TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Do you believe there is a U.S. government cover-up surrounding 9/11?
Pages (162): « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 [70] 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 »
Christ. You really are a fool. For a second, I was starting to admire your persistance but your idiocy has eradicated any respect I had for you. Why are you even here annoying me anyway? After all, I am just a trap. Apparently to get you to talk about your own life? Christ, get over yourself. I couldnt give a flying intercourse what you do outside the forum, that was a momentary point in a debate that would be long gone now ifit wasnt for your persistant whining and your ad hominem crap. Shape up and stop letting your emotions control you for fucks sake.
If you cant find anything textual than just admit it, instead of drawing this out into another slagging match.
Again; get over yourself.
Seeying as you arnt participating at all, your mind probably in bits from the implosion of self-obbsessed bullshit you've been preaching...
Gladly.
NIST Admits Total Collapse Of Twin Towers Unexplainable
Implicitly acknowledges controlled demolition only means by which towers could have fallen at free fall speed
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
The National Institute for Standards and Technology has been forced to admit that the total free-fall collapse of the twin towers cannot be explained after an exhaustive scientific study, implicitly acknowledging that controlled demolition is the only means by which the buildings could have come down.
In a recent letter (PDF link) to 9/11 victim's family representatives Bill Doyle and Bob McIlvaine, NIST states, "We are unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse."
A 10,000 page scientific study only offers theories as to how the "collapse initiation" proceeded and fails to address how it was possible for part of a WTC structure to fall through the path of most resistance at freefall speed, completely violating the accepted laws of physics.
In addition, NIST's own studies confirmed that virtually none of the steel in either tower reached temperatures hotter than 500 degrees. The point at which steel weakens is 1000 degrees and melting point is reached at 1,500 degrees, according to NIST itself.
"NIST'S 10,000-page report purports to explain what it calls "collapse initiation" -- the loss of several floors' vertical support," writes Kevin Barrett of Scholars for 9/11 Truth. "In order to dream up this preposterous scenario, NIST had to ignore its own tests that showed that virtually none of the steel got hotter than 500 degrees f. It had to claim that somehow the planes took out many core columns, despite the fact that only a direct hit by an engine would have been likely to do so, and that the chances of this happening even once are fairly low. It had to preposterously allege that the plane that nicked the corner of the South Tower took out more core columns than the one that hit the North Tower almost dead center. It had to tweak all the parameters till they screamed bloody murder and say that the steel was far weaker than it actually was, the fire was far hotter than it actually was, the sagging was far greater than it actually was, and so on. And so NIST hallucinated a computer-generated fantasy scenario for "collapse initiation"--the failure of a few floors."
"But how do you get from the failure of a few floors to total collapse at free-fall speed of the entire structure? The short answer: You don't. Anyone with the slightest grasp of the laws of physics understands that even if all of the vertical supports on a few floors somehow failed catastrophically at exactly the same moment--a virtually impossible event, but one necessary to explain why the Towers would come straight down rather than toppling sideways--the top part of the building could not fall THROUGH the still-intact, highly robust lower part of the building, straight through the path of most resistance, just as fast as it would have fallen through thin air."
"Thus total free-fall collapse, even given NIST's ridiculous "initiation" scenario, is utterly impossible. The probability of it happening is exactly equal to the probability of the whole building suddenly falling upward and landing on the moon," concludes Barrett.
NIST have yet to properly address the sudden freefall collapse of WTC Building 7, which imploded on the late afternoon of 9/11 despite not being hit by a jetliner.
In August 2006, NIST promised to scientifically evaluate whether explosive devices could have contributed to the 47-story building's collapse but no answers have been forthcoming.
In August of this year, James Quintiere, Ph.D., former Chief of the Fire Science Division of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, called for an independent inquiry into NIST's investigation of the collapse of the twin towers.
Quintiere said NIST's conclusions were "questionable", that they failed to follow standard scientific procedures and that their failure to address Building 7 belied the fact that the investigation was incomplete.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/article...nist_admits.htm
thread contributers...
http://youtube.com/watch?v=dzUNvEfYDEQ
Excellent clip Trancer-x, here is another really good one of many firefighters explaining the explosions when the towers came down.
Not everyone is asleep (or in denial)
U.S. Navy 'Top Gun' Pilot Questions 9/11
By Alan Miller
September 5, 2007 - U.S. Navy �Top Gun� pilot, Commander Ralph Kolstad, started questioning the official account of 9/11 within days of the event. �It just didn�t make any sense to me,� he said. And now 6 years after 9/11 he says, �When one starts using his own mind, and not what one was told, there is very little to believe in the official story.�
Now retired, Commander Kolstad was a top-rated fighter pilot during his 20-year Navy career. Early in his career, he was accorded the honor of being selected to participate in the Navy�s �Top Gun� air combat school, officially known as the U.S. Navy Fighter Weapons School. The Tom Cruise movie, �Top Gun� reflects the experience of the young Navy pilots at the school. Eleven years later, Commander Kolstad was further honored by being selected to become a �Top Gun� adversary instructor. While in the Navy, he flew F-4 Phantoms, A-4 Skyhawks, and F-14 Tomcats and completed 250 aircraft carrier landings.
Commander Kolstad had a second career after his 20 years of Navy active and reserve service and served as a commercial airline pilot for 27 years, flying for American Airlines and other domestic and international careers. He flew Boeing 727, 757 and 767, McDonnell Douglas MD-80, and Fokker F-100 airliners. He has flown a total of over 23,000 hours in his career.
Commander Kolstad is especially critical of the account of American Airlines Flight 77 that allegedly crashed into the Pentagon. He says, �At the Pentagon, the pilot of the Boeing 757 did quite a feat of flying. I have 6,000 hours of flight time in Boeing 757�s and 767�s and I could not have flown it the way the flight path was described.�
Commander Kolstad adds, �I was also a Navy fighter pilot and Air Combat Instructor and have experience flying low altitude, high speed aircraft. I could not have done what these beginners did. Something stinks to high heaven!�
He points to the physical evidence at the Pentagon impact site and asks in exasperation, �Where is the damage to the wall of the Pentagon from the wings? Where are the big pieces that always break away in an accident? Where is all the luggage? Where are the miles and miles of wire, cable, and lines that are part and parcel of any large aircraft? Where are the steel engine parts? Where is the steel landing gear? Where is the tail section that would have broken into large pieces?�
But no major element of the official account of 9/11 is spared from Commander Kolstad�s criticism. Regarding the alleged impact site of United Airlines Flight 93 near Shanksville, PA, he asks, �Where is any of the wreckage? Of all the pictures I have seen, there is only a hole! Where is any piece of a crashed airplane? Why was the area cordoned off, and no inspection allowed by the normal accident personnel? Where is any evidence at all?�
Commander Kolstad also questions many aspects of the attack on the World Trade Center. �How could a steel and concrete building collapse after being hit by a Boeing 767? Didn�t the engineers design it to withstand a direct hit from a Boeing 707, approximately the same size and weight of the 767? The evidence just doesn�t add up."
"Why did the second building collapse before the first one, which had been burning for 20 minutes longer after a direct hit, especially when the second one hit was just a glancing blow? If the fire was so hot, then why were people looking out the windows and in the destroyed areas? Why have so many members of the New York Fire Department reported seeing or hearing many �explosions� before the buildings collapsed?�
Commander Kolstad summarized his frustration with the investigation and disbelief of the official account of 9/11, �If one were to act as an accident investigator, one would look at the evidence, and then construct a plausible scenario as to what led to the accident. In this case, we were told the story and then the evidence was built to support the story. What happened to any intelligent investigation? Every question leads to another question that has not been answered by anyone in authority. This is just the beginning as to why I don�t believe the official �story� and why I want the truth to be told.�
Commander Kolstad is just one of the many military and commercial pilots who have publicly expressed serious concerns about the official account of 9/11. Statements from more than 30 other pilots are available at http://PatriotsQuestion911.com.
http://www.opednews.com/articles/ge...__top_gun__.htm
"If you ridicule others who have sincere doubts and who know factual information that directly contradicts the official report and who want explanations from those who hold the keys to our government, and have motive, means, and opportunity to pull off a 9/11, but you are too lazy or fearful to check into the facts yourself, what does that make you?"
- Lt. Col. Shelton F. Lankford, U.S. Marine Corps (ret)
http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/...20Lankford.html
Thanks Bill
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Q5echo Thanks Bill |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Trancer-X What else would he say? He's just another puppet of the NWO. Do you actually think that he would suddenly become critical of his buddies? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Trancer-X He's just another puppet of the NWO. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Marc Summers A democrat and republican cannot be friends. Two candidates cannot meet before the election. They must oppose each other, even in their private lives! You are so naive that you don't even understand politics. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Trancer-X |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov I'm sure this has been posted before, but reading this I thought of y'all. http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse...gi?u=911_morons |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Trancer-X It's kind of late for it, though, because while people are waking up to the truth at an ever increasing rate |
Watch out for disinfo agents within the "9/11 Truth" movement
Questioning 9/11 and to Hell with Caution
By Michael Shaw
I owe Robert Fisk an apology. He began a thread on Truthdig.com called, "Questioning 9/11 with Caution" where he essentially (and cautiously) mentioned some of the "ravers" involved in the 9/11 for Truth movement. While in there, I came in direct contact with some of these ravers(to be polite) and began to question and research some of the data they were presenting. What I came up with were some pretty interesting morsels. Perhaps even boulders!
For example, some(not all) of the so called 9/11 conspiracy theorists have ties to Lyndon LaRouche, the same guy who said MI-6 was trying to assassinate him and that the Beatles were a creation of Britain�s Defense Ministry. He also said the Queen of England was the biggest dope peddler on the planet and that Britain, (not Hitler) was responsible for the second world war.
What really got me interested in the sources of some of these more radical "truth seekers," was another dig with Amy Goodman, where a raver was chastising her, literally calling her a cog in the Bush cover-up of 9/11 because she interviewed Ward Churchill, rather then the leader of the 9/11 for Truth movement, Dr. Steven E. Jones. This was when I discovered Webster Griffin Tarpley, an author and historian best known for his book, "George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography" and a member of the Scholars for 9/11 Truth (among other affiliations). He was also a key component to the Lyndon LaRouche political movement and in fact ran for the state senate in New York and lost.
"From 1991 to 1995, Tarpley worked with the political movement run by Lyndon LaRouche, and was a frequent host of �The LaRouche Connection� described as �a news and information cable television program produced by� LaRouche�s Executive Intelligence Review News Service."
The tactics of LaRouche (as seen back in the 1970's), using his so called "new left" to attack other leftist elements, (I mean even physically beating them up), is what really caught my attention on these current so called truth seekers, who were in essence using what I thought to be the Lyndon LaRouche playbook, pretending to be left while attacking the left. It's like taking the entire political philosophy of neo-liberal David Horowitz, molding his beginnings with Maoist Marxism to his current neo-conservatism into one big ugly ball of play dough and presto! We'll come back to Mr. Horowitz later.
Next we come to the prolific Christopher Bollyn, an author who in fact exposed a Reader's Digest article about illegal government surveillance which actually praised the notion, as coming from none other than the cousin of Michael Chertof, head of Homeland Security. Now this expose' was great and I thank Mr. Bollyn for it. However, the reason I refer to him as prolific (beyond his outward appearance as a hard working reporter/journalist) is in the revelation as to whom he has worked for. Among others the American Free Press which seems to have shared the same offices as, "The Barnes Review."
Just to give you some examples:
The American Free Press
"The fact that Bollyn is extensively sourced in 9/11 skeptics� literature, combined with the fact that his employer, the American Free Press, has extreme right associations, gives defenders of the official 9/11 myth effective ammunition with which to attack their critics. Although publications of the American Free Press are generally free of racist, white-supremicist, or anti-Semitic content, its sister publication, The Barnes Review overtly promotes such ideologies. Consider the following facts:
Also, The Barnes Review in their last convention had guest speakers like Theo Junker, former member of the Wiking SS, a guy who built a memorial on his Wisconsin farm honoring Adolf Hitler (see: Time Magazine).
"Carto (born July 17, 1926 in Indiana) is a longtime figure on the far right wing of American politics. He describes himself as Jeffersonian and populist, although the Anti-Defamation League and other critics say he promotes thinly-disguised antisemitism. Carto was also the founder of a publishing company called Noontide Press, which published a number of books on white racialism, including Yockey�s Imperium and David Hoggan�s The Myth of the Six Million, one of the first books to deny the Holocaust."
Other guest speakers at the event included political writer Michael Collins Piper, a Holocaust denier and a guy who blames MOSSAD for the JFK assassination, also claims the Israeli�s are working on an ethnic bomb that will kill only Arabs. He�s a devout friend of Willis Carto and Christopher Bollyn filled in for him from time to time on his radio talk show, The Piper Report on The Republic Broadcasting Network, which is owned and operated by John Stadmiller.
John Stadmiller also has his own radio show. It�s called The National Intel Report. The RBN(Republic Broadcasting Network) covers everything from UFO�s to demonic mind control. Their sponsors include The Knob Creek Gun Range and The Nationalist Times, which comes from The American Nationalists Union, a white supremacist organization.
Next we have Dr. Harrell Rhome of Eagle Publications, a devout right wing Christian Fundamentalist and a regular contributer to the Barnes Review. He also shares the spotlight with pro-Aparteid professor, Dr.Claus Nordbruch of South Africa.
Then there's Dave Von Kleist, producer of In Plane site which has already been proved a hoax.
Now most of these folks and several others I haven't got the time to mention, all blame Israel for the attacks of 9/11 (and everything else). They also attack several independent journalists like Goodman and John Foster(Chip) Berlet, Fisk and others, actually calling them co conspirators in the so called Bush/AIPAC coverup.
I owe an apology, not only to Robert Fisk, but to everyone out there who is genuinely seeking the truth concerning 9/11. These include the many real and dedicated individuals and groups who surround it, like the 9/11 widows who pushed so hard to get Bush to present an investigation and people like the great historian Howard Zinn and Col. Karen Kwiatkowski (ret.) who showed us how Cheney doctored intelligence to war on Iraq. My hat goes off to them and those like them. What I'm presenting here has absolutely nothing to do with the fine work they do. But it is definitely something we all need to be aware of, that right wing extremists are playing a role within the role of the 9/11 for truth movement and it is very doubtful their intent is in seeking the truth about anything.
As for David Horowitz, here's a guy who is promoting a rash of anti-radical Islamic events on several US College campuses and in his last outing and along with his perpetual sidekick, Ann Coulter; had invited a guest speaker who turned out to be one of Britain's biggest holocaust deniers. Isn't that a kick in the shorts!?! Frankly I see him(and Coulter) in the same light as I see LaRouche, Bollyn, Piper and Carto.
| quote: |
| �But the craziest, most truly unhinged conspiracy theory for the towers falling on 9/11?� Torin asks rhetorically. �Fire.� The official story cannot be recreated by any experiment. NIST is the government agency involved in attempting to model what happened to the world trade center on 9/11, and they fail horribly. NIST never models what happens after the collapse initiation, and even what they do model before that is easily debunked. NIST created 16 separate physics programs to simulate the WTC 1 & 2 collapses and only got 1 to collapse partially. Torin adds, �When they did, [in the computer model] they removed 40% of the structural support.� The cross trusses that the towers received a significant amount of their strength from had to be removed to have a collapse in the computer simulation. Torin then mocks the official story, �There�s no such thing as a �pancake� collapse, but there is a progressive collapse.� A few slides are shown of progressive collapses throughout the world. None of them are anything like what happened to the world trade center with its pulverized concrete 100 microns or smaller just seconds after the start of collapse, and then its complete destruction. Torin uses his expertise to explain to the audience how and why a real progressive collapse occurs and subsequently why the WTC was not a progressive collapse. �The biggest problem with the argument,� Torin explains. �Time.� Several slides are then presented that show the hard physics and observed time of WTC 2 falling. Worst-case scenario would require 0.5 seconds per floor for collapse. �The absolute minimum amount of time for a progressive collapse would be 43 seconds.� How long did it take for the building to fall in reality? About 8.6 Seconds. �For the towers to fall at so close to free fall speed, over 110,000 separate and independent structural support points had to fail simultaneously. �Pancake theory� does NOT explain the failure of the cores.� Torin explains passionately, obviously upset with the lies being told to the American people. �Nothing is holding the building up - No resistance. 110,000 structural failures at the same time.� (Excerpted from Expert blows the cover on 9/11 inside job, 10/31/07) |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Trancer-X |
Is This 20-Year CIA Vet Crazy For Saying 9/11 Is a Probable Inside Job?
Debunkers not so quick to attack hugely respected intelligence & foreign policy expert Robert Baer
Debunkers can scoff and chuckle all day long when a celebrity uses their public prominence to talk about 9/11 truth, but when a 20-year decorated CIA veteran says that the evidence points to 9/11 being an inside job, dismissive hand waving and off-the-cuff ad hominem attacks on credibility aren't so easy to justify.
Bill Maher recently suggested that people who dare to question this habitually lying government's official version of what happened on September 11 are crazy and should ask their doctor if Paxil is right for them.
Perhaps Maher would be less reticent to question the sanity of a man labeled "perhaps the best on-the-ground field officer in the Middle East� by Seymour Hersh and whose astounding career formed the script for the Academy Award winning motion picture Syriana.
Robert Baer is no "radical left loony" as Bill O'Reilly would allege and neither does he lean to the right. He is a widely respected expert on intelligence matters and middle eastern foreign policy, an Emmy award nominated documentarian and a strong advocate of the CIA's need to increase Human Intelligence (HUMINT) on the ground.
Baer served as a clandestine officer in Madras and New Delhi, India; in Beirut, Lebanon; in Dushanbe, Tajikistan; and in Salah al-Din in Kurdish northern Iraq. While in Iraq, Baer tried to persuade the Clinton administration to back a coup to overthrow Saddam Hussein.
So when Baer told a radio host that "the evidence points at" 9/11 having had aspects of being an inside job, the noisy negativists and the trolls were notable by their absence.
So where are the debunkers on this one? What does Bill Maher have to say about it? One of the foremost intelligence and foreign policy experts in America and a 20-year CIA veteran to boot says that 9/11 looks like an inside job.
Let's hear Bill O'Reilly try and trash this hugely regarded individual as another tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy theorist.
Let's hear Glenn Beck attempt to slander Baer as the next Timothy McVeigh terrorist bomber.
Let's hear Sean Hannity ridicule this honorable professional and CIA Career Intelligence Medal decorated stalwart as a caricature of liberal political hate speech.
They couldn't, and that's precisely why the debunkers, the COINTELPRO counter-operatives, the Neo-Con talking heads and the trolls are loathe to address Baer's expert judgment on 9/11 being a likely inside job.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by culorut Is This 20-Year CIA Vet Crazy For Saying 9/11 Is a Probable Inside Job? |
look it up yourself.
Robert Baer is a few seconds into this clip.
*cough*
well, when he provides some evidence then perhaps he will be something more than an ex CIA employee with novels to sell. for instance, his books promote the idea that iran was behind 9/11, and everything he says suggests he believes iran was involved.
the statements he made (and thanks for the link, but i did find an orginal too) reflect a complicity, not an orchestration. he is questioning whether the administration allowed it to happen, not engineered the attacks.
ive always ignored the complicity argument because its uninteresting to me. but baer has said nothing about pre-planted explosives in the towers, which is the argument that i do take issue with.
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.