9/11 Reports 2

208 posts / 0 new
Last post
wage zombie

I think there's been a lot of focus on getting petitions from scientists and other such things.  And then it becomes a case of a bunch of scientists on one side vs a bunch of scientists on another side.

The arguments that I hear from 9/11 truth people are the same arguments I heard 5 years ago.  And from what I've seen, these arguments only have appeal to people who already knew them anyway.

I think there have been some good videos that have mashed up all the questions, but again, I think largely the people who have watched those videos already were aware of the questions.

9/11 happened more than 12 years ago.  I don't think the 9/11 truth movement has been effective because I don't see the results.  And I don't see much creativity in terms of exploring other strategies for getting results.

An 18 year old today was 6 when 9/11 happened.  That is the demographic that you need to win over, and you haven't.

Like I said, IMO the best thing you could do is raise a bit of money and pay a bunch of web savvy teenagers $15/hr to come up with some good memes for people to share on social networks.

jas

wage zombie wrote:

9/11 happened more than 12 years ago.  I don't think the 9/11 truth movement has been effective because I don't see the results.

What I just posted on the other page:

is a strong indication to me of 9/11 truth moving into the mainstream.

Architects and Engineers now have over 2,000 signers to their petition. I remember five years ago when they had maybe 300. The ReThink 9/11 ad campaign was active throughout this September in twelve major cities. That's never happened before. There is a massive billboard on Times Square still today informing New Yorkers about building 7. More people now know that a third building collapsed to the ground that day. Babblers know because some of us have been shouting about it for a while. But the majority of North Americans didn't know about it.

So everywhere I look I see growth in the movement, but the growth has maybe been more in mainstream terms, which is less dramatic but a good sign, in my opinion.

Quote:
An 18 year old today was 6 when 9/11 happened.  That is the demographic that you need to win over, and you haven't.

I don't agree. Most youngsters I know are far more sympathetic to 9/11 truth than crotchety old 40+ somethings Wink, who have far more intellectual bias baggage to overcome than younger people do. I don't see it as a demographic to win over, since they're growing up with 9/11 truth. They understand propaganda is a major feature of civil life.

jas

Like your point about the JFK assassination: I was born after that happened, but I grew up with the awareness (not through my family) of intense doubt and controversy around that event. Like you say, most people today understand that the official JFK story is likely a lie. I don't even know if there is an official story any more about JFK, since so many official sources have confirmed that it is a lie.

But I'm not a JFK truther - I accept that it's a lie, and I have no interest in arguing it further. I benefit from the mainstream opinion on that, and that, in turn, better informs me about how the U.S. government carries out its affairs. But if no one had spoken out about that event, we would not have that as an example of conspiracy and complicity within the U.S. govt - even though we have tons of examples from other countries and from history. Somehow, when it comes to "conspiracy stuff" the U.S. is always held up as some kind of model international citizen that would never engage in such activities. Leftists are well aware of the kinds of activities that the U.S. has engaged in. So why is state terrorism such an unthinkable possibility for them?

[edited to clarify "state terrorism" rather than "domestic terrorism"... so the NSA doesn't get any kooky ideas about me.]

NDPP

Russia Today Declares 9/11 Was An Inside Job! (and vid)

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

'911 and Operation Gladio'

mmphosis

Toasted Cars (drjudywood.com)

There is no conventional explanation for the 1,400 stangely burnt and melted cars a half mile away.

WTC 1's steel central spire (911blimp.net)

The spire survives the building's collapse then disintegrates into dust almost instantly.

Noops

jas wrote:

I don't agree. Most youngsters I know are far more sympathetic to 9/11 truth than crotchety old 40+ somethings Wink, who have far more intellectual bias baggage to overcome than younger people do.

 

Right. I have yet to convince my Dad who is in his 80's that 9/11 was an inside job.

It doesn't matter what compelling evidence I present to him. It's a cultural thing where he can't believe western governments could ever betray their citizens.

And he's a transplanted Canadian (U.S. citizen)!

He visited ground zero a few weeks after 9/11. That was his proof that the official story must be true. Frown

mmphosis

Noops wrote:

Right. I have yet to convince my Dad who is in his 80's that 9/11 was an inside job.

It doesn't matter what compelling evidence I present to him. It's a cultural thing where he can't believe western governments could ever betray their citizens.

And he's a transplanted Canadian (U.S. citizen)!

He visited ground zero a few weeks after 9/11. That was his proof that the official story must be true. Frown

I appreciate you sharing.

This is a very difficult topic, often emotionally charged, and I think that we need to make room for our feelings and others's feelings.  I don't try to convince anyone about anything.  I simply bring things up, ask questions, and encourage others to ask questions. 

Quote:
Did you know a third tower fell on 9/11?

World Trade Center Building 7, not hit by a plane, collapsed in free-fall 7 hours after the Twin Towers.

">http://rethink911.org/

Noops

mmphosis wrote:

 

I appreciate you sharing.

This is a very difficult topic, often emotionally charged, and I think that we need to make room for our feelings and others's feelings.  I don't try to convince anyone about anything.  I simply bring things up, ask questions, and encourage others to ask questions. 

Yes it is important to be gentle with some people as you say, because they have a lot of emotions and feelings invested in their beliefs. Attacking the official story is often felt as an attack on them personally.

 

Quote:
Did you know a third tower fell on 9/11?

 

Yes. I recently asked my father this question (I made sure I ask him live on the phone to catch his immediate response) and he admitted he did not know about it.

After I began to present all kinds of evidence about WTC7, he agreed that it likely was brought down by controlled demolition.
I thought I was finally getting somewhere with him.

Sadly a few e-mails later he told me he wasn't convinced that WTC7 even existed!

Ironically, my father is a civil engineer and was in the construction industry as a general contractor.

 

NDPP

US-Saudi-Pakistani Connections  in 9/11  -  by Eric Walberg

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/12/14/339893/ussaudipakistani-connecti...

"Last week, Congressmen Walter Jones and Stephen Lynch introduced a motion urging President Obama to declassify the legendary 28 redacted pages of the Joint Intelligence Committee Inquiry of 9/11 issued in late 2002, which point to official Saudi involvement in 9/11.

So who 'did' 9/11?"

mmphosis
mmphosis
mmphosis

9/11's secret 28-page history (aljazeera.com)

Families demand release of classified 2002 report detailing foreign-government support for September 11 hijackers.

jas
NDPP

9/11 After 13 Years  -  by Paul Craig Roberts

http://dissidentvoice.org/2014/09/911-after-13-years/

"For thirteen years a new generation of Americans has been born into the 9/11 myth that has been used to create the American warfare/police state..."

mmphosis
mmphosis
NDPP

Elizabeth May Presents '9/11 truther' Petition to Parliament

http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/elizabeth-may-presents-9-11-truther-petit...

"Green Party Leader Elizabeth May put forward a bizarre petition in the House of Commons Wednesday asking the government to support a popular 9/11 conspiracy theory.

Defending her actions on Twitter Thursday, May said she didn't actually support the petition..."

 

http://rethink911.ca/petition-text/

"...Canada now being a partner with the United States of America in the Global War of Terror, therefore has a responsibility to verify the findings of the United States 9/11 Commission Report before committing our military and other resources to the conflict.

Your Petitioners pray for the Government of Canada to conduct a PARLIAMENTARY REVIEW..."

mmphosis
jas

Former airline attendant writes novel depicting what she thinks likely happened with 9/11 flights; picks apart the many anomalies and breaches of airline and flight protocols that day:

Rebekah Roth interview (starts part way through)

 

bekayne

jas wrote:

Former airline attendant writes novel depicting what she thinks likely happened with 9/11 flights; picks apart the many anomalies and breaches of airline and flight protocols that day:

Rebekah Roth interview (starts part way through)

 

Apparently "they" did it:

“…Because they have been such a trusted ally of our nation, they have infiltrated our media, the Federal Reserve, the banking system and they control most of the lobbyists that manipulate far too many of our politicians. They also control most of the campaign contributions as well as both political parties…their complete control over the media is going to be very problematic for us.”

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/01/31/airline911/

 

jas

bekayne wrote:

Apparently "they" did it:

Who's "they", bekayne?

And what search terms did you use to end up at Veterans Today? Any search of her name first leads to her website. So you must have gone quite a bit out of your way.

 

bekayne

jas wrote:

 

And what search terms did you use to end up at Veterans Today? Any search of her name first leads to her website. So you must have gone quite a bit out of your way.

 

It was on the first page:

https://www.google.ca/?gfe_rd=cr&ei=x5wHVYCFO4jQ-APi5oDoBA&gws_rd=ssl#q=...

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
The truth-seeking community – and the airline industry – are abuzz over Rebekah Roth’s new book Methodical Illusion. It’s poised to break into the top 1,000 worldwide, selling so fast that Amazon may even have tried to stop its rise to bestseller status by falsely claiming “sorry, out of stock.

But who PAID THEM to commit this treasonous act of falsehood?  Amazon is nothing but a pawn, or a useful idiot in this -- who is the kingpin??

Our neo-liberal hegemeno-corporate military-industrial overlords is who.

 

Salsa

I like the "written as a novel" ( and subsequently sold as fiction on Amazon ) blurb on her website.

That's not going to fool us here on the top floor of NWO towers.

Twirls Mustache

 

jas

Salsa! We haven't seen you since the last 9/11 discussions. That's some fantastic CT radar ya got!

Should we be expecting Pants-of-Dog soon too?

Salsa

Oh, I'm here every day, I just never log in or comment.

 

This book was only worthy of comment because the marketing is extra funny.

 

jas

Salsa wrote:
This book was only worthy of comment because the marketing is extra funny.

She seems to be selling it through the normal avenues, and doing quite well. So however funny it is, it seems to be working.

Salsa

Oh yea, no doubt it will work as a marketing ploy, picking up both the target truther audience and the casual reader looking for something interesting to read in the airport. It makes her pretty much impossible to cite as a researcher though, it would be like citing Pirates of the Caribbean in discussions about piracy.

 

jas

Well, that's what her interviews are for. One of which I linked to.

Salsa

That video runs close to two hours and the makers can't even be arsed to provide a transcript.

I can read way faster than I can watch a talking head

I'm acctually surprised that babble, as a progressive site allows the posting of videos without transcribtions as many people have video access issues which makes it an ableism issue.

jas

Salsa wrote:
I'm acctually surprised that babble, as a progressive site allows the posting of videos without transcribtions as many people have video access issues which makes it an ableism issue.

By all means, take it up in a Rabble Reactions thread. Laughing

jas

An answer to Rev Pesky from this thread.

Floor failure in the Twin Towers was not, in the end, considered to be the collapse mechanism. Indeed, according to the NIST reports, the collapse depended on the strength of the floors initially to pull the perimeter columns in. NIST, in their 10,000-page report, doesn't go on to explain how the collapse progresses but the most widely distributed theory, incredibly enough, is that the top part of the building crushed down the rest of the building, column on column.

Personally, I think if you have to come up with a semi-believable gravitational collapse model that could maybe fool some children, pancaking floors is the better theory. But according to Kevin Ryan (and this is new information for me) that was ruled out by the Weidlinger report commissioned by Silverstein, as it would have pointed to design failure, thus dashing Silverstein's insurance claims for two separate collapse/terrorist events. The NIST reports (same people as the FEMA reports but completely different theories) dutifully complied with this mandate, and rejected floor failure as a theory, ultimately making their job of explaining that much harder.

Interesting presentation about how the WTC investigations evolved from ASCE to FEMA to NIST, mostly using the same players. It's from 2006, so much of the specific criticisms of NIST will be familiar to some, but I hadn't seen this particular presentation before.

Kevin Ryan: "A New Standard for Deception"

NorthReport

Thank goodness for people like Chomsky who just use common sense.

He relies on the scientific community and science for expertise.

And Chomsky said Bush wanted to go into Iraq so if Bush was going to falsely blame anyone he would have blamed the Iraqi people.

"Think for a minute" is what he said. Laughing

 

Noam Chomsky Has No Opinion on Building 7

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3i9ra-i6Knc

thorin_bane

Except Chomsky is wong in this, he says its just a distraction. He doesn't like it because it takes away from other (problems he feels) are more pressing. Though I believe this to be an important event, that is CLEARLY bullshit. Whatever you MAY believe it certainly is not what the official report says. And It is very rare to just offshore and scrap all evidence when any other crime scene is scanned and catalogued for even dog shit. 9/11 doesn't pass the eye test or the sniff test. Too much BS on this one and I really can't understand people believeing the 'official' story. This isn't tin foil hat stuff. I am an expert on metals as I am a welder and metalurgist. So as an expert(as you put it) it doesn't hold water that the buildings collapsed from fire as the official report sites.

please watch what a building that is rigged to collpase looks like, even when it is designed to fall on its footprint.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDuUR7l3bgc

NorthReport

Chomsky said that he listens to the scientific community and the vast majority of scientists.

Of course there are always some kooks in the scientific community on this subject just like there is on the topic of global warming. 

And of course Chomsky's point about if Bush wanted to hang this event on someone else he would have hung it on the Iraqis as the USA wanted to invade Iraq makes complete sense. 

 

 

thorin_bane

Well thanks for just ignoring 95% of the post. So Chomsky will ignore the many many experts that find the results in question, while a few other experts say it is plausible. Seems legit. You know the warren comission only found one bullet, but we now know there was more than one. Even if you want to say Oswald did it, one has to acknowledge it is not like how the official report describes it, much like 9/11.

jas

I think Chomsky's going to come around on this issue. He has after all, stated that, regarding the WTC, he will defer to the experts on the matter. So far, in terms of coming out publicly yay or nay, the skeptics outnumber the supporters, at least of the NIST reports, which currently stand as the official collapse explanations. Problem is, most experts would privately have their own opinion. Many different causes and mechanisms have been put forward, and there likely is no consensus.

Chomsky's statement at the same event (around 03:40 of that video) that anyone who's ever been involved in political activism "knows" that it is a "risk-free activity" is bizarre however, and should give pause to anyone who uncritically accepts anything he says.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

jas wrote:

Chomsky's statement at the same event (around 03:40 of that video) that anyone who's ever been involved in political activism "knows" that it is a "risk-free activity" is bizarre however, and should give pause to anyone who uncritically accepts anything he says.

I understand this part of Chomsky's statement quite differently than you do. He isn't saying that political activism is risk free, since he himself was arrested multiple times for being an activist against the Vietnam war. He is saying that making a fuss about the details of the collapse of these buildings is risk free because nobody other than the activists cares, particularly the authorities who would be inclined to crack down on some more threatening form of activism such as the Occupy movement, or anti-fracking protests.

jas

Well, I think he's saying that bringing concerns about activities like treason (which is what this would amount to) to the government's attention is one of the safest things in the world you can do. Presumably he's imagining a neutral and bureaucratic government process which handles complaints and concerns in a disinterested and democratic fashion. But he's spent a large part of his career showing us why the exact opposite is true. So I don't see how his comment can be reconciled with any real-world scenario or any political analysis that he's built his reputation on. What he's saying here directly contradicts the reality of the social, economic and political apparatus that he himself is credited, among others, with identifying and analyzing.

The other inherent mistake in his comment is his characterization of would-be whistleblowers not doing so because they are afraid of "the government" when, in most cases, it's likely more about fear of professional censure or ostracization. It's no coincidence that most of the more outspoken petition signers at AE911truth are retirees. 1) Retirees have the time to examine the facts and problems, and 2) Their careers are not at stake in speaking out. I believe this to be, by far, the more insidious dynamic in operation here, not fear of "the government".

jas

Mark Crispin Miller on the silence of the Left on 9/11 and other topics, and the collaboration of "left" and alternative media in placing barriers around discussion.

"The charge of 'conspiracy theory' is a kind of descendent of red-baiting..."

https://youtu.be/gfZrpSPy-ew

mmphosis
6079_Smith_W

Cheney Waits Until Last Minute Again To Buy Sept. 11 Gifts

http://www.theonion.com/article/cheney-waits-until-last-minute-again-to-...

 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

 

Never Forget the Chicago Boys who were the architects of our descent into global fascism. Harper is an acolyte of the Chicago School of Economics.

NDPP

9/11 Fourteen Years Later  -  by Paul Craig Roberts (and vid)

http://dissidentvoice.org/2015/09/911-fourteen-years-later/

"Millions of refugees from Washington's wars are currently over-running Europe. Washington's 14-year and ongoing slaughter of Muslims and destruction of their countries are war crimes for which the US government's official 9/11 conspiracy theory was the catalyst."

jas

New video about the Toronto Hearings Sept, 2011

9/11: Decade of Deception

(link starts at Lorie Van Auken)

 

 

NDPP

'Incontrovertible' : New 9/11 Documentary By Tony Rooke (and vid)

http://www.incontrovertible911evidence.co.uk

mmphosis
Rev Pesky

jas wrote:

An answer to Rev Pesky from this thread.

Floor failure in the Twin Towers was not, in the end, considered to be the collapse mechanism. Indeed, according to the NIST reports, the collapse depended on the strength of the floors initially to pull the perimeter columns in. NIST, in their 10,000-page report, doesn't go on to explain how the collapse progresses but the most widely distributed theory, incredibly enough, is that the top part of the building crushed down the rest of the building, column on column.

There's plenty of video of both towers collapsing, and they both begin to collapse at the point the airplanes entered the building. That would have been the floors most damaged by the aircraft entering and exploding. The south tower collapsed first, even though it was hit some 18 minutes after the north tower. When the aircraft hit the south tower, it hit on a corner, and that is the point where the collapse begins. There is even a tilt of the tower at that point.

The north didn't collapse until somewhat later, but again, the collapse began on the floor where the aircraft entered the building. Floors, actually, because the aircraft is more than a single floor high. While the south tower collapse began with a tilt (because a corner of the tower was most severely damaged), the north tower went straight down. What made the north tower collapse look so much like an explosion was the floors pancaking, and causing a rush of air and smoke to the outside.

If the aircraft crashing into the buildings didn't cause the buildings to collapse, it was the most incredible coincidence in the history of the universe. If, as some believe, there were charges placed into the buildings before the crashes, one can only wonder at the superb flying skills of the pilots, who apparently manually flew the aricraft into exactly the spots on the buildings where those charges were placed. If they had missed, or if the charges had been placed on some other floors, the results of that would have been obvious.

Part of the reason I believe the individual floors couldn't hold the weight of the floors above is because I listened to an interview with one of the architects, after the fact. Of course he was asked the question about the WTC being able to 'withstand the force of a 747 crashing into it'. His reply was that he stood by that assessment, but that they hadn't counted on the fire caused by the airplane fuel. And that's when he mentioned about the floors being hung from the external structure, so as to provide the 'open flooring' that was becoming the thing in office buildings.

So perhaps he was lying, but the evidencce of the video doesn't lie. Two airplanes hit two buildings. One hit directly on, in fact almost perfectly in the center of the building, and the other came in on a descending curve, and entered the building across one of the corners. That building started to collapse on that corner, and the other building, while standing a bit longer, also collapsed, starting on the floor(s) where the aircraft hit.

Many people have spent much time and money ignoring that evidence. But that's their fault, not mine. 

And then there's the anthrax. Was that a part of the plan, or was that a coincidence?

mmphosis
NorthReport

Oh for goodness sakes
Hard to believe folks are still pedalling this nonsense

Pages