View Full Version : Frequently Stupid Theories - First Draft!
MarkyX
21st August 2006, 03:03 PM
http://www.mysharefile.com/v/2761765/3_2_1_FST_D1.pdf
You know you love it.
And I would like comments on the ending bit (From Their Mouth), including the "special" image :)
It's 7 megs, due to numerous images.
EDIT: Slightly updated.
Arkan_Wolfshade
21st August 2006, 03:26 PM
I'll be doing a more focused read once I'm home from work, but one thing that did catch my eye so far is using Shanksville in the cell phone section. In the McClatchey video (linked on Killtown's blog) she says that reception around there is spotty. Perhaps we could overlay a timeline with the flightpaths, estimate about where the calls were made from cellphones and show different provider coverage maps for those areas.
kevin
21st August 2006, 03:38 PM
Looks good. I'm wondering if some people will want to print this out and hand out to others. If so it might be better to use different fonts and font styles rather than colors to delineate quotes, claims and debunking.
MarkyX
21st August 2006, 03:47 PM
Looks good. I'm wondering if some people will want to print this out and hand out to others. If so it might be better to use different fonts and font styles rather than colors to delineate quotes, claims and debunking.
Any suggestions for what fonts and format?
gumboot
21st August 2006, 03:49 PM
Any suggestions for what fonts and format?
Wingdings?
:D
-Andrew
defaultdotxbe
21st August 2006, 04:02 PM
Looks good. I'm wondering if some people will want to print this out and hand out to others. If so it might be better to use different fonts and font styles rather than colors to delineate quotes, claims and debunking.
at 74 pages its a pretty hefty printout, lol
anyway, just reading through, in your marvin bush section you might want to mention that he was chairman of the baord of directors, not exactly the same thing as "head of security" (stratasec did security in other buildings and i dont even think they were the only firm providing security at the WTC)
another thing to note might be the security contracts ending on 9/11, the contracts were ongoing and had no set "termination" date, but were terminated as of 9/11 due to there no longer being a building to secure
let me know if you want me to host this for you (or any of the sources, i see a few PDFs from mysharefile in there) PM me about it
Dog Town
21st August 2006, 04:06 PM
that he was chairman of the baord of directors
Was he chair,or just on the board?
defaultdotxbe
21st August 2006, 04:10 PM
Was he chair,or just on the board?
im pretty sure he was chair, but either he would have little to do with day-to-day operations at the WTC
MarkyX
21st August 2006, 04:12 PM
So was he head of the company in charge of security for WTC or not?
I was concerned about that part as well. I bring it up because THEY bring it up.
Dog Town
21st August 2006, 04:20 PM
I can find no where, that he was chair. Everything lists him as "a director" or "on the board" nothing like he ran the board! Director refers to "board of directors"!Hmmmm!
defaultdotxbe
21st August 2006, 04:23 PM
So was he head of the company in charge of security for WTC or not?
I was concerned about that part as well. I bring it up because THEY bring it up.
its very ahrd to get reliable information on stuff liek that because when you do a google search you just get flooded with CT sites, it looks like he was just on the board, not chair (and not CEO either, who i think would more traditionally be called the "head of the company")
Dog Town
21st August 2006, 04:26 PM
Default is right! You can argue, the only on the board, easy! If he was Chair it would state such somwhere. I can't find it?
Dog Town
21st August 2006, 04:33 PM
Also notice he was no longer even a share holder at the end of 2000. He did make a tiddy, (read:boat load),sum of cash off his stock! Whew it's good to be a Bushie!
defaultdotxbe
21st August 2006, 04:45 PM
you dont have to be a bush to make money in stocks, you just get criticized mopre for it
He was a director of the Sterling, Virginia company Securacom, also known as Stratesec, from 1993 until fiscal year 2000.
In 1996 Marvin Bush had 53,000 shares in the company's stock he bought at 52 cents a share. In 1997 the stock sold for $8.50 a share. Marvin Bush was no longer listed as a shareholder by the end of 2000.
he was on the board for 7 years, meaning he was probably responsible for most of the increase in the stock price, to me that just means he was a good businessman
if you want to make a conspiracy heres something to chew on:
The Securacom/Stratesec company was publicly traded and backed by an investment firm, the Kuwait-American Corporation.
In 2003 Marvin Bush's babysitter reportedly ran herself over with her own car in the Bush family driveway. The Police report of the accident can be found at: http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/marvinbush.htm. It took the Washington Post almost a week to publish the story.
although i think a saw CT site claiming she knew some "inside info" on stratsec/securacom
Earl The Tall
21st August 2006, 04:49 PM
I'm The God D**M Batman. I love it.
Dog Town
21st August 2006, 04:52 PM
you dont have to be a bush to make money in stocks, you just get criticized mopre for it
No doubt here! I saw the Kuw connect, can't believe Cters have not jumped all over that! One of the princes was on the board as well, most major stockholders are on boards! That is how the world works.
gumboot
21st August 2006, 04:53 PM
In 2003 Marvin Bush's babysitter reportedly ran herself over with her own car in the Bush family driveway. The Police report of the accident can be found at: http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/marvinbush.htm. It took the Washington Post almost a week to publish the story.
:eek:
She DIED!
That has to be a contender for a Darwin Award. Seriously.
-Andrew
ktesibios
21st August 2006, 05:20 PM
Well, it's not the ending, but I have a few items I noticed that might need attention:
Page 8: "Thermite Grenades are used by the infantry to disable enemy artillery pieces in a stealthy fashion, destroy items precious to the enemy, or destroy equipment that is about to belong to the enemy."
Seems awkward. Wouldn't it work better if "belong" were changed to "be captured by"?
page 25: "I fan[/b excavator or grapple".
Seems pretty obvious that should be "if an" (because it's in the middle of a sentence the "i" should not be capitalized.
page 65: "Continuing further, the Flight Data Recorder does not show any abnormalities with cabin pressure, engineers, fuel pressure, engine vibration, and other airline traits. These are not characteristics of a plane being shot down."
I'm not sure exactly what word you meant to use, but I'm reasonably certain that airplanes don't have engineers hooked up to the FDR.
page 51: "Marvin Bush was head of the security for the WTC
Yes he was, until June 2000. Marvin Bush was reelected to the Stratesec board of directors annually from 1993 through 1999. His last reelection was on May 25, 1999, for July 1999 to June 2000."
This isn't a language issue, I just plain disagree with the "yes he was" as applied to Bush being "head of security".
From the Wikipedia article about "board of directors":
The Board of Directors is a group of individuals that are elected by the shareholders of a corporation and empowered to carry out [b]certain tasks spelled out in the corporation's charter. These powers include appointing executive management, issuing additional shares and declaring dividends. In most public companies, the board will usually consist of both inside and outside directors. The inside directors have a significant fiduciary interest in the growth and well-being of the company. Outside directors may have a small stake in the company but are generally members for their business experience and contacts. In the case of an IPO, there may not be outside directors until near or immediately following the IPO.
(bolding mine)
Corporate boards don't generally take part in the day-to-day, hands-on running of the company- that's the point of their appointing executive management, to handle that kind of stuff- nor is it likely that a board member would have the kind of authority over the running of one particular contract that would be needed to arrange for some sort of nefarious @!#$% at the contract site (like, say, planting demolition charges or several tons of thermite), which is what the CTists want people to infer from the "head of security" claim.
I have no particular affection for the Bush brood, but calling Marvin "head of security at the WTC" really is stretching it. "Silver-spoon baby who lucked into a nice cushy gig" would fit the bill better.
edit: it might be worth including a link to this 911myths page (http://www.911myths.com/html/stratesec.html)
Dog Town
21st August 2006, 05:27 PM
Silver-spoon baby who lucked into a nice cushy gig" would fit the bill better.
I think you should replace "lucked", with "handed"! Otherwise,..... here here!
T.A.M.
21st August 2006, 05:33 PM
I'm gonna download it shortly.
A word re: Shanksville phonecalls...Use the Moussaoui Trial Evidence, visavie the flash animation of all the passengers for each flight, where they sat, and where their calls were made from. This is proof positive that the VAST MAJORITy of all the call swere made via Airfones, so likely "spotty" coverage wouldnt be an issue...
Dog Town
21st August 2006, 05:40 PM
This is proof positive that the VAST MAJORITy of all the call swere made via Airfones, so likely "spotty" coverage wouldnt be an issue...
I thought only the gentleman in the lav was a cell? One!
defaultdotxbe
21st August 2006, 05:45 PM
I think you should replace "lucked", with "handed"! Otherwise,..... here here!
the bush's get handed capital, but they are still good enough businessmen to make the money grow, as such i can have some amount of respect
now the kennedys, theres a silver-spoon clan if there ever was one
Brainster
21st August 2006, 05:49 PM
page 51: "Marvin Bush was head of the security for the WTC
Yes he was, until June 2000. Marvin Bush was reelected to the Stratesec board of directors annually from 1993 through 1999. His last reelection was on May 25, 1999, for July 1999 to June 2000."
Yes, I agree here--he was on the board of directors of a company that provided security. BTW, when I looked into this it appeared to be more electronic security than physical security, but it's been a couple of months since I really poked into it. Just checked the 9-11 Myths link and that's what Mike has as well.
defaultdotxbe
21st August 2006, 06:15 PM
BTW, when I looked into this it appeared to be more electronic security than physical security
yeah, now that i think about it "securacom" and "stratasec" really sound like rent-a-cops
kevin
21st August 2006, 06:53 PM
Any suggestions for what fonts and format?
Times for your comments. A sans serif font for theories (making them into section headers) and indents and italics for block quotes.
I dummied up the first couple of pages here:
http://www.box.net/public/static/akgslvjta1.pdf
I'm partial to the open source Bitstream Vera fonts so the theories are in 14 pt Vera Sans. Probably a bit too big, but this was just a quickie sample.
Somebody pointed out that 76 pages is a bit much for a printout and they're probably right, although people may print out specific pages (that might be another idea, to break up the theories into seperate pages and build a table of contents that links to actual content).
Black and white gets pretty boring when reading on screen.
MarkyX
21st August 2006, 06:57 PM
I'll probably make two versions for it.
Just don't try converting yet until I get this finalized. I'll admit though, just black and white IS boring.
Dog Town
21st August 2006, 07:01 PM
the bush's get handed capital, but they are still good enough businessmen to make the money grow, as such i can have some amount of respect
Hell look at that great Ranger deal, though! That was a set up to make Dubya sound. Period! That's how it works w/friends. No issue w/it. But I will call a spade, a spade. Joseph was a great crook, better than the business savy of the Bushies. He made no bones about it either!/derail.
kevin
21st August 2006, 08:58 PM
I'll probably make two versions for it.
Just don't try converting yet until I get this finalized. I'll admit though, just black and white IS boring.
I don't plan on doing any converting unless you don't mind giving up the original format, then I'd certainly be willing to help. Hacking PDF's for text modifications sucks.
Seems like there would be away to (abuse) cascading style-sheets to get versions that print nicely as well as display nicely.
Bronze Dog
22nd August 2006, 07:16 AM
I read a fair chunk of it yesterday. So far, so good. Do need to do a little proofreading, though. Caught a "talk" that got transmutated into a "take" along with a few other minor errors.
Arkan_Wolfshade
22nd August 2006, 07:30 AM
For whatever reason, my PC at home didn't recognize it as a valid .pdf, so I will be reading through it at work today. *whistles innocently*
Brainster
22nd August 2006, 10:23 AM
Great job! Here are some things I noted:
Page 1. "Not every Arab name is unique, just like there are many "Mark" and Michael in Western societies. Change to "there are many people named Mark, etc.
Page 2. Airfone is a proper noun as it is a tradmarked product (http://www22.verizon.com/airfone/).
Also, consider linking to the Flash presentation (http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/prosecution/flights/P200054.html) on the phone calls most commonly discussed--Beamer, Glick, Bingham Ong, etc; all were made from Airfones.
Page 3. Boxcutters were only mentioned by passengers on Flight 77. Other passengers mentioned knives in addition to the (apparently phony) bomb on Flight 93.
Page 4. Why The Towers Fell includes an interview with Robertson where he says that jet fuel was not included in their calculations of whether the WTC towers could withstand a 707.
I'll try to hit some more this afternoon.
defaultdotxbe
22nd August 2006, 12:39 PM
Page 3. Boxcutters were only mentioned by passengers on Flight 77. Other passengers mentioned knives in addition to the (apparently phony) bomb on Flight 93.
there was also a bomb mentioned via a phone call on either 175 or 11, not sure which
Page 4. Why The Towers Fell includes an interview with Robertson where he says that jet fuel was not included in their calculations of whether the WTC towers could withstand a 707.
i have a copy of this so i can pull the exact quote if need be
Mancman
22nd August 2006, 01:59 PM
I read it. It's good.
I would suggest throwing in a little more info (and a link) about the Thai factory fire you mentioned as 'collapsing in 20 minutes'.
kevin
22nd August 2006, 02:06 PM
i have a copy of this so i can pull the exact quote if need be
Transcripts with the quote are available online:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcripts/2907_wtc.html
chipmunk stew
22nd August 2006, 05:05 PM
http://www.mysharefile.com/v/2761765/3_2_1_FST_D1.pdf
You know you love it.
And I would like comments on the ending bit (From Their Mouth), including the "special" image :)
It's 7 megs, due to numerous images.
EDIT: Slightly updated.
Excellent work, Mark! I've only just browsed a bit of it looking for a claim that ought to be included--I look forward to looking at it more thoroughly.
The bit I was looking for was the gimmick they pull with the cropped close-up of Edna Cintron, saying "If the fire was hot enough to melt(/weaken) steel, then how was this woman able to survive?" This, more than almost any other claim, makes me want to throttle them.
Of course, if you zoom out, you see fires raging above and below her, and you can demonstrate just how big the fires were by scaling the building and the fires to Edna's height.
Edit: Error correction--on page 33 about the "fake Osama"--you say
The picture on the right is an example of poor directional lighting and low quality. However, if you watch the entire Osama Bin Laden tape, there are some moments where Osama Bin Laden looks more like the right photograph instead of the left.
I believe that should say "...looks more like the left photograph instead of the right."
MarkyX
22nd August 2006, 05:56 PM
Anyone got pictures of Edna Clinton from close up, to zooming out, etc
Because I deleted the one I used on 9/11 Deniers movie.
chipmunk stew
22nd August 2006, 06:15 PM
Anyone got pictures of Edna Cintron from close up, to zooming out, etc
Because I deleted the one I used on 9/11 Deniers movie.
These are pretty good.
http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?p=17648#17648
edit: Edna's name
edit2: To see this gimmick in action, look at this site and the deliberately deceptive cropping:
http://www.the7thfire.com/9-11/World_Trade_Center/no_towering_inferno.htm
gumboot
22nd August 2006, 07:20 PM
I read it. It's good.
I would suggest throwing in a little more info (and a link) about the Thai factory fire you mentioned as 'collapsing in 20 minutes'.
Case Study: The Kader Toy Factory Fire (http://www.ilo.org/encyclopedia/?doc&nd=857100058&nh=0&ssect=0)
-Andrew
MarkyX
23rd August 2006, 07:45 AM
I've added the toy factory.
So anything else? I corrected the errors listed here already, just need to know if there is more before I conver tthis to HTML and find a website for it (still up for it default?)
defaultdotxbe
23rd August 2006, 11:25 AM
(still up for it default?)
sure, we'll just have to figure out the best way to get it transferred since my mail client only likes 10mb or less (not sure how big it will end up being)
ktesibios
23rd August 2006, 03:17 PM
sure, we'll just have to figure out the best way to get it transferred since my mail client only likes 10mb or less (not sure how big it will end up being)
You could use my account on the ftp server one of the studios I work for operates. One of you uploads it and then the other downloads it. We have a full T1 connection there, so if you've got a fast connection transfers usually go pretty fast.
It's routinely used for transferring humongous ProTools sessions (like 2-3 Gb), so MarkyX's document shouldn't be any problem.
There are a few weirdities about what client software works with it, but nothing terribly difficult.
PM me if you're interested.
MarkyX
23rd August 2006, 07:09 PM
So I'm assuming everything is fine and I can release it?
© 2001-2009, James Randi Educational Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
vBulletin® v3.7.7, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.