Are the WTC collapse-initiation mechanisms being cloaked by MILDEC?

[Max Photon]

* * *


Greetings Everyone!


The purpose of this thread is to explore the questions:


Is it possible that the WTC collapse-initiation mechanisms are being cloaked by U.S. military-deception (MILDEC)?

How would MILDEC be undertaken, and sustained over time?

What does it take to see through MILDEC?


For the neophytes, please refer to:

Joint Publication 3-13.4: Military Deception (MILDEC) (http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/new_pubs/jp3_13_4.pdf)
(PDF file)

Note: Appendix A has a terrific 2-page summary: MILDEC MAXIMS

From Psyop to MINDWAR: The Psychology of Victory (http://www.xeper.org/maquino/nm/MindWar.pdf)
(PDF file)

Mass Media: The 10th Principle of War? (http://stinet.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=ADA293289)

Military Operations in the CNN World: Using the Media as a Force Multiplier (http://stinet.dtic.mil/oai/oai?&verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=ADA307447)

Manufacturing Consent (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5631882395226827730&q=manufacturing+consent&total=111&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1)
(video)


This is a very interesting topic. And simple!

All we need to do is to look at other strategic deceptions, and see how they were carried out.


The prime strategic deception has to be the USDollar.

Synthetic currency is the ultimate weapon of world control and domination, and the USDollar's value is being engineered above zero using deception.

So the trick will be to map from this strategic hoax - (or others) - to 911.


Cheers!

Max Photon

Dept. of Unformation

* * *

[Gravy]

No.

Please refer to

NIST, FEMA reports, 9/11 Engineering Studies, Others write sensibly about the WTC collapses. (http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/nist%2Cfemareports%2C911structuralengineerin)

Fire Safety Engineering and the Performance of Structural Steel in Fires (http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/firesafetyengineering%26theperformanceofst)

Accounts of structural instability in the Twin Towers, Bowing of columns, Collapse expected (http://911stories.googlepages.com/accountsoftowerstructuralinstabilityande)

Stop this, behavior, Max. It isn't funny, cute, or healthy.

[USAFMXOfficer]

Is this the current state of the CTist movement?

Max Photon sort of reminds of an individual we had on the IMDB WTC Forum by the name of "morefocusandprecision". I'll have to dig up one of his posts for you guys.

[Max Photon]

No.

Please refer to

NIST, FEMA reports, 9/11 Engineering Studies, Others write sensibly about the WTC collapses. (http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/nist%2Cfemareports%2C911structuralengineerin)

Fire Safety Engineering and the Performance of Structural Steel in Fires (http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/firesafetyengineering%26theperformanceofst)

Accounts of structural instability in the Twin Towers, Bowing of columns, Collapse expected (http://911stories.googlepages.com/accountsoftowerstructuralinstabilityande)

Stop this, behavior, Max. It isn't funny, cute, or healthy.



I believe our little English major(ette) is trying to say that he does not believe it is even possibe for MILDEC to deceive experts.


* * *

[Cl1mh4224rd]

3. What does it take to see through MILDEC?


Oh! Oh! Oh! I know this one! Evidence?!

[Pardalis]

Is this the current state of the CTist movement?

Max Photon sort of reminds of an individual we had on the IMDB WTC Forum by the name of "morefocusandprecision". I'll have to dig up one of his posts for you guys.

Max, Christophera and Ace Baker are in a league of their own.

[jhunter1163]

There's no crying in debunking!

[beachnut]

* * *Greetings Everyone!

The purpose of this thread is to explore the questions:

Is it possible that the WTC collapse-initiation mechanisms are being cloaked by U.S. military-deception (MILDEC)?
How would MILDEC be undertaken, and sustained over time?
What does it take to see through MILDEC?For the neophytes, please refer to:

Joint Publication 3-13.4: Military Deception (MILDEC) (http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/new_pubs/jp3_13_4.pdf)
(PDF file)
From Psyop to MINDWAR: The Psychology of Victory (http://www.xeper.org/maquino/nm/MindWar.pdf)
(PDF file)
Mass Media: The 10th Principle of War? (http://stinet.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=ADA293289)
Military Operations in the CNN World: Using the Media as a Force Multiplier (http://stinet.dtic.mil/oai/oai?&verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=ADA307447)
Manufacturing Consent (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5631882395226827730&q=manufacturing+consent&total=111&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1)
(video)
This is a very interesting topic. And simple!
All we need to do is to look at other strategic deceptions, and see how they were carried out.
The prime strategic deception has to be the USDollar.
Synthetic currency is the ultimate weapon of world control and domination, and the USDollar's value is being engineered above zero using deception.
So the trick will be to map from this strategic hoax - (or others) - to 911.
Cheers!
Max Photon
Dept. of Unformation
* * *
No. And your OP is nuts.

[Max Photon]

* * *

Those with the smaller brains are always the first to scream in agony.


And no wonder!

The small-minded always think something like a 911 MILDEC operation has to be some vast conspiracy.

(Tsk, tsk, tsk.)


Think Tao.

Think Principle of Least Action

Think Brachistochrone


Don't struggle. Be!

Be not stupid.


MILDEC control engineers know how to use simple nonlinear feedback in the media to bewilder you simple linear thinkers.

As an archetypal example, I present bewilderingly beautiful video of simple nonlinear feedback (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5055142518640380288&q=control+this&total=33255&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=3).


Dynamic stabilization of strategic deceptions is so simple that MILDEC need do nothing at all.

You do all the work for them!


Because MILDEC knows game theory, they toy with you.


MinMax

* * *

[Pardalis]

Think Tao.

Think Principle of Least Action

Think Brachistochrone

Think of the children.

[pomeroo]

I believe our little English major(ette) is trying to say that he does not believe it is even possibe for MILDEC to deceive experts.


* * *


I think your act has worn thin, Max. We're really tired of your silly attempts to absolve the jihadist murderers of all wrongdoing. Tell us what Apathoid gets wrong in his paper on the implausibility of remote controlled flight by Boeing 757s and 767s. Tell us why we shouldn't believe the jihadists when they crow about their victory (start by explaining why al-Jazeera is mistaken in thinking that bin Laden's videos are authentic). Demonstrate how it is mathematically possible that an insanely bloated conspiracy spanning all branches of government and several private industries wouldn't leak anything in six years. Show us how the collapse of WTC 7 fits into the grand scheme.

After you've addressed a few basic issues, you can return to playing mad scientist.

[Alareth]

MILDEC does not function the way you are attempting to portray it Max.

[Sabrina]

Max, stop posting about MILDEC as if it's a separate entity or agency. It's a tactic, nothing more, and it applies to MILITARY operations. The military had little or nothing to do with 19 Arab hijackers successfully hijacking civilian aircraft and flying them into buildings. For you to even suggest that the military would carry out an operation designed to deliberately harm the citizens of the country they are recruited to protect tells me that you know NOTHING about the values the military espouses. I can't speak for the other branches, but the Army has seven of them; Leadership, Duty, Respect, Selfless Service, Honor, Integrity, and Personal Courage. If what happened on 9/11 HAD been a military operation, it would have violated not one, but ALL of those values, which is a SEVERELY punishable offense under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Do yourself a favor and quit posting about the military like you know how it works; you don't.

[OldTigerCub]

Max,
Since you are asserting that the U.S. military somehow had a hand in the events of 9-11 (other than trying desperately, and failing, to stop any of the hijacked airliners from hitting their targets), it is obvious you don't understand who makes up that military, and how they work. I would suggest a visit to this site (http://forums.military.com/eve) to dicuss your allegations, though you might not get as warm a reception as you do here.
The idea that the value of the Dollar could be manipulated by the implementation of MILDEC is an non-starter.

[Max Photon]

Max, stop posting about MILDEC as if it's a separate entity or agency. It's a tactic, nothing more, and it applies to MILITARY operations. The military had little or nothing to do with 19 Arab hijackers successfully hijacking civilian aircraft and flying them into buildings. For you to even suggest that the military would carry out an operation designed to deliberately harm the citizens of the country they are recruited to protect tells me that you know NOTHING about the values the military espouses. I can't speak for the other branches, but the Army has seven of them; Leadership, Duty, Respect, Selfless Service, Honor, Integrity, and Personal Courage. If what happened on 9/11 HAD been a military operation, it would have violated not one, but ALL of those values, which is a SEVERELY punishable offense under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Do yourself a favor and quit posting about the military like you know how it works; you don't.


Sabrina,

The military, FEMA, NIST, and many other government entities were CONDUITS for the 911 synthetic terror attacks.


* * *

[Sabrina]

You're wrong. The military had NOTHING to do with the attacks. Take my suggestion, Max. Stop talking about the military before I let your insults get my dander up. I'm done with this conversation.

[Max Photon]

[snip]
...though you might not get as warm a reception as you do here.
The idea that the value of the Dollar could be manipulated by the implementation of MILDEC is an non-starter.



You're lost.

I said the USDollar can serve as an example of a long-term, successful strategic deception or hoax, and that we can use the USDollar example to learn deception techniques, since the geometry and dynamics of the USDollar deception and the 911 deception have much overlap, which is funny ; )

Max

* * *

[beachnut]

You're lost.

I said the USDollar can serve as an example of a long-term, successful strategic deception or hoax, and that we can use the USDollar example to learn deception techniques, since the geometry and dynamics of the USDollar deception and the 911 deception have much overlap, which is funny ; )

Max

* * *
Lost? Your ideas are very nutty.

[Whack01]

nonlinear? as in exponential???

?

?

?

or is it just bad formatting and random statements that confuse me.


/ gets a headache around exponents
// especially (1 - 1/n)^n

[Alareth]

You're lost.

I said the USDollar can serve as an example of a long-term, successful strategic deception or hoax, and that we can use the USDollar example to learn deception techniques, since the geometry and dynamics of the USDollar deception and the 911 deception have much overlap, which is funny ; )

Max

* * *


The only thing I find funny is your tangential relationship to reality.

[Architect]

Is it a typo? Does he mean Mildew? Then it could be a dewish conspiracy......


(ouch)

[technoextreme]

nonlinear? as in exponential???

?

?

?

or is it just bad formatting and random statements that confuse me.

I don't know about you but Im increasingly getting more annoyed by crazy cooks hijacking legitimate science terms.

[Architect]

I don't know about you but Im increasingly getting more annoyed by crazy cooks hijacking legitimate science terms.

You should see what they do to construction terms.... :eek:

[Gord_in_Toronto]

I know MILDEC really well and have spoken to him on many occasions and you. Max Photon, are no MILDEC. :mad:

[technoextreme]

You should see what they do to construction terms.... :eek:
Well Im an ECE and Im taking a class about linear time invariant differential equations with constant coefficients. I really can only take umbrage at the butchering of my field.

[Mr. Skinny]

MIKILLINI has coined a new term for this:

MAXDEC (Max Deception)

Don't fall for it.

[Dr Adequate]

I believe our little English major(ette) is trying to say that he does not believe it is even possibe for MILDEC to deceive experts. And, like all the other beliefs that you've paraded on this forum, this one is obviously, patently wrong.

If you can't understand plain English, how can you hope to understand anything else?

[Dr Adequate]

I said the USDollar can serve as an example of a long-term, successful strategic deception or hoax ... Let me guess ... it's a missile disguised as a dollar.

since the geometry and dynamics of the USDollar deception and the 911 deception have much overlap ... Yes, they both exist only in the minds of kooks.

[pomeroo]

Hey, Doc, you can run, but you can't hide.

"I think your act has worn thin, Max. We're really tired of your silly attempts to absolve the jihadist murderers of all wrongdoing. Tell us what Apathoid gets wrong in his paper on the implausibility of remote controlled flight by Boeing 757s and 767s. Tell us why we shouldn't believe the jihadists when they crow about their victory (start by explaining why al-Jazeera is mistaken in thinking that bin Laden's videos are authentic). Demonstrate how it is mathematically possible that an insanely bloated conspiracy spanning all branches of government and several private industries wouldn't leak anything in six years. Show us how the collapse of WTC 7 fits into the grand scheme.

After you've addressed a few basic issues, you can return to playing mad scientist."

[Newtons Bit]

Max, stop posting about MILDEC as if it's a separate entity or agency. It's a tactic, nothing more, and it applies to MILITARY operations. The military had little or nothing to do with 19 Arab hijackers successfully hijacking civilian aircraft and flying them into buildings. For you to even suggest that the military would carry out an operation designed to deliberately harm the citizens of the country they are recruited to protect tells me that you know NOTHING about the values the military espouses. I can't speak for the other branches, but the Army has seven of them; Leadership, Duty, Respect, Selfless Service, Honor, Integrity, and Personal Courage. If what happened on 9/11 HAD been a military operation, it would have violated not one, but ALL of those values, which is a SEVERELY punishable offense under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Do yourself a favor and quit posting about the military like you know how it works; you don't.

That's one thing I think people forget when talking about fascists police or military personnel: most of these people actually care about our liberty and most of them would die to protect it. As I recall, the military all swears an oath to defend the Constitution when starting.

I don't know if it's considered values per se, but the Marine Corps has something similar:
Justice, Judgment, Discipline, Initiative, Decisiveness, Tact, Integrity, Enthusiasm, Bearing, Unselfishness, Courage, Knowledge, Loyalty, Endurance

I cant believe I can still remember that.

[JimBenArm]

It was MILDEC. Just not by the US Military. It was AQ operatives disguised as ordinary citizens, comandeering jets.
Funny how he can be so right, and yet so, so wrong.

[Newtons Bit]

nonlinear? as in exponential???

?

?

?

or is it just bad formatting and random statements that confuse me.


/ gets a headache around exponents
// especially (1 - 1/n)^n

Non-linear is anything but y=m*x+b there chief. I guess y=b also counts, but that's just a case where m = 0.

[tsig]

* * *

Those with the smaller brains are always the first to scream in agony.


And no wonder!

The small-minded always think something like a 911 MILDEC operation has to be some vast conspiracy.

(Tsk, tsk, tsk.)


Think Tao.

Think Principle of Least Action

Think Brachistochrone


Don't struggle. Be!

Be not stupid.


MILDEC control engineers know how to use simple nonlinear feedback in the media to bewilder you simple linear thinkers.

As an archetypal example, I present bewilderingly beautiful video of simple nonlinear feedback (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5055142518640380288&q=control+this&total=33255&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=3).


Dynamic stabilization of strategic deceptions is so simple that MILDEC need do nothing at all.

You do all the work for them!


Because MILDEC knows game theory, they toy with you.


MinMax

* * *

How can I think, I have such a small brain, unlike you Max, who has such a large brain.

Your enormous large brain should tell you that we puny small brains cannot be learned so why try?

[technoextreme]

Non-linear is anything but y=m*x+b there chief. I guess y=b also counts, but that's just a case where m = 0.
There is another definition of nonlinearity that involves systems. It's such a simple definition and related to what you wrote too but I have no clue how to put it into words.

[Max Photon]

* * *

When you think nonlinear, think curvature.


* * *

[technoextreme]

* * *

When you think nonlinear, think curvature.


* * *
Awww for the hell of it. Dr Cox has something to say
oHMhb69w4X0
Depending on what we are talking about nonlinear may have nothing to do with curvature.

[beachnut]

* * *

When you think nonlinear, think curvature.


* * *Wrong; you have flunked your single post on nonlinear.

[technoextreme]

Wrong; you have flunked your single post on nonlinear.
Ahhh... I read your other post. So your an electrical engineer.:) Im taking linear systems right now.

[Sabrina]

That's one thing I think people forget when talking about fascists police or military personnel: most of these people actually care about our liberty and most of them would die to protect it. As I recall, the military all swears an oath to defend the Constitution when starting.

I don't know if it's considered values per se, but the Marine Corps has something similar:
Justice, Judgment, Discipline, Initiative, Decisiveness, Tact, Integrity, Enthusiasm, Bearing, Unselfishness, Courage, Knowledge, Loyalty, Endurance

I cant believe I can still remember that.

The oath goes something like this:

I, {insert name here}, do solemnly swear, (or affirm), that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."

The last part is optional; depends on if you want to toss a reference to religion in.

Contrary to what Max seems to believe, the vast majority of the people who swear that oath or a similar one in the military (the enlistment oath is somewhat different and tosses in a phrase about obeying the lawful orders of superiors for instance) actually mean it. We take it very seriously and I for one am EXTREMELY offended whenever someone makes light of my service in the manner that he has. I swore that oath on December 14th, 2001, and have never once regretted my service and have striven to do my best to uphold it. I am deeply offended that Max could even insinuate that the military had ANYTHING to do with carrying out 9/11, but as I am trying to follow the terms of service here to the best of my ability (gee, just like I've tried to uphold my oath to the best of my ability) I'm restricting myself to not commenting any further on his vile insinuations. I gave him fair warning however; if he continues in this vein, I may not remain so nice.

I hope you all will help hold me back if he continues though; I'd rather not be suspended over this cretin if I can help it.

[MIKILLINI]

You're lost.

I said the USDollar can serve as an example of a long-term, successful strategic deception or hoax, and that we can use the USDollar example to learn deception techniques, since the geometry and dynamics of the USDollar deception and the 911 deception have much overlap, which is funny ; )

Max

* * *

The war on gold in 3..2..1

[uruk]

The war on gold in 3..2..1

Too late. He's already mentioned it.

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=3031663&postcount=217

[Unsecured Coins]

The oath goes something like this:

something like this? SOMETHING?

You know better than that. flutter kick, go...

[BenBurch]

I alerted on this thread. I think this Max person is posting nonsense just to annoy us at this point.

[rwguinn]

The only thing I find funny is your tangential relationship to reality.
I Think you "tangent"-ed when you meant "Random":mad:

[Sabrina]

something like this? SOMETHING?

You know better than that. flutter kick, go...

Excuse me, who outranks who here? :p

I said something like this because it's not exactly the same for enlisted and officers, and may even differ slightly from service to service (in other words, I do not know if the Navy, Marines, and Air Force use the exact same oath or not, but if you do, I'll concede the point).

You owe me... let's see.... twenty pushups. :p

[lordofwaffles]

Ha, for a mere few moments I must gloat in my having successfully escaped the bounds of my old network, which previously devoured many of my posts, or forced me to sign in 3-6 times just to try to reply.

However, I must inform you that MILDEC is actually known as MASSIVE SECRET SHARKFORCE ONE. To conduct a Sharkforce mission, is known as jumping the shark, which would definitely well describe Max's take on 9-11. A classic case of jumping the shark.

Seriously. Max's ideas defy science on very many levels, not to mention totally ignore the possibility that American service people have any individual thought or actions. Isn't there some secret clause in the user agreement that allows us to shoot people like him, for their own good?

[Unsecured Coins]

Excuse me, who outranks who here? :p

I said something like this because it's not exactly the same for enlisted and officers, and may even differ slightly from service to service (in other words, I do not know if the Navy, Marines, and Air Force use the exact same oath or not, but if you do, I'll concede the point).

You owe me... let's see.... twenty pushups. :p

Negative. I owe you zilch. There is a reason it's called the Oath of ENLISTMENT, as only enlisted soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines take it. Since our rank is not given out by the President and commissioned officers are, they don't say that exact statement during reups and initial commissionings.

the only change is for national guard troops, and the added line is that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the Governor of (STATE NAME) and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to law and regulations

overhead hand clap, go

[JamesB]

So the military is in charge of monetary policy now? And here I thought it was the evil Federal Reserve all those years....

[Sabrina]

Negative. I owe you zilch. There is a reason it's called the Oath of ENLISTMENT, as only enlisted soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines take it. Since our rank is not given out by the President and commissioned officers are, they don't say that exact statement during reups and initial commissionings.

the only change is for national guard troops, and the added line is that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the Governor of (STATE NAME) and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to law and regulations

overhead hand clap, go

Fine, I concede the point on the oath, although I'd bet you most people who are not in the military don't see a difference between the two, but if you think for one second I'm exercising for you, you got another think coming. :p

[Unsecured Coins]

that's ok. Your counselling will reflect.

[Sabrina]

that's ok. Your counselling will reflect.

You're pushing it, mister. :p

So the military is in charge of monetary policy now? And here I thought it was the evil Federal Reserve all those years....

You FOOL! Don't you know that because it has "Reserve" in its name that means it's really the military in charge of it! OMGCONSPIRACYINSIDEJORB111!!!!ELEVENTYONE11!!! [/twoof mode]

[JamesB]

You FOOL! Don't you know that because it has "Reserve" in its name that means it's really the military in charge of it! OMGCONSPIRACYINSIDEJORB111!!!!ELEVENTYONE11!!! [/twoof mode]

Hmm, well I have drill next weekend, I will see if I can get the discount rate dropped 25 basis points...

[Unsecured Coins]

wouldn't be the first time

[Sabrina]

Hmm, well I have drill next weekend, I will see if I can get the discount rate dropped 25 basis points...

LUCKY! I have it this weekend.

Erm... okay, sorry for the derail. *grins sheepishly*

[JamesB]

Derail? I think this thread was DOA.

[beachnut]

Ahhh... I read your other post. So your an electrical engineer.:) Im taking linear systems right now.
There is fair amount of math, if I had not been going into the AF, I should have majored in Math too. I should have studied more. Later, I worked with human factors engineers, they needed a EE to keep up the lab and help run studies.

I think MAX is lost, and looks up random junk, to string BS into meaningless BS.

[beachnut]

* * *Those with the smaller brains are always the first to scream in agony.
And no wonder!
The small-minded always think something like a 911 MILDEC operation has to be some vast conspiracy.
(Tsk, tsk, tsk.)
Think Tao.
Think Principle of Least Action
Think Brachistochrone
Don't struggle. Be!
Be not stupid.
MILDEC control engineers know how to use simple nonlinear feedback in the media to bewilder you simple linear thinkers.
As an archetypal example, I present bewilderingly beautiful video of simple nonlinear feedback (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5055142518640380288&q=control+this&total=33255&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=3).
Dynamic stabilization of strategic deceptions is so simple that MILDEC need do nothing at all.
You do all the work for them!
Because MILDEC knows game theory, they toy with you.
MinMax* * *
Jones lied about thermite; he made it up 4 years after 9/11. I can show you his first paper making up the lies. Any experienced researchers, like yourself, can see how he is making up the thermite story for no reason except to mislead people he thinks are too dumb to know better. Looks like Jones is the bad guy, not your imaginary control theory ideas.

If you need a copy of his first paper say the word.

[Unsecured Coins]

say the word? ok...


the word

[Max Photon]

* * *

Gentle readers,


This thread raises the question:

Are the WTC collapse-initiation mechanisms being cloaked by military-deception?


This is a serious question, and I am only interested in serious participants.

Could those who are not serious, or who are consumed with ill-founded righteous indignation, kindly go elsewhere?

Thread is free.



NIST says the WTC towers collapsed from impact damage and fires.

This is just a working hypothesis, a model, a story, a narrative, a metaphor, an idea, a fantasy.


Good scientists have more than one working fantasy.


MAX-MIHOP is in nearly total agreement with the NIST NCSTARs, Bazant et. al., Greening, Blanchard, and on and on.

The minor difference is that MAX-MIHOP says the fires were deliberately catalyzed. Practically everything else is the same.

To ask whether the fires were deliberately catalyzed is not only a reasonable question, it is a standard question.

Yet this standard question was not asked, nor was it investigated, nor has the question subsequently been entertained or explored (until yours truly (handsome)).

Why? It's a basic, standard, obvious, common-sense question - one that would have been easy to answer had the steel - the evidence - not been destroyed with such breathtaking speed - and this in the face of the greatest crime committed against the US.


It seems common sense that if standard procedure was not carried out, then some force caused that deflection from the norm.

And since any deviation from the norm always gets all kinds of people shrieking, and since no one is shrieking from this deviation from the norm - as would be expected - then we are looking at an anomaly, and that anomaly should be explained.

The data suggest that something is damping and cloaking any investigation into whether the fires were deliberate.

This suggests the possibility that the fires were deliberate.


Interestingly, the cloaking device used for the arson is the humble assumptive close - a timeless sales standard.

Since there was no arson, we did not investigate for arson.


There was arson.


MAX-MIHOP provides rough but relatively detailed models for how the fires (and the heat-weakening caused by the "fires") were engineered, AND how the deception is being dynamically stabilized.

The most incredible aspect of the dynamic stabilization - the longterm maintenance of the deception - is that it takes zero effort.

You do all of the work for them.


Max

* * *

[BenBurch]

Max, it doesn't mean any more when you say it yet again.

[JimBenArm]

No, when you keep saying it, it becomes true.
I'm a pretty ballerina, I'm a pretty ballerina, I'm a pretty ballerina...

[pomeroo]

* * *

Gentle readers,


This thread raises the question:

Are the WTC collapse-initiation mechanisms being cloaked by military-deception?


This is a serious question, and I am only interested in serious participants.

Could those who are not serious, or who are consumed with ill-founded righteous indignation, kindly go elsewhere?

Thread is free.



NIST says the WTC towers collapsed from impact damage and fires.

This is just a working hypothesis, a model, a story, a narrative, a metaphor, an idea, a fantasy.


Good scientists have more than one working fantasy.


MAX-MIHOP is in nearly total agreement with the NIST NCSTARs, Bazant et. al., Greening, Blanchard, and on and on.

The minor difference is that MAX-MIHOP says the fires were deliberately catalyzed. Practically everything else is the same.

To ask whether the fires were deliberately catalyzed is not only a reasonable question, it is a standard question.

Yet this standard question was not asked, nor was it investigated, nor has the question subsequently been entertained or explored (until yours truly (handsome)).

Why? It's a basic, standard, obvious, common-sense question - one that would have been easy to answer had the steel - the evidence - not been destroyed with such breathtaking speed - and this in the face of the greatest crime committed against the US.


It seems common sense that if standard procedure was not carried out, then some force caused that deflection from the norm.

And since any deviation from the norm always gets all kinds of people shrieking, and since no one is shrieking from this deviation from the norm - as would be expected - then we are looking at an anomaly, and that anomaly should be explained.

The data suggest that something is damping and cloaking any investigation into whether the fires were deliberate.

This suggests the possibility that the fires were deliberate.


Interestingly, the cloaking device used for the arson is the humble assumptive close - a timeless sales standard.

Since there was no arson, we did not investigate for arson.


There was arson.


MAX-MIHOP provides rough but relatively detailed models for how the fires (and the heat-weakening caused by the "fires") were engineered, AND how the deception is being dynamically stabilized.

The most incredible aspect of the dynamic stabilization - the longterm maintenance of the deception - is that it takes zero effort.

You do all of the work for them.


Max

* * *

Yes, Max, it is a serious question. You are slandering innocent men and women with your baseless, absurd fantasies. You can't run forever.

The conclusions reached by a thousand researchers, physicists and engineers, are not fantasies.

Yes, the fires were deliberate. The jihadists who crashed planes into the towers understood that they would be causing fires.

You are lying about the removal of the steel. The process took many months--AS YOU KNOW.

Why are you lying, Max?

"I think your act has worn thin, Max. We're really tired of your silly attempts to absolve the jihadist murderers of all wrongdoing. Tell us what Apathoid gets wrong in his paper on the implausibility of remote controlled flight by Boeing 757s and 767s. Tell us why we shouldn't believe the jihadists when they crow about their victory (start by explaining why al-Jazeera is mistaken in thinking that bin Laden's videos are authentic). Demonstrate how it is mathematically possible that an insanely bloated conspiracy spanning all branches of government and several private industries wouldn't leak anything in six years. Show us how the collapse of WTC 7 fits into the grand scheme.
After you've addressed a few basic issues, you can return to playing mad scientist."

[Sabrina]

The act WAS arson, you [rule10]ing numbskull! What the heck else do you call two large jets loaded with fuel being deliberately crashed into buildings? They INTENDED to start fires in addition to the damage; hence, arson!

*takes a deep breath*

Look, I have no quarrel with you personally, Max. But when you call into question the honor and integrity of the tens of thousands of men and women I've served with, both directly and indirectly, then we're going to have problems. I will only say this one more time. Cease and desist with your vile accusations against the brave men and women of the US Armed Forces, or we will have words. Very. Strong. Words. I am well aware that not every person in every organization will exactly follow the basic tenets of said organization, but the number of people who could be accused of doing so in the military is absurdly small in comparison to other agencies. So stop. I won't ask you again. Stop.

[uruk]

* * *

Gentle readers,


This thread raises the question:

Are the WTC collapse-initiation mechanisms being cloaked by military-deception?
I don't think so. You'd figgure with ALL the people who had to be involved in a rediculously complex plan that involves horrendous civilian death, someone would develop a conscience.

As a general rule soldiers don't feel good about killing civilians. Especially, our own.
That sort of thing kind of goes against thier whole reason for being. You know, to protect Americans.

NIST says the WTC towers collapsed from impact damage and fires.

This is just a working hypothesis, a model, a story, a narrative, a metaphor, an idea, a fantasy. since it is back up with some researched and experimental data, I'd say it is more closer to a theory.
There are somethings that will never be known completely because the buildings collpased.
You have to use science to try to find the missing pieces to the picture.
Will NIST be the final, end all, word on the matter? Probablly not, But it is the best explination of events givin what could be known.

That's the difference between NIST and MAX-MIHOP.
MAX-MIHOP works with innuendo, conjecture and hearsay. There is nothing hard, just an interpretation of events.

NIST works with what it could obtain. The observables, the experimentation, the modeling, the science. It tried not to delve into areas for which it had nothing to show an indication for.

It did not look for explosives because it did not see anything that would viably indicate explosives.
If an investigator saw damage on a column or in the debri due to an explosive, I'm sure the investigation would have taken a different direction.

I would think that explosives would have left some sort of indication that would have been obvious on the steel. A cut in steel due to explosive is distinctive. I don't think they would have missed it.

As for the thermite, I think they also mention that looking for traces of thermite reactions in the debri would have been pointless with all the iron oxide, aluminum, and sulpher that were known to have already been present in the construction materials.
Greening's paper on the ad hoc thermite reaction would have added to the contamination also.
How would you have been able to tell the difference between the two?

Good scientists have more than one working fantasy. Good scientists tries not bother with fantasy. At least while working.


MAX-MIHOP is in nearly total agreement with the NIST NCSTARs, Bazant et. al., Greening, Blanchard, and on and on.

The minor difference is that MAX-MIHOP says the fires were deliberately catalyzed. Practically everything else is the same. The fires were deliberately set by terrorists. They started the fires by crashing planes into the building.

To ask whether the fires were deliberately catalyzed is not only a reasonable question, it is a standard question. To which everybody saw the fires started by terrorists either in person or on TV on September 11th.

Yet this standard question was not asked, nor was it investigated, nor has the question subsequently been entertained or explored (until yours truly (handsome)).
What do you mean? Why ask that question when everybody saw the terrorists start the fire.
And it was investigated.

Why? It's a basic, standard, obvious, common-sense question - one that would have been easy to answer had the steel - the evidence - not been destroyed with such breathtaking speed - and this in the face of the greatest crime committed against the US. the steel was examined by investigators as it was removed from ground zero and sent to the designated landfills, Some of the steel still exists in a warehouse and as tag samples in labratories.


It seems common sense that if standard procedure was not carried out, then some force caused that deflection from the norm.

And since any deviation from the norm always gets all kinds of people shrieking, and since no one is shrieking from this deviation from the norm - as would be expected - then we are looking at an anomaly, and that anomaly should be explained.

The data suggest that something is damping and cloaking any investigation into whether the fires were deliberate. What data? you've just given us conjecture.

This suggests the possibility that the fires were deliberate. The fires were set deliberately. Terrorists started the fires. We all saw that happen on September 11th


Interestingly, the cloaking device used for the arson is the humble assumptive close - a timeless sales standard.

Since there was no arson, we did not investigate for arson.

There was arson. Everybody knew it was arson. We all saw the terrorists start the fires. What was investigated was how the fires initiated the collapse of the buildings.



MAX-MIHOP provides rough but relatively detailed models for how the fires (and the heat-weakening caused by the "fires") were engineered, AND how the deception is being dynamically stabilized.

The most incredible aspect of the dynamic stabilization - the longterm maintenance of the deception - is that it takes zero effort.

You do all of the work for them.


Max

* * *
But MAX-MIHOP provides no evidence or proof of his claims.

[technoextreme]

No, when you keep saying it, it becomes true.
I'm a pretty ballerina, I'm a pretty ballerina, I'm a pretty ballerina...
Have you read Max Photons website?

[Reality Believer]

Have you read Max Photons website?

Oh yea, that is a deep trip down the rabbit hole. :boggled:

... When logic and proportion
Have fallen sloppy dead
And the white knight is talking backwards
And the Red Queen's "Off with her head!"
Remember what the dormouse said

Feed your head
Feed your head

[JimBenArm]

Have you read Max Photons website?
I'm scared to. What's here is strange enough...

[ConspiRaider]

Gentle readers,

This thread raises the question:

Are the WTC collapse-initiation mechanisms being cloaked by military-deception?
Actually I am a genteel reader, since I once knew somebody from the South. After she served me a Cajun dinner then I was certified genteel.

But that solved nothing. I still cannot figure out what you are talking about even though I am eating blackened catfish as fast as I can.

[pomeroo]

Oh yea, that is a deep trip down the rabbit hole. :boggled:

... When logic and proportion
Have fallen sloppy dead
And the white knight is talking backwards
And the Red Queen's "Off with her head!"
Remember what the dormouse said

Feed your head
Feed your head


This is what I posted the other day in the thread discussing the difficulty of Oswald's shots:
__________________________________________________ _
Originally Posted by negativ http://forums.randi.org/helloworld2/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=3097160#post3097160)
What's wrong?

Take four red capsules. In 10 minutes, take two more. Help is on the way.
__________________________________________________ _

"Remember what the dormouse said:
Feed your head--
Feed your head."

Truly, great minds think alike.

[Hokulele]

Have you read Max Photons website?

I'm scared to. What's here is strange enough...


I would rather spend the next 20 hours listening to Deep Purple's Smoke on the Water played on a solo banjo than visit that website.

[ConspiRaider]

I would rather spend the next 20 hours listening to Deep Purple's Smoke on the Water played on a solo banjo than visit that website.
I dare ya to visit it, H. If you don't within the next 62 and three-quarter hours, you must let me stay in your Maui condo for two weeks. If you do visit, I must be forced to stay in the Renaissance Hotel on Maui for the same period, on your dime.

Tick...tick...tick...

[Max Photon]

* * *

When you think nonlinear, think curvature.


* * *



Curvature is what MILDEC uses to engineer ambiguity.


Here is ambiguous curvature:

Spinning Sillouette Illusion (http://www.maniacworld.com/Spinning-Silhouette-Optical-Illusion.html)


Is the woman spinning clockwise, or counter-clockwise?


Dr. Maximum Spin

* * *

[chillzero]

OK, please remember to keep threads on topic. If this can't stay on topic, posts will be moved, and the thread might get set to moderated status.

[Mr. Skinny]

I would rather spend the next 20 hours listening to Deep Purple's Smoke on the Water played on a solo banjo than visit that website.
See if Bela Fleck does a version - it will probably be the most tolerable -(although I bet he likes to do flourishes from My Woman from Tokyo in the middle of the song.

[pomeroo]

Curvature is what MILDEC uses to engineer ambiguity.


Here is ambiguous curvature:

Spinning Sillouette Illusion (http://www.maniacworld.com/Spinning-Silhouette-Optical-Illusion.html)


Is the woman spinning clockwise, or counter-clockwise?


Dr. Maximum Spin

* * *


Ah, this is easy!

"I think your act has worn thin, Max. We're really tired of your silly attempts to absolve the jihadist murderers of all wrongdoing. Tell us what Apathoid gets wrong in his paper on the implausibility of remote controlled flight by Boeing 757s and 767s. Tell us why we shouldn't believe the jihadists when they crow about their victory (start by explaining why al-Jazeera is mistaken in thinking that bin Laden's videos are authentic). Demonstrate how it is mathematically possible that an insanely bloated conspiracy spanning all branches of government and several private industries wouldn't leak anything in six years. Show us how the collapse of WTC 7 fits into the grand scheme.
After you've addressed a few basic issues, you can return to playing mad scientist."

[Drudgewire]

Dr. Maximum Spin

No argument here. :p

[Mr. Skinny]

Curvature is what MILDEC uses to engineer ambiguity.


Here is ambiguous curvature:

Spinning Sillouette Illusion (http://www.maniacworld.com/Spinning-Silhouette-Optical-Illusion.html)


Is the woman spinning clockwise, or counter-clockwise?


Dr. Maximum Spin

* * *
Well, that explains it then. A spinning sillouette figure drilled down through the WTC's going clockwise, then anti-clockwise?

Sounds like MAXDEC

I'm on to your tricks now, Max, thanks, in fact to your very own tutorials on this forum.

You're sly.

[Dr Adequate]

Could those who are not serious, or who are consumed with ill-founded righteous indignation, kindly go elsewhere?

http://fstdt.com/funnyimages/uploads/43.jpg

[Max Photon]

* * *


Is everyone able to make the Spinning Silhouette Ambiguous Figure (http://www.maniacworld.com/Spinning-Silhouette-Optical-Illusion.html) turn BOTH clockwise and counter-clockwise?

Or are you low-level fixed-thinkers on consta-slice?


MaxxaM


* * *

[Pardalis]

Nice boobs though.

[JimBenArm]

* * *


Is everyone able to make the Spinning Silhouette Ambiguous Figure (http://www.maniacworld.com/Spinning-Silhouette-Optical-Illusion.html) turn BOTH clockwise and counter-clockwise?

Or are you low-level fixed-thinkers on consta-slice?


MaxxaM


* * *
I see. A cheap optical illusion stolen from the Community section of the forum really helps to make your point. As well as another insult.

Thanks for proving your nonsense is still nonsensical!

[Redtail]

* * *


Is everyone able to make the Spinning Silhouette Ambiguous Figure (http://www.maniacworld.com/Spinning-Silhouette-Optical-Illusion.html) turn BOTH clockwise and counter-clockwise?

Or are you low-level fixed-thinkers on consta-slice?


MaxxaM


* * *

Yeah... So?

[MIKILLINI]

Gee MaxD, is your remote-controlled planes theory still on consta-slice?

[Dr Adequate]

* * *


Is everyone able to make the Spinning Silhouette Ambiguous Figure (http://www.maniacworld.com/Spinning-Silhouette-Optical-Illusion.html) turn BOTH clockwise and counter-clockwise?

Or are you low-level fixed-thinkers on consta-slice?


MaxxaM


* * * Ah, you're insane. I'm sorry, I didn't realise. It's hard to tell people who are flagrantly mentally ill from your usual run-of-the-mill CT whackjob.

Talk to someone, OK? Go see a doctor. Seek help.

[technoextreme]

OK, please remember to keep threads on topic. If this can't stay on topic, posts will be moved, and the thread might get set to moderated status.
Well it would help if Max Photon didn't change the topic every other post. *Rimshot*
Or are you low-level fixed-thinkers on consta-slice?
I see. A cheap optical illusion stolen from the Community section of the forum really helps to make your point. As well as another insult.

Stupid question but what is consta-slice?

[Alareth]

Stupid question but what is consta-slice?

It's MAX-ENGLISH

[MIKILLINI]

Stupid question but what is consta-slice?

It's MaxDec for selling his Ronco theories.

[uruk]

Max. I remember one time you asked me if I had an alternate idea or explination of the 9/11 events.

I tell you what I'll give you this. If I was forced to choose a conspiracy theory I believed was plausible. I would have to choose some flavor of LIHOP.

LIHOP has the least amount of complexity. and the most amount of deniabilty. Two things politicians like. They don't have to think too hard and do too much and it has the smallest chance of getting caught.

It's already a given that there are groups that want to commit acts of terrorizim against us. So you just allow it to happen by selectivly and covertly suppressing intelligence reports and reassigning more capable inteligence opereatives away from areas you don't want attention. Heck you could even encourage it by having a operative infiltrate in a key area and push the idea amoungst the terrorists. That would mean that you had to worry about only one dedicated operative which you could always terminate with predjudice and pass it off as an agent killed the line of duty.

Any inpropriety that occured during intelligence gathering could always be passed of as ineptitude. And that could apply to any questionable action during the attack. Such as a delay in scrambling jets.

Next, the actual attack.
The attack itself would be real.
You would not have to fake anything at that point. No fake phone calls. No fake planes, no worries about switching planes and dealing with the passengers.

If you are willing to kill several hundred people in a building What are a few other people in airplanes.

The attack would be succesfull in scaring the American public into submission even if the buildings did not collpase. The building collapsing would be a added bonus. No need for elaborate installations with hundreds of operatives and months of prepwork. No complex plan for Murphy's Law to mess you up. You would just let the laws of physics do the work for you.

Plus any investigation performed would show exactly what you wanted to show. No explosives, no thermite. And no worries about paying off or intimidating engineers and scientists.



Perfect deniablity.

So you see Uruk-LIHOP is much better than MAX-MIHOP. It is simple, cheap and the fewest amount of operatives needed to... 0IHJ[O0IHNiok... OOF! JD IJIWEvh...OUCH!!! HEY!!!!!io[hwhoww OIH hoi ..STOP!!!! WAIT!....... HEY! DON'T TASE ME BRO!!!!! AAAAARRRRRRRGGGGGGGG!!!!!!....carry out this huge piece of fantasy and fiction. There is no reason to even belive that your country and government, who care about your safety and freedom, would ever plan and execute such a devious act that was obviously planned by Osama Bin Laden and carried out by Islamic terrorist.

So remember you are safe. The governement has your back. So god bless and remember to pay your taxes.

sincerly, a patriotic American who has been clearly dabbeling in fantasy

over and out

[Max Photon]

* * *


By consta-slice, I meant constant slice, or constant curve to the right.

I believe the majority of people see the ambiguous figure as turning clockwise.


MILDEC knows how to exploit naturally occurring, and how to generate ambiguous figures, which serve as cloaking devices.

For example:


The paper that was blown out of WTC2 was used to mask bright white flashes from burning aluminum.


Thermite was selected because its use is masked by the ambiguity created by other sources of aluminum and rust in the towers.


Steel was destroyed and finite element analysis was put in its place because the modeling of far-from-equilibrium systems - which is what the towers approaching collapse initiation were - produces noise, grey....ambiguity. (Looking inside the box columns would have been too definitive.)


Generating ambiguity to shield against both detection and prosecution is extremely effective.

People could argue until the cows come home about whether the Spinning Silhouette is turning clockwise or counterclockwise. (The real answer is neither. It's an illusion on a flat screen.)

Ambiguity is one of MILDEC's most powerful weapons.

The ambiguity generator - the ambiguator - is elegantly characterized by the cusp catastrophe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catastrophe_theory).


Singularity theory, good people, is what is needed to see through MILDEC.


The one, the only,

Max
Max

* * *

[Dr Adequate]

* * *


By consta-slice, I meant constant slice, or constant curve to the right.

I believe the majority of people see the ambiguous figure as turning clockwise.


MILDEC knows how to both exploit naturally occurring, and to generate ambiguous figures, which serve as cloaking devices.

For example:


The paper that was blown out of WTC2 was used to mask bright white flashes from burning aluminum.


Thermite was selected because its use is masked by the ambiguity created by other sources of aluminum and rust in the towers.


Steel was destroyed and finite element analysis was put in its place because the modeling of far-from-equilibrium systems - which is what the towers approaching collapse initiation were - produces noise, grey....ambiguity. (Looking inside the box columns would have been too definitive.)


Generating ambiguity to shield against both detection and prosecution is extremely effective.

People could argue until the cows come home about whether the Spinning Silhouette is turning clockwise or counterclockwise. (The real answer is neither. It's an illusion on a flat screen.)

Ambiguity is one of MILDEC's most powerful weapons.

The ambiguity generator - the ambiguator - is elegantly characterized by the cusp catastrophe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catastrophe_theory).


Singularity theory, good people, is what is needed to see through MILDEC.


The one, the only,

Max
Max

* * * Seek medical help.

This is not right.

Good luck.

[Max Photon]

Max. I remember one time you asked me if I had an alternate idea or explination of the 9/11 events.

I tell you what I'll give you this. If I was forced to choose a conspiracy theory I believed was plausible. I would have to choose some flavor of LIHOP. [snip]





Here is what I think of LIHOP.


Max

* * *

[MIKILLINI]

<Snip>

sincerly, a patriotic American who has been clearly dabbeling in fantasy

over and out

Good post, Uruk. It's actually an area that I had felt was most plausible over any other junk put out there. Why would the pseudo-perpetrators go to such lengths as to implant civilian buildings with catalyzing materials in order for them to collapse? An assurance that more lives will be lost. Financial center buildings that through their total destruction, along with massive loss of life, was how much damage to the economy would this create? Involving airlines that nearly went bankrupt after 9/11, and to further add to this, crashing flight 77 into the Pentagon and # 93 in Shanksville. All set up by the government? MILDEC?
MAXDEC is what promotes a conspiracy so elaborate in it's design. This was a pseudo-plan that had only one chance to work, only one time it would work, the planes had to hit their designated targets. In order for it to be effective, it had to. What are the odds of that compared to hijackers taking the planes over and flying them into targets they pre-planned to strike?

[MIKILLINI]

* * *


By consta-slice, I meant constant slice, or constant curve to the right.



Singularity theory, good people, is what is needed to see through MILDEC.


The one, the only,

Max
Max

* * *

Like thermite dusted shock tube Pre-planted in WTC's 1 & 2? Lasers located within WTC 7 to ignite the shock tube seconds before remote-controlled airliners struck the buildings? :monkey:

[technoextreme]

Seek medical help.

This is not right.

Good luck.
Just as a side note he's not going to stop. From reading his website he believes he's right and that he has seen the light.

[pomeroo]

* * *


By consta-slice, I meant constant slice, or constant curve to the right.

I believe the majority of people see the ambiguous figure as turning clockwise.


MILDEC knows how to exploit naturally occurring, and how to generate ambiguous figures, which serve as cloaking devices.

For example:

The paper that was blown out of WTC2 was used to mask bright white flashes from burning aluminum.
Thermite was selected because its use is masked by the ambiguity created by other sources of aluminum and rust in the towers.
Steel was destroyed and finite element analysis was put in its place because the modeling of far-from-equilibrium systems - which is what the towers approaching collapse initiation were - produces noise, grey....ambiguity. (Looking inside the box columns would have been too definitive.)
Generating ambiguity to shield against both detection and prosecution is extremely effective.

People could argue until the cows come home about whether the Spinning Silhouette is turning clockwise or counterclockwise. (The real answer is neither. It's an illusion on a flat screen.)

Ambiguity is one of MILDEC's most powerful weapons.

The ambiguity generator - the ambiguator - is elegantly characterized by the cusp catastrophe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catastrophe_theory).


Singularity theory, good people, is what is needed to see through MILDEC.


The one, the only,

Max
Max

* * *


No thermite was used at the WTC complex on the day of the jihadist attacks and all of the structural steel was recovered.

Why are you lying, Max?

You can run, but you can't hide.

[pomeroo]

Here is what I think of LIHOP.


Max

* * *



Ah, but what do you think of Apathoid's paper? You know, the paper that demolishes your nonsense about remote-controlled planes--the paper you are unable to comprehend.

[Max Photon]

Good post, Uruk. It's actually an area that I had felt was most plausible over any other junk put out there. Why would the pseudo-perpetrators go to such lengths as to implant civilian buildings with catalyzing materials in order for them to collapse? An assurance that more lives will be lost. Financial center buildings that through their total destruction, along with massive loss of life, was how much damage to the economy would this create? Involving airlines that nearly went bankrupt after 9/11, and to further add to this, crashing flight 77 into the Pentagon and # 93 in Shanksville. All set up by the government? MILDEC?
MAXDEC is what promotes a conspiracy so elaborate in it's design. This was a pseudo-plan that had only one chance to work, only one time it would work, the planes had to hit their designated targets. In order for it to be effective, it had to. What are the odds of that compared to hijackers taking the planes over and flying them into targets they pre-planned to strike?



The "hijackers" only had one shot.


And good shooting, too!

They took out WTCs 1, 2 AND 7!

Three birds with two stones!

And right down to the nub - all three towers.


Come to think of it, 911 never happened, because the "hijackers" only had one shot, and to do what they did - take over and fly commercial jets by hand, defeat the US Military in the most heavily defended airspace on earth, hit the towers - just so - so that THREE completely collapsed, with just ONE CHANCE AND NO PRACTICE - is impossible.


Right Mikillini?


Max

* * *

[uruk]

* * *


By consta-slice, I meant constant slice, or constant curve to the right.

I believe the majority of people see the ambiguous figure as turning clockwise.


MILDEC knows how to exploit naturally occurring, and how to generate ambiguous figures, which serve as cloaking devices.

For example:


The paper that was blown out of WTC2 was used to mask bright white flashes from burning aluminum.


Thermite was selected because its use is masked by the ambiguity created by other sources of aluminum and rust in the towers.


Steel was destroyed and finite element analysis was put in its place because the modeling of far-from-equilibrium systems - which is what the towers approaching collapse initiation were - produces noise, grey....ambiguity. (Looking inside the box columns would have been too definitive.)


Generating ambiguity to shield against both detection and prosecution is extremely effective.

People could argue until the cows come home about whether the Spinning Silhouette is turning clockwise or counterclockwise. (The real answer is neither. It's an illusion on a flat screen.)

Ambiguity is one of MILDEC's most powerful weapons.

The ambiguity generator - the ambiguator - is elegantly characterized by the cusp catastrophe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catastrophe_theory).


Singularity theory, good people, is what is needed to see through MILDEC.


The one, the only,

Max
Max

* * *

That's too complex. Too many people involved, Too many variables to leave up to chance.

Come over to URUK-LIHOP brand conspiracy thoery.
Join now and we'll cut your price in half on the next conspiracy theory you choose to follow.

Try a new one each month free and pay later. If you are not 100% satisfied we will refund your sense of reason and we'll even pay for the shipping charges.

So try URUK-LIHOP now. Operators are waiting. You'll be glad you did.

[Mr. Skinny]

That's too complex. Too many people involved, Too many variables to leave up to chance.

Come over to URUK-LIHOP brand conspiracy thoery.
Join now and we'll cut your price in half on the next conspiracy theory you choose to follow.

Try a new one each month free and pay later. If you are not 100% satisfied we will refund your sense of reason and we'll even pay for the shipping charges.

So try URUK-LIHOP now. Operators are waiting. You'll be glad you did.
I dunno.

Since you don't have one of those "Time Left to Call" countdown clocks in your post, I'm gonna think about it for a while.

[uruk]

Here is what I think of LIHOP.


Max

* * *

Can you be a little more ambiguous than that Max?
I almost didn't get what you were saying in that post.




I know why the caged MAX sings.

[uruk]

I dunno.

Since you don't have one of those "Time Left to Call" countdown clocks in your post, I'm gonna think about it for a while.

We've got cookies.

[pomeroo]

The "hijackers" only had one shot.


And good shooting, too!

They took out WTCs 1, 2 AND 7!

Three birds with two stones!

And right down to the nub - all three towers.


Come to think of it, 911 never happened, because the "hijackers" only had one shot, and to do what they did - take over and fly commercial jets by hand, defeat the US Military in the most heavily defended airspace on earth, hit the towers - just so - so that THREE completely collapsed, with just ONE CHANCE AND NO PRACTICE - is impossible.


Right Mikillini?


Max

* * *




Why do you continue to lie, Max?

Your thermite fantasies were exposed as uninformed nonsense.

You lack the intelligence to comprehend Apathoid's paper.

Now, you try the ancient canard about "the most heavily defended airspace on earth."

You are lying, Max.

[Myriad]

* * *


Greetings Everyone!


The purpose of this thread is to explore the questions:


Is it possible that the WTC collapse-initiation mechanisms are being cloaked by U.S. military-deception (MILDEC)?

How would MILDEC be undertaken, and sustained over time?

What does it take to see through MILDEC?


For the neophytes, please refer to:

Joint Publication 3-13.4: Military Deception (MILDEC) (http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/new_pubs/jp3_13_4.pdf)
(PDF file)

Note: Appendix A has a terrific 2-page summary: MILDEC MAXIMS

From Psyop to MINDWAR: The Psychology of Victory (http://www.xeper.org/maquino/nm/MindWar.pdf)
(PDF file)

Mass Media: The 10th Principle of War? (http://stinet.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=ADA293289)

Military Operations in the CNN World: Using the Media as a Force Multiplier (http://stinet.dtic.mil/oai/oai?&verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=ADA307447)

Manufacturing Consent (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5631882395226827730&q=manufacturing+consent&total=111&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1)
(video)


This is a very interesting topic. And simple!

All we need to do is to look at other strategic deceptions, and see how they were carried out.


The prime strategic deception has to be the USDollar.

Synthetic currency is the ultimate weapon of world control and domination, and the USDollar's value is being engineered above zero using deception.

So the trick will be to map from this strategic hoax - (or others) - to 911.


Cheers!

Max Photon

Dept. of Unformation

* * *


I know it might seem that some larger, more powerful force must have been involved somehow. It's hard to believe that a few motivated men could have possibly been so successful, dealing such a devastating blow within a few hours, demanding the world's attention. It certainly doesn't appear that Washington even attempted any defense at all. And it's clear that Washington's counterattack was delayed, feeble, and misdirected.

But it's not MILDEC.

The New England Patriots really are that good.

Respectfully,
Myriad

[uruk]

Good post, Uruk. It's actually an area that I had felt was most plausible over any other junk put out there. Why would the pseudo-perpetrators go to such lengths as to implant civilian buildings with catalyzing materials in order for them to collapse? An assurance that more lives will be lost. Financial center buildings that through their total destruction, along with massive loss of life, was how much damage to the economy would this create? Involving airlines that nearly went bankrupt after 9/11, and to further add to this, crashing flight 77 into the Pentagon and # 93 in Shanksville. All set up by the government? MILDEC?
MAXDEC is what promotes a conspiracy so elaborate in it's design. This was a pseudo-plan that had only one chance to work, only one time it would work, the planes had to hit their designated targets. In order for it to be effective, it had to. What are the odds of that compared to hijackers taking the planes over and flying them into targets they pre-planned to strike?

I think CD CTers prefer the idea of a Rube Goldberg-esk plan. It allows them to do "research" by staring for hours at youtube videos, and pictures and devising complex scenarios. Creating websites and simulation videos. Using engineering formulas (More like abusing) and sciency sounding words and terminology.
It makes them feel smarter, that they are doing something heroic with a computer, an internet account, cases of redbull, and lot of free time in thier parent's basement.

It also allows them to satisfy a need to rebel against an establishment and feed thier distrust of authority and hatred of government.

A chance to be different and provacative. (hopefully to impress some chicks)

Ever wonder why most CTers are young adult males?

Others also see it as an oppurtunity to make money or get attention off of the CT community.

There is a thread over in the Literature forum that touches on Sci-fi conventioneers and the vendors that feed off that group. A similar thing is happening in the CT subculture.


It's a very interesting Sociological phenomenon

[uruk]

The "hijackers" only had one shot. That's not true. If they had missed the towers one time, they could have banked around and tried another pass.
If the planes had been intercepted, the Military jets would have been forced to do nothing or shoot the planes down over the city. The burning wreakage would have fallen in densely populated areas and would still have cause plenty of death, devistation and fear. It was a win/win scenario for the terrorists.

And good shooting, too! How hard could it have been to aim an airplane at a huge building? They were the tallest things out there. Kind of hard to miss.

They took out WTCs 1, 2 AND 7!

Three birds with two stones!

And right down to the nub - all three towers. Sometimes you get lucky (albeit from horrible, perverse perspective) To be honest I don't think the terrorists were expecting that sort of devistation. Although I'm sure they are not complaining.
The plan would still have been effective even if the buildings still remained standing.


Come to think of it, 911 never happened, because the "hijackers" only had one shot, and to do what they did - take over and fly commercial jets by hand, defeat the US Military in the most heavily defended airspace on earth, hit the towers - just so - so that THREE completely collapsed, with just ONE CHANCE AND NO PRACTICE - is impossible.



Right Mikillini?


Max

* * *
Actually the conspiracy hypothesis you describe is actually way more improbable than the scenario you are criticising.
The terrorists had several possible scenarios that would have been as devistating if they had missed the towers or had been shot down. Thier plan was perfect. They didn't have to defeat any defenses. Confusion and hesitation by our responders was on thier side. That would have allowed them at leat two or three attempts at hitting the buildings. While thosein command wreastled with the decision to shoot down the airplane over a densely populated city. There is no way to physicaly force an airplane to a specific area you want via another air plane.

MAX-MIHOP requires that every single part of the plan happens precisely to work. If the planes had never hit the buildings or had been shot down by interdiction, the operatives would not have been able to set off the charges in the buildings.
The remote control or computer control system malfunctioning. Or the plans not hitting the right areas of the buildings.

Then there is also accidental discovery of the "shock tubes". Or exposure of the operatives planting thermite throughout the building. The lasers and targeting system working properly. One of the many operatives developing a conscience and exposing evidence. etc..
The list goes on of all the things that could have gone wrong with MAX-MIHOP

[technoextreme]

The "hijackers" only had one shot.


And good shooting, too!

They took out WTCs 1, 2 AND 7!

Three birds with two stones!

And right down to the nub - all three towers.


oHMhb69w4X0
Actually they took out more buildings than that than just those three. If Max Photon can't even get the simplest of facts straight.....

[Max Photon]

oHMhb69w4X0
Actually they took out more buildings than that than just those three. If Max Photon can't even get the simplest of facts straight.....


...then he's nonlinear - perfect for the task at hand.


* * *

[Max Photon]

That's not true. If they had missed the towers one time, they could have banked around and tried another pass.
If the planes had been intercepted, the Military jets would have been forced to do nothing or shoot the planes down over the city. The burning wreakage would have fallen in densely populated areas and would still have cause plenty of death, devistation and fear. It was a win/win scenario for the terrorists.

How hard could it have been to aim an airplane at a huge building? They were the tallest things out there. Kind of hard to miss.

Sometimes you get lucky (albeit from horrible, perverse perspective) To be honest I don't think the terrorists were expecting that sort of devistation. Although I'm sure they are not complaining.
The plan would still have been effective even if the buildings still remained standing.


Actually the conspiracy hypothesis you describe is actually way more improbable than the scenario you are criticising.
The terrorists had several possible scenarios that would have been as devistating if they had missed the towers or had been shot down. Thier plan was perfect. They didn't have to defeat any defenses. Confusion and hesitation by our responders was on thier side. That would have allowed them at leat two or three attempts at hitting the buildings. While thosein command wreastled with the decision to shoot down the airplane over a densely populated city. There is no way to physicaly force an airplane to a specific area you want via another air plane.

MAX-MIHOP requires that every single part of the plan happens precisely to work. If the planes had never hit the buildings or had been shot down by interdiction, the operatives would not have been able to set off the charges in the buildings.
The remote control or computer control system malfunctioning. Or the plans not hitting the right areas of the buildings.

Then there is also accidental discovery of the "shock tubes". Or exposure of the operatives planting thermite throughout the building. The lasers and targeting system working properly. One of the many operatives developing a conscience and exposing evidence. etc..
The list goes on of all the things that could have gone wrong with MAX-MIHOP


Wrong.

The demolition plan outlined by MAX-MIHOP is simple, and has such a strong attractor that demolition planners proceeded with 100% confidence.


* * *

[pomeroo]

Wrong.

The demolition plan outlined by MAX-MIHOP is simple, and has such a strong attractor that demolition planners proceeded with 100% confidence.


* * *


Yes, MAX-MIHOP is extremely simple-minded. There was no thermite used at the WTC complex on the day of the jihadist attacks. Your imaginary conspiracy is mathematically impossible. Apathoid's paper demolishes your lies about remote-controlled Boeing 767s and 757s.

It's like slapping a sick baby off a chamber pot.

[Pardalis]

Apathoid's paper? I missed that.

Can someone forward me to a link?

[Mr. Skinny]

***

Uruk-LIHOP is more attractive than MAX-MIHOP. It's simple and makes more sense than MAX-MIHOP.

MAX-MIHOP can't substantiate his theories. No evidence of thermite. Can't even spec the laser that he claim ignited the supposed thermite.

His theories are amusing, but don't seem to stand up to close scrutiny.

I'm sorry Max, I tried to keep an open mind, but for now, your theories seem kinda nutty.

You have a great imagination though, an I'm sure you'll come up with something better.

Folks, don't fall for MAXDEC.

Cheers,

Skinny

***

[pomeroo]

Apathoid's paper? I missed that.

Can someone forward me to a link?


It strikes a powerful--indeed, mortal-- blow to the fantasist mythos:

http://911myths.com/Remote_Takeover.pdf

[Pardalis]

It strikes a powerful--indeed, mortal-- blow to the fantasist mythos:

http://911myths.com/Remote_Takeover.pdf


Thanks, another one for my collection. :)

[uruk]

Wrong.

The demolition plan outlined by MAX-MIHOP is simple, and has such a strong attractor that demolition planners proceeded with 100% confidence.


* * *

Come on MAX, you know that's not true.
MAX-MIHOP is so rediculously complex it takes several web pages to fully explain it.

URUK-LIHOP just takes two paragraphs.

The official explination is even simpler than that

[Max Photon]

* * *

I'm a bit surprised no one has said a word about:


singularity theory
stable manifolds
cusp catastrophes
ambiguity

It's like you guys are being cloaked.


Max

* * *

[Reality Believer]

It's like you guys are being cloaked.

There is no cloaking device.

[Alareth]

* * *

I'm a bit surprised no one has said a word about:

singularity theory
stable manifolds
cusp catastrophes
ambiguityIt's like you guys are being cloaked.


Max

* * *


Could that possibly have something to do with the fact such things are totally irrelevant to the events of 9/11?

[Max Photon]

Could that possibly have something to do with the fact such things are totally irrelevant to the events of 9/11?


Sorry my friend.

History will show that 911 is a cusp catastrophe.

Do not dismiss as irrelevant that which you do not understand.


Max Relevance

* * *

[twinstead]

I'm surprised that none of you has said a word about:

Cambodian Cuisine
Spongebob
Dung Beetles

It's like you guys are being cloaked...

[twinstead]

Do not dismiss as irrelevant that which you do not understand.


Wow. Who knew superiority complex was one of your afflictions?

[JimBenArm]

Sorry my friend.

History will show that 911 is a cusp catastrophe.

Do not dismiss as irrelevant that which you do not understand.


Max Relevance

* * *
Not sorry. Pathetic.
I do understand. It's you who fail in understanding. It was a bicuspid catastrophe, precipitated by the overbite of prepubescent keyboarders with an undeserved over-inflated sense of self-worth and ego, fractured on the molars of reality.

Jim Nasium

* * *

[HyJinX]

Not sorry. Pathetic.
I do understand. It's you who fail in understanding. It was a bicuspid catastrophe, precipitated by the overbite of prepubescent keyboarders with an undeserved over-inflated sense of self-worth and ego, fractured on the molars of reality.

Jim Nasium

* * *

The perfection of this post brings tears to my eyes.

[Alareth]

Max is a performance artist and sophism is his medium.

[technoextreme]

Do not dismiss as irrelevant that which you do not understand.
We don't dismiss it because of the fact that we understand. No we understand it perfectly. We dismiss it because it defies the laws of physics.

[sackett]

Folks, listen for a sec. Max is a good example of the kind of person ChristineR was talking about when she argued that we shouldn't, as a matter of common decency, play games with the certifiable. If Max isn't barking, babbling, word-salad-tossing nucking futz, then Mother's quit making it. He's not talking to any of you, he's answering The Voices.

Dr. Adequate advised Max to get help. I doubt that that simple message will get through, but it's all Dr. A could do. I'd do the same, but once is enough.

Now I'm going to observe a moment of silence for Max Futon -- a long moment, as they say in the romance novels. For decency's sake.

[Swing Dangler]

The oath goes something like this:


Sabrina, I appreciate your service to this country. With that said, why do you think NORAD felt the need to lie to the 9/11 Commission, the American people, and to Congress?

Sabrina, why did the military agree to carry out experiments against other military personnel in cooperation with the CIA?
Source: USA Today (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-04-05-army-experiments_N.htm)

Sabrina, why did the military conduct radiation experiments against U.S. citizens? Source: Markowitz, Gerald E.
"A Little Touch of Buchenwald": America's Secret Radiation Experiments (http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=/journals/reviews_in_american_history/v028/28.4markowitz.html)

Sabrina, why did the military conduct germ warfare tests on U.S. citizens?
Source: Clouds of Secrecy (http://www.amazon.com/Clouds-Secrecy-Populated-Littlefield-Paperback/dp/082263001X).

Sabrina, I do agree that most American soldiers live to and abide by the oath that you posted. However, history tells us that the military is not above and beyond doing harmful things against their own troops and American citizens. I know that maybe difficult to understand from your point of view, but facts are facts. And in many cases the leaders of American military institutions do not necessarily have the citizens best interests at heart but instead American corporate foreign policy. Operation Northwoods anyone?

[Swing Dangler]

Folks, listen for a sec. Max is a good example of the kind of person ChristineR was talking about when she argued that we shouldn't, as a matter of common decency, play games with the certifiable.e.

What many if all of you fail to realize is that Max is taking the extended route to get to his point albeit through the use of humor and extended fielding of nonsensical comments.

I think CD CTers prefer the idea of a Rube Goldberg-esk plan. It allows them to do "research" by staring for hours at youtube videos, and pictures and devising complex scenarios. Creating websites and simulation videos. Using engineering formulas (More like abusing) and sciency sounding words and terminology.
It makes them feel smarter, that they are doing something heroic with a computer, an internet account, cases of redbull, and lot of free time in thier parent's basement.

No, I think CT'ers are trying to explain what NIST couldn't do..."provide a full explanation of the total collapse." Explosives and MAXMIHOP do that quite nicely of course.
Or at the very least, to help future engineering and construction efforts resist global collapse by fire other than the wonderful advice of more fire proofing.

[uruk]

Sorry my friend.

History will show that 911 is a cusp catastrophe.

Do not dismiss as irrelevant that which you do not understand.


Max Relevance

* * *

I think your wrong MAX the behaiviour of the paper flying around disguising the thermite flashes clearly shows the events to be a Hyperbolic umbilic catastrophe

Clearly floating paper superimposed wave diffraction in the light wave eminating from the ignited thermite which was radiating in a three dimenional manifold. The light which impinged upon the cameras CCDs had several frequencies cancelled out due to Forrier analysis thus breaking the waves into umbilic structurers of probability of detection. Of course this would result in invoking a bifucation inversion upon those interpreting the videos.

Those who watch the video will fall into one of two states. Those who believe the flashes are igniting thermite and those who don't. Cusp catastrophe modeling will show the fold point at which those who don't believe the flashes are igniting thermite will become nauseated by those who contine to harp on about thermite.

[technoextreme]

No, I think CT'ers are trying to explain what NIST couldn't do..."provide a full explanation of the total collapse." Explosives and MAXMIHOP do that quite nicely of course.
Or at the very least, to help future engineering and construction efforts resist global collapse by fire other than the wonderful advice of more fire proofing.
Hahahah..... Muahahahha..... Explosives don't work. Only people who have no clue what they are talking about takes that seriously. Not only that but your wrong about the only advice being more fire proofing.

[uruk]

We don't dismiss it because of the fact that we understand. No we understand it perfectly. We dismiss it because it defies the laws of physics.

Then there is my favorite saying. " Just because I don't care doesn't mean I don't understand." Homer Simpson.

[Sabrina]

Sabrina, I appreciate your service to this country. With that said, why do you think NORAD felt the need to lie to the 9/11 Commission, the American people, and to Congress?

Sabrina, why did the military agree to carry out experiments against other military personnel in cooperation with the CIA?
Source: USA Today (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-04-05-army-experiments_N.htm)

Sabrina, why did the military conduct radiation experiments against U.S. citizens? Source: Markowitz, Gerald E.
"A Little Touch of Buchenwald": America's Secret Radiation Experiments (http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=/journals/reviews_in_american_history/v028/28.4markowitz.html)

Sabrina, why did the military conduct germ warfare tests on U.S. citizens?
Source: Clouds of Secrecy (http://www.amazon.com/Clouds-Secrecy-Populated-Littlefield-Paperback/dp/082263001X).

Sabrina, I do agree that most American soldiers live to and abide by the oath that you posted. However, history tells us that the military is not above and beyond doing harmful things against their own troops and American citizens. I know that maybe difficult to understand from your point of view, but facts are facts. And in many cases the leaders of American military institutions do not necessarily have the citizens best interests at heart but instead American corporate foreign policy. Operation Northwoods anyone?

And not ONE of those examples cited are recent; they all date back to the seventies or earlier (could not access the second link however, so I may possibly be wrong). Not to mention, number one was conducted on VOLUNTEERS, BY the military, ON the military, not on the general American population. There's an old Army rule; "Never volunteer". Those men volunteered; therefore, it is on them and not the individuals conducting the experiment if any adverse effects had manifested. A cold attitude, perhaps, but legitimate. Irregardless, I don't believe you could cite one RECENT example of the sorts of things you are arguing, SD. And by recent, I mean in the last decade. And it must be perpetrated by the US Military ON the population of the US, not another country. I'm not about to argue about what happened in Abu Ghraib or any potential "torture" tactics possibly utilized on detainees; they have no bearing on my argument. My argument is, the vast majority (in other words, I recognize that not every member of the military has the best interests of the American people in mind, but their number is so small as to be laughable) of the US Military could not condone the deliberate murder of nearly three thousand United States citizens, not when they had sworn an oath to die protecting them if the need arose. Nor could they knowingly be involved in such an operation as Max had insinuated in his OP and several follow-up posts. That is the source of my outrage; not any possible actions carried out well in the past by the US military (and I believe the lack of such actions recently points out eloquently that the military learned their lesson in doing such things). How about you cite me something recent and perhaps I can adjust my opinion; in the meantime, do not tell me how to feel about my service to this country and the service of my fellow soldiers.

[Swing Dangler]

And not ONE of those examples cited are recent; they all date back to the seventies or earlier (could not access the second link however, so I may possibly be wrong). Not to mention, number one was conducted on VOLUNTEERS, BY the military, ON the military, not on the general American population.

There's an old Army rule; "Never volunteer". Those men volunteered; therefore, it is on them and not the individuals conducting the experiment if any adverse effects had manifested. A cold attitude, perhaps, but legitimate.
Legitimate if the volunteers knew exactly was going to become of them. And for some reason I don't think they did. Wow, I'm surprised you can legitimize those types of activities just because the subjects were in the military.

Irregardless, I don't believe you could cite one RECENT example of the sorts of things you are arguing, SD. And by recent, I mean in the last decade. A time frame eh? Ok, I will try.
UNITED STATES CODE
* TITLE 50 - WAR AND NATIONAL DEFENSE
o CHAPTER 32 - CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WARFARE PROGRAM
1520. Use of human subjects for testing of chemical or biological agents by Department of Defense; accounting to Congressional committees with respect to experiments and studies; notification of local civilian officials

* (a) Not later than thirty days after final approval within the Department of Defense of plans for any experimentor study to be conducted by the Department of Defense, whether directly or under contract, involving the use of human subjects for the testing of chemical or biological agents, the Secretary of Defense shall supply the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives with a full accounting of such plans for such experiment or study, and such experiment or study may then be conducted only after the expiration of the thirty-day period beginning on the date such accounting is received by such committees.
* (b)
o (1) The Secretary of Defense may not conduct any test or experiment involving the use of any chemical or biological agent on civilian populations unless local civilian officials in the area in which the test or experiment is to be conducted are notified in advance of such test or experiment, and such test or experiment may then be conducted only after the expiration of the thirty-day period beginning on the date of such notification.
o (2) Paragraph (1) shall apply to tests and experiments conducted by Department of Defense personnel and tests and experiments conducted on behalf of the Department of Defense by contractors.

This section, 1520, was quietly repealed by the passing of H. R. 1119, the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal years 1998 and 1999. Section 1078 of this bill prohibits the DoD, either directly or by contract, from conducting tests or experiments using chemical or biological agents on human subjects (with exceptions).

So your time frame may put a damper on the challenge you issued. Is that why you stated 'the last decade' because of this repeal of the above section?
Do you think something as atrocious as human experimentation would be declassified in 10 years? Probably not.

My argument is, the vast majority (in other words, I recognize that not every member of the military has the best interests of the American people in mind, but their number is so small as to be laughable) of [QUOTE]the US Military could not condone the deliberate murder of nearly three thousand United States citizens
I agree but that doesn't necessarily apply to those who make the decisions.
I don't think it is is the 'how many' that is at issue, but what if any command post do they hold.
How about you cite me something recent and perhaps I can adjust my opinion;
Did the NORAD lied issue not strike your fancy?

Hmmm, considering all of those were classified at one point in time, it might be a difficult undertaking to provide recent examples. I'm sure if I could, the mainstream news could provide you with the story much quicker than I could.

[milesalpha]

All I can say is that it's funny that these other conspiracies leave broad paper trails (which is the way these things are broken down by historians) and yet what would arguably be the biggest conspiracy in history didn't seem to leave so much as a post-it note.

[Sabrina]

I don't pretend to know why NORAD "lied", although given what I know of the military (more than you I'd bet) I'm sure all it boils down to is a simple CYA approach versus any ill intent. I ignored it because it isn't relevant to the argument at hand.

And yes, I feel justified in saying what I said about those volunteers. The plain fact of the matter is, neither you nor I can know what was told to those men unless we find them and talk to them about it, and given that the article you cited didn't have any sensationalist claims by those soldiers about "I didn't know what I was in for", my guess is they WERE told exactly what the purpose of the study was and leapt at the chance to legitimately come up hot on their next urinalysis. Do you have ANY idea how many people in my brigade came up hot on their urinalysis on a quarterly basis? I do, and it was a heck of a lot more than this study, my point being that even back then soldiers were looking for ways to relax and didn't mind turning to the drugs to do it. You seriously believe that soldiers are exempt from the temptations of drugs? If you believe that, you're more naive than I gave you credit for. Plus, do you HONESTLY think the media would have held that back if they'd had that information? Especially given the date of that article? I don't think so.

As for that code you cited, I knew nothing about it until you cited it just now, so no, it had nothing to do with my quoted timeframe. I simply wanted you to find something after the seventies that supported your insinuations. Tell you what; I'll take anything from the nineties on; sound good? Find me something that might make me adjust my stand.

And actually, that oath I mentioned applies more to the individuals in charge than it does the regular grunt. Violations of that oath, if discovered, carry an extremely heavy penalty, up to and including the death penalty. Any officer who's reached the rank of O-6 or above is well aware of that, which is usually enough to make them think twice (or more) about doing such a thing. Not to mention they'd have a hard time finding people to carry out the operations to begin with, as it is still lawful for a soldier to disobey an order if that order will break either federal or state law or will violate the UCMJ. And it's impossible for a high-ranking officer to carry out such an operation without at least SOME cooperation. I'm sorry, but my original premise stands; no member of the Armed Forces would EVER want to participate in an operation that would lead to the deaths of nearly three thousand American citizens, the very ones they are sworn to protect with their lives. If there is one, he or she deserves court martial and jail.

So find me an example; go on. I'm waiting.

[Max Photon]

* * *

Sabrina,

To be clear, I am saying a tiny criminal rogue element - a secret or parallel government - USED the military - or better, ABUSED the military - as a conduit for the 911 synthetic terror attacks.

As I am describing it, I wouldn't take this as the slightest slight against the US military.

I'm actually saying the military got screwed!

I doubt that helps, but I hope it does.

Max

* * *

[uruk]

* * *

Sabrina,

To be clear, I am saying a tiny criminal rogue element - a secret or parallel government - USED the military - or better, ABUSED the military - as a conduit for the 911 synthetic terror attacks.

As I am describing it, I wouldn't take this as the slightest slight against the US military.

I'm actually saying the military got screwed!

I doubt that helps, but I hope it does.

Max
* * *
Well then who did the "tiny criminal Rogue element" use to set the thermite and wire up the shock tubes and rigg the airplanes for remote control, set up and control the lasers, and fake the phone calls etc..?

"Tiny" would preclude that they did it themselves.

If it was military being duped, you'd figgure someone would question the act of rigging a civilian building with explosives.
I don't think there is anyone that dumb to think that blowing up a building filled with civilians as "for the greater good" of the country.

Why would the military willingly kill thousands of the people they are sworn to protect with thier lives?

[Sabrina]

Well then who did the "tiny criminal Rogue element" use to set the thermite and wire up the shock tubes and rigg the airplanes for remote control, set up and control the lasers, and fake the phone calls etc..?

"Tiny" would preclude that they did it themselves.

If it was military being duped, you'd figgure someone would question the act of rigging a civilian building with explosives.
I don't think there is anyone that dumb to think that blowing up a building filled with civilians as "for the greater good" of the country.

Why would the military willingly kill thousands of the people they are sworn to protect with thier lives?

The short answer is, they wouldn't. And there'd be almost no way to hide it from them either. Contrary to what may or may not be popular belief, the majority of the soldiers in the Army are highly educated men and women. You can't even be an officer unless you have at LEAST a bachelor's degree, and I'll bet pretty soon it will have to be as high as a master's before you can get promoted to field grade level (i.e. O-5 and above, if I recall correctly).

The plain fact of the matter is, the military is not populated by idiots. And whatever else you're saying, Max, you're still insinuating that the US Armed Forces wouldn't be able to figure this out, therefore you are still insulting those of us in service. Even if they didn't figure it out beforehand, you don't think they MIGHT figure it out after and then be able to retaliate against the perpetrators? Come ON; even YOU aren't that naive. NO ONE covers their tracks THAT well.

[Alareth]

No, I think CT'ers are trying to explain what NIST couldn't do..."provide a full explanation of the total collapse."


No, I think CT'ers are confused about what NIST did. It's not that they couldn't "provide a full explanation of the total collapse.", they weren't tasked with that job. I cannot comprehend why some people have such a difficult problem understanding such a simple concept.

NIST was given the job to study and determine how the collapse BEGAN and nothing else. And that is exactly what they did. Once they fulfilled that goal they stopped.

Criticizing them for not doing something that falls outside the scope of their mandate in regards to compiling the report is, IMHO, sheer stupidity.

[Max Photon]

The short answer is, they wouldn't. And there'd be almost no way to hide it from them either. Contrary to what may or may not be popular belief, the majority of the soldiers in the Army are highly educated men and women. You can't even be an officer unless you have at LEAST a bachelor's degree, and I'll bet pretty soon it will have to be as high as a master's before you can get promoted to field grade level (i.e. O-5 and above, if I recall correctly).

The plain fact of the matter is, the military is not populated by idiots. And whatever else you're saying, Max, you're still insinuating that the US Armed Forces wouldn't be able to figure this out, therefore you are still insulting those of us in service. Even if they didn't figure it out beforehand, you don't think they MIGHT figure it out after and then be able to retaliate against the perpetrators? Come ON; even YOU aren't that naive. NO ONE covers their tracks THAT well.


They don't hide their tracks.

They hide everything in plain view.

Game theory told MILDEC planners no one would look there.


MinMax

* * *

[Sabrina]

Which only illustrates my point. You're basically implying that the military would have either had the wool pulled over their eyes or would have been at least generally aware of the situation but helpless to stop it? Uh-uh. The first is extremely insulting, the latter, extremely unlikely. I can guarantee you that if there were even the slightest HINT that something were off about 9/11, the military would have been all over it. They LOST people that day; not only the civilians, but fellow members of the military, men and women they'd served with. That creates a very strong bond that would have DEMANDED follow-up. As of right now, the only thing that the military thinks is "off" about 9/11 is that the warnings were ignored or dismissed; most people I've talked to who've critically examined the events of that day agree that otherwise, all of the blame lies squarely with Al Qaeda. You're being deliberately obtuse, Max, and I'm sick of it. Stop acting like you know how the military works, because the plain fact of the matter is, you don't. You know NOTHING about the military. Accept that fact and move on. I'm done with this conversation.

[JimBenArm]

Which only illustrates my point. You're basically implying that the military would have either had the wool pulled over their eyes or would have been at least generally aware of the situation but helpless to stop it? Uh-uh. The first is extremely insulting, the latter, extremely unlikely. I can guarantee you that if there were even the slightest HINT that something were off about 9/11, the military would have been all over it. They LOST people that day; not only the civilians, but fellow members of the military, men and women they'd served with. That creates a very strong bond that would have DEMANDED follow-up. As of right now, the only thing that the military thinks is "off" about 9/11 is that the warnings were ignored or dismissed; most people I've talked to who've critically examined the events of that day agree that otherwise, all of the blame lies squarely with Al Qaeda. You're being deliberately obtuse, Max, and I'm sick of it. Stop acting like you know how the military works, because the plain fact of the matter is, you don't. You know NOTHING about the military. Accept that fact and move on. I'm done with this conversation.
Oh, but don't you know that people who have never even SEEN a real, live servicemember know so much more about the military than those of us who were brainwashed by our service? We should just bow down before his superior knowledge of how the military world works, since our shrivelled cortexes are unable to penetrate the MILDEC.

[Sabrina]

Oh, but don't you know that people who have never even SEEN a real, live servicemember know so much more about the military than those of us who were brainwashed by our service? We should just bow down before his superior knowledge of how the military world works, since our shrivelled cortexes are unable to penetrate the MILDEC.

:rolleyes:

Thanks Jim; you just restored my sense of humor over the whole shebang. *chuckles* My appreciation.

[WildCat]

Is this the current state of the CTist movement?
Mental illness seems to be rampant in the CT world.

[Swing Dangler]

No, I think CT'ers are confused about what NIST did. It's not that they couldn't "provide a full explanation of the total collapse.", they weren't tasked with that job. I cannot comprehend why some people have such a difficult problem understanding such a simple concept.

NIST was given the job to study and determine how the collapse BEGAN and nothing else. And that is exactly what they did. Once they fulfilled that goal they stopped.

Criticizing them for not doing something that falls outside the scope of their mandate in regards to compiling the report is, IMHO, sheer stupidity.

No need to substitute your own opinion into NIST statement. They said it and you don't need to defend it.


Sabrina....The plain fact of the matter is, neither you nor I can know what was told to those men unless we find them and talk to them about it, and given that the article you cited didn't have any sensationalist claims by those soldiers about "I didn't know what I was in for", my guess is they WERE told exactly what the purpose of the study was and leapt at the chance to legitimately come up hot on their next urinalysis.

Wrong.
Let me cite you one example of a volunteer who thought he was volunteering to do something honorable but instead something terrible was done to him.
Master Sergeant Stanley was stationed with his wife and children at Fort Knox, Kentucky. Responding to a posted notice, he volunteered to be a subject in a study advertised as developing and testing measures against chemical weapons. He then became one of thousands of men to be transferred to Edgewood Arsenal in Aberdeen, Maryland, for LSD experiments.
Source: Find Articles (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1374/is_5_59/ai_55722247)
The test was advertised as one thing and in reality was quite the opposite and rather nefarious.
But Stanley was never told that the clear liquid he drank for the test contained a psychoactive drug, nor was he debriefed or monitored for the hallucinations that followed, nor did he understand the source of the emotional problems that disrupted his personal life, leading finally to his divorce in 1970. In 1975 Stanley finally learned the truth when he received a letter from the army asking him to come to the Walter Reed Medical Center in Washington, D.C., for a follow-up study of the LSD subjects.

Stanley was one of several veterans who sued the government for the suffering the LSD experiments caused them.

Sabrina, the 1990's are the only time frame I can operate in? If acts agasint the American public did occur in the 1990's, do you think that would be public knowledge at this time?
I can offer one at this time...the lack of training when handling depleted Uranium when in fact a training video was produced to show military personnel.
Source: Information Clearing House (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article3581.htm)
The training materials were intended to instruct servicemen and women about the use and hazards of depleted uranium munitions. In addition, the training regimen included instructions for soldiers who repair and recover vehicles contaminated by depleted uranium.

Throughout 1996, these videos sat on a shelf, while U.S. soldiers continued to use and work with depleted uranium munitions. In June 1997, Bernard Rostker, The Department of Defense (DoD) principle spokesperson for their investigation of Gulf War hazardous exposures, stated that the depleted uranium safety training program would begin to be shared by a limited number of servicemen and women in July 1997.

STILL TODAY the vast majority of servicemen and women in the U.S. military, and likely in the armed forces of other countries which are developing or have obtained depleted uranium munitions, are unaware of the use and dangers of depleted uranium munitions, or of the protective clothing and procedures which can minimize or prevent serious short-term exposures.

Oh, but don't you know that people who have never even SEEN a real, live servicemember know so much more about the military than those of us who were brainwashed by our service?
Hmm lets see if this statement holds any water at least in regards to my own experience with the military.
Father-U.S.M.C. Vietnam-1962-1964, mortar platoon.
Step-Father-U.S.M.C. Vietnam-1967-1968 tank gunner.
Grandfather-Trainer for WW 2 pilots in an AT-6 Texan, founder of the cadet club Grissom AFB. Recruited to fly "off the books" in Vietnam by C.I.A. (thankfully he refused.)
Father-in-law- (real)U.S. army, experimental subject atomic bomb blasts in the mid west. Korean conflict.
Father-in-law (adopted) 82nd-101st Airborne, WW 2, invasion of Normandy, Battle of the Bulge.
Friend From High School-Gulf War I.
Colleague and close friend-Gulf War 2, currently suffering from PTSD, and slight head trauma. MP/Security for a big bird. He was also introduced to the Iranian nationalist woman's terrorist group. The name escapes me now but they are identified as a terrorist group by the state department.
Colleague and close friend-U.S. Army, Air Defense, Cold War, 1978, Greece
Colleague and close friend-U.S. Army, Explosive Ordinance expert, nuclear proliferation expert. As a side note, he doesn't believe a passenger plane hit the Pentagon as related to me.
Best Friend-U.S. Navy Radar repairman, -1989-1993. Indian Ocean.

So although it is true I've never served, I've been surrounded by persons in the military throughout my whole life. So I don't think your statement applies to me. The lack of service doesn't negate knowledge. You speak from one experience, I speak from numerous experiences as related to me by friends, family members, and colleagues.

Sabrina-Contrary to what may or may not be popular belief, the majority of the soldiers in the Army are highly educated men and women.
Source please?

[Sabrina]

Don't have a source; I was citing an observation of my own, wherein I have seen some individuals (hence the may or may not be popular belief; I haven't been exposed to enough indications to be able to conduct a survey, I'm simply extrapolating from personal experience) treat soldiers like they were idiots, when most of them had completed high school and in many cases had degrees of one sort or another, as well has had undergone extensive training of one kind or another. I was not stating a fact, merely an opinion, and last I checked, I don't need to provide a source for it beyond personal experience, which I've mentioned.

As for being surrounded by military individuals, do you honestly believe that's a good enough substitute for actually serving? If you do, I'm sorry, but you're acting ridiculous. There is no way to judge until you have served yourself; until then, kindly keep your so-called "experience" to yourself.

As for the study; why was that individual and the others with him not named in that article you cited initially? How do you know he's not fabricating an excuse to sue the government? I'll reserve judgment on that case until I've read about it further, but you seem oddly eager to accept the case at face value when there may in fact be a lot more to it than is shown in the media, a notoriously biased medium for news. And yes, that's another OPINION, so kindly don't ask for a source.

And yes, I do believe acts against the American public would be a matter of public record, whether the details are classified or not, especially if the military was involved. I've given you a period of nearly 20 years to play with; heck, add on the eighties if you feel you need to. That's almost thirty years; find me something. After twenty-five years, it shouldn't be classified any longer, if that's your concern.

And as for the example you cited, I'll be the first to admit that safety was not always on the mind when something had to get done quickly. I can recall several times when a soldier on my post was involved in a safety-related accident that could have been prevented if they'd just followed protocol; heck, one was in my battalion that required an investigation all the way from DoD itself. Safety, sadly, is not always a number-one priority with soldiers themselves; they sidestep it in favor of getting their job done quicker. That's not to say those soldiers were to blame, but they may have had a POS commander who preferred making himself look good instead of taking care of his soldiers (sadly, they still exist, albeit as a dying species thankfully). No system is perfect; I'm at a loss as to why you seem to believe the military should be. Regardless, whether it was their commander or the soldiers themselves who sidestepped it, it was clearly corrected or that article wouldn't have been published. I wouldn't doubt that someone's been punished or reprimanded for it. I also find that website rather questionable; regardless of my feelings about the mainstream media, I'd trust them a lot more than some random website that claims to have "news not available on CNN." There are no sources cited, no quotes from the people involved, except in repeating something a DoD spokesperson supposedly said with no source cited; in short, I find it a rather questionable example, but I've treated it as possible based on my own knowledge of the military. I just don't think it's as good an example of possible "misconduct" as you seem to think. So far, you've got a pretty weak case SD; care to step it up?

[Swing Dangler]

Don't have a source; I was citing an observation of my own, wherein I have seen some individuals (hence the may or may not be popular belief; I haven't been exposed to enough indications to be able to conduct a survey, I'm simply extrapolating from personal experience) treat soldiers like they were idiots, when most of them had completed high school and in many cases had degrees of one sort or another, as well has had undergone extensive training of one kind or another. I was not stating a fact, merely an opinion, and last I checked, I don't need to provide a source for it beyond personal experience, which I've mentioned.
[QUOTE]
As for being surrounded by military individuals, do you honestly believe that's a good enough substitute for actually serving? If you do, I'm sorry, but you're acting ridiculous. There is no way to judge until you have served yourself; until then, kindly keep your so-called "experience" to yourself.
One, I received various inputs from people who served in various branches of the military with different MOS's, from different periods of time, from different wars. A survey if you will.
Is that a substitute for serving? Probably not. But with this line of logic, you have to discount and ignore any historical or contempory textbook that examines military conduct, behavior, and operations by authors who didn't serve. You argue from a single point of view, from a single branch of the service, with a single line of experience, your own of course, packed with emotion and patriotism. I argue from a survey of attitudes and descriptions along with a military history field of study.

As for the study; why was that individual and the others with him not named in that article you cited initially? How do you know he's not fabricating an excuse to sue the government?
Sabrina, as one who serves you do realize this subject could not sue the United States government.

I'll reserve judgment on that case until I've read about it further, but you seem oddly eager to accept the case at face value when there may in fact be a lot more to it than is shown in the media, a notoriously biased medium for news.

And yes, I do believe acts against the American public would be a matter of public record, whether the details are classified or not, especially if the military was involved. I've given you a period of nearly 20 years to play with; heck, add on the eighties if you feel you need to. That's almost thirty years; find me something. After twenty-five years, it shouldn't be classified any longer, if that's your concern.
Sabrina, it took the government 30 years as detailed here (http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/07/01/1056825376086.html) to admit to these 50 tests done on our troops and in our country with the possibility of impacting civilians such as could happen through
"Blue Tango", entailed spraying two types of bacteria, including E. coli, in a rainforest in Hawaii in 1968 to gauge how they bacteria would linger in the vegetation.

Another, "Folded Arrow", involved spraying bacillus globigii from a submarine over part of Oahu, Hawaii, and over several boats off the coast in 1968 to gauge how Venezuelan equine encephalitis would be carried by wind.
Not only that, Pentagon officials lied to Congressman Mike Thompson, a California Democrat who raised the issue of chemical and biological testing on human subjects several years ago, said that Pentagon officials told him at the time that the testing "never happened." Then they changed their story to admit the tests, but "not to worry, they only used simulants." Now the military has admitted that real poisons were used, and even that admission in all probability represents less than the whole truth. Source here (http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/oct2002/germ-o18.shtml).
This isn't a case of mistakes, it is a case of coverup. It happens more frequently than you might think.
Again, it makes you wonder why NORAD lied.

Yet you think it would be public knowledge if things like this happened 10 years ago or even 20?? I don't think so. Not only that it could still be going on ...legally..
There's a tricky clause in Chapter 32/Title 50 of the United States Code (the aggregation of US general and permanent laws). Specifically, Section 1520a lists the following cases in which the Secretary of Defense can conduct a chemical or biological agent test or experiment on humans if informed consent has been obtained:

(1) Any peaceful purpose that is related to a medical, therapeutic, pharmaceutical, agricultural, industrial, or research activity.
(2) Any purpose that is directly related to protection against toxic chemicals or biological weapons and agents.
(3) Any law enforcement purpose, including any purpose related to riot control.

The definition is a little too open-ended for comfort; apparently there are a lot of circumstances under which the Secretary of Defense can test chemical or biological agents on human beings, but at least informed consent has to be obtained in advance.

Or does it. Examine if you will 1515, another part of Chapter 32, this one entitled "Suspension; Presidential authorization":

After November 19, 1969, the operation of this chapter, or any portion thereof, may be suspended by the President during the period of any war declared by Congress and during the period of any national emergency declared by Congress or by the President.

You got it. If the President or Congress decides we're at war, which we are, then the Secretary of Defense doesn't need civilian consent to test chemical or biological agents on human beings.


And as for the example you cited, I'll be the first to admit that safety was not always on the mind when something had to get done quickly.
It wasn't safety at all, quite simply a lie as to what was being done to him and other subjects.

I just don't think it's as good an example of possible "misconduct" as you seem to think. So lying to a test subject about the experiment and iits potential results isn't mis conduct? I think you may have been serving under Bush too long.

How quick you are to pass judgment on an article without reading it.
Apparently you missed the remarks from the Supreme Court justices. Here is what the article was adopted from:
Jonathan D. Moreno, a former member of President Clinton's Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments, is director and professor of biomedical ethics at the University of Virginia. This article is adapted from his latest book, Undue Risk: Secret State Experiments on Humans (W. H. Freeman and Company, October 1999).

Oh well here is another try...from the New York Times (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=940DE6DA153CF93AA15752C1A96E9482 60).
The Army's Germ Warfare Against Civilians
By LEONARD A. COLE; LEONARD A. COLE, FACULTY ASSOCIATE IN THE SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND SOCIETY PROGRAM AT RUTGERS UNIVERSITY IN NEWARK, N.J., IS AUTHOR OF A BOOK ON THE ARMY'S GERM WARFARE TESTS IN UNITED STATES CITIES.
Published: November 29, 1988

Here is another example, albeit not from the time frame that you gave me..
Project SHAD (http://www.projectshad.com/)

And to leave you with this thought on military tests on humans in the 21st century from CNN...
Testing new weapons on an unsuspecting American public.
WASHINGTON (AP) — Nonlethal weapons such as high-power microwave devices should be used on American citizens in crowd-control situations before being used on the battlefield, the Air Force secretary said Tuesday.
“If we’re not willing to use it here against our fellow citizens, then we should not be willing to use it in a wartime situation,” said Wynne. “(Because) if I hit somebody with a nonlethal weapon and they claim that it injured them in a way that was not intended, I think that I would be vilified in the world press.”

That just makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside!(Pardon the Pun).

[technoextreme]

And to leave you with this thought on military tests on humans in the 21st century from CNN...
Testing new weapons on an unsuspecting American public.

Wow. My ******** meter is off the scale. Im fairly certain they want to test it with the cops like gas canisters though you cut out the rest of the article. Quite frankly I would be happy with that. Making any assumption about covert testing is just sheer idiocy and paranoia.
This isn't a case of mistakes, it is a case of coverup. It happens more frequently than you might think.
Again, it makes you wonder why NORAD lied.
No it doesn't. You're using conjecture. Engineers would have noticed EnnieMiniMieMoHop because these people are smart.

[Sabrina]

Swing, you deliberately miss my points time and again. Enough. I'm done with this discussion. Until you can argue from logic and not emotion (which you are, regardless of your protestations to the contrary) there's no point in continuing this discussion. You hate Bush so much, as evidenced by nearly every point you make, that there is no changing your mind. So I'm done. Believe what you will about the military. Your type always does.

[Max Photon]

* * *

MILDEC is largely the cross-product of sociology and game theory.

MILDEC uses something akin to CARVER Target Analysis to rank exploitable susceptibilities.

One susceptibility exploited by MILDEC is incredulity.

MILDEC is keenly aware that the vast majority of US citizens - including members of the armed services - will consistently and completely refuse to even entertain that their government could conduct synthetic terror on the population.

Talk about a great place to hide in plain view!

Just conduct the synthetic terror out in the open, and trust that everyone will simply refuse to see it as such, but instead, will project the cause, and blind hatred, onto others.

Sabrina is a perfect example of the exploited.

(But it is not her fault. MILDEC is powerful stuff.)


Max

* * *

[JimBenArm]

MILDEC hides me in plain sight, so I can sneak up behind people and go "bop" on their heads. They turn around to punch me, but because I'm right there in front of them, they can't see me, so they never figure out it's me what done it. Then I make fun of them for being so stupid, and they go home crying! It's so much fun to play MILDEC!

[Narveson]

Since Max continues to us the term "MILDEC", I thought it was timely to post a link to the definition of MILDEC:

http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/new_pubs/jp3_13_4.pdf

As the document shows, the definition of MILDEC is somewhat different from what Max seems to be implying.

[uruk]

Swing Dangler, I noticed you only cited experiment and tests that were perform on soldiers not civilians. The military leaderships don't have much of a problem with using thier own because risk is part of thier job. They justify it by rationalising that it is all a part of protecting the populace.

Do you have any examples where the military conducted tests of that nature on the civilian population?

I would like to see the source of the last story you related. I would like to see the context. It only seems to mention that they would consider it not that they've carried it out.

Anyhoos, testing bacterial propagation on soldiers is one thing. carring out and perpetrating the death of thousands of our own civilians is quite another thing.

I'm assuming that you believe the military would be capable of such an act.

[uruk]

* * *

MILDEC is largely the cross-product of sociology and game theory.

MILDEC uses something akin to CARVER Target Analysis to rank exploitable susceptibilities.

One susceptibility exploited by MILDEC is incredulity.

MILDEC is keenly aware that the vast majority of US citizens - including members of the armed services - will consistently and completely refuse to even entertain that their government could conduct synthetic terror on the population.

Talk about a great place to hide in plain view!

Just conduct the synthetic terror out in the open, and trust that everyone will simply refuse to see it as such, but instead, will project the cause, and blind hatred, onto others.

Sabrina is a perfect example of the exploited.

(But it is not her fault. MILDEC is powerful stuff.)


Max

* * *

I noticed that Max has stopped responding to questions and has resorted to parroting.

Come on Max! I know there's still more left in you.

[JimBenArm]

Actually, I did some research and found out something interesting. Max has been presenting a very clever sales pitch here. Seems the MILDEC Cloak of InvisibilityTM actually does exist! I found a sales brochure tucked into my old service jacket. Must have slipped in there when I wasn't looking.

Anyway, here's some excerpts from it:

The MILDEC Cloak of InvisibilityTM has been manufactured from the spent cores of dowsing rods. A unique property of this material is that once it can no longer find water, nothing else can find it! Once covered in this cloak, your enemies will not be able to detect you with any known device, enabling you to slip away safely.

Lined with the downy coat of Himilayan Yetis, it is amazingly warm and comfortable. Yet the Unobtanium Oxide outer coating keeps it waterproof as well as bulletproof, useful for those long nights placing shock tubes and false-flag evidence.

You'll also be stylish, with the neck trimmed in Nessie scales and the unicorn horn clasp makes a definite statement that you are a real NWO up-and-comer! Add the half-face mask, and you can also tutor beautiful opera singers, or the optional fangs for that authentic Bella Lugosi look!

I don't know how we could have kept doubting him, since the evidence has been right under our noses the whole time! Count me as one of the convinced!

[pomeroo]

They don't hide their tracks.

They hide everything in plain view.

Game theory told MILDEC planners no one would look there.


MinMax

* * *


Find the errors in Apathoid's paper yet, Doc? As you know, the paper is devastating to your silly fantasies.

You keep lying and sweating, but you haven't explained how your imaginary conspiracy has managed to avoid leaking ANYTHING in six years. Shall we run through the numbers again?

[MIKILLINI]

* * *

Sabrina,

To be clear, I am saying a tiny criminal rogue element - a secret or parallel government - USED the military - or better, ABUSED the military - as a conduit for the 911 synthetic terror attacks.

As I am describing it, I wouldn't take this as the slightest slight against the US military.

I'm actually saying the military got screwed!

I doubt that helps, but I hope it does.

Max

* * *

And the conspiracy continues to gain more.....fantasy.
Gee Max, who would be this shadow organization? Are they the ones who control area 51? Perhaps it was this group who created the Roswell incident. Are they part of such a secret militarized group who contracted with Lockheed to build the SR-71 Blackbird?

As Pomeroo asked above, are the errors in Apathoid's paper giving you a degree of difficulty? It certainly is one of the many lynchpins needed by you to give your hypothesis any smidgen of plausibility.
But that's just the remote-control of the airliners plausibility.

[MIKILLINI]

Actually, I did some research and found out something interesting. Max has been presenting a very clever sales pitch here. Seems the MILDEC Cloak of InvisibilityTM actually does exist! I found a sales brochure tucked into my old service jacket. Must have slipped in there when I wasn't looking.

Anyway, here's some excerpts from it:

The MILDEC Cloak of InvisibilityTM has been manufactured from the spent cores of dowsing rods. A unique property of this material is that once it can no longer find water, nothing else can find it! Once covered in this cloak, your enemies will not be able to detect you with any known device, enabling you to slip away safely.

Lined with the downy coat of Himilayan Yetis, it is amazingly warm and comfortable. Yet the Unobtanium Oxide outer coating keeps it waterproof as well as bulletproof, useful for those long nights placing shock tubes and false-flag evidence.

You'll also be stylish, with the neck trimmed in Nessie scales and the unicorn horn clasp makes a definite statement that you are a real NWO up-and-comer! Add the half-face mask, and you can also tutor beautiful opera singers, or the optional fangs for that authentic Bella Lugosi look!

I don't know how we could have kept doubting him, since the evidence has been right under our noses the whole time! Count me as one of the convinced!

Hey Jim, what exactly is it that you are convinced of? You answer has an enhanced cloaking viability to it.:D

[Max Photon]

* * *

Narveson, I've posted and quoted from JP 3-13.4: Military Deception a zillion times. What is your point?


For the others, let me see if I have your positions straight:


It is impossible to fly commercial jets using remote control.
It is impossible to target such jets with any accuracy or precision, even if remote controlled flight were possible.
There is no such thing as MILDEC, or if you prefer, it is impossible that MILDEC was used in 911.
It is impossible to maintain strategic deceptions over time.
The US government would never, ever, EVER do anything bad to the citizenry, or to military service personnel.
No evidence was destroyed, and investigators had and still have ALL the steel they need, for now and for the future.

Do you all agree with this list?

Max

* * *

[WildCat]

It is impossible to fly commercial jets using remote control.
Anything can be remote controlled. But it couldn't be done in secrecy with a commercial aircraft. It would require extensive modifications that would be noticed by the many mechanics, technicians, etc who work on the aircraft daily.

[milesalpha]

Wonder if I will ever see some documentary evidence for these sillly claims. I have always found it a bit off that twoofers desperately avoid the standard methods for running down such conspiracies (hint: it has never involved youtube videos). Proving these things should be relatively easy if they knew what they were doing. I'll give one little tip for our CD fans. The amount of explosive required would be considerable, it would be very easy to narrow the possible sources and identify the unnaccounted for explosives. For more details on actually how to prove this sort of thing, see you local university history department, we used to have to do such things on a daily basis and in all my years I never saw anyone attempt it with a photgraph or youtube video. Iran-Contra, Hitler's Holocaust, the Dreyfus affair, the CIA picadillos in the 1950s...all run down through documentation. Get to work kids, this is the ONLY hope you have for your goals.

[MIKILLINI]

For the others, let me see if I have your positions straight:

It is impossible to fly commercial jets using remote control.
It's not impossible Max, but who would do the labor and technical revamping on these commercial airliners to make it possible? Would the mechanics and technicians take a bribe and do the job themselves, or look the other way? Or to take it even further, perhaps the workers were threatened if they didn't cooperate and do what they were told? Potential witnesses either way you look at it.
Tell Me, have you seen or heard of any TV programs where American or United airline mechanics have hinted about this?
Besides, you still haven't pointed out any errors in Apathoids paper yet, Max. Why not?

It is impossible to target such jets with any accuracy or precision, even if remote controlled flight were possible.


This goes for incredible odds Max. You have to wonder, was the remote guidance through satellite or on the ground? Or was it software within the mainframe of the airliners' computer system, as indicated by the revamping mentioned above?
But that means you must show how to get around this by pointing out the errors in Apathoids paper. Oh wait, you haven't done that.

There is no such thing as MILDEC, or if you prefer, it is impossible that MILDEC was used in 911.

Sure there is MILDEC, but it is used against enemies of the US.
How strong is your presumed shadow organization? Your quote:

To be clear, I am saying a tiny criminal rogue element - a secret or parallel government - USED the military - or better, ABUSED the military - as a conduit for the 911 synthetic terror attacks.

As I am describing it, I wouldn't take this as the slightest slight against the US military.
I'm actually saying the military got screwed!

So they fooled the "regular" experts too? The ones with their peers, who also reviewed evidence, were deceived as well?

It is impossible to maintain strategic deceptions over time.

In regards to 9/11, 9/11 has been the most scrutinized event in quite some time. Maintaining strategic deception in the internet era would be a most daunting task.

The US government would never, ever, EVER do anything bad to the citizenry, or to military service personnel.
Collectively, no it would not.

No evidence was destroyed, and investigators had and still have ALL the steel they need, for now and for the future.

They have what they needed for the investigation...Although those with different hypothesis believe they should have had more. Simple as that.:rolleyes:

[Swing Dangler]

Anything can be remote controlled. But it couldn't be done in secrecy with a commercial aircraft. It would require extensive modifications that would be noticed by the many mechanics, technicians, etc who work on the aircraft daily.

I have to disagree with this statement completely.

Assuming the theory in an inside job, commandeering a plane for covert operations is a long standing practice in intelligence operations. It is very easily accomplished through cut-out companies and shell operations.
The most recent example being the torture plane as detailed by the Washington Post here (http://www.president-bush.com/torture-jet.html).

For the greatest historical example, study the history of Air America.

[MIKILLINI]

I have to disagree with this statement completely.

Assuming the theory in an inside job, commandeering a plane for covert operations is a long standing practice in intelligence operations. It is very easily accomplished through cut-out companies and shell operations.
The most recent example being the torture plane as detailed by the Washington Post here (http://www.president-bush.com/torture-jet.html).

For the greatest historical example, study the history of Air America.

Swing you missed Wildcats point, you gave that article of the Gulfstream V as an example, BUT it's not a Boeing 757/767 commercial airliner owned by, say, United or American.

And when did this Gulfstream V become public knowledge?

In regards to 9/11, 9/11 has been the most scrutinized event in quite some time. Maintaining strategic deception in the internet era would be a most daunting task.

In the Washington Post article you refer to:

The CIA's plane secret began to unravel less than six weeks after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

You haven't found any errors in Apathoids paper, have you swing? Because there is a BIG difference between a Gulfstream V and a Boeing 757/767.

[pomeroo]

* * *

Narveson, I've posted and quoted from JP 3-13.4: Military Deception a zillion times. What is your point?


For the others, let me see if I have your positions straight:

It is impossible to fly commercial jets using remote control.
It is impossible to target such jets with any accuracy or precision, even if remote controlled flight were possible.
There is no such thing as MILDEC, or if you prefer, it is impossible that MILDEC was used in 911.
It is impossible to maintain strategic deceptions over time.
The US government would never, ever, EVER do anything bad to the citizenry, or to military service personnel.
No evidence was destroyed, and investigators had and still have ALL the steel they need, for now and for the future.Do you all agree with this list?

Max

* * *


Stop tap dancing, Doc. Apathoid has written an extremely detailed paper showing the the implausibility of transforming Boeing 767s and 757s into remote-controlled drones. You either refuse to read it or are incapable of comprehending it. It destroys the underpinnings of your puerile fantasies.

No evidence was destroyed. You are lying. Please stop.

[pomeroo]

Swing you missed Wildcats point, you gave that article of the Gulfstream V as an example, BUT it's not a Boeing 757/767 commercial airliner owned by, say, United or American.

And when did this Gulfstream V become public knowledge?



In the Washington Post article you refer to:


You haven't found any errors in Apathoids paper, have you swing? Because there is a BIG difference between a Gulfstream V and a Boeing 757/767.


NO conspiracy liar has found any errors in Apathoid's paper. They avoid it like the plague.

[MIKILLINI]

NO conspiracy liar has found any errors in Apathoid's paper. They avoid it like the plague.

Apparently, conspiracists continue with their theories in a self deceptive (SELFDEC) manner.
Overlooking obvious and tangible evidence because it breaks down any theories they support, believing they are the ones who are not deceived and know the "real" truth.:rolleyes:

[Swing Dangler]

Swing you missed Wildcats point, you gave that article of the Gulfstream V as an example, BUT it's not a Boeing 757/767 commercial airliner owned by, say, United or American.


Excellent point. However, the point was it was an airplane that exchanged hands numerous times through cut outs and fronts for the purpose of conducting covert operations. Or I suppose if you had the funds, you could just purchase a used one off of their website. My retort to Wildcat was that yes a commercial airliner could be modified in secret through the process described above.

May I ask why you avoided the Air America example?

Or you may wish to examine the history of Southern Air Transport as another more recent example.

[pomeroo]

Excellent point. However, the point was it was an airplane that exchanged hands numerous times through cut outs and fronts for the purpose of conducting covert operations. Or I suppose if you had the funds, you could just purchase a used one off of their website. My retort to Wildcat was that yes a commercial airliner could be modified in secret through the process described above.

May I ask why you avoided the Air America example?

Or you may wish to examine the history of Southern Air Transport as another more recent example.


Like Max Photon, you continue to pretend that Apathoid's paper, which destroys your fantasies, does not exist.

But, it does exist.

And your evil movement is dead.

[Corsair 115]

For the greatest historical example, study the history of Air America.And did Air America fly over the heavily regulated and controlled airspace of North America? You know, the airspace with thousands of commercials flights in the air, all watched by air traffic controllers to ensure the aircraft get to where they're going without flying into other aircraft?

Speaking of aircraft, have you found anything yet to explain what prompted the designers of the WTC towers in the 1960s to envision a scenario whereby a Boeing 707 would by flying at 600 miles per hour at an altitude of 1,000 feet?

[MIKILLINI]

May I ask why you avoided the Air America example?

Or you may wish to examine the history of Southern Air Transport as another more recent example.

Why would Air America be an example? To retrofit a commercial airliner to be controlled by remote guidance? Swing, are you implying the CIA had control of this part of 9/11? To purchase a used United or American Boeing, modify it, and while being modified, creating and using false shell companies to make the modified planes disappear and then reappear as the "real" United 175, 93 and American 11 and 77?
So the CIA pulled the 'ol switcheroo with 4 Boeing 757/767's.....and nobody noticed?? :jaw-dropp

[Max Photon]

Why would Air America be an example? To retrofit a commercial airliner to be controlled by remote guidance? Swing, are you implying the CIA had control of this part of 9/11? To purchase a used United or American Boeing, modify it, and while being modified, creating and using false shell companies to make the modified planes disappear and then reappear as the "real" United 175, 93 and American 11 and 77?
So the CIA pulled the 'ol switcheroo with 4 Boeing 757/767's.....and nobody noticed?? :jaw-dropp



Good Lord, is that unimaginable in your world?


Enron made 500 shell companies to create an artificial energy market, and then attacked CA to the tune of $50 billion. No one seemed to notice. (But Max, are you saying the auditors were "in on it" or incompetent?)


The US Treasury and the (non)Federal (zero)Reserves are entwined in an illegal check-kiting scheme. No one seems to notice.


Deficit spending is merely the hidden confiscation of wealth. This "shabby secret", and Sir Alan Greenspan put it, is hiding in plain view. No one seems to notice.


By the way, can some one show me where Apathoid's paper proves that the jets were not switched?


Max

* * *

[Gravy]

Not cute, not smart, not correct. Just pathetic, as always.

[Reality Believer]

Looks like somebody left the screen door open again. :boxedin:

[MIKILLINI]

QUOTE=Max Photon;3133317]Good Lord, is that unimaginable in your world?


Enron made 500 shell companies to create an artificial energy market, and then attacked CA to the tune of $50 billion. No one seemed to notice. (But Max, are you saying the auditors were "in on it" or incompetent?)

Doing it on paper Max..Paper. They got caught. Ask Jeff Skilling if they got away with it.

The US Treasury and the (non)Federal (zero)Reserves are entwined in an illegal check-kiting scheme. No one seems to notice.

As above. More paper. Ask Pat Buchanan if they paid the money back.

Deficit spending is merely the hidden confiscation of wealth. This "shabby secret", and Sir Alan Greenspan put it, is hiding in plain view. No one seems to notice.

Let's see...more paper? Ask any economist how well this is working with the economy now.

By the way, can some one show me where Apathoid's paper proves that the jets were not switched?

Let's compare paper to full bodied Boeings. Who's not going to notice actual physical plane exchanges, Max? Who's not going to notice the plane revamping?
If there is one simple error in a pre-flight check, the plane does not get to taxi out to the runway.
What are the odds with 4 planes?

So in order to avoid pointing out any errors in Apathoids paper, you deflect instead?

MaxDefDec

[MIKILLINI]

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/jetliner/b757/b757_15.jpg

See if anyone notices a switcheroo with a plane this size, Max.

And to help you along, here are some excerpts from Apathoids article:

The problem for our saboteurs is the ease at which this system can be disabled by the crew, in a variety of easy ways. Keeping in mind that the flow of control would be: Ground->ACARS->FMC->FCCs->Autopilot Servos....
Any one of these will work:
- Pull the FCC circuit breakers (3 places). This will give pilots control of the airplane by pulling power to the autopilot computers.
- Pull the FCC Servo Power circuit breakers(3 places) . This will remove power from the autopilot servos.
- Pull the ACARS MU circuit breaker(1 place).
- Pull the FMS circuit breakers(2 places). This will stop the ARINC data from entering the FCCs.
- Isolate the Left and Right Main AC Busses, and switch the Generator Control Switches "off" one at a time, until control is regained.(ACARS is powered by the L AC bus) Autopilot can still be used.

- More drastically, the crew could opt to drop both AC busses offline and fly on Standby Power. This would kill ACARS but not the FCCs or FMS. Same effect as above.

It could be argued that all these breakers can be interlocked by simply cutting the wiring going from the breaker to the FCC's/FMCs/Servos and supplying new wiring, possibly from a nearby terminal strip or circuit breaker on the same bus. But I'm not really sure that would make a difference, considering the last 2 options above, and I don’t know how the new feeding breakers would take the extra load. They'd probably open(pop).

However, lets assume for a moment that our saboteurs are really, really sharp and modified ACARS, the FCCs, and FMCs to receive power from all busses, including the Standby DC bus. Again, a major assumption on many counts. The biggest being that this may sound easy, but I assure you, it would take 2 men the better part of 12 hours to do it(if it's even possible). Then that pesky EICAS, as well as on-board BITE, might figure out that something is up because you've changed the power supply inputs.

All that aside, pilots can still defeat the system quite easily.

- Start pulling every circuit breaker in the flight deck, until control is regained. Or...
- Switch both Generator Control Switches "off", Switch the Standby Power Selector to "off", Switch the Battery "off"
The latter halts every moving electron in the aircrafts wiring. There will be side-effects to such drastic measures.
Specifically, no control over pressurization or air conditioning; this might be a bad thing at altitude, but not catastrophic. Limited engine control, but nothing too major.
No operative fuel pumps, not disastrous because thirsty engines can be suction/gravity fed.
Most of the hydraulics will still be working, the EDPs pull most of the load anyways. Since the airplane is cable driven, there will be no control problems.
So we have: 2 working engines, 2 working hydro systems, and functioning flight controls - that's enough to limp home with.
The problems I mentioned above wont be devastating if the crew descends quick after killing power.
Hypoxia would not be an issue, at all, because whatever position the Cabin Outflow Valve(pressurization control valve) was in prior to loss of power, would be where it stays when power is removed.
So cabin pressure wouldn't change until a descent started. At that point, this is where the Negative/Positive Pressure Relief Valves come in. These devices will dump excess negative/positive pressure before dangerous pressure levels are reached. These valves have no electrical connections, they are fed by pressure sensing lines and operate mechanically.

The engines on 757/767s are FADEC, which means they are essentially fly-by-wire engines. No mechanical linkage goes from the flight deck to the engines for control, it is all electronic.
So how are we going to control the engines with no power....? Well, the engines EEC's still have power because they have their own power supplies, which can't be turned off(as long as the engines are turning). It’s almost like these airplanes were designed to be robo-proof !

Now, if you are thinking that I cant possibly be correct about killing all electrical power and still being able to fly the airplane, there is a precedent.

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief2.asp?ev_id=20001211X11596&ntsbno=MIA99IA046&akey=1
On December 15, 1998, about 1216 eastern standard time, a Boeing 737-232, N327DL, registered to Wilmington Trust Company Trustee, operated by Delta Air Lines Inc., flight 2461, as a 14 CFR Part 121 scheduled domestic passenger/cargo flight, experienced a reported total loss of electrical power on approach for landing at Orlando International Airport, Orlando, Florida. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed and an IFR flight plan was filed. The airplane sustained minor damage. The airline transport-rated pilot-in-command (PIC), first officer (FO), 3 flight attendants, and 51 passengers reported no injuries. The flight originated from Boston, Massachusetts, about 3 hours 16 minutes before the incident.

...The airplane experienced a total loss of electrical power as the gear and flaps were extended. The APU did not start, and the battery indicated between 17 to 18 volts. The normal checklist procedures were accomplished followed by the quick reference procedures. Electrical power was unable to be restored. A go-around was
initiated to continue the checklist. All communications and electrical equipment failed
...Inspection of the battery revealed that the individual cell electrolyte levels were not visible and the battery was fully discharged.

This 737 limped home with no power, not even a battery. As far as I know, this is a one-of-a-kind incident, and the odds of losing all electrical power is worse than losing both/all engines, which has happened a few times.

This about wraps any case for using existing internal guidance to takeover the aircraft. It's too easily defeated and the sabotage would probably be detected by BIT/BITE/EICAS or the mechanics themselves long before the takeover could take place. Overall, a bad idea unless it’s augmented by taking the pilots out of the equation.

[Max Photon]

* * *

Greetings good people,

Here are links from another thread that address the OP:

Are the WTC collapse-initiation mechanisms being cloaked by military-deception (MILDEC).

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=3143277#post3143277

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=3143309#post3143309

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=3143545#post3143545

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=3144266#post3144266

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=3144273#post3144273

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=3144276#post3144276

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=3144286#post3144286

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=3144316#post3144316

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=3144372#post3144372

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=3144392#post3144392

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=3144403#post3144403

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=3144425#post3144425

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=3144436#post3144436

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=3144497#post3144497

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=3145430#post3145430

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=3146839#post3146839


Max

* * *

[Alareth]

Are the WTC collapse-initiation mechanisms being cloaked by military-deception (MILDEC).


No.

[JimBenArm]

No.
But...but...what about my Mildec Cloak? I thought it looked darling on Max!

[pomeroo]

Good Lord, is that unimaginable in your world?


Enron made 500 shell companies to create an artificial energy market, and then attacked CA to the tune of $50 billion. No one seemed to notice. (But Max, are you saying the auditors were "in on it" or incompetent?)


The US Treasury and the (non)Federal (zero)Reserves are entwined in an illegal check-kiting scheme. No one seems to notice.


Deficit spending is merely the hidden confiscation of wealth. This "shabby secret", and Sir Alan Greenspan put it, is hiding in plain view. No one seems to notice.


By the way, can some one show me where Apathoid's paper proves that the jets were not switched?


Max

* * *


Gee, Max, we all know the one about how pushing a thousand reindeer off a roof doesn't prove that flying reindeer don't exist.

You still haven't read Apathoid's paper, you still haven't read a basic economics text, and you're still a fact-free fraud who accuses innocent people of heinous crimes.

[AMTMAN]

You haven't found any errors in Apathoids paper, have you swing? Because there is a BIG difference between a Gulfstream V and a Boeing 757/767.

Even if there were errors Swing Dangler does not have knowledge base to recognize them. That's why he buys into some of these fantasies.

[Max Photon]

* * *

Global Derivatives Market Expands to $516 Trillion

By Kabir Chibber

Nov. 22 (Bloomberg) -- The market for derivatives grew at the fastest pace in at least nine years to $516 trillion in the first half of 2007, the Bank for International Settlements said.

Credit-default swaps, contracts designed to protect investors against default and used to speculate on credit quality, led the increase, expanding 49 percent to cover a notional $43 trillion of debt in the six months ended June 30, the BIS said in a report published late yesterday.

Derivatives of debt, currencies, commodities, stocks and interest rates rose 25 percent from the previous six months, the biggest jump since the Basel, Switzerland-based bank began compiling the data. Investors have been turning to credit derivatives as a way to speculate on a growing risk of defaults amid record U.S. mortgage foreclosures.

- - -

Do you want to hear something funny?

The current economic model - hell it's not even a model anymore...it just IS - that dominates financial eggspurts minds, is the Quantity Theory of Money.

The Quantity Theory of Money is a linearized model, that assumes pesky higher-order terms - nonlinear terms - such as speculation - are zero.

In other words, the Quantity Theory of Money (QTM) ignores speculation because it is nonlinear (read: financially irrational).

Opaque, scientific articles put out by the Federal Reserve system, supporting QTM, glut the planet.

In fact, the illegal check kiting scheme between the Federal Reserve and the Treasury NEEDS QTM to be the necessary illusion.


One itty-bitty little problem...(it's nothing really)...

If you look outside your window, you can see - if you crink you neck - a $516 trillion dollar derivatives towers! And the damn thing is accelerating!!

For those of you not in the know, that derivatives tower is a pile of side bets. It is pure speculation in fictional instruments. (It is much ado about nothing.)

You have to let this in! I'll round up and say there is 1 trillion dollars in USDollars floating around. (Remember, the USDollar is an IOU nothing.)

On top of 1 trillion IOU nothings, are about 50 trillion promises to pay back IOU nothings (even though only 1 trillion are floating around). You may know these as bonds.

On top of that are side bets, and side bets on side bets, to the tune of 516 trillion IOU nothings.

It's kind of like 516 weirdos are standing around in a huge group, each betting - speculating - a dollar as to whether little Tommy will get one dollar from the tooth fairy (and none of the weirdos have dollars).


So the financial experts' model says ignore speculation, yet speculation is 516 times greater than the underlying phenomena - the USDollar - being modeled!

And the USDollar is a nothing!!

ALL THERE IS IS SPECULATION!!!


So here are two key questions:

What tricks are being used to get financial experts to write blizzards of heavy-osity paper defending the indefensible: the regime of irredeemable currency? How are these experts being tricked or duped? Are they all "in on it", or are they acting in good faith, and - despite being experts - are simply lost?

Is it possible that engineers and scientists studying the collapse of the WTC towers are defending a similarly indefensible model? Are they all "in on it", or are they acting in good faith, and - despite being experts - are simply lost?


Or, are the experts unwittingly working in pseudo-gangs?


Max

* * *

[beachnut]

SPAM junk science of Max Photo, the fantasy expert on 9/11; disrespectful and irrational ideas on 9/11 - Max Photo

Find some facts, so far you are presenting pure BS to support fantasy BS ideas.

Got facts? NO - do you even read what your posts? Where are the facts? What does your the junk in your post have to do with the BS of the OP? You do not make sense. Why?

[Max Photon]

SPAM junk science of Max Photo, the fantasy expert on 9/11; disrespectful and irrational ideas on 9/11 - Max Photo

Find some facts, so far you are presenting pure BS to support fantasy BS ideas.

Got facts? NO - do you even read what your posts? Where are the facts? What does your the junk in your post have to do with the BS of the OP? You do not make sense. Why?



That I don't make sense to you does not mean I don't make sense. (Does that make sense?)

But - having the loving heart that I do - I am always willing to tutor the...(you know).


You asked: What does your the junk in your post have to do with the BS of the OP?

The short answer is:

Perception control engineers (such as MILDEC, or the Federal Reserve) know how create and sustain long-term strategic hoaxes, and the induction of pseudo-gangs of experts - a primary tool - is used for real-time dynamic stabilization.


Please ask again if you're still confused.


Max

* * *

[JimBenArm]

The link between Max and the universe is Pseudo-Reality!

[contra]

I'm starting to think that aliens doing 9/11 on every level seems more likely than the government pulling off an operation bigger than anything they have ever even thought of before...

Aliens would take the towers down from space with magic lasers.
Aliens could use mind control on the engineers.
Seriously. Its easier, works on more levels, has less holes and lacks the factors that the conspiracy throeists say would have to happen.

And damn those pseudo-gangs of experts that we have roaming the world.

A few quesions... as you said you will answer them.
How big is this gang? Who is a member... obviously it has to be some of the ones that have came out for the official story... so who is in on it?
So who is a dummy engineer with who didn't study the subject for years? Why do 99.whatever% of the engineers go along with their conclusions if they are totally wrong?

This puts at least 2 more groups of people who have to be 'in' on 9/11. And these must be high profile people... no easy killing them off without questions bewing asked.

I prefer my alien idea. These silly questions don't come up. The answer is 'it was aliens, they have advanced technology.'

[portlandatheist]

this post intentionally left blank

[Max Photon]

* * *


Here are excellent article on derivatives, by Antal E. Fekete:


The Shadow Pyramid - Derivatives Made Easy (http://www.professorfekete.com/articles%5CAEFTheShadowPyramid.pdf)

When Atlas Shrugged (Part 1) (http://www.financialsense.com/editorials/fekete/2006/0824.html)

When Atlas Shrugged (Part 2) (http://www.financialsense.com/editorials/fekete/2006/1007.html)


It is important to recognize that one can see through the 911 deception by studying the much, Much, MUCH grander USDollar deception. Many of the techniques used for cloaking, and for dynamic stabilization of the deception, are the same.

Fekete exposes many of these techniques.


Max

* * *

[Max Photon]

* * *

"In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation. There is no safe store of value. If there were, the government would have to make its holding illegal, as was done in the case of gold. If everyone decided, for example, to convert all his bank deposits to silver or copper or any other good, and thereafter declined to accept checks as payment for goods, bank deposits would lose their purchasing power and government-created bank credit would be worthless as a claim on goods. The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves.

"This is the shabby secret of the welfare statists' tirades against gold. Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights. If one grasps this, one has no difficulty in understanding the statists' antagonism toward the gold standard.

Alan Greenspan
Former Chairman of the Federal Reserve for 17 years
Gold and Economic Freedom


* * *

"This is a staggering thought. We are completely dependent on the
commercial Banks. Someone has to borrow every dollar we have in
circulation, cash or credit. If the Banks create ample synthetic money
we are prosperous; if not, we starve. We are absolutely without a
permanent money system. When one gets a complete grasp of the picture,
the tragic absurdity of our hopeless position is almost incredible, but
there it is. It is the most important subject intelligent persons can
investigate and reflect upon. It is so important that our present
civilization may collapse unless it becomes widely understood and the
defects remedied very soon."

Robert Hemphill
Credit Manager of Federal Reserve Bank, Atlanta, Ga.


* * *

"People appear to be forgetful that the dollar is steadily losing value, losing purchasing power, losing the all-important respect of foreigners. They have been brainwashed into thinking that inflation, like continental drift, is God-ordained. There is nothing human beings can do about it.

"It would never occur to people that they are victims of deliberate plundering by their own government, and deceitful pilfering by their banks, covered up by the mendacity of academia and the financial media."

Antal E. Fekete
Our Diseased Monetary Bloodstream


* * *

Max's question to JREFers:

How is the shabby secret - as Greenspan put it well - being kept?


Many here at JREF complain that 911 couldn't be an inside job because there is no way such a big secret could be kept.

Well how has the USDollar deception been successfully maintained since 1971?


It's ironic. Chances are that the USDollar deception - a truly magnificent strategic hoax - has been so well maintained that none of you even have the foggiest idea what I am talking about.

Yet you are so certain you see right through 911 to the truth - the US Government's truth - the same government that has completely fooled you with the USDollar deception - for over 35 years!


What a joke.

Well, what a cusp catastrophe (which has the same geometry as a joke).


You guys are a cusp catastrophe.


Max

* * *

[technoextreme]

It's ironic. Chances are that the USDollar deception - a truly magnificent strategic hoax - has been so well maintained that none of you even have the foggiest idea what I am talking about.

Max we have no idea what you are talking about because most sane and rational people have no clue what you are talking about. You make up/butcher technical terms thinking that it makes you sound smart (IE cusp catastrophe). It's been proven that you have no idea what those terms mean.

[contra]

Its always interesting to look at the history of Banking.

That banks and government get to print their own money is fun. (though government only got involved significantly after the 19th century after banks moaned that fake notes were being made). That they created inflation to curb the devaluation due to the printing of money is also fun. This is pretty well known, and not a conspiracy. Sure some people don't think about how strange the whole system is... but that doesn't make it a conspiracy.
We have so much money in the world, that there is not enough gold, or anything else for that matter, to give everyone that they are due if they wanted it. The whole system works because the money is kept by banks. This is well known.


But hey. I live in Scotland. Technically ( and mores o legally) speaking we don't accept ANY notes as legal tender :D.

[MIKILLINI]

* * *

< Snip>

What a joke.

Well, what a cusp catastrophe (which has the same geometry as a joke).


You guys are a cusp catastrophe.


Max

* * *

Max, do you have any credit cards?

[pomeroo]

That I don't make sense to you does not mean I don't make sense. (Does that make sense?)

But - having the loving heart that I do - I am always willing to tutor the...(you know).


You asked: What does your the junk in your post have to do with the BS of the OP?

The short answer is:

Perception control engineers (such as MILDEC, or the Federal Reserve) know how create and sustain long-term strategic hoaxes, and the induction of pseudo-gangs of experts - a primary tool - is used for real-time dynamic stabilization.


Please ask again if you're still confused.


Max

* * *


I'm confused, Max. You have been thoroughly exposed as a liar, a charlatan, and a know-nothing. Yet you continue to spout nonsense. Why?

[MIKILLINI]

What about them derivative remote-controlled airliners, Max?
Or that derivative thermite dusted shocking tube..placed in the precise position for the remote-controlled airliners to crash precisely in a pre-planned precision operation incorporating rust generation for that phreato-thermatic explosion, thereby creating an expected cold spot so there would be fires on piles of debris while the expected heat-weakening takes place, all under the auspices of MILDEC.
Talk about a potential cusp catastrophe of derivative proportions.

[technoextreme]

What about them derivative remote-controlled airliners, Max?
Or that derivative thermite dusted shocking tube..placed in the precise position for the remote-controlled airliners to crash precisely in a pre-planned precision operation incorporating rust generation for that phreato-thermatic explosion, thereby creating an expected cold spot so there would be fires on piles of debris while the expected heat-weakening takes place, all under the auspices of MILDEC.
Talk about a potential cusp catastrophe of derivative proportions.
Don't forget the non linear feedback. The non linear feedback is essential to MILDEC.

[USAFMXOfficer]

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/jetliner/b757/b757_15.jpg

See if anyone notices a switcheroo with a plane this size, Max.

And to help you along, here are some excerpts from Apathoids article:

The problem for our saboteurs is the ease at which this system can be disabled by the crew, in a variety of easy ways. Keeping in mind that the flow of control would be: Ground->ACARS->FMC->FCCs->Autopilot Servos....
Any one of these will work:
- Pull the FCC circuit breakers (3 places). This will give pilots control of the airplane by pulling power to the autopilot computers.
- Pull the FCC Servo Power circuit breakers(3 places) . This will remove power from the autopilot servos.
- Pull the ACARS MU circuit breaker(1 place).
- Pull the FMS circuit breakers(2 places). This will stop the ARINC data from entering the FCCs.
- Isolate the Left and Right Main AC Busses, and switch the Generator Control Switches "off" one at a time, until control is regained.(ACARS is powered by the L AC bus) Autopilot can still be used.

- More drastically, the crew could opt to drop both AC busses offline and fly on Standby Power. This would kill ACARS but not the FCCs or FMS. Same effect as above.

It could be argued that all these breakers can be interlocked by simply cutting the wiring going from the breaker to the FCC's/FMCs/Servos and supplying new wiring, possibly from a nearby terminal strip or circuit breaker on the same bus. But I'm not really sure that would make a difference, considering the last 2 options above, and I don’t know how the new feeding breakers would take the extra load. They'd probably open(pop).

However, lets assume for a moment that our saboteurs are really, really sharp and modified ACARS, the FCCs, and FMCs to receive power from all busses, including the Standby DC bus. Again, a major assumption on many counts. The biggest being that this may sound easy, but I assure you, it would take 2 men the better part of 12 hours to do it(if it's even possible). Then that pesky EICAS, as well as on-board BITE, might figure out that something is up because you've changed the power supply inputs.

All that aside, pilots can still defeat the system quite easily.

- Start pulling every circuit breaker in the flight deck, until control is regained. Or...
- Switch both Generator Control Switches "off", Switch the Standby Power Selector to "off", Switch the Battery "off"
The latter halts every moving electron in the aircrafts wiring. There will be side-effects to such drastic measures.
Specifically, no control over pressurization or air conditioning; this might be a bad thing at altitude, but not catastrophic. Limited engine control, but nothing too major.
No operative fuel pumps, not disastrous because thirsty engines can be suction/gravity fed.
Most of the hydraulics will still be working, the EDPs pull most of the load anyways. Since the airplane is cable driven, there will be no control problems.
So we have: 2 working engines, 2 working hydro systems, and functioning flight controls - that's enough to limp home with.
The problems I mentioned above wont be devastating if the crew descends quick after killing power.
Hypoxia would not be an issue, at all, because whatever position the Cabin Outflow Valve(pressurization control valve) was in prior to loss of power, would be where it stays when power is removed.
So cabin pressure wouldn't change until a descent started. At that point, this is where the Negative/Positive Pressure Relief Valves come in. These devices will dump excess negative/positive pressure before dangerous pressure levels are reached. These valves have no electrical connections, they are fed by pressure sensing lines and operate mechanically.

The engines on 757/767s are FADEC, which means they are essentially fly-by-wire engines. No mechanical linkage goes from the flight deck to the engines for control, it is all electronic.
So how are we going to control the engines with no power....? Well, the engines EEC's still have power because they have their own power supplies, which can't be turned off(as long as the engines are turning). It’s almost like these airplanes were designed to be robo-proof !

Now, if you are thinking that I cant possibly be correct about killing all electrical power and still being able to fly the airplane, there is a precedent.

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief2.asp?ev_id=20001211X11596&ntsbno=MIA99IA046&akey=1
On December 15, 1998, about 1216 eastern standard time, a Boeing 737-232, N327DL, registered to Wilmington Trust Company Trustee, operated by Delta Air Lines Inc., flight 2461, as a 14 CFR Part 121 scheduled domestic passenger/cargo flight, experienced a reported total loss of electrical power on approach for landing at Orlando International Airport, Orlando, Florida. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed and an IFR flight plan was filed. The airplane sustained minor damage. The airline transport-rated pilot-in-command (PIC), first officer (FO), 3 flight attendants, and 51 passengers reported no injuries. The flight originated from Boston, Massachusetts, about 3 hours 16 minutes before the incident.

...The airplane experienced a total loss of electrical power as the gear and flaps were extended. The APU did not start, and the battery indicated between 17 to 18 volts. The normal checklist procedures were accomplished followed by the quick reference procedures. Electrical power was unable to be restored. A go-around was
initiated to continue the checklist. All communications and electrical equipment failed
...Inspection of the battery revealed that the individual cell electrolyte levels were not visible and the battery was fully discharged.

This 737 limped home with no power, not even a battery. As far as I know, this is a one-of-a-kind incident, and the odds of losing all electrical power is worse than losing both/all engines, which has happened a few times.

This about wraps any case for using existing internal guidance to takeover the aircraft. It's too easily defeated and the sabotage would probably be detected by BIT/BITE/EICAS or the mechanics themselves long before the takeover could take place. Overall, a bad idea unless it’s augmented by taking the pilots out of the equation.


So Max, any comments on this?

Or are you going to simply ignore it, as you have demonstrated so well in the past.

[Swing Dangler]

Why would Air America be an example? To retrofit a commercial airliner to be controlled by remote guidance? Swing, are you implying the CIA had control of this part of 9/11? To purchase a used United or American Boeing, modify it, and while being modified, creating and using false shell companies to make the modified planes disappear and then reappear as the "real" United 175, 93 and American 11 and 77?
So the CIA pulled the 'ol switcheroo with 4 Boeing 757/767's.....and nobody noticed?? :jaw-dropp

No, I'm not implying that at all, although, that is promoted by the Team8 research group. I was simply countering Wildcat's point.
However, it wouldn't be that difficult to pull it off if the planes disappear off the scope and/or are lost in the primary radar holes. See the Team8 website here for a more detailed analysis as it raises some interesting points.
I'm not stating however that I accept this theory but I would be interested in discussing it for the sake of argument.
To read the full article click the link here (http://www.team8plus.org/the-movement/radar/radar.htm). From their analysis:
Summary These are absolute facts that cannot be ignored:

* Within the area that the hijackings took place, there are two areas with no primary radar coverage that stretch up towards Canada.
* Flight 11 switched off its transponder right next to an area with no primary radar coverage.
* Flight 77 switched off its transponder right next to an area with no primary radar coverage.
* Flight 93 switched off its transponder right next to an area with no primary radar coverage.
* United Flight 175 switched off its transponder next to United Flight 93.
* We have two incidences where a hijacked plane came very close to a non-hijacked plane. (What are the odds?) Flight 11(hijacked) meets Flight 175 (not hijacked). Flight 175 (hijacked) meets Flight 93 (Not Hijacked)

Question 1: How did the "hijackers" know exactly where these huge breaches in air defense were located? Question 2: Why go to all that trouble when you can take off from nearby airports (Dulles/Newark), hijack the plane and crash it straight away? This article was originally published on www.the-movement.com

Corsair 115
Originally Posted by Swing Dangler View Post
For the greatest historical example, study the history of Air America.
And did Air America fly over the heavily regulated and controlled airspace of North America? You know, the airspace with thousands of commercials flights in the air, all watched by air traffic controllers to ensure the aircraft get to where they're going without flying into other aircraft?

Speaking of aircraft, have you found anything yet to explain what prompted the designers of the WTC towers in the 1960s to envision a scenario whereby a Boeing 707 would by flying at 600 miles per hour at an altitude of 1,000 feet?

For point 1, see Operation Watchtower and its relationship to the Iran/Contra scandal.

For point 2, I addressed that long ago but I will refresh in case you missed it.
1. Pilot error or motivation.
2. Mechanical error.
3. FAA error

[Dave Rogers]

To read the full article click the link here (http://www.team8plus.org/the-movement/radar/radar.htm).

Could you check the link please? I'm getting a 404. I'd like a look at the full article.

From their analysis:
Summary These are absolute facts that cannot be ignored:

* Within the area that the hijackings took place, there are two areas with no primary radar coverage that stretch up towards Canada.
* Flight 11 switched off its transponder right next to an area with no primary radar coverage.
* Flight 77 switched off its transponder right next to an area with no primary radar coverage.
* Flight 93 switched off its transponder right next to an area with no primary radar coverage.

[...]

Question 1: How did the "hijackers" know exactly where these huge breaches in air defense were located?

If the hijackers knew exactly where these huge breaches in air defense were located, why didn't they switch off the transponders inside the breaches rather than "right next to" them? The fact that they switched off their transponders in an area where they only had to go a very small distance to drop off primary radar, yet they failed to do so, suggests not that they did, but that they didn't know where the coverage gaps were.

Dave

[metamars]

Perception control engineers (such as MILDEC, or the Federal Reserve) know how create and sustain long-term strategic hoaxes, and the induction of pseudo-gangs of experts - a primary tool - is used for real-time dynamic stabilization.


Max, why don't you google (together):

"comprehensive annual financial report" "walter burien"

and report back what lessons one can learn re government-perpetrated hoaxes. (Actually, "pseudo-reality" is more appropriate than "hoax", since suppression of even the recognition of the problem is so thorough. You won't find the "left media" looking into this, at all, not even to pooh-pooh it, as in the case of 911.) This should keep you going for quite a while. :)



More relevant to military deception, check out:
"The Really Bad Dogs of War"

http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/?p=355#more-355

re MPRI. MPRI claims "more generals per square foot than the Pentagon"

MPRI is to Blackwater what a general is to a sergeant. It is less interested in the heat of combat than—in its own words—in “training, equipping, force design and management, professional development, concepts and doctrine, organizational and operational requirements, simulation and wargaming operations, humanitarian assistance, quick reaction military contractual support, and democracy transition assistance programs.”

When the 1991 UN arms embargo prevented the Clinton Administration from helping Croats and Bosnian Muslims directly, MPRI was engaged to do all that the U.S. government preferred not to do openly. In 1994 it referred MPRI to Croatia’s visiting defense minister Gojko Susak, who duly contracted the company to train and equip its forces. According to U.S. Army War College Quarterly, with the explicit consent of the U.S. State and Defense Departments the firm undertook to modernize and retrain the Croatian army, including the general staff. In the summer of 1995, thanks to such assistance, the formerly inept Croatian army mounted Operation Storm,




using typical American combined-arms tactics, including integrated air, artillery, and infantry movements, as well as maneuver warfare targeted against Serbian command, control, and communication systems. French and British officials accused MPRI of helping to plan the Croatian invasion, an allegation denied by the company. Correctly or not, MPRI received credit for a major success.


This “major success” was the bloodiest episode of ethnic cleansing in Europe since World War II. The operation drove a quarter-million Serb civilians from their homes, with MPRI-trained Croat soldiers summarily executing the stragglers and indiscriminately shelling refugees. All along, according to the former head of Croatian counterintelligence, Markica Redic, “the Pentagon had complete supervision during the Storm action.” Miro Tudjman, son of the late president and former head of Croatia’s foreign intelligence, says that during Operation Storm all Croatian electronic intelligence “went online in real time to the National Security Agency in Washington.” Several Croat officers—including MPRI graduates—have been brought to trial for war crimes since that time, but no MPRI employee has ever been charged.


(emphasis mine)


Gee, is it just me that is finding this stuff out now?

[Max Photon]

* * *


Thanks Metamars!


What is profound is that illegal state-sponsored activities get jobbed out to the private sector.

Corporations are by their very nature limited liability structures. They are liability dissipative structures. (And they function magnificently.)

Synthetic currency has created such tremendous distortions in the financial system that there is actually nonlinear feedback - the snake biting its tail - a nation mauling itself.


Synthetic currency has created such distortions that it is now profitable to attack home.


* * *

[twinstead]

Again, Max, with all due respect I don't think you are qualified to make such profound declarations about our currency and bank systems, nor are you qualified to judge the 'non-bogusness' of any articles about it you happen to read.

At least I'm honest about it; I'm not either. That's why I defer to what the preponderance of experts say. This time however, I don't know many economics experts. So, excuse me if I don't take your word for it and investigate for myself, mkay?

[funk de fino]

More relevant to military deception, check out:
"The Really Bad Dogs of War"

http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/?p=355#more-355

re MPRI. MPRI claims "more generals per square foot than the Pentagon"
Gee, is it just me that is finding this stuff out now?

MPRI carried out a number of interesting smaller tasks including a US contract in 1994 to send 45 border monitors to Serbia to ensure that arms were not being smuggled to Bosnian Serb fighters in Bosnia. But the company first gained its reputation with a major project in Croatia, beginning in September 1994.[23] With the explicit consent of the US State and Defense Departments, the firm undertook to modernize and retrain the command structure of the Croatian national army, including the general staff. In the summer of 1995, with such assistance, the formerly inept Croatian army mounted Operation Storm, a successful summer offensive into the region of the Krajina. In less than a month they ejected Serb-supported forces and 150,000 Croatian Serb civilians with remarkably little bloodshed. Control of the region, long held by the Serbs, returned to Zagreb. According to observers, the Croat forces used typical American combined-arms tactics, including integrated air, artillery, and infantry movements, as well as maneuver warfare targeted against Serbian command, control, and communication systems. French and British officials accused MPRI of helping to plan the Croatian invasion, an allegation denied by the company.[24] Correctly or not, MPRI received credit for a major success.




You have cherry picked and left out information that was not conducive to your grand accusations of ethnic cleansing? Or was it just your source that let you down?

Isn't it unusual that ex forces wouldtry to make money using there experience and expertise? Maybe they should have all bought convenience stores and sold milk and cookies 24/7?

Remind me how the conflict (that i served in) was decided again?

[Slayhamlet]

You have cherry picked and left out information that was not conducive to your grand accusations of ethnic cleansing? Or was it just your source that let you down?

Isn't it unusual that ex forces wouldtry to make money using there experience and expertise? Maybe they should have all bought convenience stores and sold milk and cookies 24/7?

Remind me how the conflict (that i served in) was decided again?

To be fair, ethnic cleansing does not require that there be any actual killing, just the systematic and forced removal of an ethnic group from an area.

[metamars]

You have cherry picked and left out information that was not conducive to your grand accusations of ethnic cleansing? Or was it just your source that let you down?

Isn't it unusual that ex forces wouldtry to make money using there experience and expertise? Maybe they should have all bought convenience stores and sold milk and cookies 24/7?

Remind me how the conflict (that i served in) was decided again?

150K civilians don't count as ethnic cleansing, eh?

In any event, you missed the main point of my post. Try again. Why do you think I posted this? (Hint: look at what I bolded, and look at which line of Max Photon's I quoted.)

[technoextreme]

Synthetic currency has created such tremendous distortions in the financial system that there is actually nonlinear feedback - the snake biting its tail - a nation mauling itself.


Max. You have no clue what the words nonlinear or feedback means.

[funk de fino]

150K civilians don't count as ethnic cleansing, eh?

depends on what version you infer

This “major success” was the bloodiest episode of ethnic cleansing in Europe since World War II. The operation drove a quarter-million Serb civilians from their homes, with MPRI-trained Croat soldiers summarily executing the stragglers and indiscriminately shelling refugees.

the piece quoted and pasted in the middle did not support his claim

In any event, you missed the main point of my post. Try again. Why do you think I posted this? (Hint: look at what I bolded, and look at which line of Max Photon's I quoted.)

You're correct, not a clue

[MIKILLINI]

Max. You have no clue what the words nonlinear or feedback means.

Max works in the pseudo-nonlinear area.

[Max Photon]

* * *

A Question to 19-Hijacker Conspiracy Hypothesists


How did you rule out that 911 was an inside job?


After all, if a man goes to police to report his that his wife was murdered, who do police first investigate? The Man.

So how did you rule out The Man?


Max

[DGM]

* * *

A Question to 19-Hijacker Conspiracy Hypothesists


How did you rule out that 911 was an inside job?


After all, if a man goes to police to report his that his wife was murdered, who do police first investigate? The Man.

So how did you rule out The Man?


Max
Max;
Your derailing you own thread.

Lack of evidence to the contrary did it for me. To this date I've yet to see a more believable account.

[metamars]

* * *


Thanks Metamars!


What is profound is that illegal state-sponsored activities get jobbed out to the private sector.

Corporations are by their very nature limited liability structures. They are liability dissipative structures. (And they function magnificently.)

Synthetic currency has created such tremendous distortions in the financial system that there is actually nonlinear feedback - the snake biting its tail - a nation mauling itself.


Synthetic currency has created such distortions that it is now profitable to attack home.


* * *

Max, you disappoint me. I suggest you click your mouse 3 times, and follow the yellow-brick road via the Google search I recommended.

The MPRI quote shows how deceitful the US government can be, (and, just speculating, but a possible avenue for a real criminal investigation* - should we ever get one - as to how 911 was pulled off**) but the Burien stuff is actually more interesting. I suggest you look further. In particular, find out :
1) how much $$ are hidden away in the private / public legal entities
2) what happened when Burien tried to get the media to cover this
3) what happened when Burien tried to get a Congressman to investigate

It's very easy to hide things in plain sight when the media is so subservient, and Congress punts. I wonder, though, what would happen if RICO suits were brought? Probably they'd be stymied, just like the 911 lawsuits, but it's nice to dream. And unlike 911, since these various siphons for milking the public are legal, it's not clear to me what particular laws would be claimed to be violated.

There's no law against making fools out of the public .


* I think it was Daniel Hopsicker who pointed out that we know more about Lee Harvey Oswald than we do about the 19 hijackers.

** Somebody competent had to run the sims, I should think.

[Gravy]

I wonder, though, what would happen if RICO suits were brought? Probably they'd be stymied, just like the 911 lawsuits, but it's nice to dream.Which 9/11 lawsuits do you believe have merit, and why?

* I think it was Daniel Hopsicker who pointed out that we know more about Lee Harvey Oswald than we do about the 19 hijackers.Daniel Hopsicker points many things out. However, he fails to make the distinction between true things and false things. And can you think of some reasons why we would know a lot about Oswald?

Daniel Hopsicker. What, Chris Bollyn wasn't available for comment?

[MIKILLINI]

* * *

A Question to 19-Hijacker Conspiracy Hypothesists


How did you rule out that 911 was an inside job?


After all, if a man goes to police to report his that his wife was murdered, who do police first investigate? The Man.

So how did you rule out The Man?


Max

Max, how did you rule out the hijackers? Was it the non-arson type of investigation the NIST carried out that made you suspicious of "The Man"?

[peteweaver]

I believe our little English major(ette) is trying to say that he does not believe it is even possibe for MILDEC to deceive experts.


* * *
Max, grow up, pay attention to the facts. Gravy is giving you good advice here.

There are tens of thousands of experts the world over who would be up in arms, were the scenario you propose to be factual.

There are companies like Arup, engineers forums like the steel in fire forum which meets several times a year, university engineering departments, college engineering departments, private construction firms, all of whom understand what occured.

[pomeroo]

* * *

A Question to 19-Hijacker Conspiracy Hypothesists


How did you rule out that 911 was an inside job?


After all, if a man goes to police to report his that his wife was murdered, who do police first investigate? The Man.

So how did you rule out The Man?


Max


Gerald Posner put his finger on the problem all conspiracists share. He pointed out that in all their frenzied speculation, all their fabrications, wild guesses, absurd hypotheses, the JFK loons have lost two real people: Lee Harvey Oswald and Jack Ruby. Nobody who understands who Oswald was can ever doubt that he murdered John F. Kennedy.

Similarly, 9/11 fantasists have lost the jihadists. The refusal of the conspiracy liars to listen to the words spoken by Osama and his associates or to read the words of Sayyid Qutb, whose thought animates radical Islam, stamps them as unserious. The jihadists are real and they are sincere. A tiny handful of lunatics baying at the moon in the comfort of their advanced Western societies cannot drown out the voices of millions of energized, if wrong-headed, zealots.

[Max Photon]

War critics astonished as US hawk admits invasion was illegal (http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1089158,00.html)

[Max Photon]

"Over the last thirty-five or so years [since the US defaulted] people have been de-sensitized to the ‘chill-and-fever’ syndrome epitomized by the gyrating value of the dollar. It had its ups and downs but, here we are, still doing business using the services of ‘Old Trusty’. People appear to be forgetful that the dollar is steadily losing value, losing purchasing power, losing the all-important respect of foreigners. They have been brainwashed into thinking that inflation, like continental drift, is God-ordained. There is nothing human beings can do about it. It would never occur to people that they are victims of deliberate plundering by their own government, and deceitful pilfering by their banks, covered up by the mendacity of academia and the financial media." [emphasis mine]


Antal E. Fekete
Our Diseased Monetary Bloodstream (http://www.financialsense.com/editorials/fekete/2007/1127.html)

[Sparky]

Shouldn't you start another thread with this blather so I can ignore that one, too?

[Max Photon]

* * *

Wall Street Likes Bush Subprime Plan (http://www.forbes.com/businessinthebeltway/2007/12/06/bush-mortgages-paulson-biz-beltway-cx_bw_1206subprime.html)

Yeah they do.




It seems like just yesterday that there was still some pretense that the US was a capitalist society.

But now...this.

Oh the shame.


The housing bubble - actually a credit bubble - was pure MIHOP.

Now the bubble-blowers - who made a killing on the uptrend - are getting bailed out (read: making a killing) on the downtrend.

And the bankers' profits will be socialized.


Now dear JREFers, this is all happening in plain view. Where are your experts? Are they all "in on it"?

[beachnut]

* * *
Wall Street Likes Bush Subprime Plan (http://www.forbes.com/businessinthebeltway/2007/12/06/bush-mortgages-paulson-biz-beltway-cx_bw_1206subprime.html)
Yeah they do.
It seems like just yesterday that there was still some pretense that the US was a capitalist society.
But now...this.
Oh the shame.
The housing bubble - actually a credit bubble - was pure MIHOP.
Now the bubble-blowers - who made a killing on the uptrend - are getting bailed out (read: making a killing) on the downtrend.
And the bankers' profits will be socialized.
Now dear JREFers, this is all happening in plain view. Where are your experts? Are they all "in on it"?
What a pile of junk! Hate to ask how this off topic tripe is related to the OP.

The answer to the OP is NO, your posts are a big pile of junk.

You need to read the title of the OP; the answer is No. Further posts without the correct answer, no, are a waste of bits.

[pomeroo]

War critics astonished as US hawk admits invasion was illegal (http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1089158,00.html)


Max, you are as ignorant of English usage as you are of science. Perle opined that International Law probably would have required leaving Saddam in place. To say that he admitted it implies that it is a settled matter and no difference of opinion is possible. But many people better-versed in International Law than Mr. Perle disagree. As usual, you are dishonest and uninformed.

[MIKILLINI]

War critics astonished as US hawk admits invasion was illegal (http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1089158,00.html)

Gee Max, international law was in the way of "Doing the right thing", according to Perle. It's important to do the right thing, isn't it Max?

[Max Photon]

* * *

Wall Street Likes Bush Subprime Plan (http://www.forbes.com/businessinthebeltway/2007/12/06/bush-mortgages-paulson-biz-beltway-cx_bw_1206subprime.html)

Yeah they do.




It seems like just yesterday that there was still some pretense that the US was a capitalist society.

But now...this.

Oh the shame.


The housing bubble - actually a credit bubble - was pure MIHOP.

Now the bubble-blowers - who made a killing on the uptrend - are getting bailed out (read: making a killing) on the downtrend.

And the bankers' profits will be socialized.


Now dear JREFers, this is all happening in plain view. Where are your experts? Are they all "in on it"?


This is a fine article:

MORTGAGE MELTDOWN (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/12/09/IN5BTNJ2V.DTL)
Interest rate 'freeze' - the real story is fraud
Bankers pay lip service to families while scurrying to avert suits, prison


This thread's OP asks if the WTC collapse initiation mechanisms are being cloak by deception - in this case, military deception.


It makes sense to look at other (non-military) deceptions. For example, take the mortgage-market.

As the article points out, the mortgage-market is build on fraud. Fraud = Lie. In other words, the mortgage-market is a gigantic lie.


If the mortgage-market is a gigantic lie, who cloaked the truth about the mortgage-market, and how? Was it just a few people, or was "everyone in on it"? Why didn't the experts sound the alarm?


If a strategic deception was engineered in the mortgage market (as part of the illegal check kiting scheme between the US Treasury and the Federal Reserve), why couldn't the same deception techniques be used to cloak the WTC collapse initiation mechanisms?

Max

* * *

[Good Lt]

If a strategic deception was engineered in the mortgage market (as part of the illegal check kiting scheme between the US Treasury and the Federal Reserve), why couldn't the same deception techniques be used to cloak the WTC collapse initiation mechanisms?


Because there's no evidence 9-11 was an inside job, let alone the WTC demolished by explosives while the massive Zionist conspirators pulling all the strings "covered it up."

Simple.

[MIKILLINI]

This is a fine article:

MORTGAGE MELTDOWN (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/12/09/IN5BTNJ2V.DTL)
Interest rate 'freeze' - the real story is fraud
Bankers pay lip service to families while scurrying to avert suits, prison


This thread's OP asks if the WTC collapse initiation mechanisms are being cloak by deception - in this case, military deception.


It makes sense to look at other (non-military) deceptions. For example, take the mortgage-market.

As the article points out, the mortgage-market is build on fraud. Fraud = Lie. In other words, the mortgage-market is a gigantic lie.


If the mortgage-market is a gigantic lie, who cloaked the truth about the mortgage-market, and how? Was it just a few people, or was "everyone in on it"? Why didn't the experts sound the alarm?


If a strategic deception was engineered in the mortgage market (as part of the illegal check kiting scheme between the US Treasury and the Federal Reserve), why couldn't the same deception techniques be used to cloak the WTC collapse initiation mechanisms?

Max

* * *

Oh boy Max, are you certain this mortgage trend was a fraud? Was it really a deception? Are you basing this on one written opinion piece?
This mortgage angle by you needs to be carried on in a different thread...and there is one...

Prove that it was fraud, Max. Which means that whatever financing institutions had given out loans to people, added more terms to the contract without the buyers being present or not given the additional contract to read and sign. Only that would be fraud.

Deception is answering buyers questions, knowing they would not fully read the contract (But how would the financers know this?), thereby giving them an answer not consistent with what the contract terms dictate.

Gee Max, your a strange dog..ya keep barkin' up the wrong tree.

[Max Photon]

LOCALS ONLY!


The geometry of the 911-deception is a cusp-catastrophe.

The geometry of a breaking wave is a cusp-catastrophe.

A breaking wave is a good analogy of the 911-deception, hence it is valuable to observe breaking waves.


This video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E91pK-2TUFg) is from Teahupoo, Tahiti.

It is absolutely spectacular - especially the 2nd half.


Enjoy.

[Max Photon]

Here's a fine short video:

Webster Tarpley
The "War On Terror" Is A Fraud (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evGpJgwupPo)
(4 minutes)

In it he discusses how pseudo-gangs - harmonics - higher-order resistance terms - are used to maintain the grand illusion of The War on Terror.

Pseudo-gangs are used to create synthetic terror.
Pseudo-gangs are used to create synthetic dollar demand.
Pseudo-gangs are used to dynamically stabilize long-term strategic deceptions.


Low intensity warfare...

...for low intensity minds.

[Max Photon]

One of the objections to MAX-MIHOP is that there is no way such a lie could be maintained.

I have tried to counter this objection by showing that other grand lies are hidden in plain view, and are successfully maintained, some for decades.

The lie of the dollar is a multi-decade strategic deception.

The lie that a house is a hard asset - vs a hard-asset impostor - is a more fashionable deception. This case is particularly instructive because one gets to study - real time - the breakdown of a deception.


Here is a quote from Bill Bonner at the Daily Reckoning:

"The homeowner lied about how much he earned or how much he had; the appraiser lied about the value of the collateral; or the mortgage company lied about the terms of the loan. Sometimes all of them lied to each other. And then, along came the Wall Street packagers who told more whoppers. Bundling up thousands of fraudulent mortgage contracts they somehow managed to get the stuff rated "investable" grade, a lie so spectacularly in-your-face it practically knocked your nose off."


So here you ought to object like good JREF NISTIANs and say, "Impossible! Where were the thousands of auditors, and regulators, and bankers, and lawyers and all of the other zillions of experts! There is no way such a lie could be maintained. Impossible! The housing debacle is in your head. You hate America."


Mr. Bonner - like Mr. Max - is actually describing hiding a grand lie in plain view!

"...a lie so spectacularly in your face..."



911 was a lie so spectacularly in your face...


you couldn't see it.

[pomeroo]

One of the objections to MAX-MIHOP is that there is no way such a lie could be maintained.

I have tried to counter this objection by showing that other grand lies are hidden in plain view, and are successfully maintained, some for decades.

The lie of the dollar is a multi-decade strategic deception.

The lie that a house is a hard asset - vs a hard-asset impostor - is a more fashionable deception. This case is particularly instructive because one gets to study - real time - the breakdown of a deception.


Here is a quote from Bill Bonner at the Daily Reckoning:

"The homeowner lied about how much he earned or how much he had; the appraiser lied about the value of the collateral; or the mortgage company lied about the terms of the loan. Sometimes all of them lied to each other. And then, along came the Wall Street packagers who told more whoppers. Bundling up thousands of fraudulent mortgage contracts they somehow managed to get the stuff rated "investable" grade, a lie so spectacularly in-your-face it practically knocked your nose off."


So here you ought to object like good JREF NISTIANs and say, "Impossible! Where were the thousands of auditors, and regulators, and bankers, and lawyers and all of the other zillions of experts! There is no way such a lie could be maintained. Impossible! The housing debacle is in your head. You hate America."


Mr. Bonner - like Mr. Max - is actually describing hiding a grand lie in plain view!

"...a lie so spectacularly in your face..."



911 was a lie so spectacularly in your face...


you couldn't see it.


You're a spectacular liar and no one has any trouble seeing you.

[MIKILLINI]

One of the objections to MAX-MIHOP is that there is no way such a lie could be maintained.

I have tried to counter this objection by showing that other grand lies are hidden in plain view, and are successfully maintained, some for decades.

The lie of the dollar is a multi-decade strategic deception.

The lie that a house is a hard asset - vs a hard-asset impostor - is a more fashionable deception. This case is particularly instructive because one gets to study - real time - the breakdown of a deception.


Here is a quote from Bill Bonner at the Daily Reckoning:

"The homeowner lied about how much he earned or how much he had; the appraiser lied about the value of the collateral; or the mortgage company lied about the terms of the loan. Sometimes all of them lied to each other. And then, along came the Wall Street packagers who told more whoppers. Bundling up thousands of fraudulent mortgage contracts they somehow managed to get the stuff rated "investable" grade, a lie so spectacularly in-your-face it practically knocked your nose off."


So here you ought to object like good JREF NISTIANs and say, "Impossible! Where were the thousands of auditors, and regulators, and bankers, and lawyers and all of the other zillions of experts! There is no way such a lie could be maintained. Impossible! The housing debacle is in your head. You hate America."


Mr. Bonner - like Mr. Max - is actually describing hiding a grand lie in plain view!

"...a lie so spectacularly in your face..."



911 was a lie so spectacularly in your face...


you couldn't see it.

Gee Max, the homeowners in on it too? The conspiracy keeps adding more potential witnesses.:rolleyes:

[Max Photon]

Gee Max, the homeowners in on it too? The conspiracy keeps adding more potential witnesses.:rolleyes:


Good Lord, that the closest you've ever come to paying attention.


Yes Mikillini, homeowners were in on the credit bubble.

It should be obvious that deception requires a deceiver and the deceived (too often one and the same).

Homeowners were willfully deceived because they thought they could get something for nothing. (It is hard to get people to see something, when their paycheck depends on them not seeing it.)

The housing bubble was comprised largely of those willing to be deceived. These participants - as I have argued elsewhere - were put to work in pseudo-gangs. Their job - create emergency artificial demand for USDollars.


Now onto 911...

Much is the same. Here people want to be deceived that 911 was perpetrated by "those who hate our freedoms" because it preserves the inflated values of their emotional investments in perceived authoritarian power structures (you know, "USA is Number One!" and all that).

The 911 deception - much like the housing deception - IS a grand conspiracy, involving everyone.

People want to be deceived.


Thank you Mikillini for finally showing up. :)


* * * * *

Happy Holidays Everyone!

I love you all.

Max

[MIKILLINI]

The 911 deception - much like the housing deception - IS a grand conspiracy, involving everyone.

People want to be deceived.

Is this what your banking on, Max? That people want to be deceived?

The homeowner lied about how much he earned or how much he had.

Homeowners wanted a house...those in over their heads did not think their situation through. They believed they could do it, without backup savings if things didn't go as they hoped and planned. First time home buyers could get a home with no money down.
The house had to be in compliance with FMHA standards.

Those who want to be deceived about 9/11 are twoofers, pure and simple. Most of them believe the governments in on it, so they'll believe anything that's not the official story. Like, well, I don't know, like you Max?


Merry Christmas all!!

[Max Photon]

Is this what your banking on, Max? That people want to be deceived?


No.

That is what MILDEC and financial control engineers are banking on.

[Max Photon]

This thread asks:

Are the WTC collapse-initiation mechanisms being cloaked by military deception (MILDEC)?

The major objections to 911 being a MILDEC operation center around the notion that it would be impossible to execute and sustain such a complex strategic hoax, without experts seeing through it, or whistle blowers coming forward.

I have countered by pointing out that there is a much grander strategic hoax - one that has endured since August 15, 1971 - and it is hidden in plain view. That deception is the USDollar. (In short, the US defaulted on its foreign-held gold bonds, thereby declaring its insolvency. The value of a broken promise is zero. So why did the USDollar retain any value? Financial control engineers use deception to induce pseudo-gangs of USDollar speculators (like bond traders, and home buyers) to create artificial demand for the USDollar. Note: the USDollar deception is breaking down.)

So, my point has been:

To understand the 911 military deception, study the USDollar financial deception.

(Of course, this exercise has been a bit like teaching topology to fruit flies.)


I have argued that the NIST Report has been engineered as an ambiguous figure (http://www.maniacworld.com/Spinning-Silhouette-Optical-Illusion.html), and it is the ambiguity that serves to cloak the true collapse mechanism in the NIST Report. That is to say, the NIST Report does paint a portrait of the controlled demolition of the towers, but the portrait is beautifully done in greys.


Financial charts are also ambiguous figures, and thus financial charts can be used for deception.

For example:

Today, if you'll allow for a little rounding, we see:

Gold = $900/oz
Silver = $16/oz
Oil = $100/barrel

($ = USDollars)

These numbers are triple what they were in 2001.

That would lead most to think these items are becoming more expensive.

But that is just an illusion! That is financial deception!

Most only see the financial world spinning in the $/something direction - you know - $/oz, $/barrel, and so on.

Ah, but financial ratios are ambiguous figures! This means one can see the financial world spinning the other way, if one looks just right.

What do I mean? Well if you turn the telescope around, and look at not $/something, but rather, something/$, the world looks pretty different.

Suddenly, gold isn't going up - the USDollar is going down.

Silver isn't going up - the USDollar is going down.

Oil isn't going up - the USDollar is going down.


Here in the US, as nominal home prices rose, people actually thought they were getting richer! They have been deceived by deliberate financial engineering. (And, they wanted to be deceived that they could get something for nothing.)

Little did most realize that financial control engineers cleverly hide massive currency devaluation under the guise of rising home prices. Brilliant! Financial control engineers saw the exploitable susceptibility: Most people would confuse asset inflation for wealth, and - thinking they were rich - most would then take on huge debt, and in synthetic currency world, taking on debt equals liquefying the system.

(Let that in. If gas prices increase, people know they are getting poorer. If milk prices increase, people know they are getting poorer. But if house prices increase, people think they are getting richer.)


So if it is possible to hide long-term strategic financial deceptions in plain view, wouldn't it be possible to hide long-term military deceptions - like 911 - in plain view?


Max

[Max Photon]

Hey Science Fans,

Have you guys ever actually played with video feedback? It is very cool.

Take your video or still camera, plug in a line from the camera to a TV screen or monitor, and point the camera at the monitor.

This creates a closed loop - a feedback loop (uroboros for the hippies in the crowd).

Feedback loops can generate bewildering complexity.

(Skinny, avert your eyes...)

I have often shown the video CONTROL THIS (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5055142518640380288&q=Sub+oslo+control+this&hl=en), which is a magnificent example of video feedback. (The music happens to be pretty sweet too.)

I found another feedback example, which I'll post in a moment.


So how could controlled-demolitions be cloaked - hidden in plain view - with the whole world watching?

Feedback.

MILDEC is successfully cloaking the demolitions by using simple feedback to create a bewildering picture.

MILDEC is using feedback to bewilder.


How is MILDEC generating feedback?

Thermite was used to heat-weaken the towers to initiate collapse.

In other words, arson initiated collapse, or, fire initiated collapse.

"But Max," you might object, "there were massive fires created by the jets."

Yes, and those fires were a perfect place to hide arson.

MILDEC planners are generating feedback - and bewildering everyone - by hiding fire in fire.

It was SABOTAGE (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5541974353563753919&q=beastie+boys+sabotage)!


So NIST's linear model:

JETS + DISLODGED SFRM + FIRES = COLLAPSE INITIATION

whiffs at the curve-ball thrown by MILDEC:

JETS + DISLODGED SFRM + (FIRES)^2 = COLLAPSE INITIATION


Conclusion (for all you Flatlanders):

MAX-MIHOP = NIST-WITH-A-TWIST!


BetaMax

[MIKILLINI]

Hey Science Fans,

Have you guys ever actually played with video feedback? It is very cool.

Take your video or still camera, plug in a line from the camera to a TV screen or monitor, and point the camera at the monitor.

This creates a closed loop - a feedback loop (uroboros for the hippies in the crowd).

Feedback loops can generate bewildering complexity.

(Skinny, avert your eyes...)

I have often shown the video CONTROL THIS (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5055142518640380288&q=Sub+oslo+control+this&hl=en), which is a magnificent example of video feedback. (The music happens to be pretty sweet too.)

I found another feedback example, which I'll post in a moment.


So how could controlled-demolitions be cloaked - hidden in plain view - with the whole world watching?

Feedback.

MILDEC is successfully cloaking the demolitions by using simple feedback to create a bewildering picture.

MILDEC is using feedback to bewilder.


How is MILDEC generating feedback?

Thermite was used to heat-weaken the towers to initiate collapse.

In other words, arson initiated collapse, or, fire initiated collapse.

"But Max," you might object, "there were massive fires created by the jets."

Yes, and those fires were a perfect place to hide arson.

MILDEC planners are generating feedback - and bewildering everyone - by hiding fire in fire.

It was SABOTAGE (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5541974353563753919&q=beastie+boys+sabotage)!


So NIST's linear model:

JETS + DISLODGED SFRM + FIRES = COLLAPSE INITIATION

whiffs at the curve-ball thrown by MILDEC:

JETS + DISLODGED SFRM + (FIRES)^2 = COLLAPSE INITIATION


Conclusion (for all you Flatlanders):

MAX-MIHOP = NIST-WITH-A-TWIST!


BetaMax

Max, thou ought not take thyself so seriously. Although there is possible evidence to the contrary that thou do not.

Like these; Hiding fire in fire.

Those fires were a perfect place to hide arson.

MAX-MIHOP = NIST-WITH-A-TWIST!

BetaMax

Thou appear to be working for a Stundie, Max Blueray Disc!

[TheRedWorm]

Hey Max, are the effects of your thermite appreciably different than the effects of an office fire started (and at least partially maintained) by 10,000 or so gallons of jet fuel?

[Max Photon]

Hey Max, are the effects of your thermite appreciably different than the effects of an office fire started (and at least partially maintained) by 10,000 or so gallons of jet fuel?


Absolutely!

While most of the jet fuel burned off in seconds, the office fires were longer lived.

(Note that WTC2 displayed numerous unusual fire behaviors as described by NIST in NCSTAR 1-5A/9/C.)

But much of the energy of the office fires simple exited the building as hot gases. Thus, only a small portion of the office fires' energy was available to heat the steel, and even that, inefficiently.

Thermite planted inside box columns would have been much more efficient at heating the steel to 500C-600C.

Max


ETA: also see...

NIST quotes low fuel loads for WTCs 1 & 2, to cloak supplementary catalysts (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=3175273#post3175273)

[Max Photon]

Max, how in God's creation could controlled demolitions be hidden in plain view, with whole world watching? How could ALL the experts miss controlled-demolitions, for crying out loud?

Good question! To hide controlled-demolitions would be to bewilder all of the experts. How could deception planners bewilder all of the experts?

Simple! Thermite heat-weakened steel connections until the towers collapsed. The controlled demolitions were not explosives-based or cutting-based demolitions. The controlled demolitions were arson! To bewilder the experts, deception planners - magic illusionists - hid arson in the fires. Clever.

From this perspective, the function of the jet crashes was to cloak controlled-demolition by arson. In other words, the jet fires hid the thermite fires. Fire hid fire.

Can't you see it? All magic-illusionists create distractions or diversions. The jets are just that. The fires created by the jets are cloaking the fires created by thermite.

The jets are cloaking the controlled demolitions! The jets are cloaking controlled demolition by thermite-based arson which heat-weakened the towers until they collapsed.

Thermite initiated collapse. Jet-induced fires are cloaking the thermite.

Max

[twinstead]

Max, this is simply some kind of game to you, isn't it? I mean, you really can't think that your theories would make any headway at all against the cream of the engineering crop, so to speak, do you?

I mean seriously, dude: you are seriously claiming that something the evaded all the experts in the world was easily determined by YOU, Max Photon.

Are you on some kind of superiority kick or something?

[Max Photon]

Max, this is simply some kind of game to you, isn't it?


No, the cloaking of the WTC controlled demolitions is magic illusion, so I'd say it's more of a puzzle than a game.


I mean, you really can't think that your theories would make any headway at all against the cream of the engineering crop, so to speak, do you?


Sure, why not? The cream of the engineering crop has very patterned ways of thinking (ie. the scientific process), and this fixed form of thinking is highly susceptible to exploitation. Fooling the expert mind is easy. Plus, the experts are typically found in very hierarchical structures, and they are highly prone to group-think and pressure to conform. And they didn't get where they are by bucking the system or making waves. Oh, and don't forget, it's hard to get someone to see what their paycheck depends on them not seeing. No, experts are ripe for the foolin'.


I mean seriously, dude: you are seriously claiming that something the evaded all the experts in the world was easily determined by YOU, Max Photon.


Yes.


Are you on some kind of superiority kick or something?


Not at all. I am humble enough to know that ordinary people can do extraordinary things.


Max

911-God-All-Mighty-That-Dude-Is-A-Total-Stud

[beachnut]

Pathetic to make up stuff about 9/11 where people died and Max makes up foolish fantasies and lies. Blames others with no evidence. Thanks Max for being so insensitive it makes me look like a saint.

[twinstead]

Sure, why not? The cream of the engineering crop has very patterned ways of thinking (ie. the scientific process), and this fixed form of thinking is highly susceptible to exploitation. Fooling the expert mind is easy. Plus, the experts are typically found in very hierarchical structures, and they are highly prone to group-think and pressure to conform. And they didn't get where they are by bucking the system or making waves. Oh, and don't forget, it's hard to get someone to see what their paycheck depends on them not seeing. No, experts are ripe for the foolin'.


Just as I thought. You think you are better than everybody, and therefore you think you are better than those who actually have more knowledge than you do.

All I can say is arrogance is fine as long as you can back it up. As long as the majority view stays the majority view you will be relegated to the back alleys of this debate.

Until 911 is universally acknowledged to be an inside job world-wide, your 'I'm better than you, and I know more than you' crap will stay simply humorous.

MaxComedy. Put up or shut up.

ETA you know what? The Majority view of 911 supports MY view. That means that I am God, and you are but a subject. I'm starting to feel all superior now. I'm starting to feel all Max now, and I have just discovered why you revel in your Godliness the way you do. It feels good. It ROCKS! I LOVE being superior!

Whew. I feel your power now Max.

[MIKILLINI]

Max, how in God's creation could controlled demolitions be hidden in plain view, with whole world watching? How could ALL the experts miss controlled-demolitions, for crying out loud?

Good question! To hide controlled-demolitions would be to bewilder all of the experts. How could deception planners bewilder all of the experts?

Simple! Thermite heat-weakened steel connections until the towers collapsed. The controlled demolitions were not explosives-based or cutting-based demolitions. The controlled demolitions were arson! To bewilder the experts, deception planners - magic illusionists - hid arson in the fires. Clever.

From this perspective, the function of the jet crashes was to cloak controlled-demolition by arson. In other words, the jet fires hid the thermite fires. Fire hid fire.

Can't you see it? All magic-illusionists create distractions or diversions. The jets are just that. The fires created by the jets are cloaking the fires created by thermite.

The jets are cloaking the controlled demolitions! The jets are cloaking controlled demolition by thermite-based arson which heat-weakened the towers until they collapsed.

Thermite initiated collapse. Jet-induced fires are cloaking the thermite.

Max

BetaMax asking questions. BetaMax answering his own questions. BetaMax still using thermite as a lynchpin for his hypothesis.
You know Max, several years ago there were those who said Beta would overtake VHS, but that didn't happen.
You are the Beta, Max.

[Max Photon]

I think you mean Alpha.

- - -

To understand how military deception (MILDEC) planners have successfully bewilders all of the experts, consider the following:


The official model says:

JET IMPACTS - SFRM + FIRES = COLLAPSE INITIATION


MAX-MIHOP (or NIST-WITH-A-TWIST) says:

JET IMPACTS - SFRM + (FIRES)^2 = COLLAPSE INITIATION


Now surely FIRES is a complex process or function, so (FIRES)^2 represents complex multiplication.

Do you see what MILDEC has done? By hiding thermite-based fires in jet-induced fires - by hiding fire in fire - by multiplying or magnifying fire by fire - MILDEC has moved from the Real Plane to the Complex Plane. This is a key point. In the Complex Plane, one has control over imaginary components, distortion, and spin - the raw materials of deception.

Also, consider what happens if people debate (iterate) the complex statement:

JET IMPACTS - SFRM + (FIRES)^2 = COLLAPSE INITIATION

Is it not the case that iterating 2nd order complex functions generate fractals, and that fractals - while bounded - have boundaries that are infinitely long?

Debating (iterating) that statement generates fractals - nonlinear resistance in the form of endless debate bogged down in endless complexity. (Very clever, MILDEC.)

Incidentally, Paul's Magic Filter was designed to move from the Complex Plane back to the Real Plane, where imaginary components, distortion, and spin are all set to zero, so the physics of the controlled demolitions can be seen clearly.

In other words, Paul's Magic Filter controls for noise.


Max (no really)

[Mince]

Do you see what MILDEC has done? By hiding thermite-based fires in jet-induced fires - by hiding fire in fire - by multiplying or magnifying fire by fire - MILDEC has moved from the Real Plane to the Complex Plane. This is a key point. In the Complex Plane, one has control over imaginary components, distortion, and spin - the raw materials of deception.


Those sly bastards! They would've gotten away with it, too, if it weren't for you meddling mihops. Thank you for waking me up; for delivering me from sheepdom.

[lennysun]

While the whole world was watching, prime time, how could we accept and "appreciate" the Shock and Awe procedure, it was in "plain view"?

[pomeroo]

I think you mean Alpha.

- - -

To understand how military deception (MILDEC) planners have successfully bewilders all of the experts, consider the following:


The official model says:

JET IMPACTS - SFRM + FIRES = COLLAPSE INITIATION


MAX-MIHOP (or NIST-WITH-A-TWIST) says:

JET IMPACTS - SFRM + (FIRES)^2 = COLLAPSE INITIATION


Now surely FIRES is a complex process or function, so (FIRES)^2 represents complex multiplication.

Do you see what MILDEC has done? By hiding thermite-based fires in jet-induced fires - by hiding fire in fire - by multiplying or magnifying fire by fire - MILDEC has moved from the Real Plane to the Complex Plane. This is a key point. In the Complex Plane, one has control over imaginary components, distortion, and spin - the raw materials of deception.

Also, consider what happens if people debate (iterate) the complex statement:

JET IMPACTS - SFRM + (FIRES)^2 = COLLAPSE INITIATION

Is it not the case that iterating 2nd order complex functions generate fractals, and that fractals - while bounded - have boundaries that are infinitely long?

Debating (iterating) that statement generates fractals - nonlinear resistance in the form of endless debate bogged down in endless complexity. (Very clever, MILDEC.)

Incidentally, Paul's Magic Filter was designed to move from the Complex Plane back to the Real Plane, where imaginary components, distortion, and spin are all set to zero, so the physics of the controlled demolitions can be seen clearly.

In other words, Paul's Magic Filter controls for noise.


Max (no really)


Why don't you seek the help you need and stop slandering people who serve in the military? Seriously.

[lennysun]

As a consequence: 150.000 civilians, mostly young, are prematurely dead.

[Max Photon]

Second order complex functions - iterated - generate fractals.

See: Wikipedia > Fractals (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractal)


Hiding fire in fire is a complexity generator.


MaxMax

[lennysun]

"We hold these truths to be selfevident: that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalieanable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

Declaration of Independence

Right?
"Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

I think this declaration is universal, don´t you?

[lennysun]

"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood."

UN Declaration of Human Rights

Is this perspective universal? I mean, to you?