Archive for Friday, September 11, 2009
Freiberger: Remembering 9/11
Advertisement
Steamboat Springs — Should we remember or try to forget? Eight years have closed over much of the physical rubble that terrorists left behind. The salve of forgetting has soothed our scars, dried our tears, quieted our fears. Why restart the pain?
And yet that concrete cavern in south Manhattan where two towers once stood, the grass-covered Pennsylvania meadow where brave men crashed their plane, those 184 smooth and silent benches in Virginia draw us like magnets, pull us backward in time to remember.
That day's wound went deep, not the clean cut of a surgeon's scalpel, easily stitched and easily healed, but rather like the tearing of flesh by a rusted saw, ragged, gaping and dirty.
Those who have experienced the death of someone loved and cherished know about the importance of what is left behind. Even in the easiest of passings into whatever lies beyond, the one who remains suffers from the absence of what had been before, with a friend, a partner, a parent or a child. Death brought on by unexpected trauma can bring despair that far exceeds the worst of physical pain. Worse, however, than such anguish as that would be the emptiness that remains when memory no longer exists, that blank spot which erases a person's presence, as when Alzheimer's takes over the body.
Living beings grow and develop together. One individual's reaction touches the other, building as time passes into an encrusted seam between them. The older and more layered the connection, the greater the pain upon separation. The more abrupt the wrenching apart, the stronger is the need for some kind of salve. Remembrance can bring solace but only when, and not until, the wound is cleansed of ugliness.
Remember or forget?
Reshaping memories into something that is clean and good becomes the task at hand. Holding onto what is left will honor the men, the women and the children who died on Sept. 11, 2001. For most of us, there was little or no personal relationship with the people who rode elevators to their offices that morning or with the firemen who answered their call to duty and climbed the steps to help evacuate the workers. We didn't know the 3-year-old girl whose name is the first we come to as we step across a line etched into the stone of the Pentagon Memorial. Nor had we met the man who quietly spoke the words aboard a plan, "Let's roll."
Nevertheless, to the terrorists who killed them, they represented all the rest of us, the Americans who love and enjoy freedom every day. We are what haters of that freedom sought to kill. We are part of what is left of them. We join their parents, childre, friends and the relations of relations, in an increasingly widening circle as reverberations of their absence spread from family to family, state to state, country to country. They are ours.
We keep them by sustaining the memory of who and what they were. We deflect the evil that caused their deaths by using it to bring about a renewal of the common bond that unites all Americans in something very, very good - the idea of a government that accepts majority rule while respecting the right of every individual within its jurisdiction to be the person he or she chooses to be. The monument we can build is the continuance of that idea.
We are the link to the future that would have been theirs. We owe them a future that will guarantee the freedom they enjoyed to descendants of the world they knew. Sept. 11, 2001. We must remember.
Comments
Kevin_Nerney ( Kevin Nerney ) says...
Harriet, You've done it again. You always seem to find the handle to the faucet. Thanks for all you do. See you and all the others at the Botanical Gardens later this afternoon.
September 11, 2009 at 9:32 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seeuski ( anonymous ) says...
Nice piece Harriet, thank you for the positive vibes on this day of remembrance.
The fight against the anti US forces who post here will resume tomorrow.
September 11, 2009 at 10:21 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
RobDouglas ( Rob Douglas ) says...
Harriet:
Thank you for a beautifully written piece that illuminates exactly how most Americans feel.
For many of us, the wounds are indeed still deep and the memories fresh - and they always will be.
We will never forget.
Thank you again.
September 11, 2009 at 10:52 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
wyprof ( anonymous ) says...
Thanks again to Harriet for keeping the torch burning, and keeping the focus on what this is all about: the people. The people who paid the ultimate sacrifice that day. The families and friends who are left behind to honor their memories. The former community gatherings, office pools, coworkers, etc.
And - the rest of us, who are left behind to ensure our support, respect and honor, in our own ways.
September 11, 2009 at 11:05 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
This is an excerpt of Charlie Sheen's "20 minutes with the president"
Please keep in mind Mr. President everything I'm about to say is documented as fact and part of the public record. The information you are holding in your hands chronicles and verifies each and every point.
Okay, first; On the FBI's most wanted list Osama Bin Laden is not charged with the crimes of 911. When I called the FBI to ask them why this was the case, they replied: "There's not enough evidence to link Bin Laden to the crime scene," I later discovered he had never even been indicted by the D.O.J.
CS Number 2; FBI translator Sibel Edmonds, was dismissed and gagged by the D.O.J. after she revealed that the government had foreknowledge of plans to attack American cities using planes as bombs as early as April 2001. In July of '09, Mrs. Edmonds broke the Federal gag order and went public to reveal that Osama Bin Laden, Al Qaeda and the Taliban were all working for and with the C.I.A. up until the day of 9/11.
CS Number 3; The following is a quote from Mayor Giuliani during an interview on 9/11 with Peter Jennings for ABC News. "I went down to the scene and we set up headquarters at 75 Barkley Street, which was right there with the Police Commissioner, the Fire Commissioner, the Head of Emergency Management, and we were operating out of there when we were told that the World Trade Center was going to collapse. And it did collapse before we could actually get out of the building, so we were trapped in the building for 10, 15 minutes, and finally found an exit and got out, walked north, and took a lot of people with us."
WHO TOLD HIM THIS??? To this day, the answer to this question remains unanswered, completely ignored and emphatically DENIED by Mayor Giuliani on several public occasions.
CS Number 4; In April 2004, USA Today reported, "In the two years before the Sept. 11 attacks, the North American Aerospace Defense Command conducted exercises simulating what the White House says was unimaginable at the time: hijacked airliners used as weapons to crash into targets and cause mass casualties." One of the targets was the World Trade Center.
CS Number 5; On September 12th 2007, CNN's 'Anderson Cooper 360', reported that the mysterious "white plane" spotted and videotaped by multiple media outlets, flying in restricted airspace over the White House shortly before 10am on the morning of 9/11, was in fact the Air Force's E-4B, a specially modified Boeing 747 with a communications pod behind the cockpit; otherwise known as "The Doomsday Plane".
Though fully aware of the event, the 9/11 Commission did not deem the appearance of the military plane to be of any interest and did not include it in the final 9/11 Commission report.
September 11, 2009 at 11:57 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
CS Number 6; Three F-16s assigned to Andrews Air Force Base, ten miles from Washington, DC, are conducting training exercises in North Carolina 207 miles away as the first plane crashes into the WTC. Even at significantly less than their top speed of 1500 mph, they could still have defended the skies over Washington well before 9am, more than 37 minutes before Flight 77 crashes into the Pentagon, however, they did not return until after 9:55am.
Andrews AFB had no armed fighters on alert and ready to take off on the morning of 9/11.
CS Number 7; WTC Building 7. Watch the video of its collapse.
CS Number 8; Flight 93 is fourth plane to crash on 9/11 at 10:03am. V.P. Cheney only gives shoot down order at 10:10-10:20am and this is not communicated to NORAD until 28 minutes after Flight 93 has crashed.
Fueling further suspicion on this front is the fact that three months before the attacks of 9/11, Dick Cheney usurped control of NORAD, and therefore he, and no one else on planet Earth, had the power to call for military sorties on the hijacked airliners on 9/11. He did not exercise that power. Three months after 9/11, he relinquished command of NORAD and returned it to military operation.
CS Number 9; Scores of main stream news outlets reported that the F.B.I. conducted an investigation of at least FIVE of the 9/11 hijackers being trained at U.S. military flight schools. Those investigations are now sealed and need to be declassified.
CS Number 10; In 2004, New York firefighters Mike Bellone and Nicholas DeMasi went public to say they had found the black boxes at the World Trade Center, but were told to keep their mouths shut by FBI agents. Nicholas DeMasi said that he escorted federal agents on an all-terrain vehicle in October 2001 and helped them locate the devices, a story backed up by rescue volunteer Mike Bellone.
As the Philadelphia Daily News reported at the time, "Their story raises the question of whether there was a some type of cover-up at Ground Zero."
CS Number 11 Hundreds of eye witnesses including first responders, fire captains, news reporters, and police, all described multiple explosions in both towers before and during the collapse.
CS Number 12; An astounding video uncovered from the archives shows BBC News correspondent Jane Standley reporting on the collapse of WTC Building 7 over twenty minutes before it fell at 5:20pm on the afternoon of 9/11. Tapes from earlier BBC broadcasts show news anchors discussing the collapse of WTC 7 a full 26 minutes in advance. The BBC at first claimed that their tapes from 9/11 had been "lost" before admitting that they made the "error" of reporting the collapse of WTC 7 before it happened without adequately explaining how they could have obtained advance knowledge of the event.
In addition, over an hour before the collapse of WTC 7, at 4:10pm, CNN's Aaron Brown reported that the building "has either collapsed, or is collapsing."
September 11, 2009 at noon ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
CS Number 13; Solicitor General Ted Olson's claim that his wife Barbara Olsen called him twice from Flight 77, describing hijackers with box cutters, was a central plank of the official 9/11 story.
However, the credibility of the story was completely undermined after Olsen kept changing his story about whether his wife used her cell phone or the airplane phone. The technology to enable cell phone calls from high-altitude airline flights was not created until 2004. American Airlines confirmed that Flight 77 was a Boeing 757 and that this plane did not have airplane phones on board.
According to the FBI, Barbara Olsen attempted to call her husband only once and the call failed to connect, therefore Olsen must have been lying when he claimed he had spoken to his wife from Flight 77.
CS Number 14; The size of a Boeing 757 is approximately 125ft in width and yet images of the impact zone at the Pentagon supposedly caused by the crash merely show a hole no more than 16ft in diameter. The engines of the 757 would have punctured a hole bigger than this, never mind the whole plane. Images before the partial collapse of the impact zone show little real impact damage and a sparse debris field completely inconsistent with the crash of a large jetliner, especially when contrasted with other images showing airplane crashes into buildings.
CS Number 15; What is the meaning behind the following quote attributed to Dick Cheney which came to light during the 9/11 Commission hearings? The passage is taken from testimony given by then Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta.
During the time that the airplane was coming in to the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President, "The plane is 50 miles out." "The plane is 30 miles out." And when it got down to "the plane is 10 miles out," the young man also said to the Vice President, "Do the orders still stand?" And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said, "Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?"
As the plane was not shot down, in addition to the fact that armed fighter jets were nowhere near the plane and the Pentagon defensive system was not activated, are we to take it that the orders were to let the plane find its target?
CS Number 16; In May 2003, the Miami Herald reported how the Bush administration was refusing to release a 900-page congressional report on 9/11 because it wanted to "avoid enshrining embarrassing details in the report," particularly regarding pre-9/11 warnings as well as the fact that the hijackers were trained at U.S. flight schools.
CS Number 17; Top Pentagon officials cancelled their scheduled flights for September 11th on September 10th. San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown, following a security warning, cancelled a flight into New York that was scheduled for the morning of 9/11.
September 11, 2009 at 12:03 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
CS Number 18; The technology to enable cell phone calls from high-altitude airline flights was not created until 2004, and even by that point it was only in the trial phase. Calls from cell phones which formed an integral part of the official government version of events were technologically impossible at the time.
CS Number 19: On April 29, 2004, President Bush and V.P. Cheney would only meet with the commission under specific clandestine conditions. They insisted on testifying together and not under oath. They also demanded that their testimony be treated as a matter of "state secret." To date, nothing they spoke of that day exists in the public domain.
CS And finally Mr. President Number 20; A few days after the attack, several newspapers as well as the FBI reported that a paper passport had been found in the ruins of the WTC. In August 2004, CNN reported that 9/11 hijacker Ziad Jarrah's visa was found in the remains of Flight 93 which went down in Shanksville, Pennsylvania.
At least a third of the WTC victim's bodies were vaporized and many of the victims of the Pentagon incident were burned beyond recognition. And yet visas and paper passports which identify the perpetrators and back up the official version of events miraculously survive explosions and fires that we are told melted steel buildings.
(The Senior aide appears again beside the President whispering in his ear. He then quickly moves off).
PBO Well Charlie I can't say this hasn't been interesting. As I said earlier you've showed up today focused and organized. Regardless how I feel about the material you've presented, I must commend your dedication and zeal. However, our time here is up.
(the President rises from his chair , I do the same).
CS Mr. President! One more second!
(The President starts towards the door I follow him quickly step for step).
CS Mr. President, I implore you based on the evidence you now possess, to use your Executive Power. Prove to us all Sir, that you do, in fact, care. Create a truly comprehensive and open Congressional investigation of 9/11 and its aftermath. The families deserve the truth, the American people and the rest of the free world deserve the truth. Mr. President -
please disregard these facts as fantasy and ignore the truth for as long as you can.
September 11, 2009 at 12:06 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Senator Max Cleland, who resigned from the 9/11 Commission after calling it a "national scandal", stated in a 2003 PBS interview,
"I'm saying that's deliberate. I am saying that the delay in relating this information to the American public out of a hearing: series of hearings, that several members of Congress knew eight or ten months ago, including Bob Graham and others, that was deliberately slow walked: the 9/11 Commission was deliberately slow walked, because the Administration's policy was, and its priority was, we're gonna take Saddam Hussein out."
Cleland, speaking with Democracy Now, said,
"One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up".
In 2006 the Washington Post reported that several members of the 9/11 Commission suspected deception on part of the Pentagon. As reported,
"Some staff members and commissioners of the Sept. 11 panel concluded that the Pentagon's initial story of how it reacted to the 2001 terrorist attacks may have been part of a deliberate effort to mislead the commission and the public rather than a reflection of the fog of events on that day, according to sources involved in the debate."
9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerry also has unanswered questions. As reported by Salon, he believes that there are legitimate reasons to believe an alternative version to the official story.
"There are ample reasons to suspect that there may be some alternative to what we outlined in our version," Kerrey said. The commission had limited time and limited resources to pursue its investigation, and its access to key documents and witnesses was fettered by the administration.
Commissioner Tim Roemer, speaking to CNN, stated that Commission members were considering a criminal probe of false statements. As quoted,
"We were extremely frustrated with the false statements we were getting," Roemer told CNN. "We were not sure of the intent, whether it was to deceive the commission or merely part of the fumbling bureaucracy."
September 11, 2009 at 4:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Here is an article by James Corbett of Corbettreport.com
Mr. Corbett does a live radio show every sunday for an hour, it is a very good show. He also has an abundance of archived information there.
9/11 Truth cannot be stopped.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/911-truth...
September 11, 2009 at 4:29 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Sep ( anonymous ) says...
StopTheBrutalChemtrails:
It's not too late, but time is running out - get yours now!!!!
http://zapatopi.net/afdb/
September 11, 2009 at 5:04 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
lrubidoux ( Lisa Rubidoux ) says...
Harriett,
Thank you for all your efforts to bring us together on 9/11.
Never forget Captain Chic Burlingame/Flight 77
Lisa Rubidoux
Retired American Airlines
September 11, 2009 at 6:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
mavis ( anonymous ) says...
SO if every student is watching the speech next week where is the outcry and demand for some 9/11 education and exposure into the curriculum?
Parents should be outraged at the ignoring factor that has surrounded today. Why are children not being explained the signifacance of today? What was done in Steamboat schools to teach the respect and gratitude service members and others deserve?
NOTHING -- and that is why the youth of today are ignoring the problems of yesterday
September 11, 2009 at 10:04 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
The truth hurts, doesn't it, Sep?
We still don't know who murdered all of those wonderful people.
September 11, 2009 at 11:38 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seeuski ( anonymous ) says...
For the mentally challenged that follow the prostitute chasing actors on drugs, here is a well done in depth video to help bring you back from your hyperspace lunar voyages.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?doc...
WARNING! Limited use of popcorn during viewing is suggested due to possibility of simultaneous combustion which could lead to further ridiculously stupid conspiracy theories from other planets.
Beware of chemicals from the sky as they also may increase ones vulnerability to crazy people spreading proven lies about who perpetrated the 9/11 attacks.
September 12, 2009 at 8:04 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seeuski ( anonymous ) says...
Just in case anyone has any doubts about the 9/12 Tea Party movement today here is the live cameras from the DC Capitol Hill area.
http://www.trafficland.com/city/WAS/c...
September 12, 2009 at 8:45 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
You certainly can't attack the facts, so you attack the messenger, classic.
I used to think like most of the folks on here, too. I would see those 911 videos on youtube and go the other direction, then one day I was very bored and decided that I would watch one of those treasonous 911 videos to see what kind of garbage those nutty conspiracy theorists were latching onto. After I watched the first video, I had to watch another because it was so well done and full of facts. Then I spent the next three years thoroughly researching the topic. You decide, watch some of the videos about the towers and the pentagon and the pennsylvania crash site, but don't watch them because you believe in them, watch them to see just what they are saying, if you don't like what you see, you don't have to believe it, you can just use that information to further debunk it if that's what you feel. But please at least watch some of these videos, because if the conspiracy theorists are correct, then there is a problem in this country, a big problem.
Don't watch this video, it will make you into a foil hat wearing fool, haha,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wYwGac...
September 12, 2009 at 10:48 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seeuski ( anonymous ) says...
I was on the scene of the Pentagon attack, I lived in Arlington,VA on 9/11.
I saw the damage to the Building, a friend of mine was dropping his wife off at work and was on 395 on the edge of the Pentagon parking lot and witnessed the plane fly over the cars ahead of him and into the Pentagon. He described to me the light pole that he saw hit the cab in front of him.
My cousin had a lifelong schoolmate that was on flight 77 who perished and left a young wife and kids.
I was looking at new jeeps several days later at the dealer on Columbia Pike in Arlington and the salesman described the huge noise and vibration of the aircraft as it flew down that corridor towards the Pentagon at low altitude and high speed.
You are asking me to ignore all that and more in order to join a group of Bush haters who started this load of propaganda which has been debunked by so many people so many times that it is now a waste of time.
I feel sorry for you in that you have been manipulated to believe this pile of $#it.
Again, I am an eyewitness to the scene just hours after the attack and know others who saw the plane go into the Pentagon so party on bro.
September 12, 2009 at 11:02 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
NamVet ( anonymous ) says...
What I have not understood about the events leading up to the 9/11 attack was when Pres. Bush received the intelligence briefing on 8/9/2001 that said "BinLaden planning major attack using hyjacked aircraft". What did he do about it? He went on vacation. Two weeks later the FBI sent the Texas White House a memo stating Arabs where taking flying lessons but were not interested in takeoffs and landings. What did he do? Stay on vacation. I truly doubt that if John McCain had not been character assasinated by Rove, Limbaugh, Hannity etc. in the Republican primary in 2000 and had become President instead of Bush he would have gone on vacation. I believe he would have not slept until he found out when and where this was going to happen and just maybe it would have been stopped. When you add in the fact that Pearl, Wolfowitz and Cheney where planning the invasion of Iraq even before they took office and 9/11 was used as a justification to invade it makes you wonder what could have been different and where our country would be today had McCain not Bush had been elected. I doubt that our country would be in the mess it is today and Obama would not be in the White House.
September 12, 2009 at 11:14 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Architects and engineers for 9/11 truth.
KBDI TV Denver - 9/11: Blueprint for Truth World Premiere TV Broadcast
http://www.ae911truth.org/info/82
September 12, 2009 at 11:14 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Interview with Lloyd England, the taxi driver.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kzq38f...
September 12, 2009 at 11:22 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Lies are easy to debunk, try debunking the truth, you will not be able to do it.
September 12, 2009 at 11:37 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
See if you can figure out who Lloyde England's wife is.
September 12, 2009 at 11:45 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Seeuski, did you see the hole in the side of the pentagon? Did you see that it was only 16 feet wide? How wide is a commercial airliner?
September 12, 2009 at 12:03 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
This little beauty is about the right size to fit in the hole at the pentagon.
Ever heard of a global hawk?
Looks just like a commercial airliner, doesn't it?
http://www.freeimagehosting.net/uploa...
September 12, 2009 at 12:14 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seeuski ( anonymous ) says...
The only hole that I see here is the hole in your head.
Losers!!!
I was there and that is that.
Debunk that liars.
September 12, 2009 at 12:24 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seeuski ( anonymous ) says...
Mr. Namvet,
The plans to attack Iraq and take out Saddam Hussein were put in motion under the Presidency of Bill Clinton.
Have a nice day.
September 12, 2009 at 12:32 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seeuski ( anonymous ) says...
Just to remind those least they forget who our enemy was while Clinton was President.
http://www.husseinandterror.com/
September 12, 2009 at 12:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Building 7 didn't just blow itself up.
A spherical fruit that is orange in color is called a banana, right?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zv7BIm...
September 12, 2009 at 12:43 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
The people that are connected with the attacks in one way or another are emotionally attached to the incident. You can only be objective about the evidence if you are not emotionally attached to the incident.
September 12, 2009 at 12:51 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
If you can't win an argument you should turn to personal insults as quickly as possible, that will help your case.
September 12, 2009 at 12:53 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
JLM ( anonymous ) says...
How about just a smidgen of thoughtful reasoning about that 16' wide Pentagon airplane hole?
First, the Pentagon is the largest office building in the world and it has one hell of a parking lot. It operates 24/7 and is home to the US Freakin' Air Force.
When the plane which flew over the parking lots, it was positively identified by tail number by Air Force officers, non-coms and enlisted men who were perfectly knowledgeable about aircraft types.
The plane's tail number is unique and is assigned to a single plane in the entire US fleet.
There is absolutely no controversy that the plane which flew into the Pentagon was not the plane which bore that tail number and was the commercial airliner it is reported to be.
Come on, crazies. Get real!
Four planes came up missing and four crashes were identified. It is not a conspiracy. Have a nice damn day!
Maybe there is a 16' hole in your head?
September 12, 2009 at 12:54 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
charliecigar ( anonymous ) says...
You say you were there?
YOU LIE!!
Above you stated your friend was dropping off his wife at work and witnessed the plane fly over. This sounds like "hearsay". Hearsay is information gathered by Person A from Person B concerning some event, condition, or thing of which Person A had no direct experience.
I have a friend that says he has seen alien aircraft before so I must inform you that all UFO sightings are for real.
September 12, 2009 at 12:54 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
I lived in Steamboat Springs when the Bad News Building blew up, in fact a friend of mine was walking by when it happened and witnessed the explosion, but I am not going to claim that I know what caused the gas to leak into the building.
September 12, 2009 at 12:58 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
The jet engines on the commercial airliner that supposedly hit the pentagon are made from a single titanium crystal, they do not vaporize, why was the only engine found on the scene the exact type that is used in a global hawk?
September 12, 2009 at 1:04 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
"When the plane which flew over the parking lots, it was positively identified by tail number by Air Force officers, non-coms and enlisted men who were perfectly knowledgeable about aircraft types."
Can you give me the name of at least one of these officers?
Did anybody find out who Loyde England's wife is, yet? LOL
September 12, 2009 at 1:14 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Four planes attack the U.S. and you think it is not a conspiracy???
You may want to look up the definition of the word 'conspiracy'.
September 12, 2009 at 1:30 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seeuski ( anonymous ) says...
I erased what I was about to send in response to the above stupid posts in place of the faces of those who perished on flight 77.
I believe the continuance of this rather ugly path of discussion can only lead to something that we in Steamboat should avoid, physical conflict.
So in memory of the real victims of 9/11 I will start with the man my cousin new from childhood.
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/91...
The rest of the souls who perished on flight 77.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2...
May they rest in peace free from the sins of human weakness and fault that remain.
September 12, 2009 at 1:31 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
That's a great way to avoid losing an argument.
September 12, 2009 at 1:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
That's right, if you can't prove your point, resort to physical conflict. LOL
September 12, 2009 at 1:43 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
physical conflict won't change the facts at all.
September 12, 2009 at 1:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
You don't even know the name of the town you live in, it's called Steamboat Springs, but feel free to go back to where you came from any time now.
September 12, 2009 at 1:53 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
NamVet ( anonymous ) says...
Pearle, Wolfowitz, Cheney and the rest of the Neocons did not work for Bill Clinton. They all worked for Bush and were pressuring him to take out Sadam from day one. Clinton had no intention whatsoever to invade Iraq because he was totally contained. Sadam was an evil man and the world is full of them but no threat at all to the USA. There are numerous books out there that will tell you in detail why Bush invaded and 9/11 was not the reason only the excuse. Re-read Bush's 2003 State of the Union address which is full of falsehoods about Sadam buying nuclear materials from Africa that the CIA told him not to use in his speech because it was not true. The same is true of Cheney who finally admitted Sadam had nothing to do with 9/11 this year. This goes along with the other whoppers from him like the Iraqi oil revenues would pay for the war, he is just $1 trillion short of that estimate. I truly doubt this country will ever fully recover from your idol, Mr. Bush in our lifetime.
September 12, 2009 at 3:16 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
knee_dropper ( anonymous ) says...
There's nothing as entertaining as a tiff between two competing 9/11 conspiracy theorists. Reminds me of 3rd grade school yard arguments; I'd bet no matter what kind of evidence was presented to either of you it wouldn't make a damn difference either way. You two ought to start a thread in the forums to duke it out until you figure it out.
September 12, 2009 at 3:32 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
The New 9/11 Pentagon Investigation
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list...
September 12, 2009 at 3:43 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
I'm open to reviewing evidence in an objective manner. I haven't seen any evidence that opposes the "conspiracy theorists" on here yet, but If I ever do it would certainly make a difference. I, on the other hand, have linked to quite a bit of evidence for you to objectively review.
September 12, 2009 at 3:51 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Ever heard of Barry Jennings?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kRaKHq...
September 12, 2009 at 5:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
911 Commission Report Objective Review (Part 1 of 3)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iGzP_Z...
September 12, 2009 at 6:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
9/11 Live: The NORAD Tapes
How did the U.S. Air Force respond on 9/11?
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/...
September 12, 2009 at 6:22 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Lt. Col. Bob Bowman: "Who Were the [9/11] Conspirators?"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6Ls6s...
September 12, 2009 at 7:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
JLM ( anonymous ) says...
Brutal Chems ---
Give it a rest, the lobotomy scars are starting to show. Pure utter nonsense and you are embarassing all the other conspiracy loons. You're sucking up all their oxygen. Be fair, you had a good run and well, you showed them that crazy is OK.
Really, dude, you are getting a bit scary now.
The Pentagon parking lot is not like the Safeway parking lot late at night where stuff jumps out of the shadows. This is a place w/ armed guards and guys who know stuff about airplanes and such. It was broad, freakin' daylight. It was clear outside. They were tracking the airplane on radar and knew where it was going. There is no surprise here.
American Airlines knew it was missing a few airplanes. American Airlines later called in and said four planes did not make it home that day. A real tragedy and you should respect the seriousness and reverence of that situation. Real people lost their lives. Have some respect.
Gotta go, have to check with Charlie Freakin' Sheen about the Fed. LOL
Really, get some help. You deserve it. Everybody likes you. You're OK. This stuff --- pretty damn wacky, my friend.
September 12, 2009 at 7:58 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Eye witness Identifies a Global Hawk
"Christopher Bollyn, American Free Press, reports:
Samuel Danner (electrical engineer for AmTrak), was involved in the clean-up at the Pentagon crash site and inspected the debris at the site. He said, "It was not a Boeing 757 that hit the Pentagon. The plane looked like a hump-back whale." He thinks a Global Hawk hit the Pentagon. (There were only seven made as of 9/11/01 and two were missing at the time.)
Danner is a former pilot. He said the aircraft that hit the Pentagon was very quiet with one engine near the back. He also saw a second plane overhead and wonders if it was controlling the plane that hit the Pentagon. He walked the lawn and picked up small pieces of debris with others. He did not see any bodies from the aircraft.
Danner is very ill now with lymphoma, which may be the result of DU exposure at the Pentagon on 9/11. He wants to talk now (after seeing "Loose Change") because "it's been bugging me."
The Global Hawk fired a DU missile that penetrated the thick concrete wall of the Pentagon. DU was detected at the time and workers on the sYep, this 53-yr old Sam Danner, a pilot since the age of 16, was a first-hand observer of the crash. He pulled his car over to the south of the pentagon on the right side of 395 when he saw the approach of the plane that hit the pentagon.
He also observed a bunch of guys outside the pentagon standing there looking through binoculars.
He got a good view of the plane's approach, for a duration of at least three seconds. He says that the plane was not a 757, no way. "It was like a humpback whale" he says. Size of a gulfstream 300, about 100 ft wingspan, one engine on the backside with a "V" tail and no windows he could see. And it was very quiet. Going about 400mph. Overhead, at an estimated 15,000 feet he saw another plane.
As an EMT, he ran over to help at the pentagon, but found no bodies, no wreckage from a boeing aircraft on the scene. He smelled cordite and he saw a 3-foot single engine on the ground there. He picked up graphite pieces similar to the composite wings on a global hawk.
This engine matches the description of the single engine of a globalhawk. The globalhawk is a UAV (unmanned aerial vehicle) but could not have caused the damage if it wasn't containing a bunker-busting missle deployed on impact. The plane observed overhead might have been the plane controlling the remotely-controlled mission.
If a 757 had crashed into the pentagon, then there would have been aluminum all over the grass and two 9-foot diameter engines.
September 12, 2009 at 8:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
JLM ( anonymous ) says...
Chems ---
You're embarasssssing yourself, dude. Let's try a pinch of reality.
Global Hawk (RQ4A/B version) --- 9200 lb empty weight, 2000 lb payload capacity, 14,500 lb fuel --- 162' wingspan, composite contruction, only carries 2 1000 lb hard attachment points. This is primarily an electronics and photo plane designed to glide along for 24 hours at 65,000' and take pictures.
The GH is a thin wing section glider type aircraft --- think thin, delicate and light --- which would not dent a marshmallow on impact. It weighs less than most light twin engine prop planes. It does not and it could not carry the kind of armament you have imagined and the type of armament you have described is simply way too heavy to be carried by the GH. This is just simple basic info.
Boeing 757 --- this sucker is 179' long, 45' tall and has a wing span of 125'. It has a max weight of 272,500 lb. It is a very big plane.
You are talking about the difference between an ant hill and Mr Werner.
You are being silly. Too many folks saw the actual plane to "mistake" a little 25,000 lb plane (giving full credit for the enormous fuel load) for a 272,500 lb plane. We are talking about a huge, huge, huge difference.
Try some makeup over the lobotomy scars next time. You are getting desperately scary with your fictionalized existence and manufactured "facts". Didn't happen. Couldn't have happened. Go to bed and sleep it off.
BTW, even a Gulfstream is bigger than a GH.
September 12, 2009 at 10:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
O.K. JLM, you just believe whatever you want to believe, the sensible ones here can see the truth of the matter. All of your questions are answered in the new pentagon investigation videos I posted above, please watch them before you continue your wild rantings.
No-one is saying that there wasn't a commercial airliner flying by. It's in the videos, please check them out and get back to me, if you like. pay attention and listen to what the videos tell you. You may learn something.
September 13, 2009 at 12:20 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seeuski ( anonymous ) says...
One easy question for the deficient minded,
Where did flight 77 terminate and where are the passengers, terrorists and crew that were on board?
September 13, 2009 at 9:36 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
That flight most likely terminated at Reagan National, which is one mile from the pentagon. Your guess is as good as mine as to what happened to the passengers after they landed, but they were never heard from again.
September 13, 2009 at 9:53 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seeuski ( anonymous ) says...
That concludes my argument folks.
September 13, 2009 at 9:55 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seeuski ( anonymous ) says...
One last point and I will say adios amigo,
Reagan National's runway is along side the Potomac River and the hike and bike path that trails along side the river and runs along the edges of the airport is a popular tourist spot and on a Monday morning would have had hundreds of bicycle commuters and small boaters entering and leaving the inlet to Columbia Island Marina which is directly adjacent to the Pentagon.
With all flights having been grounded that 757 landing would have been witnessed by everyone and would have come across as odd giving the circumstances of the morning.
So with that my friend you have hit the end of your fairy tale conspiracy.
Maybe you can come up with the answers to Elvis, Morrison and Kennedy for us.
Happy trails.
September 13, 2009 at 10:06 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
It is a common sight to see planes land at that airport, not many people would think it odd. There are a lot of odd things about this whole deception.
Scientific Analysis Proves Towers Brought Down By Incendiaries
Jun 20, 2006 ... Scientific analysis on WTC steel debris undertaken by BYU Professor Steven Jones proves that the twin towers were demolished by means of ...
www.prisonplanet.com/articles/june200...
Physicist Stephen Jones gives his presentation "Whats New in 9/11 Research" at the 9/11 Symposium in Weats Hartford CT. 11/03/07
Dr. Jones is a founding member of Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice and The Journal of 9/11 Studies.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMhl-S...
September 13, 2009 at 10:19 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Well, that was easy, anybody else want to play?
September 13, 2009 at 10:24 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
JLM ( anonymous ) says...
Just when one thought it safe to come out in the sunlight again, we get the latest missive from the Brute.
Of course, your wacky ranting overlooks the obvious tidbit of information that every plane in America has a transponder which provides a query and response radar signature which is used by air traffic control to identify its whereabouts. All this information is in the public domain and is easily trackable by anybody with a PC.
Hmmmm, I doubt anybody was looking for those pesky little transponder signatures on say, 9-11??? Huh?
You are one silly goose but I have to give you credit for your steadfast goofiness in the face of incontrovertible evidence.
Sure that little Volkswagen is an 18-wheeler.
Sure that little GH is a 757.
Sure, Brute. Heck, we all like you personally but your rant is just wacky. Get back on the meds, babe. LOL
Thanks for some real low level entertainment, dude.
September 13, 2009 at 10:44 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seeuski ( anonymous ) says...
Just one of many debunking's of the deranged America hating nuts.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?doc...
September 13, 2009 at 11:12 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
fluoride is one of the most toxic substances on earth, on par with arsenic and lead.
It has no proven biological use inside the human body (teeth included).
There is no minimum daily requirement for fluoride. And second, it is a cumulative poison.
Only about half of what we consume is excreted. The other half collects in the teeth and bones, making them dense, but brittle.
Those little white spots visible on the teeth of many children are called dental fluorosis, a condition which not only predisposes them to decay, but also provides a sign that systemic fluoride poisoning is taking place.
Dental fluorosis appears to serve as a red flag for future bone fractures as well.
Fluoride was crucial to the H-bomb makers. It was needed to help process uranium; tons of it were needed.
During the mid-1940s the DuPont Corporation supplied the U. S. military's Manhattan Project with the fluoride it required.
There was a big problem, however. The area in New Jersey surrounding the DuPont plant was being contaminated by toxic fluoride emissions.
People were made ill, cattle and horses were crippled, and crops were either contaminated or completely wiped out.
In preparation for an impending court battle the Manhattan Project authorized the military to conduct its own fluoride studies.
Not only did they want information which would help diffuse the farmer's anger, but they also needed to know to what extent the fluoride workers were being damaged from fluoride exposure.
Some of the lab studies were performed at Strong Memorial Hospital, the same facility which injected toxic, radioactive plutonium into unsuspecting human guinea pigs.
Research from that time showed that fluoride had a negative impact on the central nervous system. This corroborates recent research showing the same thing--to the extent that the IQ's of children in fluoridated areas are lower than normal.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MhYSKA...
September 13, 2009 at 3:24 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
A photo of flight 77 immediately after the pentagon strike.
http://how911wasdone.com/images/flyov...
September 13, 2009 at 4:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
The New York City medical examiner's office, using DNA analysis, has managed to identify slightly more than half of the 2,792 people killed in the attack on the WTC towers, and it is feared that the remains of as many as 1,000 victims may never be identified. Given the fire and collapse of the two towers, this is not surprising. What is surprising is the contrast between the DNA identification process in New York and the DNA identification process that took place with respect to the victims of the Pentagon crash. Again, there was an horrific crash and a terrible fire, but authorities report that they identified remains of 184 (or here) people who were aboard Flight 77 or inside the Pentagon, including those of the five hijackers, but could not match the other remains with any of five people who were also known to be on the flight. In fact, the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology claims to have identified the remains of all but one of the passengers on Flight 77. If they achieve their goals, the New York investigators hope to achieve a 65% rate of identification. That is in a situation where many bodies were found intact as many of the victims died due to the collapse of the buildings and not due to fire. Identifying 184 out of 189 Pentagon victims is a 97% success rate in a case where we are to believe that heat was sufficient to vaporize the fuselage and engines of the plane, a vaporization needed to explain the almost complete absence of wreckage left behind of the plane, but not degrade the DNA of the passengers inside the plane. How do we reconcile a 50% rate of identification in New York, or 65% if they achieve their goals, with a 97% identification rate in Washington, especially where much of the DNA obtained in Washington had to be obtained from the area where the fuselage surrounding the passengers was before it was vaporized by the heat?
September 13, 2009 at 4:54 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
JLM ( anonymous ) says...
NYC --- 110 story building was demolished and collapsed creating a significantly larger pile of stuff to sift through. Hmmm???
Of course, it could be the flouride in their teeth.
September 13, 2009 at 8:03 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Remember, the 757 must fit into a hole the width of three windows, not the gaping hole from the later activities of the firemen. Note also that no damage to the building occurred at the points where the wings would have struck the outer wall....at over 400 mph. (A 737 would fit the damage profile better.) The fuel tanks would have increased the momentum of the wings creating a hammer-like blow to the facade. No evidence of that. Then how did all that aircraft squeeze into the relatively small hole in the Pentagon? Some hypothesize that the wings became crushed against the side of the fuselage and followed it into the hole. That still doesn't explain why no damage to the exterior of the Pentagon at the point of hypothetical wing impact. Besides, the fuel tanks inside the wings should have burst and most of the fuel exploded outside the building as the plane was extruded through that small hole. Once the tanks are ruptured in the extrusion, the fuel would be squeezed out. But no problem...Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld said, "...and the missile to damage this building..."
But let's hang in there for a bit and examine some of the other "evidence." There were a few bits of debris on the lawn that looked like they might be part of the skin of an American Airlines plane. One piece was quite near to a pickup truck which can be used for a comparison of dimensions. The letters on the debris would correspond with those on an American airliner except for one little detail. It is 1/2 to 1/3 the size. No match. Nice try.
The "something" that hit the Pentagon slammed through six walls before it left an exit hole approximately twelve feet across. Can you imagine something in an aluminum aircraft that could remain intact through six walls, multiple pillars and leave an exit wound so small. It can't be one of the engines because there is only one hole and the exit hole is consistent with the trajectory of the fuselage, not an outboard turbine. Besides, this is too near the opening and an engine would not have burned up in a fire in the open courtyard. The nose cone of the 757 is made of a very hard carbon compound that could not be expected to survive crashing through all that structure and still have enough momentum to blast a twelve foot hole in the heavy wall in the Pentagon. It's starting to seem as though Secretary Rumsfeld might be right!
September 13, 2009 at 8:44 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
"BROACH technology is innovative in that rather than simply using mass and speed to penetrate targets, as with conventional warheads, approximately 1/3 of the mass of the warhead is used for a large shaped charge. This "Augmenting Charge" detonates first, cleaving the target with a high speed plasma jet. A "Follow Through Bomb" then penetrates and detonates inside the target structure." See http://defence-data.com/paris99/pagep...
The AGM-86D Block II program is the Precision Strike variant of CALCM. It incorporates a penetrating warhead, updated state of the art, near-precision, GPS guidance, and a modified terminal area flight profile to maximize the effectiveness of the warhead. The penetrating warhead is augmented with two forward shape charges. To maximize the warheads effectiveness against hardened targets, the Block II will maneuver and dive onto its target in a near vertical orientation. The updated guidance system will increase the systems lethality by obtaining a less than 5 meter CEP. The Precision Strike variant of CALCM was successfully demonstrated in December 1996. A CALCM modified with a new precision GPS implementation flew for 4.5 hours, performed a newly developed steep terminal dive, and impacted the target within 2.5 meters of the aim point. The demonstration clearly showed that CALCM is capable of delivering it's warhead with precision accuracy from extremely long standoff ranges.
The BROACH multi-warhead system, also under evaluation for the the Joint Stand-off Weapon (JSOW), achieves its results by combining an initial penetrator charge (warhead) with a secondary follow-through bomb, supported by multi-event hard target fuzing. The outcome is a warhead and fuse combination that provides for the defeat of hardened targets more than twice that achievable for equivalent single penetrating warhead types, at an equivalent weight and velocity. See http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/bom... Other facts indicate the presence of a hollow charge (or broach) bomb:
- plasma on photo of explosion
- white initial fireball
- punched out hole at 84 m from entry point in C ring wall
- a lady's body was found in the pentagon, sitting on her desk, her arms before her face as to protect. Seems to be a death provoked by an electrical shock like the one produced by strong plasma jets of hollow charges. (Thanks to JP Desmoulins communication.).
Another possible aircraft is an Global Hawk outfitted with a Broach hollow charge. At 350 kts it would be easy to confuse a missile laden Global Hawk with a passenger aircraft. The Mobile Microwave Landing System (MMLS), designated AN/TRN-45, is a portable, ground-based microwave transmitter that provides a mobile, precision approach and landing capability for MLS equipped aircraft.
September 13, 2009 at 9:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Listen to the Alex Jones Show here.
http://www.infowars.com/stream.pls
September 13, 2009 at 9:28 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
9/11 was a magic trick, an illusion. If you think the leaders of this country are incapable of perpetrating such a treasonous crime, you need to watch Terror Storm: Final Cut - Special Edition Re-Mixed + Re-Mastered This UPDATED AND EXPANDED edition has more than 17 minutes of explosive new documentation. This final cut of Terrorstorm is the definitive work exposing the history of government-sponsored terrorism.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQ4oyV...
September 14, 2009 at 10:58 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
trafficman ( anonymous ) says...
On 9-11 I was on an 8:00 a.m. flight out of Boston Logan airport leaving out of Terminal B, same time and location as one of the planes hitting the WTC. While I was in the air, my wife, a colonel in the Air Force at the time, was working in the Pentagon, integrally involved with the highest levels of the Air Force. With the passengers unaware of what was occurring in NY, my flight landed at Regan National only minutes before the Pentagon was struck. As National airport was being evacuated I saw the plume of smoke rising from the Pentagon and heard from other passengers leaving the airport that the WTC had been hit. My wife was two sides removed from the impact area in the Pentagon so we were both extremely fortunate to have survived that day and we will NEVER forget what happened and who was responsible.
The factual errors that have been posted here supporting a conspiracy are too laughable and numerous to even comment upon. Where are all the passengers on Flight 77, hidden away in the desert along with the UFOs? Anyone who could actually believe a conspiracy of such magnitude could be executed involving so many different levels of government and could be kept secret this long must be totally deranged. You are in extreme need of mental help. To even consider that so many members of our military, who put their lives on the line each and every day to protect our freedom, including your ability to post absolute trash, would ever be involved in attacking and killing thousands of their countrymen is total lunacy.
Let us never forget those that perished that day, and those that have sacrificed their lives since then in fighting this global war on terror. While 9-11 brought it front and center we have been engaged in it long before and unfortunately we will need to stay engaged for the foreseeable future to protect our freedom.
September 14, 2009 at 11:47 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Former Airline Pilot Talks About The Doomsday Planes on 9/11
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWOi1F...
September 14, 2009 at 12:26 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Kevin_Nerney ( Kevin Nerney ) says...
Let's just assume for a second (long enough) that Stop you're right. It will not bring back my 343 colleagues nor the 3000 others that perished that day. As Colin Powell used to say "Don't bring me problems bring me solutions." Now just stop and go fly a flag, and if the one you decide to fly doesn't have 50 stars and 13 stripes go get a one way ticket out. I hope that plane doesn't have an unfortunate run in with a tall building. As my mom used to say "If you don't have anything nice to say don't say anything".
September 14, 2009 at 12:28 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Flight 77 Passengers
We are told that there were 64 passengers were on board Flight 77. We count 59, including 6 crew members. We presume they mean 59 passengers and crew, plus 5 Hijackers Patsies. There is no Arab name on the list of victims as reported by the media
The odds against this being a random group of 53 American Airlines passengers are simply astronomical! There are more top secret security clearances here than in most medium-sized cities in America.
http://911review.org/Wiki/Flight77Pas...
September 14, 2009 at 12:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
You can't have a solution without first having a problem. Once we all figure out the problem, here, we can get on to searching for a solution.
September 14, 2009 at 12:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Hijackers Alive And Well
Shortly after the events of 9/11, the FBI released a list of the 19 hijackers. The [WWW] FBI press release of September 27th, 2001 contained names, photographs, aliases and other information. places of birth, date of birth and other personal details were presented in news media throughout the world.
Officials said they reached that conclusion after assembling information from the flights' passenger lists; pay telephone records; phoned reports from passengers aboard the hijacked flights and evidence taken from the rental car found at Logan Airport. [WWW] NYT
However as soon as the list of "hijackers" was published, doubts began to arise. Saudi Arabia's Foreign Minister Prince Saud Al-Faisal told the Arabic Press after meeting with President George W. Bush on Sept. 20th, "It was proved that five of the names included in the FBI list had nothing to do with what happened."
Despite this, the FBI subsequently were adamant that they were clear on hijackers' identities: ( [WWW] AP,11/03/2001)
FBI Director Robert Mueller said Friday investigators have established the true identities of all 19 of the Sept. 11 hijackers and have found places outside the United States where the plot was hatched. ...
We at this point definitely know the 19 hijackers who were responsible, Mueller said.
The FBI has confirmed that the hijackers' names released in late September are the true identities of all 19 men, said a law enforcement source, speaking on condition of anonymity.
The names were those listed on the planes' passenger manifests and investigators were certain that those were the names the hijackers used when they entered the United States. But questions remained about whether they were the hijackers' true identities, partly because some of their names are common in the Arab world and some of the hijackers fraudulently obtained State identification cards before the hijackings.
Investigators now believe the names released on Sept. 28 are the hijackers' real names.
Subsequently at least seven or eight of the WTC Hijackers have been found alive to be alive, including at least 2 of the alleged Flight77 hijackers.
http://911review.org/Wiki/HijackersAl...
September 14, 2009 at 1:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Would anyone like to actually debate the facts or are we just going to call each other names?
September 14, 2009 at 1:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
An Appeal to Firefighters, Present and Past
Fellow Firefighters, A great tragedy befell our community on September 11, 2001, an unprecedented 343 deaths in the line of duty. As horrible as that toll is, if there were a rational explanation for it, we could accept it and mourn. We all understood the risk we accepted when we took the oath of office, that chance might cut short our lives when we placed ourselves in harm's way in the public's service. This is what we are paid for and it is our honor. However, in short, the official explanation of the events of that day are not only insufficient, they are fantastic and cannot bear rational examination. We are asked to believe that on that day three structural steel buildings, which have never before in history collapsed because of fire, fell neatly into their basements at the speed of gravity, their concrete reduced to dust. We are asked to believe that jet fuel (kerosene) can melt steel. We are asked to believe that the most sophisticated air defense system in the world, that responded to sixty-eight emergencies in the year prior to 9-11 in less than twenty minutes allowed aircraft to wander about for up to an hour and a half. We are asked to believe that the steel and titanium components of an aircraft that supposedly hit the Pentagon "evaporated". There is much, much more if anyone cares to look into it. Trade Tower #7 by itself is the "smoking gun". Not hit by an aircraft, with only a few relatively small fires, it came down in a classic crimp and implosion, going straight into its basement, something only very precise demolition can accomplish, which takes days if not weeks to prepare. The 9-11 Commission actually stated the they DIDN'T KNOW WHY IT COLLAPSED AND LEFT IT AT THAT. Brothers, I know that the implications of the above are hard, almost unthinkable, but the official explanation is utter nonsense, and three hundred and forty three murdered brothers are crying out for justice. Demand a genuine investigation into the events of September 11!
-Anton Vodvarka, Lt. FDNY (ret)
Lt. Vodvarka served on FDNY Ladder Co 26, Rescue Co. 3, Rescue Co. 1, Engine Co. 92, Ladder 82 and Ladder 101. He was awarded the Merit Class 1 award, the Prentice Medal.
http://firefightersfor911truth.org/
September 14, 2009 at 1:47 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Kevin, My mother says that you should have listened to your mother.
September 14, 2009 at 1:51 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
lrubidoux ( Lisa Rubidoux ) says...
Captain Chic Burlingame was in command of flight 77 on 9/11.
He was my coworker.
These terrorists took 2 American Airlines jets and used them as weapons that horrific day.
September 14, 2009 at 4:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
trafficman ( anonymous ) says...
You can believe your sources I will believe the credible scientific and engineering experts such as this one from MIT http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/... and others from the American Society of Civil Engineers. The National Institute of Standards and Technology information also provides a fully peer reviewed logical explanation for the collapse of Towers 1 & 2 in this link. http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/f.... The final report for building 7 which evaluated the demolition theory also provides the credible and peer reviewed analysis of what actually caused the failure. http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCSTA.... There were definitely firsts with the collapse of Building 7 that not been witnessed before, however the scientific evidence still defeats any argument that it was a result of planted explosives and determines that heat related stress and differential failure ultimately brought the building down. All credible scientific and engineering organizations have supported these conclusions, regarding both the WTC collapse, and the impact on the Pentagon.
While hearsay, I will also believe the first hand accounts of clients I have known for years who work at the Virginia DOT Traffic Operations Center located on Columbia Pike 0.6 miles from the impact area of the Pentagon who happened to be standing in the parking lot when the American flight flew overhead at extremely low altitude heading towards the Pentagon. No flights into National airport ever follow this path or travel at this low of an altitude. I will also believe the photos of aircraft engine parts, landing gear, wheel drums, damage to facilities outside the Pentagon from impact of the wings and engines, DNA evidence of the victims of the crash, and the portion of the airplane fuselage strewn on the ground outside. But if the conspiracy theorists still want to believe in pure fiction, dream on keep and enjoying whatever substance brings you to this delusional state of mind.
September 14, 2009 at 6:51 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
LMAO - Keep dreaming, sucker.
Click here to see the summary of evidence that proves conclusively that 3 World Trade Center buildings should have been tested for "exotic accelerants." It also establishes the most probable cause of collapse on 9/11/2001 to be the result of controlled demolitions. It makes no attempt to determine why, or to imply by whom.
http://firefightersfor911truth.org/wp...
September 14, 2009 at 8:50 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
The people that are connected with the attacks in one way or another are emotionally attached to the incident. You can only be objective about the evidence if you detach yourself from the incident.
September 14, 2009 at 8:55 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Despite the protests of the victims' families as well as many scientists and engineers, Rudy Giuliani's administration worked hand in hand with the Bush Administration to immediately ship the 200 thousand tons of twisted, melted, demolished World Trade Center steel off to India and China to be recycled as scrap before anyone had a chance to do a forensic examination of it. This is not what normally happens to evidence in a crime scene, and is a clear indication of the Giuliani Administration and the Bush Administration's involvement in the crimes of 9/11
911 Truth: Rudy Giuliani & the Feds Destroyed WTC Evidence
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxycV4...
September 15, 2009 at 2:02 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
If you're still not convinced there's more to it than we're being told, then ask yourself: if Tower 7 did come down due to fire, why didn't Tower 5? Tower 5 was much closer, had devastating structural damage from the Twin Tower collapses, and much more severe fires burning. But, it remained standing. So, did Tower 3,4, and 6. Look below. Do your own size-up. Our lives depend on the ability to guage when a building will collapse - test your skills.
http://www.youtube.com/v/41OCQvu7ULQ
September 15, 2009 at 2:14 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
"Did investigators consider the possibility that an explosion caused or contributed to the collapse of WTC 7?
Yes, this possibility was investigated carefully. NIST concluded that blast events inside the building did not occur and found no evidence supporting the existence of a blast event.
In addition, no blast sounds were heard on the audio tracks of video recordings during the collapse of WTC 7 or reported by witnesses. According to calculations by the investigation team, the smallest blast capable of failing the building's critical column would have resulted in a sound level of 130 decibels (dB) to 140 dB at a distance of at least half a mile, if unobstructed by surrounding buildings. This sound level is consistent with a gunshot blast, standing next to a jet plane engine, and more than 10 times louder than being in front of the speakers at a rock concert."
Still don't believe there's ANY evidence of BLAST SOUND?
How about radio transmissions and testimony from FDNY members themselves.
YOU BE THE JUDGE.
9/11 firemen - New York's bravest
http://www.youtube.com/v/SXD3bAbZCow
September 15, 2009 at 2:31 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
LMAO @ the nutters who still believe the official conspiracy theory.
September 15, 2009 at 9:16 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
kielyj ( anonymous ) says...
Chemist
You are crazy as a bed bug but you are one typing maniac.
September 15, 2009 at 9:46 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
If the truth is crazy, then I am more than happy to take on that title.
www.prisonplanet.com/yes-conspiracy-t...
www.prisonplanet.com/articles/novembe...
September 15, 2009 at 9:57 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Welcome to Firefighters for 9/11 Truth. My name is Erik Lawyer, and I am the founding member.
A great friend of mine with a Business degree from West Point, as conservative and non-conspiratorial as they get, came over one night to talk about what he saw happening in the economy. He provided some disconcerting evidence that we as a nation are at risk of entering into another depression; he pointed out historical parallels where other countries, such as Germany, suffered economic collapse. THAT was my eye opener. I became obsessed researching things such as economies, who is in control of currencies, what causes depressions, who profits during war, etc. So many things kept pointing to 9/11. Another one of my dad's favorite quotes was, "believe half of what you see and none of what you hear." So, I looked at both sides and quickly noticed a pattern. On one side, the general media ignores some of the most compelling evidence that contradicts the "official" story. On the other side, science based conspiracy sites such as Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth and Scholars for 911 Truth and Justice, along with the experience based sites such as Patriots Question 911 and Pilots for 911 Truth, fully explore the evidence. Their research points out numerous inconsistencies and raised serious questions about the "official" story. To be fair, I looked at the debunking sites again. On Popular Mechanics (the source often quoted for confirmation of the "official" story), as well as most debunking sites I usually found name calling and smear tactics. In my own personal experience, as soon as someone needs to resort to name calling and smearing during a debate, they're not very secure in their "facts" or the "truth." I found that many of these debunking sites also failed to tackle some of the most compelling evidence. They would often bring up the most ludicrous of conspiracy claims, debunk those, offer far reaching explanations, or never fully explain the "how." They often made you really have to stretch to believe that so many catastrophic failures - which had never happened before - could all occur separately, on one day, and multiple times (e.g. failure to intercept aircraft x 4 for the first time in history; complete collapses x 3 for the first time; no obvious plane wreckage x 2+ for first time, etc.). Even the NIST report only describes the EVENTS that led to the moment of collapse of Towers 1 & 2, not the SCIENCE behind the instantaneous collapse of the cold steel below the impact zone:because it is that obvious? How does that teach us how to improve building safety?
September 15, 2009 at 11:23 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
The clincher for me was when I learned that the lead investigators on the crime - the FBI - do not even have the 9/11 attacks mentioned on the Bin Laden page of the FBI's Most Wanted website list due to LACK OF EVIDENCE. How can it be that we were led to believe Osama bin Laden was responsible for the 9/11 attacks, yet the FBI doesn't publicly accuse him? Remind me again why we are at war and have given up so many rights our Founding Fathers gave us???
When I voiced my new opinion and concerns most of my friends listened. I think because they were shocked that a staunch Conservative could have such a major shift, or because they thought I had lost my mind and wanted to diagnose the cause. Curiously, some became angry at my new questions and actually thought I was supporting Terrorists with my concerns. Being a part of that same mindset myself only a few weeks ago, and then having a major shift in consciousness, really shook me to the core. What has happened to our collective consciousness that we believe anyone who doubts the "official" story or what the government tells us is an enemy? Anyone who asks for the Truth is labeled a "Wacko" or "Terrorist Sympathizer?" What has happened to us? Are we not founded on Freedom of Speech and taught to check our Government?
Through my research I learned that many mainstream people, government officials, pilots and regular "Joes" actually doubt the "official" story. Yet the media still treats "Truth" seekers like they have a mental disorder, are few and far between, and even dangerous. I've since learned there are major news stories concerning 9/11 that the media won't cover. Do you know about Tower 7? And, did you know that Japan, who lost 24 of their citizens in the 9/11 attacks, has held hearings this year on the possibility that the "official" story isn't the truth? Why hasn't the media covered THIS? I've since learned about the whistleblowers that have been silenced. There are many top pilots (including pilots who have flown those specific aircraft) who say they could not have performed the maneuvers at those speeds while physically encountering the G-Loads and overcoming control issues associated with high speeds. Now, I've been a private pilot for over 20 years and have competed in spot landing, aerobatic and maneuver contests. I know how difficult it is to perform precision maneuvers at moderate speeds, let alone full speed, and I would never dream I could do the same in a jumbo jet.
September 15, 2009 at 11:25 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
To be honest, I was asleep at the wheel, and relied on what I was being told by mainstream media. The same media, whose parent corporations, are some of the largest suppliers of weapons in this war. Before this "awakening" I had no idea the extent of our civil liberties that had been eroded in the name of Terrorism. I had never really wrapped my brain around what legalized torture means. I had always claimed America was noble. Just look at how we treated POW's during WWII and Vietnam compared to our enemies. That separated us. We were setting the example of Human Rights to the rest of the world. Sure, you'll always have individuals that will take things too far, but Government sponsored torture? What has happened to our country? What kind of example are we setting for our children, and the world? You would be interested to learn how many of our own rights have been stripped away recently. Look up the Military Commissions Act of 2006, the John Warner Defense Authorization Act, Homegrown Terrorism Act and Presidential Directive 51. It is amazing the rights we have all lost in the past couple of years and very little is covered by the U.S. media.
After discovering this, I applied the "common sense" test that my Grandfather always said wasn't so common. Why would a government so aggressively suppress truth and blatantly destroy evidence if there was nothing to hide? Why has every testimony from sworn government and military officials that points to "prior knowledge" been stricken from the 9/11 Commission Report? How did paper business cards, cloth bandanas, and plastic ID's that implicate the terrorists survive so neatly through jet fueled fireballs hot enough to destroy titanium and steel? I've seen bodies burned beyond recognition, yet I have never found one that was wearing unburned clothing. These questions alone are enough to make me risk everything for a real investigation and accounting. Sadly, there are many more questions! This has nothing to do with party politics for me anymore. This is about saving our Country and pledging allegiance to our Flag not the Government, to protecting the principles America was founded on, not the beliefs of a few people in power. I have the utmost respect of our Soldiers and the sacrifices they have made, and continue to make. This is about defending what these countless men and women have died for. This is about defending the freedoms they gave us- about defending the Constitution, and about protecting the future for our children.
September 15, 2009 at 11:26 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Lisa Rubidoux
September 14, 2009 at 4:18 p.m.
"Captain Chic Burlingame was in command of flight 77 on 9/11.
He was my coworker.
These terrorists took 2 American Airlines jets and used them as weapons that horrific day."
The whole tragedy of "9/11," when it occurred, struck most Americans with a terrible impact, emotionally and mentally. For some of us, however, that impact was heightened when we received reports of personal friends, relatives, acquaintances, etc. being involved in the death tolls.I was horrified when I began to read reports immediately following "9/11" (while researching the NWO agenda in Oahu, Hawaii, at the time it occurred.)I couldn't believe it at first when I read that the PILOT OF THE PLANE THAT ALLEGEDLY HIT THE PENTAGON was none other than "Chip" Burlingame.
Wendy Burlingame, 32, was the daughter of Charles F. Burlingame III, who was the pilot of American Airlines Flight 77 on Sept. 11, 2001.....She was found dead in her apartment, apparently of smoke inhalation, after a fire started inside her bedroom sometime Monday night. Fire officials said Burlingame and her boyfriend attempted to douse the fire using water from a sink, but it quickly spread out of control. The boyfriend made it out of the apartment, but the door closed and locked behind him and he couldn't get back inside. Burlingame and her two dogs -- identified by the Humane Society as a 4-year-old female pitbull and a 3-month-old pitbull puppy -- were found dead inside..."
***********************************
Wendy knew that something strange and suspicious had happened to her father Chip, and wanted to KNOW THE TRUTH. She refused to remain silent and became quite outspoken.
http://americanholocaustcoming.blogsp...
September 15, 2009 at 12:11 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Charlie Sheen has blasted the cowardly corporate media response to his "20 Minutes With The President" letter, slamming the press as "hopeless lap-dogs" for failing to address a single one of his 20 bullet points on 9/11 while ignoring completely his challenge to publicly debate 9/11 truth debunkers.
Sheen's open letter to the President, which took the form of a fictionalized account of a meeting between the two in which Sheen grills Obama about the unanswered questions surrounding 9/11, received widespread media coverage and was featured in thousands of newspaper stories, online articles and TV segments. Awareness of the subject only increased after the subsequent release of a You Tube video in which Sheen personally appeals to the President to answer the questions.
However, not one single mainstream media report adequately covered even one of Sheen's 20 bullet points that were listed in the article and backed up by a substantial online bibliography, found here.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/20_minute...
September 15, 2009 at 2:35 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
lrubidoux ( Lisa Rubidoux ) says...
StopTheBrutalChemtrails -you moron
His name is CHIC Burlingame
ANd yes his daughter died tragically in a fire.
That has nothing to do with your tirade.
September 15, 2009 at 4:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seeuski ( anonymous ) says...
Lisa it is best to leave this soul to his own devices and ignore the stuff.
Proving a negative is a waste of time here.
Sorry for the salt that has been inflicted on you here.
September 15, 2009 at 4:37 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
The guy that wrote that article was not aware of the correct spelling of Mr. Burlingame's nick name, did you really think that I wrote that article? LOL
September 15, 2009 at 5:02 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Did you read this part?
"Wendy knew that something strange and suspicious had happened to her father, and wanted to know the truth. She refused to remain silent and became quite outspoken."
September 15, 2009 at 5:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
JLM ( anonymous ) says...
Chem ---
Babe, you are getting a bit scary with your nonsensical rant.
West Point does not grant a degree in Business and never has.
The failure mechanism for the World Trade Center Towers is not even remotely controversial amongst civil engineers and/or structural engineers. This is very simple engineering analysis given the behavior of steel framed structures subjected to intense heat over an extended time period.
This fundamental recitation of simple engineering analysis was peer reviewed with no contentious debate amongst the engineers. It is simple engineering and nothing more.
The normal design criteria for a composite structure (steel cloaked in concrete as in the World Trade Center Towers) does not anticipate an impact loading of an airliner making impact at a high floor however the WTC did, in fact, anticipate in part such an extraordinary load. Even in that occurrence, the actual impact loading was judged to be greater than any level anticipated. Not too many 110 story buildings have been built in this country.
Chem, your comments are beginning to betray what may be a real pathological and clinically significant level of delusion and denial. Please, get some help.
Say hello to Charlie for all the non-crazy folks. Have a nice day.
September 15, 2009 at 10:34 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
MrTaiChi ( anonymous ) says...
Psychiatrists and witch doctors have in common their purpose in life as being to determine what makes people tick. I am neither. It is an interesting study to ask what makes any person such fertile ground for conspiratorial belief systems to take root. It seems enough for rational minds that four planes disintegrated into fragments and that three thousand people, more or less, did not survive to tell any tales. How can the conspiratorial belief system believe that the government perpetrated a mass murder event to support the war on terror against Osama Bin Laden's organization and at the same time disregard his boast that his group was responsible for the atrocities? In a recent Nat. Geo. channel special, the main contentions of the "truthers" were subjected to scientific analysis. Just focusing on the aspect of the collapse of the towers as a demolition, the show convincingly demonstrated that it would have taken hundreds of men weeks to cut steel and place explosives to accomplish the result claimed. This recitation of fact is only viewed as a challenge to the "truthers" to assert that it would have taken, e.g., 'only two weeks', and that therefore the macro logic is flawed. The experts on the show called this mind-set, "whack-a-mole." When pressed, the authors of truther books readily admit that they don't have answers for many of the macro-logic points, but the fact that there are micro-logical "inconsistencies" is enough for them to sustain an elaborate alternative reality. How a government that can't keep any secrets kept a lid on the hundreds of people who would have been involved in this 'conspiracy' is a matter of no valid inquiry to the truthers.
This is not new. The Arab cultural mind-set seems largely disposed to believe any conspiracy theory. There are other examples: AIDS was invented by the government as genocide against African Americans; Oswald didn't kill JFK by himself; Christ survived crucifixion to perpetrate a cult hoax; Roosevelt knew about but did not prevent the attack on Pearl Harbor; fluoridation is being perpetrated on us to drain our vital life forces, (General Jack Ripper). How popular and lucrative for its author was the Da Vinci Code. People love a good conspiracy theory. It makes them feel like insider gossipers.
It's a waste of time to engage with people of conspiratorial belief systems, because, for whatever reason, they are as invested in them as others are in religion. JLM was closest to the mark. When reality is never what it seems, it is a mental health problem.
September 16, 2009 at 12:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Steven John Hibbs / The Tonka Report September 1, 2009
After watching the National Geographic Channel's two hour propaganda hit piece, 9/11: Science And Conspiracy, I'm really quite amazed at how slick they put it all together. Without taking notes while watching it, I'll just hit on a few random points from memory right off the bat:
Once again, there was no explanation for the 6.5 second freefall collapse of WTC 7 that was not hit by an airliner, just like there was no mention of its remarkable collapse in NIST's 9/11 Commission Report...
http://stevenjohnhibbs.wordpress.com/...
Jason Rips into National Geographic's 9/11 hit piece and takes on the "no planes" theory, that is designed to make the real 9/11 Truth movement look foolish ...
http://www.prisonplanet.com/jason-ber...
If you know that there is treason being committed and you fail to do anything about it, you can be held accountable for treason, yourself.
September 16, 2009 at 6:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Maybe Mr. Tea would like to tell us how a entire 757-200 fuselage that is 45 feet in diameter fits through a 16 foot diameter hole. please don't mention the wings that were never found, which make the aircraft 125 feet wide at it's widest point. Also, please don't mention the 9 foot diameter titanium engines that magically vaporized, the passenger's bodies that were nowhere to be found, or the miles of wiring required to make an airliner like that fly. Don't mention the seats, either, about 240 of them that disappeared. The official explanation is a outrageous conspiracy theory. wake up, people, we're all in this together. The sooner we figure out what happened that day, the sooner we can prosecute the perpetrators. Remember, the FBI claims that it has "No hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11"
http://www.informationclearinghouse.i...
September 16, 2009 at 7:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Engineers Are Baffled Over The Collapse Of 7 WTC
"Steel Members Have Been Partly Evaporated"
http://www.geocities.com/streakingobj...
September 16, 2009 at 8:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seeuski ( anonymous ) says...
News to the nut, no one is listening.
September 16, 2009 at 8:53 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
JLM ( anonymous ) says...
Chem ---
Now I am beyond scared. Don't do anything dangerous to yourself or others. You are beyond a loon.
Give it a rest and get some help.
September 17, 2009 at 6:04 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
Alright.....
For the deluded amongst us.......
heh heh...... some fruity chump who calls him/her self something about Chemicals [surprised?]
The mighty Hunterdog [speaking here - using the name of a much smarter person than the 'ol dog] has deemed this person worthy of a minutes debunking.............
Let's start from the top, friend.........[or foe, I doubt you have the reasoning skills to discern the difference.]
You say:
This is an excerpt of Charlie Sheen's "20 minutes with the president"
Are you kidding me ? Charlie Sheen ? Do I even NEED to go any farther with that silliness ?
It's the worst argument from authority I can imagine.
Not a fan of Socrates, or his method of logical discernment ?
figures.
you say:
"Okay, first; On the FBI's most wanted list Osama Bin Laden is not charged with the crimes of 911. When I called the FBI to ask them why this was the case, they replied: "There's not enough evidence to link Bin Laden to the crime scene," I later discovered he had never even been indicted by the D.O.J."
OOOh....Imagine the highest law emforcement agency in the country daring to not follow the law and arresting someone on unfounded claims........There's no doubt these RELIGIOUS fundamentalists perpertrated this crime, but without sufficient evidence, it's ILLEGAL in the land of the free to indict someone on what we think they did.
your point fails, ChemConsumer...........just the first, keep score......
September 17, 2009 at 8:20 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
and on, Chemsniffer
you say:
"Sibel Edmonds, was dismissed and gagged by the D.O.J. after she revealed that the government had foreknowledge of plans to attack American cities using planes as bombs as early as April 2001."
Ms. Edmonds never claimed anything more than "chatter" was intercepted by the FBI, and that she inferred her own interpetations, AND this dog might add, AFTER the attacks.
Hindsight, right ?
You're not going to get any sympathy for the Bush administration's incompetencies from me, though......
September 17, 2009 at 8:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
Picture this:
Government: We want to cause a tragedy so great the American people will blindly follow us into war... What do you think gentlemen...
Accomplice #1: Well, the Towers are a perfect choice.. It's been bombed before. We can just blame Osama again. We've been priming the American people by having him blow up our warships and our buildings in other countries.
Government: Yeah, good idea! How will we do that?
Accomplice #1: We can hire Osama to get some of his friends to fly planes into it!
Accomplice #2: Wait... I have a better idea, We can BOMB the buildings!
Accomplice #1: Well, that means placing enough bombs into two 110 story buildings. That's going to take a lot of man power and risk us being uncovered...
Accomplice #2: Yeah, but that way, you're sure to knock them down. Besides, maybe the hijackers won't make it to the target. Maybe they'll be uncovered!
Accomplice #1: But you don't need to knock them down, all you need is the horrific sight of the planes hitting the buildings. People will get the message. It's an attack on American soil. We'll also have people like the blind sheik to cover for us. We'll even put a guy on a train with evidence.
Your plan isn't perfect either, you know. Do I have to remind you of Operation Towel Pop? We already tried to embarrass Clinton by knocking it down and failed.
Accomplice #2: Yeah, our Bay of Pigs, but I say the only way they can get the message is if we knock them down.
Accomplice #1: Do not
Accomplice #2: Do too
Accomplice #1: Do not
Accomplice #2: Do too
Accomplice #1: Do not
Accomplice #2: Do too
Government: Gentlemen, gentlemen... Please... What the hell, we'll just do both! :blink: How do we do that? I mean, how do you keep explosions from showing up on TV? We're going to have to investigate this at some point. How do we cover up the scene?
Accomplice #2: But why not just knock it dow...
Government: I've made my decision. Continue...
September 17, 2009 at 8:26 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
Accomplice #2: OK.. We install charges on every floor so that after the planes hit, we blow each floor under the crash floor one by one, very fast to simulate pancaking. We'll let the building burn a while just for effect. This will also give time for the trusses to sag making it LOOK like a fire caused the building to fall.
Accomplice #1: Nice touch...
Accomplice #2: Why, thank you. :) ...We'll set a charge off in the middle of the building AFTER the top is on its way down so everyone thinks the puffs of debris coming from the windows are from the tremendous hypodermic needle like pressure blowing debris from the weakest point in the building.
Government: What about the sound of explosions? Isn't that a dead giveaway?
Accomplice #2: No problem, We'll just let them think it's normal electrical explosions like transformers blowing up or the initial concrete and steel and floors hitting the floors below.
Accomplice #1: Yeah, it could also be the steel columns snapping like twigs from the tremendous weight of the floors above... Don't worry, we have disinformation specialists in key internet forums.
Government: WOW, You guys think of everything.. What about Building 7? Can we take that out at the same time?
Accomplice #1: We won't be able to fly planes into it, that's for sure...
Accomplice #2: Leave it to me. If we set off the explosions just right, we can have one of the towers hit Building 7, missing the two next to it. After that, we can set fires on the bottom floors and let it burn for a while, you know, to make it look possible for a normal collapse. I'll call my agent in the fire department to get everyone out before we blow it. I'll figure a way to make the floors look buckled for effect as well.
September 17, 2009 at 8:27 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
Government: Amazing ... I also want to take out the Pentagon. Any suggestions?
Accomplice #1: What we'll do is hijack a plane just for effect, then fire a missile at the Pentagon. A bunker buster.
Government: But what about the people on the plane?
Accomplice #1: We'll land the plane in area 51, then shoot them all.
Government: Why not use the plane instead of the missile? That way, you take care of all the evidence at the same time... People on the highway can also see the planes hit. If you use a missile, there's going to be a lot of witnesses who saw a missile and not a plane.
Accomplice #1: Err... ah, don't worry about these small details. I have an undercover op in the DC police department who will take the names down and shot them all.
Government: How are you going to get all the people involved in this? Bush isn't exactly loved you know..
Accomplice #1: Don't worry, psych-ops will take care of the brainwashing of the American people. As for the media, we control the left and the right!
Government: GREAT! Nice work all! Let's make the target date Sept 11, 2001.
Shall the Hunterdog continue to embarass you, ChemPerson ?
September 17, 2009 at 8:28 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seeuski ( anonymous ) says...
Love it.
September 18, 2009 at 7:50 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
Ahhh...the sound of stunned silence.
September 18, 2009 at 10:27 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Brilliant!. LMAO @ bandmommy's stoned reasoning. The sensible amongst us can see through your silly fantasies, hon, Still waiting for someone to explain how a 45 foot wide airliner fits through as 16 foot hole. Any takers?
September 19, 2009 at 3:40 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
9/11 Commission 'played with fire'
Wayne Madsen
Prisonplanet.com
Saturday, Sept 19th, 2009
Lebanese student pilot Ziad Jarrah, according to the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, also known as the "911 Commission," was said to have been the pilot of the United Airlines Boeing 757-200 that crashed into the ground near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, on the morning of September 11, 2001.
WMR has previously reported that based on numerous sources within the National Security Agency, Defense Intelligence Agency, and the U.S. Air Force, United 93 was shot down by the Air Force over Pennsylvania by two F-16s. A Global Hawk unmanned aerial vehicle was also in the vicinity of the doomed Boeing 757 and crashed where the large passenger plane was reported to have crashed.
In a compendium to the 9/11 Commission report titled, "Terrorist Travel," which contains travel documents allegedly used by the hijackers, a photograph of the U.S. visa of Ziad Jarreh is shown. The visa is said to have survived the crash of the Boeing 757 but miraculously, the fireball from the exploding aircraft managed to save that part of the visa that shows Jarrah's headshot photograph and part of his visa number.
Jarrah was born in Lebanon to Sunni Muslim parents but volunteered much of his time working with disabled and orphaned children at a Catholic school and church. There has been much speculation about whether Jarrah was ever a member of Mohamed Atta's "Hamburg cell" and whether he even boarded United flight 93 on 9/11. His background was remarkably secular.
However, based on videos of questionable origin and the visa from the crash site in Pennsylvania, spared from total obliteration by what can only be described as an "intelligent fire," is all the FBI had to conclude that Jarrah was the hijack team pilot of Flight 93. German authorities never obtained any evidence linking Jarrah to the Hamburg cell of Atta and the other accused hijackers.
The fire from the explosion of United 93 apparently "stopped on a dime" and left Jarrah's photo and U.S. visa number largely intact, largely proving to the FBI that he was the pilot of the hijacked airliner. All that. of course, if the 9/11 Commission is to be believed. Six out of the nine members of the commission believe that they were lied to and sandbagged by the Bush administration and top government officials...
There's more, LMAO @ the nutters.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/911-commi...
September 19, 2009 at 3:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Well, bandmommy, After a weak initial personal attack on Mr. Sheen you attempted to debunk his first two points with your twisted reason and failed, If you would like to continue with the next few, we'd all love to see your pitiful attempts. Thanks for playing, though, it was fun ny. LOL
September 19, 2009 at 3:52 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
Obviously, reading comprehension is not your strong point, Chemmy........As stated early in my initial post, this is the mighty Hunterdog replying to your silliness.
BTW, your "hon" comment is deprecating to the female of our species. I don't really [given the obnoxiousness of your previous posts] expect much better behavior from you, but attempting to "talk down" to the "silly little woman" shows the weakness of your arguments.
Now, are you saying that Flight 77 only gouged a 16 ft. hole in the side of the Pentagon?
September 20, 2009 at 8:42 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
Also, your method of "debate", which consists of little more than cutting and pasting from that goofball Alex Jones' website, shows that you are being extremely gullible, and quite willing to accept a conspiracy theory that flies in the face of of extensive physical evidence, including eyewitness accounts.
You accuse me of an ad hom attack on the redoubtable MR. Sheen.
Let me ask this, was Mr. Sheen witness to any of the 4 crashes ?
His version of twenty minutes with the president seems believeable to you ? If so, I have a ski mountain to sell you.
September 20, 2009 at 8:55 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
In my first post, I pointed out a very good reason why bin Laden had not been indicted.
You claim that I exhibited failed reasoning.
Understanding US law is failed reasoning ?
Anyhow, back to 77, a simple yes or no will suffice, are you claiming that the plane only made a 16 foot hole in the Pentagon?
September 20, 2009 at 9:06 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
As an aside, I was perusing Alex Jones' website, looking at some of the claims you were making in your multitude of posts and ran across one of his featured "stories", about this woman.
http://www.youtube.com/v/1qQ4iFI5Np8&
Essentially, after mentioning she had to ask the "Lord" if she should make this video, she claims to be a military reservist blowing the whistle on the preparations for martial law forcing everyone to take the Swine Flu vaccine. As part of this, she claims, military units are planning to set up checkpoints, and mark people who have received the vaccine, and then cart off the rest to concentration camps. She is, of course, revealing this at great risk to her own life, and warns that she may never be heard from again if this video "falls into the wrong hands", which I suppose is pretty hard to prevent, since it is on YouTube.
In any case, as proof of this nefarious plot, she posts the documentation at the end of the video from the miniaturized "brand new" "RFID tracking device" that they are going to use to track the movements of the people as part of this martial law crackdown. A quick examination of this paperwork shows it is a "Phoenix Jr" from Cejay Systems, which can be easily found at their website with the description.
September 20, 2009 at 9:18 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
The fact that this woman might actually be in the military, is scary.
I suppose I should add, for people who aren't familiar with the technology. That little device that she shows, is basically just a couple of LEDs which operate in the infrared spectrum. The reason it is so little is that it is just the top, and it clips on a 9 volt battery. Aside from the fact that it is not RFID, and is essentially nothing more than a tiny flashlight only visible through night vision goggles, it would be a silly way of tracking people against their will.
Gee, I don't know, how would you defeat such nefarious technology? Maybe you could... unplug the battery?
Understand why arguments made by Alex Jones and parroted by you, may be a just a little suspect ?
September 20, 2009 at 9:20 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
OK, I see now [after holding my nose and reading your posts more carefully], you ARE claiming Flight 77 only made a 16 foot hole in the Pentagon.
There are so many factual inaccuracies in that particular part of your ravings, I don't even know where to start, but here's a good spot:
First, you claim the width of the body of a 757 is 45 feet, when in fact, it is around 12 to 13 feet.
Second, you claim that the size of the hole is only 16 feet when in fact, it has been measured to have been about 30.6 feet.
I would ask, if you include the plane's engines, you're talking about roughly 18 feet of width, how do you only get a hole 16 feet wide ?
September 20, 2009 at 9:56 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
And just for "fun", a list of all the people who would have to be involved in order to pull this massive conspiracy off...
--The NYC Fire fighters
-The NYC Police department
-The NYC port Authority
-The more than 1,600 widows and widowers of 9/11
-The media (This one I almost believe) who doesn't follow up on the biggest mass murder and conspiracy in American history.
-The photographers from around the world who took pictures of the towers which clearly show bowing of the perimeter columns.
-Everyone in the NIST who covers up the largest mass murder in US history.
-EVERY STRUCTURAL ENGINEER IN THE WORLD
-The liberals who don't believe the towers were brought down. They're helping a neo-con cover-up the largest mass murder in this nation's history. Why? No clue...
-The CIA
-The FBI
-FEMA
-The American Society of Civil Engineers who have produced peer reviewed papers showing how what conspiracy theorists say is impossible is possible.
-NORAD
September 20, 2009 at 10:07 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jk ( anonymous ) says...
bandmama "Mighty Hunterdog", you were doing good until you started breaking out your measurements. Maybe you better go find a new tape measure, and try again.
September 20, 2009 at 10:10 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
Con't...
-The FAA who saw planes which conspiracy theorists say never existed.
-The Silverstein Group
-Silverstein's Insurance Company who didn't question the collapse and paid out over 2 billion to Silverstein.
-American Airlines (Pentagon)
-United Airlines (Pentagon)
-Logan, Newark and Dulles Airport for losing the planes
-Scientists and engineers who developed the remote control plane technology.
-Installers of the remote control devices in the planes (Pentagon)
-Remote controllers of the planes (Pentagon)
-Scientists and engineers who developed the new demolition technology and carried out practical tests and computer models to make sure it would work.
-Installers of the demolitions devices in the three buildings
-People who worked at the company(s) the installers used as cover
-Airphone etc employees who said they got calls from passengers (Pentagon)
-Faux friends and relatives of the faux passengers or just the faux relatives who claim to have been called by their loved ones or just the psyops who fooled relatives into thinking they really were their loved ones. (Pentagon)
-People who detonated the buildings......
Wow, seems really likely, especially when your brainwaves are "enhanced" by a tin foil hat......
Ever hear of the razor of Occam ?
September 20, 2009 at 10:11 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
jk,
From Boeing's website [I actually research as opposed to another poster here]
"Body Exterior width for the 757 200-300 series"
12 feet 4 inches
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/757f...
September 20, 2009 at 10:16 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
If you look, what Chemmy claims as 45 feet is actually the height of the tail of the plane. See the disengeniousness ?
September 20, 2009 at 10:18 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seeuski ( anonymous ) says...
Good work bandmama.
September 20, 2009 at 10:25 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jk ( anonymous ) says...
my apologies bandmama
September 20, 2009 at 10:27 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
no worries jk....I suspect you're not the one who is going to posit that it was a magic missile that did the damage......
[waits for Chemmy to posit that it was a magic missile that did the damage]
September 20, 2009 at 10:45 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Rebutting "Pentagon 9/11: Getting the Facts Straight"
Richard Stanley and Jerry Russell | August 17 2004
Original article at http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/...
"Pentagon 9/11: Getting the Facts Straight", by Dennis Behreandt, represents a full-scale frontal attack on the work of 9/11 researcher Thierry Meyssan (who is pressed into service as an exemplar of the many others who have also maintained that no jetliner struck the Pentagon on 9/11/2001. ) And we do not wish to defend everything that Meyssan has written; in fact we agree he has made many errors. But the core of Meyssan's work is not so easy to dismiss. This is the complete lack of tangible physical evidence (beyond that which could easily be planted) that a 757 was responsible for causing the damage to the Pentagon. In fact, we believe that a careful examination of the photographic record provides quite compelling evidence that this "757 attack" was a fraud. Behreandt's analysis relies heavily eyewitness testimony (which we will critique in more detail) -- but for something as substantial as a 100-ton airliner, we have every right to expect more than just hearsay doing overtime as conclusive proof, especially considering Behreandt's appeal to proper scientific practices. The rubble from Flight 77 should be on display in a museum (if indeed it exists), to put an end to the international controversy.
As documented by Meyssan in his books "9/11:The Big Lie" and "Pentagate" -- on the morning of September 11, the earliest reports from the Pentagon disaster indicated that a helicopter explosion or some other indeterminate "attack" took place. The national news media, the White House and the military were unable to ascertain that it was an airliner that struck the Pentagon, until this was (curiously) personally attested to by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who walked from his office to the disaster on a fact-finding mission. ("Big Lie", pp. 13-14; "Pentagate", pp. 94-95).
On Sept. 12, the Arlington County Fire Chief Ed Plaugher said "there are some small pieces of aircraft visible from the interior during this fire-fighting operation I'm talking about, but not large sections. In other words, there's no fuselage sections and that sort of thing... we have... what we believe is to be the nose of the aircraft." Reporters speculated that perhaps most of the plane had been consumed by fire...
September 20, 2009 at 11:39 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
...As Meyssan and others began to raise questions on an international basis, more contradictions emerged, and the "official story" began to mutate. A few highly debatable debris photographs began to emerge, and Ed Plaugher completely reversed his earlier remarks, stating that beginning 35 to 40 minutes after the attack, he saw: "pieces of the fuselage, the wings, the landing gear, pieces of the engine, seats. I can swear to you, it was a plane." Finally, the French agency Digipress stated that FBI authorities had told them (in Meyssan's words) that FBI agents "have recovered a large part of the debris, making possible a nearly complete reconstitution of the wreck of the Boeing", and FBI spokesman Chris Murray told the French paper Liberation that "The pieces of the plane are stocked in a warehouse and they are marked with the serial numbers of flight 77." Thus, to the international press, the FBI has effectively acknowledged that early reports that the plane was destroyed by fire, are impossible -- yet none of this "nearly complete reconstitution" has ever been seen anywhere in the American press, nor in any of the semi-official reports of the incident. ("Pentagate", p. 20).
If anyone is still claiming that the bulk of the plane was destroyed by fire, this can be refuted as follows: using simple measurement from the available drawings and the approach trajectory claims of the official story, one has to acknowledge that the complete upper half or third of the fuselage aluminum had to end up on the expanse of the second floor where the vast bulk of this material would be effectively shielded from the resulting fireball, concrete being an excellent insulator to fire. So ....... where is it?
Following David Hackett Fischer, Behreandt accuses Meyssan of "the fallacy of the negative proof," noting that it would be a logical fallacy to assert that simply because no one has produced any tangible remains of the aircraft, therefore the aircraft did not exist. Although it seems absurd, we must agree that Behreandt is logically correct, and furthermore, perhaps our ever security-conscious government has carefully hidden all the evidence. But we also have the problem of the missing wings and tail. As Behreandt points out, the photographic images of the facade of the Pentagon make it quite clear that the wings and tail of the airplane did not penetrate into the building. So where did they go? The photographs show quite clearly that there are no wings, there is no tail, there is not even a significant amount of shrapnel or aluminum confetti. It is as if eyewitnesses claim to have seen a pink elephant in the living room, but photographs clearly show nothing but thin air. This is not an absence of evidence, this is clear evidence of absence...
September 20, 2009 at 11:42 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
In view of all these facts, Behreandt's only recourse is his appeal to Occam's razor, with his argument that the simplest explanation is still the best -- that Flight 77 must have hit the Pentagon, because there was extensive damage to the building, and because eyewitnesses saw Flight 77 on an approach to the Pentagon. Normally this would be very sensible, but Behreandt is forgetting the context. There is a broad spectrum of evidence indicating that 9/11 was an inside job, carried out to provide a pretext for an agenda of (arguably self-destructive) imperialist conquest of the Middle East, along with accelerated erosion of American civil liberties. It was a "black intelligence op," in other words, a scam implemented by a highly sophisticated team of magicians and liars. Their goal was to create an international media extravaganza, using the most economical means available. And our argument (which is perfectly harmonious with Occam's razor) holds that the perpetrators' simplest and most foolproof means to implement the hoax was to use inexpensive shaped charge explosives planted within the Pentagon, along with an over-flight of the Pentagon with a 757 jetliner, to create the illusion of a crash. This hypothesis is explored in more detail in our article "The Five-Sided Fantasy Island", available on the Internet at www.911-strike.com/pentagon.htm .
If our account of the events of 9/11 is correct, we need to explain the phenomenon of the eyewitness testimony. In this case, the author of "Getting the Facts Straight" has first chosen to pull out of the hat, a recently ordained Opus Dei priest (formerly an attorney) whose credibility surely no one of good character can question. (See http://www.catholicherald.com/priests... ) But, instead of accepting the good priest's story on mere faith, let's be a little more... scientific, and analyze his account more closely.
http://www.mdw.army.mil/news/.....
"I was in the left hand lane with my windows closed. I did not hear anything at all until the plane was just right above our cars." McGraw estimates that the plane passed about 20 feet over his car, as he waited in the left hand lane of the road, on the side closest to the Pentagon.
Hmmm, I guess Flight 77 was moving faster than the speed of sound. Also, no description of any 500 mph induced wake turbulence, so maybe he is attempting to bolster Frank Probst's account. After all, have you ever stood 20 feet underneath a speeding airliner? Maybe it's not all that big a deal.
September 20, 2009 at 11:47 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Father McGraw, parochial vicar of St. Anthony of Padua Parish in Falls Church, who was ordained three months ago, was heading to a graveside service at Arlington Cemetery when he took the Pentagon exit by mistake. Father McGraw said he was sitting in slow-moving traffic in the left lane of Rt. 27 around 9:35 a.m. when "without warning a plane passed 20 feet over the cars, clipping a light pole," before plowing into the Pentagon.
So one wonders just how the 'secular' Opus Dei father happened to determine exactly what it was that was flying over his head and whether it was this indeed that impacted the building, or whether it was a diversion plane (as suggested initially by researcher Dick Eastman.) I don't know about him, but having an airliner screaming 20 feet over my head would be somewhat disorienting to say the least. And what would be the time period that he would have to make an identification of the plane and be sure that it actually hit the building, even if he can be trusted to tell the truth of what he saw? The government claims the plane was moving about 400 (or 500) mph, and of course, we are told (according to some accounts) that the plane was diving and pulled out just at the last moment as well.
But perhaps only "conspiracy theorists" would seriously question Father McGraw's testimony. After all, even the FBI didn't suspect good Opus Dei operative Robert Hanssen of spying for years, most likely because he was such good friends and parish members with fellow Opus Dei member Louis Freeh, the then Director of the FBI.
Another witness in Behreandt's case is Frank Probst. His account is corroborated by Don Mason's testimony http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/build03... (ASCE report - see page 13). It all seems quite plausible, excluding of course Probst's astounding maintenance of his visual acuity not to mention his life from the wind vortex necessarily generated by the alleged high speed airliner (did you say 500 mph?). In this case, Probst claims that the plane just missed him by a few feet and yet he was able to dive to the ground after seeing it approach him, turn and be able to precisely view both engines strike objects in front of the building. Wow, this is the kind of guy the NFL needs for referees. No tossing and turning from the wake turbulence, no problems with wind and debris in his eyes, what a guy!!!!
Again, only real "conspiracy theorists" would notice or care about the fact that Probst and Mason were both government employees, working for the crew that was "renovating" the Pentagon. That couldn't possibly have had any effect on their testimony. Even though that testimony mutated substantially as time went on, as we document at our web page (http://www.911-strike.com/missing-con... ).
September 20, 2009 at 11:49 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Scientific Poll: 84% Reject Official 9/11 Story
Only 16% now believe official fable according to New York Times/CBS News poll
Truth Movement has the huge majority of opinion
How will the Bush Cabal react?
Steve Watson & Alex Jones / Prisonplanet.com | October 14 2006
A monumental new scientific opinion poll has emerged which declares that only 16% of people in America now believe the official government explanation of the September 11th 2001 terror attacks.
According to the new New York Times/CBS News poll, only 16% of Americans think the government is telling the truth about 9/11 and the intelligence prior to the attacks:
"Do you think members of the Bush Administration are telling the truth, are mostly telling the truth but hiding something, or are they mostly lying?
Telling the truth 16%
Hiding something 53%
Mostly lying 28%
Not sure 3%"
The 84% figure mirrors other recent polls on the same issue. A Canadian Poll put the figure at 85%. A CNN poll had the figure at 89%. Over 80% supported the stance of Charlie Sheen when he went public with his opinions on 9/11 as an inside job.
A recent CNN poll found that the percentage of Americans who blame the Bush administration for the September 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington rose from almost a third to almost half over the past four years. This latest poll shows that that figure has again risen exponentially and now stands at well over three quarters of the population.
It took 35 plus years for the majority of Americans to wake up to the fact that the assassination of JFK was a government operation. It has only take five years for MORE Americans to wake up to the fact that 9/11 was an inside job on behalf of the Neoconservative crime syndicate within the US.
Reference to past polls show that in the last five years there has been an explosion in numbers of those who do not buy the official line.
In 2004 a Zogby Poll showed that just over half of New Yorkers believed there was a cover up.
In May of this year another Zogby poll indicated that around half of ALL Americans did not buy the official story.
The latest poll also shows a massive awakening has occurred recently given that previous estimates indicated that around 34% still believed the official story and around 30% were oblivious altogether.
September 20, 2009 at 12:03 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
This is typical, again, of someone with no argument to make.
When one aspect of it is disproven, the next thing is to ignore the evidence and jump to something else.
I believe that your original challenge, and a cornerstone of your argument, was based on your misunderstanding [misrepresentation] of the readily available evidence concerning the sizes of the impact holes compared to the size of a 757. Correct ?
I'll assume you'll surrender that point.
Ummm....regarding wreckage, there are many photos available of obviously 757 parts,including parts from a Rolls Royce engine of the exact make in that particular plane.
That claim has been proven to not be true so long ago I can't believe anyone still brings it up.
September 20, 2009 at 12:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
As it becomes clearer that more and more Americans KNOW that their government is lying to them on the most fundamental issue of their lifetimes, we must consider what kind of reaction the government will undertake.
Remember that the majority of American voters now believe the Sept. 11 terrorist attack was a more significant historical event than the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.
In July 2001 Alex jones issued an emergency warning that there was going to be a massive false flag terrorist attack in New York to be blamed on Osama Bin Laden. At that time there was not enough activism among the population to prevent it going ahead.
In August of 2006 Alex Jones issued a second emergency warning that all the factors pointed towards an imminent attack. The activism that occurred in the wake of this warning and that of others was exponential and may indeed have helped stave off another attack.
Our next warning is this, desperate times call for desperate measures. The criminal elements of the government now know that they have been totally exposed and are reviled by the majority of free thinking Americans. Will their response be to vamp up the crack down on that free thinking itself?
In essence Americans have outright REJECTED giving up their liberty for security in the wake of 9/11. The only security IS liberty itself, and the only way to stay secure is to constantly defend liberty.
September 20, 2009 at 12:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
Do you have an original thought, or do you just cut and paste from other's websites ?
September 20, 2009 at 12:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
That wasn't nice....
OK, Chemmy...Tell us all what REALLY happened.
September 20, 2009 at 12:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
So, an airplane that is 45 feet tall and 125 feet wide fits through a, let's call it a 40 foot hole, lol, how does this happen? How do we find one little rolls royce engine inside the building, but neither of the two 9 foot diameter titanium crystal turbines that should be laying outside the building since there are no holes punched in the building's facade where the engines would have been located?
9 foot diameter titanium engines don't vaporize, no matter how badly you want them to.
September 20, 2009 at 12:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seeuski ( anonymous ) says...
We have breaking news America:
Someone in the mountain ski resort of Steamboat Springs Colorado using the anonymous name of stopTheBrutalChemtrails has uncovered the mystery of the fantasy world of Alex Jones.By cutting and pasting a compilation of crap that people like former Green jobs CZAR Van Jones, loony comedienne Janine Gorafalo, kooky actor and prostitute chaser Charlie Sheen and other similar fools also including Rosie O'Donnell and Dictator Hugo Chavez have signed onto known as the 9/11 truthers.
We'll have further updates by the chemicalman as the clipping and pasting certainly continues.
September 20, 2009 at 12:35 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
In the 2008 Edition of this stunning multimedia presentation, filmed professionally in a studio before a live audience, San Francisco Bay Area architect, Richard Gage, AIA, provides the myth-shattering scientific forensic evidence of the explosive controlled demolition of all 3 WTC high-rise buildings on September 11, 2001. For details see http://www.ae911truth.org/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b74nae...
September 20, 2009 at 12:44 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jk ( anonymous ) says...
seeuski, with the cutting and pasting you do maybe you should go sit down and let the debate continue.
September 20, 2009 at 1:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
Did you expect there to be an airplane-shaped hole, like a Roadrunner cartoon ?
September 20, 2009 at 1:26 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
Obvious what happened:
A large hollow tube, with a belly full of luggage, a passenger bay with 60 people, and wings full of fuel smashed into the side of an almost solid object while moving at a tremendous speed (somewhere around 350-400mph). When the 225,000lb+ plane hit, it smashed apart with such force from the crash that it became like one massive column of liquid (no, the plane didn't melt or turn into liquid, it just acted like one physically - mountainslides act the same way, a million tons of rock acts like a large field of liquid during a landslide even if no water is present). All the small parts, luggage, people, seats, and all the tens of thousands of pounds of fuel acting like a massive river came crashing into the wall of the Pentagon. This force burst through the outside wall and flowed through the inside to the next wall, and momentum carried this mass until it finally ran out of inertia at the 3rd ring.
September 20, 2009 at 1:29 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
Then there's the unfortunate [for your argument] eyewitness accounts....[showing that I can cut and paste with the best, or worst, of them.......
"Aydan Kizildrgli, an English language student who is a native of Turkey, saw the jetliner bank slightly then strike a western wall of the huge five-sided building that is the headquarters of the nation's military. 'There was a big boom,' he said. 'Everybody was in shock. I turned around to the car behind me and yelled "Did you see that?" Nobody could believe it.'"
"Frank Probst, an information management specialist for the Pentagon Renovation Program, left his office trailer near the Pentagon's south parking lot at 9:36 a.m. Sept. 11. Walking north beside Route 27, he suddenly saw a commercial airliner crest the hilltop Navy Annex. American Airlines Flight 77 reached him so fast and flew so low that Probst dropped to the ground, fearing he'd lose his head to its right engine."
September 20, 2009 at 1:32 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
"Omar Campo, a Salvadorean, was cutting the grass on the other side of the road when the plane flew over his head. 'It was a passenger plane. I think an American Airways plane,' Mr Campo said. 'I was cutting the grass and it came in screaming over my head. I felt the impact. The whole ground shook and the whole area was full of fire. I could never imagine I would see anything like that here.'"
"Afework Hagos, a computer programmer, was on his way to work but stuck in a traffic jam near the Pentagon when the plane flew over. 'There was a huge screaming noise and I got out of the car as the plane came over. Everybody was running away in different directions. It was tilting its wings up and down like it was trying to balance. It hit some lampposts on the way in.'"
September 20, 2009 at 1:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
"We were the only people, we think, who saw it live," Dan Creed said. He and two colleagues from Oracle software were stopped in a car near the Naval Annex, next to the Pentagon, when they saw the plane dive down and level off. "It was no more than 30 feet off the ground, and it was screaming. It was just screaming. It was nothing more than a guided missile at that point," Creed said. "I can still see the plane. I can still see it right now. It's just the most frightening thing in the world, going full speed, going full throttle, its wheels up,"
September 20, 2009 at 1:34 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
and lastly.....
"The only way you could tell that an aircraft was inside was that we saw pieces of the nose gear. The devastation was horrific. It was obvious that some of the victims we found had no time to react. The distance the firefighters had to travel down corridors to reach the fires was a problem. With only a good 25 minutes of air in their SCBA bottles, to save air they left off their face pieces as they walked and took in a lot of smoke," Captain Defina said. Captain Defina was the shift commander [of an aircraft rescue firefighters crew.]
September 20, 2009 at 1:35 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
So the engines didn't want to go through the wall where they hit it so they scooted over and decided to go through the hole that the fuselage made because they didn't feel like breaking their own hole that day. Brilliant.
September 20, 2009 at 1:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
The distance between the 2 engines was app. 24 feet, which, especially since the plane caame in at an angle [because it had hit a generator and several lamp posts first], fits perfectly into a 30 foot hole..
What part of that do you not get ?
September 20, 2009 at 1:47 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
Oh wait
September 20, 2009 at 1:49 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
There were airplane shaped holes in the towers, see, that's how it works, when an object goes through another object, there will be a hole shaped like the object that made the hole, geez.
September 20, 2009 at 1:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
watch that last youtube video I posted and get back to me, hon.
September 20, 2009 at 2 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
Ha ha ha, you DO think it should have made an airplane-shaped hole, just like in the cartoons !
September 20, 2009 at 2:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
*facepalm*
September 20, 2009 at 2:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
Still waiting for you to explain what really happened, Chemmy.....
September 20, 2009 at 2:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seeuski ( anonymous ) says...
News update:
chemicalsabiman has a new fan, it is reported that jk is enjoying the koolaid that is being served.
Eyeball News is waiting for an update from chemicalderanged after hearing of reports that new actual photos of a martian missile hitting the Pentagon have been uncovered by a medicated maryjane user in the Bahama's.
Our reporter on the scene,Charlie Sheen, will have an update as soon as he is done with his massage.
September 20, 2009 at 3:15 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
I don't claim to know what really happened, I am only saying that there are enough holes in the official story that we obviously need a new investigation into the events surrounding 9/11/01.
September 20, 2009 at 4:54 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jk ( anonymous ) says...
I always love koolaid seeuski , it often makes for an interesting read, everyone knows we have been served a bunch (maybe too much) of yours throughout many of these threads. I see your creative writing ability now, it shines through when you are not discussing politics.
September 20, 2009 at 5:25 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
80,000 New Yorkers demand a new investigation into 9/11
NYC CAN News Bulletin
Thursday, Sept 10th, 2009
On Friday, September 4, the New York City Coalition for Accountability Now (NYC CAN) submitted 28,000 petition signatures as a supplement to the 52,000 signatures submitted on June 24 calling for a citywide referendum on the creation of a local, independent commission to investigate 9/11.
Over the last 25 years, every ballot initiative in New York City has been blocked on grounds of legal technicality, with the exception of the 1993 initiative to establish term limits for NYC elected officials, whose supporters also had to go to court to prove the initiative legal. With 80,000 New Yorkers having signed this petition, the City's ongoing attempt to stop this referendum from going on the ballot is yet another blatant affront to the democratic ideals upon which this great nation was founded.
On July 24, the NYC City Clerk reported to the City Council that only 26,003 signatures from the submission of 52,000 signatures were valid. In response, NYC CAN filed suit and on Thursday, August 27 submitted a Bill of Particulars cataloguing 7,166 additional signatures that NYC CAN contends should be deemed valid.
The court-appointed referee will begin a line-by-line review of the disputed signatures on Wednesday, September 9, and is scheduled to complete the review by Friday, September 18. If the referee and court accept at least 3,996 of the disputed signatures as valid meeting the requisite number of 30,000 signatures and if 15,000 of the 28,000 signatures from the September 4 submission are deemed valid, the only remaining hurdle to getting the referendum on the ballot will be the ongoing court case over the legality of the petition.
The timetable for addressing the petition's legality will be set in a meeting on Thursday September 10. The schedule should allow time for an appeal from either side in order to guarantee a final determination by the end of the month.
Once the schedule for the court case is set, NYC CAN will announce one or more rallies and events in the second half of September to demonstrate the tremendous public support that exists for a new, impartial investigation. NYC CAN calls upon all those who can be in lower Manhattan to join in solidarity with the 9/11 families, first responders, survivors and 80,000 New Yorkers to say loud and clear: no longer will we tolerate a government that ignores the will of its people. For the 3,000 who died on that day, the hundreds who have died since, and those still suffering today, 9/11 must be properly investigated.
The Bill of Particulars was assembled with the help of 50+ volunteers who gave more than 1,000 hours over a two-week period. On behalf of the petition's 80,000 signatories, NYC CAN offers its deepest thanks to these volunteers who worked long and hard to prevent the voters New York City from being silenced by their government.
September 20, 2009 at 11:30 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
"Obvious what happened:
A large hollow tube, with a belly full of luggage, a passenger bay with 60 people, and wings full of fuel smashed into the side of an almost solid object while moving at a tremendous speed (somewhere around 350-400mph). When the 225,000lb+ plane hit, it smashed apart with such force from the crash that it became like one massive column of liquid (no, the plane didn't melt or turn into liquid, it just acted like one physically - mountainslides act the same way, a million tons of rock acts like a large field of liquid during a landslide even if no water is present). All the small parts, luggage, people, seats, and all the tens of thousands of pounds of fuel acting like a massive river came crashing into the wall of the Pentagon. This force burst through the outside wall and flowed through the inside to the next wall, and momentum carried this mass until it finally ran out of inertia at the 3rd ring."
LMAO @ BandBiotch's above asinine statement. OMG, I really hope you are not a teacher.
September 20, 2009 at 11:37 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
Oh, I see.You DON'T KNOW what happened.
So after all this effort on your part to cut and paste anything you think helps your argument, you were just SPECULATING ?
Well, why didn't you just say so ?
Since you offer no alternate theory, and since the contents of your cutting and pasting offers none as well, I'm guessing the mountains of forensic and structural evidence that supports the fact that a plane is what hit the Pentagon is correct.
Just another point won for my side.
You obviously have no researching skills.
You obviously have no debating skills.
You obviously have no reasoning skills.
You are simply "trolling", trying to start arguments you are ill-prepared to engage in.
You obviously have some deep-seated female issues, judging from your repeated attempts to use female-specific derogatory insults. Didn't mommy hug you enough, or were you taken from the teat too early?
If you'd like, I'll give you one common sense reason that there's no conspirarcy.
It comes in the form of two words..."Dylan Avery".
September 21, 2009 at 7:38 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
For those of you reading this who may not know who that steaming pile of uselessness is, he's the college student who, along with a couple of his loser college buddies, created an internet movie called "loose Change". Don't waste your time watching, unless you're either a sadist or in need of a good laugh.
Just the simple fact that a moron like Avery is still alive is proof enough of the lack of a conspiracy. If the government would fake a terrorist attack on it's own soil, horribly killing nearly 3000 of it's own citizens, why am I to believe that they wouldn't eliminate Avery as well ?
Another point for my side, I think.
Would you care to offer an alternative hypothoesis, Chem, or are you going to just continue to "speculate"?
Remember, you must show scientific [empirical] evidence that supports your claim.
You remind me of the misguided folks who want "intelligent design" taught in our schools. When challenged to provide a different theory, supported by facts, they can't do it.
I think, at this point, in leiu of some astounding empirical evidence from you and your side that supports your claims, this debate has been won by me.
And you have been made to look foolish.
Have a nice day.
September 21, 2009 at 7:50 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seeuski ( anonymous ) says...
bandmama I think the legalization of drugs is in part to blame for this hurtful thread because anyone blathering this garbage is in a different mental zone from reality.
The fact that I know someone who witnessed the plane hit the Pentagon means nothing to this troll or that my Cousin had a childhood friend who perished on board the flight carries no weight and the fantasy is what is important.
It just fits in with the deranged hate Bush syndrome.
I posted an in depth study that exposes the lies being proffered by this loon.
Here it is.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?doc...
September 21, 2009 at 9:44 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
Very well done video.
I would also recommend "Screw Loose Change - The Not Freakin' Again Edition", easily found on YouTube and Google video.
I suspect that this Chem person only reads things that support his twisted theory, or at least he thinks they do.
September 21, 2009 at 9:51 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
And here's the link, maybe chemmy will put down the paint thinner long enough for a little education from the reality-based community.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?doc...
September 21, 2009 at 10:01 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seeuski ( anonymous ) says...
As difficult as it was I watched this video.
Thanks.
You can see the motivating forces by who is behind it.
September 21, 2009 at 2:45 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
Just one last funny [yet sad] observation.
Alex Jones, whose lunatic rantings have helped to fuel Chem's paranoid delusions, has a PUBLIC ACCESS show where he posits his racist, anti - US beliefs, which is funded by......are you ready ?.........by the US government.....
September 21, 2009 at 7 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Questions Abound About "9/11 Hoax"
Blog imposter turns out to be fraudulent
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Wednesday, March 14, 2007: Updated 1:43PM CST
UPDATE: The question why a "9/11 truther" would choose to act as an imposter for somebody else and deliberately bring negative attention to themselves and others is puzzling. Though this story is now confirmed to be a hoax, the reasons behind it remain suspect.
For people accusing us of falling for and proliferating a hoax, remember that the mainstream media reported on the San Francisco beheading as genuine within minutes of them receiving the video, and that too turned out to be a hoax. We're all trying to get to the truth here and we will issue retractions when we are led astray.
Our original article is posted below in full.
September 21, 2009 at 7:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
A prominent debunker of skeptics of the official 9/11 story has broken ranks and confessed that he used underhand tactics, including fallacious attribution of holocaust denial, to smear the credibility of the 9/11 truth movement.
Screw Loose Change was initially a venture undertaken by two individuals to debunk what they considered to be a number of flaws contained in Dylan Avery's film. However, one of those individuals now states that the focus soon shifted from Loose Change and became a campaign to attack, "any 911 truther for any reason whatsoever."
So claims an individual that some now finger as an imposter because he has two different blog identities.
On a new blog website called Screw Loose Change Exposed, the dissenting individual, known as Pat, describes why he and his former debunker-in-chief James decided to go their separate ways.
Though the original Screw Loose Change blog contains no denial of the individual's claims, if he is engaging in a hoax then it's either a silly effort to draw attention to himself or a deliberate attempt to make 9/11 truthers look gullible.
"Pat" relates how James pushed him to to "All but invent the crisis of Holocaust denial" and apply it to the truth movement, "Though in fact, it is no more prevalent there than anywhere else," admits Pat.
Citing his refusal to "condone the underhanded methods we've tolerated," Pat writes that there is "no honesty to debunking 911 truth."
Pat writes that he is now keen to expose how his efforts were "hijacked by other entities" and promises to divulge "what REALLY happened behind the scenes at Screw Loose Change over the last year," warning that "it is only a matter of time before the shadiest methods of debunking become known."
This admission, if it turns out to be genuine, validates in part our continued efforts to rebut 9/11 debunkers and their ad hominem attacks and baseless hit pieces, from within both the mainstream and other media avenues.
It is also a damning indictment of how the holocaust card is continually played, most recently in the context of the global warming argument, in an attempt to silence debate and attack the messenger while refusing to evaluate the evidence.
Should this turn out to be accurate, we look forward to Pat's future posts and any further light they shed on the duplicitous tactics that are being employed to smear the 9/11 truth movement which, for all its shortcomings, is an genuine attempt to get questions answered and find out the full truth of what happened on that fateful day.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/...
September 21, 2009 at 7:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
Hunterdog rests his case......biotch
September 21, 2009 at 7:17 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha....
How's that colloquial language working for you ?
Address my points directly, without cutting and pasting from the musch-discredited Alex jones website, or sit over there in the corner and mumble to yourself about the illuminati...and stuff....
My Troofer brother.....
heh heh
September 21, 2009 at 7:22 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Letter From a New Jersey Emergency Medical Technician
9/11 Blogger
Thursday, February 8, 2007
Dylan Avery posted the following letter which he and Mark of "Screw Loose Change" received. Well worth the read.
I don't know what to say, I'm not sure where I stand, and I don't know what to think anymore... not about 9/11, but society in general.
I was a NJ EMT for 6 years. I was in NY at the WTC before, during, and after the collapse. I ran from the falling towers. I hid behind a plexi-glass bus stop panel, as if that would have helped me if anything large came hurtling in that direction. My lungs are full of dust and I can barely breathe without holding back a cough and the ever-present faint taste of blood in the back of my throat. I wake up gasping for air. Those towers fell, and I was there. I don't know why the "official story" of what happened isn't questioned more than it is. Nobody listens to the people who KNOW. The 9/11 commission was made up of puppeteers, and the tesimony was given by the puppets. It's so obvious. It was a failure. If the things I, and hundreds of other people saw, felt, and heard didn't make it into that attrocious failure called the 9/11 Commission Report, then there is no other con clusion than accepting the fact that the whole thing was a whitewash.
September 21, 2009 at 7:24 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Mark... listen to me. There were explosions. There were flashes. There was molten metal running down the I-beams of the basement levels like lava flows. I've never seen anything like it. Yes, planes hit the buildings- anybody who says otherwise is a moron. But the explosions- the rapid, symmetrical, sequential explosions- they happened. We were in the basement, helping a man who had been struck by pieces of flying concrete and rebar, and there was one of the huge steel and concrete support pillars with an 8 foot section blown out of the center of it. We looked around and there were other support columns that were the same. We spoke about it right then and there... we were discussing as we were carrying this man, saying "how could someone have rigged all these explosives?". That sort of thing does not happen from an airplane hitting the building 70, 80 stories up. We stood outside listening to the explosions. One after the other, every minute or so. At one point, about 10 minutes before the first collapse, a 30 foot or so section of the courtyard exlploded straight up into the air. Just before the collapses, a series of deep, below ground explosions, then numerous explosions in the buildings upper floors. Then we ran. We felt the same deep explosions before the second collapse. This was not just the planes. THE BUILDINGS WERE RIGGED. There is no question about it. Hundreds of people know this, Mark. People were told, the crowds of people were TOLD over bullhorns, that building 7 was going to be pulled (and YES that is the term they used). There was a 20 second countdown over the radios, there were bright flashes up and down the sides of building 7, you could see them through the windows...and it collapsed. We all knew it was intentionally pulled... they told us! There was no question about it until a day or so later when the news was reporting that it had collapsed due to fire. We kept wondering when they were going to correct the news reports. Eventually, it became "official story".
September 21, 2009 at 7:25 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
I tried to explain that wasn't what happened. I kept telling people there were explosions. I kept explaining what I saw, and wrote to the newspapers, the networks, and the government about what I saw. I called to speak to the FDNY, and NYPD. I told them what I knew and wanted know why the news reports were wrong. I wasn't told I was wrong. I wasn't even given a different explaination. I was just told to "shut up", "forget about it", or "let it go, for my own good". I told my EMT Coordinator In Charge what we saw. The four of us from my squad who went were first congratulated for responding and doing such a good job, and later, two of us (the two that refused to "let it go") were brought up on charges of disorderly conduct, fired, and fined for the uniforms and equipment we used on 9/11 because they were ruined. The other two (who are women, one a mother of two, the other a mother of 3) now ref use to admit they were even there, even to us! They just won't speak about it. The four of us were heroes. Two of us were harrassed and fired, and the other two have to deny ever being there.
There is no doubt in my mind what happened in New York on 9/11. Yes, some of the conspiracy theories are far fetched. A few are even rediculous. But MOST of them, hold much more validity than the "official story". The government has one theory, and it is very weak, at best. Loose Change may be questionable, but that's what it is doing... providing theories and asking questions. Some of those questions get answered, others come up. THAT is why there is a 2nd Edition and a future final cut. Yes, the truth must be updated, of course it does. To say it doesn't is silly. What do you think an investigation is? You formulate a theory, ask questions, and get answers. When you come across new information or rule out false information, you update your theory. Why do you ridicule that concept? Why do you take so much pride in claiming "I didn't know the truth needed a 2n d Edition"? That's like your main motto and it's the weakest thing I've ever heard. Would it make more sense to you to write a story, or make a documentary, and NOT update it if you found new information? Would you want today's school children learning out of a 1977 1st Edition History textbook? Would you criticize an updated edition for them to learn out of? What about following editions? Of course not. My point is this: Loose Change may not be 100% accurate or complete, but it offers more plausible explanations, no matter how diabolical, than the 9/11 commission report fiasco.
September 21, 2009 at 7:26 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
In case you are wondering, no. I'm not going to give you my full name or what city I worked for. I had enough trouble having it dragged through local newspapers for two years. I don't want to lose another job. I don't want you unfoundedly slandering my name all over the net like you do with Dylan, Jason, and whoever else offers a point of view other than yours. I'm not giving you my name, so do as you wish with what I've told you. Just remember something. It's very easy to deny something, and even easier to "debunk" it with a simpler story, and simpler still to present that information to millions of people who not only have heard it as truth before, but WANT to believe it. It is much harder to piece together a series of events that makes much more sense, provides a motive, a means, and more capable suspects, and harder yet to present that information to millions of people who not only DON'T want it to be true, but have already heard a much happier story that they would rather believe.
Trust me, I'd much rather believe the official story. I'd also rather believe that Columbus discovered America and DIDN'T torture and murder the natives he encountered on the way here. But history had a 2nd Edition to that story. I can't wait for the Final Cut.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/...
September 21, 2009 at 7:29 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
Well, this is just getting fun, since you've, by the grace of whatever imaginary being you belive in [and I'm sure there's one at least lurking in the shadows] managed to make each and every misunderstood [misrepresented] statement common to the troofer nutballs..
Don't you people read ANYTHING that's could perhaps be contrary to what you think you already know ?
September 21, 2009 at 7:31 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
oh wait.....yeah, I forgot
September 21, 2009 at 7:52 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Beijing Skyscraper Fire: The Silence Is Deafening
Debunkers' only response is to claim that no comparison to WTC 7 can be made, yet they feverishly compared completely dissimilar bridge collapses to twin towers in 2007
Beijing Skyscraper Fire: The Silence Is Deafening 120209top
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Three days after a towering inferno engulfed a 500 foot skyscraper in Beijing, debunkers have failed to come up with any answers as to why the building remained standing in comparison with WTC 7, which suffered a uniform 7 second implosion as a result of limited fires spread across just 8 floors on 9/11.
Beijing's Mandarin Oriental hotel defied all known physics on Monday when it was consumed by fires but did not collapse, a modern day miracle in light of the commonly accepted premise that since 9/11, all steel buildings that suffer even limited fire damage implode in on their own footprint within seconds.
All joking aside, any credibility that remained behind NIST's "thermal expansion" theory, which was apparently only evident on one day in history and not in the case of hundreds of other high rise buildings that have caught fire and remained standing, metaphorically went up in the flames that consumed but did not collapse one of Beijing's most prominent buildings.
The silence of debunkers with regard to the hotel fire is both deafening and highly hypocritical. Proponents of the government's version of events are usually feverish to seize upon anything, no matter how inane and off tangent, in order to try and prop up the official fairy tale.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/beijing-s...
September 21, 2009 at 8:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
My point proven, and again, the debate......
September 21, 2009 at 8:43 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
....was about the Pentagon.....scroll back up and attempt to read proper english, then respond......in your own words, if possible........
September 21, 2009 at 8:45 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seeuski ( anonymous ) says...
bandmama,
Look at the postings at the Alex Jones site that this nut keeps pasting from.
It is a Jew hating pro Muslim site.
Who are we at war with? Islam.
Throughout history crimes have been committed by bastards and then blamed on the Jews.
This is propaganda promoted by our enemies and it becomes obvious that this chemical ali is one of them.
Just look at who Alex Jones is and what he is propagandizing.
Chemical boy, I think I saw you drive through town last year, you the one with the swastikas on your back window?
September 21, 2009 at 8:45 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
If anyone would actually like to listen to Alex a bit before they rush to adopt the point of view of the more adamant and slanderous of the official conspiracy theory believers, you can listen to the Alex Jones Show at the following link. He does a four hour show Monday through Friday and a 2 hour show on Sunday, after church.
Alex does not hate Jews and he is not pro Muslim, but you can be the judge of that, yourselves.
September 21, 2009 at 9:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
The Alex Jones Show -
http://www.infowars.com/stream.pls
September 21, 2009 at 10:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
9/11 Commission Counsel: Government Agreed to Lie About 9/11
New book from man tasked by government to help investigate attacks unveils how "official story is almost entirely untrue"
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
The senior counsel to the 9/11 Commission John Farmer says that the government agreed not to tell the truth about 9/11, echoing the assertions of fellow 9/11 Commission members who concluded that the Pentagon were engaged in deliberate deception about their response to the attack.
Farmer served as Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission (officially known as the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States), and is also a former New Jersey Attorney General.
Farmer's book about his experiences working for the Commission is entitled The Ground Truth: The Story Behind America's Defense on 9/11, and is set to be released in September.
The book unveils how "the public had been seriously misled about what occurred during the morning of the attacks," and Farmer himself states that "at some level of the government, at some point in time:there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened."
Only the very naive would dispute that an agreement not to tell the truth is an agreement to lie. Farmer's contention is that the government agreed to create a phony official version of events to cover-up the real story behind 9/11.
The publisher of the book, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, states that, "Farmer builds the inescapably convincing case that the official version not only is almost entirely untrue but serves to create a false impression of order and security."
September 21, 2009 at 11:02 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
In August 2006, the Washington Post reported, "Some staff members and commissioners of the Sept. 11 panel concluded that the Pentagon's initial story of how it reacted to the 2001 terrorist attacks may have been part of a deliberate effort to mislead the commission and the public rather than a reflection of the fog of events on that day, according to sources involved in the debate."
The report revealed how the 10-member commission deeply suspected deception to the point where they considered referring the matter to the Justice Department for criminal investigation.
"We to this day don't know why NORAD [the North American Aerospace Command] told us what they told us," said Thomas H. Kean, the former New Jersey Republican governor who led the commission. "It was just so far from the truth. . . . It's one of those loose ends that never got tied."
Farmer himself is quoted in the Post article, stating, "I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described :. The [Norad air defense] tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years:. This is not spin. This is not true."
As we also reported in August 2006, released portions of NORAD tapes from 9/11, which were featured in a Vanity Fair article, do little to answer skeptic's questions about the impotence of U.S. air defenses on 9/11 and if anything only increase focus on the incompatibility of the official version of events with what is actually known to have taken place on that day.
Make no mistake, Farmer is not saying that 9/11 was an inside job, however, Farmer's testimony, along with that of his fellow 9/11 Commission members, conclusively demonstrates that, whatever really happened on 9/11, the official story as told to the public on the day and that which remains the authorities' version of events today, is a lie according to the very people who were tasked by the government to investigate it. This is a fact that no debunker or government apologist can ever legitimately deny.
September 21, 2009 at 11:03 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
The above article can be found here.
www.prisonplanet.com/911-commission-c...
September 22, 2009 at 2:47 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Memo: 9/11 Commission Witnesses Were Intimidated By Government "Minders"
More evidence of whitewash emerges
Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Memo: 9/11 Commission Witnesses Were Intimidated By Government Minders 290409CommissionSomewhat lost within the flu pandemic media hype this week is an important new revelation concerning the cover up of the events of 9/11.
A recently uncovered 9/11 Commission memo dating from October 2003, half way through the panel's investigation, addresses concerns that government "minders" were intimidating witnesses and shaping their testimonies.
The document was drafted by Kevin Scheid, a senior staffer who led the commission's Team 2, which was responsible for reviewing the overarching structure of the US intelligence community.
Names also appearing on the memo are those of staffers Lorry Fenner, an air force intelligence officer, and lawyer Gordon Lederman.
The memo, entitled "Executive Branch Minders' Intimidation of Witnesses," states the following:
* Minders "answer[ed] questions directed at witnesses;"
* Minders acted as "monitors, reporting to their respective agencies on Commission staffs lines of inquiry and witnesses' verbatim responses." The staff thought this "conveys to witnesses that their superiors will review their statements and may engage in retribution;"
* Minders' notetaking "facilitates agencies in alerting future witnesses to the Commission's lines of inquiry and permits agencies to prepare future witnesses either explicitly or implicitly."
* Minders "positioned themselves physically and have conducted themselves in a manner that we believe intimidates witnesses from giving full and candid responses to our questions."
September 22, 2009 at 10:42 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
The staffers make it clear that intimidation by minders was widespread and had not only occurred with their team's witnesses.
The memo was discovered by an independent researcher in the National Archives, to which it was added earlier this year.
The revelations come in the wake of an admission by the senior counsel to the 9/11 Commission John Farmer who said that the government agreed not to tell the truth about the events of 9/11.
Farmer's book about his experiences working for the Commission, set to be released in September, unveils how "the public had been seriously misled about what occurred during the morning of the attacks," and Farmer himself states that "at some level of the government, at some point in time:there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened."
Farmer's statements dovetail with those highlighted in an August 2006 Washington Post report, which stated that "Some staff members and commissioners of the Sept. 11 panel concluded that the Pentagon's initial story of how it reacted to the 2001 terrorist attacks may have been part of a deliberate effort to mislead the commission and the public rather than a reflection of the fog of events on that day, according to sources involved in the debate."
The report revealed how the 10-member commission deeply suspected deception to the point where they considered referring the matter to the Justice Department for criminal investigation.
These statements and testimonies, combined with the swathes of still unanswered questions surrounding the attacks, confirm that the 9/11 Commission was a complete whitewash and intensify the need to establish a new independent investigation.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/memo-911-...
September 22, 2009 at 10:44 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
wow, you really are a nutball !
And quite incapable of rational debate.
I think, until you can put together an original thought of your own, and communicate it in your own words, I'll just leave you here to play with yourself.
[imagines Chemmy hunkered down in his mom's basement, probably sweating a lot, feverishly cutting and pasting from prisonplanet, thinking that he's offering some evidence that supports his nutty theory.....wait, there can't be a theory, 'cause he doesn't know what happened !!]
heh heh heh
September 22, 2009 at 2:54 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
In August 2005 Jim Hoffman and Don Paul recorded presentations for the second convening of the Los Angeles Citizens' Grand Jury on the Crimes of September 11, 2001. Later they spent many hours with videographer Celestine Star adding photographs, footage, and other graphics to document their assertions. The result is 58 minutes of compelling evidence and analysis.
9/11 Guilt: The Proof Is In Your Hands
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0yk2B...
September 22, 2009 at 3:22 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
[basement door opens...."Chemmy, what are you doing down there ? why does it smell like........shame?"]
LOL
September 22, 2009 at 3:53 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Sep ( anonymous ) says...
Popular Mechanics did a nice job debunking most of the 9-11 conspiracy claptrap: http://www.popularmechanics.com/techn...
September 22, 2009 at 4:14 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
Sep, You have to understand, Chemmy didn't read that one.
Apparently, reading's not one of his strong points.
Or logic.
September 22, 2009 at 5:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seeuski ( anonymous ) says...
It is a cut and paste contest people and we have already lost cause chemical ali has much more posted here.
Hey chemical ali, we all looked at the stuff and we have determined that it is false witness and you have broken the lords ninth commandment.
I am praying for your soul brother.
September 22, 2009 at 5:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
Lost ? the mighty Hunterdog has lost nothing.
In fact, he has [without trying very hard] smoked Chemmy's sorry behind in this debate.
Seeuski,
Have you seen George Carlin's paring down of the 10 commandments ?
fun stuff.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkRYaM...
September 22, 2009 at 6:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seeuski ( anonymous ) says...
George Carlin is an Icon, it was good.
I am sure the atheists laughed a little harder than most.\
As far as Chemical ali, I really do feel sorry for him if he is innocently falling for the garbage, but if he has malice in his heart then I am an adversary for life.
September 22, 2009 at 7:26 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Debunking Popular Mechanics' 9/11 Lies
Nepotism, bias, shoddy research and agenda-driven politics
Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com | August 10 2006
Popular Mechanics has re-entered the media circus in an attempt to continue its 9/11 debunking campaign that began in March of last year. A new book claims to expose the myths of the 9/11 truth movement, yet it is Popular Mechanics who have been exposed as promulgating falsehoods while engaging in nepotism, shoddy research and agenda-driven politics.
It comes as no surprise that Popular Mechanics is owned by Hearst Corporation. As fictionalized in Orson Welles' acclaimed film Citizen Kane, William Randolph Hearst wrote the book on cronyism and yellow journalism and Popular Mechanics hasn't bucked that tradition.
The magazine is a cheerleader for the sophistication of advanced weaponry and new technology used by police in areas such as crowd control and 'anti-terror' operation. A hefty chunk of its advertising revenue relies on the military and defense contractors. Since the invasions of Afghanistan, Iraq and in the future Iran all cite 9/11 as a pretext, what motivation does the magazine have to conduct a balanced investigation and risk upsetting its most coveted clientele?
Popular Mechanics' March 2005 front cover story was entitled 'Debunking 9/11 Lies' and has since become the bellwether reference point for all proponents of the official 9/11 fairytale.
Following the publication of the article and its exaltation by the mainstream media as the final nail in the coffin for 9/11 conspiracy theories, it was revealed that senior researcher on the piece Benjamin Chertoff is the cousin of Michael Chertoff, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security.
This means that Benjamin Chertoff was hired to write an article that would receive nationwide attention, about the veracity of the government's explanation of an event that led directly to the creation of Homeland Security, a body that his own cousin now heads.
This is unparalleled nepotism and completely dissolves the credibility of the article before one has even turned the first page...
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/...
September 22, 2009 at 8:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
George Carlin comments on 9/11 Truth and the NWO
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pow5_U...
September 22, 2009 at 8:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Chertoff's Cousin Penned Popular Mechanics 9/11 Hit Piece
Chistopher Bollyn for American Free Press | March 7 2005
Dictators like Saddam Hussein have always used nepotism to protect their secrets and maintain control. Like a dictatorship, the inner cabal that directs the actions of the Bush administration uses the same tactics to confuse the public and conceal the truth of 9/11.
Dictators have always employed nepotism, the placing of family members in key positions, for one simple reason: only loyal family members can be trusted with the secrets that keep them in power. For this reason the shameless nepotism of the Bush administration should alarm Americans because it indicates that a dictatorship is encroaching upon the United States.
The Defense Department defines nepotism as the situation when relatives are in the same chain-of-command.
An egregious example of dictatorial-style nepotism occurred when George W. Bush won the White House ? twice ? thanks to the key "swing state" of Florida, where the presidential candidate's younger brother is governor. In 2000 and 2004, against all odds, Florida swung decisively, the Bush way.
With high federal offices being given to the wives, sons and daughters of senior members of the Bush administration, the Hearst Corporation executives that publish Popular Mechanics magazine probably didn't worry about the ethical considerations of hiring a cousin of Michael Chertoff, a former Assistant Attorney General and the new Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), as senior researcher.
But the March 2005 issue of Popular Mechanics (PM) plumbs new depths of nepotism and Hearst-style "yellow journalism" with its cover story about 9/11. PM's senior researcher, 25-year-old Benjamin Chertoff, authored a propagandistic cover story entitled "Debunking 9/11 Lies" which seeks to discredit all independent 9/11 research that challenges the official version of events.
"Conspiracy theories can't stand up to the hard facts," the cover reads. "After an in-depth investigation, PM answers with the truth," it says. But the article fails to provide evidence to support its claims and doesn't answer the key question: What caused the collapses of the twin towers and the 47-story World Trade Center 7?
Article continues here
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/...
September 22, 2009 at 8:28 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
See if you can figure out who owns Popular Mechanics.
September 22, 2009 at 8:32 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Meigs & Fox News Attempt To Rescue Flagging Official Story On 9/11 Anniversary
Former editor of Video Review and Entertainment Weekly recycles debunked theories to attack 9/11 truth and whore his book
Paul Joseph Watson
PrisonPlanet.com
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
Fox News introduced their 9/11 anniversary coverage today by promising science would reveal the truth behind 9/11 myths peddled by conspiracy theorists, so their choice to have James Meigs, whose scientific credentials include being a former editor of Entertainment Weekly and Video Review, attempt to debunk those myths was odd to say the least.
Meigs appeared on Fox and Friends to whore his "non-partisan" book, Debunking 9/11 Myths, the foreword to which is penned by Neo-Con ideologue John McCain.
Meigs is now whitewasher-in-chief at the military-industrial complex rag Popular Mechanics, which is owned by Hearst Publishing, the progenitor of the term yellow journalism.
Unsurprisingly, Meigs recycled the usual debunked fallacies in an attempt to revive the flagging official story and was not called on any of his lies by the nodding Fox presstitutes.
"What we've done in three years at Popular Mechanics of looking into these theories is try to find the facts that the conspiracy theorists themselves site as evidence of their claims," said Meigs. "In this case they say that because steel melts at about 2,700 degrees and jet fuel only burns at about 1,500 degrees...but when you talk to engineers, what you see is that steel doesn't have to melt to fail."
What Meigs fails to acknowledge is the fact that NIST's own analysis of the WTC steel concluded that temperatures in the impact zone reached no hotter than 600 degrees, according to the Final Report of the National Construction Safety Team on the Collapses of the World Trade Center Towers.
September 22, 2009 at 8:58 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
In addition, NIST reported that, "Only three of the recovered samples of exterior panels reached temperatures in excess of 250 C (482 F) during the fires or after the collapse."
If 250 C was enough heat to weaken most of the steel in the twin towers on 9/11, then our home ovens and fireplaces would be in danger of collapse as soon as we turned them on for the first time.
Photographs taken before the collapse of the towers show people standing in the impact zones where the planes hit.
Meigs then recycles the pancake theory in an attempt to dismiss the rapid collapse of the twin towers. The pancake theory was debunked by NIST itself after their study found that, "This type of assembly (the WTC steel) was capable of sustaining a large gravity load, without collapsing for a substantial period of time relative to the duration of the fires in any given location on September 11th."
It also violates the fundamental law of physics and the Law of Conservation of Momentum, as Professor Steven Jones outlines in his research paper.
Meigs goes on to claim that falling debris from the towers was enough to topple Building 7, a high rise that stood a hefty 355 feet away from the north tower. Meigs fails to explain why the building collapsed in seven seconds into its own footprint, why first responders were told to evacuate the area because the building was going to be intentionally brought down, why police officers heard bombs tearing down the building and why a top security official who was stationed in WTC 7 witnessed bombs take out the lobby of the building before either WTC tower had collapsed.
Perhaps Fox News should give Meigs his own show, since both Fox and Popular Mechanics pose as "fair and balanced" yet do their level best to lie, smear, obfuscate and bury the truth to please their corporate and war-machine bosses.
They compliment each other perfectly.
September 22, 2009 at 9 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
wow, you really are a nutball !
And quite incapable of rational debate.
I think, until you can put together an original thought of your own, and communicate it in your own words, I'll just leave you here to play with yourself.
[imagines Chemmy hunkered down in his mom's basement, probably sweating a lot, feverishly cutting and pasting from prisonplanet, thinking that he's offering some evidence that supports his nutty theory:..wait, there can't be a theory, 'cause he doesn't know what happened !!]
heh heh heh
September 22, 2009 at 9:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
lol@chemmy
September 22, 2009 at 9:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Former CBS anchorman warns of corporate influence over news
Wayne Madsen
Online Journal
Tuesday, Sept 22nd, 2009
On September 16, Dan Rather, the former anchor of the CBS Evening News, warned that today's news is shaped by very powerful corporate network owners who "are in bed with powerful political interests" that are influenced by government regulatory interests.
Rather spoke at a National Press Club remembrance of his colleague Walter Cronkite, his predecessor in the CBS Evening News anchor chair, and Don Hewitt, the late producer of 60 Minutes.
Rather revealed that in his conversations with Cronkite, the late anchor also believed that corporate interests were shaping the news to the detriment of objective journalism.
Rather also said that corporations were determining "war coverage of the lack of coverage." He also warned that there are "too few owners of networks and stations."
Rather was joined on the stage by fellow former CBS newsmen Daniel Schorr and Marvin Kalb. Bob Schieffer, host of Face the Nation, also participated in remembering Cronkite and Hewitt.
All the participants criticized a recent piece written by Michael Kinsley who charged that Cronkite was merely a person who could read from a teleprompter. All Cronkite's former colleagues recalled stories about Cronkite editing stories based on new information he and his news team received in as little as seven minutes before the CBS Evening News went on the air nationwide. All the participants said that Cronkite had a unique ability to ad lib during hours-long live special events coverage, including political conventions and national elections, as well as space missions.
September 22, 2009 at 9:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
9/11 Debunkers Hide From Slam Dunk Evidence Of Controlled Demolition
Electron microscope analysis of steel spheres from WTC site proves thermate, proves collapse of twin towers was an act of deliberate arson
Paul Joseph Watson
PrisonPlanet.com
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
Professor Steven Jones presented brand new and compelling evidence for the controlled demolition of the twin towers and WTC 7 recently, but the 9/11 debunkers and the corporate media are loathe to tackle it because it represents a slam dunk on proving the collapse of the buildings was a deliberate act of arson.
During a talk at the Rebuilding America's Senses event at the University of Texas last month, Jones laid out facts about steel samples recovered from the WTC site that Popular Mechanics dare not even attempt to debate. Debunkers are scared to even get near this information because the science behind it fundamentally contradicts the official story of what happened on 9/11.
Jones detailed his lab experiments in which he attempted to replicate NIST's conclusion that the lava like orange material flowing out of the south tower is aluminum from Flight 175, the plane that hit the building. Jones clearly documents the fact that liquid aluminum is silver and not orange as is seen in the video of the south tower, therefore the material cannot be aluminum. Jones then explains that the material is in fact a compound that can cut through steel like a hot knife through butter, thermite with sulphur added to make thermate.
September 22, 2009 at 10:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
The crux of the fresh evidence revolves around newly uncovered globules or spheres that were discovered at the WTC site that Professor Jones was able to obtain and run a electron microscope analysis on.
The spheres contained iron and aluminum, which would be expected in any steel sample, but also sulphur which is a by-product of a thermate reaction.
So having moved from a hypothesis that thermate was used to bring down the towers from using video footage and debunking the aluminum explanation of NIST, Jones now has empirical scientific proof, undertaken under laboratory conditions, that thermate was indeed used as an artificial explosive at the World Trade Center.
It has now been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the collapse of the twin towers and WTC 7 was an act of deliberate arson and not as a result of fires from crashing planes.
Jones' evidence offers no other conclusion that insiders planted thermite devices within the buildings to literally pulverize the supporting columns and cause the collapse of the towers and also WTC 7. Debunkers have uniformly failed to address the existence of thermite and also molten metal at the ground zero site because they cannot dismiss the scientific proof, and are forced to resort to ad hominem insults and smears.
We are issuing a challenge to Popular Mechanics to rebut Professor Jones' analysis of the sphere samples and the clear evidence of thermate at the World Trade Center. Address the focused scientific proof without resorting to ad hominem attacks or straying off topic.
We don't expect the progenitors of yellow journalism to have any answers for what constitutes the smoking gun of controlled demolition.
September 22, 2009 at 10:02 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sun ( anonymous ) says...
chemtrails,I agree with bandmama when she declared her self victor,it happens!Tell me this,how could the planes not have caused the problem?Why isnt that proven that the buildings should have withstood the crash.I was working with a construction engineer that awfull day and he explained to us exactly how the thing behaved predictably because of the iron getting so hot,etc.It was so horrible that its time consuming to sort,but the details are done,Dont just be in denial and by the way ,there is not perfect or even very good justice in the world,it shouldnt be that way ,but that is the reality.
September 22, 2009 at 10:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seeuski ( anonymous ) says...
Sun,
Any attempt to reason with people that are afflicted with Bush derangement syndrome is futile.
These 9/11 truthers are motivated by hate pure and simple. The truth gets lost and that is evident in the rantings of the above cut and paste which spends the whole page attacking FOX news,the messenger, in the show segment of the 9/11 debunker.
Also when you see buzz words like neo-con used, as was the case in reference to John McCain, you know you are dealing with anti-semites who's next move is to attach blame on Jews and Israel.
This loser, chemboy, has all of the symptoms of those that proffer this hurtful lie and that is hate in the heart.
September 23, 2009 at 7:29 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
This video should be watched by everyone interested in evidence at the Pentagon. The very fact there are credible witnesses showing discrepancies in the official story regarding the flight path of the plane means there is a viable avenue for investigation. No matter who is lying - the south side 'witnesses', those who quoted the south side witnesses in the media - or the North Side witnesses themselves - someone is lying - and considering we've not been allowed to see clear footage of what actually happened at the pentagon, it does not bode well for the official story of the 757's supposed south of citgo approach.
The witnesses who are adamant of the North side approach CANNOT be discarded without consideration - they are extremely credible and DEMAND more attention.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5FhQc...
September 23, 2009 at 11:19 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sun ( anonymous ) says...
It,s almost like listening to a robot,Chem,I dont think people will listen to you untill you listen to them.You seem really devoted in your cause and very able,Please do humanity some good and get rid of the fear that consumes you on this one,I also was in an explosion and think that you are like shell shocked or something ,like a Veitnam vet.That is just one more to add to the list of atrosities,Non-injured people who will never be the same.We have to go on and make it better,and yeah its hard to believe that a handfull of turds could cause so much pain,but that is what happens when people that hate get together and go for the evil.Cant we stop the cycle?
September 23, 2009 at 12:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
trafficman ( anonymous ) says...
Amazing that someone who was originally claiming it was a guided missile that took out the Pentagon is now posting eyewitness accounts of an airplane flying overhead and into the Pentagon to support his conspiracy theory. All of the witness say it was an airplane. Are there minor differences in eyewitness accounts of the flight path, yes but that is typical for almost any event. Ask 20 people and you are likely to get 20 different versions of what they saw. Particularly when the plane is flying overhead at approximately 750 feet per second.
Previous posts by Chemical Ali that the damage to the exterior of the Pentagon from an airplane should look the same as the WTC show a total lack of understanding of basic physics. The exterior of the WTC consisting of glass and a thin metal shell is going to react completely different than the concrete walls faced with limestone of the Pentagon. Trying to compare airline wreckage photos from other crash scenes when the planes were on approach traveling at less than 200 mph, pilots are trying to save the plane and the energy is dissipated over an expansive area, with one being flown with accelerating speed into a massive concrete structure at anywhere from 300 - 450 mph is going to be completely different. Again shear ignorance to think they should look the same.
It is apparent a village is missing its idiot and unfortunately he has landed on the Pilot blog.
September 23, 2009 at 1:29 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seeuski ( anonymous ) says...
Excellent points trafficman,
Was it a missile? Was it a bird? Was it a drone? NO!!!!!! It was a plane............
Get ready for the next 5 cut and paste fantasy posts.
One of the claims is that no one would have had cellphone coverage in that plane at flight altitude.
That plane was way below flight altitude for many miles and the fact that Mrs. Olson's connection cut out several times shows the connections were fragile.
Here are a bunch of eyewitness accounts.
""USAToday.com Editor Joel Sucherman saw it all: an American Airlines jetliner fly left to right across his field of vision as he commuted to work Tuesday morning. It was highly unusual. The large plane was 20 feet off the ground and a mere 50 to 75 yards from his windshield. Two seconds later and before he could see if the landing gear was down or any of the horror-struck faces inside, the plane slammed into the west wall of the Pentagon 100 yards away. 'My first thought was he's not going to make it across the river to [Reagan] National Airport. But whoever was flying the plane made no attempt to change direction,' Sucherman said. 'It was coming in at a high rate of speed, but not at a steep angle-almost like a heat-seeking missile was locked onto its target and staying dead on course.'"
- "Journalist Witnesses Pentagon Crash." eWeek.com, 13 Sep 2001 "
http://urbanlegends.about.com/library...
A couple of the eyewitness accounts were most likely used to some degree for the trolls that "want" to believe this hoax as they describe the plane as on a path like a missile. But all of those accounts describe the plane.
September 23, 2009 at 2:50 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Trafficman, you obviously did not watch the video, also, where on earth do you get the 300 to 450 mph figure? The official story claims closer to 540mph. Making up your own set of circumstances like mama saying the plane flew sideways into the pentagon with both engines going into the same little hole as the fuselage, I see, hilarious.
September 23, 2009 at 4:08 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
"eyewitness accounts of an airplane flying overhead and into the Pentagon"
If you pay close attention you will see that none of the witnesses in that video actually saw the plane hit the pentagon.
September 23, 2009 at 5:50 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seeuski ( anonymous ) says...
Oh, I guess it stopped just in time.
So many liars huh chemical ali.
September 23, 2009 at 6:31 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
I never said the plane "flew sideways."
I showed you empirical facts that supported my arguement, which you have yet to do.
So, now you have shown yourself to be lying as well as ignorant and misinformed.
It's a trademark of the "Troofer" movement, and I shouldn't have expected more from you.
Your arguement fails, as do you, and again....unless you can provide evidence that supports your theory...real evidence, not a speculation cut and pasted from a conspiracy nut's website, I win this debate.
I had no doubt it would be any different.
Heh heh
September 23, 2009 at 10:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Kevin_Nerney ( Kevin Nerney ) says...
I told myself I wouldn't appease s.t.b.c.t. but here goes nothing. Let's say you're right. It was the Govt.,whatever level doesn't matter. Numerous people were involved and they all have come forward or been found out. They have all been sentenced to die on primetime TV. Now what? Do we scrape the whole constitution, fire the entire Congress executive branch and all the Judges on the bench and start over or should we just conquer a new continent and displace the inhabitants and resurrect the founding fathers?
September 23, 2009 at 11:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
"Do we scrape the whole constitution" We don't have to scrap our constitution, it's already being done for us.
"fire the entire Congress executive branch and all the Judges on the bench" lol, Most of them, anyway.
"should we just conquer a new continent and displace the inhabitants"
I don't have all of the answers, Kevin, and neither does Anton Vodvarka, but it does seem to appear that we need to take THIS country back, at least. And when I say "we" I mean all righteous, freedom-loving Americans.
September 24, 2009 at 12:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Bush on the Constitution: 'It's just a goddamned piece of paper'
Capital Hill Blue/DOUG THOMPSON | December 9 2005
Last month, Republican Congressional leaders filed into the Oval Office to meet with President George W. Bush and talk about renewing the controversial USA Patriot Act.
Several provisions of the act, passed in the shell shocked period immediately following the 9/11 terrorist attacks, caused enough anger that liberal groups like the American Civil Liberties Union had joined forces with prominent conservatives like Phyllis Schlafly and Bob Barr to oppose renewal.
GOP leaders told Bush that his hardcore push to renew the more onerous provisions of the act could further alienate conservatives still mad at the President from his botched attempt to nominate White House Counsel Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court.
"I don't give a goddamn," Bush retorted. "I'm the President and the Commander-in-Chief. Do it my way."
"Mr. President," one aide in the meeting said. "There is a valid case that the provisions in this law undermine the Constitution."
"Stop throwing the Constitution in my face," Bush screamed back. "It's just a goddamned piece of paper!"
I've talked to three people present for the meeting that day and they all confirm that the President of the United States called the Constitution "a goddamned piece of paper."
And, to the Bush Administration, the Constitution of the United States is little more than toilet paper stained from all the [crap] that this group of power-mad despots have dumped on the freedoms that "goddamned piece of paper" used to guarantee.
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, while still White House counsel, wrote that the "Constitution is an outdated document."
Put aside, for a moment, political affiliation or personal beliefs. It doesn't matter if you are a Democrat, Republican or Independent. It doesn't matter if you support the invasion or Iraq or not. Despite our differences, the Constitution has stood for two centuries as the defining document of our government, the final source to determine in the end if something is legal or right.
Every federal official including the President who takes an oath of office swears to "uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States."
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia says he cringes when someone calls the Constitution a "living document."
""Oh, how I hate the phrase we have-a 'living document,'" Scalia says. "We now have a Constitution that means whatever we want it to mean. The Constitution is not a living organism, for Pete's sake."
As a judge, Scalia says, "I don't have to prove that the Constitution is perfect; I just have to prove that it's better than anything else."
September 24, 2009 at 12:58 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
[cont.]
President Bush has proposed seven amendments to the Constitution over the last five years, including a controversial amendment to define marriage as a "union between a man and woman." Members of Congress have proposed some 11,000 amendments over the last decade, ranging from repeal of the right to bear arms to a Constitutional ban on abortion.
Scalia says the danger of tinkering with the Constitution comes from a loss of rights.
"We can take away rights just as we can grant new ones," Scalia warns. "Don't think that it's a one-way street."
And don't buy the White House hype that the USA Patriot Act is a necessary tool to fight terrorism. It is a dangerous law that infringes on the rights of every American citizen and, as one brave aide told President Bush, something that undermines the Constitution of the United States.
But why should Bush care? After all, the Constitution is just "a goddamned piece of paper."
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/...
September 24, 2009 at 1:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
McCain booed for saying Obama respects the Constitution
David Edwards and Stephen C. Webster
Raw Story
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Speaking to a town hall in Sun City Arizona on Tuesday, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) drew choruses of loud boos from the audience by saying that President Barack Obama respects the Constitution of the United States.
On the town hall, Arizona Central reports:
An overflow crowd of mostly seniors, totaling about 1,250, applauded McCain as he laid out a plan to slash medical malpractice costs for doctors, create a $5,000 tax rebate for families to use on private insurance and offer rewards for people who take steps like quitting smoking to stay healthy.
He also said insurance companies should not be allowed to use pre-existing conditions to deny Americans coverage.
"I want to reform health care. The costs are out of control," McCain said. "But let's not forget the quality of health care is what must be preserved as well."
And it seemed to be going well for McCain until an older woman stood up and asked, "I would like to know how the President is getting by with all of this money : It's against the Constitution. Doesn't he know that we still live under a Constitution?"
The audience erupted in cheers and applause. McCain just smiled.
"I'm sure : I'm sure that he does," he said.
The audience laughed, as if the Senator were joking.
McCain booed for saying Obama respects the Constitution 290509banner
"No, no, I'm serious," McCain said. "I'm sure that he does and I'm sure that he respects the Constitution of the United States."
"No, no, no, no :" he trailed as a roar of boos cascaded through the crowd. "Now wait, I really do. I'm absolutely convinced of it. I just believe, my friends, that there is a fundamental difference in philosophy about the role of government. That's why we have competition for public office and competition amongst parties and competition about different ideas and visions for the future of America."
He concluded: "I am convinced the President is absolutely sincere in his beliefs." The crowd booed again. "Wait a min : Wait a minute! I'm saying he's sincere in his beliefs. We just happen to disagree and he is the President of the United States and let's be respectful."
The episode seems like an echo of a McCain campaign rally in 2008 when an audience erupted in jeers after a man, playing off Sarah Palin's "palling around with terrorists" rhetoric, was told by McCain that Obama is "a decent man that you don't have to be scared [of] as President of the United States." (Watch that video below.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vlUYKs...
September 24, 2009 at 1:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Outspoken Arizona Senator Questions 9/11 Official Version Of Events
Republican attacked for expressing opinion on September 11th cover-up
Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Friday, April 25, 2008
State Sen. Karen Johnson, R-Mesa, has come under fierce criticism for going on record with her doubts over the government's version of events surrounding the 9/11 attacks.
Following a vote in the Senate Appropriations Committee on Arizona's 9/11 Memorial, Johnson told Capitol reporters "There are many of us that believe there's been a cover-up."
Details of Johnson's comments come in an vicious hit piece article in the Arizona Republic entitled Drinking the 9/11 Kool-Aid:
The senator gave details about her theories. The World Trade Center buildings could have been rigged with thermite to melt girders. The aircraft could have been drones rather than the commercial airliners most of us thought we saw crashing into the Twin Towers. As to what became of the missing passengers in the aircraft that (theoretically) did not explode against the towers: "That's what I would like to know," she said.
Citing no research whatsoever on such theories, and without referring to the hundreds of engineers, scientists, professors, former government and intelligence officials and prominent public figures who have voiced similar concerns over the official version of the attacks, which is about as water tight as a paper bag, the Arizona Republic continues the attack:
Now, we take no issue with private citizens believing whatever fever-swamp nonsense, however outlandish, they wish about their government.
We do take serious issue, however, with a public official affecting public policy on such grounds.
September 24, 2009 at 1:16 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
[cont.]
The conservative Republican senator, who has represented Mesa's District 18 for nearly two decades, is renowned for her outspoken politics and devotion to the US constitution.
In the past she has chastised big government initiatives and social programs such as No Child Left Behind, saying they infringe on state's rights.
She has previously come under attack, as "nutty" for voicing concerns on the secretive Security and Prosperity Partnership, which she, like many others, has warned represents a bureaucratic undermining of national sovereignty.
"It's all because it's going to be open," Johnson has previously told Capitol Media Services. "It's all going to be a 'North American community,' just like the European Union," complete with the creation of a single currency just like the Euro.
"We will have no sovereignty, we will have no Constitution left... we are going to be ruled by unelected tribunals, bureaucrats that are unelected," she said.
In February 2007 Johnson introduced Senate Concurrent Memorial 1002, a bill urging U.S. withdrawal from the SPP, and a North American Union. The text of the legislation is similar to other resolutions offered in South Carolina, Utah, Virginia, and Washington.
Johnson has also worked hard to introduce bills to overturn legislature outlawing carry concealed weapons on community college and public university campuses, a move that would give students, teachers and administrators a chance to protect themselves during a mass shooting.
She has also introduced a bill prohibiting schools from collecting fingerprints, hand geometry, voice recognition, facial recognition, iris scans and retinal scans
from students. Bill 1216 passed the Senate earlier this year. Johnson has also fought against REAL ID and the biometrically enhanced driver's license.
Johnson has also been criticized in the past for holding a position on the board of the Church of Scientology's Citizens Commission on Human Rights. The sum of her work here has consisted of sponsoring bills on its behalf to limit use of psychotropic drugs on children and to oppose mandatory mental health screenings for children.
A senator that actually cares about constitution law and US sovereignty, questions big corporate infested government and promotes freedom? Karen Johnson is undoubtedly kooky and most possibly evil.
September 24, 2009 at 1:17 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
JLM ( anonymous ) says...
Don't ya just love it when one nut vouches for another. Kinda like safety in numbers. Y'all are both nuts!
September 24, 2009 at 2:02 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Personal attacks on other community members do nothing for your weak argument.
September 24, 2009 at 2:22 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
I actually find it a bit telling that Chem spent at LEAST one hour (late at night in the basement smelling of shame I am sure) on this rant..............
September 24, 2009 at 3:53 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seeuski ( anonymous ) says...
Cut and paste, cut and paste.
The hate Bush derangement syndrome I spoke of earlier is the underlying motivating factor behind this truther nutball movement.
"The weak argument" is using hate Bush 3rd party quotes that don't fit with the mans persona over the last eight years.
You want people to buy into the notion that Bush cursed the Constitution?
Count me out.
The Patriot Act is lawful, it worked, and is still working to this day as is evidenced by the capture of several Muslim terrorists in NY and here in Denver.
And Obama uses it to this day. By the way, where is the anger over the White House snitch line that still exists and the use of sites like facebook and twitter that the White House is gathering emails from?
Must be part of that "change" thing I've heard about.
I am sure the usual suspects will jump all over me for this but who cares the whole country was behind Bush after 9/11 and the tactics we used were endorsed by the very people in Congress that are now yelling for investigations and trials.
A bunch of hypocrites, and so the 9/11 truther movement was started when Hillary Clinton stated several months after 9/11 "what did he know and when did he know it" referring to the rumors that had been started by the enemies of the US that George W. Bush and the CIA were behind the attacks along with the Mosad and Israel.
Every lousy accusation has been systematically debunked by experts and non experts and eyewitness accounts like people I know and my own two eyes.
The whole front of that building was demolished along with huge damage through the parking lot and people we know were killed and DNA has proven such.
But at least chemical ali has shown his true colors, he is a Bush hater and is a receptacle for the trash he is collecting and spreading.
September 24, 2009 at 4:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
Ah, another cut and paste comment from Alex Jones' buttboy....
Have you no original thoughts of your own ?
Are you incapable of finding a thread of thought within yourself ?
Apparently so.
So, to counteract your lunacy, I'think I'll just cut and paste for a while, ala the ChemIdiot...........
Yet, in just under four years, the 9/11 "truth movement" has ground to a halt. Apart from the fundamental incoherence of their theories, the downfall of the 9/11 denier juggernaut was good old-fashioned skepticism at its finest, the kind that conjures visions of James Randi challenging psychics and faith healers on their home turfs and winning. Skeptics are better at their jobs than they think, and its important to give credit where credit is due.
Staking their fortunes almost solely on Internet-based content may have been the 9/11 deniers' biggest mistake. What seems like a perfect place for pseudoscience - the Internet is un-edited, without fact-checkers or minimum publishing standards of any kind - also became a perfect place for a rapid-response system of blogs and forums to fight back. Drawing on the freely available technical information from the NIST, FEMA, and academic journals which most colleges let their students access for free, skeptical sites like ScrewLooseChange.blogspot.com and debunking911.com are able to defuse 9/11 denier claims as they arise...
September 24, 2009 at 5:44 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
"Alternative" theories claiming that no hijacked aircraft struck the World Trade Center and the Pentagon have recently resurfaced. In the case of the WTC attacks, the sheer number of eyewitnesses and the abundance of evidence are sufficient to show clearly the absurdity of these "no-plane" theories. However, the matter is quite different for the Pentagon strike and therefore deserves further discussion.
If we assume that no plane hit the Pentagon, then we are invariably faced with the alternative suggestion of a missile. A truck bomb is absolutely out of the question because of the utter lack of evidence for this kind of attack.
It should be noted that some alternative theories suggest that the Pentagon was indeed hit by an aircraft, but not by Flight 77. Such theories consider a drone or a smaller aircraft. Either way, they imply the impact of an aircraft and as such cannot be considered "no-plane" theories and are beyond the scope of this article.
The missile theory had been sidelined because many, in the US 9/11 truth movement, felt strongly that the lack of clear audiovisual evidence of the impact of AA77 was a sinister booby-trap prepared by US authorities to ridicule once and for all the entire truth movement at the appropriate time (for example, by releasing new footage or pictures, or by showing the debris of AA77 set up in a hangar). However, a 2007 speech by the late Cuban leader Fidel Castro, in which he accused the US government of orchestrating a colossal criminal operation with vast media coverage to conceal what he believes was a coup, has given new life to the missile theory.
Castro in fact claimed that "only a projectile could have created the geometrically round orifice created by the alleged airplane". He is certain that no plane hit the Pentagon and that one of the many missiles in the US arsenal was used instead.
I entirely disagree with this theory, because not only there is no evidence to support it, but there is, in my opinion, considerable evidence that allows to rule it out. Let's examine this evidence in detail.
I will not focus on the individual types of ordnance available in the US military arsenal or on the acronyms that identify the various missile types and flight profiles. Specialist websites already cover these in excellent detail. Rather, I will deal with the main evidence at the crime scene which allows to exclude the possibility of a missile attack at the Pentagon.
September 24, 2009 at 5:47 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
First of all, let's consider the only characteristic of a missile attack that I think is worth examining in detail: the angle of the attack profile. Here are some frames of special high-speed footage taken during test firings in US proving grounds, which I think speak more clearly than many words.
September 24, 2009 at 5:50 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
By the way, all this other info is readily availible at
http://11-settembre.blogspot.com/2008...
The pictures show clearly that the missile is not designed to explode upon impact against the target (in this test, a reinforced-concrete structure). It must penetrate the structure, piercing its hardened outer shell, and then detonate inside it, producing a pressure and thermal gradient whose effect is actually enhanced by the resistance provided by the structure.
In practice, penetration is achieved thanks to the kinetic energy of the missile and to the use of penetrators made of steel and, more recently, titanium, which enclose the explosive charge.
When detonation occurs, the entire structure is subjected to extremely intense stresses from the inside outward, due to the detonation of the explosive charge carried by the missile body and of any ammunition stored inside the target.
This is clearly visibile in the picture below, which shows that the entire structure is affected simultaneously and in all directions with the same intensity.
September 24, 2009 at 5:53 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
When detonation occurs, the entire structure is subjected to extremely intense stresses from the inside outward, due to the detonation of the explosive charge carried by the missile body and of any ammunition stored inside the target.
This is clearly visibile in the picture below, which shows that the entire structure is affected simultaneously and in all directions with the same intensity.
September 24, 2009 at 5:54 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
Obviously, the effects of the explosion are greater if the volume inside the target is small and if there are few pathways for venting the overpressure. An explosion in an open space is less destructive than the same explosion in an enclosed space.
Therefore, the asymmetries of the various observable macroeffects are not linked to the directionality of the stresses but to the different resistance provided by the materials and the design of the interior cavity in which the explosion occurs.
The explosion of a conventional demolition charge occurs in any case according to a rough symmetry, linked mostly to the shape of the charge and the resistance of the container, but in large spaces these effects in practice do not have a clearly identifiable role with respect to the extent of the resulting destruction.
In theory, the detonation speeds of high explosives allow us to model, as a first approximation, the explosion of a charge of this type as a static point-like charge which develops its effects spatially with a spherical geometry.
For particular applications, such as the interception of rapidly approaching airborne targets, missile charges have been developed which have a directional distribution of the effects of the explosion (shrapnel distribution and pressure wave). The purpose of these charges, which take advantage of particular geometries of the explosive and employ multiple-trigger electronic systems, is to maximize the destructive effects in the chosen direction, reducing the spatial dispersion of the pressure gradient and especially of the shrapnel formed by the charge container.
This requirement arises from the need to minimize the weight of the charge, accordingly reducing the total weight of the missile: this allows to increase its agility in performing course corrections and its maximum speed, and also allows to reduce the flight time to engage the threat.
September 24, 2009 at 5:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
Directional charges, therefore, are conceived to be used with point-like targets (to concentrate the effects of the explosion on a small surface, to overcome the resistance of the target and destroy it, as in the typical case of armor piercing), or to create walls of shrapnel and high-pressure regions in specific portions of space, in a direction which is not aligned with the missile axis (a typical example is the use of directional charges that explode at right angles to the trajectory in order to strike a target as the missile flies alongside).
The presence of a directional charge does not imply at all that the effects of the explosion, especially within an enclosed space, are nonexistent in the other spatial directions. An explosion is in practice an instantaneous phenomenon, which triggers subsequent mechanical phenomena related to the repeated impacts of secondary projectiles which draw their kinetic energy from the force impulse received during the explosion.
The trajectories of these secondary projectiles are a bundle of straight lines which converge at the point where the charge is located.
Of course, the first-approximation model stops when the pressure waves strike the resisting structure, because at that point the reaction of the target is tied to the actual characteristics of the medium and of the structures that are hit (pressure and thermal gradient, resistance and resilience of the materials, type and uniformity of the materials, presence or absence of discontinuities between the resisting elements, impulsive resistance of the materials to the impact).
September 24, 2009 at 5:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
Models for studying impulsive phenomena are very complex, indeed because they cannot be approximated by derivable functions. By definition, a function, in order to be derivable, must be continuous, but this makes it impossible to use such functions to approximate impulsive phenomena, which by definition are not continuous. It is necessary to resort to advanced computational systems, which are in any case approximate and are normally presented in higher-level courses on mathematical analysis or in the teaching of mathematical methods for engineering.
Certainly it is not appropriate, here, to delve into such models, because the challenge would be truly difficult and would require a solid experimental stage. However, for the purpose of this discussion it is sufficient to bear in mind that the detonation of a main charge is substantially omnidirectional and is intended to shatter the resisting structure from the inside, generating the maximum possible number of secondary projectiles (shrapnel, impacted objects which in turn strike other objects) having an extremely high kinetic energy, in addition to pressure and thermal peaks capable of disabling personnel and equipment.
Also, we must not forget that wave phenomena, essentially of the pressure-related type, are affected strongly by reflection and refraction. The direction of the motion of the missile, instead, does not have a substantial effect on the mode of detonation, because the time frame after initial impact is extremely small.
September 24, 2009 at 5:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
you've been owned, fool, now try to debate me without cutting and pasting from your wannabe lover's website.......
ha ha ha....
September 24, 2009 at 5:58 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
Yo, chem, you're a horrible debater....Why do you even waste your time, coming unprepared ?
September 24, 2009 at 6:04 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
And the mighty Hunterdog takes a bite out of yet another butt.....
heh heh
September 24, 2009 at 6:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
Sorry, too agressive, Mrs. Hunterdog will beat me up....
[she's the only one who would dare try]
So...chemmy, care to debate [just for fun, 'cause you know it will be] your earlier statement [cut and paste quote, really] confirming your belief [I think, it's hard to tell with all the plagarism] that the WTC's were taken down by controlled demolition ?
September 24, 2009 at 7:47 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Wow, that was a lot of hot air from a big, fat BM.
September 25, 2009 at 6:16 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
hot air ?...
wow, there's some irony for you...
but i bet you don't , considering your ignorance, get the irony...
wait, i see, you're like 14...i've been misssing it....sorry
care to debate your "controlled demolition theory", teenage troofer ?
you can't, obviously.
September 25, 2009 at 6:40 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
your argument fails....
prove me different, if you can....."troofer"
September 25, 2009 at 6:42 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Kevin_Nerney ( Kevin Nerney ) says...
I wish the newest comments were on top so that one doesn't have to scroll so far in order to continue reading where one left off.
September 25, 2009 at 11:29 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jk ( anonymous ) says...
Kevin, hit the end button on your keyboard
September 25, 2009 at 11:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sun ( anonymous ) says...
Oh My Gosh,I need to go back to college again to keep reading this inferno.Im trying to keep up but,please give up Chem. my brain could explode.Hunter dog when does the bite and chew end?Too bad the paper is to lame to have a new story to comment on,Maybe next week,Wouldnt want to tarnish the shiney Ski town image with real current issues that actually relate to our area or nation at present.Cant there be a paper site for discussion of our choosng with out dragging one article on for a month?.THE PAPER WILL PULL A STORY DISCUSSION WHEN THEY CHOOSE,WHAT IS UP WITH THIS LAME ASS TOPIC, PILOT EDITORS? I THINK YOU ARE SICK.
September 26, 2009 at 7:24 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
Sun,
Sorry, but for me it's a moral issue. I just can't stand by and let these sort of twisted lies and theories get spouted without fighting back.
And if someone can get educated in the meantime, that's a bonus.
September 26, 2009 at 8:31 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seeuski ( anonymous ) says...
exactly.
September 26, 2009 at 9:35 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
JLM ( anonymous ) says...
Hell, as an engineer and a demo man I am just overwhelmed with the body of engineering and explosives knowledge possessed by bandmama! That is one damn tough band, mama! LOL
I am also overwhelmed by what folks are willing to consider, believe and repeat --- pretty damn scary stuff mistaking a 250,000 lbs aircraft for a 24,000 lbs GH?
Maybe that's why the stock market works or maybe not?
Houston, we got some crazies down here!
September 26, 2009 at 9:40 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
LOL@JLM......
No expertise on my part, I just research....Quite unlike another poster here.
As an engineer and demolitions person, JLM, i would welcome your thoughts on whether the towers appear to have been brought down by a "controlled demolition" ?
September 26, 2009 at 9:45 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sun ( anonymous ) says...
So glad you have a chance to use your genius abitity to prove a completely,stupid point that is obvious without your private research.I do amire your intellect and again you are correct and I would never ever be able to keep up with your mind except as I do to listen in .You are truly a debator of the most amazing quality,The only really stupid thing that I have heard you say "mama',is to ask some one who is qualified if its a controlled demolition,does that mean you talked so long about it that you believe it now?Im still with you,but please tell me if there is a Santa,I know you can get to the bottom of this.
September 26, 2009 at 3:53 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
I was actually hoping to hear from someone with real-world experience with [perhaps] structural engineering and demolitions, since I only know what I read, from experts in the field.
I was hoping JLM could enlighten the chemicalsniffer in a way that I can't, or at least his arguement would carry more weight.
You see, unlike another poster here, I value the opinion of people who know what they're talking about. I'm certainly not so arrogant as to think I know more than someone who has spent more time than I on a particular subject.
Question, though....
After a rash of minue-by-minute posts, chemmy seems to have taken some time off ?
What's the guess here ? Aliens ? Illuminati ? Black helicopters on his front lawn to "eliminate the problem" ? The folks with the white dinner jacket came to take him away ?
Is he now in a padded romper room ? Or in a spaceship with aliens probing his nether regions ?
Inquiring minds want to know, LOL.
September 26, 2009 at 5:08 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Prominent Structural Engineers Say Official Version of 9/11 "Impossible" "Defies Common Logic" "Violates the Law of Physics"
George Washington's Blog
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
Numerous structural engineers now publicly challenge the government's account of the destruction of the Trade Centers on 9/11, including:
A prominent engineer with 55 years experience, in charge of the design of hundreds of major building projects including high rise offices, former member of the California Seismic Safety Commission and former member of the National Institute of Sciences Building Safety Council (Marx Ayres) believes that the World Trade Centers were brought down by controlled demolition (see also this)
Two professors of structural engineering at a prestigious Swiss university (Dr. Joerg Schneider and Dr. Hugo Bachmann) said that, on 9/11, World Trade Center 7 was brought down by controlled demolition (translation here)
Kamal S. Obeid, structural engineer, with a masters degree in Engineering from UC Berkeley, of Fremont, California, says:
"Photos of the steel, evidence about how the buildings collapsed, the unexplainable collapse of WTC 7, evidence of thermite in the debris as well as several other red flags, are quite troubling indications of well planned and controlled demolition"
Ronald H. Brookman, structural engineer, with a masters degree in Engineering from UC Davis, of Novato California, writes:
"Why would all 110 stories drop straight down to the ground in about 10 seconds, pulverizing the contents into dust and ash - twice. Why would all 47 stories of WTC 7 fall straight down to the ground in about seven seconds the same day? It was not struck by any aircraft or engulfed in any fire. An independent investigation is justified for all three collapses including the surviving steel samples and the composition of the dust."
Graham John Inman, structural engineer, of London, England, points out:
"WTC 7 Building could not have collapsed as a result of internal fire and external debris. NO plane hit this building. This is the only case of a steel frame building collapsing through fire in the world. The fire on this building was small & localized therefore what is the cause?"
Paul W. Mason, structural engineer, of Melbourne, Australia, argues:
"In my view, the chances of the three buildings collapsing symmetrically into their own footprint, at freefall speed, by any other means than by controlled demolition, are so remote that there is no other plausible explanation!"
Mills M. Kay Mackey, structural engineer, of Denver, Colorado, points out:
"The force from the jets and the burning fuel could not have been sufficient to make the building collapse. Why doesn't the media mention that the 11th floor was completely immolated on February 13th, 1975? It had the weight of nearly 100 stories on top of it but it did not collapse?"
September 26, 2009 at 6:35 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
David Scott, Structural Engineer, of Scotland, argues:
"Near-freefall collapse violates laws of physics. Fire induced collapse is not consistent with observed collapse mode . . . ."
Nathan Lomba, Structural Engineer, of Eureka, California, states
"I began having doubts about, so called, official explanations for the collapse of the WTC towers soon after the explanations surfaced. The gnawing question that lingers in my mind is: How did the structures collapse in near symmetrical fashion when the apparent precipitating causes were asymmetrical loading? The collapses defies common logic from an elementary structural engineering perspective. "If" you accept the argument that fire protection covering was damaged to such an extent that structural members in the vicinity of the aircraft impacts were exposed to abnormally high temperatures, and "if" you accept the argument that the temperatures were high enough to weaken the structural framing, that still does not explain the relatively concentric nature of the failures.
Neither of the official precipitating sources for the collapses, namely the burning aircraft, were centered within the floor plan of either tower; both aircraft were off-center when they finally came to rest within the respective buildings. This means that, given the foregoing assumptions, heating and weakening of the structural framing would have been constrained to the immediate vicinity of the burning aircraft. Heat transmission (diffusion) through the steel members would have been irregular owing to differing sizes of the individual members; and, the temperature in the members would have dropped off precipitously the further away the steel was from the flames-just as the handle on a frying pan doesn't get hot at the same rate as the pan on the burner of the stove. These factors would have resulted in the structural framing furthest from the flames remaining intact and possessing its full structural integrity, i.e., strength and stiffness.
September 26, 2009 at 6:37 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Structural steel is highly ductile, when subjected to compression and bending it buckles and bends long before reaching its tensile or shear capacity. Under the given assumptions, "if" the structure in the vicinity of either burning aircraft started to weaken, the superstructure above would begin to lean in the direction of the burning side. The opposite, intact, side of the building would resist toppling until the ultimate capacity of the structure was reached, at which point, a weak-link failure would undoubtedly occur. Nevertheless, the ultimate failure mode would have been a toppling of the upper floors to one side-much like the topping of a tall redwood tree-not a concentric, vertical collapse.
For this reason alone, I rejected the official explanation for the collapse of the WTC towers out of hand. Subsequent evidence supporting controlled, explosive demolition of the two buildings are more in keeping with the observed collapse modalities and only serve to validate my initial misgivings as to the causes for the structural failures."
Edward E. Knesl, civil and structural engineer, of Phoenix, Arizona, writes:
"We design and analyze buildings for the overturning stability to resist the lateral loads with the combination of the gravity loads. Any tall structure failure mode would be a fall over to its side. It is impossible that heavy steel columns could collapse at the fraction of the second within each story and subsequently at each floor below.
We do not know the phenomenon of the high rise building to disintegrate internally faster than the free fall of the debris coming down from the top.
The engineering science and the law of physics simply doesn't know such possibility. Only very sophisticated controlled demolition can achieve such result, eliminating the natural dampening effect of the structural framing huge mass that should normally stop the partial collapse. The pancake theory is a fallacy, telling us that more and more energy would be generated to accelerate the collapse. Where would such energy would be coming from ?"
David Topete, civil and structural engineer, San Francisco, California
Charles Pegelow, structural engineer, of Houston, Texas (and see this)
Dennis Kollar, structural engineer, of West Bend, Wisconsin
Doyle Winterton, structural engineer (retired)
Michael T. Donly, P.E., structural engineer
William Rice, P.E., structural engineer, former professor of Vermont Technical College
See this website and this website for further additions.
There are many other structural engineers who have questioned the government's account in private. We support them and wish them courage to discuss these vital issues publicly.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/...
September 26, 2009 at 6:37 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
See also this - http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/...
September 26, 2009 at 6:40 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
Hmmmm..
Well, now that your orifaces are clear,
1. " Well documented explosions" did not occur. Columbia University was running sensitive seismic recorders at the time & they picked up nothing. When conspiracy theorists talk about "well documented explosions, " they are simply referring to the puffs of air that demolition experts have stated are not explosions. See http://www.implosionworld.com/Article...
Somehow, puffs of air are now "explosions."
2. Lists of so-called experts who doubt the official explanation of 9/11 are worthless for one big reason:
The doubting scientists in this list have published nothing at all. Not one article on their 9/11 beliefs. There are no articles on thermite, none on free fall, nothing.
On the contrary, the real experts have printed dozens of real articles, in peer-reviewed journals, technical journals, and trade journals explaining how the jets caused the Towers to collapse. This is the way real science is done. You publish it in a science journal, sign your name. People know your credentials and they review the article & then publish IF it's good.
Since there is not one single article published in the technical literature by the doubting scientists, that means their ideas are worthless, no-one will accept them, they are all rejected. To any intelligent person, that ends this argument completely.
3. Professor Steven E. Jones, from BYU (Brigham Young University) may have published 40 papers, but none of them are on the 9-11 collapse. He's wholly unqualified in civil engineering. Jones' department is physics and his research is in "cold fusion."
The correct department for analysis of the twin-tower collapse is engineering, not physics.
The engineering dept at Jones own University (BYU) has heavily criticized Jones. D. Allan Firmage, Professor Emeritus, Civil Engineering, BYU, called Jones' statements "very disturbing." Also, "The structural engineering faculty in the Fulton College of Engineering and Technology [at BYU] do not support the hypotheses of Professor Jones."
See http://www.debunking911.com/jones.htm to see how Jones was ripped apart by his own University.
Jones made so many false statements about thermite being used in 9/11 that finally the editors at "Implosion World" contacted him. They cornered him with the facts. He admitted that his theories had many unexplained holes. He also admitted that none of the steel showed thermite's "degenerative fingerprint." See page 7, section 4 of http://www.implosionworld.com/Article...
September 26, 2009 at 8:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Brilliant!
September 26, 2009 at 8:43 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Conspiracy theory or hidden truth? The 9/11 enigmas...
Richard Gage, AIA, Gregg Roberts, and David Chandler
Richard Gage, AIA has been a practicing San Francisco Bay Area architect for more than 20 years, and is a registered member of the American Institute of Architects. Most recently he worked on a $400M mixed-use facility in Las Vegas NV. But he is also the founder and CEO of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, now numbering over 800 A/E's, calling for a new investigation into the destruction of all 3 WTC high-rises on 9/11. Gage has spoken at over 100 events, reaching 20 U.S. states and 8 countries. He has been invited to present in 14 cities Australia, New Zealand, and Japan before the end of this year. As the anniversary of the events approaches, Gage tells WAN why he thinks there are hidden depths to the destruction of the World Trade Centre...
http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com/...
September 26, 2009 at 9:20 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
Just to show you're incapable of an original thought of your own....
You simply cut and pasted from ....
http://www.slate.com/discuss/forums/t...
Have you no ability to debate a point given the information you have access to ?
Apparently not....
As a debater, you are simply a charlatan, and cannot stand with one like the mighty Hunterdog.
September 26, 2009 at 9:28 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
Good night.
September 26, 2009 at 9:29 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
JLM ( anonymous ) says...
This pseudo-engineering discussion of the failure mechanism of the 9-11 buildings is just so much nonsense and a fraud perpetrated by folks pretending to have academic credentials which simply do not exist.
The hamhanded, inaccurate and overuse of "engineering" terms to substantiate the bogus credibility of the con man authors of this inanity is solely for the benefit of laymen who may be impressed by the use of such terms as "ductile" and "tensile or shear capacity". This is frankly not the language of structural engineering as it relates to this type of analysis.
To argue that chopping down a red wood would be an exemplar for how a composite structure (concrete and steel) would behave in failure is nonsense that any layman can easily spot. A red wood is chopped down to fall in a specific direction by the very technique of chopping it down.
At the end of the day, there are only really two types of explosives --- fast or cutting explosives like C4 and slow or heaving explosives like ammonium nitrate of Oklahoma City fame.
The conspiracy theorists have to assume that a fast explosive was used as they argue for something to in effect "cut" the building down. The Murrah Building in shows the classic effect of a slow explosion which shattered everything but did so in a fairly limited manner.
If the building were rigged with C4 --- no small feat given the necessity to apply the C4 directly to virtually all of the structural members which would have been encased behind drywall or cementitious fireproofing --- it would also have required blasting caps or either electric or non-electric trigger which would have required a network of electrical wires or detonating cord or fuses (very unlikely application).
Perhaps the more illogical challenge is where to put everything? What floor? After all, clowns were going to fly airplanes into the building and if you rigged the wrong floor for demolition how were you going to make it coordinate with the crash sites of the planes?
All shear utter nonsense!
September 26, 2009 at 10:34 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Kevin_Nerney ( Kevin Nerney ) says...
JK- thanks it pays to get up in the morning if you can learn something new every day.
September 26, 2009 at 11:08 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Wow JLM, you real smart.
September 27, 2009 at 3:16 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seeuski ( anonymous ) says...
After google searching these so called scientists and engineers that chemical ali keeps pasting from it becomes obvious that a bunch of San Francisco radical punks have targeted the minds of the weak among us.
Someone couldn't help himself.
On the other hand, great match Hunterdog you left blood all over the ring.
September 27, 2009 at 6:37 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
Yes, Chemmy, JLM is smart, smarter than you, in that he understands what it takes to take down structures with the size and scope of the WTC towers.
When 30-40 story buildings are wired for demolition, it generally takes 3-4 months to get them wired up.
How long do you think it would take to wire 2 110 story buildings ?
Without thousands of people noticing ?
Not to mention the fact that no traces of C4, or thermite, [or whatever the goofy theory of the day may claim], have been found in the rubble of the towers.
Not to mention that the way the towers fell shows no signs of controlled demolition.
Your cutting and pasting from a Slate discussion forum does nothing to strenghten your argument. In fact, it's a point against your side, and I'll draw an analogy to show it.
If I had tumor, and 99.9% of the doctors in the world think the best way to deal with it is to remove it, do I take their advice, or the .01% that think leeches, or prayer, or a special herbal concoction is the way to go ?
Remember when I mentioned the razor of Occam ?
Again, your point fails.
September 27, 2009 at 9:25 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seeuski ( anonymous ) says...
I think this book reveals the truth and creates issues with the theories of the Bush haters.
It was well before Bush was President that we had our first encounter with the group that attacked us on 9/11.
http://jaynadavis.com/highlights.html
September 27, 2009 at 9:52 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seeuski ( anonymous ) says...
"Put together, the documents offer an A to Z look into al Qaeda's quest for murderous expertise, training manuals for virtually any kind of explosive, a chemical shopping list and where to find them: Hexamine, used in the preparation of medicines; sulfuric acid, simply auto battery acid; ammonium nitrate, an economical mixture it says, the ingredients for which are found in burned wood, metal paint and farm fertilizer. It was used to build the Oklahoma City bomb. And the list goes on, 64 different chemicals."
http://www.isis-online.org/publicatio...
No coincidence.
September 27, 2009 at 10:04 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Anyone interested in the events of 9/11 should watch this documentary in an objective manner. It is about an hour and a half in length.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=56qnNm...
September 27, 2009 at 2:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
Heh heh, "Loose Change" Vol. III !
Funny how the "troof" keeps needing to be revised.
Wasn't the last version called 'The Final Cut"?...heh heh
Funny thing is, just like Dylan Avery's other two steaming piles of pigs*@t, he never tells you....what really happened....
I took one for team this time, rolled my pants legs up and waded into this festering, horrible-smelling cesspool of a 'documentary", and here we go.....
This time the "truth" is, we're told, not that the Bush administration knew the attacks were going to happen, and-intentionally or not-failed to act, but that the Bush administration actually caused the attacks.
According to Mr. Avery, the hijacking bit was was simply an act, and at least two of the planes either didn't exist at all or didn't really crash.
What happened to the people on these planes?
The video doesn't say.
Makes me wonder, as I've pointed out before, how, in our information-rich world, was the Bush administration able to coordinate and ensure the silence of the tens of thousands of people necessary to pull this off, dupe the mainstream media-never a fan of Bush-and fool everyone..... except the knuckleheads who made this video?
Surprisingly, the video doesn't go explain that, either.
September 27, 2009 at 3:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
This "movie" is purely the usual conspiracy theory nonsense:
rumors, insinuations, strained connections, blurry photos, grainy archival footage, out-of-context comments, ironic-sounding narrator, expert opinions by people who aren't experts-'evidence' so lame Judge Judy would call you an idiot for trying to use it in her courtroom.
Virtually every theory presented has been refuted elsewhere by credible sources.
The game plan is obvious here...... make a statement or accusation.... introduce anything, however pathetic, that will support it [any random soundbite will do]..... and ignore everything that counters it.
It's the usual shoddily researched nonsense made reprehensible and immoral by cashing in on a national tragedy.
I thought about going through and pointing out a few of the many inaccuracies, examples of sloppy research, asinine conclusions, wretched writing, and so on, but frankly, this piece of crap's not worth any more time than I've already sacrificed.
Yo Chemmy, how come you've not gotten around to answering any of my direct questions to you?
September 27, 2009 at 3:52 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
And now I'm perturbed, as you've put me in the unenviable position of defending GW Bush.
September 27, 2009 at 4:15 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
windle ( anonymous ) says...
Yo, Bandmama, Admit it. Something is rotten in Denmark. I don't pretend to know exactly what, but, admit it, something stinks. "New World Order" as Fred Duckles refers to? I don't know. Gold is @ $1000 per ounce and predicted to get even higher. Silver @ $16. The dollar is a joke in terms of world trade. Where are your $$? Pesos youl'd better hope. At least the peso is not a fiat currency. The folks who use the peso now will paying your social security in 15- 20 years.
September 27, 2009 at 5:10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sun ( anonymous ) says...
Thanks for putting on those wading boots and rollng up those sleeves bandmama,Your a real warrior to wade through all of that video.JLM you made it all better Chem,Stop.there has to be a better cause for you,sorry that they couldnt prove you right,I think they tried to see it.You vainly tried to prove the controlled demolition theory,but I still didnt hear the theory about how the building should have held up from the planes hitting it.
September 27, 2009 at 5:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
windle,
I would simply say this, and I think any rational person would agree....
Religious extremists, because of their inherently idiotic beliefs that pronounce death to any supporter of their enemies...Jews, apostates, Christians, Athiests [coupled with our misguided support for at least of those groups], pulled off one of the biggest terrorist attacks in history, resulting in countless effected lives,
Or....
Thousands of people conspired to drag the US into a perhaps unneeded war for someone's profit , to somehow usher in the time of the 'new world order", whatever that means ?
I would again cite the razor of Occam, and reply "No thanks, but I have an awesome ski mountain to sell you".
September 27, 2009 at 5:42 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
windle ( anonymous ) says...
Do not cite Occam. There is much controversy attatched to the exact translation of this theory. Explain what is not simple about the conflict between Big Gov., and the Military-Industrial Complex? They both need to justify their existance. They both need to be indispensable. Who would you trust most with your health issues and with national security?
September 27, 2009 at 6:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
windle,
Why shouldn't I cite Occam ? His line of thought applies
virtually all the time. Are you claiming that Occam's Razor has "much controversy attatched [sic] to the exact translation of this theory" ?
hmmmm....
the rest of your post is fairly nonsensical to me, so would you please word it a little more succinctly ?
[dumb it down for me, please]
September 27, 2009 at 6:20 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
JLM ( anonymous ) says...
You do a huge disservice to thousands of American patriots who work for the government many times in thankless jobs --- the military of all branches, the Corps of Engineers, the FAA, the Border Patrol, the DEA, the CIA, the FBI, the Forest Service, the NCAA (just checking to see if you're paying attentioni) etc. --- to make us free, safe and secure.
Sure, there is much to dislike about the IRS and more than a few left charm school a semester early but by and large the government is peopled by folks whose attitude and efficiency is held hostage to the quality of the leadership. They mirror their leaders.
When our leaders are calling names, acting illogically and wasting opportunities to make meaningful progress in the name of our people, it is difficult to get their followers to do otherwise.
It would be good to remember that we are the "United States" of America and not the Federal Republic of America. The States have any and all powers not specifically delegated --- yes, delegated --- to the Federal government in the Constitution. We forget that it is the States which grant any and all governmental power in the US and not the Feds. It would be worth remembering that today.
We are way overdue to have a Constitutional Convention if only to remind the Federal government that the Constitution is the handiwork of the States rather than the Feds.
September 27, 2009 at 6:28 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
windle ( anonymous ) says...
The end justifies the means? Occam? You are 'safe', 'healthy' because you are constantly surveilled and monitored? You are safe and healthy because of informed choices you have made for yourself and your children? Either way you are supposedly safe and secure. The question is, simple as you might think, what have you sacrificed? How simple is that? Superiority complexes abound here. So does better spelling than me.
September 27, 2009 at 6:34 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
windle,
Scoll back up through my previous posts. Please tell me where I've said "the end justifies the means"....
Apparently, you haven't a clue what the Occam's Razor method of discernment means...Allow me to give you one...clue
Occam's razor or Ockham's razor, attributed to 14th-century English logician and Franciscan friar, William of Ockham is the principle that "entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily" or, popularly applied, "when you have two competing theories that make exactly the same predictions, the simpler one is the better."
The principle states that the explanation of any phenomenon should make as few assumptions as possible, eliminating those that make no difference in the observable predictions of the explanatory hypothesis or theory.
When competing hypotheses are equal in other respects, the principle recommends selection of the hypothesis that introduces the fewest assumptions and postulates the fewest entities while still sufficiently answering the question.
It is in this sense that Occam's razor is usually understood.
To quote Isaac Newton: "We are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances. Therefore, to the same natural effects we must, so far as possible, assign the same causes."
To summarize the common understanding of the principle, "Of several acceptable explanations [for a phenomenon], the most accurate and well-ordered theory of explanation is preferable, provided that it does not contradict the observed facts."
So tell me, what have I sacrificed by my adhering to that line of thought ?
Then you accuse me of a superiority complex, which is perhaps likely, but what is an old Hunterdog to do when confronted with ignorance ?
September 27, 2009 at 7:03 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
So Chemmy, how 'bout those questions ?
September 27, 2009 at 8:15 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
Rebutting "Pentagon 9/11: Getting the Facts Straight"
Richard Stanley and Jerry Russell | August 17 2004
Original article at http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/...
"Pentagon 9/11: Getting the Facts Straight", by Dennis Behreandt, represents a full-scale frontal attack on the work of 9/11 researcher Thierry Meyssan (who is pressed into service as an exemplar of the many others who have also maintained that no jetliner struck the Pentagon on 9/11/2001. ) And we do not wish to defend everything that Meyssan has written; in fact we agree he has made many errors. But the core of Meyssan's work is not so easy to dismiss. This is the complete lack of tangible physical evidence (beyond that which could easily be planted) that a 757 was responsible for causing the damage to the Pentagon. In fact, we believe that a careful examination of the photographic record provides quite compelling evidence that this "757 attack" was a fraud. Behreandt's analysis relies heavily eyewitness testimony (which we will critique in more detail) -- but for something as substantial as a 100-ton airliner, we have every right to expect more than just hearsay doing overtime as conclusive proof, especially considering Behreandt's appeal to proper scientific practices. The rubble from Flight 77 should be on display in a museum (if indeed it exists), to put an end to the international controversy.,,
...In view of all these facts, Behreandt's only recourse is his appeal to Occam's razor, with his argument that the simplest explanation is still the best -- that Flight 77 must have hit the Pentagon, because there was extensive damage to the building, and because eyewitnesses saw Flight 77 on an approach to the Pentagon. Normally this would be very sensible, but Behreandt is forgetting the context. There is a broad spectrum of evidence indicating that 9/11 was an inside job, carried out to provide a pretext for an agenda of (arguably self-destructive) imperialist conquest of the Middle East, along with accelerated erosion of American civil liberties. It was a "black intelligence op," in other words, a scam implemented by a highly sophisticated team of magicians and liars. Their goal was to create an international media extravaganza, using the most economical means available. And our argument (which is perfectly harmonious with Occam's razor) holds that the perpetrators' simplest and most foolproof means to implement the hoax was to use inexpensive shaped charge explosives planted within the Pentagon, along with an over-flight of the Pentagon with a 757 jetliner, to create the illusion of a crash. This hypothesis is explored in more detail in our article "The Five-Sided Fantasy Island", available on the Internet at www.911-strike.com/pentagon.htm .
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/...
September 27, 2009 at 8:26 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
JLM ( anonymous ) says...
If I were trying to trick some folks, I might not do it in broad daylight with an airplane flying into the freakin' home of the US Air Force cause they might know something about airplanes, doncha think? And maybe not in a huge parking lot with lots of witnesses. And, of course, there is the problem with the damn missing airplanes to say nothing of all the victims and the FAA tracking the transponder signatures of the planes.
Other than that old Occam got a pretty close shave, no? LOL
Do you even know what a "shaped charge" is?
In fact, it is not a type of explosive but rather a methodology for using explosives to in effect "shape" the resultant shock wave to create initially greater penetration and, usually, more typically heaving effect like in the blowing of road craters.
It can also be used to create initial penetration of a hard surface (like a tank) by a projectile and then to inject molten materials (e.g. depleted uranium) into the interstices behind the barrier layer. Inside the the tank the remaining projectile bounces around amongst all those soft skinned folks and those tank rounds until something goes boom!
You may note that our tanks have explosive charges arrayed on the outside skin of the turret to detonate upon contact and to break up the focus of projectiles which detonate creating a shaped charge thereby misdirecting the "shaped" charge and preventing penetration.
Until just a few years ago, this was a highly, highly classified defensive measure. But you really can't hide a tank, now can you?
September 27, 2009 at 9 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
JLM ( anonymous ) says...
Continued, sorry ---
A shock wave can be shaped with either slow explosives such as in the cratering of a road using a heaving charge which injects the explosive shock wave into the earth before the heaving force takes effect thereby blowing a big triangular hole in the earth; or, in the case of the infamous Iranian copper plasma IEDs it creates a flux of molten copper which rips through a lightly skinned vehicle like a Hummvee and creates horrific wounds on the occupants.
A person bent on destroying a building would be using either simple, basic cutting charges for steel structures or equally simple "ear muff" charges for concrete, masonry or composite structures --- small balanced charges of a high speed explosive which are located on opposite sides of a structural member (typicall concrete) and which cut through the concrete and reinforcing steel in compression (push), impact each other and then rebound out at 90 degrees destroying the balance of the structural member now in tension (pull).
When the shock is at its most powerful right after detonation, it cuts through concrete in compression and steel in tension and then reverses itself and cuts through concrete in tension and steel in compression. Power against structural strength and then diminished power against structural weakness.
Throwing around jargon like "shaped charges" is just another example of how the wackoes try to blow smoke up the skirts of the general populace pretending to know something whcih is simply not pertinent or relevant to the reality of the situation.
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing!
September 27, 2009 at 9:03 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
JLM ( anonymous ) says...
The part I like the best is that old Boeing 757 "on approach" to the Pentagon which apparently did not actually hit the Pentagon and then executed a "normal" missed approach, cleaned up its gear, raised it flaps, gunned its engines and simply flew away without anybody noticing it.
And where did it land? And with not another plane in the sky, the FAA never took note of it on radar and ignored its transponder reply completely. Of course they did!
I am sure that happens all the time! LOL
Of course this was all done by a bunch of clowns who could not get a Private Pilots license flying a Cessna 172 but apparently could fly a Boeing 757 in close proximity to the ground at 400 knots --- according to the crazies who routinely overlook that a missed approach or balked or rejected landing is a complex maneuver which requires expert coordination amongst the engine throttles, the landing gear, the flaps, the speed brakes and the aircraft attitude.
September 27, 2009 at 9:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
StopTheBrutalChemtrails ( anonymous ) says...
If you haven't listened to the Alex Jones Show yet, you should really give him a chance, he's doing what he can to keep your Freedom and Liberty intact. He can be annoying, at times, but he knows his stuff.
http://www.infowars.com/stream.plsa
While you're listening, you might want to check out some headline news from many of the same popular, reliable sources that the Corporate Media uses.
http://www.infowars.com
"It is easy to take liberty for granted, when you have never had it taken from you." ~Author unknown, sometimes attributed to M. Grundler
September 27, 2009 at 10:58 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
So, no answers to my direct questions, eh ?
September 28, 2009 at 6:54 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bandmama ( anonymous ) says...
There are three basic ways to talk to complete idiots.
The first is to assail them with facts, truths, scientific data, the commonsensical obviousness of it all. You do this in the very reasonable expectation that it will nudge them away from the ledge of their more ridiculous and paranoid misconceptions because, well, they're facts, after all, and who can dispute those?
Why, idiots can, that's who. It is exactly this sort of logical, levelheaded appeal to reason and mental acuity that's doomed to fail, simply because in the idiotosphere, facts are lies and truth is always dubious, whereas hysteria and alarmism resulting in mysterious undercarriage rashes are the only things to be relied upon.
Examples? Endless. You may, for instance, attempt to explain evolution to an extreme fundamentalist Christian. You may offer up carbon dating, the fossil record, glaciers, any one of 10,000 irrefutable proofs. You may even dare to talk about the Bible as the clever, completely manufactured, man-made piece of heavily politicized, massively edited, literary myth-making it so very much is, using all sorts of sound academic evidence and historical record.
You are, of course, insane beyond belief to try this, but sometimes you just can't help it. To the educated mind, it seems inconceivable that millions of people will choose rabid ignorance and childish fantasy over, say, a polar bear. Permafrost. Rocks. Nag Hammadi. But they will, and they do. Faced with this mountain of factual obviousness, the bewildered fundamentalist will merely leap back as if you just jabbed him with a flaming homosexual cattle prod, and then fall into a swoon about how neat it is that angels can fly.
Option two is to try to speak their language, dumb yourself down, engage on the idiot's level as you try to figure out how their minds work -- or more accurately, don't work -- so you can better empathize and find a shred of common ground and maybe, just maybe, inch the human experiment forward.
This is, as you already sense, a dangerous trap, pure intellectual quicksand. It almost never works, and just makes you feel gross and slimy.
And now we come to option three, easily the finest and most successful approach of all. Alas, it also remains the most difficult to pull off. No one is exactly sure why.
The absolute best way to speak to complete idiots is, of course, not to speak to them at all.
That is, you work around them, ignore them completely, disregard the rants and the spittle and the misspelled protest signs and the fervent prayers for apocalypse on Fox News. Complete refusal to take the fringe nutballs even the slightest bit seriously is the only way to make true progress.
September 28, 2009 at 7:32 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )