9/11: The 9,000 Pound Elephant in the Room
Should the family members of 9/11 victims ever be treated with disrespect? Please take one minute to hear three of the many tell you that they want the truth: Vote for Answers. Damn it, they deserve the truth and so do we.
For almost 8 years now I have been absolutely stunned by the extraordinary naiveté and willful ignorance that I have encountered in this country (people from other countries get it) whenever I have mentioned that I do not believe the Bush Crime Family’s official narrative of the events that occurred on September 11th, 2001. People just about put their hands over their eyes and ears and say “Lalalala—I’m not listening.” I even had someone get up from my dining room table and threaten to leave because what I was saying was such blasphemy. I understand the mindless Bush worshippers who don’t even know what the word “insight” means, but to see the attitude of those who call themselves “liberals” or “progressives” when the subject of 9/11 is even broached is very disturbing. They refer to anyone who questions the official story as “truthers” and the term, as they use it, practically drips with disdain. Some “liberal” sites limit discussion on the topic, but when an article pops up the comments section immediately overflows. There are actually millions of Americans and hundreds of millions or more around the world who want to know the truth. It is vitally important because 9/11 was used as the premise for the Bush administration to commit a long list of other heinous crimes. There is a desperate desire to find out that one is not alone in his or her thoughts because almost all public and media discussion has been quashed. Some say they will believe an alternative when they see proof. I answer that it was incumbent on Bush&Co. to provide evidence of their claims. Since the promise to present that evidence was made to the victims’ families years ago, there has been nothing offered. Instead, tapes, photos, videos and files have been destroyed or locked away, witnesses have been marginalized and harassed, the FBI says there is absolutely no evidence linking bin Laden to 9/11 and lies have been told to the 9/11 Commission, members of which have publicly stated they were deceived.To those who blame 9/11 on Bush Administration incompetence I ask, “Why did no heads roll?” There was nothing incompetent about how they used 9/11 to march us into Iraq. That war played out exactly as planned as every day corporate America continues to reap millions from perpetual war. To all those who refuse to face the possibility that their government would inflict such horror on its own people, I say look what else it has done since. Our youth were consigned to die, or be physically and emotionally harmed in a war based entirely on lies. Iraqi children were sodomized to extract confessions from their parents. To Bush&Co. 9/11 was just collateral damage. These pathological monsters would do anything to achieve their goals—anything! I remind you of other government hoaxes: Remember the Maine, the Gulf of Tonkin, the sinking of the Lusitania, the Mexican-American War, the Northwoods Project. Attacking one’s own people and making it look like others did it to start wars has been done before…time and time again.
Some have been lulled to complacency by the 9/11 Commission, which was little more than a dog and pony show. However, the Bush-appointed Commissioners (who all, by the way, had serious conflicts of interest that should have barred their involvement) have expressed grave misgivings about the report they themselves issued. In 2004, they contemplated bringing charges against the CIA and FBI for withholding evidence. But that was an election year, and they did nothing. You can also be assured that this investigation was tainted because after the uproar about Kissinger being put in as executive director of the Commission, Condoleeza Rice’s good friend Philip Zelikow was appointed by Bush. Everything went through Zelikow, who is literally an expert in creating myths which is exactly what the 9/11 Commission Report turned out to be.
Because of a recent development there are now serious questions about the validity of a large portion of the 9/11 Commission Report. (Personally I have a problem with the validity of the whole report since they blocked whistle-blowers and others with important testimony; allowed testimony but omitted it from the Report; allowed Bush and Cheney to speak with the committee privately and together and not under oath; never answered most of the questions or made sense of the anomalies; and held no one accountable for anything.) It has recently come to light that a torture program called Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape Training (SERE) was used in Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib and our other overseas prisons on many of our detainees. Anyone would admit to anything after the obscene and vicious things that were done to them including repeated waterboarding. It seems this particular system of torture is not used for getting information “to save us from that ticking time bomb.” Rather, it is used to obtain false confessions. What I find interesting is that whenever there is discussion in the media about why this torture program was utilized, only one point has been mentioned—that the Bush administration, after it was shown they had lied about there being weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, needed to show a connection between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden so that they could justify their illegal invasion and occupation of that sovereign nation. No one in the media ever mentions the other use—to elicit false confessions about involvement in 9/11 which they desperately needed to deflect blame away from them. However, one of the members of the 9/11 Commission, John Farmer is now writing a book saying a large part of the Commission Report is invalid because it was based on evidence gained through torture and because they were constantly stymied throughout the Commission’s tenure. Other members concur: 9/11 Commission official says public story almost entirely untrue
In looking for information on this I was sent an article from Daily Kos which had originally been posted on January 30, 2008 9-11-commission-findings-based-on-torture-(updated) that I found stunning. When examining data from the detainee interrogators, the Commissioners highly suspected that torture was being employed. Not only did they include the information gained from these suspect interrogations, but they sent the interrogators back with instructions to get certain information for them from the detainees. They knew torture would be used again. What kind of people are they? The executive director, Philip Zelikow, is now trying to distance himself from his Bush buddies on the question of torture because he damn well knew exactly what was going on and sanctioned it.
I make no apology for being a “truther.” I make no apology for believing it was an inside job. From the moment the second plane hit the tower I have known with every ounce of my being that the Bush Administration was involved. The shady evidence on the hijackers, especially the intact passport, smelled like a scam. No evidence has been presented in all these years to bolster the “official story” and so much has and continues to come to light that shows the events could not have played out the way we were told. Untruths, like phone calls from planes that never happened, unravel the fantasy. While a few theories, often cited by insiders, are far-fetched, most are very sensible and scholarly as respected scientists, architects, professors, pilots, firefighters, military and ex-CIA, politicians, historians, journalists and other scholars who have studied all aspects and timelines of 9/11 make their findings and opinions known. And let us not forget the victims’ family members who for almost eight years have been waging a relentless battle for the truth. Nor Jesse Ventura who is one of the few known faces brave enough to speak out—other celebrities who have done so were immediately discredited by the media…Howard Stern - Jesse Ventura on 9/11 & Howard Stern - Jesse Ventura on 9/11 Pt2
Bush went on the offensive immediately after the attack, asserting that any other theory other than their “official story” was a “conspiracy theory.” He knew what he doing. We were set up to look like conspiracy nuts. But if you look closely at their scenario it is the granddaddy of all conspiracy theories. There are so many unanswered questions, anomalies, bizarre coincidences, holes and pieces that don’t fit together that one is speechless when faced with the data. Their story included 19 Arab hijackers with box cutters and plastic knives supposedly being given orders by a 6′6″ man on a dialysis machine in a cave in Afghanistan. Oh, please! The Bush Crime Family had motive and opportunity. The planning began in the 90’s with the Project for the New American Century - SourceWatch (PNAC) and their document “Rebuilding America’s Defences,” that eventually, with the installation of George W. Bush as president, became our national strategic plan issued in 2002 and later in 2006 “National Security Strategy 2006,” Looking at any of these documents sends chills up one’s spine. The original document lays out in clear language their desire for American hegemony—it is blatantly a blueprint for world domination with America as the policemen. The plan was to start in Iraq, then Iran, Syria and move on from there. Back in the late ‘90s the PNAC tried to get Clinton to attack Iraq but he refused. Once the Neocons had control of the White House they were ready to carry out their plan, but they knew they would need to get the American people on board— “Further, the process of revolutionary change is likely to be a long one, absent some catalystic and catastrophic event—like a new Pearl Harbor.” (Page 63 of the original document.) September 11th was their new Pearl Harbor. If you keep your head in the sand and believe that they just got lucky, you do us all a great disservice. As we all now know they immediately set their plan into action. After watching the machinations by the Bush Crime Family these last many years, I no longer believe in coincidences…certainly not one like this.
Something happened in February that brought my attention back to 9/11—so many crimes so little time. September 11th widow Beverly Eckert died in a plane crash in Buffalo, New York. She had been a strong 9/11 activist who wanted a truthful accounting of events and accountability. How sad that she died never knowing what really happened that day.
Let me make this very clear—no matter what the Bush Crime Family involvement was—just turning a blind eye or orchestrating and carrying out the attack, it is out and out treason. Unless we hold the Bush Crime Family accountable for torture…for murder…for illegal wars…for lie after lie after lie after lie…and for 9/11 we will never be safe from them. As I am sure you have noticed we are getting daily threats from Cheney. Go ahead, continue to call me a “conspiracy theorist” if you would like, but there is little doubt in my mind that if they are not put behind bars (all of them), there will be another homegrown “terrorist” attack so that they can regain power.
I will include more information on this topic in future articles but I hope you will realize how important it is for you to let go of the fear and educate yourself on this issue so that you can join the call for a new real investigation into the biggest crime on American soil.
Two articles you should see “The Truth is Not Enough: How to Overcome Emotional Barriers to 9/11 Truth” and “Frequently Asked Questions About 9/11″ by KenJenkins at 911 truth (check out the other links on this page—good information)
(Also read anything written by David Ray Griffin.)
Email this article...
or Socialize with
Print This Article
TOP
CALynn comments:
Excellent article. Thank you for writing it. In Europe they hold college classes on how ridiculuous The Official Story is. And they laugh at Americans for buying it hook, line and sinker.
I mean how much time did the Bushies actually put into this story? Three minutes? If I was to write this story and submit it to a publisher, he’d laugh at me and say “who would buy this; it assumes people are stupid”?
In what universe do three separate buildings collapse into their own footprint in less than 8 seconds?
Maybe we should do a puppet show, you know one that shows how ludicrous The Official Story is. Or a cartoon, like Shrek…now a musical!!!
Hey, if they can make three Shrek movies and then make that into a musical on Broadway….well, baby, then anything can happen!
Last month The Nyack (NY) Library - who had allowed local members of 9/11 Truth to show the documentary Zero for several months - actually told them they could not show the film anymore because “it is too controversial.”
Hello? The truth is controversial.
Thanks again for writing it…and saying it…and having a thinking-woman’s brain.
Stefan Kosikowski comments:
Here you go Dorothy…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZgdHfDwoNY
…some people get it.
vs88 comments:
Great article, Dorothy! I’ve known since the instant it happened that the 9/11 storyline couldn’t possibly be correct for so many reasons. While your article focuses on the Who and Why, my own research has focused on the What and How aspects of the day. So many things don’t make any physical or logical sense at all. A 150 foot long aircraft disappears without a trace in a 16 foot wide hole in the Pentagon? A skyscraper falls down for no apparent reason at 5 in the afternoon? And of course, the free-falling buildings, just like all those controlled demolition shows that used to be on TV (funny how they’re not on anymore, lest we bozos make the connection!). Buildings filled with concrete and steel are pulverized? By what? Fire? Since when? When you pull at the threads of the entire story, it unravels pretty fast. I must have missed the Kool-Aid trough on the day they poured in the “shut up and believe what you’re told” powder. I sincerely hope that one day the real story will come out and those responsible (men in suits, for sure) held accountable for treason.
Stefan Kosikowski comments:
Just remember, those who openly express the fallacies of the 9-11 conspiracies mark themselves before the corporate management that is ultimately responsible. Employment concerns have a chilling effect upon one’s future, enough to remain silent… but not the least bit naive!
I’ll give you the willful ignorance, that much is undeniable for ignorance is bliss.
vs88 comments:
Here is a great video by Dr Steven Jones (a physics PhD) discussing the collapse of WTC 7:
http://911truth.org/article.php?story=20090602133438782
Dorothy Reilly comments:
I appreciate greatly the comments that have been included here. If anyone would like to contact me please send an email (be sure to indicate the email is for me at the top of your message)
Tom Me comments:
well - i don’t mean to burst your bubble - and i’m sure i wont - but i think you guys are full of it.
notice how i said “i think” - as for all i know you guys are dead on right about what you believe. but i do KNOW where you guys are wrong - and that is where you guys start saying things like you “KNOW” - i challenge just one of you to present real hard inside proof. you can’t - you can only present interpretations of this or that which lead you to BELIEVE what you’ve come to believe. i’m not saying you’re all wrong (i don’t know - i’m saying you’re rude (mixed with ignorance). some of you take your rudeness to new heights, little different than showing up at someones funeral and yelling to the widow “you killed him - didn’t you?” in front of her kids, just because you don’t like the woman. yes, there was conspiracy theorists showing up at memorial services chanting crap at the top of their lungs.
so don’t mind me if i decide not to get aboard.
however it isn’t that kind of ignorant attitude that steers me in a direction of not believing all this governmental conspiracy stuff - no, it’s much much more.
a few highlights are:
for many years i’ve worked construction and demolition. i also saw the towers being built. i honestly can’t imagine them comming down any other way - anyone that states otherwise, be a phd or not, simple doesn’t know a hill of beans about large structures and construction in general.
also, consider how the flavor of big time government invovlement wasn’t there. look at the gulf war - look how they applied what they learned from the vietnam war - don’t let the public see it. if the government was behind it, they would have done it at night (to hide the manner in which they “demolished” the towers with so called explosives - gimme a break). i’m not even gonna bother to take the time and to try to teach you all real physics.
but more on the “flavor” - no, it doesn’t have the taste of a US op - if you were paying attention, the US was gearing up to make an enemy out of china - the were setting up to turn china into the next “russia” so we could continue the cold war - because that’s good for bizzyness. i as much suspected there was gonna be a war of some kind as soon as the “supreme” court announce W as pres. he needed a war - he needed people to get behind him (so he could play freely) - in fact the moment the high court announced W as pres, i told my friend “get ready for war”. 9/11 just made it easier for him - as the gears setting up china as an enemy were moving slowly. i think if 9/11 was a government job the efforts i saw being made to set up china like that would have instead been shifted to the middle east (”look how bad these guys are”) - yet when i ask many young adults, they had no idea who bin laden was before 9/11 - cause, well, like i said, they learned from vietnam - they didn’t want attention on the middle east - i think they wanted to continue playing there without public scutiny.
you know, this is all probably worthless - i could go on and on and on, till i’m blue in the face - but you all will still “KNOW” what you “KNOW” - just like the main propergators of this conspiracy stuff - they’ll shift gears as soon as one of their “facts” is shot down - look into it - they aren’t preaching the same thing - but they also aren’t saying they’re were wrong about this or that when proven to be wrong - they’ll write their books, make their movies, write their essays - only omitting stuff that went sour on them (proven wrong) - but never admitting how what they’ve said was proven wrong - kinda like how the gov doesn’t want attention on their wrongs..
so i leave you here - with your KNOWLEDGE (maybe you can find some more funerals to crash)
Stefan Kosikowski comments:
Here are facts, sans interpretation or opinion!
There are only three steel framed building in the history of mankind that ever collapsed as a result of fire… WTC One, WTC Two, and WTC Seven, though no witnesses ever reported a fire at WTC 7 and it collapsed some 7 to 8 hours after the collapse of the other two buildings.
During WW2, a B-17 Bomber accidentally flew into the Empire State Building, but that steel framed building survived the fire, the bombs, and far worse that the World Trade Center without collapsing.
Then there is the collapse itself, occurring at free fall speed… violating the Laws of Conservation of Energy and Momentum. It is impossible to a building to collapse at free fall speed unless all the floors of the building fail simultaneously, which is what happens in a controlled demolition. The government theory, the pan-caking effect causation they put out, that each floor failed one at a time, collapsing onto the floor beneath and causing that floor in turn to collapse MUST BE A LIE given Newton’s Laws and the film coverage displaying the free fall collapse!
All true facts, no interpretation… pretty rude, huh?
Tom Me comments:
“a result of fire” !!!
Stafan, are you serious?
Let me put it to you this way - there are NO steel framed buildings in the history of mankind that ever collapsed as a result of fire - or i should say just fire. try adding in some devastating truma.
but maybe i am wrong, there are some physics as well that pertain to fire and temperature, that i won’t mention here.
as i said, i’m not going to get sucked into trying to educate you all - i’m sure i can’t - but comparing the towers to the Empire State Building is like comparing the structure of a layer cake (where each layer is seperated by vertical toothpicks), to a rock - and comparing a ww2 bomber to a jet airliner, is like comparing a bicycle to a motocycle (a big motocycle).
“free fall” - you’re on your own buddy - i’m not going to share decades and decades of expirence and learning here in these comments.
but finally i will add, you may have brought up a valid error in what i previously presented - i forgot to mention “partial facts” or “not all the facts” as this theory loves to cling to - in all its ignorance, which tend to lead people to rude assertions of KNOWLEDGE…
look, you may be right - and if you are, i’d simply say good guess (and not even an educated guess) - because you all surely have not looked into a wide enough spectrum of facts to KNOW.
Stefan Kosikowski comments:
One does not need to know every specific detail to understand when one is being lied to!
The 9-11 Report claims the buildings collapsed as a result of fire, not some other mysterious crap you are alluding to. There are many problems with the government’s theory, problems that prove it can not be true, ergo, it is a lie… not that I and many others somehow just don’t know some critical facts. Once reality sets in, the questions become why and for what.
I do realize that there are people who can’t handle the truth of evil existing around them, particularly when it concerns those in power over our lives… so believe anything you want, even the incredulous 9-11 conspiracy theory the Bush Administration cooked up if it helps you sleep at night.
Tom Me comments:
LOL - again, seriously stefan…
your arguement does you a great disservice, and supports my position - i so wish you could step back and actually look, logically and objectively, at what you’ve presented…
two comments ago, you introduced what you were stating as “facts, sans interpretation or opinion” and yet everything presented includes your (or borrowed) interpretations and opinions - you of all people should know just because a fact is a fact does not mean it is immune to interpretation, or opinion - and you pured it on (and on and on) - drawing, or implying, conclusions that, at their base, are all completely unsubstantiated - yet you “KNOW”…
that’s certainly more than i can state (for i honestly don’t know) - other than when i say how i know you all to be wrong in stating that you “KNOW”.
how about this: if a tree falls in the woods, does it mean there was no fire? - “no witnesses ever reported a fire at WTC 7? - am i to assume that you are INTERPRETING this to mean: if there were no witnesses reporting a fire then it means beyond all doubt, there was no fire - and heck, there probably are some firemen, or fire marshalls, or someone like that, who reported a fire (even if he or they are lying) - or at least reported evidence that there was a fire.
but let’s not pay attention to first hand accounts, or perhaps we can dismiss them entirely - right? much better to listen to people who tell you (second hand, third-hand, or more) what the first hand accounts were, and tell you what they mean - yes? or maybe we could simply denounce them because they do not fit into the conspiracy BELIEF structure (or simply say they’re lying ) - as is so common to this conspiracy theory.
oh - that reminds me: i made two mistakes in my last comment:
one, where i said i made a mistake - in saying i did not ‘mention “partial facts” or “not all the facts” as this theory loves to cling to’ - as in my previous comment i did state “you can only present interpretations of this or that which lead you to BELIEVE what you’ve come to believe” - and the use of the phrase “this or that” within that statement easily includes “partial facts” or “not all the facts”
my other mistake in my last comment concerns where i mention “there are NO steel framed buildings in the history of mankind that ever collapsed as a result of fire” - boy, was i off base about that - as i’ve seen first hand a steel framed building which collapsed as a result of fire (i simply forgot) - not only was the building steel framed, but it even had steel siding and a metal roof - the fire that broke out within was so hot it melted the whole structure to the ground - it collapsed as a result of fire - just fire - AND it melted the vehicles in the parking lot to the ground, including big-rig trailers (note: AND this fire most likely didn’t even produce a fraction of the heat the fire in the towers must have reached)
in the towers, we’re not just talking jet fuel burning…
- you gotta add to that the abundance of paper and books: all over, paper acting like kindling that helped spread the fire throughout offices and floors (simply helping to make a bigger and hotter fire) - and the books - you ever try to burn a book? it isn’t easy to start a book on fire - but once you get it going (in a fire big enough), lookout - they burn hot.
- wood: all types of furniture - desks, chairs, cabinets, etc. - again, like books, bulkier material made of wood is not that easy to start on fire, but in heat high enough, and flames big enough - lookout, when such goes up, it goes up hot - and add to that ‘who knows’ what kind of composite “wood” some of the furnature must have been made out of - wood chips, glue, resins, etc. - and some of such surely dates back to when fire safety was not so much an issue - as i can only imagine replacing furniture and such was not that popular of an idea, especially in the higher floors.
- oil products: nylon, polyester, and the likes - curtains, carpets, seating materials (for cooshy seats and couches), foam rubber padding (again, some of which i’m sure dating back to before fire safety was a concern) - you ever burn a pair of polyester pants, or anything “plastic-base” for that matter? it burns and burns and burns - and extremely hot too! because they are oil products - manufactured from oil - as most popular plastics, and plastic derivatives, are - in this industial age of ours.
all above, as well as other factors i’m sure, adding to the intensity of the fire(s) - and then there’s the icing on the cake…
- ventilation: i’m sure you’ve seen how blacksmith’s use bellows to blow air through the fire - and you probably know it’s to increase the heat - and surely you are aware how the higher you get off the ground the windier it gets - even adding just some of the factors i mention above with the amount of wind at the height of which the floors on fire was at - AND with the gapping hole created by the crash itself, letting all the wind ventilate the fire - i think the towers would have still collapsed even if the jet’s fuel tanks were empty - even if it wasn’t that windy of a day - the air flow at that height must have been phenomenal - even if such only consisted of new fresh air rushing in to replace the hot air that was escaping out and upwards.
and do you really think those floors had the proper amount of fire proofing applied to their beams??? back when cocaine, speed, and pot were so popular (late sixties / dawn of the seventies) - even if the workers weren’t getting stoned on the job (as i’m sure they were - in fact, i suspect they even partied with their foremans - on the job), they must have shown up for work time after time with LU-LU hangovers - oh, you may think i’m off on a tangent, but, seriously, how much attention do you really think they really put into applying the right amount of fire proofing?
even so - let’s say there was the right amount of fire proofing - it’s still only rated to handle so much heat and only so much - however, these ratings are for only a certain span of time - but the thing with heat is, you can achieve the same effect of high temperatures with lower temperatures, if the lower temperatures are for a longer duration - so even if the beams were rated to be safe to endure temperatures higher than what the fires reached - it wouldn’t matter, if the structure was exposed to temperatures (that were lower than what it was rated to handle) for a long duration - say something like - hmmm… — like for many hours (!!!)….
you know - i’m not even going to go into the structural damage - like you forgot to mention - i don’t have to - other than the opening it created to help fan the blaze - i believe the towers would have still come down (maybe a few hours later) regardless of the extensive structural damage - as i believe that the fire(s) surely burned hot enough AND would have burned long enough to cause the collapse - even if you don’t factor in the structural damage…
let me repeat - i witnessed first hand how fire caused the collapse of a steel framed building (just fire ! ).
but to compare the structure of the towers to the empire state building - SHEESH !!! - that thing, the empire state building, could probably withstand fires ten times greater - and four jet airliner crashes - all at once !
and also again, i realize how useless it is for me to present these things to you all - as i’m sure you’ll all continue to “KNOW” (and rudely assert such) regardless of what information hits you in the face - and as well, even all this (i present here) is very brief - so for now (maybe good) that’s all i’ll go into - you’re on your own to educate yourselves farther (as if you’d have any inkling to do such )…
but just to add - i sleep very fine - thank you for your concern - and if you really do wonder - i also have a great capacity for and accepting the evils which exist in our world - in fact i think there are far greater evils at work than the mere possibility of the 9/11 conspiracy (even if true) - for one thing, we’re at war, and yet, in general, our day to day is fairly not bothered by such (the lessons of vietnam were learned good) - what bothers me most (as you seem so concerned) is the pretty face we try to put on it - “operation justice” etc. etc. etc. - FOR GOD’S SAKE, WE DROP BOMBS ON WEDDINGS !!! (big “opps”), in the name of “righteousness” - dropping bombs on weddings, terrible, yes - but that still does not bother me as much as trying to put a pretty face on it all - WE ARE AT WAR - war isn’t pretty - if we’re fighting - then fight - and whipe out the enemy…
don’t get me wrong, it’s not that i’m all for war, or anything like that - but if we are fighting, i don’t think we should be pulling our punches. chances are, if we went in full force, the war would have been over long before we dropped bombs on that wedding. and that wedding is only a drop in the bucket - moms, babies, brothers - for what ? oil ? money ? pride ?
with that being said, you can only imagine how sickening i think this BS is about the torture of prisoners - like we’re better than that or something - or are suppose to be better than that - and of all things, the torture wasn’t even “real” torture - compared to what i think of as “real” torture, what actually is in question only amounts to nothing more than “annoying” some of the prisoners - the practice implemented was more like an attempt to “annoy” the truth out of such prisoners — SHEESH - gimme a break - my brothers did worse to me as i was growing up…
but i’ll leave you with that, and your “KNOWLEDGE” - and only mention that you fail to recognize the other possibility (beyond that of a “lie”) if one is not speaking the truth, so your “ergo” goes out the window - and i will not mention how far i believe evil extends - but will instead quote jack nicholson in the role of a clown:
“You can’t handle the truth!”
Stefan Kosikowski comments:
The “facts” that you love to ridicule are not my facts or your facts, they are the Government’s facts from the 9-11 Report. Watch the fall of the towers and measure the time it takes. A free falling object decends at 9.8 meters per second per second, or 32 feet per second per second if you don’t like the metric system. So it takes 6 seconds to fall 1,152 feet. Watch the fall of the towers, it is at free fall speed, which can only be achieved through a controlled demolition.
Stefan Kosikowski comments:
We both seem to have our own beliefs, I simply believe my own lying eyes over the Government’s 9-11 Report. I do find a fallacy in your point about the WTC being so inferior to the Empire State Building. I can’t believe for one second that engineers and architects would build an inferior structure, nor would the controlling authorities in Manhattan allow such. Jet fuel and every other sort of potential fuel is insufficient to melt steel. Oxygen is the key to increasing the temperature, not the fuel and again, no building that acts like a blast furnace (air flow) would be allowed by the building codes. The steel was sheared off at clean and straight angles, hardly what a melting piece of steel would look like anyway. But hey, this is getting us no where, believe what you must.
Tom Me comments:
stefan, i’m not ridiculing one fact - i’m not even ridiculing the conclusions people come to from the interpretations of the facts - i’m ridiculing how too often these conclusions are presented as facts or KNOWLEDGE
and now that i think about it, i find it odd that time, and time again, those who do not believe in the 9/11 theory tend to show that they’ve considered it strongly (or are even still considering it), and, as myself, proportionately do not criticize the theory as much as those who believe the theory tend to criticize the “non-theory” or things that don’t agree with the theory. nor, in general, do those who do not believe in the theory assert their beliefs as abnoxiously - now that i think about it, i find that fairly odd. and true, with person after person, face to face (first hand) or when presenting what they believe on tv
let me ask you this - since you seem to adhere to the planted explosives theory - if you KNOW there were planted explosives, how do you KNOW they were planted by the US government ?? or US whatever(s) and not planted by terrorists - how do you KNOW that ?
you know - i hate to say it, but to some degree, you 9/11 theorists are kinda like hitler in one respect - you think if you yell stuff long enough and loud enough, people will believe you…
as i said before “free fall” you’re on you own buddy - i typed enough here on all this, at least for the time being - you all should do the respectable thing - and learn for yourselves, from wider sources, with open objective minds…
Bob Johns comments:
From the moment I was aware that the Soviet Union crumbled I knew the Republican party needed a replacement fallguy.Therefore the likely next target would have to be the Islamic world.I was not surprised at the first Gulf War happened it was just a matter of time.We had already bombed Lybia to get to “Kadaffy duck”, the funny little man who dressed as a General, scrambled eggs and all!I knew the contempt American officers had for the “A-Rabs”. I was stationed for there for a time between 1966 and 1969, for the US airforce. Pilots returning from target practice would bragg to the enlisted ground crew that they used up their extra ordinance on any thing in the desert “wearing a sheet” implying nomads and their Camels. I wanted to beleive at the time it was just a strange kind of male bragidotio - now don’t think so, if that was so I don’t wonder why they hate us. With all of that said you can believe whatever you want: it should be after testable evidence and critical thinking and conclusion after, not before hand. I would like nothing better than to try the last Administration for treason, with more proveable evidence. They are very capable of letting something happen as a tactical political purpose. I also would like to encounter someone from another planet I’ve yet to see real, ”proof of life”.
Tom Me comments:
hey bob - nice comment.
i just wanted to chime in again and retract what i said about the issue currently in the news concerning torture - i had spoken with someone only to discover that it seems the kind of torture in question is far worse than it sounds - so i’d also have to modify that what i had experienced growing up, at the hands of my brothers may very well be in the direction of such torture - but by no means does it come close to the intensity of such torture.
with that i’d also like to add two interesting items from WW2 (and believe me, this is the context i now put the issues of torturing prisoners under) - it shames me when i consider how the japanese were treated in this country during WW2 - yet at the same time, it makes me somewhat proud how the german prisoners of war whom were brought state-side (and imprisoned here in the states - yes we had a prison camp here in the states for captured german soldiers) were treated with a certain dignity and humane level of respect.
also i should clarify that when i referred to whiping them out, i was specifically referring to those hell-bent on destroying america and americans - i know we are far from perfect, and i can understand certain peoples hatred of america, but we do have a lot going for us, and show a lot of potential - but nothing disgusts me more than people who think the term “muslim” equals “terrorist”
finally, maybe i should note my reference to hitler was only to his statement concerning “if you yell things loud enough” and nothing more.
and a “P.S.” - doh! - well yeah stefan - the towers were not built with a funace design - the big opening created by the big jet gave the thing air flow equal to, if not greater than, any funace on the face of the earth - but i can see how it’s easy to forget there was a jet involved - when you’re so focused on the explosives…
Stefan Kosikowski comments:
If I’m the 9-11 conspiracist, then you are a government apologist!
I just don’t buy your story. How can putting one hole in a building create a wind tunnel?
I looked at the video repeatedly, the plane actually crashed into a corner, so how in hell did all the supports in the building fail at the same precise moment?
If the corner failed first, would not the building topple over, not just fall into it’s own footprint like in some controlled demolition?
That is the biggest bunch of crap to swallow, that somehow, miraculously, these buildings fell into themselves rather than topple over. Impossible under circumstances not tightly CONTROLLED.
Isn’t the motto of steel, BEND BUT DON’T BREAK ???
We’re not talking about iron which is brittle and can break, steel never breaks unless you make it super COLD with liquid helium or liquid hydrogen to make it brittle.
How did all the steel end up with 30 degree angled cuts in them with nice smooth edges just like when a cutting explosive is used in controlled demolitions?
And for the love of God, why do I have to identify WHO the hell would have rigged it for it to be possible?
Sorry, the fire only smoldered for it quickly became oxygen deprived. It was not intense (white hot) to melt steel… and (playing Devil’s Advocate) even if it was, wouldn’t the steel fail slowly, sort of like a stick of butter melting, slowly folding like an accordion?
Even heat up a piece of steel and work it on the forge?
Sorry, the government’s story is patently false, just like the world is not flat, and even proving it round, many still doubted Columbus!
Since you brought up Hitler, you should have stated his greatest quote… “People will always fall for the big lie, never the small one!”
Stefan Kosikowski comments:
Speaking of Hitler…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ja4Pd3bQ-fA&NR=1
Well done.
Bob Johns comments:
Small point, the superstructure of the World Trade Center, as I understand it, at the outside corner, are of tube steel or less. The center core was real heavy I-beam vertical central support from the ground up. I do agree to a point, in as much I too question how it collapsed without toppling, that, should have held up the whole structure even without permiter assistance from the lighter outside frame. If I were going to weaken such s structure, by melting, I would focus on the central, heavier support.
frunobulax9 comments:
I have read, I dont have the source handy, that the engineer in charge of the team which specced the structural steel for the towers stated that he did not believe that the steel would have failed at the temperature and in the time that it did. It was designed to take much higher temps for a lot longer that what occurred, and this was for uninsulated beams. The beams in the tower were insulated. Jet fuel afaik is equivalent to kerosene.