The 9/11 Post 11807

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).

11,807 thoughts on “The 9/11 Post

1 62 63 64 65 66 134
  • Kempe

    No I think Craig’s acceptance of the official narrative results from his intelligence, understanding of science and analytical approach. A combination deadly to conspiracy theories.

  • Vronsky

    “No I think Craig’s acceptance of the official narrative results from his intelligence, understanding of science and analytical approach. A combination deadly to conspiracy theories.”

    Pray tell us of Craig’s understanding of science. It will be news to him!

  • KingofWelshNoir

    ‘A combination deadly to conspiracy theories.’

    Oh really? What is a conspiracy theory?

    Do you apply that label to theories you think are true, or just ones you deem are false?

    The latter, right?

    So, in deploying the phrase ‘conspiracy theory’ you are in effect saying, ‘I don’t believe that because it belongs to a category of theory I don’t believe.’

  • Duncan McFarlane

    I don’t know exactly what happened on September 11th – what i do know is that if it was an attack by Al Qa’ida the Bush administration had every reason to expect it based on previous events (e.g anti-aircraft missiles set up on roofs of buildings during the 2000 WTO meeting in Genoa in Italy) and intelligence warnings from flight school instructors in the US, FBI agents, CIA reports and warnings from German, Egyptian, British and other intelligence agencies and members of government.

    That and the failure of US airforce planes to follow standard procedure and intercept any plane that deviated significantly from it’s flight plan rapidly can only be interpreted as the Bush administration wanting the attacks to succeed as the “New Pearl Harbour” which the Project for a New American Century report ‘Rebuilding America’s Defenses’ said might have to happen for American public opinion to back a further increase in the US’s already vast defence budget. It also provided the perfect event to so terrify Americans that they would stop thinking rationally and back all the wars the Bush administration had wanted to fight before they even came in to office – to install US client regimes in Iraq and Iran and Afghanistan and Syria, securing the 2nd and 3rd largest oil proven oil reserves in the world (Iraq and Iran) and export routes for oil and gas from Iraq (through Syria and Israel to the Mediterranean) and from oil and gas rich former Soviet republics (especially Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan) through Afghanistan and Pakistan to India and the Indian Ocean (also the shortest export route to both growing markets in China and Asia and to the US, taking into account avoiding both Iran and countries where Russia could intervene easily (e.g Georgia on the AIOC Baku-Ceyan pipeline route – where Russia set up a secessionist state through a war not so long ago)

    So far they’ve largely failed in those aims, but there’s plenty of evidence those are the aims of US foreign policy – and certainly that those were it’s aims under Bush

  • Clark

    9/11 was a tragedy and was used as an excuse to launch atrocity after atrocity. But the effect upon us, us right here, is just plain sad.

    Aren’t we all supposed to be on something like the same side? Don’t we all oppose the wars that 9/11 was an excuse for? But we slag each other off and accuse each other of being shills and sleepers. There are the activists and opponents of war who thinks there were no explosives, who can argue with those who think that all three buildings were rigged, who can argue and fail to agree with those who thought the twin towers just fell, but that Building Seven was deliberately demolished. All of them can argue with the ones who think that an aircraft hit the Pentagon, and they can disagree with those who think it was a missile. On and on and on, like stupid dogs chasing their tails.

    So I do my job, and move discussion of 9/11 to the 9/11 thread. I put in a load of work moving the comments of those people who by mistake or because they think it outweighs all else, post on the most recent thread when they’ve been asked to post here, and Vronsky, my supposed friend, can accuse me of enforcing the “blasphemy laws”. I can post about where the “terrorists” come from and how the US ensures that their supply of angry young radical Muslims never runs short, and you can all ignore it because you want to argue about what makes buildings collapse, just like you ignore Glenn and Duncan McFarlane above, because you think they don’t go far enough in “exposing the truth”. We don’t know the damn truth, and we probably never will.

    Why don’t we just blast each other’s legs off with anti-personnel rifles? Why don’t we incinerate our loved ones with Hellfire missiles? Why don’t we burn each other with white phosphorus? We may as well. We’re doing the fucking warmonger’s work for them.

    Fuck, doesn’t anyone recognise a divisive distraction when they see one?

  • Clark

    We will never know what fucking happened to the buildings. Look, I thought the following up one night, just a stupid idea based upon an investigative piece I saw about the stream of metal seen running out of the side of one of the Twin Towers, and one too many spliffs. Have you ever seen the article? Someone wondered what that molten metal was, running out high up near the impact point before the collapse. He had an idea and then he actually did the work. He thought the metal might be molten lead, from lead-acid batteries from UPS – Uninterruptable Power Supplies, used to keep computers running when the power goes off.

    So this investigator did the work. He looked up the building maintenance and modification records, and followed paper trails of evidence, and found that a whole load of UPS systems really had been installed right where we saw that metal running out.

    OK, I don’t know, it could be a hoax, a complete fabrication, but it got me thinking.

    Say, some time back in, oh, 1990, someone had set up a regular delivery. Every day, a number of car batteries, or boxes of fishing weights, whatever. Dense, heavy things. Someone set up a regular order for all this stuff to be delivered to the top five or ten floors of the Twin Towers, one smallish consignment arriving every working day for ten years. Day by day, the top of the towers got heavier and heavier, way beyond the load they were designed for.

    And then on 9/11, each tower got hit by an aircraft, and when all that extra weight started to fall…

    Now I’m NOT saying that this is what happened. I’m just saying that we don’t know what did happen, and if I can think up something stupid like that, there must be a hundred other scenarios I’m too stupid to think up.

    We have a set of contradictions. We had buildings on fire, but no demolition charges being set off by the heat. Yes, there are some dust ejections that might be “squibs”; I wouldn’t know, it’s not my field. But we didn’t see windows blown out in sequence. We could have bombs in the basements, but we don’t have audio recordings of explosions in the tightly timed sequence we’d have needed to fake what looks like a verniage demolition. We have a set of contradictions, and no way of resolving them. Fuck, we don’t even remotely agree amongst ourselves, except we know it was all wrong.

    Just about any theory about the physical destruction on this page, I could pick holes in it. Official, unofficial, it doesn’t matter. None of the theories are compelling; every one of them has gaps in it.

    Meanwhile, we do have “special forces” acting in Turkey on the border of Syria. We do have huge build-ups of warships in the Eastern Mediterranean and near the Strait of Hormuz. We do have death squads openly operating in Syria, and the biggest ever US/Israeli joint manoeuvres on the Israel / Syria border, and we have constant threats and sanctions against Iran, and constant unfounded allegations of an Iranian “Weapons of Mass Destruction” programme. All just like Iraq.

    For fucks sake, keep your eyes on the fucking ball!

  • English Knight

    As the goyim are asleep (as usual), let me openly out Kempe as a hasbaric sayanim jew. All you have to do is post an ant-israel comment, and wait for it, his obfuscation even exceeds that of the yiddish professionals at Huffpo ! BTW- 911 was done by matzos NOT muzzies, follow the trail of the molten metal ! I agree with Clark,the eyes need to be kept on ball – USS Enterprise.

  • lwtc247

    Craig was right to create a separate thread. Wee smatterings of 911 do crop up and are allowed in standard posts, but 911 can rapidly grow and consume things – understandably so given their geopolitical effect, but it can destroy posts relevant ‘to the now’. Craig s solution was good I feel and Clark is right to tell people to move the discussion here.

    Sadly, I’ve noticed that even here, the hard key-points are annoying passed over and seemingly irresistibly, and way too often. Like moths to the flame, some some lesser contentious issue is usually seized upon and wrenches the spotlight from which blistering (and often irrelevant) arguments erupt. While this forum may have less of this than others, it is still too common. In general had a minimum of this as the visitors to this blog do entertain logical thought and good reasoning, I wish the

    I find it astounding amazing that although various SCIENTIFIC proofs are show conclusively that the towers were brought down – demonstrated by the failure of the laws of linear momentum – get met with the most simplistic ‘debunking’ claim which seems to successfully and instantly shroud the CD proof. Same for the elemental composition of nanothermite.

    This is a MAJOR problem with 911 discussion. Shills of course will do this, but well meaning people like Craig also fall foul of it. Please note, just because he falls foul of it doesn’t mean he’s a shill.

    The evidence that 911 was very different conspiracy from the one the US government would have us believe is simply refutable. I agree a lot with Vronsky’s take. It’s a religion that “911 was (something like) what the US government said”. It doesn’t bode well for us that people like Craig can’t seem to accept the evidence. It’s not like we don’t all support Craig on virtually most other issues, ‘cos we do. But 911 is of such importance that people like me and many better than me persist to try and shrug people out of the self-comatose stance they put themselves into.

    Craig and others should not take appeals to Craig to look at 911 with a truly open mind as an attack on him. It isn’t.

    P.S. The thing I wanted to point out about the ““Interesting. Me and the boys kicked this idea around last night..” comment was that the requirement was very much lower than what others believed we necessary to bring down the towers, than the one that people are TV-ized into understanding – which is a commercial demolition.

    And still….. The violation of the laws of linear momentum and the forensic evidence of nanothermite and the spherulites of molten iron still prove it was a CD. The philosophy around it is very much secondary.

  • Vronsky

    “the hard key-points are annoying passed over”

    Precisely so. There were many odd coincidences, peculiar events, strange behaviours and implausible outcomes – but there always are and they are proof of nothing. But the collapse of the twin towers could only have been CD. Isaac Newton will eventually win this argument.

  • Clark

    English Knight 22 Oct, 7:16 am: I strongly condemn your apparent attitude to Jewishness itself. I also strongly oppose Israeli atrocity, expansionism, de-facto racism, etc. etc. etc.


    When push comes to shove, we’ll be wanting the support of Jewish members of the Occupy movement INSIDE Israel.

  • KingofWelshNoir

    ‘strange behaviours’

    Yes, and a lot of the odd things, I have come to suspect, were deliberately planted to bamboozle the Truth community and keep them arguing over side issues for years. A prime example being Larry Silverstein’s notorious ‘Pull it’ comment. I’m pretty sure now that was a trap laid to ensnare the unwary. We all seized on it as ‘proof’ that WTC 7 was rigged for demolition. I’m sure it was, but the idea that the building owner would admit that in a phone call to the Fire Brigade the same day is preposterous. It’s a poisoned chalice. You repeat the claim and discredit the original controlled demolition hypothesis. I’m sure Benjamin Netanyahu’s remark that he was fore-warned on 7/7 by Scotland Yard falls into the same category.

  • Kempe

    Lay of EK he always brings a much needed smile to my face.

    Much though I hate to subject you preconceptions to a devastating controlled demolition I’m not a “hasbaric sayanim jew” (do you really no what that means?) or indeed any type of Jew. Not that there’s anything wrong with being a Jew, I’m just not one. I took the trouble of double checking when I took a loo break this morning and it’s still there so definitely not Jewish. Sorry.

    “Pull it” might be a term used by demolition experts; but then Silverstein isn’t a demolition expert so why would he be using such in a term in that context? It has other connotations.

    Netanyahu was on his way to a conference when news of the bombings came over the car radio. His security people insisted he return to the hotel. This can be checked.

    The elements that make up thermite/thermate were found in the debris however as the video I posted up demonstates they most likely came from other sources. No shortage of iron oxide (rust), aluminium and sulphur in an aluminium clad, steel framed building with plasterboard partions and wall coverings.

  • Vronsky

    “I’m sure Benjamin Netanyahu’s remark that he was fore-warned on 7/7 by Scotland Yard falls into the same category.”

    I think it’s quite important to the Gangsters in Charge that;

    (a) Most people believe their story; BUT
    (b) The minority who spot it as an outrageously obvious lie will be cowed.

    The murder of David Kelly is good example. Most people believe the official ‘narrative’. The remainder (survivors?) will take the point. You know – pour encourager les autres.

    “Larry Silverstein’s notorious ‘Pull it’ comment.”

    Interestingly, the BBC’s debunker special on alternative analyses of 9/11 conspiracy theories cut the last part of Silverstein’s sentence. He said:

    “I remember getting a call from the fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, ‘We’ve had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.’ And they made that decision to pull and then we watched the building collapse.”

    The BBC cut after the word ‘pull’. The following phrase perhaps too strongly suggested that Larry knew what he was talking about. Now if the BBC thinks that…

  • lwtc247

    See? From hard core physical evidence (violation of the law of momentum) and chemical evidence (nanothermite and iron spherulites), things have rapidly passed onto the sideshows of what Larry Silverstein really meant and thanks to KingofWelshNoir, the very different topic of 7/7 and BB Netanyahu – almost as though he was exercise some kind of perverse humour.

  • glenn

    Chris Michie (20 Oct, 2012 – 9:27 pm): Well said. I too have been very disappointed by people who should know better, when they wave their hands vaguely and say of course the Official Story has to be right, anything else would just be – gosh – just not make sense.

    For one thing, virtually nobody dares question Official Truths. If they do, they’re ignored. It’s bad enough to ask awkward questions about things we all know has happened (lies to get us into war, war crimes, etc.), but to question such deeply held Truths is akin to blasphemy. You’re no longer some sort of dissident, should you question anything about “9/11”, now you are self-certified insane.

    And that’s a shame because – just like that other Official Story the Christian Bible – the Official Story concerning 9/11 is transparent, self-contradictory nonsense. Saying one “believes’ it to be as stated is to declare oneself a willfully ignorant fool. Sorry if that sounds harsh, Craig. Nearly everyone who’s a True Believer in the official line knows next to nothing about it. Those who should know better but still tout the official line are complicit in a cover-up.

  • Krishnamurky

    Latest research on 911 is targeted at the molten metal hotspots detected by satellite up to six weeks later. They are trying to work out the exact tonnage detected at the base of the WTC elevators and the amount of energy required to melt all that steel. it surely did not come from all the discarded A4s in the waste?! Also another new line of inquiry is that the CNN broadcast at the time contained subliminal images of a bearded osama in the clouds !1

    [Mod: posted as ‘Observer’, has posted previously as Krishnamurky – so changed handle]

  • NR

    @ Anon 22 Sep, 2013 – 10:51 am
    “@NR – do you believe that 9/11 was a “false flag” attack? What evidence can you provide for this theory?”

    Strangely, as one who never lets a good conspiracy theory go to waste, I don’t believe 9/11 was a false flag. I briefly argued in another thread (and it does derail discussion) that while there are many anomalies, the debate is now so technical, what with traces of nano-thermite, rate of free-fall, melting vs softening point of steel, claims that no planes actually hit the towers, or alternately planes were flown by remote control, that it’s impossible for the average person to sort it out.

    I wouldn’t necessarily believe our most respected scientists to explain away everything either. There are always experts to be bought who explain away everything.

  • NR

    @ glenn 24 Sep, 2013 – 7:02 pm (in Gordon Brown thread)

    I just noticed your reply above @ glenn 26 Oct, 2012 – 1:12 am.
    My opinion on 9/11 is immediately above this comment. I’m not convinced it was a false flag, nor do I believe entirely in the official version either. It’s an event that will be long debated, like the JFK assassination, and unless one is willing to spend endless hours investigating minutia, which I’m not, I’ll leave it at that.

    My point about Sandy Hook, Boston, the Navy Yard and so on, is that both the left and the right are happy to claim a conspiracy or not-a-conspiracy when it suits their purpose, and at the moment the official position under the current administration is that 9/11 is not-a-conspiracy and all who claim it is are despicable 9/11 Truthers, now lumped in with domestic terrorists and anarchists and the dreaded Tea Party, subject to special attention from The State.

    Here’s another source (there are many) debunking Michael Moore’s propaganda, not only re “Farenheit 911” but “Bowling for Columbine” too.

  • glenn

    Your opinion (22/9/13, 5:34pm) appears to be that you can’t figure it out, so let’s just forget about the whole thing. When someone says something that asinine, I can’t help wondering WTH they bothered to mention anything about the given subject in the first place.

    Besides more false equivalence between teabaggers and “leftists”, that reference of yours is clearly a first order lunatic, with rather less credibility than you appear to think.

    This isn’t the way an honest discussion works, NR. In one, you justify your own assertions. Not simply refer to some idiot who makes the same unsupported assertions.

  • Daniel Rich

    I read this:

    “The hijackers had switched off the transponders so it wasn’t immediately clear where the plane was.”

    Switching off transponders removes the flight number and [pressure] altitude of said plane from a radar screen. The plane itself remains visible, as radar keeps bouncing of its hull/body.


  • Fedup

    Switching off transponders removes the flight number and [pressure] altitude of said plane from a radar screen. The plane itself remains visible, as radar keeps bouncing of its hull/body.

    1- You are targeting the same bunch of “ignorance is bliss” morons who are all too happy to play the “energy supplier swap market” that is rigged so obviously and loaded so heavily yet they are told to go and switch form one supplier to another, and if they don’t it is their fault that energy suppliers are screwing them!

    2- Anything technical and these blessed morons will glaze over; “transponder” is one of those “glaze over now” phrases.

    3- Military Radars can spot a bird in flight never mind a massive wide body jet slumbering around in the air space. The notion of interjecting the “transponders were off” were designed to get the blessed morons to think the air plane got invisible and no one in officialdom knew where they were heading to. (dastardly Muooolsum Terrorists)

    4- No one ever questions anything, and when they do , they start getting too technical or too naive; both of these routes are fraught with dangers of getting totally bamboozled and can be easily spun into even more lies and obfuscations.

    5- The fact that anyone would dare to come out and say; people I saw Cheney order the hit! Just shows the degrees of naivety these blessed morons display. Thus wasting time to argue the finer points is a futile circle jerk.

    6- Facts all point to a conspiracy that was aimed to either promote certain sectors interests, or to avoid disaster befalling the said interests.

    7- What were these interests, and how come no one has noticed it and no one debates it?

    8- Would Enron have gone bankrupt earlier in September, as it did in the October?

    9- What would have happened to the “free market” stocks market, when everyone was busy defrauding the next chap along and they were busy playing the Ponzi pyramid schemes?

    10- What would have happened geopolitically once the “free market” had gone tits up, if it were left to freely collapse?

    Dancing zionist scum had a lot to be thankful for. as they watched close up personal the whole game kick off.

  • Ben-American Fascist Flechette

    Unchosen ‘conspiracies’ consigned to Elba, for the sake of neatness, and the indubitable integrity of a thread.

    It’s interesting how posts are arbitrarily deleted without notice or explanation. It must be difficult to decide who should go and who should stay.

  • Fedup

    It’s interesting how posts are arbitrarily deleted without notice or explanation. It must be difficult to decide who should go and who should stay.

    Is old Jon back at the helm of the mod again?

    He never liked me, and having made too many assumptions about me, that were patently wrong, then asked me to write about myself.

    Funny old world we live in, these days everyone wants a resume, even for commenting in a blog.

    What has happened to your posts, why are you unhappy?

    Oh I forgot about the other luminaries Suhayl and his OCD about some character or other who used to comment here; as per him anyone not being complimentary towards the baby killing, land stealing supremacists used to be accused of being the whatever the name the particular nemesis had.

    At least be grateful those game are not getting played.

  • Ben-American Fascist Flechette

    It’s a generalissimo rant. Nothing specific except the fair warning that reopened a dead thread to segregate inconvenient ideas like African-american lunch counters or ‘black only’ drinking fountains.

    We’re the niggers of conspiracy.

  • Fedup

    We’re the niggers of conspiracy.

    Does that mean we are well hung?

    Come on Ben if the trolls are trying to derail the thread then it is befitting to give a thread in which they should be torlling at.

    9/11 is a conspiracy that makes any other conspiracy look straight forward. Lines of people drafted in to search the Pentagon ground, before there was any investigation, which reminds me of the two trillion dollars that the Pentagon comptroller could not account for, the whole lot stinks to high heaven, and it is toxic, sort of UFO toxic, no one dares to face up to, and this blog has its own imperatives too, so no need to feel down about it.

    In the vast universe with billions of stars, because our primitive poxy tech stuff cannot find any planets. Thus we conclude we are the only creatures in the whole wide universe, and god has made us in his image!

    Although our ancestors were so resolutely certain that Earth was flat, they even forced those whom thought it was not to grovel and squirm and accept that it was flat.

    Because we could not take in the enormity of the lies that were being fed to us, then 9/11 was the handy work of a bunch of Arabs whose leader was one gormless idiot playing fighter in the Afghan war which was being supplied and organised with the aid of boys at Langley.

    Some people have not the capacity to face up to the reality that is so dark, and almost satanic.

    There will be a time that everyone on the planet will be thinking what a bunch of dim nitwits, how could they be fooled so easily?

    I remember I sued to think how could Hoover the skirtboy could get away with cointelpro? Now whenever I go near an airport I am reminded how easy he could?

  • Fedup

    The sheriff is a Nig….. bong

    Dammit! The sheriff is a Nig…. bong

    The trip wire has been triggered and the comment gone into moderation.

1 62 63 64 65 66 134

Comments are closed.