen argument?
Respond to the issues, or smear; the choice is yours, and the response is public for all to see.
From August to January you posted your opinions without ANY challenge from me.
A TOTAL LIE.
In that period, I only started posting in this thread from 7 January 2016.
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2010/01/the_911_post/comment-page-20/#comment-572458
Easy for the reader to validate.
When are YOU going to stop lying Clark?
Exexpat, I shall correct; from August to the start of January, you certainly could have posted without any challenge from me, since I would have been unaware of your comments. I assume that whenever you posted you did so on whichever was the front thread at the time; you don’t seem the sort to adhere to Craig’s request to confine discussion of 9/11 to this thread.
Did you post nothing about 9/11 in all that time? If I am, as you allege, an establishment shill, couldn’t the establishment find someone else to challenge you while I was away travelling?
Just ignore this, like you ignore all my other points…
“Clark
3 Feb, 2016 – 12:19 am
Goodnight Exexpat. Sorry, bad news for the morning. The septemberclues.info website and videos carry advertising for various music; The Cavemen, The Social Service, and SimonShack’s September Clues Soundtrack.
I think septemberclues.info itself is a hoax, and I think SimonShack cynically knows it.
If this is so, it’s disgusting.
Clark
3 Feb, 2016 – 12:36 am
Music advert page:
http://www.septemberclues.info/SCsoundtrack/index.html
Also linked to from page above is a band called The Social Service:
https://thesocialservice1.bandcamp.com/album/realitivity
And here are The Cavemen, advertised on SimonShack / Septembeer Clues videos, on bandcamp.com, the same site as The Social Service:
https://thecavemennz.bandcamp.com/”
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2010/01/the_911_post/comment-page-23/#comment-576404
You expect a response to these type of “contributions”?
OK here is a response:
These posts are the weakest, lazy and most pathetic excuses for a post I have seen in this thread to date. </strong
What "evidence" is this that "..septemberclues.info itself is a hoax, and I think SimonShack cynically knows it." as you smear, divert, adhom, shoot-the-messenger etc etc.
“Exexpat, I shall correct; from August to the start of January, you certainly could have posted without any challenge from me, since I would have been unaware of your comments. I assume that whenever you posted you did so on whichever was the front thread at the time; you don’t seem the sort to adhere to Craig’s request to confine discussion of 9/11 to this thread.”
Like I have previously stated Clark, It’s like trying to debate with a lawyer/politician or other professional spinner.
So you did just lie then? Yes or no. Not usual verbiage.
Fuck this.
It’s like wrestling with a PIg. You like it don’t you?
I’m going for a shower.
So you didn’t post this, then?
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2015/12/no-brake-and-no-disclosure-on-media-owners-interests/comment-page-2/#comment-567263
Clark,
So you did just lie then? Yes or no.
Yes no too difficult for you?
Exexpat, yes, I THINK that Simonshack is a cynical hoaxer. The “I THINK” part means it is my opinion, no more than that.
My GUESS is that the September Clues forum was set up to attract traffic, and that Simonshack’s videos serve as a vehicle to advertise their rather good soundtracks and the bands that perform them.
This is my guess, nothing more, but if so, it is utterly disgusting, to use the known popularity of 9/11 theorising, based upon the deaths of thousands of people, as a means to generate traffic and thereby advertise bands.
The reason I think Simonshack may be a hoaxer is because the arguments presented in these videos are so weak that I doubt that Simonshack believes them himself.
But as ever, my mind is open, and if you can start treating me as your equal, as someone whose reasoning abilities are as valid as your own, as someone whose points should be addressed rather than ignored, as someone whose opinions are their own rather than paid for by “the establishment”, then we could attempt to continue our discussion of those videos.
Exexpat, you have NO RIGHT to tell me how to answer. I am not your puppet, thank you.
Exexpat, while looking for the comment of yours that I linked above, I encountered some very unpleasant comments from you, one regarding Habbabkuk’s foreskin.
My opinion of you is dropping rapidly.
What do you think of Jews, Exexpat?
My opinion of you is dropping rapidly.
I couldn’t care less. You’re a lying, abusive, deceptive troll.
I’m in this thread to discuss to 911. If you want to discuss another trolls foreskin feel free to do it elsewhere.
@Moderator
Did you delete any posts last night? What was the reason for their deletion?
Thanks