Archive for Friday, August 12, 2011

From JFK to 9/11, conspiracy theories thrive

August 12, 2011

Advertisement

— In Dealey Plaza, with the white “X” painted on the spot where President Kennedy was assassinated, ask anyone about the grassy knoll and the second gunman.

Conspiracy theories come with the territory here. And at Barbec’s Restaurant on the other side of this sprawling city, six men sit on a covered porch and convene a meeting of the North Texans for 9/11 Truth group and talk about the government’s lies about 9/11.

The group has 50 active members; 200 on the mailing list. And they number among many thousands who, after years of investigations, don’t believe the official version of how the World Trade Center collapsed, who was responsible or what the government knew and when.

Politics doesn’t have anything to do with it; two were once staunch, Bush-voting conservatives; two are progressives and two weren’t even interested in current events until after the 2001 attacks.

“Before 9/11, I was a working class person, going through life, pretty much accepting everything given and told to me,” said Bryan Black, a 50-year-old carpenter from Commerce, Texas, “I’m starting to see things. I’m more open to skeptical conversation.”

The skeptics — they prefer the term “9/11 truth activists” instead of “truthers” — have persisted, even thrived in the decade since 2001, with proponents from former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel to comedian Rosie O’Donnell. And unlike the years that Kennedy assassination conspiracies took to develop, they have mobilized with lightning-like speed on the Internet, with YouTube videos of the trade center collapsing again and again.

“There’s really a foundation of reality here,” said Ted Walter, who has worked unsuccessfully to prod New York City officials into reopening an investigation of how 7 World Trade Center collapsed on the afternoon of Sept 11. “We believe that if all of the American public saw footage of building 7 on the nightly news, it would lead to widespread skepticism of 9/11.”

For many, conspiracy theories aren’t terrifying; they’re more comforting than the idea that an event as terrifying as Sept. 11 could be so — random.

Conspiracies can be a “security blanket” for explaining away the horrific, asserts Patrick Leman, a University of London professor who researches 9/11 theories. “It stops us from having to confront the unpredictability of life.”

Jonathan Kay, a columnist with the Canadian newspaper The National Post and the author of a book about conspiracy theories, said it’s normal for people to seek out complicated and detailed explanations of big events.

“There is something in the human mind that rebels against the idea of random forces or individuals being able to bring down powerful people or powerful icons,” said Kay.

There’s no real estimate of the numbers of people in the 9/11 “truth” movements — there’s no one leader of the skeptics. A group called Remember Building 7 presented New York’s City Council with a petition in 2009 signed by 80,000 people calling for an independent probe into the attacks. Other groups include Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, Scholars for 9/11 Truth and the 9/11 Commission Campaign, founded by Gravel.

The “truthers” generally have about a dozen beliefs surrounding what happened on that day, although there are some variations on who was responsible for the attacks and why:

  • Explosives brought down the World Trade Center, not hijacked jetliners.
  • There were warnings of the impending attacks from 11 different countries, and fighter jets could have intercepted at least one of the four planes that day.
  • Criminal conspiracies within the government caused the attacks.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology conducted a probe that took six years to complete of the tower collapses; the last report found that fire caused the collapse of 7 World Trade Center, a skyscraper north of the twin towers. In the collapses of the twin towers, the agency found that extreme heat from the jetliner crashes caused some steel beams to lose strength, causing further failures in the building until the entire structure succumbed.

The investigation “was the most comprehensive examination of a structural failure ever conducted,” said Shyam Sunder, lead investigator of the collapse investigation and led to 40 building code changes to make safer, terror-proof skyscrapers. NIST maintains a website with its reports and computer-based animations that reconstruct its findings to reach out to the public.

Sunder acknowledges it hasn’t reached everyone.

Comments

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

The Stench of Truth: The 9-11 Commission Report is a conspiracy theory.

International Hearings on 9/11 to begin in Toronto in September http://www.sacbee.com/2011/08/08/3823712/international-hearings-on-911.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

Notihng fishy at all with the official conspiracy theory...It was only the largest crime scene the world has ever seen...The NIST investigation failed to even consider the use of explosives, which is direct conflict of NFPA 921. The evidence was shipped off to China as quickly as possible without benifit of investigation. Nope, mothing fishy at all here!

Daily News, 7 March 2002
WASHINGTON An inquiry into exactly what caused the twin towers to collapse after they were hit by hijacked jetliners may have been undermined by the hasty recycling of steel wreckage that could hold vital clues, experts told Congress yesterday.

About 80% of the structural steel from the World Trade Center was scrapped without being examined by even one fire expert, mostly because investigators did not have the authority to preserve the wreckage as evidence, the experts said.

WTC widows Elizabeth Jordan and Sally Regenhard appear at the hearings. "The lack of significant amounts of steel for examination will make it difficult, if not impossible, to make a definitive statement as to the specific cause and chronology of the collapse," said Glenn Corbett, a fire science expert from John Jay College of Criminal Justice in Manhattan.

http://www.ae911truth.org/

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

Bill Manning, acting as then Editor-In-Chief, published an article entitled "SELLING OUT THE INVESTIGATION" in FIRE ENGINEERING MAGAZINE on January 1st 2002. In this article, Manning issued the following public statement:

For more than three months, structural steel from the World Trade Center has been and continues to be cut up and sold for scrap. Crucial evidence that could answer many questions about high-rise building design practices and performance under fire conditions is on the slow boat to China, perhaps never to be seen again in America until you buy your next car.

Such destruction of evidence shows the astounding ignorance of government officials to the value of a thorough, scientific investigation of the largest fire-induced collapse in world history. I have combed through our national standard for fire investigation, NFPA 921, but nowhere in it does one find an exemption allowing the destruction of evidence for buildings over 10 stories tall.

Fire Engineering has good reason to believe that the "official investigation" blessed by FEMA and run by the American Society of Civil Engineers is a half-baked farce that may already have been commandeered by political forces whose primary interests, to put it mildly, lie far afield of full disclosure. Except for the marginal benefit obtained from a three-day, visual walk-through of evidence sites conducted by ASCE investigation committee members-described by one close source as a "tourist trip"-no one's checking the evidence for anything.


This public call for investigation from a prestigious public service publication was given by a competent fire engineering professional fully aware of the proper standards for the investigation of any fire or explosion incident. The allegation that evidence from the scene of a crime of mass murder was being destroyed would constitute obstruction of justice and related crimes which would rise to the level of felony offenses if deliberate violations of standard investigative procedure could be substantited. The open call was based upon violations of NFPA 921, the national standard for fire investigation. This standard is composed by the National Fire Protection Association, a group of fire protection professionals dedicated to public dissemination of standards for conducting fire investigation and ensuring public safety. Under common law, the violation of national standards leading to destruction of evidence and consequent obstruction of justice is a cognizable crime.

http://www.sacbee.com/2011/08/08/3823712/international-hearings-on-911.html

beatrice 3 years, 11 months ago

"The NIST investigation failed to even consider the use of explosives, which is direct conflict of NFPA 921."

When there is overwhelming evidence of massive airplanes filled with fuel smashing into the sides of buildings, investigating other possibilities for what happened just seems like a big fat waste of resources.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

Wow! What an ignorant response! Wrong answer, Chitfer. There is no conceivable excuse for not emplying standard investigative procedures for the crime of the century. Try again.

jhawkinsf 3 years, 11 months ago

They also didn't investigate whether or not aliens from the planet Gorb took control of the minds of the hijackers. I have proof. Anyone can hear the proof. Put tin foil on a colander and put it on your head, like a football helmet. Larry, it will make you crazy!

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

beatrice 3 years, 11 months ago

Okay, I'll try again. Big planes hit buildings. Buildings fall down.

Yep, the cause and effect argument still fits. I'm good with that.

To use the old joke, we know Bush wasn't involved, because the plan worked.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

And you're still an idiot. Do you have any professional credentials, or are you simply a high school dropout? Big planes hit building! The Empire State Building was hit by a B-25 bomber in 1945, but it didn't fall down...now what? Here's a high-rise building that burned intensly, yet it stood solid as a rock. There have only been three sky scrapers brought down by fire in history, and they all happened on the same day.

Empire State Building Plane Crash: http://www.withthecommand.com/2002-Jan/NY-empireplane.html

Other skyscraper fires of significance: http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/compare/fires.html

beatrice 3 years, 11 months ago

Although I may indeed be an idiot (it is hard to determine these things about one's self), I can assure you I did not drop out of high school. High school proved to be 9 of the best years of my life.

I do know that the construction of the Empire State Building, finished in 1931, and the Twin Towers built in 1973, was dramatically different, hence the difference in how they looked. This is why part of the B-25 that hit the ESB was lodged into the side of the building and one engine dislodged and actually when through and shot out the other side, landing on a building below. Clearly this did not happen with the Twin Towers, and wouldn't have even happen had it been hit by a B-25. Have you seen those videos of the Twin Towers? The planes went right through the walls of glass and that was a big explosion. Also, a slow-flying B-25 at the end of a flight is a dramatically different projectile than a Boeing 757.

However, believe what you will, but do know that you are wrong. Barack Obama was born in Hawaii, Oswald shot Kennedy, men walked on the moon, and the Twin Towers fell because massive planes filled with fuel crashed into them.

Now, feel free to try and insult me further. The high school line was a particularly charming touch.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

Sorry for the name calling, b. I'd rather not discuss this anymore; I've got more fun things to do tonight.

I hope I've made my point--there are a few holes in the official conspiracy theory and many professional's are demanding another investigation.

Please take 4-minutes to listen to people smarter than me who've done real forensic analysis of evidence gathered at the scene of the biggest crime of the 21st Century (to date).

http://www.ae911truth.org/

United Airlines Flight 175 was hijacked by five al-Qaeda terrorists, and deliberately crashed into the South Tower of the World Trade Center in New York City, as part of the September 11 attacks.

"Some debris from the aircraft were recovered nearby, including landing gear found on top of a building on the corner of West Broadway and Park Place, an engine found at Church & Murray Street, and a section of the fuselage landed on top of 5 World Trade Center."

wiki. Late.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

You can't be serious. So, you're telling me engineer Bill Manning, editor-in-chief of Fire Engineering Magazine (a professional fire investigator) doesn't know what he's talking about. Are you a professional investigator? Are you an engineer or architect? What experience do you have in this area? What credentials do you hold to proport such nonsense?!?

1500 professional licensed achitects and engineers are just fools, in your opinion? Using your best professional judgement as a fire investigator, architect, and engineer, (assuming you carry such credentials) you're satisfied simply watching the buildings collapse on television you're certain everything was caused by an airplane impact. No further investigation necessary... Fully investigating the crime of the century is a big fat waste? The pure stupidity of your statement leaves me nearly speechless.

Here's a wrench in your idiotic theory: What happened to WTC Bldg. 7? Why did it collapse at nearly free fall speed...it wasn't hit by an air plane or air plane fuel. Here's another point to consider. You say that the fuel helped bring down the buildings? Why doesn't the engine of my car disintegrate or melt? It's burning fuel constantly. Here's another fact you should consider...air plane fuel (kerosene) doesn't burn hot enough to melt steel. Office fires don't burn hot enough to melt steel. Most of the fuel in the air planes was combusted spontaneously after impact, remember the big fire ball?

You're a sheep. Go back to sleep and quit botheing me with your nonsense.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 3 years, 11 months ago

I think general incompetence, complacency explain 9/11 better than conspiracy.

But one thing is certain, and they even admitted it in their own literature. PNAC/neocons were hoping for their "Pearl Harbor" moment to use as cover for a wide range of Disaster Capitalism initiatives, ranging from the invasion of Iraq to the Bush tax cuts. 9/11 fit the bill perfectly.

jhawkinsf 3 years, 11 months ago

From one conspiracy theory to another.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 3 years, 11 months ago

Maybe not for you, but for millions, it will be. Especially once the gang of twelve gets done.

Jimo 3 years, 11 months ago

ROFL Coming from the least credible person on here!

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 3 years, 11 months ago

I posited no theory. They wanted to implement their program of disaster capitalism, which requires disasters.

9/11 was just the first of the disasters that presented itself. Others would follow-- Katrina, the tsunami in SE Asia. I don't believe they "caused" any of them, but they most certainly did capitalize on them, per their intent (see Crazy Larry's post below.)

The Iraq War was a disaster of their creation, and they capitalized grandly on it, as well.

jhawkinsf 3 years, 11 months ago

You suggested no conspiracy, well, maybe your choice of words wasn't the best. You said in the literature of the neocons they were "hoping" for a disaster. Are you sure that's what was said? There is a world of difference between hoping that is will happen and planning for the event, even if you believe it's likely to happen. I'd be interested in seeing a specific "hope" for the disaster. I might plan for a __ (hurricane, tornado, earthquake, terror event, etc) without specifically hoping that it will happen.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 3 years, 11 months ago

The neocons were cynical enough to use the shock and awe of 9/11 to cram through lots of unrelated policy initiatives, and this "shock doctrine/disaster capitalism" has been a very carefully laid out strategy for the last several decades.

Read Naomi Klein's "The Shock Doctrine" if you want to know more.

jhawkinsf 3 years, 11 months ago

Well, I'm not likely to read Ms. Klein's book but I did read her bio in Wikipedia. Would you characterize her as an objective source? Not that she has to be, she can come into the discussion free to spread the word of her already made up mind.
The fact is that I might agree with you that certain policies are pushed through in times of disaster. In another thread, I mentioned I'm getting a little abyss weary. We've been told that without the bailouts, we'd fall into the abyss. Businesses too big to fail, the abyss. Don't raise the debt ceiling, another abyss. It seems a good opportunity for anyone with a strong political agenda to push through their policies. But I still wonder if someone with acute political strategies would be foolish to enough commit to paper the words that they hope for a disaster to befall this country.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 3 years, 11 months ago

Klein is an excellent journalist. Sounds like you are wanting to read someone who will confirm what you already believe, though, so I can see why you don't want to read her work.

"But I still wonder if someone with acute political strategies would be foolish to enough commit to paper the words that they hope for a disaster to befall this country."

From PNAC--

Page 51, 1st paragraph, 1st sentence: "Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor."

jhawkinsf 3 years, 11 months ago

I've got a dozen books waiting to be read. But again, the quote references a "catastrophe" like Pearl Harbor without hoping for one. I have no doubt that policy makers of all stripes see opportunity in turmoil. I just don't think they "hope" for events like 9/11 or Katrina.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 3 years, 11 months ago

You can quibble about the choice of the word "hope" all you want, but the fact is that the "Chicago School" has been devising methods of capitalizing on disaster for several decades now. They don't really care whether the disasters are natural, of someone else's creation, or of their own.

Bottomline is that it's a a conscious policy of neocons for quite some time to use the turmoil of crisis to cram through policies and agendas that wouldn't stand a snowball's chance otherwise.

And Klein's book demonstrates this very convincingly.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

Rebuilding America's Defenses Strategy, Forces and Resources For a New Century A Report of The Project for The New American Century September 2000

Page 50, Chapter V, Creating Tomorrow's Dominant Force

Page 51, 1st paragraph, 1st sentence: "Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor."

This is fact, not conspiracy.

jhawkinsf 3 years, 11 months ago

As I was saying a couple of weeks ago, a large sell off in the markets will present some good opportunities. Now did I make a statement or did I conspire to make the markets go down?

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

One can make that decision without first thouroughly examining all available evidence in the matter. First question: do you manage a multi-billion dollar hedge fund?

Ron Holzwarth 3 years, 11 months ago

"thouroughly"? Your arguments would be ever so much more likely to be taken seriously if your spelling was better.

For starters, it's not spelled "thouroughly", it's spelled "thoroughly".

In case you didn't know, when a reader sees spelling mistakes, usually his first reaction is that the writer is not well educated on anything.

It's easy to use a spell check. You should use one if you want to appear as though you know what you're talking about.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

I just type too fast and sometimes misspell words. Sorry. Don't I get credit for the 99% of words spelled correctly? Why won't you consider the content of the sentence instead of the spelling of it's words?

Homework for you. Here's the question: How could BBC News announce that WTC7 (Solomon Brothers Bldg.) collapsed 20 minutes prior to it actually happening? Will you please consider this one aspect of the whole situation? The BBC announced the collapse of WTC7 20 minutes before it happened...the building is still standing in the background as they talk about it crumbling. You'll see the building behind her head as she begins discussion.

Key word search - BBC, Solomon Brothers, Jane Standley.

Here's the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltP2t9...

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

I don't believe the 9-11 Commission Report even discusses the collapse of WTC-7. This is what engineers and architects are questioning. They want another independent investigation of the whole incident.

Our government allotted 40-million dollars to investigate Bill Clinton's bj....but only 15-million for the 9-11 commission.

http://www.sacbee.com/2011/08/08/3823712/international-hearings-on-911.html

Ron Holzwarth 3 years, 11 months ago

"Why won't you consider the content of the sentence instead of the spelling of it's words?"

Let's take that sentence for example.

In that sentence, the correct usage should be "its", indicating the possessive, instead of the contraction for "it is", which is what "it's" always means for a pronoun.

Since you consistently make basic errors in the usage of the English language, exactly what evidence do we have that you are an expert on anything?

Ron Holzwarth 3 years, 11 months ago

If you want to sound convincing, you not only need to spell everything correctly, but you must also use correct grammar.

Spelling errors and grammatical mistakes cast doubt upon your credibility very quickly.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

OMFG! You're super sockpuppet, #3! You must get paid extra for this kind of hard work! Have fun at Sizzler later! LOL! ROFLMFAO!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1PBy2wF_fM

Ron Holzwarth 3 years, 11 months ago

I only do that when someone claims to be an expert on something, and then very clearly demonstrates that he does not know how to properly use the English language to concisely explain his point of view.

If you can't use the English language correctly, very few educated people will take you seriously.

And it's not "hard work", because your errors are so glaring.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

Oh come on now, #3! You're killin' me over here! Please show me where I proclaim my expertise! At what point in the conversation did that occur?

When I proclaim, "the experts are speaking out!" then post a link to ae911truth doesn't make me an expert. You've been criticizing my darn spelling and grammar the whole time, for Krom's sake. Expert?!?! Are you kiddin' round with me, #3?

I've merely passed information off to anyone caring enough to read it. I talk about the experts and what they've accomplished to date...

Hey, look at that, the clock says party time! You cats (and dogs) have a great night! Be safe out there! Sweet dreams; sleep tight; cheers; tschuss; and ciao. Don't fear the reaper.

mloburgio 3 years, 11 months ago

Son Of JFK Conspirator Drops New Bombshell Revelations Costner was set to make documentary on Hunt's confession, before Miami mafia stepped in, E. Howard believed government had sabotaged his wife's plane

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/may2007/030507jfkconspirator.htm

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

Shermer uses an array of deceptive methods to persuade the reader that challenges to the official story of the 9/11 attack are worthy only of ridicule and should not be scrutinized. His primary technique is to use hoaxes and unscientific ideas -- long promoted on the web and in videos -- to bracket the valid ideas that he seeks to shield the reader from. That Shermer went to such great lengths to thoroughly misrepresent the painstaking, scientific, evidence-based work of 911Research is a testament to the site's success.

http://www.911research.wtc7.net/essays/sciam/index.html

Ron Holzwarth 3 years, 11 months ago

Paul, have you ever read 'Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds', by Charles Mackay, LL.D.?

ISBN 0-517-541238 ISBN 0-517-539195 pbk

Although the original edition was published in 1841, it is a timeless book! A copy is readily available today.

Some of those exact same subjects are discussed. Many things have not changed since 1841, and the human mind is certainly one of them.

Flap Doodle 3 years, 11 months ago

prisonplanet sighting! That's good but this thread won't be complete until somebody (besides me) drags reptoids into the discussion.

Ron Holzwarth 3 years, 11 months ago

Oh no! I had no idea that reptoids even existed! The government has been hiding their existence from us! Be afraid! Be very afraid! http://www.reptoids.com/

Here's a clip to prove that they are real:

Since the early 1990's, John Rhodes, the original CryptoHunter, has provided television & radio interviews, lectures, workshops, and media presentations to national and international audiences regarding his Terrestrial Reptoid Hypothesis.

This hypothesis claims that the beings that humanity has been calling "E.T.'s" or "Aliens" are (in many cases) sightings of sentient Reptilian-Humanoid "Reptoid" beings that are native to Earth, or fellow "Terrans"

The Terrestrial Reptoid Hypothesis further contends that the ancestors of the reptoids (and possibly other life forms) retreated into underground caverns during environmental cataclysms long ago and there they continued to thrive and evolve into the sentient beings they appear to be today.

Their descendants, according to the hypothesis, have science and military representatives that are secretly interacting with human subjects, both civilian and military.

They appear to be currently living in three areas:

1) Under Earth's Surface, in Cavern-Cities (and villages) in remote (and sometimes local) geological locations (such as state parks and wilderness areas) - Both U.S. and Foreign.

2) Off World

3) In alternate vibrational states of reality (other dimensions).

According to Rhodes, people have reported interacting with half-human and half-reptile beings in various parts of the world since the dawn of mankind. While most of these ancestral memories or mythologies are symbols of ancient religious self-identification, a few appear to be relating actual encounters, similar to those reported in the modern UFO culture.

While most reptiles are wild and shy away from humans, reptoids have exhibited a marked degree of intelligence and an intense curiosity of the humans they encounter. These are the most mysterious of all.

Because so few people are aware that the majority of life on and in Earth has yet to be encountered by mankind, when something unusual and intelligent like a reptoid is encountered, they are misidentified as ET's or "aliens."

Some of these elusive animal-beings have been encountered by accident, some of the intelligent ones appear to be encountering humans on purpose, in the middle of the night or in disguise by day for various undeterminable reasons.

Aiko 3 years, 11 months ago

Some people believe what they want to believe. Sometimes, their life is boring and uneventful that they want to believe what is least popular opinion and look at facts with a blind eye. It makes them feel like they are "Matlock" or "Angela Lansbury" for day. I remember when people were mesmerized at crop circles and were convinced that aliens put them there.

Ron Holzwarth 3 years, 11 months ago

Aiko, I have to differ a bit with a small part of your posting. You stated: "Some people believe what they want to believe."

Instead, I believe that we ALL believe what we want to believe, and we all do that for reasons that seem good to us.

Those reasons might be from direct experience, from seeing something on television, from reading, or from something we were told. And, some believe something to be true because they will go to Hell if they don't. That's a very powerful motivator for belief, actually.

But at a very fundamental level, every single one of us is very selective in what we believe to be actually true. And, what we want to believe is what we believe.

I don't think there are any exceptions at all.

Andrew Reeves 3 years, 11 months ago

"I don't think there are any exceptions at all."

Huh. Case closed then??? I tend to ponder that beliefs are less static than that. I guess I have a fundamental level of belief that I "believe what I want to believe", which is that the human mind is more open than closed.

Ron Holzwarth 3 years, 11 months ago

"I have a fundamental level of belief that I "believe what I want to believe", which is that the human mind is more open than closed."

Yes, that is exactly what I said. In other words, of course.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

The question is do you still believe the same thing after you've been presented with hard evidence contrary of your belief. Will you consider facts that support an alternate to your belief? Or, will you just nit-pick the messenger (for lack of a better word) about grammar and spelling instead of honestly considering the facts presented? Got dang! Cut me some slack, Jack. This is the internets, for Krom's sake, not a dissertation or thesis.


Ron Holzwarth 3 years, 11 months ago

When a point is reached where the evidence becomes convincing, of course a person would have to reconsider his beliefs upon any particular subject.

All of us are learning new things all the time, and I would certainly hope that a person's opinion or belief on any particular subject would change when presented with convincing evidence that his previous thoughts had not been correct.

To do otherwise would certainly be nothing but a logical fallacy. But in most cases it takes a very convincing argument, as well as firm evidence, to make someone really think and challenge his thoughts about what he had previously been sure of was true.

And yes, it is the Internet, but some people take their postings here quite seriously, and do actually consider other points of view.

But, youtube is not a convincing source for other points of view. Many people have seen evidence that dogs can fly on youtube, and very few believed that was actually true.

When other points of view are not well presented, they are usually not taken very seriously.

If you want to be convincing, sound convincing. Every con artist knows that!

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

Because 1500-plus licensed professoinal architects and engineers (you know, the people who actually design and build skyscrapers) calling for a new investigation into what happened is ridiculous. Yep. Just a bunch of idiots who have no idea what they're talking about, right? Am I right?

Ron Holzwarth 3 years, 11 months ago

Do these "500-plus licensed professoinal architects" know how to spell "professional"?

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

Ron, Ronnie, Ronaldo, Ron...I never figured you as a sockpuppet too. You have no rebuttal other than grammar and spelling? That's pretty weak sauce, bro. I understand you have a job to do too. Anyway, I've got you marked down as #3. BTW, the scums will never win! See ya round, kid.

Ron Holzwarth 3 years, 11 months ago

Another thing - do they know when it's an appropriate time to insert "are"?

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

Tell ya what, smart guy, I'll PM you all my comments from now on so you can get your kicks, on the grammar-nazi tip.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X15-kYgpLwo

Aiko 3 years, 11 months ago

Until each one of these 1500 + licensed professional architects build an exact replica of the twin towers then fly two jetliners into them constructing the exact pattern as they were on 9/11 to see results I will not think otherwise..

verity 3 years, 11 months ago

In the O.J. Simpson case, it was said that you should never try to frame a guilty man.

The lack of a reliable investigation doesn't necessarily mean that there is a cover up. It may just mean that the investigators were incompetent or unable to do their job because of circumstances. It's not like there was a rule book for this sort of thing.

On the other hand, it doesn't rule out a conspiracy either.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

Hello? See my first post...even the official government story is a conspiracy theory. Jeez. People say 'conspiracy theory' like it's a bad thing. It is not...as previously stated, even the government's story is a conspiracy theory.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 3 years, 11 months ago

I agree. There are lots of unanswered questions and contradictory findings in the official investigation and commission, but there could be numerous explanations for that besides conspiracy.

And anyway, BushCo showed themselves too generally incompetent to have carried out such an attack without leaving an easily detectable trail.

Ron Holzwarth 3 years, 11 months ago

I think that those who carry conspiracy theories to far are paranoid. That is just my personal opinion, but I am quite sure it is held by others as well.

I did a very small amount of research on the web, here's a clip:

Prognosis of Paranoia

"Predicting the prognosis of an individual suffering from Paranoia is quite difficult. Paranoia generally becomes a whole life or lifelong condition if there exists any underlying mental disorder, such as schizophrenia or paranoid personality disorder. It certainly and sometimes get better with some treatments or remission or with slight changes in medication. People who have symptoms of paranoia as part of another medical condition may also have a waxing and waning mental course.

Sometimes it is the case that paranoia is caused by the use of a particular drug or medication. In this case, it is possible that discontinuing that substance may completely reverse the symptoms of paranoia."

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

Our work at AE911Truth is dedicated to the victims, families and all others throughout the world affected by the tragic events of September 11, 2001 and its aftermath. We are a non-partisan association of architects, engineers, and affiliates.

Our mission is to research, compile, and disseminate scientific evidence relative to the destruction of the three World Trade Center skyscrapers, calling for a truly open and independent investigation and supporting others in the pursuit of justice.

Our organization is devoted to: - Dispelling misinformation with scientific facts and forensic evidence - Educating and motivating thousands of architects and engineers and the public at large - Procuring a truly independent 9/11 investigation with subpoena power - Achieving 9/11 Truth mainstream media coverage.


Yep, sounds like a bunch of paranoia to me too. /sarcasm

Ron Holzwarth 3 years, 11 months ago

Jet airliners collided with the World Trade Center towers.

One or more bullets collided with John F. Kennedy's skull.

Julius Caesar was killed by one or more stabs with at least one dagger.

And now years, decades, and centuries later, some people are still wondering where those jet airliners, bullets, and daggers came from.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

The advancement of science; more specifically computer science is what separates them all... Computers have advanced the forensic sciences greatly. It took decades for the JFK conspiracy to take shape, whereas the questions about the government's 9/11 conspiracy theory began almost immediately and has spread like wildfire (hey, #3, should I have hyphenated wild-fire?).

Believe it or not, but you'd be hard-pressed to find even one idiot within a group of 1500 licensed architects and engineers. These are the people who build the skyscrapers and such. Why would anyone question their integrity or intention?

Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. http://www.ae911truth.org/

Ron Holzwarth 3 years, 11 months ago

Sorry Dispersant. Crazy_Larry had that one right.

Andrew Reeves 3 years, 11 months ago

I was referring to your first sentence. (since you were correcting him before). No hard feelings. It's all in fun.

Ron Holzwarth 3 years, 11 months ago

I had to look that one up.

"Too is an adverb meaning "excessively" or "also." "

I had always thought of it as meaning only "also".

Whoops!

gatekeeper 3 years, 11 months ago

if you check out the timeline of events, you will start to see that there are many cover ups in the story we were given by the govt about 9/11. Read the interviews with the employees in the control towers in Boston, NY and DC that day.

Anyone that believes that Kennedy was killed by Oswald has to be nuts. If you can find one of those magic bullets, please share.

If you trust what the govt tells you, then you need the tin foil hat. If they had nothing to hide, then so much of the information wouldn't be classified about the events.

Again, read the timeline of events on 9/11 (many website have it - minute by minute). That alone shows what a load of lies the govt's story is.

Ron Holzwarth 3 years, 11 months ago

For some people things fade into history, and then they become events to be learned from.

For other people things never fade into history, and they make it their mission to discover what really happened. They are referred to as historians.

A few quotes about history:

"Whosoever, in writing a modern history, shall follow truth too near the heels, it may haply strike out his teeth." - Walter Raleigh, in 'History of the World'

"History knows that it can wait for more evidence and review its older verdicts; it offers an endless series of courts of appeal, and is ever ready to reopen closed cases." - William Stubbs

"The notion that any one person can describe 'what really happened' is an absurdity. If ten - or a hundred - people witness an event, there will be ten - or a hundred - different versions of what took place." - David and Leigh Eddings

Ron Holzwarth 3 years, 11 months ago

I should start my own website, so that people can discover the truth according to me.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

For sure...even if the timeline is provided by a credible source, i.e. The National Institute of Science and Technology web-site....it's still a total fabrication and false. There's nothing true on the interwebs...I don't even check my bank account via the interwebs, because what you see on the interwebs is simpley a fabribaction of someone's imagination and completely false. Am I right?

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

The 'people' harassing us--because we have legitimate concerns over a botched investigation--will not consider any evidence presented, or any conspiracy theory other than what is purported by the 9/11 Commission. They're either paid to frequent web-sites in order to distract from the facts (yes, this is happening all over the internets), or it's simply more evidence to pile onto the existing mountain supporting the sad fact that our country has truly been dumbed-down to borderline retardation. In this case I believe it's the former rather than the latter. There's nothing we can do except put up with it...battle back...don't let them drown us out with their idiocy. Always link to credible evidence and let them attempt to explain it away then crush them like the scums they are.

RoeDapple 3 years, 11 months ago

"Damn!" < backs quickly out of the room . . .

Ron Holzwarth 3 years, 11 months ago

You should pack your sanity in your satchel and leave, because sane people don't belong on this forum.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 3 years, 11 months ago

They're probably both distantly related to both President(s) Bush and President Obama.

Ron Holzwarth 3 years, 11 months ago

If you assigned an equivalency to "conspiracy views" and "political views", I would know exactly what to say, and it would be this:

You forgot the undistributed middle. Or maybe, you didn't study Logic in college and therefore didn't know about its logical significance.

But if you didn't assign that equivalency, your statement doesn't have very much meaning.

On the other hand, Crazy Larry and Snap certainly do have common ancestry, and we all are the descendants of kings.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

It's funny, how you sockpuppets chat it up about anything other than the real issue of concern. I'm confident the vast majority see through your idiocy. If only one person gains interest, or learns something new from my posts, you have lost the game. Wallow in your own self-import so's I can continue lol; it's good for my health.

Ron Holzwarth 3 years, 11 months ago

"From JFK to 9/11, conspiracy theories thrive"

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

9/11 Commission Report = conspiracy theory. Am I wrong?

beatrice 3 years, 11 months ago

Yes CL, if you touch just one life it will be worth it.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

I have never heard of the name "Jack Cashill" until this thread. Now what?

Ron Holzwarth 3 years, 11 months ago

Maybe the case should be reopened about exactly who shot Abraham Lincoln.

Maybe it wasn't really John Wilkes Booth, after all.

And, did Franklin Delano Roosevelt know about the December 7, 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor before it actually happened, as some historians claim?

I think that the important thing to learn about any historical event is how to prevent it from happening again, instead of beating to death things which have already faded into history.

gatekeeper 3 years, 11 months ago

Explain how you can keep something from happening again if you don't fully know the truth of how it happened in the first place.

beatrice 3 years, 11 months ago

Amazingly, the superintent of the construction of the Twin Towers was named Kennedy, while the designer of the Boeing 757 was named Lincoln.

Katara 3 years, 11 months ago

But they both have 7 letters in their names!!!!

Ron Holzwarth 3 years, 11 months ago

Kennedy - Lincoln Similarities

Abraham Lincoln was elected to Congress in 1846. John F. Kennedy was elected to Congress in 1946.

Abraham Lincoln was elected President in 1860. John F. Kennedy was elected President in 1960.

The names Lincoln and Kennedy each contain seven letters.

Both were particularly concerned with civil rights.

Both wives lost their children while living in the White House.

Both Presidents were shot on a Friday.

Both were shot in the head.

Lincoln's secretary was named Kennedy. Kennedy's secretary was named Lincoln.

Both were assassinated by Southerners.

Both were succeeded by Southerners.

Both successors were named Johnson.

Andrew Johnson, who succeeded Lincoln, was born in 1808. Lyndon Johnson, who succeeded Kennedy, was born in 1908.

John Wilkes Booth was born in 1839. Lee Harvey Oswald was born in 1939.

Both assassins were known by their three names. Both names are comprised of fifteen letters

Booth ran from the theater and was caught in a warehouse. Oswald ran from a warehouse and was caught in a theater.

Booth and Oswald were both assassinated before their trials.

beatrice 3 years, 11 months ago

Okay, I posted this response in a thread higher up, but I wanted to post it here as well just to make sure my new friend Crazy_Larry sees my response to his calling me an idiot and asking if I had dropped out of high school. Hope I don't offend everyone by repeating myself.

To CL:

Although I may indeed be an idiot (it is hard to determine these things about one's self), I can assure you I did not drop out of high school. High school proved to be 9 of the best years of my life.

I do know that the construction of the Empire State Building, finished in 1931, and the Twin Towers built in 1973, was dramatically different, hence the difference in how they looked. This is why part of the B-25 that hit the ESB was lodged into the side of the building and one engine dislodged and actually went through and shot out the other side, landing on a building below. Clearly this did not happen with the Twin Towers, and wouldn't have even happen had it been hit by a B-25. Have you seen those videos of the Twin Towers? The planes went right through the walls of glass and that was a big explosion. Also, a slow-flying B-25 at the end of a flight is a dramatically different projectile than a Boeing 757.

However, believe what you will, but do know that you are wrong. Barack Obama was born in Hawaii, Oswald shot Kennedy, men walked on the moon, and the Twin Towers fell because massive planes filled with fuel crashed into them.

Now, feel free to try and insult me further. The high school line was a particularly charming touch.

Ron Holzwarth 3 years, 11 months ago

beatrice, honey, I don't like the way you spell your name.

So there!

Ron Holzwarth 3 years, 11 months ago

beatrice, since I've been picking on Crazy_Larry so much, I shouldn't leave you out.

They were Boeing 767s, not 757s. A very minor error.

beatrice 3 years, 11 months ago

767s? Are you serious???

Well, that changes everything! It had to be planted bombs then.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

No jet plane struck WTC Building 7. The NIST report says the building collapsed due to fire.

gatekeeper 3 years, 11 months ago

I have only one question. Please explain how Oswald came across a magic bullet? I'm really interested in these magic bullets. If they exist, then less ammo is needed by all because one bullet can go in and out of multiple people. Try explaining why almost 50 years later, everything is still classified.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

Check out the architects and engineers' website: http://www.ae911truth.org/

1500 engineers and architects or just a gaggle of crackpots?

Ron Holzwarth 3 years, 11 months ago

You've got a point.

A serious investigation would cost what, perhaps thirty million dollars? (at least)

The only thing they have to do is contribute only twenty thousand dollars each, and then maybe the truth will come out.

And, they can evenly divide up any cost overruns, and you can bet there will be some.

Do you think they are going to do that, or are they going to try to get the taxpayers to pay for it?

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

The initial 9/11 Commission allocation of $3 million was a joke, because it was significantly less than the cost of investigating Clinton/ Lewinsky affair.

ivalueamerica 3 years, 11 months ago

The beauty and ease of Conspiracy theorists is that they need very few facts to support anything they believe.

If there is a hole in the information, fill it in with whatever you want.

If there is a question about a fact, fill it in with whatever you want.

If a fact conflicts with your opinion, dismiss the fact as part of the conspiracy.

While sometimes they are correct, they will never be accepted as legitimate points of view in a discussion because their methodology is much more akin to a spiritual belief instead of a presentation of alternative or conflicting facts.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

I'm pushing forensic science and analysis of evidence--that is all.

riverdrifter 3 years, 11 months ago

I've been to the Dealy Plaza & the book depository building site. I've made longer shots on squirrels with a .22 than Oswald did on a president. It was what it was: a piece of cake for a nut job. Jack Ruby: the same.

verity 3 years, 11 months ago

I used to see a poster about twenty years ago which said,"Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you." Seems as true to me now as it did then.

While I don't discount that there may have been a 9/11 conspiracy beyond the obvious one of the the people that we know planned and executed it, I tend to think that too many people would have been involved for someone not to have blabbed by now.

I also think that people such as Cheney may have (I repeat, may have) anticipated it due to surveillance that they knew about and purposely did not stop it because it suited their purpose. Or they may just have been stupid (or both). I think many conspiracy theories overestimate the intelligence of a number of people.

Ron Holzwarth 3 years, 11 months ago

"... the simplest hypothesis proposed as an explanation of phenomena is more likely to be the true one than is any other available hypothesis, that its predictions are more likely to be true than those of any other available hypothesis, and that it is an ultimate a priori epistemic principle that simplicity is evidence for truth" (Swinburne 1997). - Richard Swinburne

verity 3 years, 11 months ago

After I read that several times, I decided I probably agree with it. However, couldn't he have put it more simply?

The simplest hypothesis is the most likely to be true.

verity 3 years, 11 months ago

After thinking about it, I'm not sure I do agree with that statement. Oversimplification perhaps (with many complicated words)? I think that often/usually we will never have all the facts and will never know the complete truth. Our human minds don't want to live with that uncertainty so we draw conclusions, perhaps that best fit the facts that we know or perhaps that fit our preconceived ideas.

Also, with both the JFK assassination and the World Trade Center catastrophe, many of the "facts" are so technical that it is hard for the layman to decide which facts are in fact fact.

Ron Holzwarth 3 years, 11 months ago

That posting is one of the many ways that "Occam's razor" has been defined.

What "Occam's razor" states is that the simplest explanation is the one that is most likely to be true.

verity 3 years, 11 months ago

OK, dammit, now I'm on a mission---I'm wondering why/how the simplest came to be thought the best. Not trying to start a fight, just curious. I used our friend, Google, and this is what I came up with: The principle was often inaccurately summarized as "the simplest explanation is most likely the correct one." This summary is misleading, however, since in practice the principle is actually focused on shifting the burden of proof in discussions. That is, the razor is a principle that suggests we should tend towards simpler theories until we can trade some simplicity for increased explanatory power. Contrary to the popular summary, the simplest available theory is sometimes a less accurate explanation. Philosophers also add that the exact meaning of "simplest" can be nuanced in the first place.

Being a this or maybe that kind of person, I tend to like explanations with "nuance" in them.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

Mineta: "During the time that the airplane was coming into 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!??"

911 Commission - Trans. Sec Norman Mineta Testimony http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDfdOw...

classclown 3 years, 11 months ago

Why is the theory concerning 9/11 that something other than the official explanation happened being referred to as a conspiracy theory? Do people not understand what the genesis of a conspiracy theory is?

When JFK was assassinated, the official story is that Oswald acted completely alone. The conspiracy theorists believe that several people - here's the kicker - conspired to assassinate the president.

The official explanation for what happened on 9/11 is that Bin Laden and several others conspired to take down the WTC and acted on their plans to do so. Since the official version is that a conspiracy occurred to take down the WTC, why do those of you that believe something else happened refer to your version as a conspiracy theory?

Or does it just sound good to scream that 9/11 was the result of a conspiracy?

To which the rest of us can simply reply "Well duh!"

classclown 3 years, 11 months ago

Crazy_Larry (anonymous) replies…

Believe it or not, but you'd be hard-pressed to find even one idiot within a group of 1500 licensed architects and engineers.

===========================================================

I've known many engineers that many people would consider to be an idiot. And there is one architect the commenters of the LJWorld know to be an idiot. Occupations do not provide a shield against idiocy as idiots can be found in all walks of life. The ability to do one thing well does not a genius make.

Ron Holzwarth 3 years, 11 months ago

The psychiatric term for people that can do only one thing well is 'Idiot savant'.

I have known at least one. He got just about straight As in Electrical Engineering, and yet I had to help him design and build the one and only actual circuit that he was required to design and build as a requirement for his Electrical Engineering degree.

And me? I can easily design op amp and transistor circuits that almost always work perfectly when first fired up.

And, I designed printed circuit boards for years, and everyone that had me do it for them thought my skills in doing that were jaw dropping, because I could do most of them manually, that is by hand without the use of a computer, literally overnight.

Most of my Electrical Engineering grades were only Cs. But I never studied, probably that had something to do with it.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

Safe to say that the vast majority of the 1500 are not idiots?

classclown 3 years, 11 months ago

The_Original_Bob (anonymous) says…

"Crazy_Larry (anonymous) replies… Tell ya what, smart guy, I'll PM you all my comments from now on so you can get your kicks, on the grammar-nazi tip." The correctly named Crazy Larry.

Sorry. You just lost due to Godwin. Put your energy into something worthwhile.

========================================

Does grammar nazi fall under the Godwin rule? It's a term that's been around forever as far the the internet goes. This is the first time I've ever seen the term get flagged.

Can we get a judge's ruling?

Ron Holzwarth 3 years, 11 months ago

I had to look up 'Godwin Rule' to see what it meant.

Heil!

beatrice 3 years, 11 months ago

Yes. Anytime you use the term nazi to describe anything other than actual Hitler-lovin' nazis who killed 6 million jews, it is a Godwin.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

It should not fall under the Godwin rule, but many here will say that it does.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

Thread has been resurrected from the dead....and my spelliing/grammar has not improved in the interim.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

That Jonathan Bush’s Riggs Bank has been found guilty of laundering terrorist funds and fined a US-record $25 million must embarrass his nephew George, but it's still no justification for leaping to paranoid conclusions.

That George Bush's brother Marvin sat on the board of the Kuwaiti-owned company which provided electronic security to the World Trade Centre, Dulles Airport and United Airlines means nothing more than you must admit those Bush boys have done alright for themselves.

That George Bush found success as a businessman only after the investment of Osama’s brother Salem and reputed al Qaeda financier Khalid bin Mahfouz is just one of those things - one of those crazy things.

That Osama bin Laden is known to have been an asset of US foreign policy in no way implies he still is.

That al Qaeda was active in the Balkan conflict, fighting on the same side as the US as recently as 1999, while the US protected its cells, is merely one of history's little aberrations.

The claims of Michael Springman, State Department veteran of the Jeddah visa bureau, that the CIA ran the office and issued visas to al Qaeda members so they could receive training in the United States, sound like the sour grapes of someone who was fired for making such wild accusations.

That one of George Bush's first acts as President, in January 2001, was to end the two-year deployment of attack submarines which were positioned within striking distance of al Qaeda's Afghanistan camps, even as the group's guilt for the Cole bombing was established, proves that a transition from one administration to the next is never an easy task.

That so many influential figures in and close to the Bush White House had expressed, just a year before the attacks, the need for a "new Pearl Harbor" before their militarist ambitions could be fulfilled, demonstrates nothing more than the accidental virtue of being in the right place at the right time.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

That on May 8, 2001, Dick Cheney took upon himself the job of coordinating a response to domestic terror attacks even as he was crafting the administration’s energy policy, which bore implications for America's military, circumventing the established infrastructure and ignoring the recommendations of the Hart-Rudman report, merely shows the VP to be someone who finds it hard to delegate.

That the standing order which covered the shooting down of hijacked aircraft was altered on June 1, 2001, taking discretion away from field commanders and placing it solely in the hands of the Secretary of Defense, is simply poor planning and unfortunate timing. Fortunately the error has been corrected, as the order was rescinded shortly after 9/11.

That in the weeks before 9/11, FBI agent Colleen Rowley found her investigation of Zacarias Moussaoui so perversely thwarted that her colleagues joked that bin Laden had a mole at the FBI, proves the stress-relieving virtue of humour in the workplace.

That Dave Frasca of the FBI’s Radical Fundamentalist Unit received a promotion after quashing multiple, urgent requests for investigations into al Qaeda assets training at flight schools in the summer of 2001 does appear on the surface odd, but undoubtedly there's a good reason for it, quite possibly classified.

That FBI informant Randy Glass, working an undercover sting, was told by Pakistani intelligence operatives that the World Trade Center towers were coming down, and that his repeated warnings which continued until weeks before the attacks, including the mention of planes used as weapons, were ignored by federal authorities, is simply one of the many "What Ifs" of that tragic day.

That over the summer of 2001 Washington received many urgent, senior-level warnings from foreign intelligence agencies and governments - including those of Germany, France, Great Britain, Russia, Egypt, Israel, Morocco, Afghanistan and others - of impending terror attacks using hijacked aircraft and did nothing, demonstrates the pressing need for a new Intelligence Czar.

That John Ashcroft stopped flying commercial aircraft in July 2001 on account of security considerations had nothing to do with warnings regarding September 11, because he said so to the 9/11 Commission.

That former lead counsel for the House David Schippers says he’d taken to John Ashcroft’s office specific warnings he’d learned from FBI agents in New York of an impending attack – even naming the proposed dates, names of the hijackers and the targets – and that the investigations had been stymied and the agents threatened, proves nothing but David Schipper’s pathetic need for attention.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

That Garth Nicolson received two warnings from contacts in the intelligence community and one from a North African head of state, which included specific site, date and source of the attacks, and passed the information to the Defense Department and the National Security Council to evidently no effect, clearly amounts to nothing, since virtually nobody has ever heard of him.

That in the months prior to September 11, self-described US intelligence operative Delmart Vreeland sought, from a Toronto jail cell, to get US and Canadian authorities to heed his warning of his accidental discovery of impending catastrophic attacks is worthless, since Vreeland was a dubious character, notwithstanding the fact that many of his claims have since been proven true.

That FBI Special Investigator Robert Wright claims that agents assigned to intelligence operations actually protect terrorists from investigation and prosecution, that the FBI shut down his probe into terrorist training camps, and that he was removed from a money-laundering case that had a direct link to terrorism, sounds like yet more sour grapes from a disgruntled employee.

That George Bush had plans to invade Afghanistan on his desk before 9/11 demonstrates only the value of being prepared.

The suggestion that securing a pipeline across Afghanistan figured into the White House’s calculations is as ludicrous as the assertion that oil played a part in determining war in Iraq.

That Afghanistan is once again the world’s principal heroin producer is an unfortunate reality, but to claim the CIA is still actively involved in the narcotics trade is to presume bad faith on the part of the agency.

Mahmood Ahmed, chief of Pakistan’s ISI, must not have authorized an al Qaeda payment of $100,000 to Mohammed Atta days before the attacks, and was not meeting with senior Washington officials over the week of 9/11, because I didn’t read anything about him in the official report.

That Porter Goss met with Ahmed the morning of September 11 in his capacity as Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence has no bearing whatsoever upon his recent selection by the White House to head the Central Intelligence Agency.

That Goss's congressional seat encompasses the 9/11 hijackers' Florida base of operation, including their flight schools, is precisely the kind of meaningless factoid a conspiracy theorist would bring up.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

It's true that George HW Bush and Dick Cheney spent the evening of September 10 alone in the Oval Office, but what's wrong with old colleagues catching up? And it's true that George HW Bush and Shafig bin Laden, Osama's brother, spent the morning of September 11 together at a board meeting of the Carlyle Group, but the bin Ladens are a big family.

That FEMA arrived in New York on Sept 10 to prepare for a scheduled biowarfare drill, and had a triage centre ready to go that was larger and better equipped than the one that was lost in the collapse of WTC 7, was a lucky twist of fate.

Newsweek’s report that senior Pentagon officials cancelled flights on Sept 10 for the following day on account of security concerns is only newsworthy because of what happened the following morning.

That George Bush's telephone logs for September 11 do not exist should surprise no one, given the confusion of the day.

That Mohamed Atta attended the International Officer's School at Maxwell Air Force Base, that Abdulaziz Alomari attended Brooks Air Force Base Aerospace Medical School, that Saeed Alghamdi attended the Defense Language Institute in Monterey merely shows it is a small world, after all.

That Lt Col Steve Butler, Vice Chancellor for student affairs of the Defense Language Institute during Alghamdi's terms, was disciplined, removed from his post and threatened with court martial when he wrote "Bush knew of the impending attacks on America. He did nothing to warn the American people because he needed this war on terrorism. What is...contemptible is the President of the United States not telling the American people what he knows for political gain," is the least that should have happened for such disrespect shown his Commander in Chief.

That Mohammed Atta dressed like a Mafioso, had a stripper girlfriend, smuggled drugs, was already a licensed pilot when he entered the US, enjoyed pork chops, drank to excess and did cocaine, was closer to Europeans than Arabs in Florida, and included the names of defence contractors on his email list, proves how dangerous the radical fundamentalist Muslim can be.

That 43 lbs of heroin was found on board the Lear Jet owned by Wally Hilliard, the owner of Atta’s flight school, just three weeks after Atta enrolled – the biggest seizure ever in Central Florida – was just bad luck. That Hilliard was not charged shows how specious the claims for conspiracy truly are.

That Hilliard’s plane had made 30-round trips to Venezuela with the same passengers who always paid cash, that the plane had been supplied by a pair of drug smugglers who had also outfitted CIA drug runner Barry Seal, and that 9/11 commissioner Richard ben-Veniste had been Seal’s attorney before Seal’s murder, shows nothing but the lengths to which conspiracists will go to draw sinister conclusions.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

Reports of insider trading on 9/11 are false, because the SEC investigated and found only respectable investors who will remain nameless involved, and no terrorists, so the windfall profit-taking was merely, as ever, coincidental.

That heightened security for the World Trade Centre was lifted immediately prior to the attacks illustrates that it always happens when you least expect it.

That Hani Hanjour, the pilot of Flight 77, was so incompetent he could not fly a Cessna in August, but in September managed to fly a 767 at excessive speed into a spiraling, 270-degree descent and a level impact of the first floor of the Pentagon, on the only side that was virtually empty and had been hardened to withstand a terrorist attack, merely demonstrates that people can do almost anything once they set their minds to it.

That none of the flight data recorders were said to be recoverable even though they were located in the tail sections, and that until 9/11, no solid-state recorder in a catastrophic crash had been unrecoverable, shows how there's a first time for everything.

That Mohammed Atta left a uniform, a will, a Koran, his driver's license and a "how to fly planes" video in his rental car at the airport means he had other things on his mind.

The mention of Israelis with links to military-intelligence having been arrested on Sept 11 videotaping and celebrating the attacks, of an Israeli espionage ring surveiling DEA and defense installations and trailing the hijackers, and of a warning of impending attacks delivered to the Israeli company Odigo two hours before the first plane hit, does not deserve a response. That the stories also appeared in publications such as Ha'aretz and Forward is a sad display of self-hatred among certain elements of the Israeli media.

That multiple military wargames and simulations were underway the morning of 9/11 – one simulating the crash of a plane into a building; another, a live-fly simulation of multiple hijackings – and took many interceptors away from the eastern seaboard and confused field commanders as to which was a real hijacked aircraft and which was a hoax, was a bizarre coincidence, but no less a coincidence.

That the National Military Command Center ops director asked a rookie substitute to stand his watch at 8:30 am on Sept. 11 is nothing more than bad timing.

That a recording made Sept 11 of air traffic controllers’ describing what they had witnessed, was destroyed by an FAA official who crushed it in his hand, cut the tape into little pieces and dropped them in different trash cans around the building, is something no doubt that overzealous official wishes he could undo.

That the FBI knew precisely which Florida flight schools to descend upon hours after the attacks should make every American feel safer knowing their federal agents are on the ball.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

That a former flight school executive believes the hijackers were "double agents," and says about Atta and associates, "Early on I gleaned that these guys had government protection. They were let into this country for a specific purpose," and was visited by the FBI just four hours after the attacks to intimidate him into silence, proves he's an unreliable witness, for the simple reason there is no conspiracy.

That Jeb Bush was on board an aircraft that removed flight school records to Washington in the middle of the night on Sept 12th demonstrates how seriously the governor takes the issue of national security.

To insinuate evil motive from the mercy flights of bin Laden family members and Saudi royals after 9/11 shows the sickness of the conspiratorial mindset.

Le Figaro’s report in October 2001, known to have originated with French intelligence, that the CIA met Osama bin Laden in a Dubai hospital in July 2001, proves again the perfidy of the French.

That the tape in which bin Laden claims responsibility for the attacks was released by the State Department after having been found providentially by US forces in Afghanistan, and depicts a fattened Osama with a broader face and a flatter nose, proves Osama, and Osama alone, masterminded 9/11.

That at the battle of Tora Bora, where bin Laden was surrounded on three sides, Special Forces received no order to advance and capture him and were forced to stand and watch as two Russian-made helicopters flew into the area where bin Laden was believed hiding, loaded up passengers and returned to Pakistan, demonstrates how confusing the modern battlefield can be.

That upon returning to Fort Bragg from Tora Bora, the same Special Operations troops who had been stood down from capturing bin Laden, suffered a unusual spree of murder/suicides, is nothing more than a series of senseless tragedies.

Reports that bin Laden is currently receiving periodic dialysis treatment in a Pakistani medical hospital are simply too incredible to be true.

That the White House went on Cipro September 11 shows the foresightedness of America’s emergency response.

That the anthrax was mailed to perceived liberal media and the Democratic leadership demonstrates only the perversity of the terrorist psyche.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

That the anthrax attacks appeared to silence opponents of the Patriot Act shows only that appearances can be deceiving.

That the Ames-strain anthrax was found to have originated at Fort Detrick, and was beyond the capability of all but a few labs to refine, underscores the importance of allowing the investigation to continue without the distraction of absurd conspiracy theories.

That Republican guru Grover Norquist has been found to have aided financiers and supporters of Islamic terror to gain access to the Bush White House, and is a founder of the Islamic Institute, which the Treasury Department believes to be a source of funding for al Qaeda, suggests Norquist is at worst, naive, and at best, needs a wider circle of friends.

That the Department of Justice consistently chooses to see accused 9/11 plotters go free rather than permit the courtroom testimony of al Qaeda leaders in American custody looks bad, but only because we don't have all the facts.

That the White House balked at any inquiry into the events of 9/11, then starved it of funds and stonewalled it, was unfortunate, but since the commission didn't find for conspiracy it's all a non issue anyway.

That the 9/11 commission's executive director and "gatekeeper," Philip Zelikow, was so closely involved in the events under investigation that he testified before the the commission as part of the inquiry, shows only an apparent conflict of interest.

That commission chair Thomas Kean is, like George Bush, a Texas oil executive who had business dealings with reputed al Qaeda financier Khalid bin Mafouz, suggests Texas is smaller than they say it is.

That co-chair Lee Hamilton has a history as a Bush family "fixer," including clearing Bush Sr of the claims arising from the 1980 "October Surprise", is of no concern, since only conspiracists believe there was such a thing as an October Surprise.

That FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds accuses the agency of intentionally fudging specific pre-9/11 warnings and harboring a foreign espionage ring in its translation department, and claims she witnessed evidence of the semi-official infrastructure of money-laundering and narcotics trade behind the attacks, is of no account, since John Ashcroft has gagged her with the rare invocation of "State Secrets Privilege," and retroactively classified her public testimony. For the sake of national security, let us speak no more of her.

That, when commenting on Edmond's case, Daniel Ellsberg remarked that Ashcroft could go to prison for his part in a cover-up, suggests Ellsberg is giving comfort to the terrorists, and could, if he doesn't wise up, find himself declared an enemy combatant.

Flap Doodle 3 years, 11 months ago

The all-time record for copy/pasting without attribution in less than 4 hours on this award-winning website may have been set today.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 3 years, 11 months ago

They should emulate you-- if they never say anything of substance, they never need attribution.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 11 months ago

You ain't seen nothing, yet, garden gnome. Pick one, any one, and research that point of fact. I double-dog dare you. Let me know if I'm posting fact, or fiction.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.