The 9/11 Post 8115


Having complained of people posting off topic, it seems a reasonable solution to give an opportunity for people to discuss the topics I am banning from other threads – of which 9/11 seems the most popular.

I do not believe that the US government, or any of its agencies, were responsible for 9/11. It would just need too many people to be involved. Someone would have objected. There are some strange and dangerous people in America, but not in sufficient concentration for this one. They couldn’t even keep Watergate quiet, and that was a small group. Any group I can think of – even Blackwater – would contain operatives with scruples about blowing up New York. They may be sadly ready to kill people in poor countries, but Americans en masse? Somebody would say it wasn’t a good idea.

I asked a friend in the construction industry what it would take to demolish the twin towers. He replied nine months, 80 men, and 12 miles of cabling. The notion that a small team at night could plant sufficient explosives embedded at key points, is laughable.

The forces of the aircraft impacts must have been amazingly high. I have no difficulty imagining they would bring down the building. As for WTC 7, again the kinetic energy of the collapse of the twin towers must be immense.

I admit to a private speculation about WTC7. Unfortunately in construction it is extremely common for contractors not to fix or install properly all the expensive girders, ties and rebar that are supposed to be enclosed in the concrete. Supervising contractors and municipal inspectors can be corrupt. I recall vividly that in London some years ago a tragedy occurred when a simple gas oven explosion brought down the whole side of a tower block.

The inquiry found that the building contractor had simply omitted the ties that bound the girders at the corners, all encased in concrete. If a gas oven had not blown up, nobody would have found out. Buildings I strongly suspect are very often not as strong as they are supposed to be, with contractors skimping on apparently redundant protection. The sort of sordid thing you might not want too deeply investigated in the event of a national tragedy.

Precisely what happened at the Pentagon I am less sure. There is not the conclusive film and photographic evidence that there is for New York. I am particularly puzzled by the much more skilled feat of flying that would be required to hit a building virtually at ground level, in an urban area, after a lamppost clipping route – very hard to see how a non-professional pilot did that. But I can think of a number of possible scenarios where the official explanation is not quite the whole truth on the Pentagon, but which do not necessitate a belief that the US government or Dick Cheney was behind the attack.

In my view the real scandal of 9/11 was that it was blowback – the product of a malignant terrorist agency whose origins lay in CIA funding and provision. Also blowback in a more general sense that it was spawned in the nasty theocratic dictatorship of Saudi Arabia which is so close to the US and to the Bush dynasty in particular. As with almost all terrorist activity, I do not rule out any point on the whole spectrum of surveillance, penetration and agent provocateur activity by any number of possible actors.

But was 9/11 false flag and controlled demolition? No, I think not.

(Now I have given full opportunity to discuss 9/11 here, any further references on other threads will be instantly deleted).


Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

8,115 thoughts on “The 9/11 Post

1 114 115 116
  • Dave

    One has only to witness the collapse of the three towers to know it was controlled demolition, but as this is evidence of an inside job, its anti-Semitic to say so, so no one wants to say so, because this is deemed a hate crime under laws put in place by those responsible for 9/11. Simples!

      • mog

        Some (probably dubious) polls about what people believe:
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polls_about_9/11_conspiracy_theories#Africa_and_the_Middle_East

        The WorldPublicOpinion.org opinion poll conducted during the summer of 2008 found that 39 percent of respondents in Turkey believe al-Qaeda were responsible. 36 percent said the U.S. government were responsible, 3 percent said Israel and 1 percent named another country. 21 percent said they did not know

        The UK and US :

        A 2011 poll carried out by GfK NOP for the BBC found that 14 percent of Britons and 15 percent of Americans questioned believe the U.S. government was responsible for the 9/11 attacks. 1 in 4 of the 16- to 24-year-olds questioned held this belief

        It is interesting reading down the list. Young Germans and Canadians score higher than many middle eastern countries in doubting the US official story, which surprised me. I think Turkey comes out as most skeptical of this list though.

    • Paul Barbara

      @ Dave August 13, 2017 at 17:52
      Lets get this straight – saying the WTC collapses were controlled demolition is NOT anti-Semitic – it is a judgement of how the WTC buildings came down.
      Are you by any chance trying to ‘muddy the waters’? I think so.
      Saying the WTC buildings were brought down with controlled demolition has SFA relation to the perps, other than it obviously wasn’t a bunch of patsies.
      For our next trick, Dave? Try harder.

      • Dave

        You misunderstood me, Its obvious CIA/Mossad were responsible because only they have the ability and influence to do it and cover up the truth afterwards. And due to this I was just pointing out why many people refuse to acknowledge what’s before their eyes, because those in power, those responsible, the Zionists, will denounce it as anti-Semitic, and have put hate crime laws in place to deal with such an eventuality and ruin more lives. The fact that so many refuse to be intimidated is of course very encouraging.

        • Paul Barbara

          @ Dave August 14, 2017 at 10:41
          I see what you mean, but the arguments pro or con controlled demolition on here don’t revolve around who did it, but on whether it was possible and whether there is any evidence to suggest it was done.
          I agree wholeheartedly that your reasoning is correct as to why many people won’t go for an ‘Inside Job’; most left-wing groups contain quite a few prominent people in their organisation of a ‘certain persuasion’; they are afraid of the obvious implications.

  • Dave

    Their methodology is to make any adverse comments, real or imagined, against a Who a hate crime of anti-Semitism and their new laws allows the crime to be perceived an offence by a third party, aided by the new definition of anti-Semitism. Its draconian and worthy of the old Soviet Union and this is done by one-sided repetition in MSM.

    The only defence is not to deny anti-Semitism, but I can understand why you would instinctively deny the charge, but to accuse your accuser of anti-Semitism. Except the smear is enough to ruin lives and its the Crown Prosecution Service, the Attorney General, a Government Minister who decides who gets prosecuted, or not, in the public interest.

  • mog

    A pretty good overview of the interaction of antisemites, anti-semitic ideas and 911 skepticism:

    http://911review.com/denial/holocaust.html

    [Note that Serendipity website hosts or hosted anti-semitic views, so that makes me less surpirsed that it promotes spuriousness like the Hightower piece which Kempe linked the other day].

    The Israel connections are neatly summarised here by J Raimondo:

    http://www.antiwar.com/justin/j030802.html

    He is careful to allege ‘a connection that has been buried’, rather than outright ‘responsibility’ – which I agree with.
    Personally, I am convinced that the responsibility of 911 does not fall on any one nation state, one nationality, one race or one religion.

    • John Goss

      Your first link Mog can be summed up by:

      “As the author of OilEmpire.us points out, people may mix Holocaust denial with challenges to the official account of 9/11 out of ignorance, but the result is to discredit these challenges.”

      This is a danger. We, most of us here, are not holocaust deniers, though there may be some revisionists among us. That boils down to figures (the most popular touted being 6 million Jews were gassed or exterminated in German camps). From my point of view it is bad enough that a single person was put to death in a prison camp during WWII. What the exact figure was (is) can never be known. But it cannot be denied that there was a holocaust.

      The clever manipulation of this holocaust has been working against any organisation or person that does not fall into line with New World Order plans. It has been going on for nearly three-quarters of a century. One of the latest manifestations has been the attempt to label Jeremy Corbyn anti-semitic. Wise up everybody.

  • Dave

    Paul @ 10.41

    Rightly there should be 9/11 pick and mix websites for different reasons. Having some only debating what caused the collapse and leaving others to draw the obvious conclusions is good tactics to avoid the accusation of anti-Semitism. Except in practice it doesn’t really because the definition has been changed to include any, real or imagined, criticism of Israel and new “hate crime” laws allow the offence to be a “perceived” offence even by a “third party” such as a well oiled lobby group! And you may recall Cameron denouncing 9/11 truth at the UN as akin to terrorism.

  • James Dickenson

    Is this ‘true’?

    ‘ . . . Four thousand Israelis were expected to have been working at the World Trade Center on 9-11, yet only one was reported to have died at the complex. Based on the Israeli government figure that 4,000 Israelis were expected to have been at the World Trade Center at the time of the attacks, it seems evident that many Israeli Odigo users got the message of warning.” ‘

    http://www.bollyn.com/chapter-1-9-11-through-the-eyes-of-an-american-skeptic

    • mog

      As far as I can tell it is partly true (as in it was in the papers):
      http://historycommons.org/entity.jsp?entity=odigo_inc.

      The ‘hard to believe’ bits for me are that the boss of Odigo said he didn’t know if the warning message had been broadcast on to other Odigo users, which seems unlikely as a messaging service would have easy access to its log of transmitions. And secondly, that the FBI was told the details of the sender and the message itself, but that nothing more was heard of it. Like so much evidence about 911, it just disappeared into the FBI’s ‘X files’.

      I cannot find a source for Bollyn’s claims about ‘4000 employees’ being absent from the WTC complex that day. Bollyn seems to me to be a mixture of a hard working digger of facts and someone willing to exagerate, bend and fabricate information to suit his hypothesis.

      • mog

        That link does work if you copy and paste it into another tab, but if you click on it, it brings up an ‘Error 404’.
        Does anone know why/ how this can happen?

    • Kempe

      No it’s more bollox.

      The original story was 4,000 Jews but they seem to have become Israelis to avoid (justifiable) accusations of anti-Semitism. That 8% of the WTC’s occupants would’ve been Israelis is barely credible although it would match the proportion in the NY population generally.

      That no Jews died on 9/11 is yet another myth easily disproved by examining the evidence. In this case the Jewish names on the lists of casualties.

  • Macky

    I have to explain that I don’t follow this thread closely, not through lack of interest, but just going through an extended very busy period lately, so I just skim & post things that catch my eye, and offer apologies in advance if already posted, as perhaps this clip has;

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSVHWiZu8NM

    BTW I recently asked a university lecturer/researcher, who specializes in structural engineering, about the collapse of the Twin Towers & WC7, and was staggered when he said he didn’t know about WC7, as he thought only the twin towers came down that day ! When I pressed him on the free fall physics of the twin towers collapsed, he shrugged it off with “probably due to structural design” !! So that’s what truth seekers are up against, mass public ignorance & lazy “experts” !!

    Re Israeli victims of 911, Wiki lists 5 (2 on planes & 3 in the twin towers), which does seem remarkably low; funny thing I looked this up about two or three years ago, and am sure that Wiki was stating only one Israeli victim back then ! Another thought, seeing as many Israelis are dual US citizens, I wonder how this factors in ?

    • mog

      @ Macky,
      Thanks for the link. The pedantic could rightly point out the misuse of terms and quotes in the clip, but it gets the basic argument accross.

      You say that you rarely visit this thread, so I guess that you are not aware that this aspect of 911 has occupied (I would estimate) over 5000 of the 8000 comments that have appeared here over the past seven years. The dispute has settled to where it was at the very beginning- with one side utterly convinced that the towers could in no way have fallen in the way they did without some process destroying the integrity of the lower structure in a controlled, carefully timed way. The other side are equally adamant that the idea of controlled demolition of the towers is ‘just silly’ and totally unnecessary for explaining what we see in the videos.

      I am through with discussing this topic as it seems to go relentlessly in circles. I have not seen any example of a ‘crush down- crush up’ collapse anywhere, ever, and it is contrary to all my understanding of physics and all my experiences of seeing how physical objects interact.

      The number of engineers, physicists and architects who have put their name forward to make this case are a tiny proportion of the number of those specialists in the world. Yet, the number who are willing to publicly speak in defence of the NIST/ Bazant theory is much smaller. It seems to me to be a kind of taboo, and if you were to in any way press your ‘expert’ for a fuller, substantiated answer, you would see what happens when a taboo is transgressed.

    • Dave

      A good video explaining high school physics, which is informative by answering the collapse theory, but not relevant, because the top bit itself disintegrates before impacting on the bit below and clearly the towers don’t actually collapse but explode into dust at free fall speed.

  • Paul Barbara

    Christopher Bolleyn is releasing a new book shortly: ‘The War on Terror: The Plot to Rule the Middle East’:
    http://www.bollyn.com/

    ‘…The government and media have lied to us all along about 9/11. The fabricated story they sold us is the keystone upon which the War on Terror is based. When you grasp the truth about 9/11 the falseness of the wars waged under the pretext of fighting terrorism becomes apparent. 9/11 truth is the key to freeing ourselves from the deception that has been imposed on us all. We need to realize that the controlled media, the most active promoter of the war agenda, will never address 9/11 truth. For this reason we need to be the voice of reason and raise awareness of the deception among our fellow citizens.

    To believe the official myth about 9/11 is to be trapped in a joyless state of mind because joy cannot co-exist with fear and hate. This is why embracing 9/11 truth is essential for our well-being and sanity, as individuals and as a nation. There is immense spiritual value in freeing ourselves from deception and living in truth.

    This is a discussion we need to have. We need to bring this war to an end. Your support can help me print the book and reach more people in this important endeavor….’

    • mog

      Personally, I wouldn’t advertise a book by Bollyn.
      He is regarded by many to be an anti-semite. He has certainly made statements that I would confidantly say would be considered to be antisemitic by most people. He definitely has a history of association with people and publications that are antisemitic.
      Bearing in mind that there are many researchers on the topic who are not surrounded by such criticisms, I would promote their work before Bollyn’s.
      The media love to draw attention to more controversial figures when discussing 911, and to ignore the others. Bollyn, Shayler, Icke, Alex Jones, – these are the names that come to mind for most who are unread with regard to 911, not Griffin, Ryan, Hicks, Hopsicker or Nafeez Ahmed – i,e, the ones who have actually done the solid research.

      Bollyn also has a patchy record with regard to the reliability of his evidence, as previously linked.

      • Paul Barbara

        @ mog August 16, 2017 at 10:47

        We are all fully aware that it is quite easy to get a ‘reputation’ for ‘anti-Semitism’, on the flimsiest of grounds. ‘They’ have actually boasted about it on occasion.
        He was so badly harassed, including having an elbow shattered and being tasered in his own home in front of his family by three police thugs, then charged with ‘resisting arrest’, that he left the States to live in Europe.
        I’ve read quite a few of his articles, and did not come across anything I would regard as ‘anti-Semitic’, and I am sensitive to that subject; that is not to say he has never written anything that could be so classed, of course.

      • Paul Barbara

        @ mog August 16, 2017 at 10:47

        I particularly liked his phrasing: ‘….To believe the official myth about 9/11 is to be trapped in a joyless state of mind because joy cannot co-exist with fear and hate. This is why embracing 9/11 truth is essential for our well-being and sanity, as individuals and as a nation. There is immense spiritual value in freeing ourselves from deception and living in truth.

        This is a discussion we need to have. We need to bring this war to an end. Your support can help me print the book and reach more people in this important endeavor….’
        It really seems to me he wants to get to the truth. Personally, I believe ‘they’ were up to their neck in it (along with traitorous Yanks); and consider, ‘they’ have actually called the USS Liberty survivors ‘anti-Semitic’ for campaigning for a Congressional investigation into the attack on the ‘Liberty’. By ‘they’, of course, I mean certain members, not all.

  • Dave

    To get the full picture you need to read a range of authors, because inevitably some will make a mistake or have their own priorities and I can understand someone wanting to recommend authors with whom they agree or at least wont embarrass them on other issues. But if you fear the charge of anti-Semitism and/or racism you may as well give up and go home now, because it goes with the territory and the response should be to treat your accuser in kind, because if those responsible for 9/11 are calling you anti-Semitic you know the word is being abused. Indeed anecdotally I recall a debate when the Chief Rabbi called Richard Dawkins “anti-Semitic” and Dawkins had a pained and bewildered look on his face. And I thought to myself, don’t be a wimp, call the Rabbi anti-Semitic back!

      • Paul Barbara

        @ Bobm August 16, 2017 at 23:02
        I wasn’t born yesterday – I’m 74 already (that’s years, not days!).
        We don’t need to point the finger at this stage, we just need to show that the ‘Official Conspiracy Theory’ is a ‘pile of pants’ (I don’t like that expression, but it was one that stuck in my craw when it was addressed to a tortured asylum seeker by some officious c*nt in our ‘Immigration Control’ set-up).
        I am not afraid to call a spade a spade, but ‘horses for courses’, this is not the place.

        • Kempe

          No you need to present a viable alternative theory, one that is scientifically sound and with solid supporting evidence, instead of inventing a series of ever more bizarre and ridiculous fantasies involving holographic planes and death rays.

          • KingofWelshNoir

            Kempe: ‘No you need to present a viable alternative theory…’

            No we don’t. We just have to demonstrate that the official narrative cannot be true. We don’t have to speculate on alternatives.

            The past few times you have posted here I have responded (politely) with two questions for you, ones which I would be most grateful if you would address.

            I don’t know how to post a link to an old comment, so I have repasted the comment at the bottom.

            Please give me your thoughts. If you take the example of the hijacker’s passport found in the rubble of the Twin Towers, it illustrates the thesis well, in my view.

            It is simply impossible for it to have fallen out of the plane, so it must have been planted. The US authorities are not stupid so they know that. But if it had been planted then the official narrative can’t be true because Al Qaeda would hardly plant evidence incriminating themselves if they really did it.

            You only plant evidence to incriminate someone who did not do it. The US authorities know this too, therefore the evidence of this passport, mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report, is enough to show the official narrative is a lie and known to be one and the truth is being covered up.

            This is the crux of it for me. You can – and numerous people have – argue about the Twin Towers till the cows come home and pour themselves a gin and tonic, but why bother when you can so easily show the official narrative is demonstrably false?

            Now, I would greatly appreciate your thoughts on the matter.

            Thank you sir!

            In case you ‘miss’ this question again, I am happy to reassure you that I will be here with it on your next visit to this thread 🙂

            ****

            Hey Kempe!

            You’re back. Three pages ago in response to one of your visits, I posted a polite question to you, but alas you had already departed. Fortunately , I have the patience of Job, so I am going to repost the question. Since you are – as I’m sure you would agree – a defender of the official narrative I would be genuinely interested in your view.

            Here is my question:

            Hi Kempe

            When you say that, like the Holy Grail, the 9/11 conspiracy doesn’t exist, I take that to mean you are a defender of the official narrative. Would you be kind enough therefore to tell me what you think about a couple of items that feature large on the conspiracy theory narrative?

            1. Satam Al-Suqami’s passport. According to the 9/11 Commission, Satam Al-Suqami was one of the hijackers on board AA Flight number 11. His passport was allegedly found in the vicinity of the WTC before the Towers collapsed. How did it get there?

            2. WTC 7 is ‘about to blow up’

            Building 7 was a 47 storey building that collapsed into its own footprint at freefall speed, displaying numerous characteristics of a controlled demolition.

            We have CNN footage showing firemen and cops moving people back from the building saying the building is ‘about to blow up’

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cU_43SwWD9A

            To me that CNN footage means exactly what it says on the tin, Building 7 was blown up. Presumably you don’t think that, so can you tell me what your explanation of the footage is?

            Many thanks

        • Paul Barbara

          @ Kempe August 17, 2017 at 04:29
          So again you’ve resurfaced on here, but left a number of people’s previous replies to you unanswered.
          If you make a point, often attacking someone else’s comments, or asking for further info, at the person responds to you, it is only polite to reply to the response.
          So, I’ll try again, for the 3rd time:

          @ Paul Barbara
          August 12, 2017 at 23:59
          @ Kempe August 11, 2017 at 15:35

          Ah, youv’e resurfaced. I notice you haven’t replied to my comment, which I put up as you requested proof:
          Paul Barbara
          August 8, 2017 at 00:18
          @ Kempe

          ‘Two issues: you wanted info about the Syrian ‘boy in the ambulance’ hoax – here it is (there are other sites as well):
          ‘FAKE NEWS BUSTED: Iconic Syrian Boy Had Makeup On, Father Speaks’:
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3yaEgM1vPY
          Safis?
          And needless to say, I am still awaiting your link to the non-existent ‘arrest’ of Louisa Ortega….
          I notice there are a few others waiting for answers from you.’

          ‘…Nano thermite only has a detonation speed of 895 m/s well below that of a true high explosive such as TNT (6,900 m/s)….’
          Ah but:
          ‘…The team tested the combustion in a shock tube studded with optical fibers and pressure sensors to measure the combustion wave speed. They found that the nano composites could generate combustion waves with velocities ranging from 1500 to 2300 meters per second, which is in the Mach 3 range…..’
          https://phys.org/news/2008-01-nanoparticles-supersonic-cancer.html

          (Hightower’s ‘challenge’ says: ‘…Find and document peer reviewed scientific research that demonstrates that a gas generating nanothermite (GGNT) based upon iron (III) oxide (Fe2O3) and aluminum (Al), where the gas generating chemical added to the nanothermite is not itself a high explosive, can be made to be a high explosive with at least a detonation velocity of 2000 m/s. The author of this paper will donate $100 for every 1000 m/s of detonation velocity that can be documented, the donation not to exceed $1,000….’
          I don’t know about you, but where I went to school, 2,300 ms is more than 2,000 ms, and is also more than 2 1/2 times your (? – as usual you give no link) figure of 895 ms.

          ‘…….Below are ten references to the fact that nanothermites can be made to be explosive.
          https://phys.org/news/2008-01-nanoparticles-supersonic-cancer.html
          1. This 2004 paper from Lawrence Livermore Labs is quite clear about nanothermites being –
          “explosive composites based on thermite reactions.”
          It begins: “We have developed a new method of making nanostructured energetic materials, specifically explosives…using sol-gel chemistry.”
          https://e-reports-ext.llnl.gov/pdf/307362.pdf
          2. This online article entitled “NanoScale Chemistry Yields Better Explosives” discusses the procedure by which sol-gel nanothermites are made and gives a nice TEM image of a nanothermite. https://www.llnl.gov/str/RSimpson.html
          3. This US Department of Defense journal from Spring, 2002 describes how:
          “All of the military services and some DOE and academic laboratories have active R&D programs aimed at exploiting the unique properties of nanomaterials that have potential to be used in energetic formulations for advanced explosives.”
          It clarifies that –
          [Nanothermite properties] “include energy output that is 2x that of high explosives” and “As sol-gel materials and methodology advances, there are a number of possible application areas that are envisioned [including] high-power, high-energy composite explosives.
          http://ammtiac.alionscience.com/pdf/AMPQ6_1ART06.pdf
          4. A high explosive creates a shockwave that always travels at high, supersonic velocity from the point of origin. This paper describes how –
          “the reaction of the low density nanothermite composite leads to a fast propagating combustion, generating shock waves with Mach numbers up to 3.”
          http://apl.aip.org/applab/v91/i24/p243109_s1?isAuthorized=no%20
          5. In this paper, former NIST employee Michael Zachariah discusses –
          “developing an oxidizer matrix for reaction with nano-aluminum [i.e. nanothermite] for energy intensive applications involving explosives and propellants…”.
          http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/cm034740t
          6. This article helps us understand how the military has been leveraging the potential explosive power of nanoenergetic compounds, specifically nanothermites. It describes a –
          “new class of weaponry that uses energy-packed nanometals to create powerful, compact bombs.” Purdue professor Steven Son, who has become a leading expert on nanothermites, goes on to say that “Superthermites can increase the (chemical) reaction time by a thousand times…resulting in a very rapid reactive wave…used in many applications, including…explosive devices.” The article says that such nanoenergetics enable “building more lethal weapons such as cave-buster bombs that have several times the detonation force of conventional bombs.”
          http://www.technologyreview.com/NanoTech/14105/?a=f
          7. Unlike some energetic materials, nanothermites are “tunable”, meaning the “ignition sensitivity thresholds, reaction rate, and pressure generation can be tailored to have a wide range of values.” Explosives generate pressure, as do nanothermites tuned to do just that.
          http://aiche.confex.com/aiche/2008/techprogram/P128319.HTM
          8. This conference paper states that –
          “Nanoenergetic thermite materials release energy much faster than conventional energetic materials and have various potential military applications such as… explosives. They are likely to become the next-generation explosive materials.”
          http://aiche.confex.com/aiche/2008/techprogram/P131370.HTM
          9. This paper from the US Army describes how:
          “These tunable nanoenergetic materials will be useful for various applications such as high-temperature non-detonable gas generators, adaptable flares, green primers for propellants and explosives, high power/energy explosives.
          http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA481290&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf
          10. Even Wikipedia knows that nanothermite is used for explosive applications.
          Nanothermites “are generally developed for military use, propellants, explosives, and pyrotechnics. Because of their highly increased reaction rate, nanosized thermitic materials are being researched by the U.S. military with the aim of developing new types of bombs that are several times more powerful than conventional explosives.”……’
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nano-thermite

          I know I have seen a government document classing nanothermite as an High Explosive, but I’ve tried to find it again and can’t.

          Oh, yes, and Hightower’s challenge is out of time.

          And don’t forget Syrian ambulance boy Omran, and Louisa Ortega (which jail was she sent to???).

        • Paul Barbara

          @ Kempe August 17, 2017 at 04:29
          Charles Manson was an American, too (Cincinnati). Must be something in the water….

  • Paul Barbara

    ‘Citizens of many U.S. allies trust Putin more than Trump’:
    https://japantoday.com/category/world/survey-citizens-of-many-us-allies-trust-putin-over-trump

    Not us, of course. We know better than much of the rest of the world, because we’ve got ‘Democracy’ and a ‘Free Press’ – in a pig’s eye (no offence meant, porkers!).
    Similarly, a bigger percentage of many countries citizens believe 9/11 was an ‘Inside Job’ than us.
    The point? A bigger percentage of us have been successfully brainwashed. Well, at least we’re still good at something!

    • Node

      They seek him here, they seek him there.
      His posts are loud, but never fair.
      He will tell you why you’re wrong, but he won’t say what’s right.
      ‘Cause he’s a dedicated follower of NIST.

      Oh yes he is, oh yes he is.
      Oh yes he is, oh yes he is.

    • John Goss

      The purpose of some comment-makers is not to answer tough questions, however politely asked, but to sow seeds of doubt. Engineer Kempe has a history of pro-officialdom going back some years.

      http://johngossip.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/the-sock-puppeteer.html

      However his contributions on the 9/11 thread have got progressively less in number and increasingly devoid of content. The Beatles probably had someone like Kempe in mind when they wrote and I slightly paraphrase.

      He’s a real nowhere man
      Sitting in his nowhere land
      Making all his nowhere plans for somebody

      Doesn’t have a point of view
      Knows not where he’s going to
      Not a little bit like you and me?

      Nowhere Man, please listen
      You don’t know what you’re missing
      Nowhere Man, your world is at their command

      He’s as blind as he can be
      Sees just what they want him to see
      Nowhere Man can you be seen at all? (In three weeks?)

      Nowhere Man, don’t worry
      Take your time, don’t hurry
      Leave it all till somebody else lends you a hand

1 114 115 116