Loose Change

[Ramooone]

Um, Rumsfeld was in the Pentagon when it was struck at 9:38.


which is another good point. if they planned this attack do you think rumsfeld would even show up to work that day?

If i was in that situation and someone said to me "we're planning this huge attack on the pentagon, alot of people are going to die, but you'll be ok cause you're on the other side of the building" would you still go into work? i woulndt trust that crap with how many things that can go wrong.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

which is another good point. if they planned this attack do you think rumsfeld would even show up to work that day?

If i was in that situation and someone said to me "we're planning this huge attack on the pentagon, alot of people are going to die, but you'll be ok cause you're on the other side of the building" would you still go into work? i woulndt trust that crap with how many things that can go wrong.

Didn't Hanjour fudge his first attack run and have to come around and hit the other side?

If Hanjour nailed it on his first attempt, wouldn't Rumsfeld have been among the first to die?

[Regnad Kcin]

It should have been known that Rumsfeld had an appointment to meet with congress leaders for breakfast/CIA briefing. (1) So why did it take so long to inform him that America was under attack? (2) Why did they wait until 40 minutes after the WTC attacks to inform him that pentagon had been struck? Something just don't fly.

(3) I've been wondering what was going through Bush's mind that morning. He walked into the classroom 10 minutes after north tower was struck. He was going through photo op when the south tower was struck. Andy Card walked into the classroom to inform him that america was under attack then walked out right away without waiting for Bush's response. Bush just sat there with his poker face for another god knows how long. It wasn't the pet goat fiasco that I find most disturbing about his (in)actions. It was the fact that he comfortably slept in his own bed in the WHite House later that night knowing that some crazy jihadists had killed thousands of people without fearing that his own life may be in danger. (4) WTF...?!!!

(5) Manny...do you remember the daily shoving matches between firefighters and the police at ground zero because the firefighters were ordered to keep out of the rubble zone?Numbers added by me.

Little friend, as it has been mentioned to you once or twice, questions are not evidence. However, since you seem so fond of them, here once again are a couple:

- What do you do for a living?

- What is your I.Q.?

[Pardalis]

It wasn't until several minutes later, when flight 77 hit the Pentagon, that he went into "action," which consisted of seeing if he could help with rescue efforts...an understandable "human" reaction, but not exactly what I'd expect the number 2 commander in the U.S. to do.

Yeah, I remember seeing pictures of him running on the Pentagon lawn with injured personnel.

[Pardalis]

It was the fact that he comfortably slept in his own bed in the WHite House later that night knowing that some crazy jihadists had killed thousands of people without fearing that his own life may be in danger. WTF...?!!!

YOU DON'T KNOW THAT!

I saw him cry on national TV on september 13th.

http://forums.randi.org/imagehost/88864460e89d4edc3.jpg

edited to remove bad link

[Pardalis]

Yet even in the 30 minute appearance that was shown on al-jazeera like 3 moths after 911 and which the most CT:s agree is "real" he praises the attackers and encourages to Jihad. And still some CT:s say "Osama is innocent" and the "confession tape" is fake. If it is not real Osama in the tape then what are he's sons doing in it?


Peace

Yeah, and no conspiracist can't deny now, with the great footage you have shown of OBL, that he does write with his right hand, speaks and gestures with his right hand, and has at multiple times a ring on his finger. I really don't see how they can deny that... Geggy?

Peace to you too Karim:)

[Pardalis]

http://flight77.info/old.htm[/url]


If you can debunk one of the conspiracist very own theories, can't you at least admit they might be wrong as well with all the other theories?

BTW, you haven't responded to my previous post. Let me re-ask the question:

Do you have any evidence that there was a controlled-demolition-that-didn't-look-like-a-normal-demolition-so-that-it-would-look-like-a-collapse-from-the-top-but-wasn't?

How does a fake-collapse-from-the-top-style-controlled-demolition work exactly?

[Belz...]

It should have been known that Rumsfeld had an appointment to meet with congress leaders for breakfast/CIA briefing. So why did it take so long to inform him that America was under attack? Why did they wait until 40 minutes after the WTC attacks to inform him that pentagon had been struck? Something just don't fly.

And you have a hard time understanding that this doesn't mean there's a conspiracy.

It was the fact that he comfortably slept in his own bed in the WHite House later that night knowing that some crazy jihadists had killed thousands of people without fearing that his own life may be in danger. WTF...?!!!

How do you know he slept comfortably ? In fact, how do you know he slept at all ?

Manny...do you remember the daily shoving matches between firefighters and the police at ground zero because the firefighters were ordered to keep out of the rubble zone?

Irrelevant to his question.

[Belz...]

He doesn't even read his own posts.

Actually, I was just poking him with my proverbial cattle prod. He meant he ran out when informed of the pentagon attack. I'm just pulling his chain. I know that he meant the WTC attack.

Points to Gravy, though. I forgot that Rummy was IN the pentagon when the plane struck.

[Belz...]

Belz...what do you mean? He ran out after being told about the pentagon attack, not the WTC attacks.

Well at least you're lucid enough to see through my petty little scheme.

But Gravy's right. He was INSIDE THE PENTAGON. So obviously, he must've heard something, and not 40 minutes after. The building's not THAT big.

[Pardalis]

I'm saying it didn't look like a controlled demo that is normally practiced in a regular building imploding project

I'm saying it (controlled demo) was done differently and uniquely for the towers to start imploding from the top

Let's apply Ockham's Razor here...

the official story:
The towers collapsed from the top because of structural failures.

geggy's theory:
The towers looked to have collapsed from the top because of utlra specialised controlled demolition charges specifically placed to make it look like it was stuctural failures.

[dubfan]

Not sure if this has been posted here already, but just in case:

http://www.flight77.info/

It details the ongoing FOIA lawsuit against DOJ/DOD to release any video that has been withheld of the Flight 77/Pentagon attack.

Summary: the government is apparently in possession of a single "responsive record" of the attack that has not been released to the public. This record consists of video time-lapse images from two cameras in the Pentagon parking lot. *Some* images from *one* of the cameras were leaked to CNN, without authorization, back in 2002, and these are the ones we've all seen and squabbled over. DOJ claimed a FOIA exemption because release of the remaining video endangered the prosecution in the Moussaoui trial. The trial is over, and the judge in the case has given the government until 5/26 to explain why they need to continue to claim the FOIA exemption.

According to a statement by the FBI agent who conducted the search, there were 85 (!) separate video records found (this was during the second search -- the first search turned up nothing, the government said. Plaintiff sued again and said, "look harder"). Of those, 84 didn't show the impact, according to the agent's statement -- she apparently viewed them herself. The one record that did is at the center of the dispute. The FBI agent claims there was no video from the Sheraton found, but there was one found from the Arlington Doubletree. No explanation has been given for why the 84 videos that show nothing have not been released.

After reading those court documents, I almost don't blame the CTs. It's very hard to understand the government's logic in resisting this request. If there's a national security argument (denying the enemy a real-time trajectory analysis or bomb damage assessment), they're not making it -- so far, it seems they're withholding based on legal grounds, and the fear of jeopardizing the Moussaoui trial. Of course that's over now, so that argument should be moot. It will be interesting to see how the government responds in the next few weeks.

[Dave_46]

It was the fact that he comfortably slept in his own bed in the WHite House later that night knowing that some crazy jihadists had killed thousands of people without fearing that his own life may be in danger. WTF...?!!!

Does anyone know where the President spent that night ? I seem to recall that he was whisked away to a bunker somewhere.

Dave

[dubfan]

IIRC, he spent the night in DC, after having been whisked off to Offut AFB for a few hours while the chaos was still unraveling. The Woodward book "Bush at War" would probably be a good resource for finding a definitive answer.

[Dave_46]

I just wondered if it was another "fact" he had got wrong.

Dave

[Zoilus]

Okay so I'm on the fence but I wanna believe the OV. Tell me something that will make me believe it. Give me your strongest case (I've read some of this thread, but 3,000+ posts--fuhgedaboutit).

[Dragon]

Okay so I'm on the fence but I wanna believe the OV. Tell me something that will make me believe it. Give me your strongest case (I've read some of this thread, but 3,000+ posts--fuhgedaboutit).You want to believe the Official Version? What does that mean? Why don't you examine the evidence for yourself and then come to a conclusion?

[Pardalis]

Okay so I'm on the fence but I wanna believe the OV. Tell me something that will make me believe it. Give me your strongest case (I've read some of this thread, but 3,000+ posts--fuhgedaboutit).

Strongest case? Reality. What don't you believe in the official story?

[Regnad Kcin]

You're "on the fence?" Why? The official version is clear, simple, and comprehensive.

As for telling you something, "strongest case" or otherwise, to "make [you] believe it," I'll return to the basics of how these things work:

If something appears to be a duck, behaves as if it is a duck, and we can hear tell-tale quacking, our conclusion is going to be fairly safe. If, however, one wants to argue that there is no waterfowl present, they must provide the evidence for their position.

Welcome to the forum.

[Pardalis]

Okay so I'm on the fence but I wanna believe the OV. Tell me something that will make me believe it. Give me your strongest case (I've read some of this thread, but 3,000+ posts--fuhgedaboutit).

Let me quote the following from http://www.perrylogan.org/


Number of structural engineers who posit bombs in the towers: 0

Number of engineering classes taken by the guys who are absolutely sure there were bombs in the towers: 0

Number of scientific polls showing a significant number of Americans believe 9/11 was an inside job: 0

Number of architects who posit bombs in the towers: 0

Number of explosions registered by seismologists when the towers fell: 0

Number of materials specialists who posit bombs in the towers: 0

Number of engineering conferences held to discuss bombs in the towers: 0

Number of engineering reports discussing bombs in the towers: 0

Number of seismologists who posit bombs in the towers: 0

Number of demolition experts who posit bombs in the towers: 0

Number of documents revealing the secret plan: 0

Number of NORAD people who said they stood down on 9/11: 0

Number of NORAD people who said they were confused by drills on 9/11: 0

Number of defense experts who say NORAD standing down was inexplicable: 0

Number of eye witnesses in the Pentagon who believe that a missile hit the building on 9/11: 0

Number of firemen at the scene who say there really were bombs in the buildings (i.e., not just saying it SOUNDED like bombs): 0

Number of commercial airline pilots who say the NORAD thing sounds fishy: 0

Number of journalists (mainstream or otherwise—but NOT wingnuts posing as journalists) who write seriously about 9/11 conspiracy theories: 0

Number of people who say they were actually involved in the plan: 0

Number of FBI agents, ex-agents, or whistle blowers who say 9/11 was an inside job (as opposed to mere incompetence): 0

Number of people who might know anything who have come forward (as opposed to people who wouldn't know anything—like a former German Defense Minister): 0

Number of clips of the buildings falling (used by conspiracists to bolster their theory) that have been authenticated by experts: 0

Number of items in the Northwoods document that were actually pulled off: 0

Number of intelligence specialists who think 9/11 was an inside job: 0

Number of historians who subscribe to the inside-job hypothesis: 0

Number of sane people who think Bush used his family friends to bring off 9/11: 0

Number of sane people who think international bankers financed a plan to close down Wall Street: 0

Number of sane people who think the most incompetent administration in galactic history pulled off the most complex subterfuge in history...fooling everyone except a few creepy guys who got on the web: 0

Number of follow-up domestic terror attacks after 9/11 (as confidently predicted by most inside-job theorists): 0

[dubfan]

Okay so I'm on the fence but I wanna believe the OV. Tell me something that will make me believe it. Give me your strongest case (I've read some of this thread, but 3,000+ posts--fuhgedaboutit).

Because there's no evidence to the contrary. With all due respect, it's like being on the fence about Santa Claus. If you want to believe in Santa Claus, at some point you need to pony up and show me the guy in the red suit, the reindeer, and the bag of toys. Until then, you're perpetuating a fantasy.

[Ersby]

Okay so I'm on the fence but I wanna believe the OV. Tell me something that will make me believe it. Give me your strongest case (I've read some of this thread, but 3,000+ posts--fuhgedaboutit).
Hi. I realise that I'm about the fifth or sixth poster to respond to you, and for that I apologise, but I would like to ask you to be more specific. What is causing you doubt?

Also, I should say that geggy began with a very similar gambit. "I have genuine doubts" blah de blah, before he turned into a CT fundamentalist. This is perhaps why five or six people have jumped upon your statement. It's both regrettable (since you may feel under attack) but at the same time understandable (since we've seen the same thing before).

So where are your doubts?

[Regnad Kcin]

Number of sane people who think the most incompetent administration in galactic history pulled off the most complex subterfuge in history...fooling everyone except a few creepy guys who got on the web: 0Now that's comedy!

[Gravy]

Not sure if this has been posted here already, but just in case:

http://www.flight77.info/

It details the ongoing FOIA lawsuit against DOJ/DOD to release any video that has been withheld of the Flight 77/Pentagon attack.

I really wish there was no video at all. It's just titillation for the slavering CTs. All this time they've refused to face reality because the government is withholding a VIDEO. Why in the world is the existing evidence not enough for them? Because they will cling to ANYTHING in order to extend their stay in fantasyland. The same CTs refuse to accept video evidence of other aspects of 9/11 when it is presented. So if the Pentagon footage doesn't meet their standards, there we go: years more of wild speculation and ignoring all the evidence that has already proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are wrong. It's so dishonest, and so disgusting.

Imagine that I'm on trial for murder. Dozens of credible witneses saw me commit the murder in broaad daylitght. The DNA evidence, and all the other physical evidence in the case, says I did it to the exclusion of all others. If I'm a CT, I can simply say, "Aah, but there's no video!" and stroll out of the courtroom, right?

If the video is he government's property, obviously it should be made available: that's our property and I can't imagine there'd be any reason to classify it. But it sickens me that the CTs have made an issue of its "importance."

[Gravy]

Let me quote the following from http://www.perrylogan.org/
Number of people who say they were actually involved in the plan: 0
That's wrong. Some people have admitted involvement. One just got life in solitary confinement for his involvement.

[Gravy]

Okay so I'm on the fence but I wanna believe the OV. Tell me something that will make me believe it. Give me your strongest case (I've read some of this thread, but 3,000+ posts--fuhgedaboutit).
Welcome! Why do you want to believe the official version?

ETA: I noticed you started a 9/11 poll here: http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=1622875#post162287

The choices you gave and comments you made don't sound like they came from someone who wants to believe the OV. Are those really tha only ways you think 9/11 could have played out? And what would you like to see investigated more thoroughly, and why?

[Dr Adequate]

Okay so I'm on the fence but I wanna believe the OV. Tell me something that will make me believe it. Give me your strongest case (I've read some of this thread, but 3,000+ posts--fuhgedaboutit).There can't be a single "strongest point" against the Loose Change people, because their theory is so piecemeal.

There is not, for example, one single point which will both refute the "Pentagon hit by a missile" stuff and the "WTC7 brought down by a controlled demolition" stuff, because those are two completely different conspiracies using, if they ever happened, two entirely separate sets of personnel and equipment and techniques. They would have to be debunked separately.

[CurtC]

Okay so I'm on the fence but I wanna believe the OV.I beleive you would be josephborden from the LC forum, right? Welcome to the JREF forum, where you can say whatever is on your mind. I just request that you please not try to hide what you really think, and it appears that you're doing that here.

Please drop the charade, and I know that you will find a respectful, mature conversation over here. Again, welcome!

[Pardalis]

Does that mean that geggy's shift is over? Are they switching places like in a relay race? Damn, I was looking forward to reading his explanation of his controlled-demolition-looking-like-a-false-failure-from-the-top theory...:(

[Gravy]

I beleive you would be josephborden from the LC forum, right? Welcome to the JREF forum, where you can say whatever is on your mind. I just request that you please not try to hide what you really think, and it appears that you're doing that here.

Please drop the charade, and I know that you will find a respectful, mature conversation over here. Again, welcome!
Can't be josephborden. It doesn't tmake sense that he would post here and not address me directly, and I haven't heard a peep from him by email.
Did you guys know you were so important to Gravy?

He's taken many man hours to put this doc together

Take a look at it, then drop him a line with comments and suggestions:

itmatters@mail.com

JBR

[Manny]

Does that mean that geggy's shift is over? Are they switching places like in a relay race? Damn, I was looking forward to reading his explanation of his controlled-demolition-looking-like-a-false-failure-from-the-top theory...:(And I was kind of looking forward to learning whether pretty much every surviving member of FDNY was either in on the conspiracy or dumb as a bag of rocks not to notice the thousands of detonators which were doubtless in the rubble of the World Trade Center.

[chipmunk stew]

Okay so I'm on the fence but I wanna believe the OV. Tell me something that will make me believe it. Give me your strongest case (I've read some of this thread, but 3,000+ posts--fuhgedaboutit).Be gone, troll!

Oh, wait, I thought this was the LC forum for a second.

I mean: Welcome, Zoilus!

[hellaeon]

Hello to Zoilus.
Strongest case? Im unsure how to respond to that? Its not like a murder case of someone stabbing someone else and dna puts them at the scene. Its a complex detailed operation performed by some mad religious folk. In the end the complexity was shown to be just faults in the methods of departments and communication between them in the USA. These guys wlaked in, hijacked planes and smashed them into landmarks with the intent of a major catastrophy.

I suggest you do read the entire thread and skip the parts that have at times degenerated to a bit of slander here and there.

There was a few notable posters.
Alek, then there was Roxdog - I believe he is a bit of a big Kahoona at the LC forum, and of course Geggy.

Very much everything they posted was based on their own assessment of the situation without the desire to learn. I mean that in an unoffensive way such as me building a house without any help or instruction. Then a windy night smashes it to twigs. However depsite my friend in the building industry saying 'nah nah you idiot, look, this is how it works' I close my ears and eyes and say 'I KNOW WHAT IM DOING OK! I dont need to know or learn how it works, I just do!' These guys posted ad hoc videos and pictures and pointed to distortions in video quality as evidence of bombs and 'controlled' demolitions despite the actual time and skill and knowledge needed for such a thing being something well away from their grasp. Seriously, video pixelation was used as evidence of 'squibs'. Please....

Some simple things or facts which are shown in high detail throughout the thread refute much of what is the crust of the arguement the CTers put forth.

Again I do suggest you read the thread or I can see you will get yelled at as seriously, the main guys here have been through the same arguements at least 4 or 5 times. Within those 4 or 5 times we hear things like:

"It was a controlled demolition made to not look like a controlled demolition"
No timers. No thermite. No Explosive chemicals. Uniquely done by thousands of demo experts without thousands of people noticing the explosives or strange personnel in the building. Lets just imagine 'they' (those all secretive globalists) did put the explosives there. Can you envision the amount needed? I cant, and im not even an expert. Problem from this point is neither can the experts. Since they all agree that the building fell on its own accord from damage sustained from two airliners slammed into it without pre planted explosives.

"I believe the passengers were offloaded and the planes remotely flown in"
Never mind the amount of people to conduct fake calls etc, the DNA of passengers, luggage, body parts, the air traffic controller records, black box recorders, but the sheer amount of people needed to be involved to pull this off all needing to be 'paid' off....

Then of course the missle theory....I just wont bother - please READ the thread.

Other examples of such idiocy in the face of just basic evidence is actually amazing to think that it even needs to be addressed. Its completely illogical. Its like argueing that red is blue and not red.

Seriously, please read the thread before posting further. Its an effort yes, but worthwhile. Good things come to those who wait. If you want to gather knowledge and wisdom, you need to invest time.

Cheers

[WildCat]

Does that mean that geggy's shift is over? Are they switching places like in a relay race? Damn, I was looking forward to reading his explanation of his controlled-demolition-looking-like-a-false-failure-from-the-top theory...:(
That's the brilliance of their strategy - right when we get one having to defend what borders on insanity, a new one comes in to start from point A again.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Somebody's set a new standard in debunking debunkings. looks like Gravy has another looooong night ahead of him with this one:

911physicsDOTatspaceDOTcom/Pages/Debunking911Myths.htm

(stinkin 15 post requirement)

[WildCat]

Somebody's set a new standard in debunking debunkings. looks like Gravy has another looooong night ahead of him with this one:

http://911physics.atspace.com/Pages/Debunking911Myths.htm

(stinkin 15 post requirement)
Fixed.

eta: er, not fixed. I can't get it to work.

eta2: fixed for real, I hope!

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Fixed.

eta: er, not fixed. I can't get it to work.

eta2: fixed for real, I hope!

Bingo!

[Ramooone]

according to the loosers they now have the compnay that contracted and performed the demolition of the towers.

http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=3888&view=findpost&p=4290403

i wonder if controlled-demolition inc. can sue these guys for slander

[hellaeon]

I would love to see a major company sue these f***wads for slander. Just claiming all this crap without thinking it. The same claims over and over and over.

God damn it. These guys are immensly stupid. Uh...its a blight on humanity.

[CptColumbo]

When it's written is it Libel or Slander? I forget which is which.

Either way, they should be more careful in the accusations they make. The LC producers should distance themselves from this statement. It would be the first intelligent thing they've done yet.

[RSLancastr]

When it's written is it Libel or Slander? I forget which is which.Published is libel.

You can find libel in the library.

[CptColumbo]

Published is libel.

You can find libel in the library.
Thanks.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

I'm typing a heads up for thier PR contact right now.

A case like this will be an easy pick-up for a junior trial lawyer looking for his first win.

The big question is, how retarded are they? Are they so insane that they'll think getting thier day in court will help them?

Or will we see thier true colors shine through as they desperately try to settle out of court for something less than the mortgage on grandma's house?

[CptColumbo]

They'll find courts have little patience for speculation without evidence.

[hurdygurdy]

http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/

:D

[Kevin_Lowe]

My quick rebuttal of the first page of http://911physics.atspace.com/Pages/Debunking911Myths.htm follows.

Quotes taken from http://911physics.atspace.com/Pages/Debunking911Myths/Hijackers.htm

Why doesn't Mike mention the following:

THREE OF THE alleged hijackers listed their address on drivers licenses and car registrations as the Naval Air Station in Pensacola, Fla.—known as the “Cradle of U.S. Navy Aviation,” according to a high-ranking U.S. Navy source.

Why would the hijackers put their home addresses as being the Naval Air Station if they didn't train there? Or did the Hijackers manage to steal the identifies of several Arabs who just coincidently were being trained by the US Military?


My Answer: You need to provide a cite other than an anonymous source for the claim that the hijackers gave Pensacola as their address. Scans of their licenses and registration papers would do. Until then this is an empty assertion.


Here it would appear 911Myths is attacking a straw man, no serious 9/11 researcher has ever sighted this a key piece of evidence. You can choose to believe that Mohamed Atta's passport did survive. However this story like many others was later retracted. If Mike had done some serious research he would know this. I think it's pretty sad he is trying to prove something which is now denied by the US Government.


My Answer: This is the No True Scotsman fallacy in action. You can't just define away all the wingnuts who referred to the passports as "not being serious".


His response is not true, for the reason that the Hijackers saw there names and photos on television and actually went to the American embassy in Saudi Arabia and told the authorities that they wanted there names and photos taken off the FBI most wanted list.


My Answer: As above, get some evidence.


All he seems to be investigating is whether or not Hani Hanjour was a poor pilot. At best he was said to have below average to average piloting skills. Mike fails to discuss the difficulty of the maneuvers the alleged hijackers supposedly made.

Russ Wittenburg a former Vietnam Combat and Commercial Pilot says there is no way any commercial pilot yet alone an amateur like Hani Hanjour could of possibly flown "Flight 77" in the manner it was flown.


My Answer: Russ Wittenburg is a lunatic and no other pilots agree with him. Nor has he shown his work.


Mike's response is basically that the planes could not of been remote controlled because they would of had to have had several cameras aboard them. This is not true at all, the planes could simply be programmed to fly exactly where they wanted to, how do you think autopilot works?


My Answer: Autopilots can't magically compensate for wind and whatnot at the last second. Sufficiently advanced instruments and computers could conceivably do the job, but then you have the job of explaining who created this amazing technology and installed it, why nobody phoned the ground saying "Hey, this plane is flying itself!" and so on and so forth. This idea requires a ridiculously complicated conspiracy to work.


Since this information came from the US Government we cannot conclude that it is at all accurate or that it has any truth to it what so ever. It may just be a coincidence that none of the hijackers bodies were identified, but how many coincidences are you going to believe?


My Answer: It's not a coincidence, you moron. Can't you read? The hijackers could not be identified by DNA because nobody had DNA samples from them at the time. Thus they are not on the list of people identified by DNA. How is that a coincidence?

[tsig]

Welcome! Why do you want to believe the official version?


The choices you gave and comments you made don't sound like they came from someone who wants to believe the OV. Are those really tha only ways you think 9/11 could have played out? And what would you like to see investigated more thoroughly, and why?

Who would they trust to do the investigation? Structural engineers? No the've already spoken so we can't trust them. A professor at a religious school? Sounds reliable to me.

These worthless liars are scamming thier cluesess sheep, oh wait they have a lot of clues, they just can't tell us what they mean


Thanks Gravy, you, along with the other posters are truely doing a rotten job that needs doing and doing it well.

[Gravy]

Somebody's set a new standard in debunking debunkings. looks like Gravy has another looooong night ahead of him with this one:

911physicsDOTatspaceDOTcom/Pages/Debunking911Myths.htm

(stinkin 15 post requirement)
Nah. One line "rebuttals?' Laughable photo "evidence?" More wild speculation? This guy's not bright at all. He's still using Karl Schwarz as an expert! Next.

[Gravy]

I'm typing a heads up for thier PR contact right now.

A case like this will be an easy pick-up for a junior trial lawyer looking for his first win.

The big question is, how retarded are they? Are they so insane that they'll think getting thier day in court will help them?

Or will we see thier true colors shine through as they desperately try to settle out of court for something less than the mortgage on grandma's house?
Sultanist had given CDI a heads up about this stuff a while ago, and got a response from Stacey Loizeaux:
I had a suspicion this was probably just more of the mountain of 9-11 bul***it being circulated on the Internet, so I decide to make contact with CDI to get at the bottom of it.
I sent them this email...
_____________________________________
Gentlemen,

Speaking as an American, I am in desperate need of your assistance.
You may or may not be aware that upwards of six hundred thousand pages of the World Wide Web are now devoted to advancing "theories" to explain the events of 9-11. One of the widespread claims being that the three skyscrapers in the World Trade Center were collapsed by "controlled demolition" .
It has now gotten to the point that one of the individuals in the forefront of this, a former Professor of Religion at the Claremont School of Theology (Claremont, California), Dr. David Ray Griffin, is making the claim that "a demolition expert employed by Controlled Demolitions Inc." is stating that "this type of collapse could only have been done through a planned event, using precisely placed explosives".
Dr. Griffin's claim is being advanced on the Internet as we speak. And believe me a great many people are reading this. A claim which is now directly involving the reputation and credibility of your organization.
I ask you to please set the record straight. Is it or is it not true that anyone involved with your organization has made this statement? And does anyone in your organization believe that the three skyscrapers of The World Trade Center may have collapsed due to controlled demolition?

Sincerely,
Bob XXXX
_______________________
I received this email reply...
_______________________
Bob,

Thank for your email and your concern for the reputability of our organization.
Of course, we’ve been aware of the numerous ludicrous conspiracy theories floating around out there and have received literally thousands of emails containing everything from simple questions to unveiled threats. Our position up until now, as a family and a firm, has been that “to acknowledge the claim is to lend it credibility” and therefore, they should be ignored.
After reading your email, however, I’m afraid we may have to take a new tack.
To put your mind at ease, I can assure you that NO individual from CDI made any such statement as that purported by Dr. Griffin, and I would greatly appreciate your forwarding me a link to the page where this is stated. If he has, indeed, committed libel in some regard, rest-assured that legal action will shortly follow.
Thanks again for the “heads-up.” I look forward to hearing back from you soon.

Regards,
Stacey
======================
Stacey S. Loizeaux
The Loizeaux Group, LLC
Controlled Demolition, Inc.
2737 Merryman's Mill Road
Phoenix, Maryland 21131 USA
______________________________________
http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=1547853&postcount=84

[tsig]

Hi Gravy, just as I posted a program came on tv about 911 woo woo! lol

Funny they even had computer simulations of a plane crash as well as an eyewitness. The the dead bodies made me very mad at the LCers.

We know the passengers bought ticket and thier bodies are there on the ground under white sheets; anyone who denies that are ghouls, digging up dead people and hijacking them again

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Nah. One line "rebuttals?' Laughable photo "evidence?" More wild speculation? This guy's not bright at all. He's still using Karl Schwarz as an expert! Next.

Those were almost my thoughts exactly, Gravy. I put that link up there for comedic relief more than anything. If three lines could wipe out entire pages of data and references, Dylan Avery would be president.

Speaking of wich, if anyone perusing the new United 93 movie boards and is wondering if I'm as crazy as the tinfoils, don't worry. The United 93 boards were a complete write off more than a week ago and now I'm just getting my yuks making outrageous comments just to drive the nutters even crazier.

My latest thread on wether Dylan Avery should get the death penalty should be worth at least 4 pages.

[chipmunk stew]

Somebody's set a new standard in debunking debunkings. looks like Gravy has another looooong night ahead of him with this one:

http://911physics.atspace.com/Pages/Debunking911Myths.htm (http://911physics.atspace.com/Pages/Debunking911Myths.htm)

(stinkin 15 post requirement)I don't think Gravy needs to worry about this one. The only people it's going to convince are true believers. The "debunking" rarely involves anything even remotely substantial. And the nice thing is, it's basically a mirror site of the entire 911myths.com. This site only gives the CTs false security that 911myths.com has been taken care of.

[gruk]

If you were first told that NYC had been attacked with planes and you were the man responsible for giving orders to deploy fighter jets, what would you do? Would you either..

1. Continue with your breakfast.
OR
2. Jump out of your seat and rush to the command center.

To be honest, I'd get on the phone to the command centre, asking them to keep me updated, then shove food down myself as fast as I could, because in taht sort of situation, you have NO idea when you'll be able to feed again. But, then, I used to be an infantry grunt and I imagine things might be different at the lofty heights of HQ (like having food on call and be able to get a decent night's sleep every day).

[NoZed Avenger]

I'm typing a heads up for thier PR contact right now.

A case like this will be an easy pick-up for a junior trial lawyer looking for his first win.


Two words: "judgment proof."

[Gravy]

The Loosers have a new hero: The President of Iran (http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=3888).

[NobbyNobbs]

Let's apply Ockham's Razor here...

the official story:
The towers collapsed from the top because of structural failures.

geggy's theory:
The towers looked to have collapsed from the top because of utlra specialised controlled demolition charges specifically placed to make it look like it was stuctural failures.


This reminds me of something my dad used to say..."Hamlet wasn't written by Shakespeare but by another man of the same name." (Yes, he was being tongue-in-cheek when he said it.)

[NobbyNobbs]

I really wish there was no video at all. It's just titillation for the slavering CTs. All this time they've refused to face reality because the government is withholding a VIDEO. Why in the world is the existing evidence not enough for them? Because they will cling to ANYTHING in order to extend their stay in fantasyland. The same CTs refuse to accept video evidence of other aspects of 9/11 when it is presented. So if the Pentagon footage doesn't meet their standards, there we go: years more of wild speculation and ignoring all the evidence that has already proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are wrong. It's so dishonest, and so disgusting.

Imagine that I'm on trial for murder. Dozens of credible witneses saw me commit the murder in broaad daylitght. The DNA evidence, and all the other physical evidence in the case, says I did it to the exclusion of all others. If I'm a CT, I can simply say, "Aah, but there's no video!" and stroll out of the courtroom, right?

If the video is he government's property, obviously it should be made available: that's our property and I can't imagine there'd be any reason to classify it. But it sickens me that the CTs have made an issue of its "importance."

Especially since when it *does* come out, they will simply claim it was tampered with and it will become more fuel for the "government cover-up" fire.

[geggy]

YOU DON'T KNOW THAT!

I saw him cry on national TV on september 13th.

http://forums.randi.org/imagehost/88864460e89d4edc3.jpg



Are those...
1. 'OMG I'M SO RICH' tears?
2. Photo-op 'look at my tears! I really do care!' tears?
3. 'oops i done screw up and 3000 people has died in result of it' tears

I think we all know w. bush had gotten a heart of a gold. He didn't want to get up and leave after hearing about the second attack, not because he needed a fresh pair of underwear, it was because he really does care about the children that in no way anything will come in between himself and the children, not even a terrorist attack, that will interupt the fundamental of children's education...because he really does care and has gotten a heart of a gold. hyuk hyuk.

http://www.geocities.com/iseepee57/gwb.jpg
LOOK AT MY TEARS...I REALLY DO CARE...

Why does he alway seem so caring in photo op session???

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Oh? Please, do elaborate. Provide some edification for my, apparently, confused mind.

Still looking for some illumination geggyster.

[kookbreaker]

Geggy, you are a sick, sick person.

[Tirdun]

So are we supposed to build a viable theory of what conspiracy transpired on 11-September based on the reactions of Rumsfeld and Bush? Or is this supporting evidence of some facet of the overall sinster plan?

Rumsfeld jumps up and rushes off somewhere. Bush sits like a deer in the headlights while the Secret Service secures the building and his transportation to safety. Did he look shellshocked? Sure, I'm just not sure that supports ... well, anything, actually. I don't particularly like either man, but I don't see their responses as lending your paranoid fantasies any weight.

So... new ignore function essentially makes someone vanish into the bitbucket of the internet... come on geggy, give me a reason not to. Post something that stands up to ridicule.

[Pardalis]

Are those...
1. 'OMG I'M SO RICH' tears?
2. Photo-op 'look at my tears! I really do care!' tears?
3. 'oops i done screw up and 3000 people has died in result of it' tears


Man, you are soooooooooooo predictable. I posted this pic just to pick on you.


This next quote is from "The Last Stand" from the Looser forum:

There is a good percent of the world that is aware about what really happened on 9/11, including the President of Iran. He touches on the subject in this letter but does not go into detail. The general American person is among the most brainwashed population in the world. The conversion of our own population is the hardest battle.

This sounds alot like treason to me.

I wonder who is doing the brainwash here...

[Pardalis]

Geggy boy, since you're back, can you answer my previous question?

How does a fake-collapse-from-the-top-style-controlled-demolition work exactly?

[juryjone]

Geggy boy, since you're back, can you answer my previous question?

How can you say geggy's back when he wasn't all here to begin with?

[juryjone]

Somebody's set a new standard in debunking debunkings. looks like Gravy has another looooong night ahead of him with this one:

911physicsDOTatspaceDOTcom/Pages/Debunking911Myths.htm

Man, you gotta love the "search for truth".

Here's one of my favorites from that site:

"Also consider that the explosives in the Towers sent pieces of the buildings fly upwards, which added to the collapse time of the Towers.

What could possibly be causing large chunks of pulverized concrete to be sent flying upwards into the air? Fire? Arabs With Box Cutters?"


Proof that debris was flying upward? Provided by a still picture. A STILL PICTURE. With markings showing some sort of measurements from the middle of the building outwards.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Stop it, you're killing me!

[juryjone]

More humor from Debunking911Myths:

Mike doesn't seem to grasp the importance of the flow of the dust clouds. If anything the way the dust clouds formed and moved after the collapse is the greatest evidence of controlled demolition.

The above picture shows what is called a Pyroclastic Flow (of pulverized concrete.)

Above is a Pyroclastic flow of smoke, that has been produced from a Volcano.

Pyroclastic flows are something that are only known to happen in either Volcanoes or in turbidity currents that occur on the edge of continental shelves.

So.. is he saying that volcanos are controlled demolitions? Somehow, I think he thought he was leading somewhere with this, and he didn't quite get to that point.

[chipmunk stew]

More humor from Debunking911Myths:



So.. is he saying that volcanos are controlled demolitions? Somehow, I think he thought he was leading somewhere with this, and he didn't quite get to that point.I think he's saying that the most qualified person to investigate the tower collapses would be a geologist. :confused:

Edit: No, now that I re-read it, I think he's saying that the government rigged the towers with volcanoes.

[kookbreaker]

Geggy boy, since you're back, can you answer my previous question?

How does a fake-collapse-from-the-top-style-controlled-demolition work exactly?

A wizard did it.

[DavidJames]

Let's face it. The intelligence and wisdom of the CTers at Loose Change was obtained from watching TV and movies. No one there, or any of the CT contributors, for that matter, has the education or practical experience to speak intelligently about any of the important aspects of the event.

Most, if not all of their "theories" are based on watching videos of the event.

[Manny]

Michael Moore's former assistant (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/contributors/bio.php?nick=jason-pollock&name=Jason%20Pollock), on the Huffington Post (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jason-pollock/every-american-should-see_b_20722.html), thinks you should go see Loose Change right now. No, really, today! After all, "the film shows beyond a shadow of a doubt that the World Trade Center buildings collapsed because there were explosions all the way down. There is no way that a fire caused the buildings to collapse. You can see in the video, which we have all seen 1 million times, that each floor explodes as the towers collapse to the ground."

[geggy]

Kookbreaker, I'm sick as opposed to Bush swindling america into a war in a country that had nothing to do with sept 11 because "God told him to"?

Riiiiiight...

http://www.geocities.com/iseepee57/bushgoat.jpg

Yeah he sure looks shell shocked to me. If you'd see the rest of the "pet goat" video, you'll see W. smiling and laughing while reciting words from the book along with the children. Yep, reeeaal shocked.

How does a fake-collapse-from-the-top-style-controlled-demolition work exactly?

I've already explained thousands of times in this thread and you people accuse me of going round and round on the merry go round.

[Pardalis]

I've already explained thousands of times in this thread and you people accuse me of going round and round on the merry go round.

INDULGE ME

[Pardalis]

Until a few days ago, you had said that the towers collapse looked like controlled demolitions. Now you say they are controlled demo made to look like stuctural failures from the top. To me there's a big difference. I want you to explain.

[rwguinn]

Kookbreaker, I'm sick as opposed to Bush swindling america into a war in a country that had nothing to do with sept 11 because "God told him to"?

Riiiiiight...

http://www.geocities.com/iseepee57/bushgoat.jpg

Yeah he sure looks shell shocked to me. If you'd see the rest of the "pet goat" video, you'll see W. smiling and laughing while reciting words from the book along with the children. Yep, reeeaal shocked.



I've already explained thousands of times in this thread and you people accuse me of going round and round on the merry go round.

in reverse order:
No. You haven't
So, the CEO of a major superpower, on being informed that a disaster of unknown origin has just occurred, is supposed to (A) panic, jump up and down, accusing specific people of unimaginable horrors, and run out of the room, inciting panic into everyone around him at the time,or (B) remain as calm as possible, continuing his task-at-hand, waiting further information of what has happened, while the people who get things done arrange the necessary security and transportation to get him into a position to know what is happening, all the while projecting calm reassurance, as befits a CEO?
I don't agree with all that has happened since then, but his demeanor at the time was EXACTLY what I want my President to project.

[Pardalis]

geggy, sunshine of my day, basically what I'm asking is how can someone like you, who doesn't have any kind of expertise in anything, can differenciate a fake collapse from a real collapse?

[aggle-rithm]

Michael Moore's former assistant (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/contributors/bio.php?nick=jason-pollock&name=Jason%20Pollock)...

Could ANYTHING look worse on a resume?

[aggle-rithm]

Edit: No, now that I re-read it, I think he's saying that the government rigged the towers with volcanoes.


A-HA!! That explains why they made us all make fake volcanoes for science projects when we were growing up. It was practice for 9/11!!

Boy, those globalists know how to plan ahead. ;)

[aggle-rithm]

Kookbreaker, I'm sick as opposed to Bush swindling america into a war in a country that had nothing to do with sept 11 because "God told him to"?

Riiiiiight...


False dichotomy. There's no reason you can't BOTH be sick.

[DavidJames]

Kookbreaker, I'm sick as opposed to Bush swindling america into a war in a country that had nothing to do with sept 11 because "God told him to"?I'm not happy about that either, but that unless you can show some real evidence for any of the whacky theories you're purposing, they will remain, whacky theories.

[brodski]

A-HA!! That explains why they made us all make fake volcanoes for science projects when we were growing up. It was practice for 9/11!!

Boy, those globalists know how to plan ahead. ;)

well there was that suspicious order by restaurants in the WTC of 300 millions tonnes of baking soda, and several tankers full of vinegar where reported missing just prior to 9/11.
:p

[Manny]

Could ANYTHING look worse on a resume?"Co-producer, Loose Change." :D

[Pardalis]

well there was that suspicious order by restaurants in the WTC of 300 millions tonnes of baking soda, and several tankers full of vinegar where reported missing just prior to 9/11.
:p

Woah, are you suggesting that huge grey cloud of debris was in fact a cloud of foam? :eek:

[kookbreaker]

Kookbreaker, I'm sick as opposed to Bush swindling america into a war in a country that had nothing to do with sept 11 because "God told him to"?


I'm sick of you assuming that Bush is a mass-murderer just becuase he has policies you do not like. I don't like you, so can I accuse you of being a serial rapist?

You fail to understand that many of us do not particularly like Bush or his actions. That does not mean we thus subscribe to every bad thing said about him as being the TRVTH.

You want to complain about the man? There's a whole Politics subforum for that. Unless you can prove that he's guilty of mass-murder, your little anti-Bush tantrums are IRRELEVANT.

[kookbreaker]

I've already explained thousands of times in this thread and you people accuse me of going round and round on the merry go round.

Actually, no, you have not done so. Or else you could link to the posts where you have successfully explain how it was done.

But you can't because you are lying like a rug, as usual.

[brodski]

Woah, are you suggesting that huge grey cloud of debris was in fact a cloud of foam? :eek: I am now! :p
And we all saw the alleged "fire suppressing" foam in pictures of the pentagon crash! Are we really meant to believe that the Fire Fighters (employed by the government) put it there?

[Pardalis]

And we all saw the alleged "fire suppressing" foam in pictures of the pentagon crash!

I always assumed it was ectoplasm... I'll be darned!

[Tirdun]

Yeah he sure looks shell shocked to me. If you'd see the rest of the "pet goat" video, you'll see W. smiling and laughing while reciting words from the book along with the children. Yep, reeeaal shocked.

I've seen it. Endlessly, thank you.
GWB spends 7 minutes in the classroom after being told that a second aircraft had hit WTC2. Seven. I've spent half that composing this post.

I find it well within the realm of reason that it would take seven minutes for the security detail for the President of the United States to digest and confirm the information and prepare to leave. Seven minutes from being told that the unthinkable was happening, that we had no idea what else was coming and that there were limited (if any) plans to cover this, to moving out to a secure location. Its not like they had Air Force 1 parked out back and I suspect they had a police escort planning to take them back later in the morning, police who were now ... oh, at least a couple minutes away.

Further, I have no idea what my face looked like when my coworker told me an aircraft had hit WTC2, but I'm glad there was no video camera. Did Bush make the right move for his PR? I don't know or care. What did you want him to do, launch the nukes? Give a prepared speech? Explain the situation? He was in an elementary school a thousand miles from DC in a situation well out of control.

This will be my last post on this thread, because it is useless. Geggy, you've yet to post a single piece of information that didn't rely on conjecture, supposition and ignorance to shore up your shell of a conspiracy. You've glossed over the numerous problems in your .... questions, argued endlessly on topics beyond your experience and ignored the responses except where you could continue down some CT path. The moon hoaxers are less ridiculous, and it pains me to admit that something less coherent is even possible. Humanity is slipping into the void of ignorance while you cheer and wave.

[brodski]

I always assumed it was ectoplasm... I'll be darned! well, I'm not subscribing to the "volcano" theory, over the "ectoplasm" theory, I'm just asking questions, you know?
I think we both raise some good points, and they are points which will never be investigated by the government! Why did the 9/11 commission ignore both of these theories? What are they hiding?

[aggle-rithm]

Woah, are you suggesting that huge grey cloud of debris was in fact a cloud of foam? :eek:

All I know is, I won the science fair because my pyroclastic flow took out all the other entries.

It's true. :) (TM)

[Regnad Kcin]

[geggy,] you are lying like a rug, as usual.Or lying like a bad toupee.

[Stellafane]

...I've already explained thousands of times in this thread and you people accuse me of going round and round on the merry go round.

Hi geggy. I can understand not wanting to answer the same thing repeatedly. So how about you respond to something you haven't explained yet, even though I've asked it a couple of times: Assuming that what you and your fellow CT'ers are saying is true, and the Bush administration are the worst mass murderers in the history of America, what should we do about it? Don't say "ask questions," because if what you're saying is accurate, the time for asking questions is long past. Don't say "reopen the 9/11 investigation," because what would that prove? You already say there's ample evidence to prove your point, and why would a new investigation, done by the same types of experts, turn out any differently? And don't say "vote Democrat" because a regime willing and able to murder thousands of its own citizens whould certainly not hesitate to fix an election (maybe they already have, if you're looking for a consipracy that may actually have a bit of substance to it). And besides, the Dems have all the info you do and more, and still all of them agree with the official version of 9/11. So by your lights they're either stupid or untrustworthy.

So, please tell me geggy: what should we, the American people, do about this? This isn't just an academic or rhetorical question; the answer goes a long way towards helping me understand what it is you and your cronies want from all of this.

[Stellafane]

geggy, sunshine of my day...

You one funny dude Catman.

[aggle-rithm]

I've seen it. Endlessly, thank you.
GWB spends 7 minutes in the classroom after being told that a second aircraft had hit WTC2. Seven. I've spent half that composing this post.


Of all the LEGITIMATE things Bush gives us to complain about, why do people like geggy keep pulling this one out of the trash?

Maybe Bush could have handled it better.

Maybe, if he could do it over again, he would handle it differently.

So what? Would it have made ANY DIFFERENCE at all if he had left right then instead of 7 minutes later?

Sheesh.

[aggle-rithm]

So, please tell me geggy: what should we, the American people, do about this? This isn't just an academic or rhetorical question; the answer goes a long way towards helping me understand what it is you and your cronies want from all of this.

Maybe we should take the same bold action as the Loosers: Hang out in an internet forum, trading implausible theories and bitching about the government.

[Dave_46]

I've already explained thousands of times in this thread and you people accuse me of going round and round on the merry go round.

"Thousands" of times.

Under his name - Posts: 151

Dave

[rwguinn]

The Iranians have adopted the loosescrews as their very own.
Are you happy, geggy, aiding and abetting the enemy of the US and the rest of the world?
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/2006/05/post.html

[juryjone]

Humanity is slipping into the void of ignorance while you cheer and wave.

Thanks for the new sig - I've been looking for a new one.

(Speaking of sigs, it's "occasion", not "occation".;) )

[Stellafane]

Of all the LEGITIMATE things Bush gives us to complain about, why do people like geggy keep pulling this one out of the trash?

Maybe Bush could have handled it better.

Maybe, if he could do it over again, he would handle it differently.

So what? Would it have made ANY DIFFERENCE at all if he had left right then instead of 7 minutes later?

Sheesh.

I guess Bush should have donned his cape, flown to the Pentagon, intercepted the plane in mid-air, and taken out the hijackers with his X-ray vision. Then he could carry the plane on his back and set it down gently on the White House lawn in front of the cheering masses. Anything less proves he's a mass murderer.

[Pardalis]

Maybe we should take the same bold action as the Loosers: Hang out in an internet forum, trading implausible theories and bitching about the government.

The creepy nerd Revolution.

[Manny]

Are you happy, geggy, aiding and abetting the enemy of the US and the rest of the world?Don't see why he wouldn't be. The head Loosers are giving their presentations at the Nation of Islam (http://featuringdave.com/logicalmeme/?p=3410)'s mosques.

[kookbreaker]

Of all the LEGITIMATE things Bush gives us to complain about, why do people like geggy keep pulling this one out of the trash?

Maybe Bush could have handled it better.

Maybe, if he could do it over again, he would handle it differently.

So what? Would it have made ANY DIFFERENCE at all if he had left right then instead of 7 minutes later?

Sheesh.

He was supposed to stand up and say 'Activate the Omega 13!' and then all would be better! That is, of course, unless he planned the whole thing!

[chipmunk stew]

Okay so I'm on the fence but I wanna believe the OV. Tell me something that will make me believe it. Give me your strongest case (I've read some of this thread, but 3,000+ posts--fuhgedaboutit).I have a feeling that nothing I tell you can make you believe it, but I'll tell you why I believe it:

Almost every inconsistency, seemingly suspicious occurrence, or alternate explanation raised by inside jobbers is something taken out of context, misreported, misinterpreted, or simply wrong, and has a perfectly innocuous explanation, completely falling apart under even the most basic scrutiny--controlled demolition, no plane at the Pentagon, no plane at Shanksville, no hijackers, NORAD stand down, etc.

Literally nothing that these people have raised has turned out to be worth investigating beyond what we are already investigating (such as the tower collapses) or already know (such as NORAD's activities and timeline).

The official version, on the other hand, is coherent and internally consistent, and stands up to serious, unbiased scrutiny. There are some unknowns in the details, but no more than you'd expect from any huge, complex event, and any red flags raised have been addressed to my satisfaction.

Bolstering my confidence in the major structure of the OV is the fact that it's not high-paid gov't lackeys that are primarily responsible for its shape and narrative. It's the crews on the ground and in the field who were most closely involved in the aftermath and/or affected by it, and whose who have the most specialized expertise in the many strands of investigation--these people are almost unanimous in their acceptance of the official version.

The people harboring deep doubts about the OV, on the other hand, are almost unanimously far-removed from first-hand experience and/or expertise related to the attacks, and base their doubts on their armchair analysis of videos, still photos, and quotes stripped of their context. And the logical outcomes of their doubts inevitably lead to absurdities and/or contradictions.

In my view, there's simply no contest.

[dubfan]

"Co-producer, Loose Change." :D

:D

[Pardalis]

The Iranians have adopted the loosescrews as their very own.
Are you happy, geggy, aiding and abetting the enemy of the US and the rest of the world?
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/2006/05/post.html

Wow, just read the readers responses in the bottom of the page! Forget the avian flu, there's another epidemic on our hands... the idiocy pandemic!:boxedin:

[dubfan]

Wow, just read the readers responses in the bottom of the page! Forget the avian flu, there's another epidemic on our hands... the idiocy pandemic!:boxedin:

I have an offline acquaintance who is a 100% *******-crazy conspiracy theorist. Illuminati, the Cassiopeians, the whole thing. He told me I need to be concerned about the "creeping fascism" plaguing our country. I didn't tell him I was more concerned about creeping stupidity.

[CurtC]

Michael Moore's former assistant (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/contributors/bio.php?nick=jason-pollock&name=Jason%20Pollock), on the Huffington Post (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jason-pollock/every-american-should-see_b_20722.html), thinks you should go see Loose Change right now.That kid's writing is as sloppy as a Loose Change Forum regular. The Huffington Post is a strange place - on one hand, The Bad Astronomer sometimes has his writing featured there, and on the other hand, they have stuff like this, and incoherent ramblings from Deepak Chopra, and the "vaccines cause autism" wackos. What a mix!

Someone who has an account to comment there needs to point out to MarkusQ that Ben Chertoff is not related to Michael Chertoff, and had never even heard of him until the PM article had already been written.

[chipmunk stew]

That kid's writing is as sloppy as a Loose Change Forum regular. The Huffington Post is a strange place - on one hand, The Bad Astronomer sometimes has his writing featured there, and on the other hand, they have stuff like this, and incoherent ramblings from Deepak Chopra, and the "vaccines cause autism" wackos. What a mix!

Someone who has an account to comment there needs to point out to MarkusQ that Ben Chertoff is not related to Michael Chertoff, and had never even heard of him until the PM article had already been written.I commented, but it's a brand-new account, so I don't have instant posting privileges. It has to be moderated, I presume.

I pointed out the Chertoff lie, linking to CptColumbo's posts, and also responded to the article itself, providing a link to Gravy's critique.

[Dr Adequate]

Could ANYTHING look worse on a resume? "Michael Moore's former personal fitness coach and fashion consultant."

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

I commented, but it's a brand-new account, so I don't have instant posting privileges. It has to be moderated, I presume.

I pointed out the Chertoff lie, linking to CptColumbo's posts, and also responded to the article itself, providing a link to Gravy's critique.

I created an account and posted as well, very shortly after the link was posted here. My comments are still not up. :(

[geggy]

The official version, on the other hand, is coherent and internally consistent, and stands up to serious, unbiased scrutiny. There are some unknowns in the details, but no more than you'd expect from any huge, complex event, and any red flags raised have been addressed to my satisfaction.

Bolstering my confidence in the major structure of the OV is the fact that it's not high-paid gov't lackeys that are primarily responsible for its shape and narrative. It's the crews on the ground and in the field who were most closely involved in the aftermath and/or affected by it, and whose who have the most specialized expertise in the many strands of investigation--these people are almost unanimous in their acceptance of the official version.

Ha! Don't make me laugh. The FBI was told to put halt to the sept 11 investigation just a month after the attacks. Several commissioners of the sept 11 commission have resigned over their frustration with W. stonewalling and under-funding the investigation. They were given only $3 mil and 9 months(?) to start with. Later the commission would request for more fundings at $12 mil, but were only given $9 mil. Max Cleland, the most ouspoken of the ex-commissioners, have complained that they weren't given enough money and time to start with the investigation. Later after the report was released, he would eventually call it a total farce, which lead me to believe something is fishy about sept 11 itself. I think someone who was actually a part of the commission would have a lot more credibility to speak out against the sept 11 report than those who do.

[juryjone]

Max Cleland, the most ouspoken of the ex-commissioners, have complained that they weren't given enough money and time to start with the investigation. Later after the report was released, he would eventually call it a total farce, which lead me to believe something is fishy about sept 11 itself.

Got a source for that "farce" statement other than "trooth" websites?

Wait...who am I talking to?

[Stellafane]

Ha! Don't make me laugh. The FBI was told to put halt to the sept 11 investigation just a month after the attacks. Several commissioners of the sept 11 commission have resigned over their frustration with W. stonewalling and under-funding the investigation. They were given only $3 mil and 9 months(?) to start with. Later the commission would request for more fundings at $12 mil, but were only given $9 mil. Max Cleland, the most ouspoken of the ex-commissioners, have complained that they weren't given enough money and time to start with the investigation. Later after the report was released, he would eventually call it a total farce, which lead me to believe something is fishy about sept 11 itself. I think someone who was actually a part of the commission would have a lot more credibility to speak out against the sept 11 report than those who do.

Hi geggy. For at least the fourth time (I've lost count): Assuming your version of 9/11 is correct, and the current administration are a bunch of heartless mass murderers, could you please tell me what we as Americans should do about this?

[chipmunk stew]

Ha! Don't make me laugh. The FBI was told to put halt to the sept 11 investigation just a month after the attacks. Several commissioners of the sept 11 commission have resigned over their frustration with W. stonewalling and under-funding the investigation. They were given only $3 mil and 9 months(?) to start with. Later the commission would request for more fundings at $12 mil, but were only given $9 mil. Max Cleland, the most ouspoken of the ex-commissioners, have complained that they weren't given enough money and time to start with the investigation. Later after the report was released, he would eventually call it a total farce, which lead me to believe something is fishy about sept 11 itself. I think someone who was actually a part of the commission would have a lot more credibility to speak out against the sept 11 report than those who do.There's a ton of other independent information out there beyond the 9/11 Commission report. I've never relied on the report. But the fact remains, the major themes it addresses stand up to serious scrutiny, and the questions it doesn't cover are addressed adequately elsewhere.

[Shrinker]

Ha! Don't make me laugh. The FBI was told to put halt to the sept 11 investigation just a month after the attacks. Several commissioners of the sept 11 commission have resigned over their frustration with W. stonewalling and under-funding the investigation. They were given only $3 mil and 9 months(?) to start with. Later the commission would request for more fundings at $12 mil, but were only given $9 mil. Max Cleland, the most ouspoken of the ex-commissioners, have complained that they weren't given enough money and time to start with the investigation. Later after the report was released, he would eventually call it a total farce, which lead me to believe something is fishy about sept 11 itself. I think someone who was actually a part of the commission would have a lot more credibility to speak out against the sept 11 report than those who do.
Geggy do you even have a job? Somebody complaining about lack of resources is not evidence of anything. It's not even evidence that there actually was a lack of resources. People are complaining like that everywhere. It only makes the news when somebody else thinks it proves something.

Now, anyway, $9M. 9 months. They had access to evidence you can only dream of. Yet the biggest complaint that comes out of it was they didn't get enough money. Not, 'hey something fishy here', not 'the gubmint did it', not 'building rigged with volcanos', 'not plane loads of passengers missing' but simply, we wanted more money. Doesn't seem to back up your case at all.

And another thing. Having provided this evidence, I assume you are never ever going to claim these people where bought off? I mean, it's pretty obvious they weren't isn't it?

Edit: typos

[Pardalis]

Geggy-the-Great, can you explain to me how a controlled-demolition-made-to-look-like-a-false-collapse-from-the-top is supposed to work?

WITH EVIDENCE please...

[Trifikas]

Could ANYTHING look worse on a resume?

"Fact Checker for 'Loose Change' Video"?

[Regnad Kcin]

I've already explained thousands of times in this thread and you people accuse me of going round and round on the merry go round."Thousands" of times.

Under his name - Posts: 151

You see, geggy, my little friend? That's how evidence works.

[Pardalis]

Could ANYTHING look worse on a resume?

"psychologist and Truth Movement activist."

[Pardalis]

Geggy's second post, #1410

Facts, not conspiracy theories, were thrown at your face repeatedly, yet you're still clinging onto the official story of 9/11 like flies on poop.

I appreciate you guys challenging me on the questions, even though it feels as if we're on a merry go round reaching 36th page of the thread. I have not seen loose change as it is not subtitled cuz you see, I'm deaf myself and I would need the subtitles to be able to understand what's being said in the video.

However I've started reading articles, both independent and mainstream reports, relating to sept 11 as early as 2002. I'd recommend you to start with this... informationclearinghouse.info/article4582.htm An excellent article, actually, written in 2003. If some of you are new to the sept 11 "conspiracy theories", I probably can understand what you're thinking. At first I dismissed it as an impossiblity that the government could perform such atrocity as massive as sept 11 toward their own people.

But then I kept an open mind and took a closer look, despite being indifferent to the ufo/jfk/bigfoot conspiracy theories, the anomalies surrounding sept 11 raises a lot of valid questions. After the FBI were forced to put halt to the sept 11 investigation on Oct 10, 2001, after 3 years of Bush's attempt at obstructing the independant investigation, the 9/11 cOmmission Report were finally released to the public and yet, it has a lot of holes in it and does not answer a lot of important questions.

I'm convinced that Osama, who was an asset to the CIA, and the 19hijackers, whom 7 of them came forward proving their innocence after the
attacks, had nothing to do with sept 11. I believe those who were training to become pilots in the US were members of al-Qaeda yet they were set up as scapegoats and patsies, provided by Pakistan's Intelligence Agency, the ISI. The forewarnings received by the Bush administration were put forth themselves to cover their own tracks. For all we know, the august 6th memo was most likely doctored, just as the nigeria document confirming Saddam's yellow cakes thta acted as a justification for Bush administration to invade Iraq.

Even if they had forewarnings of the sept 11 attack that was going to take place, then why were plans for war game exercises went ahead as scheduled on the morning of sept 11? Perhaps this article will help you understand why none of the fighter jets in the Air Force base 10 miles from DC were deployed:
infowars.com/articles/us/former_head_of_star_wars_say_cheney_main_911_suspe ct.htm

The Project for New American Century, created in 1997 whose members are
Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Cheney, etc, created a document called "Rebuilding
of the Defense System" in 1998, which was criticized harshly by those in the capitol. They then rewrote the document in 2000 cliaming that they would need a "catalyzing event--like a new pearl harbor" in order to generate public support to meet with the PNAC's agenda to invade the MiddleEast. Don't believe me? Look it up at newamericancentury.org

As for WTC7, four years and a half since the attacks and the NIST has not come to conclusion as to why it collapsed? An obvious sign of a cover up. You're probably thinking, why would they even intentionally implode WTC7? The government agencies housed at the building were the US secret service, the department of defense, FEMA, the SEC, the CIA and the IRS. Could it be just a coincidence? Is it a coincidence that Larry Silverstein had signed $3.2 billion, 99 year lease several weeks prior to sept 11, only later to claim more than $5 billion from insurance after the attacks? Or the fact that Marvin Bush, George Bush's younger brother, was the head of security in WTC during the time of the attacks?

Speaking of WTC, here are interesting facts about buildings 5 and 6...
-both had thinner steel columns than buildings 1, 2 and 7
-both stood closer to buidlings 1 and 2 than building 7 did
-both suffered far more damages than building 7 did
-both did not collapse, yet building 7 did

Some of you have proven to me that you lack any knowledge of how
building implosion works...

Go here: question911.livejournal.com/2804.html

Because of several witness statements, I strongly believe AA77 struck the pentagon. But I admit the fact they refuse to release videos of the pentagon attack is very suspicious.

I don't know what happened to flight 93. Many had claimed that it made an emergency landing in Cleveland because it was said to be carrying a bomb. Many said it was shot down. Anything that I come to conclusion as to what had happened to flight 93 would be conspiracy theory because I don't have any real, solid proof backed up, which is why I don't spend much time on it.

It's interesting that, as you may have already read the highly unconvincing Popular Mechannic's article debunking the sept 11 CT, was written by Chertoff's son.

I think you guys need to remind yourselves that this is not fantasy, and that it is very, very probable that the Bush administartion may had orchestrated the entire event themselves. You just need to do research yourselves on the internet to allow for it to sink in. But beware of government sponsered disinformationalists spreading misleading information across the internet in attempt discredit the 9/11 truth seekers and divert the attention away from those responsible....


What a load of crap!:eye-poppi

I don't think the word "stubborn" is strong enough.

[Gravy]

The moon hoaxers are less ridiculous, and it pains me to admit that something less coherent is even possible. Humanity is slipping into the void of ignorance while you cheer and wave.
You're assuming that geggy can't also be a moon hoaxer.

Guess what? I learned this week that one of the Head Loosers, either Dylan or Jason (can't tell from the audio), is a moon hoaxer, but of I kind I haven't come across before. Here's a quote while the two of them are being interviewed by Eric Hufschmid, who is both a moon hoaxer, a 9/11 CT, AND a Holocaust denier:
I mean, I don't like it when people attack you about the moon landings. I've done a bunch of research on that too, and I really don't think that the videos that they're showing us are real. I contend that we may have been to the moon, not with rocket technology, but with something else and it's secret. Definitely not the Apollo landings – they're a joke.

[Gravy]

...Assuming that what you and your fellow CT'ers are saying is true, and the Bush administration are the worst mass murderers in the history of America...
I'm guessing that Native Americans would beg to differ.
So, please tell me geggy: what should we, the American people, do about this? This isn't just an academic or rhetorical question; the answer goes a long way towards helping me understand what it is you and your cronies want from all of this.
A very good question. The Loosers say that if they don't get action out of the government after their big rally in NYC on 9/11/06, on 9/11/07 they're going to camp outside the White House until something is done. Camping isn't allowed there, so I've been encouraging them to start a hunger strike ASAP.

[Shrinker]

I'm guessing that Native Americans would beg to differ.

A very good question. The Loosers say that if they don't get action out of the government after their big rally in NYC on 9/11/06, on 9/11/07 they're going to camp outside the White House until something is done. Camping isn't allowed there, so I've been encouraging them to start a hunger strike ASAP.

I'd suggest a thirst strike - its quicker.

[Shrinker]

Geggy, could you explain why you posted about the 9/11 commisioners' complaints when, if everything you said was true...

The harsh criticisms directed at the government show that the commsionioners' opinions were not bought by government bribes or that they were silenced by blackmail.
The limited scope of the criticisms shows that they didn't have any evidence of anything as dramatic as murder, treason or a gigantic conspiracy. Please don't try anything silly like suddenly claiming the story might not be true, or that all the commisioners' complaints were an act to throw us off the trail, or that its a sign that the conspirators are somehow fighting amongst themsleves. It's too late for that. You brought this stuff up as proof of a conspiracy. You forced it into your own demented world view without even the slightest bit of logical analysis, and now you've exposed yourself to ridicule again.

[Gravy]

That kid's writing is as sloppy as a Loose Change Forum regular. The Huffington Post is a strange place - on one hand, The Bad Astronomer sometimes has his writing featured there, and on the other hand, they have stuff like this, and incoherent ramblings from Deepak Chopra, and the "vaccines cause autism" wackos. What a mix!

Someone who has an account to comment there needs to point out to MarkusQ that Ben Chertoff is not related to Michael Chertoff, and had never even heard of him until the PM article had already been written.
I had done that first thing this morning, but like Chipmunk I had to register, and it takes time to get a post up.

[Stellafane]

I'm guessing that Native Americans would beg to differ.

Aw c'mon, Gravy...I love ya guy, but that's kind of a cheap shot. I'm hardly going to defend the long, sordid genocide that is the history of this country's treatment of Native Americans. But I don't know of any one single individual personally responsible for the deaths of some 3,000 civilian Americans (native or otherwise) in a single day. And if I'm wrong about that, I'll gladly amend my statement to "one of the worst mass murderers" to ensure I'm not offending anyone.


A very good question. The Loosers say that if they don't get action out of the government after their big rally in NYC on 9/11/06, on 9/11/07 they're going to camp outside the White House until something is done. Camping isn't allowed there, so I've been encouraging them to start a hunger strike ASAP.

It's my theory that CT'ers don't really want us to do anything, they're just getting off on "asking questions" and getting the occasional adult to pay a little attention to them. Of course, if I were in their place, and I honestly believed I was in a country run by mass murderers, I'd either hightail it outa here pronto, or stay here and do something really drastic. So I want to know which one they advocate; it'll help me better understand where they're coming from...and where they think they're going.

[Regnad Kcin]

...It's my theory that CT'ers don't really want us to do anything, they're just getting off on "asking questions" and getting the occasional adult to pay a little attention to them. Of course, if I were in their place, and I honestly believed I was in a country run by mass murderers, I'd either hightail it outa here pronto, or stay here and do something really drastic...Well, judging by the photo of the trio of Loose Changers (found on Gravy's document), they've taken the dramatic and, yes, brave step of donning matching T-shirts!

[dubfan]

Well, judging by the photo of the trio of Loose Changers (found on Gravy's document), they've taken the dramatic and, yes, brave step of donning matching T-shirts!

If you ever want to find out just what Loose Change means to Dylan Avery, all you've got to do is read his blog (http://loosechange911.blogspot.com/). It's all about advancing his film career by appearing at "events", lounging at poolside, and sipping lattes from his comfy chair at Starbucks.

You'd think someone with an agenda so crucial to the country would be out trying to gain support from the engineering departments at Stanford, MIT, and Georgia Tech. Or talking to representatives from the airline pilots union. Or making presentations to the membership of ASCE. You think he'd actually be focused on gathering some actual evidence to support his case.

But he's doing none of that, because he there's no evidence for him to gather. Instead he's acting like the propagandist that he is, and his own blog is proof of that in black and white.

[Pardalis]

If you ever want to find out just what Loose Change means to Dylan Avery, all you've got to do is read his blog (http://loosechange911.blogspot.com/). It's all about advancing his film career by appearing at "events", lounging at poolside, and sipping lattes from his comfy chair at Starbucks.

You'd think someone with an agenda so crucial to the country would be out trying to gain support from the engineering departments at Stanford, MIT, and Georgia Tech. Or talking to representatives from the airline pilots union. Or making presentations to the membership of ASCE. You think he'd actually be focused on gathering some actual evidence to support his case.

But he's doing none of that, because he there's no evidence for him to gather. Instead he's acting like the propagandist that he is, and his own blog is proof of that in black and white.

He's got his eyes on directing "The Da Vinci's Code II: The Return"

[Mr. Skinny]

I am now! :p
And we all saw the alleged "fire suppressing" foam in pictures of the pentagon crash! Are we really meant to believe that the Fire Fighters (employed by the government) put it there?
Brodski, I'm sure I've missed the original source of "fire suppressin" foam so I'm not sure what you're refering to, sorry.

Anyhow, Fire Depts. do have AFFF (Aqueous Film Forming Foam) for flam. liquid fires.

Come on, what have I missed?

[DavidJames]

He's got his eyes on directing "The Da Vinci's Code II: The Controlled demolition"

Fixed your post.

[aggle-rithm]

I'd suggest a thirst strike - its quicker.

Oxygen strike would be quicker still.

[aggle-rithm]

Hi geggy. For at least the fourth time (I've lost count): Assuming your version of 9/11 is correct, and the current administration are a bunch of heartless mass murderers, could you please tell me what we as Americans should do about this?

I think he's already doing it. :(

[Stellafane]

He's got his eyes on directing "The Da Vinci's Code II: The Return"

Nah, it's "The Da Vinci's Code II: Revenge of the Squibs."

[aggle-rithm]

It's my theory that CT'ers don't really want us to do anything, they're just getting off on "asking questions" and getting the occasional adult to pay a little attention to them.

The tragedy of it is, while they're harping on and on about "inconsistencies", there are REAL problems in the world that need to be addressed, not the least of which is a possible repeat of 9/11 on American soil -- this time with a completely unexpected modus operandi. Of course, they will find problems with the official story on this one, too...

[aggle-rithm]

Ha! Don't make me laugh. The FBI was told to put halt to the sept 11 investigation just a month after the attacks. Several commissioners of the sept 11 commission have resigned over their frustration with W. stonewalling and under-funding the investigation. They were given only $3 mil and 9 months(?) to start with. Later the commission would request for more fundings at $12 mil, but were only given $9 mil. Max Cleland, the most ouspoken of the ex-commissioners, have complained that they weren't given enough money and time to start with the investigation. Later after the report was released, he would eventually call it a total farce, which lead me to believe something is fishy about sept 11 itself. I think someone who was actually a part of the commission would have a lot more credibility to speak out against the sept 11 report than those who do.

How much money do you think it would take to investigate all the CT "evidence"? We've been doing it for several months now, and I would be willing to bet it hasn't cost anywhere near 12 million bucks. All takes to debunk the "free fall" claim, for instance, is a casual look at any video of the WTC collapse.

[Stellafane]

The tragedy of it is, while they're harping on and on about "inconsistencies", there are REAL problems in the world that need to be addressed, not the least of which is a possible repeat of 9/11 on American soil -- this time with a completely unexpected modus operandi. Of course, they will find problems with the official story on this one, too...

Yeah, that is a true tragedy, made worse by the fact that if these bozos are to be believed, then this country has nothing to worry about as far as foreign terrorism is concerned, it's our own government that we have to watch. So while our eyes are focused on stray pixels and blurry shadows and whether or not Rumsfeld ate breakfast on 9/11, terrorists are plotting the next attacks on US targets such as tunnels, bridges, and nuclear power plants.

The total sum of all the combined effort every CT'er has ever made on behalf of their "cause" fails to equal the contribution to society made by a 3-year old kid picking up a gum wrapper. What an obscene waste of time and energy.

[Manny]

The tragedy of it is, while they're harping on and on about "inconsistencies", there are REAL problems in the world that need to be addressed, not the least of which is a possible repeat of 9/11 on American soil -- this time with a completely unexpected modus operandi. Of course, they will find problems with the official story on this one, too...Or even closer to home, unanswered questions about 9-11 itself. The NIST report on 7 WTC is due soon. As a person who inhabits tall office buildings and works for employers who like column-free space, I'm actually pretty intensely interested in precisely why it fell (I know generally how it fell, of course). What if the NIST report overlooks or downplays something important? Will structural engineers hold back criticism lest they be lumped in with idiots and terrorists like the Loosers? Probably not. I hope not. But what if there's a shy guy somewhere with just the right input which will make the next generation of skyscrapers just a little safer who doesn't speak up. Or what if he does speak up but his valid criticism is drowned out by a chorus of "controlled demolition!"

[Dr Adequate]

Could ANYTHING look worse on a resume?http://img139.imageshack.us/img139/1872/cv1tp.jpg

[dubfan]

Shamefully stolen from a post at LGF (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=20480#c0151):

http://www.ufos-aliens.co.uk/cosmicapollo.html

Any of this reasoning look or sound familiar?

[Pardalis]

Shamefully stolen from a post at LGF (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=20480#c0151):

http://www.ufos-aliens.co.uk/cosmicapollo.html

Any of this reasoning look or sound familiar?

I bet they can find anomalies in my last year's family Christmas pictures!

[TjW]

Woah, are you suggesting that huge grey cloud of debris was in fact a cloud of foam? :eek:
He's not saying it is, and he's not saying it isn't: he's just asking questions...

[Gravy]

If you ever want to find out just what Loose Change means to Dylan Avery, all you've got to do is read his blog (http://loosechange911.blogspot.com/). It's all about advancing his film career by appearing at "events", lounging at poolside, and sipping lattes from his comfy chair at Starbucks.
Okay, I HAD to go there, and I HAD to look at the comments on the most recent post, and I HAD to see that a CT believes that a B-52 Stratofortress 8-engine jet bomber hit the Empire State Building in 1945.

No, I did all that by choice, and now I don't feel so good. I think the dumbness is coming through my computer monitor and eating my brain.

[hellaeon]

"Argue with fools and after a while no one can tell the difference..."

[CurtC]

If you ever want to find out just what Loose Change means to Dylan Avery, all you've got to do is read his blog (http://loosechange911.blogspot.com/).

April 29:In fact, you're not going to hear from me much in the next 12 weeks or so. I have a lot of work to do.

May 4:k, guys, I basically am off the internet until the 12th.

May 5:Checkin in from a coffeehouse down the block from my screening... once this screening's over, we're basically off the radar for 12 weeks.

May 8:Again, not really on the net until the 12th.

May 10:Two nuggets for you:

OK, Dylan, go already!

[CptColumbo]

Someone who has an account to comment there needs to point out to MarkusQ that Ben Chertoff is not related to Michael Chertoff, and had never even heard of him until the PM article had already been written.
Where is this going on?

[chipmunk stew]

Where is this going on?The Huffington Post (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jason-pollock/every-american-should-see_b_20722.html)

[CptColumbo]

Well you can tell them that they don't just have to take my word for it they can check for themselves.

MAIL:
POPULAR MECHANICS
810 Seventh Avenue, 6th Floor
New York, NY 10019

FAX:
212-586-5562

E-MAIL:
popularmechanics@hearst.com

That is if they're willing and able to do some of their own research.

[chipmunk stew]

Well you can tell them that they don't just have to take my word for it they can check for themselves.

MAIL:
POPULAR MECHANICS
810 Seventh Avenue, 6th Floor
New York, NY 10019

FAX:
212-586-5562

E-MAIL:
popularmechanics@hearst.com

That is if they're willing and able to do some of their own research.Thanks. "Purym" wants to know why she should trust you over Alex Jones. I'll break it down for him/her.

[dubfan]

Stop the 9-11 Coverup. We're Serious (http://loosechange911.blogspot.com/2006/05/stop-9-11-coverup-were-serious.html)

http://www.loosechange911.com/img/us.gif

Just look at those hard-nosed investigators.

[Gravy]

Ha! Don't make me laugh. The FBI was told to put halt to the sept 11 investigation just a month after the attacks.
That's funny, someone must have forgotten to tell 4,000 FBI agents that. And someone must have forgotten to tell the full-time 9/11 FBI investigators the same thing in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006.

All of which has been covered here before. Geggy, I'll say it again: how many days in a row have you said something mind-blowingly stupid? Is reading CT sites working out for you? Are you seeing progress? Are you saying a smaller percentage of stupid things than when you started posting here?

Several people here have given you advice on how to improve your reasoning and ressearch skills. You have not taken that advice. Don't you want to do better? Do you really want to keep saying dumb things every day? You do it every day, geggy, and every day I tell you so.

Please answer this: why have you not changed your approach?

Max Cleland, the most ouspoken of the ex-commissioners, have complained that they weren't given enough money and time to start with the investigation. Later after the report was released, he would eventually call it a total farce, which lead me to believe something is fishy about sept 11 itself. I think someone who was actually a part of the commission would have a lot more credibility to speak out against the sept 11 report than those who do.
geggy, you do know that Max Cleland voiced his support of Bush's Iraq policy in ads and in campaign speeches, right? And you do know that he voted for the resolution to use force, right? And you do know that when he lost his election, and started speaking out against the administration's stonewalling of the 9/11 Commission, he was angry that Bush was trying to hide the fact that Saddam had no connection to 9/11, right? And you do know that Cleland does not have any disagreement with the Report's conclusion that 19 Arab terrorists working with al Qaeda committed the crimes of 9/11, right? And you do know that neither he, nor any other 9/11 commissioner, has accused anyone in the U.S. government of complicity in the attacks, right?

The commissioners who complained all had valid complaints. In order to get the information they wanted, they had to subpoena the White House, the Justice Department, the FAA, NORAD, etc. All these organizations are partly to blame for not averting the attacks. As bureaucracies do, they all tried to cover thair behinds rather than disclose information that might make them look bad. The Commission made "deals" with them in order to avoid time-wasting legal processes. It stinks that they had to do that. It stinks that Bush and Cheney testified together, and not under oath. It stinks that not all of the commissioners were allowed access to all the information. It stinks that election politics came into play at a time when bipartisanship should have been paramount. These are all serious problems that need fixing. None of that lends validity to your ridiculous theories.

You also have a serious problem that needs fixing. You refuse to learn from your mistakes.

This stuff may all be a game to you, but it isn't to me, and it bothers the hell out of me that you make the same mistakes every single day.

What are you going to do about that?

[Gravy]

The Huffington Post (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jason-pollock/every-american-should-see_b_20722.html)
Crap! My comment from this morning never showed up! It was the first one of about 40 I made on blogs today. Thanks, you guys, for posting there.

[Regnad Kcin]

From reading that site's opening post, I'm gonna go off in the woods and become a hermit, 'cause there may be no hope for mankind.

[Ramooone]

they get more paranoid by the minute....

http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=3940&view=findpost&p=4311529

[hellaeon]

wow these people are immensly deluded. Drop outs. I am speechless seeing that 'we are serious' rubbish. Its basically people who hate bush. These people have so many screws loose.

These guys have no idea the difference between a movie and real life!
Xmen is real! Superman lives! HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

I love Australia.

You guy shave it all. Intelligent Design. Conspiracy nuts screaming about demolitions without evidence. I mean omg, pentagon bodies got taken to a different morgue then others during 9/11! cover up!

You know on the weekend, one of the teams expected to win in the Australian Football League didn't!! F**k conspiracy!

[geggy]

Heh you crack me, up, gravy. Keep the lies coming, why don't you?

[Xraye]

it seems as though you all have thought very much about this issue and have researched it extensivly. perhpas you could address some particular issues with which I find intruiging and worthy of further analysis. I appologise for typing the links longhand, apparently members with fewer than 15 posts aren't allowed to post links.

Initially the most convincing evidence I saw that the twin towers where taken down by explosives where the demolition squibs found in most of the videos showing the collapse.
911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/collapses/squibs.html
Here's a good sight where you can really check it out. The loose change video also shows a whole bunch of them frrom different video tapes.

physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html
Here's a research paper by Professor Steven E Jones, a physics professor at Brigham Young University, which brings to light some very interesting evidence regarding molten steel found at ground zero, more info on the demolition squibs, the phenomena of WTC 7, and what appears to be cordite dripping from one of the towers before it falls.

Nobody has of yet been able to find another steel reinforced skyscraper that colllapsed because of a fire. As you can see here: portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/02/310898.shtml
there are many buildings in which fires have raged far longer and hotter than in the WTC towers and have stood firm. As a matter of fact the WTC itself had an inferno within it that lasted for 3 hours in the 1970's, and that was before they added fireproofing technology like sprinklers, elevator shaft dampers, and electrical system fireproofing.

You may say that it was a combination of the impact of the jet and the fire that caused the collapse, the fire not melting the steel but weekening it enouph for it to not be able to support the building. However, even if that where true (which experts in "Scholars for 9/11 Truth" seem not to think), the steal beams below the fire would retain their structural integrety and would remain standing or would only bend, causing the building to fall sideways rather than straight down. The reason you need demolitions to bring down a building like this is because you have to cut the steel beams into segments in order for the building to fall straight down.

The fires in the trade center where actually dying down before the collapse, as indicated by black smoke coming from the towers. Here there's a recording of a fire fighter who reached the 78th floor of the second tower and seemed to think that the fire would be easy to contain.
wnyc.org/news/articles/7869

Ben Fountain, a financial analyst who worked in the World Trade Center Complex, told People Magazine that in the weeks before 9/11 there were numerous unnanounced and unusual drills where sections of both the twin towers and building 7 were evacuated for "security reasons". This allows for an explanation as to how the bombs could have appeared within the towers.

Then of course there's the put options:
sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/09/19/BU184559.DTL
made before the attacks which indicate the strong possibility of forknowledge of the attack and of which Lyn Howard claimed that the CBOE was investigating. To date no such investigation has been made public.

Another peculiar piece of information which should also be investigated is Larry Silverstein's purchase of the 2 main WTC buildings and a substantial insurance claim put in effect, both shortly before the 9/11 attacks. He even went so far as to demand twice the insurance reimbersement, one for each seperate plane crash.

So these are a few preliminary pieces of evidence that I submit to your forum in the interest of challenging your skeptical stance on the issue and for obtaining feedback as to possible alternate interpretations of the evidence. Most of the evidence I've presented is contained within the Loose Change 2 video.
video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5137581991288263801&q=loose+change

I'm personally dissapointed that the government hasn't addressed most of these issues, and there are many people (including professional physicists, engineers, and similar experts as represented in the "Scholars for 9/11 Truth" orginization) who find the goverment appointed investigations full of inconsistancies and impossibilites.

[chipmunk stew]

it seems as though you all have thought very much about this issue and have researched it extensivly. perhpas you could address some particular issues with which I find intruiging and worthy of further analysis....Welcome, Xraye! All of your questions have been addressed in this thread and elsewhere, but I don't expect you to slog through 80-some pages to find it. I only mention this to prepare you for the impatience you are going to encounter. A lot of people here have debated many times over these same questions, introduced by newbies in ones and twos, using the same links and same questions.

Don't take it personally, and I hope you stick around.

I'll be addressing some of your questions personally, but I have to go to work. In the meantime, please review the critique of Loose Change mentioned in my signature. There's a wealth of information there.

[Dr Adequate]

Some ratbag posted Dr Adequate's rant about complexity over there:

http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=3851&st=0#entry4258603

Let's see how long it takes them to move the thread into the troll section and ban the person who posted it. Maybe we should have some kind of sweepstakes where we guess how long it will take? Well, here's a strange thing. After seeing the responses, I couldn't help going over there and explaining what I meant. And now I can't post there. No notice of suspension, nothing. I just can't reply to threads. I was, however, able to edit my sig.

[Dr Adequate]

it seems as though you all have thought very much about this issue and have researched it extensivly. Hello Xraye!

So ... we meet again ...

Welcome to the forums!

[Xraye]

here's a video of an interesting perspective givin by 2 foriegn intelligence agents. in it they cite the neo conservative document "Rebuilding America's Defenses", as well as a book entitled "The Grand Chessboard" written by Zbigniew Brzezinksi who was the National Secretary Advisor to Carter and who worked with Regan in an intelligence capacity. both are very interesting pieces of evidence that give much credence to the possibility of a governmental conspiracy in which 9/11 was used as a catalyst to gain popular support for thier foriegn adjenda.

video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8274552561914055825

[Shrinker]

it seems as though you all have thought very much about this issue and have researched it extensivly. perhpas you could address some particular issues with which I find intruiging and worthy of further analysis. I appologise for typing the links longhand, apparently members with fewer than 15 posts aren't allowed to post links.
Welcome to the forum! You're in for a bumpy ride, but you are far more welcome here than we are at the Loose Change forum. ;)

Initially the most convincing evidence I saw that the twin towers where taken down by explosives where the demolition squibs found in most of the videos showing the collapse.
911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/collapses/squibs.html
Here's a good sight where you can really check it out. The loose change video also shows a whole bunch of them frrom different video tapes.
We covered this somewhere in the 85 preceding pages. I know its huge but it would be good etiquette to read them and respond to the responses, not just present the same evidence we've already seen.

physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html
Here's a research paper by Professor Steven E Jones, a physics professor at Brigham Young University, which brings to light some very interesting evidence regarding molten steel found at ground zero, more info on the demolition squibs, the phenomena of WTC 7, and what appears to be cordite dripping from one of the towers before it falls.
We've seen all this too.

Nobody has of yet been able to find another steel reinforced skyscraper that colllapsed because of a fire. As you can see here: portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/02/310898.shtml
there are many buildings in which fires have raged far longer and hotter than in the WTC towers and have stood firm. As a matter of fact the WTC itself had an inferno within it that lasted for 3 hours in the 1970's, and that was before they added fireproofing technology like sprinklers, elevator shaft dampers, and electrical system fireproofing.
And this.

You may say that it was a combination of the impact of the jet and the fire that caused the collapse, the fire not melting the steel but weekening it enouph for it to not be able to support the building. However, even if that where true (which experts in "Scholars for 9/11 Truth" seem not to think), the steal beams below the fire would retain their structural integrety and would remain standing or would only bend, causing the building to fall sideways rather than straight down. The reason you need demolitions to bring down a building like this is because you have to cut the steel beams into segments in order for the building to fall straight down.
Would the steel beams below the fire retain their structural integrity if the building above fell down upon them? You're going to need a lot of math to prove that. Also, you don't know what is happening to the core inside the building. The outer shell is collapsing straight down, but inside the building, the vertical core sgments could be shearing, bending, snapping or toppling. How do you know whats happening in there?

The fires in the trade center where actually dying down before the collapse, as indicated by black smoke coming from the towers. Here there's a recording of a fire fighter who reached the 78th floor of the second tower and seemed to think that the fire would be easy to contain.
wnyc.org/news/articles/7869
You going to need a lot of math regarding the heat conductivity of steel, concrete etc to show that the steel was actually cooling while the fires died down. Steel retains heat for a long time. How small does a fire have to be for the net tempertaure change to be negative rather than positive? If you want to make a claim its up to you to do the working.

Ben Fountain, a financial analyst who worked in the World Trade Center Complex, told People Magazine that in the weeks before 9/11 there were numerous unnanounced and unusual drills where sections of both the twin towers and building 7 were evacuated for "security reasons". This allows for an explanation as to how the bombs could have appeared within the towers.
In this thread its been clearly shown that rigging the WTC for demolition would have taken weeks, not hours. Does Ben Fountain or any of the other 20,000+ survivors describe any evidence of the building being torn up and put back together after one of these drills?

Then of course there's the put options:
sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/09/19/BU184559.DTL
made before the attacks which indicate the strong possibility of forknowledge of the attack and of which Lyn Howard claimed that the CBOE was investigating. To date no such investigation has been made public.
Tiresome old news. It has been investigated, but the findings were too boring to make it onto the moonbat boards.

Another peculiar piece of information which should also be investigated is Larry Silverstein's purchase of the 2 main WTC buildings and a substantial insurance claim put in effect, both shortly before the 9/11 attacks. He even went so far as to demand twice the insurance reimbersement, one for each seperate plane crash.
How dare he buy stuff! How dare he insure it! How dare he claim on the insureance! What on earth is so strange about this?

So these are a few preliminary pieces of evidence that I submit to your forum in the interest of challenging your skeptical stance on the issue and for obtaining feedback as to possible alternate interpretations of the evidence. Most of the evidence I've presented is contained within the Loose Change 2 video.
video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5137581991288263801&q=loose+change


You're way too late to challenge us with this stuff. If you have more however, bring it forth..

I'm personally dissapointed that the government hasn't addressed most of these issues, and there are many people (including professional physicists, engineers, and similar experts as represented in the "Scholars for 9/11 Truth" orginization) who find the goverment appointed investigations full of inconsistancies and impossibilites.
The government hasn't addressed the issues because they are in possession of so much more information than you are. They know that your questions don't even make sense when viewed alongside that evidence. They also know that your 'experts' are a tiny fringe movement of cranks working outsode their expertise, and that the general public will just believe whatever the hell they want. Answering all this nonsense would be a vast and pointless waste of time. Look what happened to the official Roswell report.... or don't you believe that either?

[Xraye]

thank you much doctor.

[Gravy]

here's a video of an interesting perspective givin by 2 foriegn intelligence agents. in it they cite the neo conservative document "Rebuilding America's Defenses", as well as a book entitled "The Grand Chessboard" written by Zbigniew Brzezinksi who was the National Secretary Advisor to Carter and who worked with Regan in an intelligence capacity. both are very interesting pieces of evidence that give much credence to the possibility of a governmental conspiracy in which 9/11 was used as a catalyst to gain popular support for thier foriegn adjenda.

video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8274552561914055825

Hi Xraye. Welcome aboard. I have to second Chipmunk Stew's recommendation to read that critique of "Loose Change." I have to second it because I wrote it :D, and I took some time to address, in detail, nearly all of the questions you ask. You requested that we watch "Loose Change." I contend that no one besides Avery, Rowe and Bermas has watched it more closely than I have. Actually, in terms of its substance and specific claims, I contend that I have watched it much, much more closely than they have.

Do you have any evidence that anyone not named in the "official" version was involved in any way in the planning or execution of the terrorist attacks of 9/11?

ETA: I assume that you're from the "Loose Change" forum. I would have posted my critique there, but I was banned quite a while ago because the mods felt that I was "wasting people's time" and "arguing dishonestly"...on a thread I started. That thread, by the way, was by far the most popular on the site. Can I get your opinion about the LC mods, who claim to be "truth seekeers." banning people who disagree with the claims made in the video? It's been an ongoing problem.

[Belz...]

Are those...
1. 'OMG I'M SO RICH' tears?
2. Photo-op 'look at my tears! I really do care!' tears?
3. 'oops i done screw up and 3000 people has died in result of it' tears

LOOK AT MY TEARS...I REALLY DO CARE...

Why does he alway seem so caring in photo op session???

You truly are a despicable, rotten man. How dare you question people's emotions, now ? You look at a picture, decide the emotion is not genuine, and somehow decide that this supports your childish theory.

You might have notice I've stopped beign polite, now.

[Xraye]

Shrinker, I'm surprised that you don't feel welcome to post in the other forum. What gives you that impression? Gravy and Shrinker, on your advice I'll wade through the previous posts and make note of any relevant posts that may adress my questions, as well as the websight you've made which addresses the Loose Change video.

It may take me some time to research my response to your guy's questions, so please be patient.

[Belz...]

Heh you crack me, up, gravy. Keep the lies coming, why don't you?

Woah... I mean... you just... like... demolished his arguments with such eloquence and ease that I must now become one of you.

...no... really, geggy. I'm sure we're just a few years away from brain transplant. Wouldn't that work great for you ?

[Belz...]

here's a video of an interesting perspective givin by 2 foriegn intelligence agents. in it they cite the neo conservative document "Rebuilding America's Defenses", as well as a book entitled "The Grand Chessboard" written by Zbigniew Brzezinksi who was the National Secretary Advisor to Carter and who worked with Regan in an intelligence capacity. both are very interesting pieces of evidence that give much credence to the possibility of a governmental conspiracy in which 9/11 was used as a catalyst to gain popular support for thier foriegn adjenda.

Except that large-scale conspiracies are impossible.

Doesn't ANYONE in the CT croud have psychological, historical or sociological training ?

[brodski]

Shrinker, I'm surprised that you don't feel welcome to post in the other forum.
Welcome to the forum.
Skeptics don't feel welcome at the LC forum, because we keep getting banned or suspended for what seem like spurious reasons, one poster got a 3 month suspension for just asking what the forum rules are! Mods over there have given very clear indications that if you don't "get it" after your first few threads there, then you are an "obvious troll" who should not waste their time. Over here you will not be suspended or banned for your views, or rules are clearly stated, and we even have an appeals process.

[Reeco]

Shrinker, I'm surprised that you don't feel welcome to post in the other forum. What gives you that impression? Gravy and Shrinker, on your advice I'll wade through the previous posts and make note of any relevant posts that may adress my questions, as well as the websight you've made which addresses the Loose Change video.

It may take me some time to research my response to your guy's questions, so please be patient.

Please, let's not try and kid anyone here. The Loose Change forums are not a good place for debate, unless you happen to believe in the CT. It's a boys club.

Also, I'm not sure how closely you've watched the footage of the WTC collapse if you believe the fires were nearly out. They were raging right up until the last.

[Dr Adequate]

Initially the most convincing evidence I saw that the twin towers where taken down by explosives where the demolition squibs found in most of the videos showing the collapse.
911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/collapses/squibs.html
Here's a good sight where you can really check it out. The loose change video also shows a whole bunch of them frrom different video tapes. The site you link to says itself that "It shows two very distinct squibs emerging from the North Tower's northwest side, which is in profile on the tower's right, at about two and five seconds into the collapse."

So they didn't cause the collapse, did they?

Moreover I can't help but notice that the holes in the building associated with these "squibs" seem to be rather smaller than the one associated with the plane.

Nobody has of yet been able to find another steel reinforced skyscraper that colllapsed because of a fire ... You may say that it was a combination of the impact of the jet and the fire that caused the collapse, the fire not melting the steel but weekening it enouph for it to not be able to support the building. You seem to have answered yourself.

the steal beams below the fire would retain their structural integrety and would remain standing or would only bend, causing the building to fall sideways rather than straight down. Have you done the math? 'Cos I've seen a lot of reports by experts, and they don't seem to be of your opinion.

The fires in the trade center where actually dying down before the collapse, as indicated by black smoke coming from the towers. Unfortunately the fire dying down would not restore structural strength to the building.

Another peculiar piece of information which should also be investigated is Larry Silverstein's purchase of the 2 main WTC buildings and a substantial insurance claim put in effect, both shortly before the 9/11 attacks. He even went so far as to demand twice the insurance reimbersement, one for each seperate plane crash. Swiss Re, the reinsurance company that is leading the legal case against Mr Silverstein, said it had uncovered new evidence showing Silverstein Properties decided to buy less cover for the World Trade Centre than would be required to rebuild them because it wanted to cut costs.

This was despite Mr Silverstein's assertion after the 11 September attacks that he should be compensated for the full sum that reconstructing the towers would cost.

Jacques Dubois, the chief executive of Swiss Re's American arm, said: "In our view, Silverstein Properties knowingly and deliberately underinsured the WTC complex. We believe the record establishes that in order to save on premium dollars, Silverstein intentionally refused to insure against the risk of loss in excess of $3.5bn." * (http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_200302/ai_n12671482) More later ...

[Gravy]

Shrinker, I'm surprised that you don't feel welcome to post in the other forum. What gives you that impression? Gravy and Shrinker, on your advice I'll wade through the previous posts and make note of any relevant posts that may adress my questions, as well as the websight you've made which addresses the Loose Change video.

It may take me some time to research my response to your guy's questions, so please be patient.

Thanks. If you click on the link in my signature, it will start the download of 5 Mb .doc file. The entire text of "Loose Change" is there, in order, along with my comments and a subject index, so it's easy to follow. That will be much faster than reading the 3,000+ posts here. (I think you should read the posts here, I'm just suggesting what would be faster).

[Shrinker]

Shrinker, I'm surprised that you don't feel welcome to post in the other forum. What gives you that impression? Gravy and Shrinker, on your advice I'll wade through the previous posts and make note of any relevant posts that may adress my questions, as well as the websight you've made which addresses the Loose Change video.

It may take me some time to research my response to your guy's questions, so please be patient.
Hehe, sorry Xraye, but that question's been answered on this thread too. Have you not noticed over there how non-believer's questions get moved rapidly into the under-the-bridge board? haven't you noticed how folks get banned if they don't convert within a couple of days?

JREF poster Geggy has been posting here for several days now, possibly several weeks. He's a CT believer and brings some lousy evidence to the debate, but nobody here wants him banned for it. Thanks to geggy, and the good folks debating him, I know no more about the truths and fictions of this whole 911 thing than I did a month ago.

[Gravy]

Shrinker, I'm surprised that you don't feel welcome to post in the other forum. What gives you that impression?
Please check this post:http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=1565506&postcount=1169

[geggy]

Thank god for your presence, xraye. I've already pointed out several things that you've posted above such as evidence of squibs in the collapsing of the towers, the wtc7 collapsing showed penthouse dropped first before everything else pointed out a characteristic of controlled demo, PNAC's agenda, etc, but many have refused to believe it. So maybe you'll do a better job of addressing the anomalies surround sept 11 than I have in this thread so ya can give me some breathing room for me to discuss the things I know more about. My wife is a psycho therapist and a friend is working on obtaining phd in psychology, we've all had interesting discussions regarding sept 11 and the psychological impact that it had on everyone. Please do stick around.

[aggle-rithm]

From reading that site's opening post, I'm gonna go off in the woods and become a hermit, 'cause there may be no hope for mankind.

Interestingly, it makes just as much sense when altered thusly:


I recently watched the film ATTACK OF THE KILLER TOMATOES and couldn't believe what I learned. I thought that I had read and heard everything about 9/11, but I was wrong. This film makes quite a case for an alternate view of what happened on September 11th, 2001.

[Shrinker]

Thank god for your presence, xraye. I've already pointed out several things that you've posted above such as evidence of squibs in the collapsing of the towers, the wtc7 collapsing showed penthouse dropped first before everything else pointed out a characteristic of controlled demo, PNAC's agenda, etc, but many have refused to believe it. So maybe you'll do a better job of addressing the anomalies surround sept 11 than I have in this thread so ya can give me some breathing room for me to discuss the things I know more about. My wife is a psycho therapist and a friend is working on obtaining phd in psychology, we've all had interesting discussions regarding sept 11 and the psychological impact that it had on everyone. Please do stick around.

Yes, Xraye, geggy has already explained to us that its a controlled demolition because it looks like one, but it doesn't look like one because They designed it not to look like one. So you can skip that part.

[aggle-rithm]

My wife is a psycho therapist....

TOO easy.

Must...control...snide...remarks...

[Gravy]

My wife is a psycho therapist
I hope she gets better!

But seriously, geggy, have you read my critique of "Loose Change?" I've asked you a few times now. Yes or no?

[aggle-rithm]

Thank god for your presence, xraye.

YOU'RE WELCOME, GEGGY. NOW, WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO START USING THAT BRAIN I GAVE YOU?

(Sorry, couldn't resist!)

....the wtc7 collapsing showed penthouse dropped first before everything else pointed out a characteristic of controlled demo....

The cardinal rule of controlled demo: MAKE SURE THE PENTHOUSE FALLS FIRST!

[geggy]

Sure, retort yourself to mocken and insulting because it's easier for you to deal rather than opening up to the painful idea that the bush admin may have had a hand in the attacks.

[Stellafane]

Thank god for your presence, xraye. I've already pointed out several things that you've posted above such as evidence of squibs in the collapsing of the towers, the wtc7 collapsing showed penthouse dropped first before everything else pointed out a characteristic of controlled demo, PNAC's agenda, etc, but many have refused to believe it. So maybe you'll do a better job of addressing the anomalies surround sept 11 than I have in this thread so ya can give me some breathing room for me to discuss the things I know more about. My wife is a psycho therapist and a friend is working on obtaining phd in psychology, we've all had interesting discussions regarding sept 11 and the psychological impact that it had on everyone. Please do stick around.

Hi geggy. For the fifth time: Assuming your version of 9/11 is correct, and the current administration are a bunch of heartless mass murderers, could you please tell me what we as Americans should do about this?

(This is sort of fun in a monotonous kind of way...)

[NobbyNobbs]

Please check this post:http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=1565506&postcount=1169

Thanks for mentioning this Gravy. I was just about to post on it anyway. My one month long suspension, caused by asking what the rules were, was supposed to have ended 6 hours ago.

It may have, because the error message has changed. It now simply says "You do not have permission to view this board."


Unbelievable.

I know some people have talked about disabling cookies. Assume that I am computer illiterate. Is disabling cookies a difficult thing to do? I'd love to read the other forum again, or at least be able to see what people here are referencing when they link to it.

[Gravy]

here's a video of an interesting perspective givin by 2 foriegn intelligence agents. in it they cite the neo conservative document "Rebuilding America's Defenses", as well as a book entitled "The Grand Chessboard" written by Zbigniew Brzezinksi who was the National Secretary Advisor to Carter and who worked with Regan in an intelligence capacity. both are very interesting pieces of evidence that give much credence to the possibility of a governmental conspiracy in which 9/11 was used as a catalyst to gain popular support for thier foriegn adjenda.

video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8274552561914055825

Watched it. Xraye, you're going to have to do much, much better than that unless you're just here, like geggy, to express your opinions. This video is your "evidence?"

Most of the video is British MP Michael Meacher speaking. He's not a "foreign intelligence agent." Meacher is a former Environment Minister, and is now a Labour MP.

Nearly all of the video is statements of conjecture. They do make a few valid points about intelligence lapses. THose same points are addressed in the 9/11 Commisison Report.

Meacher claims to have read that report. But get this:
Meacher:
The first hijack happened at the latest at about 8:20. For the next hour and forty minutes, no aircraft was put into the air, even though there was at the U.S. Andrews Air Force Base, 10 miles from WAshington, D.C.,...a whole squadron of top-level fighter planes.

No planes were flown in from other air bases, even though at top speed, they were certainly within range. Why did that happen?

...(about tthe lack of fighter response) why, on this single day, did that not happen?

...(about tthe lack of fighter response) why did that not happen on that very important day? That question has never been answered.

Narrator:
After the hijacking it took 100 minutes for the first fighter aircraft to take off. Remarkable facts.
Xraye, can you point out the errors here?

In an interview with Andrew Harvey (not in your video):
Andrew Harvey: You do quote that, you suggest that the American forces stood by while that attack took place.

Meacher: I did not say that, it is absolutely not my view.

Xraye, you are welcome here. But if you persist in insulting our intelligence with stuff like this, it's going to turn out for you like it has for geggy.

[Shrinker]

Sure, retort yourself to mocken and insulting because it's easier for you to deal rather than opening up to the painful idea that the bush admin may have had a hand in the attacks.

Some people don't find that painful at all. A large proportion of the folks you are debating with aren't even American. If Bush did it for power and money then it would be quite a relief for the non US citizens worried about Al Qaeda's next attack. Would it not?

[Gravy]

Thanks for mentioning this Gravy. I was just about to post on it anyway. My one month long suspension, caused by asking what the rules were, was supposed to have ended 6 hours ago.

It may have, because the error message has changed. It now simply says "You do not have permission to view this board."


Unbelievable.

I know some people have talked about disabling cookies. Assume that I am computer illiterate. Is disabling cookies a difficult thing to do? I'd love to read the other forum again, or at least be able to see what people here are referencing when they link to it.

You mean that you can't view the site at all? That doesn't sound right. I'm banned but I can view the site. If there's a cookie issue, your web browser's help menu will tell you how to reset cookies. Cookie settings usually range from "Never ask" (accept all cookies) to "Never accept," (which you don't want).

p.s. I hear that mentioning my critique is a bannable offense there, so watch it!

[Gravy]

Sure, retort yourself to mocken and insulting because it's easier for you to deal rather than opening up to the painful idea that the bush admin may have had a hand in the attacks.
I'm open to the idea that Bush may have had a hand in the attacks. Please provide, in your 156th post, any evidence that supports it.

[Stellafane]

Some people don't find that painful at all. A large proportion of the folks you are debating with aren't even American. If Bush did it for power and money then it would be quite a relief for the non US citizens worried about Al Qaeda's next attack. Would it not?

Oh man, wouldn't it be great if it really were Bush? Then we could get rid of his sorry butt and live without worrying about further attacks. And all those "fake" terrorists, you know, the ones that have been vowing to destroy us for decades, we could just laugh and say "C'mon guys, we know you're just kidding. We got the real menace locked up!" And under the wise and benevolent rule of President Avery, America would be without fear, a land of peace and plenty, a sunny place where children play and birds sing and the lion lays down with the lamb and unicorns frolic in the meadow.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Still looking for some illumination geggyster.

Please, fill the dry sponge of my brain with the fonte of your knowledge.

[Dr Adequate]

physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html
Here's a research paper by Professor Steven E Jones, a physics professor That's not a "research paper", that's a website. Research papers are submitted to research journals, where they undergo peer review.

Professor Jones could do with a little peer review, especially as he's often talking about areas outside of his own expertise.

When he does talk about physics he is profoundly disappointing :

... with the upper part falling nearly as rapidly as ejected debris which provide free-fall references (http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/proofs/speed.html; Griffin, 2004, chapter 2). Where is the delay that must be expected due to conservation of momentum – one of the foundational Laws of Physics? That is, as upper-falling floors strike lower floors – and intact steel support columns – the fall must be significantly impeded by the impacted mass. Well Professor Jones --- may I call you "Jonesy"? --- there are indeed laws of physics. And they are a set of quantitive equations. And it is, stop me if I'm wrong, YOUR JOB, TRADE, AND PROFESSION TO APPLY THEM TO PHYSICAL SITUATIONS. So why don't you?

He admits that the building is not in fact falling at free-fall acceleration. So the next step would be to find out what the acceleration is, and so how much resistance the collapse met with.

It's his JOB to do stuff like that. But he hasn't. This is why this is not, and never will be, a "research paper". Scientists have a very expressive phrase for an argument in this stage of development. They call it "handwaving".

[geggy]

How is debunking your hypothesis an insult to your intelligence, gravy?

[Belz...]

Thank god for your presence, xraye. I've already pointed out several things that you've posted above

All of which have been debunked abundantly, truth be told.

such as evidence of squibs in the collapsing of the towers, the wtc7 collapsing showed penthouse dropped first before everything else pointed out a characteristic of controlled demo,

Since you've been, unsurprinsingly but also dishonestly, unable to tell us what differences there should be between controlled and un-controlled demolitions, this statement is actually pretty hilarious.

but many have refused to believe it.

Sorry, I'm not a club-man, myself. I stand up for evidence and truth, not my own personal fancies.

My wife is a psycho therapist and a friend is working on obtaining phd in psychology, we've all had interesting discussions regarding sept 11 and the psychological impact that it had on everyone.

She's a psy, now ? Hopefully she won't get into multiple-personality disorders or blocked-out memories.

[Belz...]

Sure, retort yourself to mocken and insulting because it's easier for you to deal rather than opening up to the painful idea that the bush admin may have had a hand in the attacks.

Geggy. You're an idiot. You've been posting here for, what, weeks ? Uttering useless pieces of "evidence", and have been shown, constantly, to be wrong. People are a little tired of you, I guess. And now that they stoop to insults you're offended ?

Get a brain.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

How is debunking your hypothesis an insult to your intelligence, gravy?

What hypothesis has Gravy posited?

[Gravy]

How is debunking your hypothesis an insult to your intelligence, gravy?
Please explain what has been "debunked"

ETA: While you're at it, please provide the evidence that Bush had a hand in 9/11, and please answer this question: have you read my critique of "Loose Change," or not?

[Dr Adequate]

How is debunking your hypothesis an insult to your intelligence, gravy? How does citing Michael Meacher as a "foreign intelligence agent" debunk any hypothesis of gravy's? It debunks nothing. It has itself been debunked. Meacher is not a "foreign intelligence agent". He's a former lecturer in social administration and an MP.

How often are you going to declare victory without reference to the facts?

[kookbreaker]

physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html
Here's a research paper by Professor Steven E Jones, a physics professor at Brigham Young University, which brings to light some very interesting evidence regarding molten steel found at ground zero, more info on the demolition squibs, the phenomena of WTC 7, and what appears to be cordite dripping from one of the towers before it falls.


As has been pointed out, Jones work is not a paper, it is not peer reviewed. It has been rejected by the Structural Engineers at his own University. Even without that, Jones' work is ludicrous. He misuses the 2nd law of thermodynamics very badly, he declares a piece of what is obviously reenforced concrete to be a lump of cooled molten steel. Other silliness reigns in Jonestown.


Nobody has of yet been able to find another steel reinforced skyscraper that colllapsed because of a fire. As you can see here: portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/02/310898.shtml
there are many buildings in which fires have raged far longer and hotter than in the WTC towers and have stood firm.


All of the fires mentioned had major differences:

1) Firefighting efforts. The Meridian in Philly never had water ceasing to be pumped on it from the moment the Fire Department arrived. By comparison, the WTC towers were a struggle and the main fire was probably never reached.

2) Different structure design. The Meridian and Hilton were concrete with steel reenforcement not a purely steel structure. The Hilton was a combination of the two.

3) Actual failure. The Meridian building was abandoned for internal firefighting due to fears of internal collapse. Picture of the insides taken a few days later show the support beams sagging very badly. Despite the fact that the fire was about midway up the building, the building was ordered entirely destroyed due to damage. It was a loss. The Hilton's steel structure portion did collapse.


As a matter of fact the WTC itself had an inferno within it that lasted for 3 hours in the 1970's, and that was before they added fireproofing technology like sprinklers, elevator shaft dampers, and electrical system fireproofing.


The WTC already had some fireproofing, and the fire was nowhere near 'inferno' levels. The fire was electrical in nature and never reached the flammable office materials.


You may say that it was a combination of the impact of the jet and the fire that caused the collapse, the fire not melting the steel but weekening it enouph for it to not be able to support the building. However, even if that where true (which experts in "Scholars for 9/11 Truth" seem not to think), the steal beams below the fire would retain their structural integrety and would remain standing or would only bend, causing the building to fall sideways rather than straight down. The reason you need demolitions to bring down a building like this is because you have to cut the steel beams into segments in order for the building to fall straight down.


This is simply not true. Structural Engineers and Failure Analysts reject the Scholars claims and they are in the position to know. You, and the 'scholars' have no concept of the amount of energy the falling mass had.


The fires in the trade center where actually dying down before the collapse, as indicated by black smoke coming from the towers.


Black smoke is not an indication of a dying fire. It is what is being burned.


Here there's a recording of a fire fighter who reached the 78th floor of the second tower and seemed to think that the fire would be easy to contain.
wnyc.org/news/articles/7869


Too bad the main fires were about 3-5 floors above where he was talking about

http://911myths.com/html/no_wtc2_inferno_.html


Most of the evidence I've presented is contained within the Loose Change 2 video.
video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5137581991288263801&q=loose+change


Its very rude to blunder into a thread without having at least read part of it. Loose Change is a bad joke, even your beloved 'Scholars' aren't too fond of it. Gravy's work has throughly debunked the LC nonsense.

[CurtC]

Shrinker, I'm surprised that you don't feel welcome to post in the other forum. What gives you that impression?I'm another one who was suspended from the LC forum. When posting there, I was careful to be always sincere and polite. TheQuest suspended me for 60 days because they don't have time for answering questions from people who don't "get it." They apparently have something very important coming up in the next 60 days.

Xraye, I also want to extend a welcome to you. The members at this forum generally conduct themselves in a mature manner, but we do actually require evidence to accept extraordinary claims. I hope you have good evidence, and not just a bunch of innuendo.

You've brought up a lot of points in your first post, so I think it's going to be a little messy and hard to follow here with all the point-specific replies, but we can handle it if you can.

[geggy]

Hi geggy. For the fifth time: Assuming your version of 9/11 is correct, and the current administration are a bunch of heartless mass murderers, could you please tell me what we as Americans should do about this?

(This is sort of fun in a monotonous kind of way...)

I cant really answer that question for you. I'm not going to force you to do anything because thats for you to decide. I'm here on my own merit after coming to a conclusion that the Bush admin may have had a hand in the attacks. How much of an impact did sept 11 have on your personally and emotionally? How would you feel if you find out you were duped into believing that al-Qaeda were the responsible ones and the fact the bush admin toyed with your mental state at the time? If that doesn't stir up anger inside you, then I dont know what will...


In my vision, it would be great if everyone put aside their differences, whether youre a liberal, conservative, democrat, republican, independant, whatever and come together as one because its all about humanity fighting (peacefully) against the violence and treachery toward humanity that poses great danger to the global civilization.

Belz...i cant blame you for not being able to trust me because we dont know each other. Its easier for me to point out the anomalies with the people i've known most part of my life because they know who i am and they can trust me. They know I have the tendency to mock crazy conspiracy theories such as UFO, elvis, bigfoot etc, but thats most likely not the case with sept 11. I'm sorry you cant see the obviousness of the coverups surrounding sept 11 and being indifferent to finding out the real truth. Really its not my problem.

[DavidJames]

I'm here on my own merit after coming to a conclusion that the Bush admin may have had a hand in the attacks. Please, can you just give us a simple list of the evidence you've evaluated to come to this conclusion. So far, you haven't provided any in your posts here. Yes, you don't like the way Bush reacted on that morning and you've tried to complain about the actions of NORAD and others, but those claims have been soundly refuted. So please, if you wouldn't mind.

[Hastur]

It's not a question of trust, geggy, it's a question of proof. So far, you have provided nothing that doesn't have a more rational explanation. Where's your evidence of a controlled demolition that doesn't look like one? How would it work? Could it EVEN work? How can the difference be determined?

[Gravy]

The WTC already had some fireproofing, and the fire was nowhere near 'inferno' levels. The fire was electrical in nature and never reached the flammable office materials.
Quick correction here. The 1975 fire in WTC 1 was a serious fire that did damage a good deal of nonstructural items on the 11th floor. However, it was fought the entire time, first by WTC personnel and then by the NYFD, who extinguished it. i was a 3-alarm fire, as opposed to a 12-alarm. geggy has repeatedly claimed that it spread from the 9th to the 19th floor. It did not. Beyond the 11th floor it was restricted to a concrete-enclosed cable shaft. And, of course, the building was not severely damaged by a 100-ton airliner flying at 400-500 mph.

[kookbreaker]

Thanks for the correction, Gravy.

An interesting mental exercise as well is to consider what would have happened had this inferno started in a 1975 office, as opposed to a 2001 office.

Doesn't sound like much of a difference? Think about it. Most objects in the office today are particle board and plastic, paper abounds everywhere since everyone has a printer, a fax and copiers can duplicate a 100 page printout in mere seconds.

By comparison, most of the 1975 furniture is mostly (ugly) metal with litle particle boarding, there are no plastic computers and peripherals, typewriters would be mostly metal, nobody keeps a cardboard box in their office with reams of paper for their printer. Carpeting might not even be considered a necessity for office spaces at this time., etc. etc.

It doesn't seem like a big thing, but when you consider that it was mostly the flammable office materials that caused the heat weakening...

[Gravy]

IBelz...i cant blame you for not being able to trust me because we dont know each other.
geggy, I don't speak for Belz, but I'll tell you why I don't trust you. In fact i tell you this every day: because you are wrong on virtually every point of "fact" that you bring up.

Remember a while back when you said to me "Trust me. This is no b.s." and I showed you that you were not to be trusted because your statement was total b.s.?

Every day I ask you why you are behaving this way, and why you refuse to confront your mistakes and learn from them. And every day you start anew with a fresh stupid statement.

Will you now please answer these questions?

1) What was debunked in Xraye's post I referred to?

2) Do you have any evidence at all that George Bush was complicit in planning or executing the terrorist attacks of 9/11, or is that just a belief of yours?

3) Why do you refuse to learn from your mistakes?

[Pardalis]

I cant really answer that question for you. I'm not going to force you to do anything because thats for you to decide. I'm here on my own merit after coming to a conclusion that the Bush admin may have had a hand in the attacks. How much of an impact did sept 11 have on your personally and emotionally? How would you feel if you find out you were duped into believing that al-Qaeda were the responsible ones and the fact the bush admin toyed with your mental state at the time? If that doesn't stir up anger inside you, then I dont know what will...


In my vision, it would be great if everyone put aside their differences, whether youre a liberal, conservative, democrat, republican, independant, whatever and come together as one because its all about humanity fighting (peacefully) against the violence and treachery toward humanity that poses great danger to the global civilization.


What a load of crap! I think your wife should read this post without knowing who wrote it, she'll immediately diagnose the author of suffering with accute apophenia, with hints of paranoid dillusion.

Can you answer my previous question geg? How a controlled demolition, that is made to look like a collapse from the top, is supposed to work exactly?

edited for spelling

[pgwenthold]

I still wonder, geggy, what was your old CT buddies' response when you informed them that the picture you tried to use to show molten steel from the fire was actually due to a cutting torch (shown on video)?

[FFed]

The fires in the trade center where actually dying down before the collapse, as indicated by black smoke coming from the towers.


Black smoke is not an indication of a dying fire. It is what is being burned.




Not sure if this has been mentioned before, but dark smoke can also be an indication of the heat of the fire. At least in forest fires. When I take forest fire reports from pilots, one of the things I need to know is the colour of the smoke. In forest fires, dark smoke mostly indicates high heat.

[juryjone]

In my vision, it would be great if everyone put aside their differences, whether youre a liberal, conservative, democrat, republican, independant, whatever and come together as one to agree with me, regardless of my lack of evidence.

Fixed your quote for you, geggy. Because the only way everyone is going to come together is if we all become equally deluded, right?

[Gravy]

I still wonder, geggy, what was your old CT buddies' response when you informed them that the picture you tried to use to show molten steel from the fire was actually due to a cutting torch (shown on video)?
Happy 4,000th, pgwenthold! Now drop and give us 4,000.

[Pardalis]

How much of an impact did sept 11 have on your personally and emotionally?

It seems it has disturbed YOU to the point of denial. I think that's the problem with you Conspirationnists, you haven't learned to cope with 9/11 yet, you still live in the aftermath of the trauma. That's why you endlessly try to make out theories and see anomalies everywhere. My advice, DEAL WITH IT.

How would you feel if you find out you were duped into believing that al-Qaeda were the responsible ones and the fact the bush admin toyed with your mental state at the time?

Not your frontal lobe theory again! Please, you really freak me out when you say things like that!

In my vision,

That seems about right.

it would be great if everyone put aside their differences, whether youre a liberal, conservative, democrat, republican, independant, whatever and come together as one because its all about humanity fighting (peacefully) against the violence and treachery toward humanity that poses great danger to the global civilization.

What about Al Qaida? Do you completely deny their existence?

I'm sorry you cant see the obviousness of the coverups surrounding sept 11 and being indifferent to finding out the real truth. Really its not my problem.

I think IT IS your problem. YOU have to prove that there is a conspiracy. So far you haven't done that.

[Stellafane]

I cant really answer that question for you. I'm not going to force you to do anything because thats for you to decide. I'm here on my own merit after coming to a conclusion that the Bush admin may have had a hand in the attacks. How much of an impact did sept 11 have on your personally and emotionally? How would you feel if you find out you were duped into believing that al-Qaeda were the responsible ones and the fact the bush admin toyed with your mental state at the time? If that doesn't stir up anger inside you, then I dont know what will...

In my vision, it would be great if everyone put aside their differences, whether youre a liberal, conservative, democrat, republican, independant, whatever and come together as one because its all about humanity fighting (peacefully) against the violence and treachery toward humanity that poses great danger to the global civilization....

Hi geggy. Thank you for your reply to my question. I would say "answer," but of course you didn't supply one, as I suspect you're fully aware. Your response to the 9/11 atrocities, which you claim to believe are the work of Bush and his henchmen, apparently is to be "here on my own merit." But that isn't really doing anything, is it? Certainly you're not suggesting that if the American people come to realize that they're led by a mass murderer, the appropriate response is to come here or some other online forum and talk about it? That's sure not what I would do, if I believed what you do. And after all the talking is done, then what? Talk some more? Close our eyes and hope Bush goes away? What, exactly? You must have at least the vague outline of some plan or goal, otherwise everything you're doing is a massive, masturbatory waste of time.

And although I agree that you have a truly lovely vision about people of all stripes and persuasions coming "together as one," a hope that I too fervently share, that's a rather vague course of action, wouldn't you agree? How would you suggest we achieve this "coming together," especially under the current administration?

So let me phrase my question slightly more carefully: In your best-case scenario, what do you think would be the best thing we as Americans should do in response to our government murdering some 3,000 of our own innocent civilians? And please don't hide behind the "I already answered that" facade, because we both know you haven't.

[Pardalis]

My wife is a psycho therapist and a friend is working on obtaining phd in psychology, we've all had interesting discussions regarding sept 11 and the psychological impact that it had on everyone.

Was it during a session?

[chipmunk stew]

In my vision, it would be great if everyone put aside their differences, whether youre a liberal, conservative, democrat, republican, independant, whatever and come together as one because its all about humanity fighting (peacefully) against the violence and treachery toward humanity that poses great danger to the global civilization.How does clinging to and repeating false beliefs about the nature of this danger, despite being shown over and over again that the information you've based these beliefs on is wrong, further this goal?

Trying to pin 9/11 on Bush is not going to create peace, geggy. You're chasing phantoms, not confronting evil.

Why not get involved with a group that is actually actively promoting peace. I belong to a Unitarian Universalist church, and we're intensely focused on social justice, both locally and globally. We try to promote understanding by hosting interfaith events, where church and community members gather with local Muslim groups to learn more about one another. You could join the ACLU or Amnesty International or Doctors Without Borders or Habitat for Humanity. You could join the effort to extract our military presence from the Middle East.

You could do SOMEthing, ANYthing much more powerful and effective than spreading CT nonsense. Even simply living your life as a peaceful man would be more effective. Spreading fear and paranoia and apocalyptic thinking moves us away from peace.

[Belz...]

I cant really answer that question for you. I'm not going to force you to do anything because thats for you to decide. I'm here on my own merit after coming to a conclusion that the Bush admin may have had a hand in the attacks.

I repeat, for the Xth time: if your conspiracy/silencing theory is true, how can you still be alive ?

In my vision, it would be great if everyone put aside their differences, whether youre a liberal, conservative, democrat, republican, independant, whatever and come together as one because its all about humanity fighting (peacefully) against the violence and treachery toward humanity that poses great danger to the global civilization.

So you have, like, a political agenda now ?

They know I have the tendency to mock crazy conspiracy theories such as UFO, elvis, bigfoot etc, but thats most likely not the case with sept 11.

Why not ? What makes those other CTs less plausible ?

I'm sorry you cant see the obviousness of the coverups surrounding sept 11 and being indifferent to finding out the real truth.

And I'm sorry you beat your wife. We can go on for days inventing intentions for one another, but that doesn't bring us anywhere. If the coverup is that "obvious", then how can you consider it a coverup ? If it's that "obvious", then why do you have such a hard time finding evidence for it ?

You've been pretty dishonest in your discussions, here, Geggy. The most obvious one, for me, is when you switched to saying that the WTC collapse looked like a controlled demolition, to saying it DOESN'T look like one, but BECAUSE it was made in a controlled demolition manner in order to not LOOK like one, which is both circular and laughable. You'll say anything that fits your world-view, no matter what the evidence says, even if you make a complete fool out of yourself while doing so.

[Belz...]

Please, can you just give us a simple list of the evidence you've evaluated to come to this conclusion. So far, you haven't provided any in your posts here. Yes, you don't like the way Bush reacted on that morning and you've tried to complain about the actions of NORAD and others, but those claims have been soundly refuted. So please, if you wouldn't mind.

Even if they HADN'T been refuted, of course, they'd still be circumstancial.

[Stellafane]

...In my vision, it would be great if everyone put aside their differences, whether youre a liberal, conservative, democrat, republican, independant, whatever and come together as one because its all about humanity fighting (peacefully) against the violence and treachery toward humanity that poses great danger to the global civilization...

In thinking more about this statement, I can't help but be struck by a certain historical parallel that occurred in the very town you live, geggy. A long time ago, the citizens there had a vision of America very similar to yours. They saw this country as a land of peace and prosperity, where people could be happy and free. Their concept of "free" would probably be rather narrow by modern standards -- it basically meant "free to think like we do" -- but in spirit, their dreams and hopes were much the same as ours. And they wanted to ensure that no evil intruded on this vision. But of course, there are no real utopias. And in that place long ago, bad things kept happening -- people got sick, crops failed, the weather turned harsh and bitter. So folks were constantly wondering why these things should happen to them.

Then one day a group of adolecents decided to accuse a few individuals in their town of being witches. They would later admit that they did it "for sport," it was basically a game that got out of hand. Latter-day psychological analysis has suggested that these young people were basically feeling irrelevant and repressed, so they did this to seek attention. In any case, a few adult extremists took the kids seriously. Many others in town went along with the extremists. Those that didn't often got accused of being witches themselves. In the end, a lot of perfectly innocent people got strung up by their necks and hanged. One guy wasn't so lucky; they piled rocks on top of him until he suffocated.

Through it all, the people of the town insisted they were only serving their holy vision of America, by ridding the land of evil. A lot of them probably even believed it. But more recent speculation has noted that most of the accused came from the same part of town, and tended to be the more succesful and prosperous members of the community. So politics may also have had a lot to do with it.

So, does any of this sound familiar geggy? Do you think the lessons learned from the Salem witch hunts might be instructive nowadays? Or are we just doomed to repeat history over and over again?

[Regnad Kcin]

Sure, retort yourself [sic] to mocken [sic] and insulting because it's easier for you to deal [sic] rather than opening up to the painful idea [sic] that the bush [sic] admin [sic] may have had a hand in the attacks.Except they didn't, my paranoid little friend. You see, conjecture is not evidence.

As for evidence you were asleep in class the day teacher was covering basic rules of English...

[Manny]

Not sure if this has been mentioned before, but dark smoke can also be an indication of the heat of the fire. At least in forest fires. When I take forest fire reports from pilots, one of the things I need to know is the colour of the smoke. In forest fires, dark smoke mostly indicates high heat.No, it had to be because the fire was oxygen starved. For evidence, just look at this recent warehouse fire in Brooklyn (http://www.gothamist.com/archives/2006/05/03/greenpoint_term.php). The smoke is black because Brooklyn air has almost no oxygen.

[dubfan]

Hey, I hate to go slightly OT and distract everyone from all the geggy-love, but I think this is going to be one to watch:

http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=3994

A 14-year old HS student is asked on a test who was responsible for 9/11. He answers "George Bush". The kid is sent to see a psychiatrist. Loosers get wind of the story; hilarity ensues.

[kookbreaker]

No, it had to be because the fire was oxygen starved. For evidence, just look at this recent warehouse fire in Brooklyn (http://www.gothamist.com/archives/2006/05/03/greenpoint_term.php). The smoke is black because Brooklyn air has almost no oxygen.

Its true! Air has less that 20% Oxygen. How can you possibly expect any fires to happen that way. Obviously, no fires could ever burn anywhere in air.

</LC mode>

[Regnad Kcin]

Thank god for your presence, xraye. I've already pointed out several things that you've posted above......Which have been addressed countless times before.

...such as evidence of squibs in the collapsing of the towers...But let's do it again, shall we?

There is no "evidence of squibs in the collapsing of the towers." All there is is a faint visual similarity (at one or two physical points). You know, the same way rubbing alcohol looks like water, but you wouldn't want to drink an ice-cold glass of the stuff.

Actual evidence of squibs would be: One or more squibs, or their residual remains, recovered from the wreckage of the towers Testimony of one of the dozens of technicians necessary for procuring, transporting, wiring, and detonating the thousands necessary for the task Presence of related wiring and peripheral components Wiring diagrams and plans, either hard copies or e-mailsY'know...evidence!

A related, circumstantial trail of the wtc7 collapsing showed penthouse dropped first before everything else pointed out a characteristic of controlled demo...Mmm, delicious rubbing alcohol.

PNAC's agenda, etc, but many have refused to believe it.So refreshing on a hot afternoon!

So maybe you'll do a better job of addressing the anomalies surround sept 11 than I have in this thread so ya can give me some breathing room for me to discuss the things I know more about.The "things [you] know more about?" So, what do you do for a living?

My wife is a psycho therapist...No, no... What do you do for a living?

...and a friend is working on obtaining phd in psychology, we've all had interesting discussions regarding sept 11 and the psychological impact that it had on everyone. Please do stick around.That the events of the day had a "psychological impact...on everyone" does not in any way serve to further your premise.

[chipmunk stew]

Gravy, your work is making the rounds.
This thread was started today at Loose Change:
a complete LC2 debunk (http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=3983)
It has a link to your work that points to two mirror sites in Germany.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Here's a quote while the two of them are being interviewed by Eric Hufschmid, who is both a moon hoaxer, a 9/11 CT, AND a Holocaust denier:

Isn't that like the Triple Crown of ignorance or something?

If you reach that level of idiocy, will the other lesser mental midgets look up to you?

Expiring minds wanna know!

[chipmunk stew]

Gravy, your work is making the rounds.
This thread was started today at Loose Change:
a complete LC2 debunk (http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=3983)
It has a link to your work that points to two mirror sites in Germany.dubfan, I see you've been posting on this thread. Would you mind letting "Terrorcell"Has anyone downloading this?


If so please post the contents (I don't trust d/l'ing a 911 debunk claim) and then I'll be more than happy to debunk it.know that there's an html version of Gravy's work? (It's in my sig)

[Regnad Kcin]

Gravy, your work is making the rounds.
This thread was started today at Loose Change:
a complete LC2 debunk (http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=3983)
It has a link to your work that points to two mirror sites in Germany.Reading stuff like that actually makes me physically weary. Strange.

I only pop in to those threads on the recommendation of posters here. I wonder, how is it that dubfan has not been banned? Have they "loosened" (snort) their hold a bit as of late?

ETA:

Gravy, someone on that thread criticized your "10 takeoffs and 13 landings" comment (and then said he/she went no further with your work because of it) due to your ignorance of touch-and-go practice. That may be something to consider.

[Pardalis]

WOW, how can you keep your cool with such garbage from the LC forum, Dubfan? You are terrific!

[dubfan]

dubfan, I see you've been posting on this thread. Would you mind letting "Terrorcell"know that there's an html version of Gravy's work? (It's in my sig)

Done.

[aggle-rithm]

Sure, retort yourself to mocken and insulting because it's easier for you to deal rather than opening up to the painful idea that the bush admin may have had a hand in the attacks.

There's nothing painful about that idea at all. It's simply stupid.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Gravy, your work is making the rounds.
This thread was started today at Loose Change:
a complete LC2 debunk (http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=3983)
It has a link to your work that points to two mirror sites in Germany.

So, they're saying that even if everything in Loose Chain (v1 or v2) is debunked, as long as it makes people ask questions, it's a good piece of work? :jaw-dropp

Is it physically painful to be that mind-numbingly stupid?

[Gravy]

No, it had to be because the fire was oxygen starved. For evidence, just look at this recent warehouse fire in Brooklyn (http://www.gothamist.com/archives/2006/05/03/greenpoint_term.php). The smoke is black because Brooklyn air has almost no oxygen.
So THAT's why I feel dizzy when I read these CT claims!

[aggle-rithm]

My wife is a psycho therapist and a friend is working on obtaining phd in psychology, we've all had interesting discussions regarding sept 11 and the psychological impact that it had on everyone. Please do stick around.

Is it possible that geggy is completely delusional, and his "wife" and "friend" are actually psych students who are interviewing him for a study on abnormal psychology?

Have I been watching too many "Twilight Zone" episodes?

Am I here to prove anything, or just to ask questions? ;)

[aggle-rithm]

Is it physically painful to be that mind-numbingly stupid?


Yes! The only reason they think at all is because it feels so good when they stop (which they apparently do quite often).

[Gravy]

Gravy, your work is making the rounds.
This thread was started today at Loose Change:
a complete LC2 debunk (http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=3983)
It has a link to your work that points to two mirror sites in Germany.
Cool! I've been told by various people hosting it that it's been downloaded several hundred times. It's also good to know that the LC forum isn't banning people who link to it. You've been a big help in getting the word, out, Chipmunk.

[DavidJames]

geggy or Xraye:

Are you aware of anyone who is refuting the official version of the events who have based their refutation on anything other then watching the events on video?

1. Have any of them been directly involved in the investigation?
2. Have any of them directly analyzed the debris or other evidence?
3. Have any of them interviewed (and have supporting documentation of the interview), any of those involved with the official investigation?

[Gravy]

dubfan, I see you've been posting on this thread. Would you mind letting "Terrorcell"know that there's an html version of Gravy's work? (It's in my sig)
Hey, that's nice! Kept most of the formatting, too. Did you do that, Chipmunk, or is that CurtC's?

See, geggy, you can read it inline now, or you can download the indexed version. Facts are so close!

[chipmunk stew]

Done.Thanks.

He took the coward's way out: http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=3983&view=findpost&p=4336201
Since I found a blatant lie right off the bat I'm not even going to bother......




The Lie :

QUOTE Good move. But the suggestion that [Lyman Lemnitzer] was removed for submitting this plan is misleading. It certainly didn't endear him to McNamara and Kennedy, though, and when his term ran out he was transferred to Europe to become the head of NATO.



The Truth :


QUOTE At the request of President-elect John F. Kennedy, McNamara agreed to serve as Secretary of Defense of the United States, a position he held from 1961 until 1968. He became president of the World Bank Group of Institutions in April of 1968, retiring in 1981.



http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/McNamara/mcnamarabio.html (http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/McNamara/mcnamarabio.html)



I would suspect the whole thing is full of similar lies and I'm not wasting my time on proving so if one can be found immediately.Seems his reading comprehension skills are lacking, too. What his quote about McNamara has to do with Lyman Lemnitzer is beyond me.

dubfan, you're doing so well over there. Would you mind setting him straight? And remind him of his bold statement that he'd "be more than happy to debunk it"?

Much obliged.

[Dave_46]

I'm a bit late with some of this.

Fireproofing. Please do not use this word. The correct term is fire protection. Nothing can be fire proofed, but it can be protected so that it survives for a limited period in a fire. The use of fireproof implies that it will last indefinately. It wont.

Smoke colour. This can be affected by the oxygen level, but is more likely in a large fire to be influenced by the material burning. We had a large (enormouse) fire a an oil depot north of London in December. There was a pall of black smoke extending into France. There was plenty of access for oxygen in that fire.

Dave

[chipmunk stew]

Hey, that's nice! Kept most of the formatting, too. Did you do that, Chipmunk, or is that CurtC's?That's all CurtC.

[Belz...]

Hey, I hate to go slightly OT and distract everyone from all the geggy-love, but I think this is going to be one to watch:

http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=3994

A 14-year old HS student is asked on a test who was responsible for 9/11. He answers "George Bush". The kid is sent to see a psychiatrist. Loosers get wind of the story; hilarity ensues.

Human idiocy knows no bounds, I guess.

[Gravy]

Gravy, someone on that thread criticized your "10 takeoffs and 13 landings" comment (and then said he/she went no further with your work because of it) due to your ignorance of touch-and-go practice. That may be something to consider.
Fair enough. That was meant to be a humorous comment. It started out as a bowling analogy. It certainly does invalidate the rest of the document.

[Gravy]

So, they're saying that even if everything in Loose Chain (v1 or v2) is debunked, as long as it makes people ask questions, it's a good piece of work? :jaw-dropp

Is it physically painful to be that mind-numbingly stupid?
See, Arkan, "Loose Change" has made you ask a question!

[NobbyNobbs]

You mean that you can't view the site at all? That doesn't sound right. I'm banned but I can view the site. If there's a cookie issue, your web browser's help menu will tell you how to reset cookies. Cookie settings usually range from "Never ask" (accept all cookies) to "Never accept," (which you don't want).

p.s. I hear that mentioning my critique is a bannable offense there, so watch it!

Not at all. I can get to invisionfree, directory and all. It's when I try to go to the LC forum that I get the above message. Since I was banned, I haven't even be able to read what others have written there. Frustrating, but very telling.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Well the United 93 movie forums have been taken down... again!

But I've managed to make myself somewhat infamous among the whackjobs with my "Death to Dylan" post that has been copied and pasted to the LC forums: http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=3962

Do I get a cookie or something for getting a post onto the LC boards without actually signing up?

Edit: w00t! I can post links now! Where do I go to post links to girl/girl pr0n?

Edit 2: Crap! I forgot about the "good mormon boy" thing, where do I go to post links to pictures of carebears?

[Gravy]

dubfan, you're doing so well over there. Would you mind setting him straight? And remind him of his bold statement that he'd "be more than happy to debunk it"?

Much obliged.
Good Lord!
I forgot to include my disclaimer on the critique:Warning, contains facts, logic and English grammar. May not be suitable for idjits.



edited to indicate my astonishment that people can so willingly display their idjitcy in public.

[kookbreaker]

Ugh. I hate the vapid Sarlac of stupidity that is the Loose Change forums. But its good to see Dubfan doing well there, and that they all seem to be defending LC by saying Gravy's document is 'full of lies'. Well that proves it then!

[kookbreaker]

Edit 2: Crap! I forgot about the "good mormon boy" thing, where do I go to post links to pictures of carebears?

Use kittens. They are much more palatable.

[Shrinker]

Fair enough. That was meant to be a humorous comment. It started out as a bowling analogy. It certainly does invalidate the rest of the document.
What's wrong with making the 10/13 comments? Gravy, what you said (both v1 and v2) is hilarious. It makes me chuckle to myself everytime I think of it. Have the loosers got come kind of justification for it now?

[Pardalis]

Ugh. I hate the vapid Sarlac of stupidity that is the Loose Change forums. But its good to see Dubfan doing well there, and that they all seem to be defending LC by saying Gravy's document is 'full of lies'. Well that proves it then!

Man, if my english was any better I'd like to go over there and give him a hand.

It's funny how our friend Roxdog is accusing Dubfan of asserting motives behind Jones' university, and yet they all make alot of assertions about Bush's politics and motives.

[CurtC]

Gravy, someone on that thread criticized your "10 takeoffs and 13 landings" comment (and then said he/she went no further with your work because of it) due to your ignorance of touch-and-go practice. That may be something to consider.Consider? What's wrong with the comment? I used to fly planes, way back in the '70s, but even way back then we had touch-and-go practice. If you count the "touch" as a landing, you'd have to count the "go" as a takeoff!

[Manny]

Fireproofing. Please do not use this word. The correct term is fire protection. Nothing can be fire proofed, but it can be protected so that it survives for a limited period in a fire. The use of fireproof implies that it will last indefinately. It wont.Which is actually probative regarding the '75 fire. In that fire, the gypsum wallboard began intact. There would have been 1-hour rated walls including appropriate wallboard in most places and 2-hour rated walls in others (per NYC fire code1). There is no such thing as an "aircraft collision-rated" wall. On 9-11 one can reasonably posit that at least some of the wallboard would have been torn away. The same would be true of the ceiling systems.



1: In fact the Port Authority was exempt from the New York City Fire Code. That said, I find it hard to believe that they wouldn't enforce its basic elements of compartmentalization, which are simply restatements of industry standards.

[chipmunk stew]

Phew!
dubfan, Terrorcell's really got you up against the wall now! What ever will you do!
http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=3983&view=findpost&p=4338184