Top Leaderboard, Site wide
September 17, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Help us grow by sharing
and liking Truthdig:
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed

Newsletter

sign up to get updates






On the Run


Truthdig Bazaar
Iraq: A War

Iraq: A War

Chris Hedges
$20.00

more items

 
Report

How Little We Know About the Origins of 9/11

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Sep 8, 2011
AP / Brennan Linsley

An unidentified detainee peers out from his cell inside the Camp Delta detention facility at Guantanamo Bay in 2006.

By Robert Scheer

For a decade, the main questions about 9/11 have gone unanswered while the alleged perpetrators who survived the attacks have never been publicly cross-examined as to their methods and motives. It is not conspiratorial but rather obviously plausible to suggest that they have been kept out of sight because legal due process, constitutionally guaranteed to even the most heinous of criminals, might provide information that our government would find embarrassing.

We remain in ignorance as to what drove religious zealots formerly allied with the United States to turn against us, and what was the role of our ally, Saudi Arabia, the country of origin for most of the hijackers and their financing. Why in the aftermath of the attack did the United States embrace Pakistan, which was one of only three governments (Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates were the others) to diplomatically recognize the Taliban and which turned out to be harboring the fugitive Osama bin Laden? And why did we instead invade Iraq, a nation known to be engaged in a deadly war with bin Laden and his al-Qaida?

How little we know about the origins of the Sept. 11 attacks is laid out in the disclaimer on Page 146 of the official 9/11 presidential commission report. A box on that page states clearly that the conventional narrative of how those portentous events unfolded is based largely on the interrogation under torture of key witnesses who have never been permitted a single moment in a publicly observed court of law. 

As the bipartisan commissioners ruefully conceded, their examination of the motives, financing and actions of the alleged 9/11 perpetrators had to “rely heavily on information from captured al Qaeda members” that the commissioners, despite having been granted the highest security clearance, were never allowed to seriously vet:

“We submitted questions for use in the interrogations but had no control over whether, when, or how questions of particular interest would be asked. Nor were we allowed to talk to the interrogators so that we could better judge the credibility of the detainees and clarify ambiguities in the reporting. We were told that our requests might disrupt the sensitive interrogation process.”

Advertisement

Square, Site wide
That sensitive interrogation process included the waterboarding of the key witnesses, led by alleged 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who was scheduled to go on public, civilian trial in Manhattan last spring, until the Obama administration caved in to hysterical Republican-led pressure and called off the trial. 

The fear of a public trial is apparently that it will be an occasion to humanize the presumed perpetrators of barbaric acts, but by that standard no alleged murderer should ever be tried in civilian court. The counterargument is that we as a society have, from the drafting of our Constitution, been committed to due process of law. But an even more compelling objection to the present secrecy flows not from the inalienable rights of the accused to justice but rather from the need to fully inform the public as to the dangers faced by our society.

Major policy developments, including two undeclared wars, were conducted in the name of defeating the perpetrators of 9/11 without the public being made aware of the relevant facts. Surely a public trial would have revealed, to the deep embarrassment of the Bush administration, that there was no connection between the 9/11 hijackers and the government of Iraq that the United States overthrew.

At the very least, such testimony would have shed light on the cozy relationship between the U.S. government and the key leaders of al-Qaida, particularly the American-educated Mohammed, recruited by the CIA to join the fight against the Soviets in Afghanistan. It certainly could also have proved embarrassing to former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who, during the Bush administration, opposed public trials and managed last March to get President Barack Obama to reverse his pledge of civilian trials. Gates boasted in his 1996 memoir of his long history of working with Islamic fundamentalists in Afghanistan, dating to his days in the Carter administration. As his book publisher bragged at the time, Gates exposed “Carter’s never-before revealed covert support to Afghan mujahedeen—six months before the Soviets invaded.”

Of course 9/11 changed everything; nations were invaded, trillions of dollars were wasted, hundreds of thousands of civilian and military lives were lost, torture became acceptable and the public has come to tolerate a daily governmental assault on privacy as normal. But for all of the high drama and cost of the U.S. response, when it comes to understanding the forces behind the attack, we still do not know what we are talking about.

Robert Scheer’s column has moved to Thursday. Sign up for our newsletter and get Scheer in your inbox.

Click here to check out Robert Scheer’s new book,
“The Great American Stickup: How Reagan Republicans and Clinton Democrats Enriched Wall Street While Mugging Main Street.”


Keep up with Robert Scheer’s latest columns, interviews, tour dates and more at www.truthdig.com/robert_scheer.


New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

blogdog's avatar

By blogdog, September 18, 2011 at 12:53 pm Link to this comment

polemic far from over - points to address:

1) AWOL Chain of Command - It is well documented that the officials topping
the chain of command for response to a domestic attack

2) Air Defense Failures - The US air defense system failed to follow standard
procedures for responding to diverted passenger flights.

3) Pentagon Strike - How was it possible the Pentagon was hit 1 hour and 20
minutes after the attacks began?

4) Wargames - US military and other authorities planned or actually rehearsed
defensive response to all elements of the 9/11 scenario during the year prior to
the attack - including multiple hijackings, suicide crashbombings, and a strike
on the Pentagon.

5) Flight 93 - Was Flight 93 shot down, as indicated by the scattering of debris
over a trail of several miles?

6) Did cell phones work at 30,000 feet in 2001?

7) Demolition Hypothesis - What caused the collapse of a third skyscraper, WTC
7?

8) What did officials know? How did they know it? - Various individuals came
into possession of specific advance knowledge, and some of them tried to warn
the US prior to September 11th.

9) Able Danger, Plus - Surveillance of Alleged Hijackers - The men identified as
the 9/11 ringleaders were under surveillance for years beforehand.

10) Obstruction of FBI Investigations prior to 9/11
A group of FBI officials in New York systematically suppressed field
investigations of potential terrorists that might have uncovered the alleged
hijackers.

11) Insider Trading - Unknown speculators allegedly used foreknowledge of the
Sept. 11th events to profiteer on many markets internationally.

12) Who were the perpetrators? - Much of the evidence establishing who did
the crime is dubious and miraculous.

points to address vis-à-vis THE 9/11 COVER-UP

13) Who Is Osama Bin Ladin? -  Who judges which of the many conflicting and
dubious statements and videos attributed to Osama Bin Ladin are genuine, and
which are fake? The most important Osama Bin Ladin video (Nov. 2001), in
which he supposedly confesses to masterminding 9/11, appears to be a fake. In
any event, the State Department’‘s translation of it is fraudulent.

14) All the Signs of a Systematic 9/11 Cover-up - Airplane black boxes were
found at Ground Zero, according to two first responders and an unnamed NTSB
official, but they were “disappeared” and their existence is denied in The 9/11
Commission Report.

15) Poisoning New York - The White House deliberately pressured the EPA into
giving false public assurances that the toxic air at Ground Zero was safe to
breathe.

16) Disposing of the Crime Scene - The rapid and illegal scrapping of the WTC
ruins at Ground Zero.

17) Anthrax - Mailings of weapons-grade anthrax - which caused a practical
suspension of the 9/11 investigations - were traced back to US military stock.

18) The Stonewall - Colin Powell promised a “white paper” from the State
Department to establish the authorship of the attacks by al-Qaeda. This was
never forthcoming.

19) A Record of Official Lies - “No one could have imagined planes into
buildings” - a transparent falsehood upheld repeatedly by Rice, Rumsfeld and
Bush.

20) Pakistani Connection - Congressional Connection - The Pakistani
intelligence agency ISI, creator of the Taliban and close ally to both the CIA and
“al-Qaeda,” allegedly wired $100,000 to Mohamed Atta just prior to September
11th, reportedly through the ISI asset Omar Saeed Sheikh (later arrested for the
killing of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, who was investigating ISI
connections to “al-Qaeda.”)

21) Unanswered Questions and the “Final Fraud” of the 9/11 Commission - The
September 11th families who fought for and gained an independent
investigation (the 9/11 Commission) posed 400-plus questions, which the
9/11 Commission adopted as its roadmap. The vast majority of these questions
were completely ignored in the Commission hearings and the final report.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, September 15, 2011 at 8:05 pm Link to this comment

It’s the Klingons, man! The Klingons and the Romulans, y’know.  And the phone police are their human agents!

Gotta watch those phone police!

Report this
Gabriel's avatar

By Gabriel, September 15, 2011 at 8:30 am Link to this comment

Thanks Leefeller.

Idiots are getting exposed, all of them. Wikileaks is a tiny drop to what’s coming down the pipe. Amount of info being let loose would fill Library of Congress .. not just on 9/11 but everything. Most of it not intentionally.

Many PPL have whole rooms full of HD’s, dedicated fiber connections, getting largest HD’s by the 100’s and they can’t keep up. Others are taking this info and doing R&D. Corporations are loosing info life mad, especially what they been trying to hide for 100’s of yrs.

Most serious investigators won’t bother with sites like TD. They go straight to anonymous or other serious disclosure groups. There’s an info war going on likes of which is hard to imagine. These PPL are using tools the system can’t keep up to, and never will. There’s a hidden network on just about every frequency you can think of.

It’s how I can say, if it’s not triple encrypted ... it’s gone.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, September 15, 2011 at 7:27 am Link to this comment

Lee….
TMI, pal, TMI!

ROFL

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, September 14, 2011 at 4:58 pm Link to this comment

ITW, Occasionally I wear Freudian slips,... but most of the time I prefer chemise shifts while wearing my leather bombers hat.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, September 14, 2011 at 4:28 pm Link to this comment

ardee,

So, pray tell, PatrickHenry, September 13 at 3:13 am , what is it that you do for a living that makes you such an expert on the implausible and the impossible?

I am and have been a card carrying member of Steamfitters Local 602 in Washington DC for close to 27 years, the last 10 years as a project manager.  I worked on the Pentagon before and after the ‘plane’ hit and am familiar with structural, mechanical and plumbing engineered drawings for projects from 1 to 250 million.  It one time I have been a certified welder, control tech and CAD operator.  As a project manager I draw on all these past achievements to bid work.

I also hold an unlimited masters license and sit on the board of my kids school PTA.

Satisfied?

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, September 14, 2011 at 1:01 pm Link to this comment

How do you know LeeFeller’s mis-typing was accidental? Lee is one of the cleverest posters here!

Report this

By SoTexGuy, September 14, 2011 at 12:43 pm Link to this comment

LeeFeller wrote the Towers fell or were ‘caused by the heat and damage of the
collusion’

Now I and most everyone know he likely meant to say ‘collision’ .. yet the
accidental mis-typing is hilarious!

Adios!

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, September 14, 2011 at 6:34 am Link to this comment

Smoking chain saw and smoking other things.

Having worked in the timber industry years ago, I was astounded by the falling of the Towers buildings straight down instead of falling like a tree. Of course I did not see anyone doing an under cut on the Towers buildings to make them fall one way or the other as in sideways.  So even when the planes hit the building near the top as a sloppy top cut like they used to do in the timber business years ago.  Even the top of the building did not topple off like the top of tree would have.

Now this makes sense to me because a building is not solid like a tree.  If trees could be made to fall straight down like the towers instead of laying down as trees do.  It might bebe safer for fallers when yelling out ...‘timber’, but would not very well for the timber profits.

Far as I am concerned the Towers went straight down from the top down from the compounding weight and stress of the structural weakling caused by the heat and damage of the collusion, then followed something called gravity straight to the bottom like a gathering snow ball turning into an avalanche.

Now I plan on attempting a nil hypothesis experiment with a house of cards, a fan, a can of kerosine and a snow ball!

Belief needs not the presence of truth, for this is called faith or is it blarney?

Report this

By ardee, September 14, 2011 at 3:35 am Link to this comment

The only ‘dwarfs’ I know associated here are the small minded celebrity plumbers, truck drivers and pharmaceutical workers who know little of what they crow about.


So, pray tell, PatrickHenry, September 13 at 3:13 am , what is it that you do for a living that makes you such an expert on the implausible and the impossible?

Report this
ControlledDemolition's avatar

By ControlledDemolition, September 13, 2011 at 5:47 pm Link to this comment

@Inherit The Wind

First, I’m glad you are not a dullard.  I almost put in a parenthetical asterisk pointing out the potential for circular logic, but it is not a valid objection here.  You rest your case on conventional demolition ALWAYS showing flashes and starting from the bottom up, with recognizable visual signs.  I do not hold this to be necessarily true (others might supply examples).  Unconventional demolition with modern wireless technology and nano-explosives should not be ruled out if the primary hypothesis (gravitational collapse) is blatantly false.  Your argument seems to be: it’s never happened before, therefore it did not happen.

If there are no other examples of such a demolition of such a tall structure ... that (sic) [then] the conclusions are unverifiable speculation and cannot be seen as authoritative.  You’re not one of those denying the moon landing, are you?

Next, you make my point.  All your astronomical observations, evaluating more and more detail, allows you to say accurately that, although the sun appears circling the earth, really, all things considered, the earth revolves around the sun.

All things considered, a gravitational collapse due to fire and floor failure cannot bring down the internal steel structure at near free-fall speed.  Add those details to your soup.  Lots of other evidence—such as direct, verifiable existence of nanothermite—supercede your naive perceptions and necessitate looking at the ecliptic, at retrograde planets, constellations and the big picture.  The destruction of the Towers is certainly not the only anomaly with the 911 story.  Analysis is needed.  Check out the Int’l 911 Toronto Hearings—scientists, chemists, physicists, engineers, architects, et. al., who present authoritarian research.  No unverifiable speculations except, maybe, when noting the need for more investigation.

I’m glad you are not a dullard.  But I also hope you’re not a hopeless contrarian living in a specious philosophical dreamscape.  You can’t continue to deny facts that contradict your preconceived notions (you say “back at ya” but I did not start out wanting to see 911 as false-flag; it’s a logical conclusion).  You want to deny demolition without addressing the absurdity of the official narrative.

I’ve got to curtail this discussion.  Some of us have to embezzle money for a living.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, September 13, 2011 at 3:28 pm Link to this comment

“Just to be clear, you might want to change your strategy in what you say and do, as there is a multitude of kids being born that can literally read minds, and have been for many years. Let’s just say they don’t like liars and manipulators.”

Why would I want to change me strategy of what I say and do, plus what would reading minds have to do with either? I also do not have a fondness for liars and manipulators, so why the inclusion in the statement, seemingly a strange comment if not some sort of strange threat, almost smacking of a form of religiosity with touch of ye old inquisition in it. Strange comment.

Sanity get out of the way!... Only one person I know has ever been able to read me mind, this is the Great Unyun who happens to be my ditty of choice and she says she never wants to enter that crazy place ever again, for my mind is a complete mess!

Gabriel, I wish you success and luck on your venture of exposing the cult of idiots, I even agree with you on the concept of their existence but what changes you intend in this exposure from what is already known hopefully will be something with much more teeth and girth propagating the needed change from the usual and what is already known.

Really, ...good luck!

Report this

By bd6951, September 13, 2011 at 1:33 pm Link to this comment

The esteemed mathematician Albert Bartlett argues that the most serious failing of society is its failure to grasp the doubling function.  I disagree (partly).  I believe society’s most serious failing is to not grasp the laws of energy and matter, thermodynamics.  Even though most people don’t know this it is the laws of thermodynamics, especially the second law, that dictates every aspect of modernity.  It is the reason your house needs heat in the winter, A/C in the summer.  It is the reason that you have to put fuel in your cars’ tanks regularly.  It is the reason ethanol is a EROEI catastrophe.  It is the reason that this country engages in perpetual war - to procure precious liquid transportation fuels.  It is the reason the world in now several years past peal oil (IEA).  And it is the reason that the official accounts of 9/11 are simply wrong and impossible.  If the people postings comments here denying that 9/11 was an “inside job” understood these laws they would most certainly have to change their views. 

Paul Craig Roberts, a former WSJ editor and Bush II Assistant Secretary of Treasury and a prominent voice in the 9/11 truth movement, suggests that our society has devolved from one that accepted the scientific method to a culture whose perceptions are now skewed by the pop culture of Harry Potter, Star Wars and superheroes.  He is absolutely right. 

We lie to ourselves about EVERYTHING - climate change, peak oil, cutting taxes for the wealthy creates jobs.  We lie to ourselves when we believe that the government - “our” government - would not do something as sordid as fake a terrorist attack to start/continue wars for oil.  Until the events of 9/11 are explained in a way that satisfies the laws of physics this country will continue its inexorable race to complete and total collapse.

Report this
drbhelthi's avatar

By drbhelthi, September 13, 2011 at 11:36 am Link to this comment

9/11 and Shanksville, PA.
A large dimple in the ground, absent any aircraft wreckage = no aircraft crash at that location.
Rather, a cavity left by an air to ground missile. What about the recently released video, allegedly held back for ten years,  of smoke arising in the distance and a male voice saying he heard on the scanner than an airplane crashed and is burning there. This video is firm evidence that someone made a video, showed smoke rising in the background, with a male voice added for effect, making statements that reinforce the “official story.”  Similar to the videos attributed to Osama bin Laden, which CIA insiders admit were phony.

The various postulates of curmudgeon99 on the 3-part waste of Truthdig space - - .
An airliner flew into the ground in front of the Pentagon, and disintegrated ?  Where in the
history of aviation is an example of an airliner crashing and the crash rubble disappears ? 
Nowhere. Nor on the grounds of the pentagon on 11 Sep 2001, either. Nor near Shanksville, PA, either. Nowhere in the history of aircraft crashes.
Even Air France Flight 447 that crashed at cruising speed into the ocean, June 1, 2009, the main part of the wreckage was located at the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean. However, the July 2011 official explanation reads like a fairy tale, also.  Two experienced airline pilots are unable to manually fly their airliner, without benefit of auto-pilot?  NONSENSE. Sounds more like a Lockerbie-type incident.

As far as GHWBushJr not knowing the entire 9/11 plan?  Why should he?  All he was required to do, was not to disagree with the plan.  It was arranged for him to be hundreds of miles away, on territory deranged by his brother, “Jeb” Bush, who defrauded the Florida vote three years later. The key to Junior Bush´s involvement is found in his answer to the question, when did you first learn about the airplanes flying into the Twin Towers?  The gist of his response, “- a TV was running in the room, and I saw the first plane fly into the tower - - . “
WRONG ANSWER .
Only the brothers from France, in NYC doing a documentary on NYC firefighters, had recorded
the first USAF cargo plane flying into the first tower. Their footage had not been released to news media. Junior Bush stated an impossibility. Which suggests that he knew some detail of the event, prior to the event, even though the question was posed much after the event.

As far as convincing the shills of Zionism and the NAZI element of the C.I.A. of the truth, it is
wasted effort.  They are compensated to follow the guidance of Goebbels, and regurgitate the
official story. NAZI General Goebbels, Hitler´s chief of propaganda, who followed the practice of propagandists of thousands of years ago.  Repeat an idea long enough, and the people will
eventually believe it.  Which idea applies to the “general populace,” such as believed the pre-
election promises of Obama in 2008 and voted for him.  Many of whom will believe his newest
“Tax the Rich” pre-election promise fairy-tale, for the 2012 election.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, September 13, 2011 at 11:11 am Link to this comment

Demo:
Well put! However, I do have some observations:

“But I think we can agree that, if it was a demolition, it was not a standard demolition.  Certainly you would not want a false-flag operation to display obvious evidence of demolition!!  “Flashes” from explosives would depend on the type of explosives used, n’est pas?”

This is convenient circular logic.  If it’s a conventional demolition then we see the signs of conventional demolition.  If we do not see the signs of the conventional demolition then we cannot, repeat, cannot infer that is is UN-conventional demolition, only that if, (and it’s a big “if”) it IS a demolition, that it MUST be unconventional.  But that “if” is the key.  All we agree is that it was NOT a conventional demolition.  And thank you—you are one of the few who supports the demolition hypothesis who recognizes that.

“I recommend you believe you’re own lyin’ eyes—but you should note that there are structural engineering principles beyond your perception, internal to the buildings.  This subject was discussed in the recent Int’l 911 Toronto Hearings, which you might review.  You should believe/consider/evaluate them instead of me, to answer your question.”

Again, a sage bit of advice.  Rather than accept you as authority check my premises. 

I’ll forgo, for the moment, questioning the validity of the conclusions of the Toronto Hearings other than to say this:  If there are no other examples of such a demolition of such a tall structure, and our sample of two (the north and south towers ) are not independent of each other (meaning, we CAN assume that whatever brought down one tower brought down the other), that the conclusions are unverifiable speculation and cannot be seen as authoritative.

“I observed the sun rotating around the earth.  Agreement or disagreement is meaningless.  That is what I saw.  (But, of course, further analysis is required.)” 

Excellent point! But also, as you know, easily refuted.  I observe the Sun seems to circle the Earth.  But I also observe that the Sun moves North and South a fixed and measurable amount over the course of the year.  I also observe that the sun seems to constantly be moving against the background of constellations.  I further observe that the planets all move across the sky in virtually the same plane as each other and as the sun.  I also observe that the Earth appears to be a spheroid and not a pancake (I’ll leave those points aside) and that the Moon, the Sun and the other planets also appear to spheroids. Finally, I observe that several planets actually reverse direction and appear to go backwards for a while, and then reverse direction again.

All these motions become insanely complicated and difficult to predict as long as I continue to hold onto the assumption that the Sun circles the Earth.  It APPEARS to but contradicts the OTHER things I see with those lyin’ eyes!  However, when I model all this stuff as a solar-central system, it becomes a simple, clear, elegant and PREDICTABLE system.

So… We have agreed that the WTC could not have been brought down by a CONVENTIONAL controlled demolition.  What other observation(s) of that event have I missed, especially ones that support unconventional controlled demolition.  I give the credit to avoid saying “It couldn’t have been anything but….”

Report this
ControlledDemolition's avatar

By ControlledDemolition, September 13, 2011 at 10:44 am Link to this comment

@curmudgeon99
RE: Ted Rall’s excellent analysis

Answer: The plane hit the lawn, not the building. The Pentagon is made of reinforced WPA-era concrete. The plane’s wings were thin, light and full of jet fuel. They disintegrated upon impact.

To be clear, I find such a statement—trying to be pro- or anti-conspiracy theory, I don’t know—to be totally misleading.  It glosses over the disappearance of the Boeing 757 engines:  the 6-ton titanium alloy engines made to withstand extreme heat.  They would not “melt.”  There is no visual evidence that such a large object impacted the lawn at the Pentagon.  Maybe it disintegrated before it hit the lawn?  Even the worst of plane crashes leave, say, the tailwing if not a lot of other strewn debris.

Report this
ControlledDemolition's avatar

By ControlledDemolition, September 13, 2011 at 10:17 am Link to this comment

@Inherit The Wind
@cpb

Unconventional does not mean impossible.

I won’t reiterate the many points which convince me that a gravitational collapse due the fiery floor failure does NOT explain the observed phenomena.  You differ (based on perception).  The internal strength of the supporting steel structure needs to be compromised to account for the near free-fall speed; a block-by-block descent is NOT observed, but instead a wave-front of disintegrated and exploding, laterally ejected material is.

But I think we can agree that, if it was a demolition, it was not a standard demolition.  Certainly you would not want a false-flag operation to display obvious evidence of demolition!!  “Flashes” from explosives would depend on the type of explosives used, n’est pas?

I recommend you believe you’re own lyin’ eyes—but you should note that there are structural engineering principles beyond your perception, internal to the buildings.  This subject was discussed in the recent Int’l 911 Toronto Hearings, which you might review.  You should believe/consider/evaluate them instead of me, to answer your question.

I observed the sun rotating around the earth.  Agreement or disagreement is meaningless.  That is what I saw.  (But, of course, further analysis is required.)

Actually, I sympathize with your resistance, provided you stay rational unlike some of the lurking loonies.  That 911 was an inside job is difficult to wrap one’s brain around; it’s very dark.

cpb, I hear you.  But he is basing his stance on perception, which in this case is very misleading.  Other demolition scenarios are feasible and likely, given the uniqueness of the Towers, the need for secrecy, and military-only access to the sophisticated explosives (viz., direct evidence of nanothermite).  I’m going to give him the benefit of the doubt that he can consider alternative views intelligently.  If I’m wrong, I’ll admit it.

Report this
Gabriel's avatar

By Gabriel, September 13, 2011 at 9:17 am Link to this comment

@ Leefeller

Nice try. This is about Justice and putting those that committed murder out of their misery. Definitely NOT any of your political trash.

It’s about exposing a cult of idiots that are bent on power, occult games, murder, satanic sacrifice, legalized gambling, destruction of society and those think they are above the Law.

They’ve been at it for 1,000’s of years and their time is about up.

This is only the first stage. As men and women wake up, learn and gather together there is a paradigm shift to finding our true nature and our greater existence. No amount of smoke and mirrors will stop this trend.

You might say it’s our next step in the universe.

For those that don’t wake up it’s just too bad, as they will perish as smurfs and slaves subject to murderous elites and their bloodlines.

Just to be clear, you might want to change your strategy in what you say and do, as there is a multitude of kids being born that can literally read minds, and have been for many years. Let’s just say they don’t like liars and manipulators.

As for 9/11, the people have done their homework and have put together 99% of what actually happened and who’s involved. What I mention on TD is a drop in the bucket of what’s actually known.

Report this

By Wishingforsanity, September 13, 2011 at 8:47 am Link to this comment

Seriously, does anybody really get any satisfaction other than on the most base level at
sniping and name calling ala high school age kids on any article…especially a
progressive site like Truth Dig?  Seriously? Are these attacks on each other furthering
any sort of healing or movement towards peace in our own society? How can we as a
people come together to stop hatred, violence and ignorance when that is all we find
everywhere we search?  This is just a call to please try and find some of the decency
we lost post 9/11 as a country that can no longer even share ideas on a higher level
because we have become so self-centered that we no longer care about those “invisible
others” we debate so viciously with.  What IS so funny ‘bout peace love and
understanding? Now, attack ME if you like. But, before you do, ask yourself, “why?”
Peace to you and yours, every single one of you, Whether you agree with me or not.

Report this
tropicgirl's avatar

By tropicgirl, September 13, 2011 at 8:36 am Link to this comment

I wouldn’t give these depraved deviants that much credit.

It’s simply a pig-pile of clever criminals.

Nothing new in history. It will eventually implode. The bigger they are, the harder they fall, causing death and destruction as they go.

Too bad some of you actually worship them, and not your fellow man, who has done nothing.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, September 13, 2011 at 7:08 am Link to this comment

“Why does the federal government feed the conspiracy theorists? Maybe it’s unintentional, but probably not. I think the U.S. has become like a Third World dictatorship: the more they keep us guessing, the smarter they seem, and the more we’ll fear them.”

It seems to me controversy is intentional in this case, for the government, parts of the government as clowns in power, intentionally keep poking sticks and jerking things around to keep focus away from real tangible issues. 

I do not know this, but it seems like an offensive tactic used by the Republicans in most cases to take peoples eyes away from the money making opportunism’s and manipulations. So we see this constant cornucopia of manipulations as effective ossification intended to promote unstable thoughts, from fear and constant bickering about things contrived with the intention of feeding the disenfranchised peoples (which is really all the people) into wearing tin foil hats about everything from gays to grassy knolls, socialism to pinko commie naming, from constant attacks on social security to Medicare.

I see belief in a causes, especially in this cause of the Towers very much the same as a fanatical religion.  A religion of conspiracy for the belief of certainty subsisting on a foundation of speculations just like all religions and causes for thousands of years.  What I find very similar is the conspiring folks may have as may different theories, speculations and guesstimates as there are different religions out there!

Report this
tropicgirl's avatar

By tropicgirl, September 13, 2011 at 6:04 am Link to this comment

The History channel has already started manipulating the story for posterity. The only footage shown of the buildings going down is shakey-cam stuff, none of the innumerable clear, stable informative shots of the buildings coming down. During the part where the detonation can be clearly seen while watching a clear shot, the camera shakes and points elsewhere, only to resume as the buildings are coming down.

I had to laugh, however, when AMC showed Oliver Stone’s JFK all day Sunday…

Perhaps ITW and others here still believe in Oswald? After all, how could such a crime be accomplished in such secrecy… Well… you destroy autopsies, kill witnesses and “accidently” burn or lose records. And control the press. Easy peasy. But eventually it comes out, when it is too late to matter.

And that doesn’t include the psycho-loners, brainwashed or worse, with chunks of their lives missing from memory. And, of course, there are the regular murderers in the shadows, adept at sabotaging planes, passing on disease, and so on.

Keep messing around with the truth. The forces in control have the ability to bring us to a new dark ages, which is probably the goal. To dismantle.

The 911 truth deniers have questionable motives, in my opinion. With tragic results.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, September 13, 2011 at 3:34 am Link to this comment

Gabriel,
Thanks for your input. I’ll give it all the consideration it merits.

But I am surprised. I would have thought you would attribute the collapse to preternatural or extra-terrestrial beings. That’s about your speed.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, September 13, 2011 at 3:13 am Link to this comment

The discovery of the nano-thermite was the smoking gun as far as physical proof for the international community is concerned.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=13049

The elevator union wouldn’t have anything to do with this as the building engineers have complete access and knowledge to the workings of the elevators and the restricted areas of the elevator shafts.

The only ‘dwarfs’ I know associated here are the small minded celebrity plumbers, truck drivers and pharmaceutical workers who know little of what they crow about.

Report this
Gabriel's avatar

By Gabriel, September 13, 2011 at 12:22 am Link to this comment

@Inherit The Wind, September 12 at 4:18 am

If you’d actually open your eyes you’d see that each floor is pulverized to dust before it has a chance to hit the next. Then we have massive amounts of dust and debris being shot outward and away from WTC buildings 100’s of feet.

If that’s not enough we have 1,000’s of joints attached by large bolts per floor and in between floors. It’s impossible that all of them would give way at the same time for each floor. Some floors would have slid to one side and whole above structures would have gone that way. This didn’t happen.
Only Demolitions and nothing but demolitions could make such a precise straight down close to free fall implosion and ejection of matter.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CG7I4UnoBnA

These facts alone prove it’s demolitions.

If you slow the video down to 1/10 to 1/100 you can hear the explosions like 1,000’s of firecrackers and bombs as each floor is pulverized.

But I guess you’re not bright enough to slow the video down or see what’s actually there. Nor do you have any basic demo experience.

If there was pancaking there would be massive slabs left of at least 30 floors. Where are they?

Furthermore you never checked with experienced demo people, nor showed them the raw videos.

If you bothered to check there were explosions even before the planes hit. They continued til all buildings were “pulled” / brought down by controlled demolitions. But I guess all those witnesses and news media are lying eh?

Does video lie too?
Try “911 Eyewitness 1 of 3” ... 1:30 minutes in and on:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4563604978641682920
- Very telling .. as each chopper passes explosions go off.

Controlled demolitions start where they are necessary per particular buidling ... not where you want them to be. Get it right.

Even NYPD chopper cops: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8iUCH2z69l4

Epic fail ITW. Same as most subjects you comment on TD.
If you’re going to comment then at least do some basic research, so you don’t look like the ultimate fool.
LMAO

Report this
cpb's avatar

By cpb, September 12, 2011 at 8:49 pm Link to this comment

I don’t want it both ways Windy, there you go inventing
your own truths about what others have said again.  At
least you’re consistent.

Identifying you as a troll doesn’t count as abuse, it’s
known as a ‘call out’.  The way you rant and spew at people
in these threads is well known.  I’m not surprised to hear
you yet again accusing others of your own behavior mind
you, it’s that consistency again.

Troll.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, September 12, 2011 at 8:40 pm Link to this comment

CPB:

You can’t have it both ways.

You can’t say it’s “obviously” a demolition and then say all the deviations are due to some super-secret magical explosive that doesn’t act like the ones demolition pros use.  As if a demo pro would use an explosive he/she is not familiar with.

I’ve been warned off from responding to abusive posts like yours as you deserve.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, September 12, 2011 at 3:29 pm Link to this comment

@ curmudgeon99 maybe after all my theory of Zionist Dwarfs may not be credible.

I find your accounting refreshingly playable, acceptably palatable and far as I can iterate, the most sensible comments I have heard aside from my own.

So, no Zionist Dwarfs in the elevator union?

Report this
blogdog's avatar

By blogdog, September 12, 2011 at 1:57 pm Link to this comment

a final entry on the putsch - complete chapter here http://www.911truth.org/stories/TarpleyChapterIX.htm complete book here
http://www.progressivepress.com/book-listing/5th-ed-911-synthetic-terror

[...]

BUSH AND PUTIN ON 9/11

The potential for a thermonuclear confrontation or even of an all-out thermo-  nuclear exchange growing out of 9/11 has generally been ignored by the US controlled media, but such a potential was clearly present. It was inherently present because of the tense relations among the US, Russia, and China in the wake of the bombing of Serbia and the Kursk incident. It was made explicit when a flying object, probably a cruise missile, hit the Pentagon. As the 9/11 commission report notes, one fighter pilot who saw the damage to the Pentagon immediately thought of Russia as the most likely adversary. This innate mental reaction must have been repeated thousands of times in the minds of non-witting military personnel on the day of 9/11. Clarke points out that the US proclamation of Defcon Delta, the level of readiness just below actual war, was inevitably immediately noticed by Russia, and came near causing immediate counter-measures of readiness on the Russian side. This was the first Defcon Delta since Henry Kissinger had ordered a world-wide alert to deter possible Soviet intervention in the Yom Kippur War in the Middle East in October 1973. Defcon Delta posed the danger of an escalation of mobilization between the two leading nuclear powers:

Frank Miller reported that DOD had gone on a global alert, DEFCON 3: “This hasn’t happened since the ‘73 Arab-Israeli War.”

“State, State, go.” Armitage acknowledged the call. “Rich, DOD has gone to DEFCON 3 and you know what that means.” Armitage knew; he had been an Assistant Secretary of Defense in the first Bush administration.

“It means I better go tell the Russkies before they shit a brick.” Armitage activated the Nuclear Risk Reduction Center, down the hall from the State Department Operations Center. The NRRC was connected directly to the Russian Ministry of Defense just outside of the Kremlin. It was designed to exchange information in crisis to prevent misunderstanding and miscalculation.

Armitage reappeared. “Damn good thing I did that. Guess who was about to start an exercise of all their strategic nuclear forces?” He had persuaded his Russian counterpart to defer the operation. (Clarke 15-16)

Most US 9/11 commentators have virtually nothing to say about Bush’s famous telephone conversation with Russian President Putin; Bamford, Thompson, and others exhibit elaborate disinterest in this matter. And yet, this is another one of the central moments of 9/11. In order to avoid a possible thermonuclear exchange, Putin needed to be reassured that the US Defcon Delta was not a cover for a thermonuclear sneak attack upon his country, something perfectly within the realm of possibility from the Russian view. Putin also needed to be told that thermonuclear launches from the US toward the Middle East or other areas were the work of a rogue network, not of the constituted government.  Putin, in short, had to be asked for cooperation and restraint.
[...]

The existence of Russian strategic maneuvers on 9/11 involving bombers had been known to the Pentagon, since it was the explicit premise for the maneuver Northern Vigilance. In this case, it would have been known to the plotters as well. Therefore, the planners of 9/11 were well aware that their incendiary actions would take place against a dangerous backdrop of simultaneous US and Russian aircraft maneuvers.

[...]

Report this
cpb's avatar

By cpb, September 12, 2011 at 1:51 pm Link to this comment

@ curmudgeon99

The ‘excellent analysis’ you bring forward is a somewhat
refreshing middle of the road perspective that is
typically non-existent in this highly polarized debate.

Also refreshing is having someone address the
Shanksville incident directly, which despite numerous
challenges, it is hard to get anyone to focus on. 
Towers towers towers.. occasionally Bldg7, but rarely
will any deniers go anywhere near Shanksville.

That said, much of what he uses to dismiss any thoughts
of internal conspiracy is just politely worded
rephrasings of a lot of the ‘same old same old’, and
most of these “it couldn’t possibly be” type arguments
have been quite appropriately addressed by others, on
numerous occasions.  It’s a well worded summary and I
see no reason to doubt the sincerity or integrity of the
author, but he basically accepts the official story,
see’s no reason to not accept it, but doesn’t come
across as if he’s really dug that deeply into any of
outstanding issues.

Report this
blogdog's avatar

By blogdog, September 12, 2011 at 1:45 pm Link to this comment

again, avoid distractions: more on the putsch from
http://www.911truth.org/stories/TarpleyChapterIX.htm
here Webster Tarpley discusses it in detail at http://tarpley.net
http://tarpley.net/audio/getfile.php?f=20110908-WGT_on_INN.mp3

[...]

In an interview with Tony Snow on Fox News Sunday, National Security Advisor
Condoleezza Rice confirmed that the September 11 threat against President
Bush’s life included a secret code name.

SNOW: Sept. 11 there was a report that there was a coded message that said,
“We’re going to strike Air Force One” that was using specific coded language
and made the threat credible. Is that true?

RICE: That is true.

SNOW: So we have a mole somewhere?

RICE: It’s not clear how this coded name was gotten. We’re a very open society
and I don’t think it’s any surprise to anyone that leaks happen. So, I don’t know
– it’s possible the code name leaked a long time ago and was just used.

SNOW: How on earth would that happen?

RICE: I don’t know. I don’t know. We’re obviously looking very hard at the
situation. But I will tell you that it was plenty of evidence from our point of view
to have special measures taken at that moment to make sure the president was
safe.

This exchange was reported by Carl Limbacher of NewsMax.com, who added
that “US intelligence officials have not ruled out the possibility that a
government mole may have given terrorists the top secret code language they
used to deliver the threat ‘Air Force One is next’ as the World Trade Center and
Pentagon were under attack.” (NewsMax.com, September 23, 2001) Of course,
the real imperative was to consider whether the rogue network behind the
attacks extended into the ranks of holders of top secret security clearances.

The threat to Air Force One was repeated by others in the administration. In the
September 12 White House briefing, Ari Fleischer told reporters, “We have
specific and credible information that the White House and Air Force One were
also intended targets of these attacks.” The next day Fleischer was asked, “[It
was] yesterday reported that some of the people in the Pentagon were a little
bit skeptical about your comments yesterday that the White House and Air
Force One were attacked – were targets of attack, given that the plane had
come from the south. What do you –” Fleischer: “Who are these people?”
Reporter: “Well, I don’t know. They weren’t my sources, so…” Fleischer: “No.
There’s – I wouldn’t have said it if it wasn’t true.” Reporter: “Can you confirm
the substance of that threat that was telephoned in…that Air Force One is next
and using code words?” Fleischer: “Yes, I can. That’s correct.”(September 13)

On Meet the Press of September 16, Cheney began to back away from the story,
telling Russert: “The president was on Air Force One. We received a threat to Air
Force One – came through the Secret Service ...” Russert: “A credible threat to
Air Force One. You’re convinced of that.” Cheney: “I’m convinced of that. Now,
you know, it may have been phoned in by a crank, but in the midst of what was
going on, there was no way to know that. I think it was a credible threat,
enough for the Secret Service to bring it to me.” (Meet the Press, September 16)
Notice that the top-secret code words, the really sensitive point, have now
disappeared. Still, the Bushmen were extremely sensitive to any impugning of
their man’s courage under fire. A journalist who said Bush was “flying around
the country like a scared child, seeking refuge in his mother’s bed after having
a nightmare” and another who said Bush “skedaddled” were fired. (Washington
Post, September 29, 2001)

[...]

Report this
cpb's avatar

By cpb, September 12, 2011 at 1:39 pm Link to this comment

@ Controlled Demolition

Don’t hold your breath waiting for Winded Inheritance to
address a direct question, especially if it doesn’t fit
into his tightly molded reality.

As for his expertise having watched how ever many hours
of YouTube controlled demolition educations videos, his
‘lyin eyes’ don’t talk to his trolling brain about the
Thermite apparently.  Getting into a long winded direct
comparison of those two towers vs traditional demolition
is an exercise in pointlessness.  That is, until the
civilian demolition industry gets the technological
trickle down and starts using what is still to this
point, correct me if I’m wrong, top secret military
grade advanced materials with extremely limited
availability.

Report this

By curmudgeon99, September 12, 2011 at 1:29 pm Link to this comment

Part 3

Now let’em fly

On a number of pressing issues in recent years, the federal government has refused transparency, much less a real investigation that would have enabled people to move past 9/11. After Obama took office, for instance, he announced that there would be no prosecutions or investigations of torture in Iraq or at Guantánamo under Bush.

The evolving accounts of Osama bin Laden’s death seemed ideally tailored to create the suspicion that big secrets were being covered up. First we heard that Osama came out guns blazing, then he merely had a gun, then he was unarmed, finally he was executed after he had been handcuffed. As for disposing of the body at sea, well, a certain amount of skepticism naturally follows the lack of a corpse.

The Pat Tillman and Jessica Lynch narratives followed similar trajectories.

Why does the federal government feed the conspiracy theorists? Maybe it’s unintentional, but probably not. I think the U.S. has become like a Third World dictatorship: the more they keep us guessing, the smarter they seem, and the more we’ll fear them.

Report this

By curmudgeon99, September 12, 2011 at 1:28 pm Link to this comment

Part 2 of Ted Rall’s excellent analysis…..

Let the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune begin

Part 2

Everything I’ve read and watched on Truther sites is like that: easily dismissed by anyone with a basic knowledge of physics and architecture. (I spent three years in engineering school.) Therefore, with one exception, I believe the official story.

The exception is United Flight 93, which crashed into a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania.

I think there’s a possibility it was shot down by a USAF fighter jet. According to the 9/11 Commission Report a shootdown order was issued to the Air Force, which had at least one jet close enough to intercept the airliner before the crash. In addition, local media reported that the plane’s engine was found miles away from the crash site. Engines don’t bounce that far.

There was almost certainly a revolt aboard the flight. But the 9/11 Commission Report never confirms that the passengers gained access to the cockpit: “The cockpit voice recorder captured the sounds of the passenger assault muffled by the intervening cockpit door…The hijackers remained at the controls but must have judged that the passengers were only seconds from overcoming them. The airplane headed down…”

Sounds strange to me. As far as we know, the cockpit door remained locked. The hijackers knew they were going to die. Why would they give up their mission before they were forced to do so?

Of course, I don’t know what happened aboard Flight 93. I’m no expert.

I do know that most 9/11 Truther narratives don’t make sense. For example, how could workers rig up the World Trade Center for a controlled demolition—a months-long project that would require miles of cable, tens of thousands of pounds of explosives, hundreds of workers—without being noticed by the 50,000 people who worked there?

What I really don’t understand is the movement’s motivations. What do Truthers want?

For the sake of argument let’s assume that the four 9/11 planes were found at the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean, confirming that they never hit their targets. Like in the TV show “Lost.” Are Truthers naïve enough to think there would be a revolution?

“Our government has lied to us about the events of 9/11,” Truther Frank Agamemnon said last year on Russia Today TV. “And if the truth came out about it, maybe the wars would stop.”

I don’t think so. Americans didn’t rise up when Bush stole the 2000 election. They didn’t care when WMDs failed to turn up in Iraq. We did nothing about Abu Ghraib or legalized torture or a president who says he has the right to assassinate each and every one of us, even if we’re innocent of any crime. Even if 9/11 did prove to be an inside job, I predict the national reaction would be:

“Huh.”

Truthers aren’t crazy. Not most of them, anyway. They’ve glommed on to the simple (crazy) fact that there has never been a real investigation of the September 11th attacks—a query led not by a politician like former New Jersey governor Tom Kean but by incorruptible scholars and respected experts independent of the world of politics, including those from other nations. And even Kean reported that the Bush Administration dragged their feet and failed to cooperate.

Since 9/11 the media has ignored Truthers or dismissed them as wild-eyed lunatics. As we saw with the Obama birth certificate issue, however, brushing people off merely raises more questions and prolongs the discussion.

Report this

By curmudgeon99, September 12, 2011 at 1:25 pm Link to this comment

Sorry guys, I think this post from Ted Rall is much closer to the truth than what I read.

PART !

The Truth About 9/11 Truthers
Why Does the US Government Create Paranoia?
by Ted Rall

“Truthers expect something from you,” an interviewer told me last week.

Indeed they do. I rarely get through a public appearance or talk-radio interview without being asked about 9/11 by a “Truther”—a person who believes that the attacks were planned and/or carried out by the U.S. government.

The 9/11 Truth movement is diverse. Some adherents think the Twin Towers and especially the Pentagon were struck by remote-controlled missiles or drone planes, not hijacked jets. Others accept the involvement of four commercial airliners in the official account but think the Twin Towers, and especially 7 World Trade Center, an office building across the street from the Twin Towers that collapsed hours later, were brought down in a staged, controlled demolition. Then there’s the “stand down” theory, which posits that the Bushies knew what was coming and ordered the military not to respond.

Theories about the execution of the 9/11 conspiracy vary. Its purpose is broadly believed to have been to cow the public into relinquishing long-cherished freedoms and liberties, opening the door to a post-9/11 police state.

As a critic of U.S. government policy, I get a lot of email from Truthers. They ask me to support their cause.

Truthers are passionate and energetic. They send links to websites, books and DVDs questioning the series of events laid out in the 9/11 Commission Report and mainstream media accounts. They remind me that the Bush and Obama Administrations have gotten caught lying about the post-9/11 war on terror. Why, then, am I not open to the possibility that 9/11 was an inside job? Am I lazy? Or some government shill? (If so I wish they’d pay me.)

I am open-minded. And I don’t trust our political leaders. So I read everything that people send me. I watched films like “Loose Change” and “In Plane Sight,” a professionally edited documentary that relies on insinuation to argue that nefarious government somebodies fired something other than hijacked jets into the World Trade Center and Pentagon.

Example: “How can a Boeing 757, which is over 44 feet in height and 124 feet in width, simply disappear without a trace into a hole that is only 16 feet in diameter? Also, why is there no external damage to the Pentagon where the wings and the tail section would have impacted with the outer wall?”

Answer: The plane hit the lawn, not the building. The Pentagon is made of reinforced WPA-era concrete. The plane’s wings were thin, light and full of jet fuel. They disintegrated upon impact.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, September 12, 2011 at 1:07 pm Link to this comment

ControlledDemolition:

Who am I supposed to believe? You, or my own lyin’ eyes?

I watched a lot of videos of controlled demolitions.  I pointed out what I saw that I don’t see in the video of the towers collapsing.  It’s as simple as that.  What I observed.

It goes further than that. If you look at controlled demolitions, not only do the explosions start at the bottom, they go up the along the outer wall to weaken the framework. This happens BEFORE the building comes down.  Again this is not in the WTC collapse.

No, I’m not an engineer. Nor am I a demolition expert.  What I am is observant and I observed significant anomalies that do not conform with what I observed with standard demolitions.

I’ve listed this anomalies. You’ve said “I don’t agree”.  EVERY video I’ve seen of a controlled demolition shows charges going off on the bottom floors first first. Not one bore any resemblance to how the towers fell. Agreement or disagreement is meaningless.  That is what I saw.

Nor did I see ANY flashes as the towers pancaked, yet those flashes are the signature of the demolitions.

So…do I believe you, or what I observe?

“Who ya gonna believe-a, me or-a your own eyes?”—Chico Marx.

Report this
ControlledDemolition's avatar

By ControlledDemolition, September 12, 2011 at 12:02 pm Link to this comment

@drbhelthi

Let me get out my tape measure.  “Only steel structures retained their form after filling the cavity that had been blown beneath the buildings.”  Are you claiming the steel columns, un-translated into dust, remained intact but simply disappeared into the basement hole?

I also note that Gabriel September 12 at 9:35am has some good references for the debunkers, whom I assume to be arguing in good faith and are not CIA shills paid to deflect public attention with la-la-land diversions.

Report this
blogdog's avatar

By blogdog, September 12, 2011 at 11:51 am Link to this comment

don’t be too distracted by ‘demolition’ - it was a putsch ... e.g.

‘Angel is next’: The terrifying message pilot of Air Force One got as he flew
President Bush on 9/11

http://tinyurl.com/3o2dd8c

but he doesn’t tell the whole story

“ANGEL IS NEXT” –
http://www.911truth.org/stories/TarpleyChapterIX.htm
THE INVISIBLE GOVERNMENT SPEAKS

Chapter Nine from “9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made in USA”, Copyright 2005, 2006
by Webster Griffin Tarpley, published by Progressive Press.

From 10:00 a.m. to approximately 8:00 p.m. (on Sept. 11), US government
officials were not thinking that this was the work of Arab terrorists, but rather
that it was an expression of a military coup being carried out by US-based
extremists who were capable of provoking a nuclear war. – Réseau Voltaire,
Paris, September 27, 2001

Sheikh: They [the Americans] were terrified thinking there was a coup. – “Bin
Laden” tape of December 2001 (Meyssan 2002 197)

The current tenant of the White House most probably was not familiar in
advance with a detailed outline of the 9/11 plot. He was assisted in not
knowing and not acting by his cognitive impairment, his contempt for detailed,
accurate information, and his habitual mental lethargy. Whether or not he
suspected that something was coming, whether or not he knew this or that
detail, are all matters to be determined with the help of open archives and
cross-examination of the subject. The guess here is that Bush knew far less
than many of his most severe critics might surmise. Bush’s crime was not the
crime of knowing everything in advance; it was rather the crime of not knowing
what he should have known, and of then compounding that by capitulating, by
turning the US government and polity in the direction demanded by the terror
plotters. Better than “Bush knew,” as we will see, is “Bush surrendered.” “Bush
knew” makes a good political slogan, but it cannot be a guide to understanding
the true scope of what actually happened. Students of 9/11 who build their
work around the thesis that “Bush knew” are on treacherous ground.

[...]

Report this
ControlledDemolition's avatar

By ControlledDemolition, September 12, 2011 at 11:50 am Link to this comment

@Inherit The Wind
@Marian Griffith

I think we have several points of valid contention.

1) The weight of the top floors above the impact zone compared to the strength of the structural steel below.  Granted some weakening from the fires, this weakening cannot migrate through, say, 80 or 90 floors of the 47 strong support columns:  not enough fire for that large an area(*).  In fact, to enjoy near freefall speed of collapse, these columns have to be severed.  The pancake theory would have things come down in blocks (IMHO) but instead everything is turned to dust.  I get it that you content the steel only has to twist and deform, it doesn’t have to melt.  I don’t think that’s the most reasonable explanation, but folks with their HP calculators can probably give more numbers on the weight-force vs. the vertical resistance of the huge steel supports.  Besides, there is direct evidence of nanothermite in the dust; are we to ignore that?

(*) Also, the tapes from the firefighters clearly indicate that the fire could be extinguished with “one hose” which does not make it sound like it’s hot enough to weaken the entire bottom portion of the building(s).

2) The plane crash would have removed the detonation cords necessary for a synchronised explosion.  OK, I agree with that, provided you can prove that wireless technology is not available for controlled demolitions.

3) Buildings are always demolished from the bottom up.  I reject that argument.

4) There is NO explosions from the floors below the falling floors.  I disagree.  I reject the “air compression” theory of the lateral ejections—everything falling has been virtually disintegrated and there is no hard wave-front to enforce the compression into the lower floors.  I would content that the lateral ejections are in fact evidence of squibs.  Gravity, by the way, works in a downward direction, which does not account for massive beams being thrown sideways, beams which are, according to you, merely warped.  Futhermore, there is witness testimony to explosions going off in the lobbies, which are (drum roll, please) below the plane impact zones.

5) Whistleblowers after 10 years.  I doubt if anyone complicit in mass murder is going to rend the veil, but I hope I’m wrong.  Besides, I reject your contention that thousands had to be involved. 

6) a) Pesky Physics makes the practical implementation (of controlled demolition?) impossible.  b) All the “experts” claiming it’s a controlled demolition are contradicted by direct visual evidence.  You’re joking, right?  I just assume you misspoke in some sort of doublespeak, and are not in la-la-land.  But to give you the benefit of the doubt, could you clarify?

7) There has never been a demolition of a building this tall.  Duh.

8) The Devil Did It.  I agree with that; or at least some real sick evil puppies doing the Devil’s work.


In conclusion, Inherit The Wind I find your arguments weak and incorrect, glossing over details.  Marian Griffith I find your arguments descriptive but without real substance.  I do note that, like the 911 Commission, you both are ignoring Bldg 7.  But what about it?  Would you acknowledge the need for an independent investigation into the still unanswered questions of 911—or do you conceive that all questions have been adequately answered?

Report this

By truedigger3, September 12, 2011 at 5:56 am Link to this comment

Helloe good people,

Is there a problem in accessing Chris Hedges’ last article? I cannot access that article as of last night and ONLY that article. I can access anything else in truthdig.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, September 12, 2011 at 4:18 am Link to this comment

Look at videos of controlled demolitions. YouTube has plenty.  The buildings’ lower floors are detonated first virtually always.  Even though they land in their own foot print, the roofs inevitably tip.  The top floors fall because the bottom floors and gone even before the higher up detonations.

Look at the WTC collapse. It’s completely collapsing from the top and pancaking. No tipping of the roof.  There is NO explosions from the floors below the falling floors.

There has never been a demolition of a building this tall.  All the “experts” claiming it’s a controlled demolition are contradicted by direct visual evidence.

Controlled demolitions start at the bottom, not at the top.  See for yourself.

So…Are you going to believe the conspiracy theorists or your own lying eyes?

Report this
drbhelthi's avatar

By drbhelthi, September 12, 2011 at 2:02 am Link to this comment

@CD   —we’re talking about 250,000 TONS of structural steel—Uhm no?
A fire does not have to weaken the entire building… Just look at the footage of the collapse. 
By Marian Griffith, September 11 at 2:46 pm

Agreed.
Look at the footage.
The dust is imminent, from the beginning of the “collapse”.
Upon collapsing, the upper level structures and appendages, other than steel, had already been reduced to dust.  As were all structures, appendages and bodies beneath, excepting steel.
The building form was retained, due to the swiftness of the “translation” event.  Somewhat similar to a sand castle on the beach.
The weight of the steel, un-translated into dust, of the upper levels, dropped the levels below, which were already dust, but with retained form, due to swiftness of the event. Even the form of the upper levels disappeared into dust upon contacting the rubble pile beneath. Only steel structures retained their form after filling the cavity that had been blown beneath the buildings. 

Who, among USGOV employees in the 1960s, would have thought that fifty years later, Russian intelligence would provide the accurate explanation to a major, building demolition event, in the U.S.A. ?  Destruction that is reported by experts to have been conducted by the USGOV administration in office at the time, reportedly, in planning for years ?  Which administration also tried to conceal seismographic records of the event ? 
Sorry. Not a man-made earthquake in 2001. 
Man-made earthquake methodology is only a couple years old.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, September 11, 2011 at 5:11 pm Link to this comment

Here’s a good synopsis which a reinvestigation should address.

http://www.trutv.com/conspiracy/government-lies/911-10yrs/intro.html

Report this
Gabriel's avatar

By Gabriel, September 11, 2011 at 5:09 pm Link to this comment

@Marian Griffith

Or maybe You don’t know as much about fire and its effect of constructions as you like to think.

Bradford fire is clearly wood greatly accelerated by paint or similar finish.
... as opposed to concrete .. which is a heat-sink.

Kerosene burns off quickly in open air / doesn’t last long enough to heat up steel and definitely not concrete. For over an hour small fires burned at WTC and nothing buckled or fell.

If combination of kerosene and office furniture would burn hot enough to bend steel it would have happened in the first 15 minutes, at most.

Crystal Palace fire was again full of accelerates. Whole structure was painted with highly flammable material and interior was full of wood and other fuels.

9/11 was planned before the Empire State Building hit as it’s recorded on US currency. You see they -Elites- like to brag about their exploits.

It goes much further back then you say, back to merchant Jews and their quest for global power, crucifixion of one that kicked them off The Temple Mount, deals they made after sacking Rome by fire, creation of their script = the bible. And they are following it as a script.

If you take a close look at their occult documents they are blatantly stating their plans: 30 miles of books and records in Vatican, Templars, Freemasons, banking cartel, Usury = charging interest, fiat money system, sacking of Europe, expansion into Orient, creating a global banking cartel, registering everyone by Identification and Birth Certificates [becoming their property], 20 year economy cycle, starting a new Israel ... it’s all there for anyone and everyone to read.

One added bonus was finding The New World / The Americas. What a perfect way to build a state to attack all others while keeping the population ignorant.

It’s only North Americans that are so dumb as not to do their research.

They / Elites hold technology way beyond what is generally known, from a previous culture before 10,500 yrs ago. Kept secret among themselves and passed on via mathematics, encoded in their buildings, books, documents, Torah, Kabbalah and many others dating back to BAAL = Babylon.

I suggest you people start studying History and what it’s all about ... or you will all end up as fertilizer and/or as part of their blood rituals / wars and executions. Their records say the worst is yet to come, where 99% of Earth’s population will be sacrificed to their New God or Returning God.

I you don’t then they win ... and most of you will be dead.

Or maybe you missing the fact that Earth is turning into one big fascist state?

Solutions?
Here ya go: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Z9WVZddH9w

And Boycott every part of their system til it becomes extinct. Your life and everyone around depends on it.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, September 11, 2011 at 4:37 pm Link to this comment

bd6951,

I too have over 30 years in the commercial mechanical union trades and have worked on many   large projects.  I am familiar with working with, on or near structural steel with the redundant over engineering envolved and necessary asbestos abatements.

The building did not twist, buckle or fall in other directions in its structural failure as it should have in the official story, it fell in its own footprint which is the path of most resistance.  Any person who understand the malleablity of heated steels vs. the cutting torch will know this.

Report this

By henrydeluxe8, September 11, 2011 at 4:06 pm Link to this comment

@Diamond, one more with more detail and commentary:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJb-GPtb2I0

Report this

By bd6951, September 11, 2011 at 3:53 pm Link to this comment

To: Marian Griffith

Give it up.  In fact, I know much about what I have written here.  My 30 year plus career in the construction and utility scale renewable energy industries provides for me a vantage point most people simply do not have.  Your arguments require a willingness to accept the suspension of the laws physics for a single day and intelligent people understand that is impossible.  My suggestion for you and everyone else who hold such uninformed notions is to watch the 9/11 Toronto Hearings that began Thursday and concluded today.  You will see and hear very brilliant people presents evidence that in no uncertain terms proves beyond a shadow of doubt that all 3 WTC buildings were imploded.  I challenge you to watch these presentations.  One of two results will occur: you will realize how wrong you have been; or you will solidify my initial assessment that you are a moron.

Report this

By henrydeluxe8, September 11, 2011 at 3:51 pm Link to this comment

@ Diamond, I wasn’t sure before, but it seems clear to me you simply don’t
understand structure.  No wonder whomever pulled this off gets away with it. 

On the positive side, you’ve taken the step away from buying the official story, on
the negative, you are essentially and perhaps unwittingly helping these monsters
maintain the big lie.

Here, check this short vid, keep your eyes in the 3rd quadrant of the screen to the
right and look at the steel structure as it sits there for a few moments and then it
turns to dust.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PlRhkn8LLeE

Report this

By diamond, September 11, 2011 at 3:24 pm Link to this comment

“Review your statement, by your own words there’s a sequential process to demolition, NOT a simultaneous one, THAT"S why, the speed of collapse is SLOWER than free fall. I really don’‘t know why this detail is so hard for you and others to grasp.  And if you re-read what I have said to you and others, I haven’t
said I buy the official story- PRECISELY because of the fact that the speed of collapse is inconsistent with the evidence.  A more exotic approach was used here- That’s all I’m saying.”

Exotic is certainly one way of putting it. You’re not arguing with me, you’re arguing with Sir Isaac Newton and the law of gravity. The free fall speed is timed from when the building started to go down straight into its footprint in the manner of a controlled demolition. Blowing the basement did not collapse the building, it was cutting the steel that held it up that collapsed the building. The time of free fall begins when it starts to collapse and not before. Then you can time the 10 seconds it takes to collapse if you watch a video of the collapse. That’s what happened and it wasn’t exotic at all, it was straight out of the demolition manual.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, September 11, 2011 at 2:56 pm Link to this comment

If I believe half of what I am told and half of what other people happen to be saying, it would seem four halves are needed to make a whole!

My theory about the 7 dwarfs and elevator union is constituted from the imbecilic nonsense written here on this thread.  Far as it makes about as much sense if not more so, as to any other speculation, estimation or fantasy story out there, and I never embellish except when the need arises!

Now if I am wrong about the 7 Dwarfs, I will apologize after all, maybe the dwarfs could have after all really been Zionists!...  S h u t .....  u p!

Since I also feel our great government has a propensity to seldom if ever tell the truth to the common slobs on the street, this doesn’t mean I feel some mouth breathing urge to make hair brained tin foil hat crap up to fill in the holes in other peoples heads!

So I happen to believe the 7 Dwarfs are as real as Micky Mouse!

Report this

By prosefights, September 11, 2011 at 2:49 pm Link to this comment

Sunday September 11, 2011 15:44

We’ve never seen so many comments as those posted to Scheer’s 9/11 article.

So, we’re doing a 9/11 audio/video/still/text program on why the US gets into these things.

9/11 focus is on what they did to us.

Our focus is on what we did to them, in particular Iran.

http://www.prosefights.org/deaton/deaton.htm#911

Report this

By Marian Griffith, September 11, 2011 at 2:46 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

@CD
—we’re talking about 250,000 TONS of structural steel—

Uhm no? A fire does not have to weaken the entire building…

Just look at the footage of the collapse. It starts at the burning floors, at which point about a third of the building above it comes down. The result is a dynamic load for which the columns are not designed (and those were weakened by the fire too). Those columns collapse as well and the whole things picks up a little more speed, making the impact on subsequent floors more severe.

If there were explosions on those burning floors the plane crashing through it and out the other side would have ripped away any directional charges that somehow could have been applied without anybody noticing, and they most certainly would have removed the detonation cords necessary for a synchronised explosion.
So even if against all logic a massive conspiracy could have been pulled off that even 10 years later not a whisper has been made by any of the thousands who should have been involved, there is still this pesky thing called physics that makes the practical implementation impossible. The Devil Did It, is a more plausible explanation than controlled demolition of the two towers.

Report this

By henrydeluxe8, September 11, 2011 at 2:07 pm Link to this comment

@Diamond, you write: “FIRST” they blew the basement which is standard
demolition practice because it creates a pit for all the debris to fall into and THEN they triggered what is known as a demolition wave which travels down the sides of the building in a precisely timed way”

Review your statement, by your own words there’s a sequential process to demolition, NOT a simultaneous one, THAT"S why, the speed of collapse is SLOWER than free fall. I really don’‘t know why this detail is so hard for you and others to grasp.  And if you re-read what I have said to you and others, I haven’t
said I buy the official story- PRECISELY because of the fact that the speed of collapse is inconsistent with the evidence.  A more exotic approach was used here- That’s all I’m saying.

Report this
ControlledDemolition's avatar

By ControlledDemolition, September 11, 2011 at 1:56 pm Link to this comment

I have to give a nod to this commentary:  By Bill Jones, September 9 at 7:38 pm (Unregistered commenter).  I hope he returns to this list to read what’s going on.  Bill, excellent summary!

If you really accept the official version of 911 without reservation, you’ve got your head in the sand.  There are just too many anomalies.  If you really have legitimate concerns over the scientific data, that’s fine.  You should at least support an independent investigation, unlike the Philip Zelikow-controlled farce.  bd6951 and others are right-on to recommend the current Toronto Hearings, should you question the science.  But if you wish to deflect legitimate inquiry with psychological insults and fantasyland non-sequiturs, you are just acting the troll or worse.  That 911 was an inside job is just too dark a scenario to contemplate, is it?  You may resume the ostrich position.

BTW, I typed too fast and misspoke earlier.  I said people “heard many explosions” going off before planes even hit the Towers, but some were before the planes hit and some afterwards (viz. Barry Jennings’ report from Bldg 7).  Reports of explosions in the lobbies prior to impact is accurate, however.

Report this

By curmudgeon99, September 11, 2011 at 1:01 pm Link to this comment

Don’t quibble all of you…

In memoriam of the Reichstag fi…..er, 9/11.

1. The U.S. was paying the Taliban Megabucks to NOT grow opium - successful
2. Just remember that in Aug 2001, the then UnoCal rep (Kharzai) had just wined and dined the Taliban in the U.S. in a failed effort to build pipeline
3. The Taliban offered Bin Laden to the U.S. in exchange for proof he committed 9/11 and that he would be tried in court
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/asia/2011/09/20119115334167663.html
Taliban ‘offered bin Laden trial before 9/11’
Former minister says group was prepared to see bin Laden put on trial prior to 9/11, but US was not interested.
The Taliban government in Afghanistan offered to present Osama bin Laden for a trial long before the attacks of September 11, 2001, but the US government showed no interest, according to a senior aide to the Taliban leader, Mullah Omar.

Wakil Ahmad Muttawakil, Taliban’s last foreign minister, told Al Jazeera in an exclusive interview that his government had made several proposals to the United States to present the al-Qaeda leader, considered the mastermind of the 2001 attacks, for trial for his involvement in plots targeting US facilities during the 1990s.

“Even before the [9/11] attacks, our Islamic Emirate had tried through various proposals to resolve the Osama issue. One such proposal was to set up a three-nation court, or something under the supervision of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference [OIC],” Muttawakil said.

“But the US showed no interest in it. They kept demanding we hand him over, but we had no relations with the US, no agreement of any sort. They did not recognise our government.”

The US did not recognise the Taliban government and had no direct diplomatic relations with the group which controlled most of Afghanistan between 1996 and 2001.

But proposals by the Taliban were relayed to the US through indirect channels such as the US embassy in Pakistan or the informal Taliban office for the UN in New York, Muttawakil said.

Robert Grenier, the CIA station chief in Pakistan at the time of 9/11, confirmed that such proposals had been made to US officials.

Grenier said the US considered the offers to bring in Bin Laden to trial a “ploy”.

“Another idea was that [bin Laden] would be brought to trial before a group of Ulema [religious scholars] in Afghanistan.

“No one in the US government took these [offers] seriously because they did not trust the Taliban and their ability to conduct a proper trial.”

Subsequent to the 1998 US embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania, as US pressure grew, the Taliban insisted on a procedure under the supervision of OIC because it considered it a “neutral international organisation”.

The OIC is a Saudi Arabia-based organisation representing 56 Muslim nations. Al Jazeera contacted the OIC, but nobody was available for comment…..

Report this
ControlledDemolition's avatar

By ControlledDemolition, September 11, 2011 at 12:53 pm Link to this comment

@Inherit The Wind PART TWO

But how would such a conspiracy have worked?  Good question.  Since the official version is spoonfed “facts” from the shadows of the intelligence (sic) community (sic) that cannot possibly be true, I also would like to find out in detail how it was accomplished—the chain of command, who knew, who was following orders, etc.  Cheney’s role in the wargame drills and stand-down orders on 9/11/01 also needs further questioning.  And who, nowadays, are accessories after the fact to mass murder and treason—people getting paid to deflect public attention from the unanswered crimes of 911, putting up all kinds of psychological smoke screens to attack “conspiracy theories.”

Two points require emphasis.  First, I don’t think you would need thousands of individuals “in the know” to enact a false flag operation.  Maybe you don’t appreciate the efficacy of the compartmentalization of military actions in which subordinates act under a plausible story but are ignorant of what’s really going on.  Second, maybe you don’t appreciate the degree to which the military and the media are embedded in times of war to “manage public perception” (psyops or psywar).  Truth does not matter; what is important is how things are viewed.  So 19 boxcutter arabs defeat the U.S. military establishment and even get into Pentagon airspace without a military transponder—and we broadcast the complete solution in a day or two.  Wow.  FOX news (sic) even broadcast the official answer as to why The Towers fell on the afternoon of 9/11/01.  Wow.

OK, I’ve answered you as best I can within my own time-constraints.  I’m open to discuss any rational concern, provided you don’t go off into fantasyland like some of the debunkers.

Report this
ControlledDemolition's avatar

By ControlledDemolition, September 11, 2011 at 12:50 pm Link to this comment

@Inherit The Wind PART ONE

Belatedly I’ll give it a quick shot.  What is really needed is an independent investigation with subpoena power to uncover the names of some really sick puppies.  I suppose you already know that the commissioners of the “official” 911 Commission Report have serious doubts themselves as to the completeness of their findings.  Anyway…

1) It wasn’t an attack by Al Qaeda but was a black box job.
Where did you get the idea of “Al Qaeda”?  Heard it on the news, perhaps?  Or maybe you saw that video with the fake “bin Laden” claiming responsibility?  If 911 was an inside job—to be judged with a truly independent investigation—then part of the crime (my opinion) is to have a patsy set up to take the fall.

2) The planed (sic) didn’t blow up the WTC but there were demolition charges planted.
Lots of information here from Architects and Engineers (and other commentators in this list) to show that the actual damage from the plane impacts was insufficient to cause the collapse.  Of course there’s a bunch of kerosene, but orders of magnitude too small: we’re talking about 250,000 TONS of structural steel.  Besides, there is direct physical evidence of nanothermite.  Go look at the videos again with an open mind (of course skepticism is always welcome as long as it stands within the bounds of rationality: at the very least you should agree to an independent investigation, IMHO).

3) No plane struck the Pentagon, but a cruise missile fired from a UN Navy ship did.
I have no idea about your speculation about a UN (US?) Navy ship, but geometrically the hole in the wall is too small for a Boeing 757.  The 6-ton steel-titanium alloy engines were constructed to house a lot of heat energy; they would not “melt.”  The circuitous entry path to the Pentagon is also suspicious, when a direct hit would have caused more damage—but, alas, the Navy auditors investigating the trillions of missing dollars on the far side of the building were killed.  Circumstantial, to be sure, but (my opinion) warrants more inquiry.  Some 911 Commission Report members note that the military lied to the Commission, by the way.

4), 5), 6) and 7) can be skipped for now.  I think Building 7 is very important and I agree with bd6951 that if you don’t see that as controlled demolition, you can compete with Leefeller to be head of the moron class, only more so.

Continued…

Report this

By David Akin, September 11, 2011 at 12:46 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

How little we know about the origins of 9/11? Really!?
One need not look any further than Dick Cheney’s career path and his Zealot Zionist Handlers at the American Enterprise Institute and AIPAC & ZOA. The Noecon’s in their think tanks in Washington had beed using Osama’s uncles in Saudi Arabia and Saddam in Iraq, selling them weapon systems of every sort and size to defete the Russian’s and Syrians. I was stationed in Europe and Dick Cheney & Donald Rumsfeld were on the Front pages of the Stars and Stripe nearly every other month after signing weapon contracts with the likes of Saddam & Saudi Princes and other so called “Freedom Fighters”. Until such time as the Mosaad discovered that the political winds had shifted. It is all well documented, Oooops,..I forget,..the very same poeple own and control the Media, Bankings,& Plutocratic Systems in Washington D.C.,and are the very same people who say’s how “Little” we know about the “Origins” of 9/11.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, September 11, 2011 at 12:25 pm Link to this comment

For all the conspiracy buffs, this is my favorite scenario, from “The Abduction of Margaret Houlihan”:

Flagg: (to Burns) You were insanely jealous of her engagement. You were furious at being rejected! You were capable of murder.
Hawkeye: That’s right! So you hit over the head with a blunt instrument.
B.J.: A saxophone.
Hawkeye: Then you hypnotized her and told her she was Johnny Ray.
B.J.: Then you performed plastic surgery on her, made her look like Johnny.
Hawkeye: The rest is obvious. You stuck her in a trunk, you mailed her to Las Vegas, and now she’s doing two shows a night at the Sands.
B.J.: Three on Saturdays.
Flagg: (dragging Burns with him) There’s only one flaw with that theory.
Hawkeye: Only one?
Flagg: They don’t do three shows Saturday night at the Sands.
Hawkeye: How do you know?
Flagg: I was a showgirl for six weeks.

Report this
drbhelthi's avatar

By drbhelthi, September 11, 2011 at 12:03 pm Link to this comment

“dr: Hot headed? Guilty. Idiot? No. Killing the messenger? Hopefully not. I’ve read your link re: Operation Paperclip, etc., twice. The premise is so completely bizarre that it is probably true. ” Billy Pilgrim

Comrade Billy P.  Read closer.
I used the work idiocy;  not idiot. Idiocy reflects hot-headedness. I further explained it in my blog.
Your response suggests that you are not well-acquainted with USGOV records.
If you google the following two words, you will have your thrill for the day.  Bush NAZI

Report this

By Marian Griffith, September 11, 2011 at 11:55 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

@bd6951

Or maybe you don’t know as much about fire and its effect of constructions as you like to think.

Go look up the Bradford Stadium fire. This was an open stands with wooden seats that caught fire during a match. The fire was hot enough that people where overcome by heat before they could climb a separation not even a meter and a half high. People halfway on the soccer field had their hair catch fire from the heat radiation, and both the steel structure of the stands as the steal structure of the roof were warped as the steel warped and became plastic under the combinatin of heat and static load.
And yes, that was a simple wood fire that was barely contained. Not nearly as hot as a kerosene fire that is mostly contained.

Or look up the Crystal Palace fire. Which was just a greenhouse. This fire too caused the (cast iron) steel structure to collapse because it was hot enough to make the metal lose its tensile strength.

But I guess we can also believe that the the events of 9/11 were a conspiracy that started about a century back ... Just so that at some point the American government could pull off a ludicrously complicated and improbable conspiracy to convince the population to go to war (when all evidence has shown that if one thing is easy it is to convince the american people to enthusiastically march towards another war)

Report this

By Basoflakes, September 11, 2011 at 11:51 am Link to this comment

Two weeks after 9/11, Time magazine reported the reasons behind the attacks, straight from the mouth of Bin Laden.

The two top reasons were American military presence in Saudi Arabia, and American aid to Israel in it’s apartheid stance against the Palestinians - both legitimate reasons for some kind of action against the United States.  We immediately removed the troops in Saudi Arabia, but have always stood steadfastly behind Israel’s attempts to push Palestinians into the Mediteranean.

Bin Laden was defenseless and unarmed when he was found.  However, the US gave the Seals orders to kill on site.  The reasons are simple.  Bin Laden would have made an embarassing witness against the United States.

Virtually every conflict that the US was engaged in after WW2 was one of imperialism and greed.  That is what should be remembered on 9/11 - not the small number of deaths incurred on US soil but the millions of deaths and chaos caused by America around the world based on lies and false pretenses.  We should be ashamed.

Report this

By bd6951, September 11, 2011 at 10:05 am Link to this comment

To: Truedigger3

Go right to the head of the moron class.  Your comment is so wrought with inaccuracies as to barely merit a response but I can’t resist.  The coefficient of expansion for concrete and steel are nearly identical so you eliminate heat differential as a factor in the implosion of WTC7.  Your comment exposes you as yet another person who has never sweated a copper pipe or cut a piece of steel with a torch.  You have no idea of how heat flows through a medium, in this case structural steel.  That you actually believe a kerosene fire burning in an open environment can generate heat sufficient to distort structural steel exposes your abject ignorance.  You would do well to tune into the final day of the 9/11 Toronto hearings and watch the videos of the first three days so that you might learn the facts of the evidence collected that point with zero doubt to controlled demolition.  Do you really want to be among those whose stupidity is on full display?

Report this

By Steve R, September 11, 2011 at 9:59 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I cannot believe that intelligent people still expect
us, 10 years later, to swallow the “official” account
of what happened on 9-11.

These intelligent people need to explain to us how
THREE buildings, built to withstand almost anything,
one of which was not even hit by a plane (building
7), simply collapsed into their own footprints?

These intelligent people need to explain to us how
every other commercial airline wreck EVER, left
bodies and/or body parts and baggage strewn all over
the place, yet on 9-11, FOUR airliners crash and
there is almost ZERO DEBRIS - as if they were
vaporized?

These intelligent people need to explain why Dick
Cheney ordered the air force NOT to shoot down any of
the so-called “hijacked” planes - even after the
first one hit the twin towers.

These intelligent people need to explain why no other
buildings anywhere in the entire world have EVER been
bought down by planes or fire!

Are we Americans so complacent that we would accept
them taking us for DUMB, STUPID, MORONS?

I guess we will never push hard enough for the truth
- and as with JFK’s assassination, the truth will
never be revealed.

Sleep tight tonight George, Dick, Donald, Larry,
Condoleeza and the rest of you. You know who you are
- and you’ll get yours one day!

Report this
James M. Martin's avatar

By James M. Martin, September 11, 2011 at 8:10 am Link to this comment

To me, the most obscene image of George W. Bush is of him kissing Saudis during a time when we had $5 gas in some parts.  Bush had gone there to ask the king to help out.  He went home empty-handed.  Generations of Bush-Saudi ass-kissing, obsequious fossil fuel freaking Dubya and Bandar the Bandit, the rejection said it all. An important fact about the 9/11 plane bombers is that the great majority of the original 16 (four per jet) were from Saudi Arabia.  Now, why would you suppose these nice young men would be attracted to jihadist martyrdom?  Most were well educated and from good families.  The answer is simple: the Saudis bribe religious fundamentalists in their own country so that the latter do not jet bomb the home front.  These young men are brought up in Madrasahs where the teaching is as much of the Koran as of Korzybski, and where the instructors can find in molecular biology evidence that the heathen West is entirely evil and should be destroyed in the name of Allah.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, September 11, 2011 at 7:27 am Link to this comment

Moron Leefeller here! Okay the 7 dwarfs may not be credible as Zionists it is probably more likely or possible they could have been Methodists!

Night time employees and security at the Towers reported hearing strange noises coming from the 50 thousand elevator shafts and from behind the the walls of the Towers for several months before 911.

In particular people reported (which were always ignored) hearing the sounds of whistling and even a few songs like ‘Whistling while you work’ and occasionally an annoying renditions of its ‘A small small world’,... it was suggested by some people radio waves were being picked up by the made in China steel beams of the Towers from Disneyworld in Florida because of sun spots.

Some people even reported hearing sneezing and what sounded like snoring?

The truth is the 7 dwarfs couldn’t be Zionists because it is a well known fact Zionists are afraid of heights and especially afraid of the powerful elevator union.

Now that I think on it… I am afraid of heights, so maybe I am a Zionist?

Shut…. up?....You know, we seem to have Doc, Dopey and Grumpy all here on TD at the same time,  now that is what I call a real coinkydink!

Report this
Billy Pilgrim's avatar

By Billy Pilgrim, September 11, 2011 at 5:47 am Link to this comment

dr: Hot headed? Guilty. Idiot? No. Killing the
messenger? Hopefully not. I’ve read your link re:
Operation Paperclip, etc., twice. The premise is so
completely bizarre that it is probably true. Nothing
surprises me anymore in the insane asylum called
America. As I write this, our nation is beginning a
day long orgy of remembrance of a day best forgotten.
I will spend today reading an historical novel about
the Lodz Ghetto. I will watch baseball and football.
I will smoke a cigar and walk my dog. I will hug my
family. I will not watch the self-flagellation pity
party our lying politicians are throwing. I knew a
bond trader at Cantor Fitzgerald who perished. He
grew up on my block in Brooklyn. I don’t need to
remember what happened one decade ago.

I have no fear of our intelligence community. I know
that everything one does or says is being carefully
monitored. Before I leave, and proceed to enjoy
reading Mr. Hedges’ new column, I would like to share
with you and the rest of Truthdig an interesting
event I experienced over 30 years ago. As I mentioned
above, I grew up on a middle class tree lined block
in Brooklyn, N.Y, from the mid 1960’s through the mid
1980’s. I lived in an apartment building. Sometime
around 1980 (I was in my early 20’s), I answered my
doorbell and admitted into my apartment a young man,
perhaps a few years older than myself, average
height, stocky, dirty blond hair and mustache,
fashionably long for the era. He showed I.D. from one
of our government security agencies (I can’t
remember, but probably F.B.I.), and requested to ask
me a few questions regarding a man who lived on my
floor. I was understandably nervous, however, I said
sure and invited the gentleman in. The person whom he
wanted some information on was named “Dov Zackhiem”.
I knew of a family with that surname who was living
on my floor. I was asked if I knew anything about Dov
that may have adversely affected his chances of being
hired by the government for any security sensitive
position. After doing an impersonation of a nervous
“Ralph Kramden” of the old “Honeymooners” show, I
stammered a few unremembered sentences regarding the
outstanding character of Mr. Zackheim. After thanking
me for my input, and as I was escorting my
interrogator to the door, it suddenly dawned on me
that I didn’t know anything about Dov, who was much
older than me. I thought the agent was asking me
about Dov’s younger brother, whom I did know, along
with his parents, who also still resided on my floor.
I told the agent about my confusion; he appeared
nonplussed, thanked me again, and departed. It was
only recently that I learned who Dov Zackheim is. I’m
sure most Truthdig readers, being much more
politically aware than myself, know the history of
Mr. Zackheim.

Report this

By ardee, September 11, 2011 at 5:42 am Link to this comment

diamond, September 11 at 1:29 am

I seldom bother to respond to conspiracy theorists, as it seems am extreme waste of time. I agree in fact with the assessment of Billy Pilgrim regarding the posts of the blatantly obvious unhealthy doctor but note that that person’s posts have been ridiculous for a very long time and deserve only the turbo scroll.

I respond to you because, unlike those of the aforementioned crank, I have read much of value in your posting history. I ask only whether you have ever seen a building prepared for demolition. Or watched one in the act of its demise?

In order to effect that neat and vertical descent the demolition crews do much preparation, days and days thereof in fact. Supports are cut, charges are placed by the hundreds as well in many cases.

All this you claim to believe happened in two buildings with daily and continuous traffic and thousands upon thousands working within, all the while ‘men in trench coats’ are placing satchel charges on almost every floor and cutting main support beams.

The occasion of this anniversary is a time to reflect upon why nineteen men were driven to such an act of desperation, a time to think about those who died as well, the three thousand in those structures and those on those planes who died after saying goodbye to loved ones by phone ( go away Doctor, please).

Conspiracies work only to benefit those who used this event to their own purpose, however unwittingly and self righteous the theorists believe themselves. You are, I believe, far better than that.

Report this
Gabriel's avatar

By Gabriel, September 11, 2011 at 5:29 am Link to this comment

@ henrydeluxe8
Oh but come on genius .. you’ve been challenged. Is that the best you can do?
You’re good at yapping off on the net ... let’s see if you have the balls to prove it.

Report this

By truedigger3, September 11, 2011 at 5:11 am Link to this comment

Many people who claims that they are Engieers or Physicists ignore a basic elementary fact in Physics which is different materials expand and contract differently under the same temperature or under differnt temperatures.
Yes, building 7 was not hit by any plane but it also collapsed. But it caught fire from the flying amber and the heat from the fires in the adnacent towers. As the evening fell the fire died out and the HIGH building 7 started to cool down differently, in differnt spots, with its different materials at different locations and hights. That put tremendous stresses and strains on the structure and tore it apart and resulted in its collapse.
Several people wrote here, and I agree with them, that it is better to ask questions about who benefited strategically and politically, from 9/11, whether in its domestic or foreign policies and intentions and aims??!!
Questions about who ignored glaring yellow warning lights and why??!!. Who received strong wanrnig memos and put it in a drawer and deliberately “slept on it”.
Discussing HOW the buildings collapsed is futile and waste of time and energy where the “EXPERTS” will keep agruing indefinitely. It is better to ask questions about WHO and WHY??!!
A duplicate in history can be found similar to what happened to building 7 in the collapse of “Die Fraue Kirche” Cathedral after the infamous massive fire bombing of Dresden, Germany in Feb. 1945.
The Cathedral caught fire and survived intact, as the fire raged, until the fire died out and it started to cool down when after a while it suddenly collapsed completely on itself!.

Report this

By diamond, September 11, 2011 at 1:29 am Link to this comment

“@diamond- Spare me- stop cage-rattling and grandstanding. A degree of structural resistance will occur with ANY conventional explosive, basic physics. Control demolition takes place in a staggered fashion. NO WAY, that free fall will occur when the resistance a structure offers as it implodes will slow down a fall
that OBVIOUSLY is not taking place by the mere force of gravity until its link to the system gives way. That very detail, assuming it does not go over your head adds a considerable amount of time to the collapse. Your flawless piece of logic fails to account for this, AND the fact steel beams and most of the structure turned to dust. BTW, no conventional technique even if you blew up those buildings would account for the 10.5 second speed. But apparently this detail eludes you and others.”

What are you talking about? First they blew the basement which is standard demolition practice because it creates a pit for all the debris to fall into and then they triggered what is known as a demolition wave which travels down the sides of the building in a precisely timed way so that the sides of the building don’t bulge because that would cause the building to topple. The way they do a demolition is to have everything come straight down into its footprint and of course as the steel pillars are cut with explosives it all comes down at free fall speed, because it has no choice. Once the support is gone it is subject to the law of gravity.

I was watching Richard Gage at the Toronto Hearings and he said that the top demolition man in Europe had looked at videos of all three buildings coming down and said ‘That’s a demolition’ in each case. And what else would he say? They are all so obviously demolitions that there’s nothing else to say. If the building had come down because the steel failed or melted it would have come down asymmetrically. Gage explained it by saying that if you break your leg you collapse towards the injury. You don’t fall straight down into your footprint. And if the building had failed and collapsed that way it would have fallen first to the side of the collapse, not straight down. It’s very obvious what happened to those buildings. And that’s actually the least of it.

Report this

By henrydeluxe8, September 11, 2011 at 1:11 am Link to this comment

“.......And with the right explosives he can make a similar building come down
faster than freefall. Play your basic physics on that” - by GaGAbriel

Right, right,  Soooooo, faster than the speed of free fall -wow! let me guess; he
also boils a one minute egg in 25 seconds, and runs the 4 minute mile in, what, a
minute? impressive, impressive.  Well, listen, Gab, don’t you let anybody discourage you because you happen to be slow, it’s ok, it’s ok,  Hope you wear a helmet when you go outside.  Tie those shoe laces well and everything is gonna be ok. No prob. Keep laughing as you seem to, being different is what this fine nation is all about. Bye, bye.

Report this
blogdog's avatar

By blogdog, September 10, 2011 at 11:31 pm Link to this comment

RE:”...sufficiently well read to know the
derivation of my name, however, as for yours…”

I guess that’s in reference to the avatar “Billy Pilgrim” - yeah, I’ve read ‘Slaughterhouse-Five’ but know
nothing of the Atlanta-based band - I guess you refer to the former

OK, you’ve got a history (we all do) - in public polemics nobody cares about your history, unless it’s
pertinent to the issue at hand, otherwise, it’s as useless as faulty rhetorical tricks (e.g. ad hominems)

if you can make a position, make it - if not, do more research - the internet is a great research tool - but
you know it’s full of lies and you’re being spied on all the time - so what - that’s not paranoia - it’s just
data sweeping - it’s what they do - most of us look stuff up and hopefully analyze it, draw opinions and
share - self/group education - it’s legal- at least for now and 99.99% is innocuous

btw: the reason Bush regime intelligence (and likely Obomber regime as well) fail to ask for FISA warrants
(issued virtually automatically) is because the ‘blind’ data sweeps probably pick up too many of their own
black-ops in progress, which they want no judge to ever see

but, if you haven’t noticed, perhaps the biggest conspiracy in the USA is simply to make people stupid -
for that, POP culture is the best - the numero uno drug of choice - media: TV, internet, iPhone, iPod, et
al, is the delivery system par excellence - product which largely kills reasoning capacity - makes and
keeps people stupid - cheap and easy to achieve

Billy Pilgrim, looks like you’re into literature, good choice - now make the most of it - “...as for [mine]...”

Dog Star

In the distance
    the Dog Star’s echo
It went out there when first
    he faced his hungry abandon
It was already growing
    deep in his braided chest
    where no one had ever been
It sailed out over the city
    and mingled with others
    some centuries old
    some from ancient packs
It reached from inside my ear
    while I slept
    reached into deep firmament
    and led me out
    to meet my own hungry abandon
    running on the edge
    not knowing if the pack
    will catch up
    or turn away forever
In the distance
    the Dog Star’s echo
    still out there
    still in deep firmament
    hungry abandon
    where no face lingers
Retreat from so far distant
    into the melee of the pack
    the polyphony of hearts beating
    familiar smells
    the joy on the crispest
    seven-dog night
Nights the Dog Star’s echo
    reaches into all
    into hungry abandon
    deep firmament and
    into the anchor of the pack

Report this
drbhelthi's avatar

By drbhelthi, September 10, 2011 at 11:23 pm Link to this comment

“I do believe Bush/Cheney are war criminals and need to be
arrested, etc. “
“ I guess I am a twit as I was foolish to admit my lack of scientific
expertise-“  “Billy Pilgrim”

Admitting honest fact is not viewed by intelligent people to be
foolish. It is viewed as honesty.  However, your hot-headed idiocy
qualifies you as a twit, to say the least. Your killing the messenger
reflects a thousands of years old pattern, that is still being
practiced by a certain clan. The use of which practice tends to
reflect subservience to this clan. Which clan insults the sheep who
hold to the genuine Jewish belief.

Subservient shills of this clan typically and automatically apply the
pattern of kill the messenger. Prostituting ones intelligence,
subservient to this clan, qualifies one for the title of “twit”, and
additional titles.  Hot-headed idiocy reflects only hot-headed
idiocy, a trait of narrow-minded humans, typically.

I find it regrettable that you are not familiar with the history of
the 1945 Dulles brothers, the C.I.A., Operation Paper Clip, and the
origin of the GHWBushSr family. Your occasional hot-headed idiocy
tends to reflect the following:
“We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything
the American public believes is false.”—William Casey, CIA
Director (from first staff meeting, 1981, as recorded by the
investigative journalist, Mrs. Mae Brussell.)

Report this
Gabriel's avatar

By Gabriel, September 10, 2011 at 10:21 pm Link to this comment

@henrydeluxe8

LMAO ... Just about every idiot knows steel doesn’t turn into dust. Your epic fail.

Lack of debris? What do you call all that concrete dust and furniture debris spread over 30+ blocks?
Do you think it took months to cart it away just for fun?

Any time you want to show me your theory in practice just choose a reputable demo company and we’ll see for real. We’ll be sure to video tape it for TD and everyone else.

I’m sure all the engineers, prof. demolitions people and ex-Army Core of Engineers would love to see your genius.

Basic physics? Complicated?
FYI: I have a friend with 30+ yrs of Demo experience and can make a building come down just about any way possible. He can make it come down outside first, or inside first ... or top, center or bottom first. He can even make it bounce a couple of times as it comes down, or make it come down in a continuous cork screw from bottom up or top down.
He doesn’t care whether it’s concrete, steel, plastic, glass, stone, brick or ginger bread.
And with the right explosives he can make a similar building come down faster than freefall. Play your basic physics on that.

Amateur hour has been over for 9 yrs ... So try to go back to Demolition school or check out the 1,000’s of 9/11 disclosure websites before you make a bigger fool of yourself.

They go much further by stating most of the idiots involved and everyone up the money ladder.

The game is up with 85% of people world wide knowing who done it and why. Now only thing left is to prosecute those idiots and disband their system of control, right down to dust.

Report this

By jrosenb1, September 10, 2011 at 9:31 pm Link to this comment

We indeed do not know the exact degree of intentionality in possible Bush
administration collusion with al-Qaeda on Sept. 11.  But it is clear that despite
months of warnings, the administration conveniently looked the other way on that
fateful day.  They protected members of the bin Laden family, protected bin Laden
himself by letting him slip away at Tora Bora, and they diverted resources from
the Afghanistan war to invade Iraq.  The administration had the means, the
motive, and the political will to carry off all that happened, and the real purpose
seems to have been to provide a pretext for invading an oil-rich Gulf state whose
economy they could bend to neo-conservative business fantasies.  One must
always ask: Cui bono?  To whose advantage?  Yet pointing out the obvious has
routinely been dismissed as wacko conspiracy theory.  I salute Scheer for filling
out the picture a bit more than customary.

Report this
Billy Pilgrim's avatar

By Billy Pilgrim, September 10, 2011 at 9:01 pm Link to this comment

bd: I bow to your superior intellect. I am not a
climate change or peak oil denier. I also don’t
believe the official 9/11 story. I do believe
Bush/Cheney are war criminals and need to be
arrested, etc. I just feel the whole 9-11 scenario is
more complex than we can imagine, and it’s a waste of
time to try and muddle through the whole sordid
episode. Insulting those who don’t adhere to the
unofficial Truthdig poster party line doesn’t
accomplish anything. I guess I am a twit as I was
foolish to admit my lack of scientific expertise,
thereby showing weakness to the likes of the
execrable drbhelthi, an insufferable paranoid type
who wears a tin foil hat under his too cool raspberry
beret. Apparently the good dr., who sees boogeymen
behind every dark alley, thinks I’m some CIA plant.
His schtick is wearing thin. I hope he’s pulling my
leg and is sufficiently well read to know the
derivation of my name, however, as for yourself…

Report this
DieDaily's avatar

By DieDaily, September 10, 2011 at 8:01 pm Link to this comment

In my opinion, as a Physicist, the science (i.e. purely by academics) to date has incontrovertibly proven that the official 9/11 story is physically impossible. If the official report had bothered to include any mention of Building 7 (the mammoth 49-story, square-block third building that was not struck by any plane yet collapsed into its own footprint at nearly free-fall speed at 5:20pm) one could have used even stronger language about the implausibility of official account, such as “fairy tail”.

Stronger evidence yet exists in the form of the extreme and devious secrecy and skulduggery of the establishment, which NEVER releases evidence (say, the 60+ videos of the alleged jet airliner crashing into the pentagon and leaving a mere 18-ft hole, those would be nice) and never presents evidence (such as the FBI site which clearly explains that they have no evidence against Bin Laden and therefore were not able to lay any charges). But really, all the technical argument is already foregone and really beside the point, especially for those that have already studied it. Like the 1560 accredited and licenced architects and engineers that will tell you ALL about all of that (http://ae911truth.org/ or just watch their new experts-and-academics-only documentary at http://911expertsspeakout.org/).

But the real common-sense arguments come from the money trails, the insider trading players (who all shorted the airlines in question before the fact), the 46 defense exercises operating on that day (including one that simulated airliner strikes on buildings, of course), the fact that the Patriot Act had been long-since drafted and was rolled out in all it’s multi-thousand page glory mere days later, the fact that on Sept 10 Rumsfeld noted that more than a trillion dollars seemed to have gone missing from the pentagon’s coffers, and a long and sad litany of literally hundreds and hundreds of other “coincidences” attendant upon the events of that day. It does not take a scientist or statistician to figure any of this out.

It’s pretty hilarious that it’s not yet even being acknowledged in the mainstream media that over 75% of Americans feel that the official story is not true. The “conspiracy theory” is the “theory” that 19 cave-dwelling morons “conspired” to bring us to our knees on that day and defeated our entire law-enforcement, intelligence, and military might with apparent ease. The “conspiracy theorists” are really that remaining minority of people that are unsophisticated enough, or whose sense of impartial analysis in addled enough, to drink that kind of faith-based cool-aid.

Report this

By henrydeluxe8, September 10, 2011 at 7:12 pm Link to this comment

@Gabriel, apparently you are afflicted with fits of laughter,  in between one of those, pause, take a breath and explain steel turning to dust, the lack of debris on the rubble pile, a negligible seismometer signature on that tub to account of the size of the buildings, give me one of those- the steel to dust- then I’ll tell you why there are also explosions. ANd apparently you are also unable to grasp the significance of a structure that size falling at free fall speed.  An understanding of basic physics should be a nice time saver when discussing something as complicated as this.

Report this

By bd6951, September 10, 2011 at 6:05 pm Link to this comment

To: Leefeller

Let me get right to the point. Your “zionist dwarves” comment qualifies you for membership in the moron club.  You know nothing of either the construction of the towers nor the ability to access the elevator shaft areas of them.  Additionally, you clearly have never been in a high rise building during construction.  Let me go real slowly here.  The elevator building union is the most powerful organization in the building industry especially in NYC where there are 58,000 elevators (The New Yorker).  Once access was gained into the core of the towers the process of wiring the towers for demolition can proceed at a leisurely pace out of view of prying eyes.  My suggestion is to watch the videos of the conference taking place in Toronto (it began Thursday) and learn what some really brilliant people have discovered about the “day that changed everything”, that is if you really are interested in knowing the truth of 9/11.  Otherwise, shut up.

Report this
Gabriel's avatar

By Gabriel, September 10, 2011 at 5:36 pm Link to this comment

@henrydeluxe8

ROFL ... I think you better explain that to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sK50So-yYRU ... and related videos.

Explosions at WTC buildings were heard and recorded by News and Independent Media right from the start til free-fall.
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=wtc+explosions&aq=1&oq=wtc+expl

More specifically ... As each chopper goes past explosions are heard and seen.

Final demolitions of each tower clearly shows explosions at bottom levels and computer controlled explosions at each floor, mainly the inner 47 columns, as the buildings went down.

Mind you, 9/11 was a work of art as demolitions go, a masterpiece.

Similar goes for flight 93 and pentagon.

At all locations there was multiple types of explosive residue found. If you are careful enough you can still go to those locations and glean such residue.

Too bad for them [ones who did it] as they recorded it on video. This shows exactly how they did it. LMAO

Report this

By truthseeker, September 10, 2011 at 5:33 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Please Mr Scheer,
  There are quite a few questions that need to be asked, that are a bit more relevant than the one’s you cite in your piece…...Building 7, the Pentagon “plane” photo, reports and recordings of explosions prior to the collapse of the the buildings, are just some that come to mind and need to be examined.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, September 10, 2011 at 5:27 pm Link to this comment

Leefeller,

If yours is the logic of those who believe in the official story, I wonder how anyone could possibly believe otherwise.

Report this

By carroll price, September 10, 2011 at 5:06 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The question of who did 9/11 is more important and easier to answer than how it was done.  There is room for questions and disagreement on how it was done, but there is simply no question that Israel planned and carried out the entire operation.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, September 10, 2011 at 4:32 pm Link to this comment

The U are with me or U are against me, point was used by someone with the credibility of a cock sure cockroach. Damn, I have heard it someplace before but I just cannot place it…. It will come to me.

The official story may probably not be the truth, but it is a hell of a lot more credible then the 7 Zionist Dwarfs working with the elevator union planting explosives through out all the buildings.

So experts, when you plant explosives in a building, do they plant them behind the walls or only in the elevator shafts? Under someones desk? Maybe they built the building with Chinese steel, I know Chinese nails suck.

The truth seems to be evading the tin foil hat crowd like facts conveniently evade politicians especially those filled with certitude those damn Republican politicians.

So this is the unofficial theory, ‘there is no way a plane full of aviation fuel can make a building collapse, because after all look at how well the Empire State Building handled King Kong climbing all over it, unless we discover all of a sudden that King Kong happened to be a card carrying Zionist!

I like the Zionist Dwarf theory, I am going to stick by that one, it fits nicely with my new tin foil hats!

Report this

By henrydeluxe8, September 10, 2011 at 4:11 pm Link to this comment

@diamond- Spare me- stop cage-rattling and grandstanding. A degree of structural resistance will occur with ANY conventional explosive, basic physics. Control demolition takes place in a staggered fashion. NO WAY, that free fall will occur when the resistance a structure offers as it implodes will slow down a fall
that OBVIOUSLY is not taking place by the mere force of gravity until its link to the system gives way. That very detail, assuming it does not go over your head adds a considerable amount of time to the collapse. Your flawless piece of logic fails to account for this, AND the fact steel beams and most of the structure turned to dust. BTW, no conventional technique even if you blew up those buildings would account for the 10.5 second speed. But apparently this detail eludes you and others.

Report this

By diamond, September 10, 2011 at 3:40 pm Link to this comment

“AGAIN, no building brought down by controlled demolition free falls.”

You’re kidding, right? This is like saying that no rock thrown off a cliff free falls. Of course it does and so does anything else subject to the law of gravity, whether it’s a building or a baboon makes no difference.

Report this

By diamond, September 10, 2011 at 3:35 pm Link to this comment

“If they had collapsed thru a controlled demolition scenario you would have had a degree of resistance as each floor pancaked down.E.g., allow a very conservative half a second per floor, if we start from about the 80th, that gives us a collapse time of 40 seconds, assume there was a geometric acceleration fall that would mean
about half that time- still twice the speed at which those towers collapsed.  In other words, we are supposed to accept that two 110 story towers collapsed with zero resistance or at the speed of free fall, i.,e if you had dropped a brick from the top of one of those it would have fallen in about 9 seconds. Physics 101.So your controlled demolition scenario might need some revising along with your higher- than-thou attitude.”

Good God. Don’t you know anything? All objects (regardless of their mass) free fall with the same acceleration, whether it’s a brick or a building - 10 m/s/s. Using this it’s possible to calculate that free fall speed for a building that’s 110 stories high, is around 10 seconds. This just happens to be the approximate speed at which those buildings did come down. A building will only fall down, meaning in this case drop through air at free fall speed, if explosives are used. A pancake collapse for a 110 story building takes 96 seconds, nearly ten times as long as it took those buildings to come down into their footprint in the exact manner of a demolition. Therefore all three buildings were blown up.

Report this

By henrydeluxe8, September 10, 2011 at 2:39 pm Link to this comment

@drbhelthi-you write:
“The information presented so far so clearly evidences controlled demolition
that to hold any other opinion renders one an imbecile.  Again, you should be
careful of further exposing yourself as a 9/11 moron, my new term for anybody
who believes the official account”

Where did you get the idea that I buy the official story? you are either a careless
reader or you spend so much time adding insult to your comments that you
simply end up watering down any legitimate argument you may have.  As a
matter of fact, your insistence in having everyone see the world the way you see
it - and if not- the person or persons turn into morons or worse, etc,, renders
you a zealot, a bully and a fundamentalist.

AGAIN, no building brought down by controlled demolition free falls. GOT
THAT? That you seem unable to grasp this point is troublesome, your physics -
in spite of all your posturing- leave lot to be desired.  No control demolition
turns steel to dust, no control demolition would make 2000 toilets per tower
just disappear, and lastly, I don’t trust anything the Russians say.

Now, to be clear, evidence shows this to have been a false flag operation, a
complex and multi- layered action complete with murky details and tons of
misinformation.

Your scenario is correct as far as holding the position that the official story -
when reviewed-  just does not add up.  As for the rest, you are fitting the
puzzle pieces with what you think you know, chances are that if you had a less
arrogant attitude you could perhaps arrive at a more viable position with less
vitriol and more insight.

Report this

By christian96, September 10, 2011 at 2:27 pm Link to this comment

Information gathered by the Pentagon from Osama
Bin Laden’s compound indicates that Allah appeared
to Osama and assured him that at the same time the
planes flew into the twin towers invisible UFO’s
from Allah would release laser beams into the steel
structures causing them to fall to the ground.
Allah assured Osama Bin Laden the pilots of the
planes would immediately be transformed from
physical bodies into spiritual bodies and gathered
into UFO’s and flown to Mecca.  This information
has been leaked from Area51.  President Obama
doesn’t want the information leaked to the
public for fear of panic, especially among Christians who don’t believe in Allah.

Report this
drbhelthi's avatar

By drbhelthi, September 10, 2011 at 1:14 pm Link to this comment

@ henrydeluxe8

The timing of the thermite ignition had a significant effect on the speed of collapse of the buildings.
However.
Converting human bodies so swiftly to dust is not immediately explained by the extensive use of thermite.  The explanation by Russian intelligence sources makes sense to some of us. It also tends to explain the almost free fall of the structures directly downward.

Report this

By bd6951, September 10, 2011 at 1:10 pm Link to this comment

Henry, Henry, Henry….Is it any wonder we are the end of empire?  The WHOLE point is that the buildings fell at free-fall which means that all of the structure below the point of impact was removed via controlled demolition.  For everyone who has questions log onto the 9/11 Toronto Hearings.  The information presented so far so clearly evidences controlled demolition that to hold any other opinion renders one an imbecile.  Again, you should be careful of further exposing yourself as a 9/11 moron, my new term for anybody who believes the official account of the “day that changed everything”.

Report this

By henrydeluxe8, September 10, 2011 at 12:34 pm Link to this comment

@bd6951, You are very confidently cite demolition and dismiss other points.
Before you do that, you have to ask: could a 110 story building collapse in 10.5
seconds? the plain answer is a resounding-NO.  If they had collapsed thru a controlled demolition scenario you would have had a degree of resistance as each floor pancaked down.E.g., allow a very conservative half a second per floor, if we start from about the 80th, that gives us a collapse time of 40 seconds, assume there was a geometric acceleration fall that would mean
about half that time- still twice the speed at which those towers collapsed.  In other words, we are supposed to accept that two 110 story towers collapsed with zero resistance or at the speed of free fall, i.,e if you had dropped a brick from the top of one of those it would have fallen in about 9 seconds. Physics 101.So your controlled demolition scenario might need some revising along with your higher- than-thou attitude.

Report this
drbhelthi's avatar

By drbhelthi, September 10, 2011 at 12:16 pm Link to this comment

@ Colm McGinn

Sounds good. Until the facts are evaluated.
Free-burning kerosene is what created the marvelous clouds of fire
that was blown out in all directions; for the viewing audience. It
started fires, but melted no steel.

The light from the explosion trigger, seen just prior to impact,
initiated the explosion of the ordnance strapped to the belly of the
USAF cargo aircraft. The pre-detonation trigger also clues to the
type ordnance. The thermite used at various levels of the buildings
was ignited separately. 

As far as the underground explosion that hollowed out the receptacle
for the non-steel rubble - - which was not shipped to Japan, Russian
intelligence services provided an explanation.

Report this

By bd6951, September 10, 2011 at 11:49 am Link to this comment

To Colm:

You too should tune into the Toronto hearings.  You might learn something.  Evidence points to controlled demolition by conventional means.  Listen to people who design and build steel frame buildings.  Listen to structural engineers.  Leave the Alex Jones-like scenarios about pulse weapons and small nuclear weapons at the door.  Kerosene burned in an open environment CANNOT generate temperatures necessary to soften, let alone melt steel.  End of story!  If you had ever build anything of consequence in your life you would not hold these silly notions.

Report this

By Colm McGinn, September 10, 2011 at 11:15 am Link to this comment

At bd6951:

All this about laws of physics should start WITH the
self same laws; It’s about energy, loads & loads of
chemical, kinetic, & heat energy

U.S. Massive Ordnance Air-blast Bomb, or MOAB,
weighs 8 tons, and has the explosive effect of 11
tons of TNT (has ~ 11,000 KWH of energy contained
within it)

Boeing 767, hitting the one of the towers at 300 mph,
converts it’s fuel load to aerosol in less than a
second. While the explosive force was maybe only
comparable to one of these bombs, the amount of
energy contained in 11,000 gals. of jet fuel
(kerosene) was at least 30 times that of the above
fuel- air bomb.

It’s all a question of chemical energy, & mass. And
then of gravity, as the steel columns become
critically weakened by those minutes / hours of
burning kerosene, plastic, wood, adhesives, paper,
etc.

Report this

By bd6951, September 10, 2011 at 10:46 am Link to this comment

To: Billy Pilgrim

Let’s just cut to the chase you twit.  Log on to the 9/11 hearings going on in Toronto as I write this (and am listening to the current speaker).  Hear what EXPERTS - engineers, chemists, architects and physicists - are saying about the official story.  Then compare your opinion to the known facts.  By the way, were you even aware that these hearings are being held?  And while we’re at it my guess is that you are a climate change and peak oil denier.  Finally, the reason that the Cheney/Bush junta “allowed” the “day that changed everything” to occur is PEAK OIL.  If you understood the implications of the end of oil you would understand why they believed they needed an excuse to attempt to sequester the remaining recoverable oil on our planet.  It is better to remain silent and let people wonder about your intelligence than to open you mouth and remove all doubt.  Any questions?

Report this
sallysense's avatar

By sallysense, September 10, 2011 at 10:12 am Link to this comment

(flight 93’s eyewitness plight)...

eyewitness accounts of the plane going down…
poured from shanksville’s local people…
some saw military aircraft overhead too…
before 93’s crash in that field…

in fairness to flight 93’s innocent victims…
should investigators shun certain details known?...
even keen observations from neighbors close by…
revealed missile-like noises and combat jets flown…

why did federal officials ditch notable witnesses?...
when do firsthand views turn worthless for government?...
how can findings be thorough if reports lack that evidence?...
and why were several discouraged from recounting events?...

Report this

By bd6951, September 10, 2011 at 9:51 am Link to this comment

To: Billy Pilgrim

How pitiful.  Conspiracies everywhere?  You didn’t read that in my replies to your moronic screeds.  This is a very simple calculation.  The laws of physics are immutable.  The “official” account of 9/11 violates the laws of physics.  Therefore the “official” account of 9/11 is a lie.  If you can present evidence of a single instance when the second law of thermodynamics - you do understand thermodynamics - is violated you will be the first to do so in the history of humankind.  What amazes (and frightens) me about guys like you is that you can look at the collapse of WTC7 and still defend the truly delusional notion that the building was not imploded.  You, sir, are proof positive that the dumbing down of America is a done deal.

Report this
tropicgirl's avatar

By tropicgirl, September 10, 2011 at 9:32 am Link to this comment

Seriously I am not reaaly sure that ITW and LaFayette, to name a few, are really interested in the truth about 911. Understandably, its hard to take.

But I doubt they have even seen Loose Change - Final Cut, where even the most hesitant in convinced in about…. 10 minutes into the film.

And then, if I were skeptical and sincere, I would read what the Architects and Engineers have to say.

No need to reinvent the wheel here. The research has been done and the movies have been meticulously produced.

Its a matter of motivation.

Report this

Page 1 of 3 pages  1 2 3 >

 
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.

Like Truthdig on Facebook