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).
The twin towers collapse looks amazing to me but the offical line seems plausable.
On the other hand. The WTC 7 collapse seems to defy any logical explaination. But when I have the time Larry, I will check out your link and see if it can shed any light.
I quite like quorn. I’m not a vegan, or even a veggie, but I eat it ocasionally. Maybe it helps not to expect it to be meat ? It’s just something else to eat.
“I think I will eat more fish and tell you all about it.”
Whale meat again.
Don’t know where, don’t know when …
9/11
9 – Numerical equivalent of the word Baha’
11 – Twin towers
This post dedicated to David Christopher Kelly, CMG 1944?”2003 RIP PBUH
Larry:
“frank verismo, a structural engineer would laugh at you.”
Folding so quickly? I’m not surprised. All you’ve done so far is hide behind (incompetent) 3rd party websites and indulge yourself in ad hominem attacks.
Seriously – is this how you behave in the real world, Larry?
“is this how you behave in the real world, Larry?”
Omigod no, he’s a highly-paid lawyer from one of the USA’s best law schools.
Very intellectual chap.
“Debunked by a child”
See? He’s been playing with thermite since he was 11. Expert.
I should be in bed …
Frank: You do wonder. If the Larry’s of this world really thought our statements were so utterly ridiculous, why not leave them stand, so everyone could see for themselves? Why are the Larry’s so desperate that they throw tantrums to get attention?
The more screaming and shouting a Larry-type does, the more one should pay attention to that which they want to distract. I’ll look out the next time “larry” screaming-fit occurs, because a good post must have preceded it. A Larry-type might actually serve a useful purpose here in flagging decent posts – so he should keep up the good work 🙂
Hi Crab,
yes, I like Derren Brown, too. I like the ones where he does something impossible, and then explains how it was possible. I recognise some of his techniques from my brief interest in Neurolinguistic Programming (Bandler and Grinder) some decades ago.
Physics will have to come to terms with consciousness at some point, I reckon, and so does Roger Penrose. The Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics can’t just have some undefined phenomena collapsing all the wave functions, after all.
RetroPsychoKenesis. You can try this one at home:
http://www.fourmilab.ch/rpkp/experiments/bellcurve/
The whole Fourmilab site is worth a look.
dreoilin:
“Omigod no, he’s a highly-paid lawyer from one of the USA’s best law schools.”
He told you this? Good grief. Move over, Perry Mason.
There’s plenty of evidence that suggests the Bush administration did nothing to try to prevent the 9-11 attacks – despite repeated warnings from flight school instructors, FBI agents, CIA agents and German intelligence.
Well before 2001 the Project for a New American Century – which included many people who would be senior members of the Bush administration – suggested it would require another “Pearl Harbour” to get public support for the increases in defence spending and “regime changes” in Iraq, Afghanistan and Iran which it’s members wanted.
That may be why Bush and friends ignored every warning and had the upper ranks of the FBI ignore warnings by field agents.
For more on this, with sources supplied see these two posts on my blog
http://inplaceoffear.blogspot.com/2008/11/9-11-warnings-ignored-timeline-summer.html
http://inplaceoffear.blogspot.com/2008/11/they-didnt-even-try-to-keep-americans.html
Glenn:
“Why are the Larry’s so desperate that they throw tantrums to get attention?”
It did occur that Larry’s intention was to derail the thread. Any appearance of sincerity he began with petered out quite swiftly.
“A Larry-type might actually serve a useful purpose here in flagging decent posts”
Fair point!
Just got back from working out.
I was a highly paid lawyer.
It’s still the case that I graduated from one of America’s best law schools. I previously brought that up to make a point about who is qualified to assess the legality of an action under international law (and I don’t think it’s the exclusive province of public international lawyers).
“suggested it would require another “Pearl Harbour” to get public support for the increases in defence spending and “regime changes” in Iraq, Afghanistan and Iran which it’s members wanted.”
LIE. And you know it. For one thing, they were talking about rebuilding America’s defenses. A “new Pearl Harbor” (to the extent mentioned) had nothing to do with foreign interventions.
Once again. FAIL.
“Frank: You do wonder. If the Larry’s of this world really thought our statements were so utterly ridiculous, why not leave them stand, so everyone could see for themselves?”
You might be right. Your movement has failed, after all. You look like idiots. Do the anti-war people in the UK really embrace you, or do they treat you as idiots, as they do in the U.S. and Canada?
Larry what you did by trying to to say “You lot disagree with me because you all hate Jews” is despicable.
And don’t deny it. That is what this sentence of yours as well as many others you have used means:
“One difference between this and the standard relitigation of the issues from 2004 is that this is a British site, so the Jews were going to be blamed fairly immediately.”
Your use of attacks on Jews to justify yourself and attack your adversaries is a slap in the face of every Jew who has suffered from antisemitism. Both you and another person on this site have made a habit of that, and you should stop such childish behaviour.
That sort of behaviour is very common amongst Zionist war mongers and it is the only way they can shut the mouths of those who disagree with them when it comes to justifying the unjustifiable.
You behaved like this little girl on this clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNQSV3BBtZ4&feature=player_embedded
And you should be treated just like that little spoilt girl who cries antisemitism because she can’t defend the murders of the Innocent in any other way.
So Larry if you have to defend the indefensible, do it like a man, and stop whimpering antisemitism like a bitch on heat who fails to attract the dogs.
I see you people who use racist attacks on Jews as slogans to win arguments in the same light as I see those who desecrate the grave of Holocaust victims.
Glenn –
Look at this picture of the ValuJet crash and tell me where the plane is:
http://www.cnn.com/EVENTS/1996/year.in.review/us/valujet/valujet.html
Arsalan: That youtube reference (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNQSV3BBtZ4&feature=player_embedded) was brilliant, thank you. It called these despicable anti-gentiles out with their games full on.
May I suggest you do not rise to the bait, and just use these “wide-stance” Larry types for their function – getting all hysterical whenever a good post has been made.
We’ve had no less than four L-stars for my latest argument concerning a controlled demolition by demonstration of the laws of inertia and momentum, for instance. So I say, keep it up, “Larry” – keep flagging those posts which need attention!
Do you guys even get that Craig Murray doesn’t believe your silly conspiracy?
And he’s seen the worst of the U.S./UK governments!
Glenn, what was your argument? I must have missed it.
“Do you guys even get that Craig Murray doesn’t believe your silly conspiracy?”
So what?
And when a 911 Denier brings up “the laws of inertia and momentum” they sound EXACTLY like an Evolution Denier bringing up the law of conservation of energy.
Evolution Deniers: believe that there is a conspiracy among the vast numbers of experts in biology to deny their faith in intelligent design
911 Deniers: believe that there is a conspiracy among the vast numbers of experts in structural engineering (and many other fields) to deny their faith in inside jobby job idiocy
Arsalan,
good post.
Larry,
you’re out of order.
Which post by Arsalan was good?
Larry,
I like most of Arsalan’s posts; he has a good sense of humour and he makes good and moral points. But I was particularly referring to his 12:47 post. His most recent post on this thread.
MJ: “Frankly Larry, I’ve always been a little suspicious of the Pentagon’s claim that it found DNA of all the passengers, particularly since the analyses were conducted ‘in house’ rather than by civil authorities.
Posted by: MJ at January 28, 2010 10:57 PM”
MJ, didn’t we already go over this?
The Pentagon DID NOT claim to have the DNA of all the passengers. A link that YOU posted showed that the remains of Dana Falkenberg – who was two or three years old – were never found. They also said they couldn’t identify the remains of a number of Pentagon staffers.
It’s strange that you demand extra evidence for the deaths of the passengers and hijackers than you do for the deaths of the Pentagon staffers.
You even wanted me to dig up newspaper reports of the funerals of the passengers as proof. Which I did. Only you went on to say that you didn’t believe the reports.
What evidence do you need to see that you will believe?
Would you believe the testimony of the firefighters in “Firefight” which describes finding the remains of the passengers?
If your “hypothesis” is unfalsiable then it is no hypothesis.
glenn, Norman Finkelstein is cool and he dresses well too.
Here is another one:
http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/finkelstein-on-holocaust-remembrance-day/
I think what America is using 911 in the exactly the samething Israel uses the holocoast.
They both use the dead to justify killing.
We should not allow them to. The worse way to insult the people who died in 911 is to use their deaths as an excuse to kill others. The worst way to insult the people who died in the holocoast is to use their deaths as an excuse to kill others. And that is what is happening.
Clark, I wasn’t the one who brought up the Jews. Someone above brought up Jewish bankers, etc. etc. I mentioned that this is a British thread, so Jews will be blamed for 911 immediately, and then Arsalan went off on me bringing up Jews.
So that’s a good post for you, is it?
Larry,
see, there’s another one by Arsalan. He sees clearly past the surface to issues of right and wrong, and he makes the right choice.
If only the same could generally be said of lawyers. The law is becoming divorced from right and wrong, and that is worrying.
Such issues are far more important than arguing over the details of 911.
“You even wanted me to dig up newspaper reports of the funerals of the passengers as proof. Which I did. Only you went on to say that you didn’t believe the reports.”
Angrysoba, damn, was that the weasel that didn’t believe the passengers died? I get these people mixed up?
What a religion these people have. It would be easier to turn a Sunni into a Shiite.
You’re probably familiar with Mark Roberts – he talks about confronting people at Ground Zero with actual evidence, and they turn their heads away. They just don’t want to see the evidence; it’s like they’re afraid.
Interestingly, those with the best credentials on this thread don’t believe in the inside job.
Frazer, works with explosives and says the controlled demolition “theory” is impractical and that the buildings collapses don’t have the signature features of a controlled demolition.
Chris from Glasgow is an architect and has no problem believing that the plane impacts and fire brought down the towers.
Craig Murray is aware of how MI5/MI6 and other government bodies and intelligence agencies work and he finds it implausible that it was an inside job.
Larry and I are New World Order agents and we know they never did an inside job. No sireee!
Larry,
it’s a good post because it calls you out. I’ve said that you’re a bully; you’ve improved somewhat, but you still let your skill at argument obscure the truth, for yourself as much as for others, I believe.
Larry, it is better to be good and compasionate than it is to appear right.