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).
Node, I think you need to reread the thread. Exexpat was playing to the gallery, accusing me of “sliding” the forum (ie. he accused me of being part of the conspiracy), accusing me and Glenn (on other threads) of acting on behalf of the establishment (ditto); he didn’t respond to any of my analyses and just moved on instead, and I found that he’d posted anti-Semitic comments.
Then look through what Paul Barbara has done and see if you can spot the unfairness; there are several instances. Until he acts fairly, proceeding would waste much of my time.
Thanks Node I appreciate your support.
In case you didn’t see this and for the benefit of others I posted this earlier this week.
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/02/hillary-clinton-is-the-guardian/comment-page-10/#comment-580060
**********************************************************************
Clark,
I too am not engaging with you (and haven’t for some weeks now) until you
1) Stop trolling
2) Sort your head out
3) Stop acting like an officer of the court on the 9/11 thread
Your posts of late show no signs of any of the above.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
wow my *********** can exit through the building too – just like on 9/11 🙂
@Paul Barbara
Welcome aboard. I’m happy to discuss 9/11 with you.
I can see you have sourced “The Great American Psy-Opera” – can I ask if you have seen september clues linked on my moniker?
Reason I ask this is that “Ace Baker” has been outed as a massive plagarist and worse here >
http://www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=1094
If your unfamiliar with CluesForum please have a look here http://www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=477
Node, do you consider it acceptable that Exexpat repeatedly insinuated that I was part of the support for the 9/11 conspiracy, and then went on to directly accuse both Glenn and myself of the same thing? You wrote:
I probably did become confrontational – after being accused of being party to atrocity, yes. I have also been asked to account for how I spend my time, lest this incur suspicion. Who are you people? You’re like totalitarians! I’m assumed to be guilty, told to account for how I spend my day, and then I’m supposed to apologise too? Or what, you’ll flush my head down the toilet and give me a kicking?
And it’s ME that’s suppose to “sort my head out”?
Exexpat, I don’t understand your 3:53 pm comment. Please make it clear for me.
The official account – as decimated by James Corbett.
Video is less than 5mins.
https://www.corbettreport.com/911-a-conspiracy-theory/
Everything you ever wanted to know about the 9/11 conspiracy theory in under 5 minutes.
TRANSCRIPT: On the morning of September 11, 2001, 19 men armed with boxcutters directed by a man on dialysis in a cave fortress halfway around the world using a satellite phone and a laptop directed the most sophisticated penetration of the most heavily-defended airspace in the world, overpowering the passengers and the military combat-trained pilots on 4 commercial aircraft before flying those planes wildly off course for over an hour without being molested by a single fighter interceptor.
These 19 hijackers, devout religious fundamentalists who liked to drink alcohol, snort cocaine, and live with pink-haired strippers, managed to knock down 3 buildings with 2 planes in New York, while in Washington a pilot who couldn’t handle a single engine Cessna was able to fly a 757 in an 8,000 foot descending 270 degree corskscrew turn to come exactly level with the ground, hitting the Pentagon in the budget analyst office where DoD staffers were working on the mystery of the 2.3 trillion dollars that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld had announced “missing” from the Pentagon’s coffers in a press conference the day before, on September 10, 2001.
Luckily, the news anchors knew who did it within minutes, the pundits knew within hours, the Administration knew within the day, and the evidence literally fell into the FBI’s lap. But for some reason a bunch of crazy conspiracy theorists demanded an investigation into the greatest attack on American soil in history.
The investigation was delayed, underfunded, set up to fail, a conflict of interest and a cover up from start to finish. It was based on testimony extracted through torture, the records of which were destroyed. It failed to mention the existence of WTC7, Able Danger, Ptech, Sibel Edmonds, OBL and the CIA, and the drills of hijacked aircraft being flown into buildings that were being simulated at the precise same time that those events were actually happening. It was lied to by the Pentagon, the CIA, the Bush Administration and as for Bush and Cheney…well, no one knows what they told it because they testified in secret, off the record, not under oath and behind closed doors. It didn’t bother to look at who funded the attacks because that question is of “little practical significance“. Still, the 9/11 Commission did brilliantly, answering all of the questions the public had (except most of the victims’ family members’ questions) and pinned blame on all the people responsible (although no one so much as lost their job), determining the attacks were “a failure of imagination” because “I don’t think anyone could envision flying airplanes into buildings ” except the Pentagon and FEMA and NORAD and the NRO.
The DIA destroyed 2.5 TB of data on Able Danger, but that’s OK because it probably wasn’t important.
The SEC destroyed their records on the investigation into the insider trading before the attacks, but that’s OK because destroying the records of the largest investigation in SEC history is just part of routine record keeping.
NIST has classified the data that they used for their model of WTC7’s collapse, but that’s OK because knowing how they made their model of that collapse would “jeopardize public safety“.
The FBI has argued that all material related to their investigation of 9/11 should be kept secret from the public, but that’s OK because the FBI probably has nothing to hide.
This man never existed, nor is anything he had to say worthy of your attention, and if you say otherwise you are a paranoid conspiracy theorist and deserve to be shunned by all of humanity. Likewise him, him, him, and her. (and her and her and him).
Osama Bin Laden lived in a cave fortress in the hills of Afghanistan, but somehow got away. Then he was hiding out in Tora Bora but somehow got away. Then he lived in Abottabad for years, taunting the most comprehensive intelligence dragnet employing the most sophisticated technology in the history of the world for 10 years, releasing video after video with complete impunity (and getting younger and younger as he did so), before finally being found in a daring SEAL team raid which wasn’t recorded on video, in which he didn’t resist or use his wife as a human shield, and in which these crack special forces operatives panicked and killed this unarmed man, supposedly the best source of intelligence about those dastardly terrorists on the planet. Then they dumped his body in the ocean before telling anyone about it. Then a couple dozen of that team’s members died in a helicopter crash in Afghanistan.
This is the story of 9/11, brought to you by the media which told you the hard truths about JFK and incubator babies and mobile production facilities and the rescue of Jessica Lynch.
If you have any questions about this story…you are a batshit, paranoid, tinfoil, dog-abusing baby-hater and will be reviled by everyone. If you love your country and/or freedom, happiness, rainbows, rock and roll, puppy dogs, apple pie and your grandma, you will never ever express doubts about any part of this story to anyone. Ever.
This has been a public service announcement by: the Friends of the FBI, CIA, NSA, DIA, SEC, MSM, White House, NIST, and the 9/11 Commission. Because Ignorance is Strength.
Exexpat, I need examples of both “trolling” and particularly “acting like an officer of the court”. The only relevant behaviour of mine is on this site, so please quote the relevant text.
I do think we should probably all be acting like officers of the court. Otherwise, what? 9/11 is just a laugh, just entertainment? Does the truth of 9/11 not matter? Is it just so much gossip and trivia?
Its great that the blog home page is linked in the recent posts. So much quicker for new readers to find the 9/11 post 🙂
September Clues research has established these 4 main points:
1- The 9/11 imagery was nothing but a Hollywood-style film production, complete with actors in the role of ‘eye-witnesses’ or ‘firefighters’, staged ‘running crowds’, 3D-compositing and special cinematic effects. The ‘9/11 movie’ was split into a number of short clips and sold to the TV audience as ‘newscasts’. The few clips featuring ‘airplanes’ (or dull silhouettes thereof) were computer-generated images – all of which in stark conflict with each other, as now comprehensively demonstrated in every imaginable manner, angle and method.
2- No commercial airliners were hijacked or – much less – crashed into the WTC towers, the Pentagon or the Shanksville field. No valid/verifiable records exist for : their airport logs/schedules, their numbered parts, their alleged passengers. Their reported speeds at near sea-level as well as the absurd visuals of their total, effortless disappearance into the WTC façades defy the laws of mechanics and physics – and the absence of visible wake vortexes in the WTC impact imagery also defies the laws of aerodynamics.
3- The World Trade Center Complex (9 buildings in all) were demolished with powerful explosives. No image-analyses of the tower collapses can help determine just what type of explosives were employed – since the videos are 3D animations and do not represent the real-life events. In reality, as they collapsed, the WTC complex was most likely enveloped by military-grade smoke obscurants. No real/private imagery exists of the morning’s events – ‘thanks’ to electromagnetic countermeasures.
4- No “3000” people were trapped in the top floors/nor perished in the WTC towers. Only one thing was more important to the perps than avoiding a mass murder of (thousands of) American citizens : to sell the notion that “bogeyman Bin Laden” killed (thousands of) American citizens. We have renamed the ‘victims’ of these psy-operations “VICSIMS” (SIMulated VICtims). In fact, our research has seen the same pattern emerge in all the so-called “Al-Quaeda Terror Attacks” around the world (LONDON 7/7, MADRID 11, BALI, MUMBAI, etc…). In all logic, the very last aggravation the plotters behind these false-flag operations wish to have, are scores of real families hounding them forever with real questions and real class actions. Hence: NO real terror victims = Logical PsyOp rationale.
Exexpat, thanks for the transcript of James Corbett. He’s clever; I like his reports and that one is a great piece of satire. As he says, “brought to you by the media…”.
Do you agree that this has to cut all ways? If people offer other stories, then those too must be open to question WITHOUT insinuations and accusations of the questioner being part of the cover-up?
So, I stand accused of being accessory to mass murder, and I’m supposed to apologise for being cheeky.
I get it.
Of course we often hear in the media about the wars on Gaza and all the civilian deaths and casualties there, but it’s all nonsense; it’s just invented. Look at the following video fakery from Associated Press, and all the crisis actors they can pull in to push their media lies:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umL5ORTjNTE
No one died in Operation Cast Lead, no one at all.
We know from the Synched Out video that CNN was one of the TV stations showing fake videos on 9/11, and here they are again with more video fakery from Gaza:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4xCkY6orfU
Look at the way the newscaster twitches when she has to say “killed”; it’s obvious that she’s lying and totally insincere. Are we really supposed to believe that a child would stick his arms out like that at 0:30? Come on! He’s obviously been told to make it look dramatic. And the man’s face in the still at 0:58; another crisis actor. You can see that the other men around him are looking perfectly normal.
No one died in Gaza because there were NO Israeli air-strikes; there’s no plane at the start the sound has been dubbed on, it’s obvious.
And here’s CBS, another of the 9/11 fakery TV stations, showing “explosions” from Gaza and some “injured” children. These TV companies all work together; reject their lies!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xW6oIVZEFsk
Clark: “So, I stand accused of being accessory to mass murder, and I’m supposed to apologise for being cheeky.”
That might be putting it a bit strong, but in all fairness you do like to rush things along a bit.
If people want to swap a few conspiracy theories, and dueling you-tubes, what’s wrong with that? If another wants to discuss some fine point there is hardly any rush. There are some basic points you’d like to discuss with me, I understand that. But there are some basic points about op-amps which I’m trying to work out with a mate who lives in Australia, who’s also interested in electronics – we discuss findings, references, experimental results and have questions for one another.
We’ll get there. Occasionally getting back to sideline projects, as we feel inclined, is what makes life interesting.
*
About the collapse of the buildings – it’s a funny thing, that you can visualise it in your mind, and then make the proof around how that happened. Even Einstein didn’t arrive at his great discoveries mathematically, he envisioned them beforehand, and then formulated his way to prove it – something he found particularly hard. The same with Kepler, and probably Newton too – each knew what he was seeing, it just needed to be explained from the ground up. That’s the tough bit – that’s what made them geniuses.
Not being a genius myself, I can only express that the collapse of the WTC-I & II were not natural. Not when you have spent a lot of time in high rise buildings, gain an appreciation for their remarkable resilience and same for the engineers and architects, together with the regulators, who built them. It simply does not appear something that could just happen like that.
One might say, “So you landed three double-sixes on three throws of the dice. So what. It happens.”
And it could happen that WTC-I and II just took incredibly improbable odds, and happened to be constructed that badly, and happened to be damaged in _just_ the right way. You would have to assume rather a lot, actually.
But down they came, regardless.
Now in mentioning other events of that day, you would have me shifting the goalposts. Misdirecting, various other dishonest tactics.
WTC7 falls down? Well, just another good few rolls of that double-six.
How about terrorist pilots, some of whom “who couldn’t really fly at all”, making it onto their targets like flying aces? A sizable few double-six dice there, surely. All of them successfully taking over the planes, with little resistance? Another couple of double-sixes. How many double-sixes for non-observing Muslims on suicide missions, for a plot hatched in a cave, all going down like some fiendishly choreographed plot from Breaking Bad?
Another double-six for the Air Traffic Controllers running a drill that day, so getting entirely distracted when planes went off their flight plans. NORAD stands down despite such clear violations of protocol, just for long enough. The Pentagon has no images, let along evidence, for a passenger jet hitting it. Apparently, security at that building is appallingly lax.
And has no defence against such attacks – would you believe it? The Pentagon itself is utterly defenceless. The aerobatics necessary to hit it were frankly unbelievable for a novice in a jumbo. Those double-sixes just keep adding up.
I could go on, but when the 50, 60 or 70’th double-six has been rolled, aren’t you getting a bit concerned that the particular few double-sixes you’re looking at might not be suspect too?
*
My theory about the WTC collapses is not worked out by a long way. But the Official one hardly seems convincing, and it is just seems too convenient by far to swallow wholesale, which makes all the constituent parts more than a little suspect too.
Just sayin’ 😉
Glenn, ah, my co-defendant. Yes, you were accused of being accessory to mass-murder, too; here:
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2010/01/the_911_post/comment-page-24/#comment-576848
So make sure you pay proper respect to the prosecuting authority, or Node will be on your case. Note the charges:
* Commenting under a false name,
* Intimidation,
* Conspiracy,
* Attempting to suppress evidence so as to pervert the course of justice.
Where’s the harm? How about harm to my state of mind, “Glenn”?
Don’t worry mate. You’ll be let off because you proclaim explosive demolition. I only question government motive and possible collusion, confessions under torture, and possible sabotage of Building Seven. It’s just not enough to gain any clemency for me.
It’s OK, I know I deserve it.
Glenn_uk; 12:13 pm:
Glenn, I thought that some years ago you posted a comment linking to http://whatstheharm.net/index.html
From Exexpat:
What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Chris Spivey claims that the Woolwich murder of Lee Rigby never happened and that all his family are “VICSIMS”. Spivey encouraged his followers to harass Rigby’s family through their Facebook accounts. This caused them considerable distress and caused much taxpayers’ money to be wasted on the prosecution of Spivey, trial, defence and enforcement.
I object to be being treated as a pariah because I question ad-hoc UNOFFICIAL 9/11 theories.
Exexpat, you maintain that all such terror attacks are “media fakery”, right?
In June last year, the blog owner Craig Murray made two posts about a terror attack in Sousse, Tunisia. His niece Kirsty and her fiancée were personally involved; both were wounded. Kirsty’s family were prevented from contacting her by the Tunisian authorities so they asked Craig to help. Craig used his diplomatic contacts and was permitted to speak to her by telephone. This was how Craig came to hear Kirsty’s story first-hand. His subsequent post questioned the BBC account for reporting less attackers than were actually present:
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2015/06/tunisian-attack/
I was somewhat involved myself. Craig was in Ghana and it was me that informed him of comments from other family members asking him to remove his post:
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2015/06/kirstys-story/
The matters Craig raised were eventually covered in the Mirror:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/tunisia-terror-attack-british-survivor-5966422
Please tell me what may think and say about this incident that is acceptable to you. Must I regard Kirsty and her fiancée as VICSIMS, and Craig as an agent of disinformation? He has become a friend of mine and I trust him. I worked and socialised with him and his friends and family extensively last year.
Node, do you yet see why I take seriously such matters of truthfulness and accusation?
@Exexpat 25 Feb, 2016 – 7:33 pm Thanks for the info; I’ll check it out.
Meanwhile, here is an article from the Sunday Express, and a video on 9/11: ‘Brother of Briton murdered during 9/11 attacks calls for inquest to be re-opened’: http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/643797/Brother-Briton-murdered-Twin-towers-terror-attacks-inquest-reopened
‘Incontrovertible – New 9/11 Documentary by Tony Rooke’:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5UyynjxAyw
Here is a website for those interested in a re-investigation (I take a different line to some of the info on it; it sometimes appears too ‘Politically Correct’):
Reinvestigate 9/11 http://www.reinvestigate911.org
Paul Barbara, why did set up trick questions for me?
Paul Barbara, 2:48 pm:
What do you mean by this? Please make your meaning clear.
@Clark – I did not set up ‘trick questions’ for you; strange though it may seem, I have better things to do.
Re ‘politically correct’, I suggest you research the term, rather than ask me silly questions.
Paul Barbara, do you believe that aircraft hit the Twin Towers or not? Whether you set me up to fail or not depends upon the answer to this question.
I understand the conventional meaning of “political correctness”. I do not see how it applies to the reinvestigate911.org site, so please give me examples from the site so I and others can understand what you mean.
Paul Barbara, from your 25 Feb, 3:39 am comment:
“Urban” is quite a common surname and New York has a population of millions; can you substantiate that the Urban of the Gelatin performance art group was in fact involved with the “Dancing Israelis” and Urban Removals?
And can you substantiate this:
@ Clark: ‘“Urban” is quite a common surname and New York has a population of millions; can you substantiate that the Urban of the Gelatin performance art group was in fact involved with the “Dancing Israelis” and Urban Removals..’
No, I can’t; just another of the remarkable set of ‘coincidences’ occurring re 9/11.
‘…And can you substantiate this:
“the cardboard boxes weren’t just any old boxes; the numbers on them show they had originally contained special fuses of the kind used in controlled demolition”
Yes, I could, but it would require too much work for me, seeing as if I presented the links to you, you would dismiss them. Do the work yourself, if it really interests you.
Paul Barbara, why do you think I’d dismiss convincing evidence? And what about other readers?
Or is it that the evidence is unconvincing and you’d rather propagate a rumour than show the evidence to be weak?
Regarding “Urban”: I have seen a video asserting that quite a number of Israelis were rounded up and sent to Israel in the weeks after 9/11; I’m not sure how well established this is. Do you?
They might have been students? There’s so much to remember…
Twin Tower collapse scenarios.
We’ve seen videos of what happened (so Exexpat can’t really get involved in whatever may follow because he denies the authenticity of the videos); in each tower, at the level of the damage and fire, after different but relatively short intervals, the less damaged part of the building began to fall.
So what were the possibilities from here onwards? What do physical considerations tell us of the probabilities of those various outcomes?
I’ll start…
Let’s consider just one of the towers for now to avoid grammatical complication with plurals.
I’ll call the part above the damage and fire zone “the upper lattice”. I don’t want to call it a “block” because that will tend to make us think of it as solid, whereas I’ve read (but not confirmed) that the volume of the towers was about 95% air space.
So let’s consider the lattice. It has an outer mesh – again, I don’t want to call it a wall because that’s more solid and continuous than the actual structure was. The mesh consists of steel and concrete – let’s ignore the glass for simplicity. This mesh has great compressional strength in both its vertical direction and in the direction running horizontally along the mesh.
However, this mesh has no diagonal bracing, and it is much weaker in the direction running horizontally through the mesh at right-angle to it.
I don’t know where I’m going with this in advance. At present I’m just trying to get some terms defined and a basic description agreed. I’m hoping this will be a collaborative process
Anyone who wishes to get involved; are you happy with this so far or would you like to suggest any changes?