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).
I’m useless in those fields; but I can and do listen to those who are. THAT’S why I posted the videos – the ‘Experts’ explain their arguments.
Evidence of demolition? Search for ‘iron spherules from thermite found in all tested dust samples’.
Maybe the reason you have so little time is how much time you spend on this blog; get your facts or info first, then post.
For instance, you think Israelis expelled ‘might have been artists’. Why not just search that, like putting in the search engine ‘Israeli artists expelled after 9/11’; if no luck, just try ‘Israeli ‘artists’ expelled from the US’.
By the way, Clark, can you give me some examples of ‘False Flag’ ops you believe in?
Paul, Operation Northwoods was planned but didn’t happen. USS Liberty is the well known one, I haven’t got the wrong ship, have I? It was a US observation and communication ship, attacked by Israel aircraft. Bay of Tonkyn or something like that? To start the Vietnam war. There are others. I don’t really know historical details, I tend to look them up. There have been loads of coups supposedly by the locals but with Western secret services behind them – Iran, to overthrow Mosaddegh’s government, instigated by MI6 at BP’s request, implemented with CIA help. Many such incidents are disputed as the propaganda continues, or details get argued over. The point is, you don’t need to convince me that such things have been done, and I certainly don’t rule any of that out regarding 9/11. I don’t know how 9/11 happened. That’s the point of wanting an independent investigation, and we’re not going to get one if we make ourselves look like fools because weak skyscrapers actually did just fall down.
Things have been a bit different since 9/11 and I think this needs to be faced. These Wahhabist extremists seen in, for instance, Libya and Syria may be the ultimate in plausible deniability – I assume you’re familiar with that term. And yes, such extremists often end up serving Israel’s agenda and the neocon agenda in general – that’s what we’re seeing in Syria, isn’t it?
Also, possibly the Reichstag fire, and various under Operation Gladio.
Details are often disputed but that’s inevitable with clandestine operations. Consequently I don’t exactly believe or disbelieve. Some matters are better established than others.
But I’m not ‘sheeple’ just because I’m not convinced of explosive demolition. And I’m not ‘the enemy’ either. But I am dispirited, I hope you can see why.
@Clark: ‘Things have been a bit different since 9/11 and I think this needs to be faced. These Wahhabist extremists seen in, for instance, Libya and Syria may be the ultimate in plausible deniability – I assume you’re familiar with that term. And yes, such extremists often end up serving Israel’s agenda and the neocon agenda in general – that’s what we’re seeing in Syria, isn’t it?’
What has changed since 9/11 is the headlong pursuit of previous plans – as Rumsfeld said to 4* General (Retd.) Wesley Clark, when he visited the Pentagon days after 9/11 to find out what the US was doing about it, ‘We have found out we can bomb who we like – Russia won’t do anything about it. Nobody is going to tell us who we can bomb’.
On his way out, Wesley Clark was called into a 3* serving General on the Joint Chiefs of Staff, whom he had worked with, who told him he had to speak to him. The 3* General told him the US was going to attack Iraq. Wesley Clark said ‘Why, have we linked Saddam to 9/11?’ and the 3* told him, ‘No, but we are going to attack Iraq’. That was before the US had started attacking Afghanistan. After the US and assorted cronies started attacking Afghanistan, Wesley Clark went back to the Pentagon and asked the 3* General if the US was still going to attack Iraq. 3* said ‘Wes, it’s worse than that; we’re going to take out 7 governments in 5 years: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran’ (http://www.globalresearch.ca/we-re-going-to-take-out-7-countries-in-5-years-iraq-syria-lebanon-libya-somalia-sudan-iran/5166) – there are several interviews up on the web. Obviously, their timetable has slipped.
Check out also ‘Yinon Plan’, 1982. Also ‘Hornet’s Nest + Islamic terrorists’ (though this is disputed, it fit’s what has occurred to a ‘T’).
2 British planes were reported shot down by Iraqi forces whilst airdropping arms to IS; also, at least one US helicopter.
The ‘Coalition’ attacks on IS were a farce; the Syrians, Iraqis and Iranians all castigated the ‘Coalition’ for not bombing IS, and for ‘accidentally’ bombing the defending forces. Search all this if in doubt; it’s all there.
Re False Flags, here are 42 admitted ones:
42 FALSE-FLAG ATTACKS OFFICIALY ADMITTED TO:
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/42falseflags.php#axzz42SYHt4e1 And that’s just admitted ones!!
Watch ‘Alex Jones Interviews Aaron Russo (Full Length)’:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3NA17CCboA
Russo, ‘befriended’ by Nick Rockefeller (of the bankster family) who tried to recruit Russo to the CFR, told him many things. Russo ‘contracted’ cancer in 2001, when he started to speak out, and died in 2007.
At an hour and nine minutes, it could be the most enlightening video you’ve ever seen.
Again, I’d ask you also to watch the A&E videos re the Towers; if you are really interested, you should at least know what those experts have to say.
Paul, I’ve downloaded the Zero video, Meet the Experts and the Aaron Russo interview – I haven’t watched any of them yet. Regarding the video of Russo, we must be careful of any assertions it contains. Russo’s association with the Rockerfellers could have exposed him to disinformation, and his impending death would have cut short his time for critical thinking, further investigation and cross-checking.
Since you’ve set me “homework” likely to take several days, could I ask you to review some of my comments? I’ll just draw attention to a couple –
9 Feb, 2016 – 1:43 am –
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2010/01/the_911_post/comment-page-24/#comment-577730
11 Feb, 2016 – 3:45 am –
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2010/01/the_911_post/comment-page-25/#comment-578252
On the matter of false flag attacks and reminded by Craig’s latest post, I suspect that the Ghouta gas attack was wrongly attributed to the Syrian government.
Hi Clark,
I will check out your comments – no possibility at the moment as I’m half cut – bedtime!
Ghouta was definitely a US-organised ‘False Flag’; I’ll send supporting links SAP.
Anyone know of a really good autobiography of Robert Ludlum. The books, which he wrote and which were published before he died are intriguing. The Chancellor Manuscript is fascinating.
Who was whispering in his ear?
What is he saying in The Chancellor Manuscript?
Apart from the obvious blackmailing intelligence theme was he actually complaining that he may have been used as a ‘blind’ in some of his earlier work just as the novelist within the novel, who resembles the author is used, Or was he just a good storyteller, who enjoyed adding a layer.
Paul, thanks. I was accused of impatience earlier, but I’d been waiting a long time for responses that seemed reasonable. You don’t seem to be treating me as either deluded or criminal – you’ve been checking me out, and that’s fine by me because you do seem to have read rather than ignored my comments that I oppose the warmongers. I’ll look forward to the links concerning Ghouta. It looks like a false flag to me because of the timeline –
– US President states that it’s a “red line” if Syrian government uses chemical weapons,
– Big debate about Syria scheduled at the UN,
– Immediately before said debate, the Syrian government appears to use chemical weapons.
Nah, too stupid.
Fwl, sorry, I can’t help you regarding Ludlum.
Fwl, you may find this of interest:
The Ludlum Conspiracy: Was the master storyteller and creator of the blockbuster Bourne movies murdered by his gold-digging wife?:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1363110/The-Ludlum-Conspiracy-Was-master-storyteller-creator-blockbuster-Bourne-movies-murdered-gold-digging-wife.html
Thanks, unfortunately that Kearns & Campbell biography doesn’t appear to be easily available.
Fwl: You’re right: http://www.amazon.com/Ludlum-Identity-Behind-Jason-Bourne/dp/1935257706
When prices rise to this extent, ‘Dirty Tricks’ are likely to blame.
Why not contact the author, and suggest he run a reprint?
If all the books are suddenly ‘bought’, then he could reprint, ad infinitum, at great financial profit.
Another article: ‘The Robert Ludlum controversy: nephew raises questions about top thriller writer’s death’:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/the-robert-ludlum-controversy-nephew-raises-questions-about-top-thriller-writers-death/story-e6frg6so-1226009074660
Hi Clark, here’s some info on Syria:
Britamgate: Staging False Flag Attacks in Syria:
http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2013/01/31/britamgate-staging-false-flag-attacks-in-syria.html
Turkey Smuggled Sarin Gas to Terrorists in Syria:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article43726.htm
The Dirty War on Syria: Washington Supports the Islamic State:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-dirty-war-on-syria-washington-support s-the-islamic-state-isis/5494957
Israel’s covert involvement in Syria conflict to escalate:
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/12/03/isra-d03.html
MADAYA: Letter of Complaint to Canadian Broadcast Ombudsman:
http://21stcenturywire.com/2016/01/12/madaya-letter-of-complaint-to-ca nadian-broadcast-ombudsman/
Madaya Fake Media Images: BBC Caught Recycling 2014 Footage from Yarmouk:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/madaya-fake-media-images-bbc-caught-recycling-2014-footage-from-yarmouk/5500604
“Greater Israel”: The Zionist Plan for the Middle East:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/greater-israel-the-zionist-plan-for-the-middle-east/5324815
And some more on Syria:
Israel says Syrian government used chemical weapons during truce:
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-israel-idUSKCN0W356M
And we should believe Israel, already?
And the Syrians air force is the only party in the conflict known to have helicopters?
Indeed? What about Russia, the US, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Israel and Qatar?
Why on earth should Assad be so stupid as to use Chemical Weapons, knowing full well the US’s and other intelligence agencies would easily be able to prove they had used them, if they had? Notice, no evidence, just allegations, from Israel, which aren’t worth a tinker’s cuss.
Paul, thanks for that collection of links. There is a long-running argument as to whether the US uses Israel or Israel uses the US. I think that such analysis by nation-state is distracting.
It seems clear what’s really going on. The grouping often called “The West”, which includes Israel, competes with the other two great power groups, one centred on Russia, the other on China. The competition between “The West” and the Russian grouping is a direct competition for influence, control and territory in the Middle East with the objective of maximising control over hydrocarbon reserves:
http://www.killick1.plus.com/map.jpg
Neocon and Zionist objectives converge. The Zionist expansion of Israel serves the Neocon objective of maximising control of hydrocarbon reserves, and Neocon military interventions in the Middle East serve the Zionist objective of destabilising Israel’s opponents. These objectives match so closely that they act almost as a single force.
– – – – – –
There’s another matter to consider in connection to this and that is the role of so-called “Islamic extremists” or “Jihadists” – I find both terms misleading and indeed insulting to Islam in general; their ideology is inspired by Wahhabism which is the state religion projected by Saudi Arabia and its petrodollars. How do you see the role of Saudi Arabia and Wahhabist extremism in the overall conflict?
On a personal note, I’m busy in various ways and having trouble keeping up; I haven’t watched the videos you linked yet. Please bear with me.
Please note: I most definitely do not subscribe to the ‘lizards who control the universe’ stuff, but I’ll chuck in this video that David Icke put out yesterday (it was all happening yesterday). It’s a response from Icke about derogatory comments that David Cameron made about him recently.
Whatever folks think about Icke, I think he’s right when he says: if conspiracy theorists are all crackpots, why are the authorities so afraid of them?
It seems a reasonable question…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFCaAK9c93g
Folks might also ask why one of the most seminal events in modern history, which has profoundly changed our world for the worst, an event that has many questions hanging over it, is relegated to a backwater thread like this.
You’re allowed to discuss it; but shh, not too loudly.
RobG, it’s an old thread but it’s linked on every page of this site, so hardly “backwater”.
Over the last couple of months it has become abundantly clear to me why discussion of 9/11 is directed to this thread of its own. Just because I’m not convinced of demolition of the Twin Towers by explosives, I’ve been subjected to something like an Inquisition by the conspiracy theorists.
I’ve explicitly stated that I call for a proper independent, international investigation of 9/11, that I believe there to be all manner of cover-up in the official reports, that the matter was shamelessly spun and propagandised by the corporate media, and that I’m utterly opposed to the Neocons and the wars they used 9/11 as an excuse for, but apparently, none of that matters. Unless I espouse either a “no planes” or a pre-rigged demolition theory, I’m either suffering psychological derangement or I’m one of the Bad Guys.
To their credit Fwl has treated me well throughout, and Paul Barbara, after a dodgy start, is now discussing reasonably with me. But John Goss has accused me of propagating “spook stories”, Maxter, Node and Glenn_UK have stopped speaking to me altogether, and Exexpat has accused me of working on behalf of the cover-up and likened me to “Cameron with blood on his hands”.
Many people’s thinking on 9/11 is just too inflammatory and divisive. If it were permitted on other threads all other topics would be drowned under it.
And Rob, you’re thinking like a conspiracy theorist by calling this thread a “backwater” and claiming that discussion is being hushed-up. Constantly wanting the limelight on the front thread is your own ego problem, I’m sorry to say. Not that you were particularly guilty, but it was really disappointing to watch people splurge their own hobby-horse subjects all over Eric Lubbock’s obituary thread, the thread about corruption in African politics and the ICC, and the thread about the Chagossians. Those threads all concerned issues that get very little mainstream exposure, but many commenters chose to oust discussion of those subject to make way for their own favourite matters that anyway get discussed on many other threads.
Sorry, but I do get fed up with people’s apparent self-importance.
Clark, do you have time to watch the David Icke video I’ve linked to above?
It’s very relevant to a thread like this, and your input on it.
It basically comes down to: what are you afraid of?
You’ve probably frightened off most posters on this thread, so I doubt if we’ll get any kind of discussion about it.
You win (on this board, at least).
Rob, to be fair I used to be just as bad, if not worse, myself. I splurged a load of 9/11 crap all over a new thread about African cocoa growers. Here’s the moment that I grew up; check comments before the one I link to, and the “war criminal makeover” threads posted that day (Jan 19) to see what was going on:
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2010/01/cadburys_demise/#comment-272888
Posts around that time:
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2010/01/page/2/
Rob, I still have over six hours (!) of video to watch recommended by Paul, but I’ll try to watch the Icke video when I can.
Can you two decide between you which I should prioritise?
Please note that it takes me longer than the running time of a video to watch it properly. I sit down with coffee, not intoxicants. I open a text editor and make notes when I think I’ll need them, and if something seems important or if I miss commentary or testimony, I rewind and listen again.
It’s the ‘The 9/11 Post’, but shh, you mustn’t really talk about it, because only we know what truth is.
Cue the Orwell orgasm.
I took a guess that I wouldn’t need to treat Icke’s video as evidence and watched the first seven minutes while eating a sandwich. I haven’t learned anything yet. I already knew that the CIA had popularised the term “conspiracy theory” as cover for the assassination of Kennedy.
I also already knew that academics have been studying the phenomena. I became convinced that there really is such a phenomena over the last couple of months on this thread – I know I’m not acting on behalf of the 9/11 cover-up, so when others confidently declare that I must be, and even try to show me off to others like some exhibit in a zoo, I know that they can’t have any evidence for their belief so some psychological mechanism must have come into play.
Icke is projecting a polarised view. Sure, I agree that there’s propaganda and spin, both from governments and from media organisations. I know that governments have been speaking, purportedly against the “conspiracy theories”, but I think that this is convenient for government for less obvious reasons…
Icke presents his argument as government versus those “uncovering the truth” – but Icke must be wrong. Nearly a decade and a half after 9/11, the various theories about it are utterly contradictory, as clearly demonstrated on this thread. Truth clearly isn’t being uncovered, so why dos the government act worried?
What I strongly suspect is actually happening is that government is using all these whacky and contradictory theories as cover – ie. there really are truths about 9/11 and 7/7 etc. that the government doesn’t want widely known, but by attacking theories the government knows to contain zero significant truth, they provoke reactions like Icke’s. Icke and similar conspiracy theorists thus declare that no-plane theories, media fakery theories and others with no truth content at all are the TRUTH that the government is trying to hide.
Double-whammy – the government gains an extra layer of cover, and simultaneously cause serious researchers to be discredited by associating them in the public mind with those promoting patent nonsense.
In short, the government gives credence to disinfo by acting scared of it.
I’m at fourteen minutes. Look how this is playing out. Sunstein recommends “cognitive infiltration of extremist groups”. Icke has identified his own sort of conspiracy theorists as “extremist groups”. Result? People like me who dare to question, say, explosive demolition of the Twin Towers get labelled, by conspiracy theorists such as Exexpat, as Sunstein’s infiltrators!
Brilliant! Governments and conspiracy theorists between them have managed to discredit critical thinking altogether!
Grrrr….
This really isn’t helping. Where the fuck do we go from here? I’m no longer permitted to question anything, or I get labelled as one of the Bad Guys!
But questioning, critical thinking, elimination a la Sherlock Holmes, is all we have for telling fact from fiction.
Suggestions?
Well I’m giving up on Icke’s video because (1) he’s clearly displaying the conspiracy theorist mindset and (2) he’s denying global warming and climate change, and I’ve seen enough of that argument to know that greenhouse gas emissions are causing climate change and denial is funded by vested interests.