paul:

wow, took you a whole 15 days to come up with that did it? 

So let me get this straight, because no one has fully accounted for the reason for the collapse of wtc7, that means it was, what, demoed?  Aside from the fact that the very premise of your statement is incorrect, where is your proof it was controlled demolition.  And you mentioned nothing of WTC1 and 2, so are you admitting that they were not demoed? 

And please supply a link to your poll, that is way way outside any of the numbers i have seen about people questioning 9/11.

And i am not afraid of anything paul, least of all you, with your BS info and your failure to grasp simple concepts.  And certainly not of the timeliness of your responses.

Hey friends (and you know who you are), don’t even waste another keystroKe oN ‘numbnuts’ Niloroth, an ovbious idiot, or disinformation stooge for the government. Hell, he doesn’t even grasp the concept that the NIST failure to, even at this late date, explain WHY WTC #7 fell, is evidence in and of itself.

On a poll mentioned just tonight on the news it said 62% of Americans now believe the Bush administration had complicity in 911, even if it was just by looking the other way.

When over 180,000,000 Americans agree on ANYTHING isn’t this sancton to call for another, more comprehensive, more complete investigation, by a reliable citizen selected committee instead of the government?

Why does this administration refuse if there is nothing to hide?

What are you afraid of Nil Set?

Damn typo,

“As for the sulpher sphere, much as he would like it to not seem, Jones is not the first person to notice them, he is just the first idiot to claim they were from thermite.”

should read

As for the iron-rich spheres, much as he would like it to not seem, Jones is not the first person to notice them, he is just the first idiot to claim they were from thermite.

Sorry about that.

continued:

Cyrena:

Here, go to http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/911pentagonflight77evi dencesummary and click on the excel file link, it is a breakdown on all the eyewitnesses.  I think i am done with you though, i have provided you with what, maybe 10 different sources or documents that you wanted, and as far as i know, you have read and responded to 1!  I am tired of doing research for you that you won’t even F’n read.  You have no interest in fact, you have no interest in evidence, and i have caught you in at least one lie that you won’t even admit to.  If you want to learn something, go read that link, if you want to stay ignorant and angry and paranoid, well, then i have nothing for you.

Paul:

Typical anti-semitic drivel that you folks like to post, it does noting to debunk the physical evidence that the NIST put forth as the reasons the towers fell.  I started one of the video’s but it was the same BS, “no other steel building has ever collapsed”.  Tell that to the people who saw the Kader toy factory fall.

As for the sulpher sphere, much as he would like it to not seem, Jones is not the first person to notice them, he is just the first idiot to claim they were from thermite. 
“Iron Spherules: Another curious phenomenon thought to be linked to the structural steel is creation of tiny spheres of steel or iron, found in the dust after collapse. Several researchers report this, including Lowers and Meeker [237] who documented a few examples of particles found to be nearly pure iron and quite spherical, approximately 7 microns in diameter; and the RJ Lee Group [238], who identified small, round iron particles as evidence of high temperatures. The significance of these spheres is still debated, along the following lines: As discussed previously, there is no evidence at all for large amounts of melted steel. If the spheres are formed by melting steel, it must be surface melting or some other highly localized process.
The quantity of these spherules is unknown, but thought to be very small – the iron-rich content of all dust samples was between 0.1 and 1.3% [239], most of which was not in the form of spherules. A large quantity would suggest melting of steel on large scales, but a small quantity suggests otherwise.
Small quantities of structural steel or other iron-rich objects could be partially melted through sheer friction, originating in the aircraft impact or the collapses. Much like the sulfidized samples, it is impossible to tell whether these spherules were created prior to collapse, after collapse, or both. After collapse, it is plausible for the debris to have reached much higher temperatures. There is potential site contamination from salvage operations, in which numerous steel pieces were cut, involving nontrivial amounts of melted steel. It is also possible for the spherules to have been left over from the buildings’ original construction. Iron that appears to have melted may have merely oxidized [240], and surface chemistry effects of merely heated iron may give rise to tiny amounts of melting even at moderate temperatures.
Chemical factors, combined with heat, could lead to eutectic mixtures of iron with other elements (such as sulfur) melting and dissociating at relatively low temperatures, potentially creating the iron spherules.”
sorry for the formating, the source is http://www.911myths.com/drg_nist_review_1_1.pdf which is also a full and complete rebuttal to griffins debunking 9/11 debunking book.  Griffin has a copy of it since he requested one from the author, but even though it has been out for months, he has yet to reply to anything the author has stated. 

Doug:
“The whole point is that you are NOT interested in TRUTH. As you yourself admit, you are only out to make a nuisance of yourself by debunking everything in order to marginalize other peoples’ valid concerns - which there is already evidence to support, uhh.”

If i can debunk their evidence, doesn’t that then make their concerns by default invalid?  And again, i ask, where is the evidence?  Are you stating, as paul does, that steven jones theory about the iron rich spheres is the only correct theory?  Are you saying that the reason they are there is because of non existant thermite cutter charges that steven jones himself has yet to produce, or create, or even prove would be effective?  There is NO WAY thermite/thermate caused the damage to the towers, it doesn’t work the way he wants it to work.  Jones and Gage together just tried to use thermite to cut standing steel a few weeks ago, and they failed.  So i am lost as to how you think that the truthers have any valid concerns about the physical evidence.

Good point, cyrena. I’ve seen claims on the MSM that there were ‘hundeds’ of witnesses that saw a plane hit the Pentagon, but only seen/heard testimony from a few interviewed on camera.

One woman reported trying to be convinced she saw a plane by someone in a suit that seemed like a gov’t worker, and another guy in a suit said he definitely saw a 757 fly into the building, but that is suspect info because how many people in a situation where a jet is screaming loudly flying a few feet right over their heads know the difference in models?

Hell, most people don’t know the difference between planes even sitting on a tarmac at an airport, with the possible exception of the humped 747 or the pointed nosed Concorde.

Some of the ‘supposed’ witnesses also claim the plane skidded off the ground before it hit the building, but mysteriously the ground around the line of approach is pristine. The cable spools are still in the pictures up close to the building, so we know that testimony is bogus, or mistaken at best.

Yes, and where is the debris from that 60 TON plane (empty weight)? It should be all ove the place, especially after knocking down a number of metal poles before hitting.

Who is the obviously insane person that originated the claim the plane ‘vaporized’, and that’s why there is no wreckage?

Not to be booringly repetitive, but for those who haven’t seen the film in this link it would be a good idea for you to take a look at how a rational mind operates instead of swallowing the government’s obvious lies hook, line, and sinker:

http://www.geeman-headquarters.com/Hufsmid_Movie.html

Nimrod,

...and what about the 103 people who saw the plane hit?  What about the 95% of the plane that was recovered from the site?…

If you’ve SEEN this 95% of the airplane that was recovered from the site at the Pentagon, then that makes you the only person on the face of the earth that has.

So, lets see YOUR proof. Let’s see this 95% of the recovered airplane. Let’s hear from the 103 people who saw it hit. That would SOOO relieve me, and then you’d be a hero.

See, nimrod, you’ve been holding out on us all this time. You never mentioned that you saw this 95% of a recovered airplane. And, this is the first I’m hearing about 103 live witnesses who saw the 757 actually hit that Pentagon. Where are they?

OH, have you ever actually READ the official story? I think I’ve asked you that a few times. Be kind of hard for us to prove or disprove any of it to you, if you’ve never read it.

But, never mind that. Just round up those 103 witnesses for us, and show us that 95% of the recovered airplane, and you will have done your duty to the citizens of the US.

But, if for any reason you can’t find it now, you do NOT have to honor your committment to lead a new investigation. We’d just as soon you didn’t.

RE: #112131 by niloroth on 11/07 at 10:08 am
(113 comments total)

“Folks, if you can give me one piece of physical evidence that shows that the physical evidence used by the NIST to prove the official story of 9/11 is false, i will lead the charge for a new investigation.”

WE’RE GOING TO HOLD YOU TO YOUR PROMISE OR YOU ARE JUST A LIAR

niloroth, here is your damned “proof” Let’s see you dispute this!

STEVEN JONES -
The Physical Evidence of Thermite in the WTC Dust
by Christopher Bollyn
16 May 2007

http://www.erichufschmid.net/TFC/Bollyn-Physical-Evide nce-of-Thermite.html

Thanks cyrena & Doug for the continued support. Don’t waste your time with numbnuts. He’s interested in controversy, not truth, and probably a Zionist on top of that. Here’s a couple links I think you will find extremely interesting. Allow yourself some time because they will take it to get a full undestanding of what the decent people in this world are facing & have been for quite some centuries. Try them in order and they will make more sense.

http://iamthewitness.com/doc/RothschildsTimeline-filer /frame.htm

http://www.Hugequestions.com

http://www.geeman-headquarters.com/Hufsmid_Movie.html

#112162 by niloroth on 11/07 at 12:05 pm: “...No, i am just looking for something that proves that the official story is not true.  Have i missed something?  ......Has someone posted something that i have not been able to debunk easily and off the top of my head....?”

You are still saying two opposite things, niloroth.

The whole point is that you are NOT interested in TRUTH. As you yourself admit, you are only out to make a nuisance of yourself by debunking everything in order to marginalize other peoples’ valid concerns - which there is already evidence to support, uhh.

Douglas Chalmers:

No, i am just looking for something that proves that the official story is not true.  Have i missed something?  Has someone posted something that i have not been able to debunk easily and off the top of my head?  If so, please point it out.  I have been asked about the freefall issue by paolo, i proved him wrong, never heard from him again, i have been asked by cyrena to produce information from the NTSB about the planes, i did so, not that she will admit it.  People have talked about a missle hitting the pentagon, go to http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/911pentagonflight77evi dencesummary to read about the 103 eyewitnesses who saw it hit.  People talked about eyewitness hearing what sounded like bombs, leaving out the fact that 6 times as many people described the collapse as sounding like a rumble or a train.  Should we be looking towards amtrack as the ones who brought down the towers?  The official story matches the evidence, that is why i believe it, and i have yet to see anyone with evidence to the contrary.  If you have it, lets see it.

#112131 by niloroth on 11/07 at 10:08 am: “...if you can give me one piece of physical evidence..... No one has ever backed up their claims. ...”

You have rehashed the entire story, whether deliberately or otherwise, to deny the evidence which has already been widely presented, niloroth, uhh...... Are you confused - or sick???

Folks, if you can give me one piece of physical evidence that shows that the physical evidence used by the NIST to prove the official story of 9/11 is false, i will lead the charge for a new investigation.  That is all i have ever asked for on this site, and i have yet to see it.  The only things i have gotten are half backed ideas about missles and controlled demolitions.  No one has ever backed up their claims.  Cyrena claims the wtc 1 and 2 were brought down by explosives, where is there evidence?  What parts of the NIST’s reports are wrong?  People say a missle hit the pentagon, then what knocked down the light poles, and what about the 103 people who saw the plane hit?  What about the 95% of the plane that was recovered from the site?  Just stop messing around with dancing israeli’s and put options, and get to the facts.  It isn’t that hard, or at least, it wouldn’t, if the evidence suggested ANYTHING other than the events happening as they did that day.

#111813 by PaulMagillSmith on 11/05 at 2:51 pm

• niloroth,
While I appreciate the time you have taken to be extremely skeptical (unless you’re just a plant on this site paid to cast doubt on anything that might get too close to the truth), “Being skeptical is healthy, but being overly skeptical can lead to a cynicism that creates tunnel vision”

Paul,
Thanks for the links. They are indeed helpful for some of my work, and I’m sure that a few of my colleagues will appreciate them as well.
But, I fear you’re probably wasting your time with Nimrod. For instance, just read carefully through one of his shorter and most recent posts…

#111908 by niloroth
• paul:
“..Ah yes, i can clearly see how the oversimplification of complex issues such as government systems in the link you posted props up your theories that 9/11 was in inside job.  Look, if you want to debate politics, fine, go for it.  If you want to accuse the government and 1,000’s of american citizens of being involved in the murder of 3,000 other american citizens, then please provide some actual proof.  Other than that, keep your insane and unsupported theories to yourself.”

He suggests that we are accusing not JUST the government, of murdering 3,000 American citizens, but that you’re ALSO accusing ‘thousands’ (he writes 1,000’s) of American citizens of being ‘involved’ in these murders as well. So, who is he talking about? Who (in the government) is he talking about? And who are these other thousands of American citizens that he’s talking about?

I’ve never heard or read of anyone accusing “thousands” of American citizens of murdering 3,000 other American citizens.

So, who’s really been ‘accused’ of such? In reality, it didn’t take thousands of Americans to pull off the attacks of 9/11. Even those who may have been involved didn’t necessarily have to know about it themselves. Yet, this is the stuff that comes from Nimrod.

And…ALWAYS, ALWAYS, Nimrod will insist that you furnish some ‘proof’ of your legitimate reasons for questions. In short, he wants you to show some physical proof of what he knows isn’t available. (such as a photo of the plane that allegedly hit the Pentagon, or some other ‘proof’ of a negative). Or, he might like to have you come up with a photo of a missile that hit the Pentagon, except of course you can’t show him that either, because there are no photo’s of ANYTHING that may have caused the damage to the Pentagon.  So, Nimrod is a troll, (paid or otherwise) and he’s also trying to find out who knows what, and if there actually IS something out there, that might actually prove what really happened. (like the contents of any one of those multiple cameras that HAD to be in place at the Pentagon, that no one has ever seen, since they were immediately confiscated by persons unknown.) He’s not actually interested in the truth, only in trying to distort/destroy, silence, or distract attention from it.

So, while I can certainly appreciate your efforts in giving him the benefit of the doubt, (which is something that I generally try to do myself) or to engage in a logical or intellectual discussion with him, it ain’t gonna happen. It only takes a certain amount of time, to figure out who is about that, and who isn’t. Nimrod is not.

He also tells you that if you want to debate ‘politics’ you can. But, you should shut up about the truths of 9/11. So, in short, Nimrod is in active denial about the fact that the events of 9/11 are ALL ABOUT ‘politics’ and the creation of a fascist dictatorship. (or, he just doesn’t want anyone else to make that obvious connection). Or, he doesn’t even understand what ‘politics’ is.

Meantime, thanks again for the links.

#111974 by PaulMagillSmith on 11/06 at 3:17 pm

RE: #111908 by niloroth on 11/06 at 6:49 am

“...It would be very easy to settle this issue once and for all......... When over a hundred million disbelieving Americans are demanding a full, comprehensive, un-biased, non-partisan, independent re-investigation of the events of & surrounding 9-11-2007, why would anyone in their right mind object.....?”

Could it be that there is somthing to hide? If not then let’s do this! If there is then we MUST do this...... This topic is tearing at the basic fabric of American trust in our society & government.....”

This gets back to the 51% rule, you know, PMS. The sickness of democracy is that up to 49% of the voters can always be utterly ignored - at least until the next election.  All manner of games are played in the meantime.....

But there must be some Democrats who knew what really happened with 9/11, too, though. Isn’t that why they are always “caving in” to Bush even though they more or less have effective control?

That is to say, they are only too keen to keep to the rules. Otherwise, they would be running the very real risk of being politically destroyed by the GOP. No-one must ever know so the Bush Neocon show goes on.

Ironically, though, those very Democrats (we all know which ones by now) could destroy the Bush administration and the entire Republican party forever. Sadly, they are too weak to see or to do, uhh!!!!!!

RE: #111908 by niloroth on 11/06 at 6:49 am

It would be very easy to settle this issue once and for all.

When over a hundred million disbelieving Americans are demanding a full, comprehensive, un-biased, non-partisan, independent re-investigation of the events of & surrounding 9-11-2007, why would anyone in their right mind object?

Could it be that there is somthing to hide? If not then let’s do this! If there is then we MUST do this.

This topic is tearing at the basic fabric of American trust in our society & government and must be resolved if we are to walk together as a united nation into the future.

If you agree that a re-investigation might help end some of the current divisiveness in our country, then fine. If you adamantly refuse, then list specific reasons, and just saying it has already been investigated is unacceptable entirely.

paul:

Ah yes, i can clearly see how the oversimplification of complex issues such as government systems in the link you posted props up your theories that 9/11 was in inside job.  Look, if you want to debate politics, fine, go for it.  If you want to accuse the government and 1,000’s of american citizens of being involved in the murder of 3,000 other american citizens, then please provide some actual proof.  Other than that, keep your insane and unsupported theories to yourself.

niloroth,

While I appreciate the time you have taken to be extremely skeptical (unless you’re just a plant on this site paid to cast doubt on anything that might get too close to the truth), I think you should look at this link (I think you will find the links on it of interest also, cyrena)

http://www.oldamericancentury.org/14pts.htm

“Being skeptical is healthy, but being overly skeptical can lead to a cynicism that creates tunnel vision”

cyrena:

Lets see, you wanted info from the NTSB, i provided it

You wanted info from the black boxes, i provided it.

You supported Paul in his baseless accusations about the put options, i have debunked them 2 times.

Meanwhile, you have never supported your statement that the towers were imploded, and you have never supported your assertions that the Israeli’s were in on the deal.  Feel free to offer some actual evidence any day now, i will not however be holding my breath.

PaulMagillSmith:

The arguments get weaker and weaker.

First off, read the whole article, don’t just read the parts the truthers want you to.

“The proposed system, which would go into effect immediately, effectively deputizes hundreds, if not thousands, of key players in the private sector.”

is very different from ACTUALLY deputizing people like Michael Ruppert says.  (no surprise there, Ruppert’s grasp on the truth is tenuous at best.  I seem to remember he is of the opinion that the CIA created crack, and that AIDS was manufactured in a lab.) And what does an ex LAPD officer know about members of congress being bound by secrecy?

But the accusation is that we are now letting hundreds, if not thousands in on the plot as well, AFTER the fact?  And not even one whistle blower?  Who would go down in history as on of this countries greatest heroes? 

How about “Because the control list contains confidential information,” the SEC said, “we ask that you disseminate the information within your institution only on a need-to-know basis.” Note that this is not the SEC saying that they are not allowing their contacts to say anything about the cases they are working on, but rather to be judicious about how and to who they disclose information.  This is fully inside the usual scope of protection that is extended to investors by securities and investment firms.

From the Article:
“Alan Sorcher, staff attorney for the SIA, said that he doubted the formalization of industry involvement raised new legal questions for people already covered by federal securities laws and the half-dozen federal money- laundering laws that have been in existence since 1970.

“Our members are subject to a number of rules and regulations, so I don’t think what the SEC has done is unusual,” Sorcher said.”

I think that helps to make the point.  Again, you need to start reading the ENTIRE source, not just trust the truther quotes.

As for the citations of the increase in put options, notice the way they inflate the numbers by only selecting certain days to compare the put option transactions?  I already posted previously that while the number of put options were high, they were not in fact outside the statistical norm, especially not for the financial situations of the airlines at the time.  Did you know for instance that AMR released a profit warning days before the attacks?  You won’t find that on the truther sites.  I pointed it out in my previous post, i think you still missed it.

From the article:
“No similar trading occurred on any other airlines”

Go back and look at my link in the previous post, and see if you can figure out why there would be no trading on the other airlines.  None were in such bad shape.

continued:

I also especially liked this quote:
“Interpreting and Reinterpreting the Data
An analysis of the press reports on the subject of apparent insider trading related to the attack shows a trend, with early reports highlighting the anomalies, and later reports excusing them.”

That would be consistent with investigators in the days after the attacks searching for any and all leads in connection with the attacks, and then, as they investigate them, discarding the ones that don’t lead to anything in favor of ones that do. 

Someone else put it better than i can, i will quote:
“Okay, I’ll reiterate: because these trades were initially thought to be worthy of investigation does not mean that wrongdoing is thereby established. People who investigate anything, be it crimes, technical failures, diseases or scientific questions, quickly learn how to change their minds and discard hypotheses that don’t hold up as more facts accumulate- at least they do if they want to be successful at their chosen vocation.

By adopting a mindset that takes an initial impression and clings to it like a life preserver irrespective of what the growing set of facts indicates you are crippling your prospects of understanding anything more complex than the A,B,Cs.”

Okay, are you going to have a go at try #3 at posting the same lies, oversimplifications, and half truths on this subjects?

• #111614 by niloroth on 11/04 at 12:19 pm
(103 comments total)
• Seriously, are you truthers ever going to post something i can’t debunk easily and clearly in about 30 minutes?  I keep waiting, but it doesn’t happen.
Nimrod, I’ve given you multiple opportunities. You don’t seem to ever try to debunk my stuff though. I mean, you try to change the subject, (which is typical troll behavior) but you don’t ever come up with anything.

And, just for the sake of instruction, (which I don’t usually give for free), most of the ‘truthers’ on this site don’t rely on google links for their analysis, though from time to time, valuable information does pop up on it. (if only because there are enough ‘experts’ in various fields of interest, to find it).

Here again though, you’d have to know what you were looking for, and, well….you don’t. So, take Paul’s advice; please don’t try to use this to write your dissertation. It would appear that the 9/11 Commission made this same error, which is why nobody believes anything they’ve come up with.

And, you haven’t come up with anything either. You see Nimrod, there’s a difference between “debunking’ by coming up with something totally irrelevant, and actually proving something false, by supplying fact that contradicts it.

You’ve hopelessly failed to do that. So, when is your troll internship over anyway?

Wanna take a go at debunking the SEC facts and figures that Paul has posted in #111642 by PaulMagillSmith

I guess some ‘truther’ just made all of that stuff up, eh? So, why did we know this 6 years ago? (about the airline put options)

http://911research.wtc7.net/sept11/stockputs.html

An October 19 article in the San Francisco Chronicle reported that the SEC, after a period of silence, had undertaken the unprecedented action of deputizing hundreds of private officials in its investigation:

The proposed system, which would go into effect immediately, effectively deputizes hundreds, if not thousands, of key players in the private sector.
...
In a two-page statement issued to “all securities-related entities” nationwide, the SEC asked companies to designate senior personnel who appreciate “the sensitive nature” of the case and can be relied upon to “exercise appropriate discretion” as “point” people linking government investigators and the industry. 17

Michael Ruppert, a former LAPD officer, explains the consequences of this action:

What happens when you deputize someone in a national security or criminal investigation is that you make it illegal for them to disclose publicly what they know. Smart move. In effect, they become government agents and are controlled by government regulations rather than their own conscience. In fact, they can be thrown in jail without a hearing if they talk publicly. I have seen this implied threat time and again with federal investigations, intelligence agents, and even members of the United States Congress who are bound so tightly by secrecy oaths and agreements that they are not even able to disclose criminal activities inside the government for fear of incarceration. 18

Interpreting and Reinterpreting the Data
An analysis of the press reports on the subject of apparent insider trading related to the attack shows a trend, with early reports highlighting the anomalies, and later reports excusing them.

In his book Crossing the Rubicon Michael C. Ruppert illustrates this point by first excerpting a number of reports published shortly after the attack:

A jump in UAL (United Airlines) put options 90 times (not 90 percent) above normal between September 6 and September 10, and 285 times higher than average on the Thursday before the attack.
-- CBS News, September 26

A jump in American Airlines put options 60 times (not 60 percent) above normal on the day before the attacks.
-- CBS News, September 26

No similar trading occurred on any other airlines
-- Bloomberg Business Report, the Institute for Counterterrorism (ICT), Herzliyya, Israel [citing data from the CBOE] 3

Morgan Stanley saw, between September 7 and September 10, an increase of 27 times (not 27 percent) in the purchase of put options on its shares. 4

Merrill-Lynch saw a jump of more than 12 times the normal level of put options in the four trading days before the attacks. 5

AND THE WINNERS ARE…

While most companies would see their stock valuations decline in the wake of the attack, those in the business of supplying the military would see dramatic increases, reflecting the new business they were poised to receive.

Raytheon
Raytheon, maker of Patriot and Tomahawk missiles, saw its stock soar immediately after the attack. Purchases of call options on Raytheon stock increased sixfold on the day before the attack.

A Raytheon option that makes money if shares are more than $25 each had 232 options contracts traded on the day before the attacks, almost six times the total number of trades that had occurred before that day. A contract represents options on 100 shares. Raytheon shares soared almost 37 percent to $34.04 during the first week of post-attack U.S. trading. 13

Raytheon has been fined millions of dollars inflating the costs of equipment it sells the US military. Raytheon has a secretive subsidiary, E-Systems, whose clients have included the CIA and NSA. 14

PaulMagillSmith:

Go for the low hanging fruit there killer.  I was mostly joking about the google trends stuff, but way to dodge the fact that i destroyed your post about the stocks.  glad you are taking me to task about a google test lab beta.  You got me on the ropes now.

Niloroth:

From your reference of Google trends:

“8. How accurate and up-to-date is the information provided by Google Trends?

Google Trends is a Google Labs product, which means it’s still in its early stages of development. The data Google Trends produces may contain inaccuracies for a number of reasons, including data-sampling issues and a variety of approximations that Trends makes use of. We hope you find this service interesting and entertaining, but you probably don’t want to write your Ph.D. dissertation based on this information”

Pay particular attention to the last sentence, “...but you probably don’t want to write your Ph.D. dissertation based on this information”

I’ve seen & commented on your troll posts before, and don’t give a damn if 5 years from now there are only a handful of us seeking the truth about 911 (but I doubt our numbers will shrink from the 100,000,000 Americans who currently don’t buy the lies of the Official 911 Commission Report)...regardless of our number the truth is still the truth and should always be sought.

There are just too many unanswered question NOT to have another (and really comprehensive)911 investigation. What are you & the righties so afraid of anyway?

damn, should have checked the links first.  Apparently google trends doesn’t link well.  Oh well.

Seriously, are you truthers ever going to post something i can’t debunk easily and clearly in about 30 minutes?  I keep waiting, but it doesn’t happen.  And the large majority of the people posting in these 9/11 threads are truthers.  You would figure someone would have something i would have trouble with.  Anyway, here, have some fun and go see the google trends pages for the truth movement.  For a movement that has been breed and fostered online, you folks sure are dropping in the rankings.  I figure about 5 years from now the truth movement will just be a bunch of old stoned radicals sitting around wondering why no one talks to them anymore.

9/11 truth
http://www.google.com/trends?q=9/11+truth

loose change
http://www.google.com/trends?q=loose+change&ctab=0 &geo=all&date=all&sort=0
(Notice the highest point for loose change was the popular mechanics debunking article.)

And since people who believe the conspiracy theory like to refer to it as “9/11 truth” as opposed to the rest of us, who would consider it a “9/11 conspiracy” lets compare the 2
http://www.google.com/trends?q="9/11 +truth",+"9/11+conspira cy"

Yeah, you guys are headed for obscurity.  You can only convince so many people with lies.  Eventually the majority see through them.

Have fun when you are relegated to the nut case history pile.

PaulMagillSmith:

The lowering of the bar for acceptable evidence that the truth movement continually engages in never fails to amaze me.  Sure, if you read that link you might be led to think there is something going on.  Of course those of use who do research from more than one source have a tendency to quickly uncover the BS.  I would suggest you try it some time.

So, off the top of my head, here we go with this latest truther pack of lies and half truths. 

1) The put options.  The ammount of put options were not in fact defy the laws of probability, at least not unless defying the laws of probability is something that happens on a regular basis. (which kinda doesn’t happen.) “Insight reported that there were repeated spikes in put options on American Airlines during the year before Sept. 11 (June 19 with 2,951 puts, June 15 with 1,144 puts, April 16 with 1,019 and Jan. 8 with 1,315 puts). In the same period, United Airlines had slightly more action (Aug. 8 with 1,678 puts, July 20 with 2,995, April 6 with 8,212 and March 13 with 8,072).”

So, no, really not at all defying probability.  (well, not in the real world at least, might be different in yours.)

Now, just as even more proof that this is really not that out of place at the time, go read http://money.cnn.com/2001/07/18/travelcenter/airlines_ losses/index.htm and then look over the trading again.  Actually, i know you won’t read it, so here, i will post the major part. 

“The widest loss came from UAL Corp. (UAL: down $0.74 to $35.00, Research, Estimates), parent of United Airlines, the world’s largest carrier. It posted a second-quarter loss worse than Wall Street forecast.

AMR Corp. (AMR: down $1.16 to $35.24, Research, Estimates), the world’s largest airline company, which owns both American Airlines and Trans World Airlines, posted a loss that was a penny a share less than forecasts, and it warned that if conditions don’t improve it will lose money in the third quarter and full year, rather than posting the third-quarter profit previously seen by analysts.”

Yes, that was published July 18th 2001.  And AMR issued a Q3 profit warning on the afternoon of 09/07/2001.  so um, airlines in trouble, and profit warnings, and you expect people not to place put options on those stocks?  Add to that the fact that they were not out of the ordinary, and you really don’t have anything but truther lies and misdirection do you?

On to the rest of that article. 

As far as the Elgindy trial thing goes, note the fact that even though he called about liquidating his investments on the 10th, they weren’t actually traded until the 18th. Kinda late at that point isn’t it?  I mean, if he knew before hand, and since he was a very experienced trader (especially a short trader, which was the reason he was in a courtroom in the first place) he would have made sure he could trade the stocks before the market dropped right?  The only reason this issue is even on that page is because the prosecutor mentioned 9/11 in the bail hearings, and the fact that he was getting insider info from an exFBI agent.  You would figure that if this guy had any real connection to the events of 9/11 he would have been nailed for them by the government right?  After all, that would have served to point even more towards the attacks being done by muslims right?  I mean, if there was a conspiracy, wouldn’t they want to nail this guy even if he has nothing to do with it?  It doesn’t make sense, if as you suggest, that the government would plan this whole thing, and then have a chance to nail this guy and make him a part of it, and then not do it.  You insane theories don’t even hold up to each other.

Okay, just to wrap up, here are some quotes from the page YOU LINKED TO.  I think you failed to read it all that well. 

“Somewhere out there are hedge funds or individual investors who profited from the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. But they had no foreknowledge of the catastrophes, an FBI spokesman said Thursday. Spokesman Ed Cogswell said the FBI has closed its investigation of stock and option trading that took place days before the attacks. He said the investigation turned up “absolutely no evidence’’ of anyone with inside knowledge of what would happen.”

“For instance, American Airlines was at $40 in May and fell to $29 on Sept. 10; United was at $37 in May and fell to $31 on Sept. 10. These stocks were falling anyway, and it would have been a good time to short them.”

“Not only does the relatively modest action belie some daring market conspiracy by those in touch with terror plans, but the pre-Sept. 11 market history is also consistent, more or less, with business as usual.”

“Cogswell said most of the options trading was carried out by hedge funds with bearish outlooks. He did not name any of the funds, which pursue risky investment strategies on behalf of wealthy clients. Market regulators in other countries opened similar investigations after the attacks, but Cogswell said he believes all have been concluded with no evidence that allies of Osama bin Laden were involved.”

You said “Go to the link I posted and then come back and tell us who seems not to be telling the truth, or has problems with crediblity.”

Okay, i will, it is the truth movement, and you.

Response to#111458 by PaulMagillSmith
• For anyone who disputes that there was something ‘fishy’ about 911 all they need do is FOLLOW THE MONEY.

Check out this link, but when you do please keep in mind WTC 7 contained records for hundreds of investigations into insider trading on the stock exchange:

http://www.yirmeyahureview.com/archive/911/insider_tra ding.htm

Paul, thanks so much for posting this link. I knew about these ‘put options’ at the time, but didn’t have access to all of this information, (at least not easy access), so I was unaware of how many journals/journalists addressed this, and within a very reasonable amount of time. That makes this link a VERY valuable resource!!  Thanks again. You do good work!!

For anyone who disputes that there was something ‘fishy’ about 911 all they need do is FOLLOW THE MONEY.

Check out this link, but when you do please keep in mind WTC 7 contained records for hundreds of investigations into insider trading on the stock exchange:

http://www.yirmeyahureview.com/archive/911/insider_tra ding.htm

You will notice from detailed studies that not only did United & American Airlines show numbers of ‘put’ options that defied the laws of probability, but also insurance companies connected with the WTC, and even members with seats on the New York Stock Exchange itself. Sometimes the number of ‘put’ options, placed in a very few number of days preceding the attacks, approached up to 75 (or more) times the normal daily average. (a ‘put’ is betting the value of the stock would fall, which they did...drastically)

RE: #111233 by niloroth on 11/02 at 11:18 am
(96 comments total)

“I mean, the truth movement as a whole has a really bad track record with honesty, so i guess we shouldn’t expect much more from you right?”

niloroth, I think you are either a troll or are too lazy to do our homework. Go to the link I posted and then come back and tell us who seems not to be telling the truth, or has problems with crediblity. If you can’t tell just by the statistics provided there is ‘something rotten in the state of Denmark’, regarding what we have been propagandized & lied into believing about the events, causes, and perps involved with 911, then we shouldn’t pay any attention to what you have to say about anything because you are just plain STUPID.

911truthdotorg:

Um, mr dotorg, when i called you out for lying in post #110551, Your response was to lie again in post #110557.  So i am kinda wondering why anyone would entertain the idea that anything you post could actually be factual.  I mean, the truth movement as a whole has a really bad track record with honesty, so i guess we shouldn’t expect much more from you right?

Quote: “...Only he, among all the candidates of both parties, truly grasps the issue and possesses the fortitude to confront the threat....”

Ha ha, ha ha! Well then, he should go off to Eye-Rak and confront them...... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9WUpIcsJRw&NR=1

I’d rather believe a prostitue than Rudi Giuliani.

Not only did 911 happen on Rudy’s watch, but he appears to be complicit in the attacks. Why and how, for instance, was the crime scene cleaned up and hundreds of tons of the evidence sold to China (or whomever) for scrap metal? And why didn’t the federal government stop Giuliani from disposing of all this evidence?  Why are there still not scores of NY’s finest detectives scouring that area for evidence? It happens every time a citizen commits a crime. Why not in Guiliani’s New York when the perps are goverment agents? This government is known to gaffle up all the evidence of its crimes, such as the Waco Massacre and the OK City Murrah Building operation and now 911, and bury it in the ocean. Guiliani simply did it one more time and for the same reasons: to protect the guilty.

However, I think America deserves what it’s getting. There is nothing like a bunch of in yo’ face govt maniacs like the 911 perps (which includes Giuliani) to wake people up. Thus, hooray for the bad guys!

Yo, akira_schmuck, I wasn’t going to post, but I just had to after reading your stupidity! hahahaha

Please, do this country a huge favor, and NOT vote!!
You sound like a closet giuliani lover, for sure!

Framing The Truth Movement As Terrorists

Bellicose establishment hacks like O’Reilly and Beck pray for another attack so they can blame it on peaceful activists who are putting them to shame

Steve Watson & Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Thursday, November 1, 2007

A disturbing trend has emerged amongst establishment “news” hacks who are raising the same talking point ad infinitum, dubbing the global truth movement as “anarchists” and violent individuals who may be aiding terrorists, and praying for another attack in America so they can blame peaceful activists who are consistently putting the Neo-Cons to shame.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/november2007/0111 07_framing_terrorists.htm

Google videos: 9/11 Press for Truth, Loose Change 2nd Edition, Terror Storm

This sort of glared out at me from Joe’s article.
• “Islamic terrorists killed Americans. Slaughtered Americans. Bombed the World Trade Center. Bombed it,” he said in a typical speech last summer. “You know what the reaction of the Clinton administration at the time was? It was a crime. It was another group of murders. ... Well, it wasn’t just another group of murders.”

Now of course Rudy is speaking of the 1993 attacks on the WTC. And, while those attacks (occurring on Rudy’s watch) did in fact take the lives of many Americans, they were, in essence, very clumsy and armature efforts by what we can only consider to be ‘unprofessionals’. These people were eventually tried and convicted.

So, it seems strange for Rudy to refer to this BOMBING and to bring in the WTC, and all of that, (even though indeed it WAS a parking garage within the WTC where this crime took place, and explosives were used) because it connects the average American’s mind to the atrocities of 9/11/2001 rather than the much smaller scheme of 1993, that has already been prosecuted (as the crime that it was) with the responsible people caught and accounted for. So when he speaks of the ‘bombing’ and the slaughter of Americans at the WTC in 1993, it would almost seem like he’s speaking of the same crime of 2001, (also on his watch) which was also a bombing and slaughter of far more professional sophistication, and the perpetrators have yet to be appropriately identified and accounted for.

Just sort of odd that he would be making these comments in 2006 or 2007.

Fellow TruthDiggers:

I think most of us know what has happened in the past. We also know what is planned for the future. The question is this: How are we going to take action in the present to stop what has been planned for the future.

I want to know what you are doing today and going to do tomorrow.

All I have right now is to help Ron Paul get elected.

HE SHOULD BE ARRESTED FOR REPLACING HIS TEETH WITH ELEPHANT TUSKS. PROBABLY A GAY ELEPHANT AT THAT..