9/11 Conspiracy Theory Redux: Malkin Argues That Qana Was An Inside Job
9/11 Conspiracy Theory Redux: Malkin Argues That Qana Was An Inside Job
Fox News analyst and right-wing blogger Michelle Malkin is pushing wild conspiracy theories about the tragic death of 56 innocent civilians, including 37 children, in Qana, Lebanon. Like 9/11 conspiracy theorists, Malkin claims the incident was an inside job. Malkin has another thing in common with 9/11 conspiracy theorists: there is no evidence to support her claims.
The Choreographed Photos Claim. Malkin argues that the pictures of dead civilians at Qana “appear to be posed, not spontaneous action shots of an unfolding tragedy.” She cites the blog EU Referendum, whose author Richard North speculates that one man who appears in several photos carrying dead bodies is a “Hezbollah official.” Asked by a Washington Post blogger for evidence to substantiate this claim, North responded, “All I have to go on is gut instinct.”
The Hezbollah Bombing Claim. Malkin also pushes the theory that Hezbollah “destroyed the building deliberately.” Malkin points to a possible eight hour delay between when the Isrealis report striking the building, and the first reports of the building’s collapse. (Even popular conservative blogs have noted the similarity between this claim and the WTC Building 7 conspiracy theories.)
Accounts of the incident from Israel, Lebanon and reporters all contradict Malkin’s version of the events. Villagers in Qana say the wall and roof of the building collapsed shortly after the building was struck. Reporters on the scene confirm that the building “appeared to be hit from above.” Israeli Air Force chief of staff Amir Eshel has acknowledged he “can’t say” when the building collapsed, and has relied on “foreign press reports” to determine the timing. Regardless, Israel is not suggesting that the collapse was staged by Hezbollah. Eschel called even the suggestion that Hezbollah had stored munitions in the building a “conspiracy theory.” The Israeli airforce says it has “no information on…the presence of Hezbollah men [in the area] at the time.” Also, Israel has apologized for the incident.
But remember — we’re the “moonbats.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
…. ok…..
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:13 pmWhat did Hezbollah do Malkin paint the Red Cross emblem on the building or the UN insignia?
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:13 pmThis is over the line for even Malkin > she must be banned/fired from reporting on FOX News!
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:16 pmJudd,
We don’t think that Bush and friends planned 9/11. We think that they knew it was going to happen and did nothing to stop it.
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:16 pmWTF……first amendment rights are wonderful……
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:16 pmUh fellas, are you taking this agrument from the point of the RIGHT-WING NEO-CONS who say all 9/11 conspiracy theorists have no evidence to suppor their claims?
Malkin has another thing in common with 9/11 conspiracy theorists: there is no evidence to support her claims.
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:18 pmI will admit that Hezzbollah did ANYTHING if they can arrange for a real 911 investigation to be done… regardless of the outcome.
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:18 pmmichelle, michelle, michelle…
reading the jerusalem post again? will you never learn?
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:18 pmWhat do we call “Choreographed” news coverage? Propaganda.
Mz Malkin needs to sit down and be quiet now. Either that or go give the Emperor a blowjob so we can impeach him.
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:20 pmLike 9/11 conspiracy theorists, Malkin claims the incident was an inside job. Malkin has another thing in common with 9/11 conspiracy theorists: there is no evidence to support her claims.
Judd--so i guess my question in the other thread about a sep. thread for the wapo article on the 9/11 commission would ’scare’ you into–as with kos and the others–being considered ‘unserious’ and a ‘tin-hat manufacturer’…
can you clear that one up for us???
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:21 pmNice trick, trying to tie 9-11 skeptics and that radical wingnut Michelle Malkin. I saw what she said, and if
anyone has two brains cells to rub together saw the same thing, I’m sure they turned the channel.
So don’t be so concerned about Ms. Fruitcake. My problem is with your obvious bias towards 9-11 truth people. You need to get a clue my friend. The scholars, formal Bush officials, journalists, researchers both pro and amateur alike, have uncovered VOLUMES of evidence that could topple whoever did the deed.
http://www.st911.org/
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:22 pmCrazy people. Crazy.
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:23 pmUMM… I think that steel melts at 2700 degress F, and jet fuel can only burn at 1374 degrees F at its hottest, is proof. Further more if jet fuel could bring down a steel building then WHY does the FAA make black boxes out of steel?????
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:23 pmThe BEST evidence to prove a conspiracy for 9/11 has been destroyed > the steel beams from the WTC buildings were shipped to China to be resmelted into NEW steel, so no way to be tested for Thermite charges that could have been used to implode the towers!
As for Malkin I think she gets paid by Israeli Mossad to spew this bogus Hezbollah blew up their own children nonsense!
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:24 pmWill someone please take Malkin’s bong away?
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:27 pmNote: We aren’t going to be publishing “evidence” that 9/11 was an inside job in this comment section There are places people go to discuss such things but this isn’t one of them.
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:28 pmThis Malkin line is all over the lunasphere today. Limbaugh, Dennis Prager, Michael Medved all have mentioned the same things, more or less. Even Dore Gold, former Israeli UN ambassador, talked about it on Medved. It’s truely disturbing to observe right-wing Israeli propagandists plugging so easily into the right-wing noise machine.
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:29 pmNo evidence for 911 theorists, thats funny, one cant prove that islamic terrorist pulled off the attacks. There is actually NO evidence Bin Laden planned this. Eye witness reports for or against the theories, are worth about as much as a shit stained shirt.
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:29 pmwhoooaaaa!
JUDD can you explain that comment for me/us?? am i at one of those sites that thinks they are somehow ‘above the fray’ regarding conspiracies and 9.11???
i know that Malloy was talking about Kos and i think franken saying that these two will not allow–yes the word is ALLOW–talk of conspiracty and 9/11.
is this–just judging from your note-=-one such site????
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:29 pmThe Illuminati, Rendon Group and Bilderberg Group had a top-secret meeting at Area 51 with the G8, Bill Gates and the Chief Shaman of the Yetis. They decided to fake an attack on the World Trade Center.
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:29 pmYeah, this is one of those sites.
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:30 pmNote: We aren’t going to be publishing “evidence†that 9/11 was an inside job in this comment section There are places people go to discuss such things but this isn’t one of them.
is there a reason for that? just curious.
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:30 pmam i at one of those sites that thinks they are somehow ‘above the fray’ regarding conspiracies and 9.11???
#
Yeah, this is one of those sites.
Comment by Judd — August 2, 2006 @ 6:30 pm
may i say that i am completely shocked and disappointed with that Judd. if you could here several of us now:
BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:33 pmThe reason is that it has the tendency to dominate every discussion. At some point, it’s necessary to discard discredited ideas and move on.
If you don’t believe those ideas have been discredited and want to write a lot about them that’s your right. But we have the right not to enable that.
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:33 pm#4 Spudge has it right
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:33 pmMalkin is a whackjob and so are a lot of 9/11 theorists…
but there are these headlines in the paper today as well as a laundry list of unanswered questions and inconsistancies in the offical story.
9/11 panel distrusted Pentagon testimony
Commissioners considered criminal probe of false statements
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/02/9-11panel.pentagon/
9/11 untruths could be criminal – report
THE 10-member commission that investigated the US response to the September 11 attacks considered seeking a criminal probe of the Pentagon, believing it had deliberately misled the panel and the public, The Washington Post reported today.
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,19998813-5001028,00.html
9/11 Panel Suspected Deception by Pentagon
Allegations Brought to Inspectors General
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/01/AR2006080101300.html
GOD, please let there be an investigation into 9/11 and the Iraq war planning.
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:34 pmokay Judd. thanks for your honesty–even though i think you are being fashionably close-minded and some what silly
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:35 pmi do not want to talk on and on, but, Judd, if speaking about the 9/11 stuff–and even the story about the bi-[partisan comission today at wpost educated people to the bad behavior of the bushies and the republicans that follow them, AND that mobilized PROgressive people to VOTE to change that behaviour,
wouldn’t that be a GOOD thing to discuss? do you know what i mean??
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:38 pmI must weigh in on this…
Judd, then why did C-Span have their special report Saturday night?
There are A LOT of unanswered questions.
Plus, a full third of Americans think there was some gvt. involvement with 9-11.
Look at the tape of Bush’s reaction. It wasn’t “Oh my God what’s going on?”
It was more like “Oh my God, they actually DID it.”
Norad didn’t scramble jets WHY? No real answer. And like Raw Story reported, there is evidence the Pentagon LIED about 9-11 events.
Please don’t lump together the two acts of terrorism. They are NOT alike!
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:38 pmPost 32 boc > I think Judd is trying to tell us the subject of this thread is MALKIN’S bogus conspiracy, on Hezbollah blowing up their own children, so he wants us to discuss that only!
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:39 pmI tend to agree with #4 as well. I think the administration knew something was going to happen, but did nothing to stop it.
As for Malkin, I guess if she and rest want to screw on tinfoil hats, and take a 180º on conspiracy theorys, more power to them. Frankly I hope they do. It will help to alienate moderates from the radical right fringe.
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:39 pmHaaretz reports that NO rockets were fired from Qana, according to the Israeli Air Force.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/745185.html
Damn silly thing to stage, Michelle — n’est-ce pas?
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:40 pmI think Judd is trying to tell us the subject of this thread is MALKIN’S bogus conspiracy, on Hezbollah blowing up their own children, so he wants us to discuss that only!
Comment by Jay Randal — August 2, 2006 @ 6:39 pm
but, jay, that is why i asked him if this is one of ‘those sites‘ and he clearly said it was one of those ‘sites‘
i know there is alot up there, but, please read through and see if you agree with me on that.
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:41 pmJudd,
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:44 pmIt IS unfair to include 9-11 theory if you don’t want it discussed.
Well, my comment must have been deleted. Pardon for the use of the word “a**”.
From now on, it’s arse.
Look, Judd, with all due respect, you have a nice little website and a nice audience and a nice job. But don’t for a second believe that we liberals are satisfied with temporary rushes from reading and watching Malkin et al on this site.
We have a deep, deep distrust. We are believing our eyes. Seems to me that you need to post a succinct explanation for writing what you said.
You are correct in observing how 9/11 tends to dominate a comments section. It’s a clue, and the right path in the future is to not insult our intelligence by lumping millions of Americans who do not believe the official version of events into the same cesspool of reichwing frothers like Malkin.
And you are right in another point: this website is not for me anymore.
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:47 pmi think that there is more to it maybe…
by comparing malkin to 9.11, it makes 9.11 stuff seem equally as stupid…
i don’t know why Judd would want to do that… i am really confused about that
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:47 pmPost 38 they all lied > I basically agree with you, but Judd/TP controls this blog site, so we have to abide by their rules/decisions, since we are guest posters on here!
Judd > a suggestion > maybe have a thread sometime just to discuss 9/11 to allow people to vent about it and discuss conspiracy theories?!
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:48 pmJudd sez:
Note: We aren’t going to be publishing “evidence†that 9/11 was an inside job in this comment section There are places people go to discuss such things but this isn’t one of them.
Yes, but you won’t hesitate to publish a cowardly, groundless smear against proponents of 9/11 Truth, will you, Judd?
To say I am disappointed is the height of understatement.
Malkin has another thing in common with 9/11 conspiracy theorists: there is no evidence to support her claims.
If you don’t want to discuss 9/11, that’s one thing, but to throw that poisonous statement out there and then declare a moratorium on discussion of said statement is the very definition of hypocrisy.
I’ll tell you what, Judd, I’ll bring the evidence supporting my ‘moonbat’ 9/11 conspiracy theory, and you bring the evidence supporting your 9/11 conspiracy theory, and we’ll see which one holds water.
To call yourselves a ‘progressive’ site, and yet actively suppress discussion of what is most probably the greatest scam ever perpetrated upon the American public is disingenuous at best. I honestly thought better of you, Judd.
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:50 pmbut jay he controls the site but this is more like editing.
i don’t need to ‘vent’ about ’sonpiracy theories’ jay. the 9.11 inside job is ESSENTIAL to an understanding of the hate for humans all over this administratin.
this is all about the PNAC and “another pearl harbor” and occupation and murder!!!
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:51 pmI concur, TripMaster Monkey
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:52 pmWell said TripMaster, I second that.
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:52 pmI’m glad, trueblue, since my post will likely be deleted within the next 5 minutes…
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:53 pmTrueblue: “a full third of Americans think there was some gvt. involvement with 9-11.” – - Sigh….and now 50% of the population thinks Saddam had WMD. Unless you can provide a legitimate source for that number it’s foolish to mention it.
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:54 pmHooooome run, TripMaster.
If you don’t want to discuss 9/11, that’s one thing, but to throw that poisonous statement out there and then declare a moratorium on discussion of said statement is the very definition of hypocrisy.
And it’s hypocricy of a rare authoritarian streak. Smells like…chicken.
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:54 pmWell, Judd,
Seems you’ve been outvoted.
YOU brought up 9-11 conspiracy.
You cannot dictate where the conversation goes…..
My 2 cents….
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:54 pmand if you don’t believe the
PNAC-=-Pearl Harbor—Richard Perle—Dick Cheney–9.11—Iraq—destabilized ME—new world order
how can you be not just another democrat?
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:54 pmand what about he zogby poll??? there are 42% of the people out there that aren’t TOO GOOD to think it was an isnide job…
don’t we want them to vote in november? by not energizing themn, aren’t you not doing ENOUGH to push progressive issues to the congress???
it seems all too muich inconsistent to a progressiveness.
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:56 pmI have countless times posted sites to go to find what SCIENTISTS have to say about this “conspiracy”, and I for one trust those brave enough to SPEAK OUT! Not those that DON’T.
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:58 pmOutvoted, for sure. So be sure and count all those ballots, folks, and keep moving along, nothing more to see, move along.
Oh? You’d like to stay for the approved outrage? Welcome, passive reader! Be sure to click on our advertisers, they’re great folks.
Ooooh, what a monkey Malkin is. Um, what did you say? 9/11? Have you received permission to own that thought? Didn’t think so. Why don’t you move along to some pictures of Bill O’Reilly on Media Matters for America…that’s sure to distract you.
And thanks for stopping by!
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:59 pmEverybody take a deep breath and NOT start a rebellion on TP over this please! None of us trust the Bush Regime, so it’s hard to believe the official version of 9/11, but TP wants the focus on Malkin instead of 9/11 on this thread!
August 2nd, 2006 at 6:59 pmReply to Badmoonman:
a full third of Americans think there was some gvt. involvement with 9-11.†– - Sigh….and now 50% of the population thinks Saddam had WMD.
The crucial difference between those two statistics is that people believe the latter due to a neocon media blitzkrieg planting the idea at every opportunity, while people believe the latter despite a neocon media blitzkrieg attempting to dismiss the idea at every opportunity.
As for providing a source, do your own homework. You might learn something you weren’t looking to learn. I know I sure did.
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:00 pmam i reading what i think i am reading? this is most interesting… i always wondered why there was not a mention of 9.11 on here, but for when a poster mentioned it, and, today we have our answer…
this site is just above the fray, just too good, too ‘bright’ to dabble in with the commoners that distrust the government’s answers, and believe that the 9.11 moral is that the bush crime family has no respect for the life of civilians and for those people not contributing to their campaigns and their worldview.
and, in a quixotic twist, this site gets a quick dig in at the conspiracy folks by comparing the crazy malkin to us… very slick trick!!!
i am amazed!!!!
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:04 pmReply to Jay Randal:
None of us trust the Bush Regime, so it’s hard to believe the official version of 9/11,
It’s a bit more than ‘hard’, Jay…if a mind capable of rational thought is confronted with the facts, belief in th e’official version of events’ is patently impossible.
but TP wants the focus on Malkin instead of 9/11 on this thread!
If that’s so, perhaps Judd should have refrained from his childish stab at 9/11 Truth advocates with this statement:
I didn’t bring up 9/11, Judd did. If you’re looking for someone to blame for sending this thread careening out of control, you needn’t look any further than him.
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:04 pmEverybody take a deep breath and NOT start a rebellion on TP over this please! None of us trust the Bush Regime, so it’s hard to believe the official version of 9/11, but TP wants the focus on Malkin instead of 9/11 on this thread!
Comment by Jay Randal
Well maybe even TP doesn’t realize the extent of the frustration of the regular person!
AND, if they wanted to focus on Malkin’s STUPID story, DON’t link it with 9-11! DON’T expect us to stay silent on the (probable) INSIDE job that killed 3,000 people and started this POINTLESS war!!!
Just saying…..
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:05 pmMax Sawicky ran a post on the Qana deniers, which linked to a few of the rightwing blogs who were spreading these denials. At the time, I noted all one had to do was go visit NRO’s The Corner and watch Jonah Goldberg repeat these lies ad nausam. Yes, the loyal soldiers of Karl Rove have the same talking points. Hmmmm.
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:05 pmTrip and true > I am just trying to be a peacemaker on this thread, but perhaps it was unwise for Judd to link Malkin’s rants to 9/11 views?! The cat is out of the bag on this now I guess?!
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:09 pmHere’s a belated attempt to try to steer this out-of-control thread back on topic:
Another Israeli Myth Exposed: There Were No Hezbollah Rockets In Qana
– courtesy of Looking Glass News.
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:10 pmBTW:
Stephanie Miller covered this subjuct this morning.
There were reports from the ground that civilians were running away from sites where Hizbollah fired, knowing that an Israeli strike was forthcoming.
That’s why they STAYED there, because no strikes occured from that position. They felt they were safe.
9-11, however, is FAR different…..
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:12 pmNice job, trueblue, TripMaster, the band.
I couldn’t believe what I read by Judd, either. Like a slap in the face.
So…is this site limited to the sideshow? By that, I mean the entire mass media stew, the frenzy, the frothing. But don’t mention 9/11???
9/11 is the last thing the PowersThatBe like to see exposed. Read the news today, which I found astounding to be even printed.
So Judd, bu-bye. You have done what 9/11 did: pushed me further to the left.
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:12 pmI have to go eat, but will be back later, to see how this thread fight turns out > bye all.
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:12 pmit is terribly ironic that this post appeared within fifteen minutes or so of the mention on the other thread of today’s washington post article regarding the suspicions of members within the 9.11 commission and the LIES they were told by NORAD…
it seems that the attitude of the dailykosines and the other ‘anti-conspiracy-theory-because-we-want-to-get-on-msnbc-more-often-and-sell-more-books’ crowd is perhaps finding that their perceived elitism is just a facade!
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:12 pmsubject….oops
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:12 pmWhy does ThinkProgress always dismiss people who questions 9/11 as being crazy conspiracy theorists? Frankly I find it insulting, and the oposite of what this site is suppost to be about: exposing truth.
Judd, there are enormous amounts of evidence suggesting all kinds of things about 9/11. You know that. Don’t play dumb.
At least there’s people like Randi Rhodes and Mike Malloy out there who have the courage to have honest and open discussions about this, and aren’t afraid of being called “crazy” by crazy ass republican loyalists.
If Judd can tell me why NORAD didn’t follow SOP that day and scramble jets, and if he can tell me where the tapes of the air traffic controllers, norad and the black boxes are… AND if he can tell me how it is scientifically possible for jet fuel to melt the steel in the towers in 56 minutes to the point of a perfect collapse of the buildings when there have been similar crashes into buildings before with jets that have burned for hours and hours on end without compromising the integrity of the structures… THEN JUDD, I’ll shut up.
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:15 pmboc,
this appears to be more proof of the arguments made by a recently banned poster around here… this site is just to the left of hillary clinton’s purse and, you and i know, that isn’t left enough.
:)
peace.
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:15 pmReply to boc:
Exactly, boc…9/11 is the elephant in the room, and trying to effect change in this country without addressing 9/11 is like painting a house that’s falling down.
Judd, I have to drive home now, but as soon as I get there I’ll be back, and I hope you have some sort of explanation for your behavior.
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:16 pmIt is getting time to suspend all activity by congress, senate and administration and pull all parties associated with PNAC before a grand jury and get to the bottom of this War on Terror BS which has become a front to kill the Constitution and Bill of Rights. FBI, Intellegence and DoD (Able Danger) needs to be asked a few questions as well. This GWOT crap is a war on freedom and liberty around the world and replacing it with a global military plutocracy. The people responsible for taking away the evidence should be indicted immediately. The FAA would have put the pieces together carefully if it was an air disaster. This is far more serious and questions need to be answered by all of the organizations that are suposed to represent or defend this country. They were obviously out to breakfast when the incedent happened and far too many coincidences of pre-attack positioning and organization were set up. It wasn’t like the people in high places were not told.
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:16 pmIf a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.
Thomas Jefferson
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:18 pmand, boc, jpm, and madashell, save the thread with a ’save as’ because judd will turn this thread into swiss cheese in about an hour or so…
stay strong and don’t let the middle suck the life out of you!
peace,
james risser
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:20 pmSomehow I get the feeling Judd will let this thread be.
He’s got a lot to chew on with our responses.
TripMaster Monkey, I’m sure we’ll be here waiting for you when you get home.
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:21 pmSaved as “Save As”, as requested……..
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:23 pmIf these folks spent this much energy and time investigating Ohio’s vote, we might have a story.
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:24 pmtrueblue,
okay, you said that on post #79, and no comments moderated, at 7:21pm.
when is the monkey coming back in?
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:25 pmTo james risser, the band, madashell, just plain mad, TripMaster, true blue…
thanks.
I got tears in my eyes, seeing some corroboration.
Jesus, we are in so much trouble in this wonderful country.
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:27 pmtrue blue,
we are with you!
i mention the swiss cheese because the malkin thread on qana from two days or so ago had at least 14 moderated, read: ‘deleted’, comments… it is sort of interesting to see the ones they leave in if you can remember the ones they take out…
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:30 pmJeez, no no,
He’s got to drive home!
It’ll be a while!!
He’ll be back, don’t worry.
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:30 pmHey, no no,
your link comes up as deleted when I run my mouse across it.
Thought you should know…..
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:33 pmThinkprogress, is the Washington Post a conspiracy theorist too? Did you see today’s story? The 9/11 commission knew they were being deliberately lied to by the pentagon concerning 9/11. stop dumping on those of us with the brain power to put 2 and 2 together.
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:34 pmJudd,
time to let us know we can talk about this…..
You’re just gettin’ us riled up!
:)
Let it be……
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:36 pmHey, no no,
your link comes up as deleted when I run my mouse across it.
Thought you should know…..
i expect post #82 where i mention #79 will be gone soon too…
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:36 pmYou’re all discussing while I am verclempt.
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:37 pmI think we’re OK.
Judd would have to delete the entire thread at this point; so blog away…!
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:39 pmCan somebody tell me how many facts and/or % of the US population do you need before something is no longer considered a conspiracy theory?
More than 100 and/or 33% of the United States?
…just curious…
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:39 pmThink progress = gatekeepers
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:40 pmany fool with a iq over 50 knows the govermant has somthing to hid
about 9-11 it’s your duty to ask these questions
true blue,
he has already started a bit, no? he will trim out the it seems that the attitude of the dailykosines and the other ‘anti-conspiracy-theory-because-we-want-to-get-on-msnbc-more-often-and-sell-more-books’ post because i sense that he cares way too much about what the BIG blogs think of him….
this anti-9.11 truth outburst on his part proves that.
a conspiracy is no longer a conspiracy when the msm accepts it as such. before that, nothing is true.
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:42 pmTo: everyone on this board
TP, Kos, Americablog and many of the others (with the exception of Rawstory.com and Bradblog.com) The non-discussion of the truth of 9/11 along with the willfully ignorant, non-discussion on voting fraud is the cancer of the Progressive movement.
Everything you/we are fighting for, everything you/we hope for and work for is nothing, NOTHING!!! without our votes being acurately counted and these sick people out of power!!!
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:45 pmOK, I’m Saving That, TOO!!!!!!
WELL SAID!
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:47 pm(not meant as a yell, just enthusiasm!!)
very lame…. i thought this was think progress not thought suppress…. very very lame…. you can find thousands upon thousands of things wrong with the world, document injustices perpetrated by abusers of power in this country and across the world, and purport to be honestly pursuing the truth in such matters and provide those without a voice a forum to discuss relevant issues… but i get it, “yes, we are one of those sites”… “one of those sites that is ‘above the fray’ regarding 9-11 conspiracy theories ” and the like… it’s not like cnn had a poll or anything indicating that 90 some percent or whatever of respondents believed there was something untruthful about the official version of events….
hmm… i wonder why even bother bitching about pat roberts stonewalling, after all it’s not there’s anything to hide now that we know there IS no evidence to support those “wacky” conspiracy theorists, those wacky academics, and professors, and retired military officers, much less families of victims of 9-11 who begged for a real investigation….. in other words there ALL wrong because they have no evidence to support their claims…. and for them to say that thats because they’ve been prevented from asking those questions or have them answered? psssh….OH NO, THERE’s no EVIDENCE of that…. *cough* right chairman roberts?
this was the worst posting i’ve read on TP because it tries to arrogantly lump group of people with legitimate, scientific questions that strike at the heart and root of a defining moment in US history, in an attempt to shape an correct understanding of that event, with a group of people trying to define a moment in history to fit their agenda by “gut instinct”.
you could try establishing a forum here on TP that actually tries to address this topic that seems to “dominate the comments” and weeds out the fact from fiction instead of demonizing it as ALL fiction… no need to worry about having to do that for malkin and bunch cuz i really don’t see TP giving credence to any of her claims on here anytime soon…
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:50 pmJP
YES!
it simply baffles me how the progressive movement has been hijacked by those who fail to espouse the critical components of that which we must fight the hardest!!!
the fact that this administration would so closely allie itself and fulfill the destiny of the pnac and be the embodiment of fascistic neoconservative religious extremist ideal MUST be pointed out by those who wish to change it!!! and, 9.11 truth folks are doing so.
i am astounded that the nearly-msm-kos-and-crew have chosen to ignore this story just so they can get on tv more often and sell more of their books!
thank god for MIKE MALLOY, and a handful of the posters on this site that are true to the movement.
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:52 pmNote: We aren’t going to be publishing “evidence†that 9/11 was an inside job in this comment section There are places people go to discuss such things but this isn’t one of them.
Comment by Judd — August 2, 2006 @ 6:28 pm
Judd, please, we KNOW you are monitoring.
Allow us to blog the way the thread is going. We here in AMERICA want to comment on the atrocities that befell us on 9-11. Not on what some idiot says about Lebanon, which has CLEARLY been disproven.
Please let us know we can talk about this.
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:53 pmThank you very much.
#74 the band & #68 boc; “no left turn unstoned”
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:00 pmPlease let us know we can talk about this.
Thank you very much.
and, rather than merely give us ‘permission’ perhaps you will stick around and debate the issue seems you be so strongly against its discussion. we can also debate other issues and their relative importance to the progressive movement, the future elections, and the future, generally.
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:03 pmNo, I don’t think that would be wise, yes no.
I (we, I think) simply would like Judd to let the thread develop the way it was.
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:07 pmAnd it’s been 10 + min. since my post to you.
I assume you have decided and would like to post your decision to your readers?
Thank you, BTW, for the ability to post comments here.
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:08 pmI greatly appreciate it.
So I guess the moonbat leftists understand how crazy their kook, conspiracy theories are now.
I’m surprised the mental midgets on the left aren’t claiming that Bush did the bombing via Airforce 1. Well, Israel and the jews are just as evil as Bush, so it’s ok to let Bush off on this one.
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:11 pm#14
Al Gore you are smarter that AL GORE. LOL!
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:11 pmtrue blue,
i mention the debate because it is something i have asked him about four times now, and, he never responds. he has sniper-like tendencies and will just ignore your request until you either forget it or something more urgent comes along to take your attention away. that is just my opinion, of course.
but, if one has such strong opinions on the ‘baselessness’ of the 9.11 truth people, one would think one would be willing to debate the subject. i know i would.
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:12 pmJudd, have an open thread for 911 Conspiracy at all times. Boot off anyone fron other threads bringing that up. You have a bunch of great people here but, they are divergent. The 911 conspiracy will never-never go away. Just give them an outlet. They are good people, who knows they might be proved right some day. I don’t buy it because it is too damn complex to pull off- too many people would have to not tell any one–that never ever happens. However, I want to point out that most that beleive in that conspiracy I support on most of their other posts and positions- no insult meant to any of you. I could be wrong.
Peace
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:12 pmI just got home, and haven’t read all the comments, so this may have been said already — WHAT THE F*CK IS WRONG WITH THAT WOMAN!?
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:13 pmIf TP is not going to discuss 9/11, they are free to do whatever they wish.
I leave you with this… Judd, for everything you guys know/have reported on about what Bush and his Admin has done over the past 6 years (and know where they wish to go with this as in police state/martial law), tell me how the truth behind 9/11 is irrelevant to discuss?
Without 9/11, please tell me how the American people would ever allow this or any administration to jail and torture 1000’s of people without trial or charges?, spend the surplus into a $9 Trillion dollar deficit? send 150,000 of our troops into a country for 3.5 years and incur an acceptable 2500 fatalities/18000 wounded/100000 civilian deaths in the name of freedom? spy and datamine information on all of us without a warrant?
These are the broad strokes and the details/lies are in the thousands.
What does it take for TP to get that America the great democracy no longer exists because 9/11 enabled them to get away with all of this. Another 9/11 will seal the deal permanently.
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:13 pmThe American Scholars Symposium: 9/11 + The Neo-Con Agenda was covered by Reuters, The Washington Post, ABC & NBC Affiliates, CSPAN, and even more independent media outlets from all across the globe.
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:18 pmWow. TP just to say the thing about 9/11 conspiracy theorists, didn’t he?
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:20 pmThanks #108.
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:20 pmhi, z!
how’s it going today? i have been humming the cyndi lauper tune ‘true colors’ for the past hour or so…
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:22 pmi only got to 60, before i knew i had to post soon, or not at all…
i’m in agreement with most – if TP wanted no discussion on 9/11 theories, then why the sam hill did this thread get posted?!?
especially considering the WaPo story and another in Vanity Fair…
these 2 have some conflicting “facts”, but at least it’s out there…
AND i heard about these on randi rhodes, who also doesn’t like to discuss the 9/11 theories – BECAUSE WE DON’T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED… but she was persuaded to watch the Scholar’s Panel on c-span… yesterday she opened up the phone lines to callers who had questions that they wanted answerd by a REAL investigation… when the WaPo and Vanity Fair stories came out, she read some of them on the air… it was all very smart and enlightened, not crazy at all…
all things considered, it’s pretty hard to argue with spudge:
We don’t think that Bush and friends planned 9/11. We think that they knew it was going to happen and did nothing to stop it.
and we really, really do need to know the TRUTH…
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:22 pmyes no (I assume previously no no) DELETED again!!!
Jesus, Judd, be a man and let it go!!!!!!!
Tracy,
Haven’t seen you in a while. Structural Engineer? How many buildings have collasped due to FIRE?
Hmmm…….
NONE, except the USA’s version of the jets flying into them.
There are lots of other fires, encompassing TENS of floors…. no collapse.
In fact, the WTCS’ collapses were the only ones recorded in history as being felled by fire.
Does Not Make Sense……
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:23 pm“appear to be posed, not spontaneous action shots of an unfolding tragedy.â€
“All I have to go on is gut instinct.â€
Mm-hmm, and you ‘appear’ to be a first class nut case, but my gut instinct tells me you are a very disturbed young lady.
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:24 pmI would think the originator of the thread, whom also does not want certain topics discussed here, would have known what he was getting himself into. Oh well, I’ve done several things, and likely still more, in which I didn’t know what I was getting myself into.
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:26 pmyes no (I assume previously no no) DELETED again!!!
Jesus, Judd, be a man and let it go!!!!!!!
yes, ‘yes no’, was ‘no no’ \\\
i told you so, true blue…
the phrase ‘all hat, no cowboy‘ often applies to law school grads as well…
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:28 pmFor Truth,
I, too would like Judd to weigh in.
We all know you are there……
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:28 pmPerhaps if I didn’t KNOW the NEOCONS long range goals, I wouldn’t be so quick to question 9/11 at all. But cheney said it – WE NEED A PEARL HARBOR…coincidence? I DON’T THINK SO.
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:29 pmIs ANYONE here a structural engineer?
Comment by Tracy — August 2, 2006 @ 8:14 pm
You don’t need one. The buildings were brought down by that little understood fourth fundemental force “gravity” The melting point is not that key- it is at what point it is “structually weakened” No offense to all my friends here-GWB=worst president in history-rethugs are ba$tards–just not with the conspiracy thing, but willing to listen and think about your points. I did check one -and your right -Usama bin laden is NOT wanted by the FBI for 911. Go figure? see I will listen.
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:29 pmI admit when I first read the topic headline, I was surprised. It’s funny I never knew who this character was until lately. She probably is smart, I think I read somewhere of her credentials, not bad actually. Its sad she used all her talents and resources to become a pissy little 7th grader on TV.
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:30 pmOMG – and THEY DIDN’T SHOOT KENNEDY EITHER.
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:31 pmOMG – and THEY DIDN’T SHOOT KENNEDY EITHER.
Comment by madashell
WOW!!! That’s Great!!!
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:32 pmTracy,
I have a hard enough time providing my own structure. I think a lot of interesting points are raised in the “structural” argument. I have been around when there were “engineers” posting on this site about the purported topic, and of course, they all felt it appeared to be a controlled demolition.
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:34 pmDear TP,
You deserve most all the animosity and mockery present on this thread. Did you copy Glenn Greenwald? I find it bizarre the exact comparision was made accidentally. I also think it unusual that the 911 doubters would be the first group to come to mind when thinking about the latest event performed by the rightwing freakshow with their incessant lying and obfuscation. TP is your sandbox and you are free to let your readers know who is and who is not welcome to play… but your sneer at the doubters and skeptics belie a snottiness that wasn’t visible until your unprovoked provocation. So you’re not convinced there’s anything fishy with the official story? Fine. But to compare the doubters with Malkin? That reveals something altogether different.
Kenneth Patchen
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:34 pmWho here has seen the C-Span Special on the 9-11 cover-up?
I think you can download it if you haven’t seen it. Saw the link @ Raw Story.
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:35 pmOh, this is good. We’ve got the wacko, kook 9/11 conspiracy theorists turning on their leftist brothers who have to live in the real world, at least part of the time.
It’s kind of like the way the democrat politicians look at the leftist blogosphere. “Yeah, we like your money and votes, but when you moonbats in blogosphere land get your comments in the regular press, we’re scared”.
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:39 pmComment by kennethpatchen — August 2, 2006 @ 8:34 pm
no! are you really kenneth patchen?
regardless, that was so well said and in one paragraph; you have said what i have been trying to say through my several personas for hours!
thanks!
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:39 pmhow’s it going today? i have been humming the cyndi lauper tune ‘true colors’ for the past hour or so…
Comment by yes no
I noticed that. You and trueblue are making beautiful music together. ;)
Things are going well, but I hate being the last girl to the party. I have on such a pretty dress, too…
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:44 pmYo Ricky,
I don’t think anyone is “turning” on anyone, although I am not surprised that you interpret questioning authority and not always blindly following the dear leader as “turning” on them.
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:47 pmTo the Memory of my fellow American, compatriot and the Soldier of Freedom
Michael Levin, 22,
“… moved to Israel three years ago from Pennsylvania and enlisted in the paratroopers, Israeli media reported. Levin cut short a visit to his family four days ago and returned to his unit.”
By HAMZA HENDAWI, Associated Press Writer
Peace for Israel
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:47 pmPeace for the Palestinians and the Lebanese.
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:50 pmit is doubtful that it is the kenneth patchen, but, it would be nice to think so. here is one of my favorite quotations from him:
“I speak for a generation born in one war and doomed to die in another.â€
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:51 pmThe name “one jew” really smacks of victimhood, like your alone against the world or something.
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:51 pmQana conspiracy theories=calculated perpetrator cover story to hide the truth
vs
9/11conspiracy theories= spotaneous questions of a victimized nation mounting into a search for a truth.
Totally different.
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:51 pmMy Fellow Americans: As you all know, the defeat of Iraq regime has been completed.
Since congress does not want to spend any more money on this war, our mission in Iraq is complete.
This morning I gave the order for a complete removal of all American forces from Iraq. This action will be complete within 30 days. It is now to begin the reckoning.
Before me, I have two lists. One list contains the names of countries which have stood by our side during the Iraq conflict. This list is short. The United Kingdom, Spain, Bulgaria, Australia, and Poland are some of the countries listed there.
The other list contains everyone not on the first list. Most of the world’s nations are on that list. My press secretary will be distributing copies of both lists later this evening.
Let me start by saying that effective immediately, foreign aid to those nations on List 2 ceases immediately and indefinitely. The money saved during the first year alone will pretty much pay for the costs of the Iraqi war.
The American people are no longer going to pour money into third world Hellholes and watch those government leaders grow fat on corruption.
Need help with a famine? Wrestling with an epidemic? Call France.
In the future, together with Congress, I will work to redirect this money toward solving the vexing social problems we still have at home. On that note, a word to terrorist organizations. Screw with us and we will hunt you down and eliminate you and all your friends from the face of the earth.
Thirsting for a gutsy country to terrorize? Try France, or maybe China.
I am ordering the immediate severing of diplomatic relations with France, Germany, and Russia. Thanks for all your help, comrades. We are retiring from NATO as well. Bon chance, mes amis.
I have instructed the Mayor of New York City to begin towing the many UN diplomatic vehicles located in Manhattan with more than two unpaid parking tickets to sites where those vehicles will be stripped, shredded and crushed. I don’t care about whatever treaty pertains to this. You creeps have tens of thousands of unpaid tickets. Pay those tickets tomorrow or watch your precious Benzes, Beamers and limos be turned over to some of the finest chop shops in the world. I love New York.
A special note to our neighbors. Canada is on List 2. Since we are likely to be seeing a lot more of each other, you folks might want to try not pissing us off for a change.
Mexico is also on List 2. President Fox and his entire corrupt government really need an attitude adjustment. I will have a couple extra tank and infantry divisions sitting around. Guess where I am going to put em? Yep, border security.
Oh, by the way, the United States is abrogating the NAFTA treaty – starting now.
We are tired of the one-way highway. Immediately, we’ll be drilling for oil in Alaska – which will take care of this country’s oil needs for decades to come. If you’re an environmentalist who opposes this decision, I refer you to List 2 above: pick a country and move there. They care.
It is time for America to focus on its own welfare and its own citizens. Some will accuse us of isolationism. I answer them by saying, “darn tootin.”
Nearly a century of trying to help folks live a decent life around the world has only earned us the undying enmity of just about everyone on the planet. It is time to eliminate hunger in America. It is time to eliminate homelessness in America. To the nations on List 1, a final thought. Thank you guys. We owe you and we won’t forget.
To the nations on List 2, a final thought: You might want to learn to speak Arabic.
God bless America. Thank you and good night.
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you are reading it in English, thank a soldier
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:52 pmWhoa Judd…facts are facts, and for you to malign those that question the Administration bullshit tale about 911 by comparing that skepticism with Malkin’s clearly bigoted perspective on Qana… is extremely disappointing!!
Could this be another GOP/Rovian ploy to somehow mitigate or deflect the fallout from the recent MSM airing of the 911 Truth documentation? I read that the release of all but 7 photos and vids from the Moussaoui trial were just that. Arlen Specter has used this tactic numerous times, where he will appear to be challenging the Bush Administration on a particular issue, only to change his colors later once public attention has lessened.
The fact that you give Malkin any creedence at all makes me think “to hell with Think Progress!!”
Styve
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:53 pmI looked at 4 of the pentagon dead body photos realesed, it looked like they were workers in the building, no plane wreckage around them. But what do I know anyway.
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:55 pmWow! You guys are PARANOID! Whhh! Bush brought the towers down! You sound like morons! No wonder you cant win an election
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:56 pmHi again:
An hour drive home and a dinner later, and I’m back…and Judd’s silence defeaning. No correction to the insulting and baseless stan at 9/11 Truth advocates, and no justification, either.
Judd, I’m not the only person to have said this: if you’re going to make an assertion like this:
…then at least be man enough to back it up. My challenge still stands: I have plenty of evidence to back up my claims…can you say the same?
Two things:
* If you’re going to ‘discard discredited ideas’, you need to a) actually discredit it first, and b) according to that logic, you must ‘discard’ the ‘official version of events’, since it has been thoroughly discredited from all angles.
* As I said earlier, if you were so concerned about 9/11 ‘dominating’ the discussion, you really should have refrained from your childish stab at the 9/11 Truth community.
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:00 pmCatatonic, go back to sleep.
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:00 pm‘its hard out there for the band’
Comment by yes no yes
I need to become more literary, too, because I don’t know who either Patchen or Rexrod are.
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:00 pmDuh. :)
I need to leave because MiniBlue wants my to watch the Stephen King thing on TNT.
I’m ashamed that Judd has not weighed in, and admited he was wrong.
I’m also ashamed TP has decided to delete links……
Next thing I’LL be banned, because I spoke ill of TP.
(Absolute power, you know…)
Good luck, posters!
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:01 pmI’ll be back when MiniBlue no longer needs my presence… (is asleep)
Thanks Mr. 5-Noted Music Scale Guy.
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:01 pmGoodnight, good mama, trueblue!
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:02 pmLove ‘ya, Zooey!
Oops, gotta go! She’s an angry teenager who wants her mom!!!
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:04 pmAs I said earlier, if you were so concerned about 9/11 ‘dominating’ the discussion, you really should have refrained from your childish stab at the 9/11 Truth community.
Comment by TripMaster Monkey
That’s true.
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:04 pmZooey is the dress blue?
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:05 pmFor what it’s worth, my two cents. I am very suspicious of conspiracy theories in general and do not particularly like the 9-11 theory being thrown into as many threads on TP as it is. In that I agree with Judd. On the other hand, I’m not willing to dismiss the possibility of 9-11 being either an inside job or known beforehand by BushCo. My biggest concern is an issue like this dividing progresses in a way that the neocons haven’t. We just cannot afford to let that happen. There must be a compromise here – after all, we all want to see negotiation to end conflicts. Let’s start internally. My suggestion is to occasionally have threads specifically for speculation about 9-11, raising questions, etc. and for those who belief the inside job theory should refrain from bringing the topic into other threads. Thoughts?
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:06 pmyay… i just love chain letters… especially real old ones…
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:06 pmwhat? – no “send this to 10 friends and all your cares are gone”?
Zooey is the dress blue?
Comment by For Truth
Of course! It goes with my eyes. How did you know?
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:07 pmI’m Terrible Herbst.
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:07 pm#99 – very lame…. i thought this was think progress not thought suppress….
fell off the couch. thanks!
# 133 – … but your sneer at the doubters and skeptics belie a snottiness that wasn’t visible until your unprovoked provocation. So you’re not convinced there’s anything fishy with the official story? Fine. But to compare the doubters with Malkin? That reveals something altogether different.
Kenneth Patchen is my new hero this hour.
People, the bigger game is polarization. Think about who benefits, in terms of money, when 80% of the electricity in the world is used to write screeds in the comments sections of blogs. (hyperbole alert)
While I’ve spit bile over the last five years, it hasn’t affected the richest of the rich. Right vs. Left, yada yada.
The obvious truth is that 9/11 was not explained truthfully. People know it. Remember that clip of the firemen, one guy motioning with his hands and arms, describing how the floors fell? Years ago! Did that ever show up on TV? I don’t know.
Did WAMY investigation by FBI show up on TV? No, I read about it on the Internet. And I read more.
Judd, your readers are astonished. I rarely write in the blogs, it takes time to think of the right way to say things, therefore my contributions are not as good as I’d like them to be in the time alloted. Attention wanders, maybe Friends is on, or ThoughtSuppress has posted a new sideshow item on Bush. It’s on to the next outrage.
However, 9/11 is not one of those issues. So dig into it. Read, and make up your mind, and spread the word. Your 100% avoidance is telling me, a lifetime broadcaster, that it is intentional.
Has ThoughtSuppress never encountered a news or political story about the 9/11 report? I seem to recall reading quite a few. In fact throughout the entire liberal blogosphere there is precious little, but I didn’t notice it — the flood of outrage spewing from our Leaders is commanding all the attention. But not all…because we DO remember the weirdness of 9/11. We DO recall the shock when the lightbulb went on. And today, in this thread, we ARE astounded at your apparent ignorance of the topic at hand, and suspicious that it isn’t ignorance at all, but will.
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:09 pmThoughts?
Comment by PLC (PatrioticLiberalChristian)
katy and I have been trying to get Judd to have an open thread, since we don’t have ThinkFastPM anymore. One open thread per day would probably help keep some of these threads on track.
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:11 pmhey zooey! you were only fashionably late, is all…
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:11 pmand you look mahvelous!
I mean one open thread, in addition to the ThinkFast thread.
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:11 pmyou were only fashionably late, is all…
and you look mahvelous!
Comment by katy
My feet are killing me, though.
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:14 pmClogs just don’t go with party dresses. :)
now…about this dress?
Comment by yes no yes
Hmmmmm?
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:16 pmOk, I’ve made one suggestion for compromise. Zooey has made another. Come on, any more?
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:16 pmPLC,
Are you trying to keep us on-topic? :)
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:18 pmpedicure, my lady?
Comment by feet r us
Please. But don’t tell hugo.
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:20 pmFun is fun, but dress comments? Get a room.
The obvious topic is hypocricy on the part of Judd, for the site.
He hasn’t returned to ’splain a thing, and probably won’t.
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:20 pmAre you trying to keep us on-topic? :)
Comment by Zooey
Yes and no. I actually think this is a serious issue because we can’t have progressives destroying each other when we don’t agree on a topic and win elections. We, unlike neocons, are never going to agree on everything so we need to be sure that we can disagree productively and without rancor.
I really don’t care about OT subjects, especially from you since you already responded to my request. Thanks, BTW.
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:22 pmUh oh, james is gone. No pedicure…
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:22 pmzooey – that was serndipitous that our 2 posts (155+56) came up together like that…
i take it you got that message…
this is a strange happening with this thread…
any bets if it’s another 500-er? doesn’t seem to be moving that fast… the night is young…
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:25 pmPLC,
I think of you as the voice of reason around here. You’re right, we prog/libs have it harder because we are able to think for ourselves, and will not always agree, That’s why I get so upset when we fight among ourselves sometimes, over silly things like personality conflicts.
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:26 pmkaty,
No way am I sticking around for 500! I think TP got wind that james was here, so they’re deleting him again. Stupid.
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:29 pmPLC,
Your comment caused my thought to catlyize into another thought. Is that one of the reasons why Dems lose elections, as the ant colony mentality works better. Having our disagreements is divisive, and the Repubs/NEocons all fall in lockstep together. Just a thought.
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:32 pmAll:
I appreciate the honest feedback on this thread about my post.
One thing we decided early on in this site is that it wasn’t going to be a venue to discuss 9/11 conspiracy theories. People make a reasonable point that, if that’s the rule, perhaps such theories shouldn’t be referenced in the main posts.
That’s fair enough. But this post is published and that doesn’t change our site policy.
TP is a lot more tolerant about commenters than many other sites. Many sites won’t allow any comments that come from a different political perspective. We allow a lot, but it’s not a free-for-all.
I welcome input on how we moderate comments and other administration of the site. But in the end we have to set the rules. Everyone is free then to decide if this is the kind of site they want to spend time on or not.
I understand some of you are upset with me. That’s OK. I’m not trying to please everyone. I’m trying to run this site the best way I know how.
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:33 pmZooey
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:36 pmThanks. I sometimes find myself a bit lost about the content of many posts here because of the volume of information from some obviously very intelligence people who post. I don’t have the time or often the inclination to research that much. However, I think I have a strength in the process of reasoning, assimilation of information, and problem solving (as I’ve revealed once, I’m a practicing psychologist). I am also very interested in changing progressive tactics from issue-oriented to values-oriented campaigning because I think we’ve got a better chance of winning elections and because, frankly, issues and information change while values do not as readily.
Anyway, again thanks for the compliment.
Thankyou Judd, sounds fair enough.
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:36 pm…james was here, so they’re deleting him again. Stupid.
Comment by Zooey — August 2, 2006 @ 9:29 pm
zooey – that’s weird – i just found this one:
Comment by kennethpatchen — August 2, 2006 @ 8:34 pm
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:37 pmno! are you really kenneth patchen?
regardless, that was so well said and in one paragraph; you have said what i have been trying to say through my several personas for hours!
thanks!
Comment by james risser — August 2, 2006 @ 8:39 pm
re # 164 – We, unlike neocons, are never going to agree on everything so we need to be sure that we can disagree productively and without rancor.
Yeah, how about a nice, fresh, steaming cup of God’s Productive Disagreement.
I think we can all agree that something is up, when the ostrich flock is found with their heads in the sand. What are they not looking at?, one wonders.
Then PLC will say they’re not looking at Exhibit A. Zooey will say they are not looking at Exhibit B. A furor will arise, but in the end it will be a nice hot cup of God’s Productive Disagreement that salves the sting, calms the neurotransmitters, and returns the empty suit back to sunny contemplation about the state of the world.
Maybe a split in the liberals is good. I certainly don’t want to be an ostrich, nor argue about what the ostriches are not looking at. I’d rather be in a group that SEES the 800-lb gorilla in the rocking chair by the fire. And who gets the gorilla back into the zoo from where it escaped.
So be a liberal who argues about how long the rocking chair can hold the load of the gorilla, be an ostrich. I’m not wasting my breath on that.
Let’s split the liberal forces into ostriches and peacocks. Peacocks are incredible watchdogs, I hear. And we look great.
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:37 pmthanks for your response, judd…
still confusing…
like, what ever did you expect?
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:39 pmPeople make a reasonable point that, if that’s the rule, perhaps such theories shouldn’t be referenced in the main posts.
Thanks for acknowledging that, Judd.
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:39 pmI’m a practicing psychologist
Comment by PLC
I must have missed that. It explains a lot!
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:40 pmOk, is this still about Malkin? Oh Yeah, she’s acting like a pissy 7th grader.
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:41 pmi have been trying to say through my several personas for hours!
thanks!
Comment by james risser — August 2, 2006 @ 8:39 pm
Comment by katy
I saw that. He pulled off his own mask…silly james. :(
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:42 pmNewsHeadlines on the Righty’s side of the blogoshpere, “ThinkProgress moonbats turn on ThinkProgress”
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:43 pmGood catch Zooey, he did pull of the mask.
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:44 pmLet’s split the liberal forces into ostriches and peacocks. Peacocks are incredible watchdogs, I hear. And we look great.
Comment by boc
Who peed on your Wheaties?
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:44 pmno no no no no no no again again again
You’re so funny.
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:46 pmWho peed on your Wheaties?
Comment by Zooey
Judd did, deary. Read the thread.
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:47 pmI’m Terrible Herbst.
Comment by For Truth — August 2, 2006 @ 9:07 pm
Is someone dogging you, or am I totally dense?
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:48 pm#156
Probably a good idea to have an open thread.
To:
boc, yes_no, JP, ShamRockNRoll, Blue Dog49, Jay Randall, TripMaster Monkey, jimmy the saint and all of the others in involved in the “9/11 thread” fight –
Michelle Malkin is laughing at you.
All of you.
Don’t think she doesn’t check out this site and check the comments.
Don’t think she doesn’t fill up with glee to read comments like “TP is no longer for me … because they won’t let me discuss 9/11 the way I want to …”
163 posts – ( as I write ) and very few dealt with her and her comments.
I agree – 9/11 IS important. I WAS THERE !
It should be discussed.
But it is a monster of an issue and the discussion does need to be managed.
Send a comment to Judd ( or whomever at TP ) with your issues via the “contact us” link above. Views and arguments can be exchanged via normal email. I am assuming they will respond – I’m not with TP, so I don’t know. Send a note and find out.
But knock it off with the “I’m so disappointed, I don’t know what to do … ” bullsh#t.
Get a f#cking grip, people.
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:51 pmJudd has had his say. It is his site and we are guests here. We should be thankful for the opportunity to express all the other progressive ideas and concerns. We should also be glad that he has let this thread run its course and those who disagree with his decision to have their say. Now, we can either accept this reality, agree to disagree on this topic, and continue to work toward our common goals. Or, we can bad-mouth, label, and discredit each other, thereby doing the neocons work for them. I choose to let this topic go on TP and to go elsewhere if I want to discuss 9-11.
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:53 pmgood point, triumph…
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:57 pmJudd:
One thing we decided early on in this site is that it wasn’t going to be a venue to discuss 9/11 conspiracy theories.
Interesting concept…a bit like trying to discuss the tragedy of the Titanic while forbiddding any mention of icebergs…
People make a reasonable point that, if that’s the rule, perhaps such theories shouldn’t be referrenced in the main posts.
Glad you concede that point, but by conceding the lesser point, you avoid the more important issue: that you made a unsubstantiated and childish stab at the 9/11 Truth community, and we have yet to hear either an apology or a substantiation.
That’s fair enough. But this post is published and that doesn’t change our site policy.
I’ve seen ‘published posts’ change here before. Don’t attempt to hide behind your ’site policy’.
TP is a lot more tolerant about commenters than many other sites. Many sites won’t allow any comments that come from a different political perspective. We allow a lot, but it’s not a free-for-all.
The issue here isn’t your ‘tolerance’. The issue here is that you used the discussion topic as a springboard for an unsubstantiated, personal attack against the 9/11 Truth movement, and then hid behind your ’site policy’ to attempt to stifle any rebuttals. O’Reilly would be proud.
I understand some of you are upset with me.
More like profoundly disappointed in you, Judd. While forbidding discussion of 9/11 is, in the final analysis, your choice (if insane), it is dishonest in the extreme to then attack the 9/11 Truth movement yourself, and then, again, attempt to forbid subsequent discussion. You can’t have it both ways, Judd. Period.
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:59 pmZooey
“Terrible Herbst” is a legendary bad guy from old western days. I thought I might have acted Terrible by asking about the color of the dres, being blue and all. But you were not offended, so thats good.
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:00 pmDon’t know what you mean by dogging, and as for whether you’re totally dense, if you are I’m sure it isn’t your fault.
What I’m railing about is what James Resser said, the arrogance of power.
I didn’t choose to be angry about being lumped with Malkin, I didn’t choose to be insulted by the willfull blindness of poor souls like Judd who no doubt have good intentions but only to the limit of acceptable ideas. A 9/11 thread is AMAZINGLY complicated. Lots of emotions. But it seems to be verboten emotion at ThoughtSuppress. (Still love that name!)
Problem is, people like me are shocked when people like Judd behave or say things like O’Reilly. And insulted too, when an insufficient excuse is offered as an explanation.
I’ve been reading TP for years. Subscribe to the report daily. All good stuff. But did they have a sign up that said Malkin sounds like 9/11 conspiracy theorists, the common denominator being “inside job”? Of course there was no sign like that.
But I didn’t realize there should have been.
I didn’t expect to hear ANYTHING REMOTELY LIKE WHAT JUDD WROTE AND SUPPORTS, however limply.
I don’t even like to “peek” at conservative websites, they’re creepy. Now, I’m just off my meds on the possibility that EVEN THIS site employs someone who, you gotta admit, published a sentiment that I would expect on Faux News.
No evidence?! That’s simply not true. To quote Jack Straw, it’s “nuts”.
I urge you to become more informed, Zooey. In kindness, becomed informed, I say.
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:06 pmFor Truth,
That’s a giggle.
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:06 pmNo offense taken, at least you didn’t ask how short it was…not short, BTW. ;)
Think Progress just jumped the shark. Not having the root cause for all these failures is a failure. Who’s afraid of another 911 investigation? Lot’s of people on payola. Read up on Gulf of Tonkin, USS Maine etc. The best way to beat the enemy is to become the enemy, unfortunately it goes to far many time. JUst throw away all the coindicence analysis about who 911 attacks benefitted and it was nice knowing you. If you can’t even do a piece on it and look at the facts I am sorry for you, but at least you got your payola.
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:06 pmGet a f#cking grip, people.
============
i’m done for the night as soon as i get this one posted–even though the weak one, judd, will delete it immediately rather than ADDRESS the concerns…it is his style. bear with me one more time… please note how the coward judd has deleted nearly every one of my posts
the disappointment, speaking for myself and it sounds like a few others, is keenly expressed by Kenneth Patchen above…
i claim this behavior is systemic at this site, and, i also claim they have ‘hijacked’ the term progressive–a term i believe in–and have bastardized it. i don’t feel like getting a ‘grip’ on that, thank you.
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:08 pmtruthout has the vanity fair story:
9/11 Live: The NORAD Tapes
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:09 pmBy Michael Bronner Vanity Fair August 2006 Issue
Moonbats believe the official lie, while you are at it you might as well swallow WMDs, LIberation of IRAQ, Jessica Lynch, Pat Tillman, “LEt’s Roll” etc. If you are willing to swallow that then of course 911 was just like our government says it was. Nothing to see here and nothing to come back for here at Think Progress if its all just for political parties and division of the people. What a pathetic bunch of payola in Kos, Think Progress etc.
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:12 pm#188
Thanks, Katy.
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:12 pmTripMaster, you’re great. If I wasn’t so old I’d say You Da Man.
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:13 pmDan Rather, how I wish it was really you.
Dan Rather stood up to Nixon.
Yeah, I think ThoughtSuppress has jumped the shark. What’s the point in being in an opposition party if you veer away from the easiest target to oppose?
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:17 pmI urge you to become more informed, Zooey. In kindness, becomed informed, I say.
Comment by boc
Excuse me, boc, I am not totally dense, nor am I uninformed. Thanks for your little lecture, but save it. I’m not here to fight with someone on the same side as me, but don’t imply that I’m stupid.
Having done my own research on the topic, I don’t subscribe to 9/11 conspiracy theories, and I’m not going to be drawn into a discussion about them.
It looks to me that Judd had a bit of a lapse of good judgment when he compared Malkin and 9/11 conspiracy people. That’s ok, because we all have our moments.
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:18 pmyou’re welcome, triumph…
but i’m also nodding as i read the comments by tripmaster, boc, plc, so many…
we all need the TRUTH…
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:19 pmsnap, zooey…
we all have our moments… for sure…
i’m done for the night… walk the dog, then watch my guys…
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:21 pmsee ya’s…
Dan, bingo again.
It’s reasonable to equate party members who lie to serve the party, to other parties with lockstep members…like the Communist Party.
Any party.
Any religion, for that matter.
Again, if ThoughtProcess has changed the meaning of “progressive” to include a disclaimer at the bottom of dictionary entry that says “*as long as you don’t talk about 9/11 being an inside job, batteries not included” well, just let us know on the front page of the website.
Don’t insult me, maroon.
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:23 pmKaty,
see ya, have a great evening.
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:23 pmAll I can say is to me EVERYTHING that has transpired in the last six years is connected to 9/11. The WAR, to me is the BIGGEST. My friend said it best that fateful day – can you say POLICE STATE?
And, my god, if you know the PNAC’s agenda, then how can anyone possibly think that they would not employ ANY MEANS possible to reach those goals?
Like it was said in a post above – research FALSE FLAGGING.
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:29 pmThe important thing is that everyone understand three things:
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:31 pm1) Hezbollah is doing everything possible to keep Lebanese civilians out of harms way
2) Hezbollah has nothing at all to gain from overstating civilian casualties
3) We should all trust 100% BBC, AP, and Reuters to be impartial on matters involving israel, and anyone who would suspect their motives is obviously a nut
katy
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:31 pmYou’re absolutely right that we all need the truth and, yet, none of us can possess or process all the truth, all the time. We each have our blind spots or just areas of truth that we do not want to explore for a host of reasons. That’s what bothers me about this thread – there has been a lot of DEMAND for all of us to focus on an area that maybe we aren’t ready or willing to process. For me, the 9-11 conspiracy theory is difficult to process because it is so assaultive of my patriotism and hopefulness for the American system. In a word, I don’t want it to be true and I admit that, in this issue, I may be rightly labelled an “ostrich”. But, BushCo has given us so many other appalling issues to address and redress that I am a “peacock” about looking at. I just do not accept that I am somehow any less “progressive” on account of these points, anymore than I accept the neocon label of “anti-American” when I criticize U.S. policies. OK, off my soap box – time for bed in a few minutes.
PLC,
Well said, once again.
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:34 pmAre all female Reichwingernuts idiots? Malkan and Coulter and Ingram (sp) are all idiots…must be the brainwashing they get in those young republican sessions. Of course dead people look like they are not moving you crazy whore.
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:36 pmAre all female Reichwingernuts idiots?
Comment by Ken
The males, too.
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:39 pmHmm very interesting comments while I was away having dinner, and then a powerfull thunderstorm swept over my area outside Atlanta, Georgia, so just getting back on here.
Someone mentioned on here that Malkin might read this thread? I hope she does, but I could care less what she thinks about the comments! She is a horribly vicious women with a nasty temper, and a mouth that is only surpassed by Ann Coulter’s, so her views on anything are nothing but steaming piles of crap!
I am glad that the 9/11 discussion has been worked out for the moment, so we can get back to trashing Malkin/FOX News, and all the other GOP scum in Washington, DC!
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:40 pmShe is a horribly vicious women with a nasty temper, and a mouth that is only surpassed by Ann Coulter’s, so her views on anything are nothing but steaming piles of crap!
Comment by Jay Randal
I would only add that she’s a self-hating woman, like Coulter.
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:44 pmwhat pisses me off more than the official story or the vilification of anyone who doubts it is…
…the fact that Hollywood is making another damn movie about the tragedy.
Most Americans will believe a movie more than thier own conscience, which makes the task of challenging the government lie that much more difficult.
Not to mention that it’s in poor taste. It’s a slap in the face to the victims as well as all New Yorkers IMO.
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:46 pmOk, DAN RATHER, I don’t know about anyone else, but I get the point. Thanks.
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:46 pmDid you notice that you’re hanging around, just like us?
The Washington Post story today PROVES that there was a conspiracy involving what occurred on 9/11. The 9/11 Commission admit they were lied to by the pentagon to a point that they were going to call on the inspector general.
Now, the 9/11 Commision wasn’t just the commissioners, but 80+ staffers that worked on it as well. And you have to add in the dozens of Pentagon staffers that were contacted by the commission.
So just on the Washington Post story today alone we have a significant issue on 9/11 Coverup that was kept back for 2 years from the time that the 9/11 Commission Report was released, a coverup that involved well over a 100 people.
Just on this story alone, you can tell that the Kean Commission report can by no means be described as authoritatitve.
Time for a real independent investigation. And the whole house of cards will come tumbling down.
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:47 pmNow back to the point.
It was a hughe massacre by the reckless Israel “Defense” Force, it was mounstrous, so Faux News are trying to sex it up for the American people, so they don’t feel ashamed of implicitly supporting this war.
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:48 pmI wouldn’t want to “Jump a Shark”.
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:48 pmI am glad that the 9/11 discussion has been worked out for the moment
Please explain how it has ‘worked out’, Jay. Judd ducked the issue and justified leaving the inflammatory, baseless insult to the 9/11 truth movement by hiding behind his ’site policy’.
Judd is doing much more than merely stifling debate on 9/11…he is actively opposing the movement. This goes far beyond just ‘rising above the controversy’.
This is not ‘working out’, Jay…this is not ‘working out’ at all.
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:49 pmThe Police feel if you have nothing to hide, you should let them search you. Same for investigating 9/11.
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:50 pmSame for investigating 9/11.
Comment by For Truth
Right. Investigate away, I say. Couldn’t hurt. I don’t think it’s any more than GWB failing in the most profound way possible, but if people want to know more, it’s ok.
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:53 pmKelso > I am NOT going to see that 9/11 movie, because most likely it will be filled with falsehoods and propaganda too! Nicolas Cage is a good actor, so many people will be lured to see it, because he stars in it! I will NOT see that movie about the passenger jet that crashed, because the flyers supposedly fought the hijackers > again I think it is filled with propaganda!
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:54 pmPost 224 Trip > I do NOT disagree with you, but since Judd sets the rules we have to let it go at present on this thread! I would like a REAL investigation of 9/11, but if in fact our government actually did do it, then they will NEVER allow a REAL investigation to ever take place, or at least as long as Bush and Cheney are still alive! Our government sunk the battleship Maine in Havana Harbor, Cuba, to justify the US declaring war on Spain, but we did not find out about the truth of what really happened, untill a few years ago! I believe Judd/TP are being cautious about discussing 9/11, perhaps too cautious?!
August 2nd, 2006 at 11:03 pmJay:
I believe Judd/TP are being cautious about discussing 9/11, perhaps too cautious?!
I believe you are being overly charitable. If Judd’s motivation was caution, he wouldn’t have issued his childish slam on the 9/11 truth movement. Clearly, caution isn’t high on Judd’s list of priorities…
August 2nd, 2006 at 11:12 pmYes DAN > war has become “Big Business” now > President Eisenhower tried to warn us about that in 1961 as he left the presidency, but at the time people thought his speech about the “Military-Industrial-Complex” was goofy, but in fact he told the truth, then Vietnam War occured! The Iraq war/occupation is as phony as the Spanish-American war, that the Maine was sunk to start it!
August 2nd, 2006 at 11:15 pmOy, goodnight.
August 2nd, 2006 at 11:15 pm#224 by my man, TripMaster.
Please explain how it has ‘worked out’, Jay. Judd ducked the issue
Ducking the issue. Head in the sand. Move along, nothing to see here.
Those who aren’t ostriches will be outraged and informed long after the thread is gone. Ostriches and ducks. Is ThoughtProcessed for the birds?
Time will tell.
August 2nd, 2006 at 11:16 pmLike 9/11 conspiracy theorists, Malkin claims the incident was an inside job. Malkin has another thing in common with 9/11 conspiracy theorists: there is no evidence to support her claims.
Disappointed to read that part, getting swabbed by the same brush.
Anyone who claims there is no evidence to support claims about 9-11 conspiracy has not seriously looked at the massive amount of evidence. I mean, what do you think the Vanity Fair and WaPo articales are talking about? Why would the 9-11 Commission members have considered criminal charges and been shocked by the difference between the stories told by the Pentagon and FAA, and the tapes they heard?
Disappointing.
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:09 amI’ve read some comments here that express the feeling that the 9-11 theorists might be right but it’s too hard to think about and Bush has so much else you could go after him for. The problem for people like me in the movement is that everything happeneing today and since 9-11 comes from that day and what was done to America. Military adventurism, diminishment of our rights, massive federal debt and corporate raiding, the permanent damage to our world image and stance, on and on. And it’s still happening as we read and write. It’s happening as we go into mid-term elections and the Diebold enabled fraud we face.
To quote that moron W. “It’s hard. It’s hard work.” Getting to the truth, stopping fascism is hard work.
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:23 amStopping fascism is always hard to do! Germans were fooled by Hitler, but as they woke up Adolf either sent them to the Russian front to die, or sent them to Dachau concentration camp to die! Bush might declare martial law, while the Congress is away on summer vacation, or he might attack Iran, or do both?! Whatever that man does will screw us over! Sorry to be negative, but Bush is a sneaky bastard!
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:41 am228 Jay,
The movie is propaganda. They are going to tell the official story in THX Dolby Surround Sound and stadium theater seating. Now who wouldn’t wanna watch that? It’s got stuff blowing up and stuff and ya know..Nicholas Cage!
But seriously, yes it’s hollywood, but how do you make a movie with details of events in which nobody can tell you exactly what happened? It will be great seeing the ‘take the plane’ scene. Do you think N. Cage will be the guy who says Lets Roll!!?
As for Malkin, I continually ask myself why networks carry such Jerry Springer-like trash. There is never an intelligent point that comes out of these people’s heads. They make an ass of themselves and then get invited back on the show again next week. The same douchbags get invited back to all the crappy pundit shows over and over and over. People eat this crap up, I guess trash sells and it DID work for Mr. Springer.
Methinks DAN RATHER is correct. There is nothing but a divide and conquer technique being foisted on the American people. The trick is to just keep us all harping on each other while the Admin. works day and night to subvert the nation’s founding principles and whatever social progress that they deem to be too restrictive to allow them to foward the goals of power and consolidation of wealth.
All governments have signs of corruption, yet the Bush administration has been able to get away with more propaganda, outright lies, and misinformation than I’ve ever experienced. It’s as if the fear drummed into us after 9/11 created superpatriots. The pseudo-patriotism or nationalism is based not on pride..otherwise people WOULD actively question…., but rather it’s based on fear and nothing else (ex. terror color warnings and crap scrolling across the news stations which never disappeared after 9/11) Many are willfully ignorant and afraid to question the actions of their Government.
What everyone should understand is: THESE PEOPLE WORK FOR US AND NEED TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS
….or else we need a revolution of the French variety.
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:04 am#170: One thing we decided early on in this site is that it wasn’t going to be a venue to discuss 9/11 conspiracy theories. People make a reasonable point that, if that’s the rule, perhaps such theories shouldn’t be referenced in the main posts.
Count me among those we agree with this. I think it’s unfair to compare Michelle Malkin to 9/11 conspiracy theorists if we’re not allowed to discuss the merits of this comparison in detail.
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:19 am#170: Everyone is free then to decide if this is the kind of site they want to spend time on or not.
Of course. After some thought, I’ve decided not to spend any more time at this site. The main reason is posts such as this:
(#29): At some point, it’s necessary to discard discredited ideas and move on.
To allow the “discredited ideas” of so-called global warming skeptics day after day, but not those of 9/11 conspiracy theorists, suggests a shallowness of thought that I can no longer support.
Thanks for the memories.
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:39 amhaha, ”theorists” beat up TP. here’s my theory, TP tries to stay credible with the media big boys by steering clear of 9/11 because one day cnn might plug tp.org by name.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:03 am# 247. Paul:
Dude,these were not graphics!
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:28 amIt might have been a super-imposed airliner,and/or trick photography,but this was not a graphic.
Someone else had to see these images..(on t.v.).
223 Alponse: After thinking about it, and revisiting this thread, I’d have to agree, and say farewell to the ill-named ThinkProgress. It’s just sad that I read so many passionate posts by commenters here today, and it’s for nothing.
They don’t care, they don’t respond — I don’t get it, and never will.
August 3rd, 2006 at 6:40 amboc & alphonse (& others):
It’s not for nothing. The consensus shown by posters here on this issue illustrates that.
I, for one, refuse to be driven away. I will continue to try to be a positive, contributing member of this community. I’m not going to plug 9/11 Truth for no good reason, but if the topic is relevant, I will continue to post what I know, and provide links so other TP readers might learn something.
If Judd doesn’t like it, he’s free to delete my posts. Personally, I believe it’s one of the more pernicious forms of censorship, and against everything ThinkProgress purports to stand for, but in the final analysis, it is his barbecue.
If members of the 9/11 truth community only went where they were wanted, there wouldn’t be much of a movement. Preaching to the already converted is easy, but accomplishes little. True progress occurs when you manage to convince formerly ardent supporters of Bush (like my wife and her family, for example) that something really is rotten in Denmark.
So, I’m not going anywhere, and I sincerely hope you don’t either, boc, alphonse, and everyone else who’s considering leaving over this. Leaving now is a bit like boycotting the Republican Convention because you’re not allowed to demonstrate. Sometimes, a little civil disobedience is in order.
The only way I’ll stop posting here is if Judd bans me. If I’m suddenly conspicuous by my absence, you’ll know why.
August 3rd, 2006 at 7:03 amWow. Long thread.
August 3rd, 2006 at 7:04 amThat Malkin girl is really sick. Maybe the attack vs the UN post in Lebanon was bombed by UN´s troops.
And for the 9/11 discussion: I feel that whoever wrote the title knew 9/11 was going to be brought up. And, for the there is no evidence to support her claims that is insulting and scary coming from a Progressive site. I still dont know whats keeping you all guys afraid. What we want is the truth, just that.
By the way, boc, great link…thanks!
If you’re truly bent on leaving, please leave some way for us like-minded individuals to stay in touch!
Thanks!
August 3rd, 2006 at 7:10 amJudd
#170
“TP is a lot more tolerant about commenters than many other sites. Many sites won’t allow any comments that come from a different political perspective. We allow a lot, but it’s not a free-for-all.”
That has been my observation as well so far.
“I’m not trying to please everyone. I’m trying to run this site the best way I know how.”
Thank you, Sir. Your professional qualities would not be put in doubt by fair observer.
Also, thank you very much on following up with your post. That made this thread more alive (it’s easy to notice) and interesting.
Thanks again, hope to see you again on-line in these discussions.
August 3rd, 2006 at 8:23 amHA! Judd gets support from One Jew, of all people.
If that’s not an indictment, I don’t know what is.
August 3rd, 2006 at 8:29 amJust a thought… Is it perhaps possible that Judd realizes that the vast majority of the public will NOT believe a conspiracy until it is proven through an investigation, and that such an investigation will not happen until Dems are back in control of the government. Following that logic, is it not possible that he is steering clear of the issue so as not to alienate the average voter and thus hurt our chances of taking control of Congress in ‘06 and the presidency in ‘08. Some may say I am being elitist here, but I just don’t think the American public as a whole is capable of wrapping their mind around this issue. I have no faith in the general public’s intelligence (electing a moron as president twice will do that to you). Frankly, it would seem to me that it is in 9/11 conspiracy theorists best interests to leave this issue out of the mainstream until after Dems have regained control. Just a thought.
August 3rd, 2006 at 8:41 amI think we are seeing,on this and other sites,the consequences of a mindset that relegates any theory,no matter the validity,that doesn’t offer concrete proof,to the same ridiculed scrap heap as UFO or ghost sightings.
I, personally, have many doubts about the “official” 9-11 explanations,and have done much research on the subject.
Perhaps it will require a certain MSM reporting inertia on this important topic;with more and more expert testimony,the words of eyewitnesses,perhaps even a guilt-wracked government official’s admission,and other evidence,that will enable these theories to rise to the perceived level of “concrete proof”for many.
I do believe the truth will help to set us free.
August 3rd, 2006 at 9:37 amPost 241 kactionj > 9/11 has become a divisive issue on TP, but the distrust of the Bush Regime will never go away! My feeling is that if 9/11 occured exactly as our government claims, then they would want a 100% open investigation of it to back up their claims, but if they had something to hide, then a cover-up occurs, which has happened! Enough said about it!
The main focus has to be the impeachment, or forced resignation, of Bush and Cheney! I hope that dozens of GOP members are removed in elections come November, but I am aware that they tend to cheat a lot!
August 3rd, 2006 at 9:39 amSorry, kactionj, but that argument, eloquent though it may be, quite simply does not hold water. Issuing an unsubstantiated and unwarranted attack upon the proponents of 9/11 Truth is not ’steering clear of the issue’.
Some may say I am being elitist here, but I just don’t think the American public as a whole is capable of wrapping their mind around this issue.
Well, you are being elitist. Most Americans are perfectly capable of seeing the glaring inconsistencies in the administration’s ‘official version of events’. Most Americans recover nicely once you manage to purge their minds of the poison disseminated by Fox News on a daily basis.
I have no faith in the general public’s intelligence (electing a moron as president twice will do that to you).
Do some research. Bush didn’t ‘win’ either of those ‘elections’.
While 9/11 conspirascy theorists may disagree on the details of what actually happened on 9/11, they are unanimous in one thing: the ‘conspiracy theory’ handed to us by our government as the ‘official version of events’ is provably false. This alone is sufficient reason for this issue to remain in the mainstream.
Judd maintains that TP is ‘above the fray’ when it comes to 9/11 discussion, but his poisonous remark equating 9/11 truth seekers to government shills like Michelle Malkin belies that assertion. It was, in a word, inexcusable.
August 3rd, 2006 at 9:41 amTripMaster Monkey,
I’m willing to concede that if TP wants to steer clear of the issue, it should nopt make references to it at all. Judd admitted as much. You would like Judd to apologize for the comparison, and, for for whatever reason, Judd sees no need to follow that acknowledgment with an apology. You’ll get no argument from me on that point.
As for whether Bush really “won”. Certainly he did not win in any fashion the first time, but it should not have been close enough to steal. As for the second time, Bush may indeed have lost Ohio but for voter fraud, but he won the popular vote by over 3 million. I think its likely that Republicans might have rigged the election to the tune of up to several hundred thousand votes, but 3 million? If the public was intelligent enough to grasp this issue, Republicans would not have been able to steal the 2004 election through any means. As it is, there is a strong case that whatever happenned, it is highly likely that more Americans voted for Bush than voted against him. I do not see that as a sign of intelligence on the general public’s part. Sorry, we may just have to agree to disagree here.
Making 9/11 conspiracy theories part of the general debate right now will serve to alienate moderate voters. This is especially true in many of the areas where Democrat’s have a chance to pick up seats in Congress. I realize that almost all the crimes of this presidency stem from 9/11, but that debate is not going to win the Dem’s control of Congress without a complete, impartial investigation that the Dem’s will not get until after they are in control. This is not a chicken or egg conundrum. The Dem’s simply must have control of Congress before this issue can effectively be raised.
PS. I am heading out of town, so if I don’t repond to further posts, it is not that I am ignoring the debate, ducking the debate, or anything else like that. Just won’t have internet access. Have a good weekend.
August 3rd, 2006 at 10:02 amI’m willing to concede that if TP wants to steer clear of the issue, it should nopt make references to it at all. Judd admitted as much.
Certainly, he admitted it, but the poisonous remark is still up there at the top of this page for all to see. Judd admitting that it was wrong but not apologizing or correcting the statement is analogous to a mugger admitting that theft is wrong, but failing to apologize or return your wallet. Scant comfort.
Judd’s ‘admission’ is buried in the depths of this discussion (currently post #170, number may change as post deletions continue), while the offending statement is still in the headline, easily visible from the front page of ThinkProgress. If Judd really thought it was wrong, he would have edited it by now (as he has other misleading or incorrect stories). The fact that it still remains, unedited, in all its venomous glory, is testimony to Judd’s anti-9/11 Truth agenda.
Making 9/11 conspiracy theories part of the general debate right now will serve to alienate moderate voters.
As I said earlier, the alternate theories don’t have to be part of the general debate…only the inescapable fact that the ‘official’ theory is demonstrably and intentionally false.
Have a good weekend.
August 3rd, 2006 at 10:20 amReply to dff:
Well spoken, dff…please read this post before you go…we need all the help we can get here.
August 3rd, 2006 at 10:22 amIs it possible that the RW is trying to set up these tactics as “their” tactics, so if hard evidence comes out that 9-11 had some of the same elements, they can point to Qana as evidence that “they” use those tactics, not “us”?
Just a witchy thought.
August 3rd, 2006 at 10:25 amGood point, Witch, much like when they compared Al Gore’s claims about global warming to Goebbels’ “big lie” strategy.
Of course, anyone with two neurons to rub together will know that the neocons have been using Goebbels’ tactics as their own personal playbook, but throwing the accusation onto others tends to dilute its impact, whic is precisely the point.
The neocons could indeed be trying the same play here, especially in light of the recent upsurge of public awareness of the 9/11 shenanigans.
August 3rd, 2006 at 10:34 amWow, this is really weird, I’d say. I posted two 9/11 sites last night – both run by professors, scientists, physisists (sp), etc…. and they were both deleted. WTF?
August 3rd, 2006 at 10:50 amkactionj is absolutely right.
1. You can try to pursue this issue with Dems in charge or you can try to pursue this issue with the Republicans in charge. This should be an easy choice – particularly to those of you who believe that the Republicans are the culprits.
2. This is not going to get resolved before November of 2006 anyway, so you can really lighten up on this for a bit.
3. Many of us on this site are very intense with our internet / political / anti-conservative research.
A lot of people ( i.e., moderate voters ) are not as deeply immersed in this as you are. Even if you are right about this, you must concede that you will have to make your case incrementally. Which means it is going to take awhile under any circumstances. So chill out on the “this must be discussed NOW or I’m leaving” stuff.
4. Just looking at the front page of the site: TP has:
a) Forced the odious Washington Times to apologize for printing what they wanted Dingell to say instead of printing what he actually did say.
b) Helped to expose the heavy-handed tactics of Focus of the Family. Religion should be out of government – but FOTF’s tactics to co-opt politicians and other people of influence ( Supreme Court Judges – for example ) – turn that on its head.
Lucky for women who want to vaccinate themselves from the HPV virus that FOTF did not interfere. But FOTF was thinking about it before they ultimately decided to “bless” the vaccination. What if they didn’t “bless” it? Who are they to tell a woman who wants nothing to do with their organization or beliefs that she cannot have this vaccination?
c) They are already setting the stage to highlight the incompetency of Rumsfeld. Easy batting practice at this point – but it still needs to be done. Repeatedly
There is a lot more going on right under all of our noses besides the 9/11″truth” – whatever that turns out to be.
So for all of you in the ” I gotta leave TP over this ” camp – when you finally get your chance to speak to the Washington Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, Time Magazine, etc. about your version of the 9/11 “truth” – and that organization misrepresents your argument or does a “cut and paste” hit job on you like they did Dingell – who is going to stick up for you?
Red State.com ???
August 3rd, 2006 at 10:59 ammadashell sez:
I posted two 9/11 sites last night – both run by professors, scientists, physisists (sp), etc…. and they were both deleted. WTF?
As if any more proof was required that Judd has an agressive anti-9/11 Truth agenda…
madashell, could you please post those links again…I’d like to see them. With any luck, I’ll read your post before the Ministry of Truth removes it again.
August 3rd, 2006 at 10:59 amHere you go TripMaster: Scholars for 9/11 Truth; http://www.physics911.net/
and this from Buzzflash – The Bush Administration is a threat to our national security in and of itself. You need look no further than 9/11.
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:04 amAnd one more thing, and then I will go away. SIBEL EDMONDS – Interpreter, was on the job that fateful day. She has things to SAY – BUT HAS BEEN GAGGED BY THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT. Anyone who has SAID ANYTHING have literally put their lives on the line.
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:10 amsorry, I lied – one more:
Conspiracy and Closed Minds on 9/11
by Morgan Reynolds
March, 2006
While more Americans doubt the 9/11 story every week, evidence abounds that many have a mental block against rational examination of the evidence about 9/11. The possibility that it was an inside job is a non-starter for them. Programmed “cut outs†insure that 9/11 doubts are consigned to the “conspiracy†closet.
Last June I was explaining the fuss over my 9/11 article to a family member who shall remain anonymous and he interrupted and said, “I don’t want to talk about it.†Millions join him in that sentiment. By implication they might as well say: “I’d rather cling to the official 9/11 myth†= “If mass murderers run free, I’m fine with that†= “If 9/11 was an inside job, then I’m ruled by monsters and I might have to do something about it, I’d rather watch Paris Hilton.â€
Where does this passive attitude come from? Causes are many but American indoctrination has two sides that figure prominently in the explanation:
Belief in “American Exceptionalismâ€
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:14 amDisbelief in conspiracy
9/11 ‘Conspiracy Theorists’ have ‘no evidence’ of an inside job, eh?
And here I thought all this time Think Progress was a well-researched, intelligent blog, and now I’m being lumped in with the likes of Michelle Malkin simply because I question the veracity of the government’s Official 9-11 conspiracy theory?
I am completely offended by that suggestion.
Especially because Malkin is attempting to apologise for Israel’s massacre in Qana and the 9-11 Truth movement is attempting to uncover what really happened that day. This is apples and oranges at best.
It’s pretty clear that Think Progress has not done its homework at all on 9-11 if it is willing to post tripe like this.
I especially like the way the article isn’t attributed to a specific writer, either, but left to the generic Think Progress moniker. This shows that the writer certainly has the courage of his/her convictions.
Why is Think Progress deleting 9-11 posts in this thread?
Just what the hell is going on with this site?
I used to have a very high opinion of it, but know I may have to reassess…
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:14 amJack – my sentiments exactly!
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:16 amTriumph sez:
kactionj is absolutely right.
You’re missing the point, Triumph…exactly as kactionj missed it earlier (no wonder you think he’s ‘absolutely right’).
Two things:
1) The major grievance here is not that Judd forbids 9/11 ‘conspiracy theory’ discussions…it is that Judd abused his position to issue a poisonously derogatory statement against those same 9/11 ‘conspiracy theorists’, and then denied them the opportunity to defend themselves by deleting their responses.
2) The actual ‘conspiracy theories’ needn’t be focused on at all at this time…all that needs to be addressed is that the ‘conspiracy theory’ espoused by our administration is demonstrably and intentionally false.
4. Just looking at the front page of the site: TP has: [blah blah blah]
So that excuses Judd’s behavior? Is that the point you are honestly attempting to make?
Overall, Judd runs a great site, and I enjoy coming here and sharing my views. But the moratorium on 9/11 Truth discussion is just plain wrong. Yes, it is his choice to make, but that doesn’t affect the rightness or wrongness of the act. Executing childish attacks on proponents of 9/11 truth, while hiding behind said moratorium to avoid discussion of your attack, is far past wrong…it is reprehensible.
Forced the odious Washington Times to apologize for printing what they wanted Dingell to say instead of printing what he actually did say.
Hey, that’s great…but Judd’s slanderous statement against the 9/11 Truth movement still graces the front page of TP. Crowing about forcing an apology and correction out of another publication for printing libelous statements, while steadfastly refusiing to correct and apologize for your own libelous writings, is the very definition of hypocrisy.
when you finally get your chance to speak to the Washington Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, Time Magazine, etc. about your version of the 9/11 “truth†– and that organization misrepresents your argument or does a “cut and paste†hit job on you like they did Dingell – who is going to stick up for you?
It should be clear to all by by now that TP won’t be ’sticking up for us’…they’re far too busy sticking it to us.
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:21 amSkepticism about conspiracy, small or large, is somewhat beside the point in the case of 9/11 because the official Osama-and-Nineteen-Young-Arabs (ONYA) conspiracy tale is so farcical and impossible. Nearly everyone in America has easy access to the internet and hundreds of websites expose the 9/11 fraud. The analysis is out there and in a few dozen books, although the mainstream media ignores it all. Only government could have pulled off a psy-op this big, not a rag-tag band of Arab incompetents with no visible means of support repeatedly running afoul of law enforcement in the field. All the other intelligence services and governments know the real story about who did 9/11. It is like an elephant in the living room, studiously ignored by insiders who keep quiet about it. After thorough exposure via the Downing Street memo and other irrefutable evidence about the Bush-Cheney lies to justify invading Iraq, it takes a lot to remain ignorant about 9/11. It is not about a conspiracy too large to work. Ignorance increasingly has to be willful.
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:21 ammadashell and trip:
Excellent posts. But, as you were told yesterday, the thread was severely edited by the Truth Police.
This post will be gone soon, so I hope you both get to read it. Congratulations on not accepting the official party-line of the self-serving Judd, who someone referred to as ‘all hat and no cowboy’ and ‘Georgetown Lite’. He is more concerned over the perception the media has of him personally, than the higher goal of having the truth discussed by those of us who come here to discuss/debate the events of the day with an authentic ‘Progressive’ spirit.
So, Mad, Trip, and people like Dan Rather, and others above: Beware of being banned by the Truth Police, but, I hope you never quit fighting.
**
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:25 amOperation Northwoods plan (now public under the FOIA) called for airliners to be crashed into public buildings to provide an excuse for the invasion of Cuba.
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:32 amanon,
As I have said earlier, while I won’t use this site as a soapbox to yammer on about 9/11 Truth in an offtopic manner, I will discuss it if the topic in question turns to it, moratoriums be damned.
If Judd doesn’t like it, he can delete my posts (as he’s done before). I sure as hell am not going to censor myself on this topic.
(interesting aside…Judd claims he will not tolerate 9/11 discussion, but what actually gets deleted far more often than anything else are links to sites with information regarding 9/11. Seems that Judd’s only worried about 9/11 discussion if it’s substantiated…but I digress…)
And, if Judd doesn’t like me, he can ban me. I acknowledge that this is his sandbox, and he has that power. However, I won’t be cowed into submission by the threat of banning. There are plenty of other sandboxes out there, Judd.
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:34 amTRIP
Well, there is life after banishment, but, it is harder to get through, needless to say.
Just know that this site has an agenda and is packed with John Podesta-former Clintonistas, for one; and, know that they do get money from special-interests, and that they are beholding to and are more fearful of the special interests than they are of supporting a true progressive agenda. This has been proven by me in their mishandling of the Lebanon coverage that was non-existent for at least ten days, and, yesterday, when the Truth Police made the announcements about what IS and IS NOT allowed to be spoken of–regardless of the truth.
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:52 amYou opened up a pandora’s box with your careless statement “Malkin has another thing in common with 9/11 conspiracy theorists: there is no evidence to support her claims.” Even if I had emerged from a time capsule yesterday, I would be suspicious of the Official 9/11 story. Vanity Fair has an article on the tapes from NORAD on 9/11. Now that the information has been disseminated, members of the 9/11 commission say that they were mislead, if not lied to, by military officals about the events of that day. You might call that “evidence” that things were not as we were told. And if the truth was something else, then multiple people would have had to agree to tell a different story and many more would have had to agree not to correct the record. Another word for this is “conspiracy.” It’s in the dictionary.
Please correct your above-quoted statement.
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:53 amJohnny,
Yes, I pointed that out to the Truth Police about sixteen hours ago… :)
#
it is terribly ironic that this post appeared within fifteen minutes or so of the mention on the other thread of today’s washington post article regarding the suspicions of members within the 9.11 commission and the LIES they were told by NORAD…
it seems that the attitude of the dailykosines and the other ‘anti-conspiracy-theory-because-we-want-to-get-on-msnbc-more-often-and-sell-more-books’ crowd is perhaps finding that their perceived elitism is just a facade!
Comment by the band — August 2, 2006 @ 7:12 pm
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:57 amI’ll just say this about 9/11 theories.
I think people need to give it a rest on the implausible stuff, like:
Penatgon was hit by a cruise missle.
The planes were remote controlled.
The illuminati and the Bilderberg group planned it.
They need to get with the plausible stuff, like:
Someone planned the multiple simulations and war games to confuse NORAD and FAA.
Someone called in orders to stand down for over an hour.
When people hear “illuminati” and “planes are tv fakery” they dont’ want to hear anymore.
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:24 pmIt only hurts efforts to find out the truth.
What else would you expect from this vile, shrieking banshee?
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:25 pmBlomi – all it takes is watching the tape the Pentagon released – I watched it over a dozen times and I SEE NO PLANE!
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:28 pm#260-
My problem with 9/11 theories is they go too far.
I think 19 Arabs did hijack planes believing they were fighting for Islam and all that.
It’s about who supported them and trained them and then who let them carry out the attacks.
Someone fooled them, funded them, trained them, and then fooled our air defenses with simulations and wargames while they carried out the mission.
That’s my theory, and it’s extremely plausible.
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:32 pmI also see no cruise missile.
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:34 pm271 – NEITHER DO I – but MOST IMPORTANTLY – I SEE NO PLANE!
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:38 pmMichelle Malkin is now officially the West Coast version of Ann Coulter!
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:47 pm“Malkin has another thing in common with 9/11 conspiracy theorists: there is no evidence to support her claims.â€
That sentence makes me want to tell the administrators of this site to piss off. The arrogance within that statement is no better than the TRASH that comes out of Malkin.
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:47 pmThe plot by America’s military bosses was devilish in both design and intent – to fabricate an outrage against innocent civilians, fool the world and provide a pretext for war. In the pentagon, a top secret team drew up a plan to simultaneously send up two airliners painted and numbered exactly the same, one from a civil airport in America, the other from a secret military airbase nearby.
The one from the airport would have military personnel on board who had checked in as ordinary passengers under false names. The one from the airbase would be an empty drone, a remote-controlled unmanned aircraft.
Somewhere along their joint flight paths, the passenger-carrying plane would drop below radar height, and disappear, landing back at the airbase and unloading its occupants in secret.
Meanwhile, the drone would have taken up the other plane’s designated course. High over the island of Cuba, it would be exploded in mid-air after broadcasting an international distress call that it was under attack from enemy fighters.
The world would be told that a plane load of blameless American holidaymakers had been deliberately shot down by Fidel Castro’s Communists – and that the US had no choice but to declare war and topple his regime.
This ‘agent provocateur’ plan – code named OPERATION NORTHWOODS and revealed in official archives – dates from 1962 when the Cold War was at its height.
Four decades later, there are a growing number of people who look back at this proto-conspiracy and then to the events of 9/11 and see uncanny and frightening modern parallels.
For Cuba, read Iraq, say these skeptics. For the dummy airliner, read the Twin Towers in New York.
OPERATION NORTHWOODS – That plan was proposed in all seriousness by America’s Joint Chiefs of Staff in a memo to the Secretary of Defence. It got as far as the Attorney General – Robert Kennedy, brother of the president, John Kennedy, before being vetoed.
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:49 pmBlomi, you need to do more research. To take just one example, it is not is not possible for Hani Hanjour to have piloted whatever crashed into the Pentagon, for two good reasons:
1) Hani Hanjour was a mediocre pilot at best and flat-out incompetent at worst. The manuveurs that Flight 77 allegedly performed are beyond the skill of all but the most talented pilots.
2) The manuvers Flight 77 allegedly performed are not possible due to the software safety features present in modern airliners. These safety features limit manuvers to approximately 1.6 Gs, and are there to prevent a pilot from making a mistake and pulling a high-G manuver that could injure a passenger. The pilot cannot override this feature. However, the safety feature is automatically overridden if the airliner is flown by remote control (a standard feature of Boeing 757s and 767s). Hani allegedly pulled between five and seven Gs in his final turn. See the problem?
Again, you need to do more research.
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:49 pm272 – We don’t see much of anything, so we can’t go making claims about what it was, because if you go claiming it was a cruise missle, and then video is released showing a plane, that would discredit the entire ‘movement’ in a lot of people’s minds.
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:50 pmLook Blomi – I never claimed it was a cruise missle – I DON’T KNOW what hit the Pentagon, but IT CERTAINLY WAS NO JETLINER!
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:52 pmBlomi – also – did you know the authorities took control of any video tapes taken that day that had the Pentagon in view? THEY DID!
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:54 pm276 – BELIEVE me, I’ve heard it ALL.
Maybe this can be proven later, but stick to the NORAD FAA stuff FIRST.
Clamor for the videos from the gas station and the hotel facing the pentagon.
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:55 pmDemand truth and evidence from the government, but try to limit claims about what is and is not possible.
Hey – has anyone here seen V for Vendetta yet?
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:55 pm279 – I know I know. I was writing before I even saw your post.
I’ve seen it ALL.
I’m saying that most people’s strategy is all wrong.
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:56 pmDemand truth and evidence for the official story (they can’t provide it). Don’t make speculative claims.
what is possible? USA TURNING INTO A FASCIST STATE!
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:57 pm278- YOU DON”T KNOW THAT. It could have been. The stills from the security camera are worthless. The view of whatever it was is blocked and it’s a blurry fisheye lens.
Please, I beg of all ‘9/11 truthers’ Stop claiming it wasn’t a plane, because if it was, it discredits everything else in most people’s eyes.
Demand the other videos. When they aren’t given up, that’s damning.
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:59 pm#277
Blomi -
If they had a video of a plane crashing into the Pentagon, we would seen it as much as the footage of the towers.
The fact they have not shown ANY video with a clear shot of a plane says that they do not have one.
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:00 pmCommercial airlines do u-turns off their projected flight path all the time. The FAA never pays any attention to the planes that criss-cross our airways all day long. The planes aren’t tracked, nobody ever communicates with them, there is no such thing as black boxes and flight recorders, NORAD doesn’t respond to hijacked planes, the Government never knows what’s going on especially when planes are headed for DC and NYC, and presidents shouldn’t have to do anything more than read MY PET GOAT during a national emergency. Before 9/11 we had never even contimplated the idea of national security and now everything is different.
Now that’s a conspiracy theory!
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:01 pm“This age: layers of lime harden in the sick son’s blood? There’s nowhere to run from the tyrant-epoch? Who else will you kill? Who else glorify? What other lies will you invent?”
–Osip Mandelshtam, “1 January 1924″
This column stands foursquare with the Honorable Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, when he warns that there will be more terrorist attacks against the American people and civilization at large. We know, as does the Honorable Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, that this statement is an incontrovertible fact, a matter of scientific certainty. And how can we and the Honorable Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, be so sure that there will be more terrorist attacks against the American people and civilization at large?
Into the Dark: The Pentagon Plan to Foment Terrorism
From the Moscow Times, Nov. 1, 2002
This piece was chosen as number 4 in
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:02 pmProject Censored’s “Top Censored Stories of 2002.”
Jack Frost. Yes, that’s right. So hammer them for that. They can’t prove their story.
BUT, what if the ‘9/11 truth’ movement became extremely mainstream? Then real people in power would start asking all the right questions. A video of a plane hitting the pentagon surfaces.
Then what?
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:02 pmThe fact is that it has been FIVE YEARS since 9/11/2001. WHEN, then Blomi, when?
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:05 pmmadashell,
when people start demanding answers instead of making specualtive claims
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:07 pmYeah right – WITH OUR MSM? You have GOT TO BE KIDDING!
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:13 pmThere is genuine transgression here, a stepping-over — deliberately, with open eyes, with forethought, planning, and conscious will — of lines that should never be crossed. Acting in deadly symbiosis with their supposed enemies, the terrorist mafias, Bush and his cohorts are plunging the world into an abyss, an endless night of black ops, retribution, blowback, deceit, of murder and terror — wholesale, retail, state-sponsored, privatized; of fear and degradation, servility, chaos: the perversion of all that’s best in us, of all that we’ve won from the bestiality of our primal nature, all that we’ve raised above the mindless ravening urges and impulses still boiling in the mud of our monkey brains.
It’s not a fight for freedom; it’s a retreat into darkness.
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:16 pmPretty soon after the events of 9/11, there where people who raised serious questions about the official story of 9/11. Now, four and a half years later, the evidence that this story is a lie, is overwhelming. Question is, what are we going to do about it? Are we going to sit and leave it for what it is, allowing the perpetrators to continue their illegal operations? Where do you think that would lead to? What will happen with our democracy if we allow these practices? And maybe the biggest question that we might ask ourselves is: “Why is it that we still allow criminals to lead our country and more and more determine our lifes?†People of this world, please think about what you allow this world to become if you allow the present course of actions taken by leaders who seek nothing else but power and control over others and eventually total world domination!
Some may still think that the official story is true, because they simply cannot believe that our leaders would be capable of doing such terrible crimes against their people. Well, if you are one of those who live in such emotional fields that you simply cannot bear the truth that your leaders would be capable of doing these things despite the scientific evidence that they are, then please don’t read this any further, for you wouldn’t accept any of this anyway. Emotions can and do shut down one’s ability to think clearly and to examine the facts with a clear mind. Our leaders and indeed our corporate networks know this and use it to their advantage to gain control over you. Look what has happened since 9/11, the Patriot Act, the Department of Homeland Security, Afghanistan, Iraq, the American government spying on its own people, and even the Constitution being questioned! Are you really prepared to give up your freedom in order to be protected from so called “terrorism� Is our country really any safer than it was before 9/11? Face it people, YOU HAVE BEEN LIED TO BY YOUR OWN GOVERNMENT.
Scientific Evidence that Official 9/11 Story is a Lie
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:23 pmLookie lookie:
http://www.rba.gov.au/MediaReleases/2006/mr_06_05.html
That crazy neo-con den Human Rights Watch funded by insane right winger George Soros disagrees with the “official” Lebanese body count at Qana.
Isnt it nice that the Lebanese government is too weak to control its own territory but is always on hand to give inflated body counts to sleepy reporters at the BBC, AP, reuters?
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:24 pmthen there’s this: EPA Misled Public on 9/11 Pollution
August 3rd, 2006 at 2:09 pmWhite House ordered false assurances on air quality, report says
Who is this Zooey fool that thinks this is MySpace?! Troll antics like that should not be tolerated. I am done with Think Regress, but I did catch a nugget worth exploring…
Bluedog49 raises a fascinating point about the option activity, and it almost seems as though it mirrors what would occur in an insider trading situation, depending on the origin of the insider information on which the trades were made. Any way to prompt an SEC investigation? The names of the parties involved and the details of the trades/activity could be truly essential information for a lawsuit to get to the bottom of the Lies of 9-11!??!
Go Team Go!!
Styve
August 3rd, 2006 at 2:56 pmWho is this Zooey fool that thinks this is MySpace?! Troll antics like that should not be tolerated.
styve, z is no fool and has not even been here today, from what i can tell. and, as for the myspace slap, i don’t know what you could mean… and, z is not a troll, but, you, perhaps, not so much doubt on my part.
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:02 pmIn keeping with the Washington Times correction policy – TP needs to adjust the number of dead civilians at Qana – conservatives realize the bigger the number of dead civilians, the greater the outrage among Progs – and what would be the point of correcting the numbers posted by Human Rights Watch??? Honesty…..nah???
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:27 pm#295 – “Why were there 200 to 4000 times the normal option calls on United and American during the 2 weeks leading up to the attack while there was normal option activity on all other airlines? ” Comment by Bluedog49
******I’m sure BluePuP the options calls had NOTHING to do with pending and ongoing labor negotiations for both airlines!!! THAT isn’t nearly as fun and nefarious to ponder….
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:32 pm#288
Blomi -
If they produce a video clearly showing a plane after 5 years of refusing to do so, I will be suspect of the video they eventually release, no matter what it shows.
It’s long, long past the time where these criminals can be afforded the benefit of any doubt.
Isn’t it also time we stopped the pattern of asserting that the Bush Administration has been wrong and/or lying about everything before and after 9-11, but are correct as far as their story about everything regarding that fateful day?
Because to me, that’s the very definition of denial.
And all denial does is stave off the day on which you’ll have to admit the truth to yourself.
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:41 pmhint of reality
:-)
Sweet.
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:42 pmI’m sure BluePuP the options calls had NOTHING to do with pending and ongoing labor negotiations for both airlines!!! THAT isn’t nearly as fun and nefarious to ponder….
Comment by mighty aphrodite
Now that is interesting…
Know of a way to check the put options during the times of all previous and current labor negotiations to see if that always happens? It is not like labor negotiations are uncommon… so there should be plenty of evidence of what normally happens to the stock during labor negotiations…
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:46 pmI just saw several off topic personal type notes, and it looked like the thread had taken a nose-dive. Sorry Zooey!!
Styve
August 3rd, 2006 at 5:14 pm#115
“NONE”
You aren’t a structural engineer or an architect are you? The impact of the jets into the WTC towers blew off much of the fireproofing on the columns and beams AND the bolts that made the moment connections therefore exposing them to the heat from the fire which caused them to weaken and cause the subsequent collapse. They don’t have to come close to melting for the steel to fail from dead loads.
“Does Not Make Sense…… ”
…to someone who isn’t a structural engineer or architect.
August 3rd, 2006 at 6:29 pm#125
“I have been around when there were “engineers†posting on this site about the purported topic, and of course, they all felt it appeared to be a controlled demolition.”
I doubt they were structural engineers. There hasn’t been ONE structural engineering firm in the U.S. to offer the “controlled demolition” theory as a cause of the collapse.
August 3rd, 2006 at 6:48 pm#141
Scientific evidence by an engineer(s) base on structrual engineering practices….not evidence based on someone’s intuition or gut feeling.
August 3rd, 2006 at 6:52 pmReply to Tracy:
Sorry, Tracy, but that explanation doesn’t wash.
– The WTC towers were specifically constructed to be able to withstand impacts from jet airliners.
– Even with the insulation removed, the fire from the burning jet fuel (which is nothing more exotic than kerosene), which was estimated at around 500 degrees Fahrenheit, could not have appreciably weakened ASTM E119 certified steel, which is rated to withstand temperatures around 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit for several hours. The fire most certainly could not have weakened the steel enough in the brief interval between impact and collapse.
– If a fire-induced collapse did happen, it would have been asymmetrical, leading to the buildings, or parts therof, collapsing to one side. This is not what was witnessed on 9/11. Rather, the towers collapsed straight down, necessitating a complete, catastrophic, and simultaneous failure of all load-bearing supports, which a randomly burning fire is incapable of producing.
– The towers collapsed at a speed only marginally slower that that of an object falling completely unsupported in a vacuum. The only way this is possible is if all the load bearing members failed just before the falling top stories reached them, removing their resistance to the collapse.
– With very few exceptions, all the steel in the towers was sheared into 30-foot lengths. Steel used in construction of steel-framed buildings does not shatter under extreme stress, it bends.
– All the concrete comprising the towers was pulverized into sub-100 micron particles (extremely fine dust). The kinetic energy of the building collapse is insufficient to explain this.
– and one more reason to doubt the ‘official version of events’: WTC 7 was not struck by an airliner…yet it to collapsed suddenly and completely, falling neatly into its own footprint, only a few hours after fire broke out in the structure. WTC 7 is only the third steel-framed building in history to ever (allegedly) collapse as a result of fire (the first two being WTC 1 and WTC 2).
Do some research, Tracy…you’ll be surprised.
August 3rd, 2006 at 7:30 pmDear Gerald – How sweet and thoughtful to come to BluePuPs’ rescue – he/she needs it. What did your options research disclose???
August 3rd, 2006 at 8:47 pmSorry Zooey!!
Styve
Accepted. The thread had taken a nose dive long before I showed up. (There are a bunch of deleted comments inbetween that mess) :)
August 3rd, 2006 at 8:50 pmI agree with Judd. Steel does not need to melt to fail. I’m actually getting tired of having to point that out over and over. Am not sure why it’s so difficult to understand.
Here’s NOVA’s take on this: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/index.html
August 3rd, 2006 at 9:40 pmBuilding 7 probably fell from seismic stresses. When two planes hit two buildings which then collapse, it creates earthquake-quality seismic stresses on its neighbors.
August 3rd, 2006 at 9:43 pmun-b,
August 3rd, 2006 at 10:21 pmthat’s all well and good (#312), but until the government actually addresses that aspect, it’s open for debate, wouldn’t you agree? also open to debate is why the government hasn’t addressed that topic.
Ban TP (Think Progress)
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:16 pmIgnore TP (Total Propaganda)
Use TP (Toilet Paper)
PEOPLE: Look into Marvin Bush, George Bush younger brother, head of Securacom, installing the security system in the World Trade Center who was ALSO responsible for security at Dulles Airport (do the math) … pulled the plug on security sysytems of the WTC after hours on Friday September 7th for a “routine” check??? Fast forward to Tuesday, September 11, 2001… There you have it!!! MY GOD!!!
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:55 pmHow much more can be suppressed? This was an inside job. Period.
#275, Madashell,
Bulls Eye!!!… What happened to RFK?…. and while we are on the subject…. JFK?
Just wondering…
I am mad as hell and can’t take this anymore… Please!!!
August 4th, 2006 at 12:14 amcheck it out
http://belowgroundsurface.org/
copy now, or hit “save as” NOW
August 4th, 2006 at 12:31 amFrom the archives of Center for American Progress
http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=124722
August 4th, 2006 at 12:51 amthat’s very interesting boc. a good reference.
August 4th, 2006 at 2:18 amboc,
while i don’t necessarily ascribe to unbelievable’s point of view, in general we are only hurting ourselves by arguing with those that don’t believe the deep, dark truth that we do. and i do have respect for unbelievable as a conscientious commenter here.
i prefer to focus on the fact that we still don’t have a complete, coherent investigative picture of what happened, and in fact, as your post above proves, the administration has so far done everything in its power to prevent that investigation from happening.
if we can finally get people behind a real, thorough, independent investigation, the particulars will sort themselves out.
August 4th, 2006 at 2:24 amI asked this tonight on C&L and I’d like the ones still posting to answer this for Judd…
To C&L:
Hey guys where’s your daily Jack Cafferty from CNN clip?
Was it because Jack noted that there was a deliberate cover-up about 9/11 from the Pentagon for over two years?
http://www.canofun.com/cof/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=17765&mid=104438#M104438
Since ThinkProgress decided to lump 9/11 conspiracy theorists with the likes of Michelle Malkin, I have a new conspiracy theory: “Liberal/Progressive” Blogs like Crooksandliars and ThinkProgress who will go as far as to censor comments from their own readers about 9/11 by deleting them from their website, have some kind of secret deal with the government and in my opinion are nothing more than a front group for the NSA to find out exactly what we think and say, who we are, and how to find us when martial law is declared.
August 4th, 2006 at 2:43 amOK, PRex, you make sense. Peace, brother Judd. Keep up the good work.
But the deed is done, isn’t it? Published, argued about, yet not retracted or adequately addressed.
And the world goes on.
But in making your point, that “we” need to stick together in order to let the stuff that flies off the fan just land where it may, and to trust that it’ll sort out, you tend to help me make my point. Why are we talking here?
I was not on the hunt for a fight in the parking lot at TP. As usual, I landed here to get trusted information, in this case to read yet another winger story about Malkin the Malevil. Then what the…!? It was unexpected and it was so so wrong. You know the rest of the story.
The bigger picture is: when my source of trusted information is lumping me in with Malkin, I got questions a-bubblin’. Too bad this is just a commercial site posing as a leader. For all of its existence, I’ve read TP. I signed up for the newsletter early on. John Podesta? Sure!
But it’s just a website. People have their own motivations, they run the place; been there, done that, got the t-shirt.
And they still haven’t addressed the post by Judd.
So I clicked around the site. Not much to find regarding the 9/11 Omissions Report. Lots of old stuff, some of it good, which I linked to. So why the blackout on 9/11 doubts? Judd says TP isn’t one of those sites. OK, but that carries some weight in the words. What are “those sites”? They are beacons for people filled with rage about the condition of this country. Sure, some are inarticulate, some are incapable of correct spelling and tend toward bombast.
There is so much space between the poles! Cover it or don’t, do as you like (I would say to TP) but for God’s sakes don’t insult the over 50% of Americans who don’t think the government is truthful. It must be 75% of liberal blog readers, as a guess.
This will pass, like fast food. It’s there, it’s bad, it’s gone. From now on I’ll be checking to understand where a progressive blog stands on the issue before trusting any of them.
OT… do you remember MediaWhoresOnline? The original, the best, the awesome MWO. Some say it might have been Duncan Black, Atrios. I dunno, but MWO saved my sanity in the months after Bush got selected, and after 9/11.
I’m not going to rag these people anymore, it’s a dead-end. But I will be surprised if they ever come clean on the reasoning behind Judd’s editorial comment in the original post.
Have a good one.
August 4th, 2006 at 3:03 amJP, it’s a good question but John Amato had a guest blogger the last couple days, running his own site as well. I’ll cut them some slack for that reason.
What I’d do is watch for a bit, and when one sees a blackout on certain topics, go for it. Flush ‘em out, as our tinhat prez does.
Just don’t shoot anyone in the face. :-)
August 4th, 2006 at 3:11 amEyewitness reports from firefighters and police was finally released at the end of last year under the Freedom of Information Act.
They talked about hearing the pop-pop-pop of controlled demolition below the areas where the planes struck.
Jamie McIntyre,reporter for CNN,arrived at the Pentagon 45 minutes after the incident.
August 4th, 2006 at 9:56 amHe said there was not a trace of a plane to be found…and there was an undamaged open book on a stool a few feet from the hole.
Unbelievable – you keep posting that same link. Have you even linked to the ones that have been posted – of the scientists and academics????
August 4th, 2006 at 1:41 pmthat’s all well and good (#312), but until the government actually addresses that aspect, it’s open for debate, wouldn’t you agree? also open to debate is why the government hasn’t addressed that topic.
Comment by progressaurus rex — August 3, 2006 @ 10:21 pm
I do believe the government is an accomplice to 911. I agree with what Spudge said at the open of the thread, that they looked the other way on their watch when they knew Osama was going to attack.
However, I do believe Osama did this. And I do know, as someone who has degrees on the subject and practiced for 14 years before teaching Science last year and Architecture this year, that the buildings were 100% capable of collapsing from those planes hitting them.
You know that I think people have been too quick to jump on the “Inside Job” theory without questioning it.
Too many people who support it say that no building ever collapsed from fire alone – omitting the fact that this wasn’t just a fire. Or just a plane crash. It was both of those things plus a building that was of unique design. A building where it’s facade was a large component of its structural system – and once compromised allowed the top portions to become severed from the rest of the building – which acted like pile drivers. No building is designed to withstand all of that.
People also say that it must have been an inside job because the building fell upon itself. Well, it was 208′ in length on both sides. It would have to be tipped 104′ in any direction to fall over. There is no force that exists that can push a 208′ square mass over. It’s why buildings never fall over. They are too big.
People say that it wasn’t hot enough. But it was hot enough because the entire floor system was on fire simultaneously, causing the attachment system they used in construction to weaken and fail. Once that occured, the stress was too great for the subsequent floor.
It makes logical and perfect sense to me, someone who has studied building physics and design how these towers fell from planes crashing into them. And the fact that people dismiss that is frustrating. Would be like someone who has never lived in your city telling you that you don’t know anything about what it is like to live there.
August 4th, 2006 at 4:24 pmUnbelievable – you keep posting that same link. Have you even linked to the ones that have been posted – of the scientists and academics????
Comment by madashell — August 4, 2006 @ 1:41 pm
It’s because it’s a great link and I want more people to see it. NOVA is a credible and frankly liberal source.
Also, it’s not up to me to disprove a conspiracy theory. That burden of proof is on those who claim it. All the practicing, real world people I know or have read share my expert opinion that the buildings were entirely capable of falling under the circumstances without any explosives. The only people I’ve read who support the Inside Job Theory are theorists who are comparable to the weathermen who claim Global Warming is a hoax.
Sorry, but I think this makes the left look utterly not credible. Like the right wingers who said that the moon landing was a hoax. They base their science on a general ignorance of complicated physics and astronomy in our population. And I believe the hypotheses about building engineering are the same in the Inside Job Theory.
August 4th, 2006 at 4:29 pm# 329 Just because you don’t understand the complexity of structural statics doesn’t mean you should just jump on the first anti-Bush theory that comes along. It makes those of us on the left look bad. It looks like we’re just so eager to blame Bush for something I personally do not think he is capable of pulling off. The man couldn’t find oil in Texas…
1. Couldn’t find oil in Texas, ran companies into the ground, but was saved by money from Saudi Arabia, ususally the bin Ladens.
2. Other people with degrees like yours have produced proof that the towers fell at free-fall speed (very near) so you should be more interested in learning, not being an ostrich.
3. Mr. Bush did not personally pull this off. It was planned for years, and could only have happened if people at key posts in government, in the military and in intelligence coordinated their efforts, hence the word “conspiracy”.
4. First theory to come along? Makes us look bad? What a hoot.
I’m impatient with folks who purport to possess the skills and knowledge necessary to scientifically study the day, yet don’t bother to do so, and STILL remain near the starting line.
We are not looking for something with which to blame Bush. We have found it, it is there In Plane Sight.
Best.
August 4th, 2006 at 8:26 pm2. Other people with degrees like yours have produced proof that the towers fell at free-fall speed (very near) so you should be more interested in learning, not being an ostrich.
Why, because they want something more than 15 minutes of fame? They are the minority from teh entire profession. A very small minority. Which you want to take over the majority of people like me. That sounds like you want an Inside Job to be right more than you care about a concensus. And I’m not just speaking from degrees, but from reality based experience. Most of those with just degrees don’t have the real world experience to back up their speculation.
Buildings are mostly composed of air. Look around your house. It’s 96% open space – air. Therefore, when the towers collapsed, there was nothing solid that was preventing them from falling at free-fall speed. It makes legitimate sense that something that is 95% empty space is going to crumble that quickly.
You routinely knock the right for repeating talking points. So why are you doing it yourself?
3. Mr. Bush did not personally pull this off. It was planned for years, and could only have happened if people at key posts in government, in the military and in intelligence coordinated their efforts, hence the word “conspiracyâ€.
That’s ridiculous. These people can’t win a war in Iraq against an angry mob
And if the goal was to attack Iraq, they would have loaded their planes with Iraqis and not Saudis.
This does not make sense, therefore, it is not likely that it is true.
4. First theory to come along? Makes us look bad? What a hoot.
You think it doesn’t make you look bad? Then why are people on the same side of the aisle telling you that your theory is so full of holes that it’s the equivalent of the Moon Landing Hoax Theory?
I’m impatient with folks who purport to possess the skills and knowledge necessary to scientifically study the day, yet don’t bother to do so, and STILL remain near the starting line.
I’ve given you several applied facts that logically explain how the towers collapsed without explosives, and debunked many of the inside job talking points. Just because you don’t want to accept the reality that I’m right doesn’t make me the one who is behind. I spent 14 years designing and building buildings. If I told you that you don’t know anything about the career you have, which one of us would seem irrational? It works both ways.
I’m tired of structures begin misrepresented so that people can spread fallacies that steel needs to melt for a building to collapse because it endangers people. They need to know that steel only has to be compromised to fail, and that there’s a reason we fireproof steel buildings. To give people more time to get out of them if they catch on fire. In the Trade towers the planes physically impacted the fire proofing on the interior column system. We don’t design fire-proofing for impacts. Therefore, exposure to fire for 20 – 30 minutes was enough to cause the structural steel to fail, as it did, and cause the collapse.
We are not looking for something with which to blame Bush. We have found it, it is there In Plane Sight.
Best.
Comment by boc — August 4, 2006 @ 8:26 pm
No, it isn’t. Your theory is riddled with holes that do not accurately represent the reality of the built environment. It’s why I am always telling people – look, buildings don’t fall over like trees, so to suggest that the buildings collapsing upon themselves is some how a sign of some wrong doing is actually just flat our incorrect. Same with the free-fall, the fire’s impact, the planes’ impacts, and so on. They are all serious misrepresentations of the reality.
I assure you, if I see anything that is plausible and logical in conjunction with my experience, I’ll be the first to point it out. I think Bush is a dangerous man who needs to be removed from office, along with his Henchmen. I want to see them go. However, the rumors about steel needing to melt for a building to collapse when it’s not the case, about it not being able to falling upon itself when that’s all it will ever do, and about eye-witness accounts when years of studies have proven eye-witnesses are not reliable in traumatic conditions because the higher functions of the brain shut down and so on just don’t support an Inside Job Theory.
And to someone who has first hand knowledge of the profession, it’s like hearing the Moon Landing Hoax Theory about wrinkles being mistaken for waves and so on. I just can’t bear to hear it from the left…
August 4th, 2006 at 9:32 pmJust us, I guess.
Initially, this thread was filled with people objecting to what Judd wrote.
To prove why we don’t like being lumped into the same petri dish as Michelle Malkin, we as individuals pointed to glaring problems with the official whitewash.
Alas we devolved into what we have now — wasted time. Similar to those 14 years of your so-called career. B-bye.
August 4th, 2006 at 11:32 pmJust us, I guess.
Initially, this thread was filled with people objecting to what Judd wrote.
I think we have to consider that he opposes people posting Inside Job Theory on his blog. He’s probably fed up himself with those who treat teh Inside Job as a blind faith religion and try to force it upon him and those who post here. As an Atheist living within teh Bible belt, I know the feeling all too well. Sometimes you have to make your position clear. I think he did.
To prove why we don’t like being lumped into the same petri dish as Michelle Malkin, we as individuals pointed to glaring problems with the official whitewash.
But the manner in which it was handled, I think was a bit hypocritical. This is his house. It’s his rules. A lot of guests criticizing his house rules in this manner is rude. Send him an email. Or, be polite like Spudge was.
Judd is a human too. Expecting him to be perfect makes us just as absolutist as the far right.
Alas we devolved into what we have now — wasted time. Similar to those 14 years of your so-called career. B-bye.
Comment by boc — August 4, 2006 @ 11:32 pm
Well, if you can’t accept that I know what I’m talking about because I am legally an expert, then just insult me? That’s your approach? You’ve lost all credibility. And sadly, if you are incapable of learning anything, then the only thing wasted is you. Good luck with that. You’ll need it.
August 5th, 2006 at 9:05 amComment by progressaurus rex — August 5, 2006 @ 2:03 am
There is no having a discussion with you on this Rex because you want it to be true so badly.
You insulted the source of the award-winning NOVA report instead of the facts that were presented in it. That’s usually something the right does when they can’t argue the facts. And you’re not arguing my facts. You haven’t offered any evidence that buildings fall anyway but upon themselves, that steel must melt to fail, or that a building isn’t mostly air that will collapse into a relatively small pile. This is because you can’t argue with the truth and still be reasonable. And you know that. You just won’t admit it because you want to believe this is true more than you want to know that ‘Loose Change’ doesn’t jive with the majority of structural engineers and architects who are practicing.
And it wasn’t my only source – nor my main source. My main source is and has been my professional expereience in building design. And that experience shows me and the majority of structural experts that your one guy is the minority.
The Moon Landing Hoax people are still around. The Flat Earth Society still exists. I’m sure the Inside Job hypothesis will linger as well. It just doesn’t mean that I have to tolerate its ignorance any more than a doctor would accept the lunacy that you can get pregnant from a toilet seat – because there are people who still believe that as well.
What I’m suggesting is that based on the facts, the real effort should not be put into outrageous Inside Job Theories, but into blaming the Bush Regime for ignoring the reports and warnings that Osama was determined to attack us. There is where you’ll be credible, and factual. And with that credibility, people will listen. It will take time, but they will.
August 5th, 2006 at 9:16 amProRex, huzzah! sorry, unbelievable, if you can’t bear to hear this. but i’ve gotta tell ya: get used to it. Thoughtfully kind of you, really, to post a non-polemic response. And unbelieveable, you made some sense in stating Judd doesn’t want to get into the whole thing.
However I must cling to the hope that as time goes by, it will feel good to lose the attitude, unbelieveable.
To wit: “And you’re not arguing my facts…this is because you can’t argue with the truth and still be reasonable.”
It’s been said before but let’s review: you’re entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts.
“My main source is and has been my professional expereience in building design.”
Are we mind readers? Are we gullible? You have to have a better argument than that.
“What I’m suggesting is that based on the facts, the real effort should not be put into outrageous Inside Job Theories, but into blaming the Bush Regime for ignoring the reports and warnings that Osama was determined to attack us.”
Many times in this delicious post you have had a chance to see that real effort IS being put into pinning BushCo for its sins. If you had done some actual searching and reading about the 911 Truth movement instead of clinging tightly to your own set of facts, it would be evident in your discourse.
August 5th, 2006 at 11:11 amHowever I must cling to the hope that as time goes by, it will feel good to lose the attitude, unbelieveable.
The attitude is all yours.
It’s been said before but let’s review: you’re entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts.
Then you should accept that. I didn’t make up facts, just pointed them out. It’s why I am an expert on the matter.
Are we mind readers? Are we gullible? You have to have a better argument than that.
I posted facts. What more do you want? A lecture on structural statics and a field trip?
Many times in this delicious post you have had a chance to see that real effort IS being put into pinning BushCo for its sins. If you had done some actual searching and reading about the 911 Truth movement instead of clinging tightly to your own set of facts, it would be evident in your discourse.
Comment by boc — August 5, 2006 @ 11:11 am
You are making grossly incorrect exaggerations. And what I said was that instead of posting about Inside Job Theiries, put that energy into other venues.
I’m getting the feeling you need to be right more than you are willing to live in reality. Whatever. Just don’t go around suggesting that a building is supposed to fall over when they only collapse upon themselves (basic physics), that steel must melt to fail (chmistry) or that a building comprised mostly of air falls any slower than near free fall (more physics). When you do, you endanger the safety of people in building emergencies who may not act quickly enough. But I guess you haven’t consered the ramifications of your statements? Just about ignoring facts in favor of the opinion of a small minority of non-practicing industry people. I hope you do a better job of picking your doctor. I’d rather have one with experience, personally.
August 5th, 2006 at 4:46 pmFrom practicing experts in the field of building design. I just Googled this. Funny how much this repeats the facts I pointed out…
How did the Twin Towers fall?
1. Impact from the Terrorist Planes
When Boeing jets piloted by terrorists struck the Twin Towers, some 10,000 gallons (38 kiloliters) of jet fuel fed an enormous fireball. But, the impact of the planes and the burst of flames did not make the Towers collapse right away. Like most buildings, the Twin Towers had redundant design. The term redundant design means that when one system fails, another carries the load. Each of the Twin Towers had 244 columns around a central core that housed the elevators, stairwells, mechanical systems, and utilities. When some columns were damaged, others could still support the building.
2. Heat from the Fires
The sprinkler system was damaged by the impact of the planes. But even if the sprinklers had been working, they could not have maintained enough pressure to stop the fire. Fed by the remaining jet fuel, the heat became intense. Most fires don’t get hotter than 900 to 1,100 degrees F. The World Trade Center fire may have reached 1,300 or 1,400 degrees F. Structural steel does not easily melt, but it will lose about half its strength at 1,200 degrees F. The steel structure of the Twin Towers was weakened by the extreme heat. The steel also became distorted because the heat was not a uniform temperature.
3. Collapsing Floors
Most fires start in one area and then spread. The fire from the terrorist planes covered the area of an entire floor almost instantly. As the weakened floors began to collapse, they crashed into the floors below. With the weight of the plunging floors accelerating, the exterior walls buckled.
Why did the collapsed towers look so flat?
Before the terrorist attack, the Twin Towers were 110 stories tall. Constructed of lightweight steel around a central core, they were about 95% air. After they collapsed, the hollow core was gone. The remaining rubble was only a few stories high.
Could the World Trade Center have been made stronger?
In a report produced by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), and other organizations, experts concluded that no skyscraper could have withstood the impact of the terrorist airplanes. Further, the experts warned that it would not be “technically feasible” to design a building that could survive this type of terrorist attack. Instead, engineers and architects are suggesting that we focus our efforts on designing better warning and evacuation systems so that we can save more people inside the buildings.
http://architecture.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http://www.icivilengineer.com/News/WTC/structure.php
August 5th, 2006 at 4:55 pmMore liberal support of the facts (with pictures):
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1540044.stm
“It was as if the top of the building was acting like a huge pile-driver, crashing down on to the floors underneath,” said Chris Wise.
August 5th, 2006 at 4:59 pmhttp://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2001/december5/wtc-125.html
Structural engineer describes collapse of the World Trade Center towers
BY MARK SHWARTZ
Vulnerabilities in the design of New York’s World Trade Center (WTC) are likely to have contributed to the collapse of its two main towers and adjacent buildings, according to Ronald O. Hamburger, a structural engineer currently investigating the Sept. 11 disaster.
“These buildings were incredibly strong, especially with respect to resisting dead loads and wind loads, but they also had a number of vulnerabilities,” Hamburger told a packed auditorium on Nov. 29 when he delivered the second John A. Blume Distinguished Lecture — an annual event sponsored by Stanford’s Blume Earthquake Engineering Center.
This graphic shows buildings in the New York Financial District affected by the Sept. 11 terrorist attack. Gray buildings were destroyed, red are in danger of collapse, blue suffered major structural damage and others shown were damaged, but can be repaired. Graphic courtesy of: Ronald Hamburger/ABS
“What New York City experienced on Sept. 11 was very much like an earthquake,” he told the Stanford audience. “Life loss exceeded anything we in the United States have experienced in an earthquake, and the financial loss exceeded anything we’ve experienced — and it all occurred within one square mile.”
As chief structural engineer and senior vice president of ABS Consulting Inc. in Oakland, Calif., Hamburger is a member of an engineering team commissioned by the Structural Engineers Institute of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) to assess the performance of the WTC and surrounding buildings in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks.
He pointed out that four buildings were immediately destroyed in the WTC assault, and three others suffered irreparable damage and are in the process of being razed. Another half-dozen buildings were harmed structurally but can be repaired, and more than 50 others were damaged by the enormous debris cloud and the burning material that followed the collapse of the twin towers.
“Thirty million square feet of commercial space were affected, including 10 million square feet that were taken out permanently — the equivalent of all the financial office space in the city of San Francisco,” he noted.
Hijackers’ plan
Using photographs of the WTC taken before, during and after the Sept. 11 assaults, Hamburger presented a brief chronology of events. He noted that the first jetliner banked into the north tower at a 45-degree angle, damaging floors 92 to 95. About 40 minutes later, the second jet crashed into the south tower, hitting floors 78 to 84.
An aerial view of downtown Manhattan. Credit: spaceimaging.com. Copyright spaceimaging.com All rights reserved. Online or news media distribution or publishing requires permission from Space Imaging.
“I believe that the hijackers flew the aircraft into the lowest part of the buildings they had access to,” Hamburger commented. “If there had been no nearby structures, they would have hit the towers lower.”
One member of the audience asked Hamburger if he believed that the pilots intentionally banked the planes at an angle to take out as many floors as possible.
“Yes,” he replied.
According to Hamburger’s preliminary analysis, the impact of the jetliners shattered and fractured two-thirds of the support columns on one face of each tower, causing the partial collapse of several floors. Debris penetrated each building’s core and may have damaged the core columns located in the center of the 110-story structures.
“The damaged columns held up the weight of the building, so logic would dictate that the building would fall,” said Hamburger, “but that didn’t happen. Because of its great structural redundancy, the load was distributed to other parts of the building. We have reason to believe that, without the fire, the buildings could have stood indefinitely and been repaired. But we did have a fire.”
Born of fire
Hamburger noted that the fuel in both jetliners burned off rapidly, despite media reports that the aircraft continued burning long after the crash.
“The impact probably caused a failure of the fireproofing in the affected areas,” he said. “We think that the fuel ignited several floors in the building,” he added, which had a devastating effect on the steel support beams.
“Steel is born of fire,” Hamburger explained. “As it’s reheated, it expands and loses its rigidity. Above 1,000 degrees Fahrenheit, it loses a significant amount of its strength.”
He said the extreme heat from the fires might have caused the steel floors to expand and bow, which may have caused the support columns to bend inward and buckle. Heat also may have caused the steel flooring to separate from the columns, or the columns themselves may have heated up and buckled outward.
Hamburger and his colleagues have not yet determined which of these scenarios occurred on Sept. 11, but there is little doubt that the collapse of the upper floors of the WTC towers brought down both structures.
“Think of the impact of dropping a 25-story building straight down,” Hamburger told the audience. “It was like a pile driver, which is why it collapsed as it did.”
Vulnerabilities
While acknowledging the many innovations that went into the design of the WTC towers in the 1960s — including one of the earliest applications of computer stress analysis — Hamburger also cited several features that made the buildings vulnerable to the intense fires that ultimately caused their collapse.
“The floor trusses [joists] were relatively flimsy. As the tower collapsed, the trusses just fell apart,” he observed, noting that trusses are difficult to fireproof.
Hamburger noted that each tower was constructed using a novel tube frame system designed to resist winds of up to 80 miles per hour. But the connections of the tube frame were weak, causing them to break apart and become three-pronged missiles that crashed into the street and into nearby buildings.
Hamburger also discussed the collapse of WTC Building 7, which housed the offices of Con Edison, the FBI and the CIA.
“WTC-7 was a 47-story building and became a two-story pile of rubble,” Hamburger said, “making it the first major structure in the United States to collapse because of fire.”
Future designs
He pointed out that fires frequently occur in high-rise buildings and noted that between 1994 and 1998, 30 fires occurred in the United States in buildings that were 50 stories or taller.
“The question is, should fire protection standards be changed in some significant way in the aftermath of Sept. 11,” Hamburger asked, “and should structural engineering designs include consideration of fire load and the response of structures? Right now, structural engineers know very little about fire.”
He and his colleagues will attempt to answer those questions when the ASCE report is made public next spring.
Does it make sense to design buildings to withstand such events as Sept. 11 in the future?
“In my opinion, no,” Hamburger concluded, although he does support the decision implemented after the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing to redesign federal buildings to withstand the accidental loss of major structural elements.
The Blume Lecture series honors John A. Blume, often called “the father of earthquake engineering,” who earned his undergraduate and doctoral degrees at Stanford. In 1974 he helped underwrite the John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, which promotes earthquake engineering research and education. Today at age 92, Blume remains a consulting professor in Stanford’s Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering.
August 5th, 2006 at 5:02 pm# 337,338,339 and 340.:
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzz……………
August 6th, 2006 at 3:12 amZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzz……………
Comment by yawn — August 6, 2006 @ 3:12 am
In other words, you’re not smart enough to understand. I didn’t think so. It’s why you believe in Conspiracy Theories and fairytales to begin with… Christianity included.
August 6th, 2006 at 7:57 amConspiracy theorists blog that Flight 93 photo is fake
Sunday, August 06, 2006
By Caitlin Cleary, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
This image of the smoke cloud left by United Airlines Flight 93 after it crashed into a field in Somerset County on Sept. 11, 2001, was taken by Val McClatchey from the porch of her home.
Click photo for larger image.
STOYSTOWN, Pa. — It was a remarkable shot that produced a one-of-a-kind image: a green pasture, red barns in the distance and, against a brilliant blue and cloudless sky, a lone mushroom cloud of dark gray smoke.
Taken the morning of Sept. 11, 2001, seconds after United Airlines Flight 93 plunged into a nearby field, the eerie photo was, and still is, according to the FBI, the closest thing it’s got to an image of the crash itself.
Val McClatchey snapped the single picture with her new digital camera. The wife and mother had been sitting on the edge of her sofa, clutching her second cup of coffee and watching the smoking towers of the World Trade Center on TV, when she heard the sudden surge of a plane engine, followed by a violent, house-shaking boom. Mrs. McClatchey grabbed the camera and ran onto the front porch of her house along Indian Lake.
“I didn’t even aim. I was just like, ‘Oh, my God,’ ” she said. She dropped the camera, jolting the battery loose, then tried in vain to call her husband, son and daughter. She had no idea what she’d captured until the state police put a call out to people in the area, asking for photos, debris and other evidence. She took a printout of her photo to the police, she said, and, within an hour, FBI agents were at her house.
Once the full, national scope of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks had settled in, word spread quickly of Mrs. McClatchey’s photograph, and soon, everyone wanted to buy a copy.
“But it’s not something that felt right,” she said.
She copyrighted her photo and gave it a title, “End of Serenity.” This would later prove an apt description of what was in store for Mrs. McClatchey, 50. She would find herself the target of 9/11 conspiracy theorists and involved in a copyright lawsuit against The Associated Press.
“Right now, it’s become more of a curse than a blessing that I took it at all,” she said.
During the next few years, the photo would appear in magazines and newspapers, from Newsweek to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, with Mrs. McClatchey’s permission. It became part of a fund-raising brochure for the Flight 93 Memorial Fund. Copies are available upon request, with proceeds going to the charity Heroic Choices, formerly the Todd Beamer Foundation.
Mrs. McClatchey’s photo was included in the Smithsonian Institution’s traveling exhibit, “Bearing Witness.” And her personal story appears to fit seamlessly into the larger narrative of the Shanksvsille crash site and temporary memorial, when, dozens of times a day, volunteers such as Donna Schmucker tell Mrs. McClatchey’s story and other witness accounts to the visitors who stream onto the site, holding up her photo in the laminated pocket of a binder for all to see.
But Mrs. McClatchey’s fame has recently taken a sour turn. The real estate agent has recently become a target of bloggers calling themselves “9-11 researchers,” who are seeking to prove that the U.S. government was complicit in the attacks that brought down the Twin Towers, pierced the Pentagon and crashed United Airlines Flight 93. “The End of Serenity” has turned out to be their smoking gun.
The smoke plume doesn’t line up right, they say. It is too large in the frame. The smoke is characteristic of an ordnance blast, not a jet fuel fire, further evidence that the government shot down Flight 93. They analyze wind direction, debris patterns and camera trajectories, all in the service of the theory that the crash was faked.
They have visited Mrs. McClatchey’s office and called her at home, posting satellite maps of her property and accusing her of digitally altering her photo to insert a fake smoke plume. The bloggers have picked apart her story, highlighting inconsistencies in different news accounts and questioning her motives. Others have described her as “surly,” “hostile,” “irate” and “defensive.” People have called her at home, accusing her of being anti-American and of “holding the photo hostage.”
On a simple Google search, Mrs. McClatchey’s name now pops up in the same sentence as “total fraud.”
“Val McClatchey has made it unmistakably clear to us that she intends to milk her 9-11 claim to fame for all it’s worth, truth be damned,” writes Lisa Guliani, of WingTV (World Independent News Group), who traveled to Stoystown to interview Mrs. McClatchey.
“If the smoke plume was photo-shopped on there, then that could mean either that the photo was simply a fraud by Val, or it was a fraud by her and the FBI and/or other government agents since she did mention that the FBI did inspect the memory card from her camera,” writes a blogger identified as Killtown.
Mrs. McClatchey was taken aback by the personal criticism by those who, she said, “hide behind their aliases.”
“This Killtown, whoever he may be, I find it very disturbing that this is a 16-page attack on me personally,” said Mrs. McClatchey, who opened her real estate company a year and a half ago. “My business is named. That hurts me personally. It’s pretty disturbing. My whole life is out there, a map to where I live, a map to my office. It’s a safety issue for me. There’s some crazy people out there.”
Killtown’s blog links to hundreds of conflicting witness accounts and news stories, video and photos of suspicious damage and debris, and other 9/11 conspiracy blogs, attempting to build up a preponderance of doubt about the government’s claims. Killtown posits whether the World Trade Center towers were brought down by explosives, and whether the Pentagon was hit by a missile. (The blogger identified only as Killtown could be reached only via e-mail. He or she agreed to be interviewed without ever revealing identity and never got in phone contact with this reporter.)
About Mrs. McClatchey’s “End of Serenity,” Killtown concludes that either the smoke plume in the photo came from a bomb blast closer to her house, or that the picture was faked by Mrs. McClatchey or the FBI. Killtown writes: “If the first is true, then Val may be off the hook. If any of the latter two are the case, then Val, you got some splainin’ to do!” He then proceeds to post her home address, phone number and personal e-mail information.
Mrs. McClatchey acknowledged that a lot of people are alleging she fabricated the photo, but she stands by its authenticity. Days after Sept. 11, neighbors saw the image, still in her camera. The camera and computer were new, and she didn’t have access to Photoshop or any other photo-altering software.
“I know that photo is completely legitimate,” Mrs. McClatchey said. “Other people saw the same thing I saw.”
Special agent Jeff Killeen, of the FBI in Pittsburgh, confirmed that the photo of the barns and the smoke plume was “a very legitimate photograph.”
V.W.H. Campbell, Post-Gazette
Val McClatchey looking over the Flight 93 Memorial site which she had not been to since November 2005.
Click photo for larger image.
“We consider that a photo that was taken moments after Flight 93 crashed to the ground,” Mr. Killeen said. “It’s a remarkable shot. It’s remarkable that someone had the wherewithal to snap a photo of the crash. This is a one-of-a-kind. We really don’t know of anything else.”
The photo is even more surprising considering the sparsely populated area around the crash site, Mr. Killeen said. He compared “End of Serenity” to a hypothetical photo of the first bombs hitting Pearl Harbor, or a still image of one of the commercial jetliners in mid-collision with the twin towers.
As for the 9/11 conspiracy theorists, Mr. Killeen said, “They can debunk all they want.” On Sept. 11, he was at the site shortly after the crash, and knows the amount of debris and other evidence that was gathered from the scene but was never made public. Officials did look into the possibility that Flight 93 was shot down, he said, “but there’s no evidence to suggest that whatsoever. None.”
Mrs. McClatchey still occasionally gets requests for copies of “End of Serenity.” She prints them out on her personal printer, and says she has no idea how many hundreds or thousands of dollars the photo has raised for the Heroic Choices charity. She operates on the honor system, she says, and simply forwards the checks to them. Representatives from the charity did not return calls requesting comment.
Mrs. McClatchey has begun accepting some money, on account of her copyright action against The Associated Press, which, she says, distributed her photo without her permission.
“So here I am, in the middle of this nasty lawsuit,” she said. “I have kept some of the money, because now I have some legal fees. It’s very unfortunate, because I was trying to do the right thing.”
David Tomlin, assistant general counsel with The Associated Press, confirmed that litigation was in progress.
“To the extent that we distributed her picture, we assert we had permission to do so,” Mr. Tomlin said. “We deny infringing on her copyright.”
Across the country road from Mrs. McClatchey’s home is a fenced-in pasture with red barns under a bright blue sky, the same scene from “End of Serenity.”
Given the headaches of a lawsuit and the blunt personal criticism from the bloggers, Mrs. McClatchey wonders if her quick decision to grab her camera that morning nearly five years ago and capture the last puff smoke that was Flight 93 was the right one. But she is glad to be able to give something back to the families of the dead, and thinks her photo will stand the test of time and conspiracy theorists.
“The truth speaks for itself,” she said.
——————————————————————————–
(Caitlin Cleary can be reached at ccleary@post-gazette.com or 412-263-2533. )
August 7th, 2006 at 9:48 am9/11: Debunking The Myths
PM examines the evidence and consults the experts to refute the most persistent conspiracy theories of September 11.
Published in the March, 2005 issue.
FALSE WITNESS: Conspiracy theorists claim this photo “proves” the 9/11 attacks were a U.S. military operation. PHOTOGRAPH BY ROB HOWARD
For background on this investigative feature, please click here.
FROM THE MOMENT the first airplane crashed into the World Trade Center on the morning of September 11, 2001, the world has asked one simple and compelling question: How could it happen?
Three and a half years later, not everyone is convinced we know the truth. Go to Google.com, type in the search phrase “World Trade Center conspiracy” and you’ll get links to an estimated 628,000 Web sites. More than 3000 books on 9/11 have been published; many of them reject the official consensus that hijackers associated with Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda flew passenger planes into U.S. landmarks.
Healthy skepticism, it seems, has curdled into paranoia. Wild conspiracy tales are peddled daily on the Internet, talk radio and in other media. Blurry photos, quotes taken out of context and sketchy eyewitness accounts have inspired a slew of elaborate theories: The Pentagon was struck by a missile; the World Trade Center was razed by demolition-style bombs; Flight 93 was shot down by a mysterious white jet. As outlandish as these claims may sound, they are increasingly accepted abroad and among extremists here in the United States.
To investigate 16 of the most prevalent claims made by conspiracy theorists, POPULAR MECHANICS assembled a team of nine researchers and reporters who, together with PM editors, consulted more than 70 professionals in fields that form the core content of this magazine, including aviation, engineering and the military.
In the end, we were able to debunk each of these assertions with hard evidence and a healthy dose of common sense. We learned that a few theories are based on something as innocent as a reporting error on that chaotic day. Others are the byproducts of cynical imaginations that aim to inject suspicion and animosity into public debate. Only by confronting such poisonous claims with irrefutable facts can we understand what really happened on a day that is forever seared into world history.–THE EDITORS
THE PLANES
The widely accepted account that hijackers commandeered and crashed the four 9/11 planes is supported by reams of evidence, from cockpit recordings to forensics to the fact that crews and passengers never returned home. Nonetheless, conspiracy theorists seize on a handful of “facts” to argue a very different scenario: The jets that struck New York and Washington, D.C., weren’t commercial planes, they say, but something else, perhaps refueling tankers or guided missiles. And the lack of military intervention? Theorists claim it proves the U.S. government instigated the assault or allowed it to occur in order to advance oil interests or a war agenda.
Where’s The Pod?
CLAIM:Photographs and video footage shot just before United Airlines Flight 175 hit the South Tower of the World Trade Center (WTC) show an object underneath the fuselage at the base of the right wing. The film “911 In Plane Site” and the Web site LetsRoll911.org claim that no such object is found on a stock Boeing 767. They speculate that this “military pod” is a missile, a bomb or a piece of equipment on an air-refueling tanker. LetsRoll911.org points to this as evidence that the attacks were an “inside job” sanctioned by “President George Bush, who planned and engineered 9/11.”
FACT: One of the clearest, most widely seen pictures of the doomed jet’s undercarriage was taken by photographer Rob Howard and published in New York magazine and elsewhere (opening page). PM sent a digital scan of the original photo to Ronald Greeley, director of the Space Photography Laboratory at Arizona State University. Greeley is an expert at analyzing images to determine the shape and features of geological formations based on shadow and light effects. After studying the high-resolution image and comparing it to photos of a Boeing 767-200ER’s undercarriage, Greeley dismissed the notion that the Howard photo reveals a “pod.” In fact, the photo reveals only the Boeing’s right fairing, a pronounced bulge that contains the landing gear. He concludes that sunlight glinting off the fairing gave it an exaggerated look. “Such a glint causes a blossoming (enlargement) on film,” he writes in an e-mail to PM, “which tends to be amplified in digital versions of images–the pixels are saturated and tend to ’spill over’ to adjacent pixels.” When asked about pods attached to civilian aircraft, Fred E. Culick, professor of aeronautics at the California Institute of Technology, gave a blunter response: “That’s bull. They’re really stretching.”
No Stand-Down Order
CLAIM: No fighter jets were scrambled from any of the 28 Air Force bases within close range of the four hijacked flights. “On 11 September Andrews had two squadrons of fighter jets with the job of protecting the skies over Washington D.C.,” says the Web site emperors-clothes.com. “They failed to do their job.” “There is only one explanation for this,” writes Mark R. Elsis of StandDown.net. “Our Air Force was ordered to Stand Down on 9/11.”
FACT: On 9/11 there were only 14 fighter jets on alert in the contiguous 48 states. No computer network or alarm automatically alerted the North American Air Defense Command (NORAD) of missing planes. “They [civilian Air Traffic Control, or ATC] had to pick up the phone and literally dial us,” says Maj. Douglas Martin, public affairs officer for NORAD. Boston Center, one of 22 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regional ATC facilities, called NORAD’s Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS) three times: at 8:37 am EST to inform NEADS that Flight 11 was hijacked; at 9:21 am to inform the agency, mistakenly, that Flight 11 was headed for Washington (the plane had hit the North Tower 35 minutes earlier); and at 9:41 am to (erroneously) identify Delta Air Lines Flight 1989 from Boston as a possible hijacking. The New York ATC called NEADS at 9:03 am to report that United Flight 175 had been hijacked–the same time the plane slammed into the South Tower. Within minutes of that first call from Boston Center, NEADS scrambled two F-15s from Otis Air Force Base in Falmouth, Mass., and three F-16s from Langley Air National Guard Base in Hampton, Va. None of the fighters got anywhere near the pirated planes.
Why couldn’t ATC find the hijacked flights? When the hijackers turned off the planes’ transponders, which broadcast identifying signals, ATC had to search 4500 identical radar blips crisscrossing some of the country’s busiest air corridors. And NORAD’s sophisticated radar? It ringed the continent, looking outward for threats, not inward. “It was like a doughnut,” Martin says. “There was no coverage in the middle.” Pre-9/11, flights originating in the States were not seen as threats and NORAD wasn’t prepared to track them.
Flight 175’s Windows
CLAIM:On Sept. 11, FOX News broadcast a live phone interview with FOX employee Marc Birnbach. 911inplanesite.com states that “Bernback” saw the plane “crash into the South Tower.” “It definitely did not look like a commercial plane,” Birnbach said on air. “I didn’t see any windows on the sides.”
Coupled with photographs and videos of Flight 175 that lack the resolution to show windows, Birnbach’s statement has fueled one of the most widely referenced 9/11 conspiracy theories–specifically, that the South Tower was struck by a military cargo plane or a fuel tanker.
FACT: Birnbach, who was a freelance videographer with FOX News at the time, tells PM that he was more than 2 miles southeast of the WTC, in Brooklyn, when he briefly saw a plane fly over. He says that, in fact, he did not see the plane strike the South Tower; he says he only heard the explosion.
While heading a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) probe into the collapse of the towers, W. Gene Corley studied the airplane wreckage. A licensed structural engineer with Construction Technology Laboratories, a consulting firm based in Skokie, Ill., Corley and his team photographed aircraft debris on the roof of WTC 5, including a chunk of fuselage that clearly had passenger windows. “It’s … from the United Airlines plane that hit Tower 2,” Corley states flatly. In reviewing crash footage taken by an ABC news crew, Corley was able to track the trajectory of the fragments he studied–including a section of the landing gear and part of an engine–as they tore through the South Tower, exited from the building’s north side and fell from the sky.
PLAIN VIEW: Passenger windows on a piece of Flight 175’s fuselage. PHOTOGRPAH BY WILLIAM F. BAKER/FEMA
Intercepts Not Routine
CLAIM:”It has been standard operating procedures for decades to immediately intercept off-course planes that do not respond to communications from air traffic controllers,” says the Web site oilempire.us. “When the Air Force ’scrambles’ a fighter plane to intercept, they usually reach the plane in question in minutes.”
FACT: In the decade before 9/11, NORAD intercepted only one civilian plane over North America: golfer Payne Stewart’s Learjet, in October 1999. With passengers and crew unconscious from cabin decompression, the plane lost radio contact but remained in transponder contact until it crashed. Even so, it took an F-16 1 hour and 22 minutes to reach the stricken jet. Rules in effect back then, and on 9/11, prohibited supersonic flight on intercepts. Prior to 9/11, all other NORAD interceptions were limited to offshore Air Defense Identification Zones (ADIZ). “Until 9/11 there was no domestic ADIZ,” FAA spokesman Bill Schumann tells PM. After 9/11, NORAD and the FAA increased cooperation, setting up hotlines between ATCs and NORAD command centers, according to officials from both agencies. NORAD has also increased its fighter coverage and has installed radar to monitor airspace over the continent.
THE WORLD TRADE CENTER
The collapse of both World Trade Center towers–and the smaller WTC 7 a few hours later–initially surprised even some experts. But subsequent studies have shown that the WTC’s structural integrity was destroyed by intense fire as well as the severe damage inflicted by the planes. That explanation hasn’t swayed conspiracy theorists, who contend that all three buildings were wired with explosives in advance and razed in a series of controlled demolitions.
Widespread Damage
CLAIM:The first hijacked plane crashed through the 94th to the 98th floors of the World Trade Center’s 110-story North Tower; the second jet slammed into the 78th to the 84th floors of the 110-story South Tower. The impact and ensuing fires disrupted elevator service in both buildings. Plus, the lobbies of both buildings were visibly damaged before the towers collapsed. “There is NO WAY the impact of the jet caused such widespread damage 80 stories below,” claims a posting on the San Diego Independent Media Center Web site (sandiego.indymedia.org). “It is OBVIOUS and irrefutable that OTHER EXPLOSIVES (… such as concussion bombs) HAD ALREADY BEEN DETONATED in the lower levels of tower one at the same time as the plane crash.”
FACT: Following up on a May 2002 preliminary report by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), a major study will be released in spring 2005 by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), a branch of the U.S. Department of Commerce. NIST shared its initial findings with PM and made its lead researcher available to our team of reporters.
The NIST investigation revealed that plane debris sliced through the utility shafts at the North Tower’s core, creating a conduit for burning jet fuel–and fiery destruction throughout the building. “It’s very hard to document where the fuel went,” says Forman Williams, a NIST adviser and a combustion expert, “but if it’s atomized and combustible and gets to an ignition source, it’ll go off.”
Burning fuel traveling down the elevator shafts would have disrupted the elevator systems and caused extensive damage to the lobbies. NIST heard first-person testimony that “some elevators slammed right down” to the ground floor. “The doors cracked open on the lobby floor and flames came out and people died,” says James Quintiere, an engineering professor at the University of Maryland and a NIST adviser. A similar observation was made in the French documentary “9/11,” by Jules and Gedeon Naudet. As Jules Naudet entered the North Tower lobby, minutes after the first aircraft struck, he saw victims on fire, a scene he found too horrific to film.
“Melted” Steel
CLAIM: “We have been lied to,” announces the Web site AttackOnAmerica.net. “The first lie was that the load of fuel from the aircraft was the cause of structural failure. No kerosene fire can burn hot enough to melt steel.” The posting is entitled “Proof Of Controlled Demolition At The WTC.”
FACT: Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn’t need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength–and that required exposure to much less heat. “I have never seen melted steel in a building fire,” says retired New York deputy fire chief Vincent Dunn, author of The Collapse Of Burning Buildings: A Guide To Fireground Safety. “But I’ve seen a lot of twisted, warped, bent and sagging steel. What happens is that the steel tries to expand at both ends, but when it can no longer expand, it sags and the surrounding concrete cracks.”
“Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F,” notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. “And at 1800° it is probably at less than 10 percent.” NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat.
But jet fuel wasn’t the only thing burning, notes Forman Williams, a professor of engineering at the University of California, San Diego, and one of seven structural engineers and fire experts that PM consulted. He says that while the jet fuel was the catalyst for the WTC fires, the resulting inferno was intensified by the combustible material inside the buildings, including rugs, curtains, furniture and paper. NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F.
“The jet fuel was the ignition source,” Williams tells PM. “It burned for maybe 10 minutes, and [the towers] were still standing in 10 minutes. It was the rest of the stuff burning afterward that was responsible for the heat transfer that eventually brought them down.”
Puffs Of Dust
CLAIM:As each tower collapsed, clearly visible puffs of dust and debris were ejected from the sides of the buildings. An advertisement in The New York Times for the book Painful Questions: An Analysis Of The September 11th Attack made this claim: “The concrete clouds shooting out of the buildings are not possible from a mere collapse. They do occur from explosions.” Numerous conspiracy theorists cite Van Romero, an explosives expert and vice president of the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, who was quoted on 9/11 by the Albuquerque Journal as saying “there were some explosive devices inside the buildings that caused the towers to collapse.” The article continues, “Romero said the collapse of the structures resembled those of controlled implosions used to demolish old structures.”
FACT: Once each tower began to collapse, the weight of all the floors above the collapsed zone bore down with pulverizing force on the highest intact floor. Unable to absorb the massive energy, that floor would fail, transmitting the forces to the floor below, allowing the collapse to progress downward through the building in a chain reaction. Engineers call the process “pancaking,” and it does not require an explosion to begin, according to David Biggs, a structural engineer at Ryan-Biggs Associates and a member of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) team that worked on the FEMA report.
Like all office buildings, the WTC towers contained a huge volume of air. As they pancaked, all that air–along with the concrete and other debris pulverized by the force of the collapse–was ejected with enormous energy. “When you have a significant portion of a floor collapsing, it’s going to shoot air and concrete dust out the window,” NIST lead investigator Shyam Sunder tells PM. Those clouds of dust may create the impression of a controlled demolition, Sunder adds, “but it is the floor pancaking that leads to that perception.”
Demolition expert Romero regrets that his comments to the Albuquerque Journal became fodder for conspiracy theorists. “I was misquoted in saying that I thought it was explosives that brought down the building,” he tells PM. “I only said that that’s what it looked like.”
Romero, who agrees with the scientific conclusion that fire triggered the collapses, demanded a retraction from the Journal. It was printed Sept. 22, 2001. “I felt like my scientific reputation was on the line.” But emperors-clothes.com saw something else: “The paymaster of Romero’s research institute is the Pentagon. Directly or indirectly, pressure was brought to bear, forcing Romero to retract his original statement.” Romero responds: “Conspiracy theorists came out saying that the government got to me. That is the farthest thing from the truth. This has been an albatross around my neck for three years.”
VIOLENT COLLAPSE: Pancaking floors–not controlled demolition–expel debris and smoke out South Tower windows. PHOTOGRAPH BY AP/WIDE WORLD PHOTOS
Seismic Spikes
CLAIM:Seismographs at Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory in Palisades, N.Y., 21 miles north of the WTC, recorded the events of 9/11. “The strongest jolts were all registered at the beginning of the collapses, well before falling debris struck the earth,” reports the Web site WhatReallyHappened.com.
A columnist on Prisonplanet.com, a Web site run by radio talk show host Alex Jones, claims the seismic spikes (boxed area on Graph 1) are “indisputable proof that massive explosions brought down” the towers. The Web site says its findings are supported by two seismologists at the observatory, Won-Young Kim and Arthur Lerner-Lam. Each “sharp spike of short duration,” says Prisonplanet.com, was consistent with a “demolition-style implosion.”
FACT:”There is no scientific basis for the conclusion that explosions brought down the towers,” Lerner-Lam tells PM. “That representation of our work is categorically incorrect and not in context.”
The report issued by Lamont-Doherty includes various graphs showing the seismic readings produced by the planes crashing into the two towers as well as the later collapse of both buildings. WhatReallyHappened.com chooses to display only one graph (Graph 1), which shows the readings over a 30-minute time span.
On that graph, the 8- and 10-second collapses appear–misleadingly–as a pair of sudden spikes. Lamont-Doherty’s 40-second plot of the same data (Graph 2) gives a much more detailed picture: The seismic waves–blue for the South Tower, red for the North Tower–start small and then escalate as the buildings rumble to the ground. Translation: no bombs.
WTC 7 Collapse
CLAIM:Seven hours after the two towers fell, the 47-story WTC 7 collapsed. According to 911review.org: “The video clearly shows that it was not a collapse subsequent to a fire, but rather a controlled demolition: amongst the Internet investigators, the jury is in on this one.”
FACT: Many conspiracy theorists point to FEMA’s preliminary report, which said there was relatively light damage to WTC 7 prior to its collapse. With the benefit of more time and resources, NIST researchers now support the working hypothesis that WTC 7 was far more compromised by falling debris than the FEMA report indicated. “The most important thing we found was that there was, in fact, physical damage to the south face of building 7,” NIST’s Sunder tells PM. “On about a third of the face to the center and to the bottom–approximately 10 stories–about 25 percent of the depth of the building was scooped out.” NIST also discovered previously undocumented damage to WTC 7’s upper stories and its southwest corner.
NIST investigators believe a combination of intense fire and severe structural damage contributed to the collapse, though assigning the exact proportion requires more research. But NIST’s analysis suggests the fall of WTC 7 was an example of “progressive collapse,” a process in which the failure of parts of a structure ultimately creates strains that cause the entire building to come down. Videos of the fall of WTC 7 show cracks, or “kinks,” in the building’s facade just before the two penthouses disappeared into the structure, one after the other. The entire building fell in on itself, with the slumping east side of the structure pulling down the west side in a diagonal collapse.
According to NIST, there was one primary reason for the building’s failure: In an unusual design, the columns near the visible kinks were carrying exceptionally large loads, roughly 2000 sq. ft. of floor area for each floor. “What our preliminary analysis has shown is that if you take out just one column on one of the lower floors,” Sunder notes, “it could cause a vertical progression of collapse so that the entire section comes down.”
There are two other possible contributing factors still under investigation: First, trusses on the fifth and seventh floors were designed to transfer loads from one set of columns to another. With columns on the south face apparently damaged, high stresses would likely have been communicated to columns on the building’s other faces, thereby exceeding their load-bearing capacities.
Second, a fifth-floor fire burned for up to 7 hours. “There was no firefighting in WTC 7,” Sunder says. Investigators believe the fire was fed by tanks of diesel fuel that many tenants used to run emergency generators. Most tanks throughout the building were fairly small, but a generator on the fifth floor was connected to a large tank in the basement via a pressurized line. Says Sunder: “Our current working hypothesis is that this pressurized line was supplying fuel [to the fire] for a long period of time.”
WTC 7 might have withstood the physical damage it received, or the fire that burned for hours, but those combined factors–along with the building’s unusual construction–were enough to set off the chain-reaction collapse.
FINE LINES: Revisionists say sharp spikes (graph 1, above) mean bombs toppled the WTC. Scientists disprove the claim with the more detailed graph 2 (below).
Seismograph readings by Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University/Won-Young Kim (senior research scientist)/Arthur Lerner-Lam (associate director)/Mary Tobin (senior science writer)/www.ldeo.columbia.edu/lcsn
FIRE STORM: WTC 7 stands amid the rubble of the recently collapsed Twin Towers. Damaged by falling debris, the building then endures a fire that rages for hours. Experts say this combination, not a demolition-style implosion, led to the roofline “kink†that signals WTC 7’s progressive collapse. PHOTOGRAPH BY NEW YORK OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
THE PENTAGON
At 9:37 am on 9/11, 51 minutes after the first plane hit the World Trade Center, the Pentagon was similarly attacked. Though dozens of witnesses saw a Boeing 757 hit the building, conspiracy advocates insist there is evidence that a missile or a different type of plane smashed into the Pentagon.
HQ ATTACK: Taken three days after 9/11, this photo shows the extent of the damage to the Pentagon, consistent with a fiery plane crash. PHOTOGRAPH BY DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Big Plane, Small Holes
CLAIM: Two holes were visible in the Pentagon immediately after the attack: a 75-ft.-wide entry hole in the building’s exterior wall, and a 16-ft.-wide hole in Ring C, the Pentagon’s middle ring. Conspiracy theorists claim both holes are far too small to have been made by a Boeing 757. “How does a plane 125 ft. wide and 155 ft. long fit into a hole which is only 16 ft. across?” asks reopen911.org, a Web site “dedicated to discovering the bottom line truth to what really occurred on September 11, 2001.”
The truth is of even less importance to French author Thierry Meyssan, whose baseless assertions are fodder for even mainstream European and Middle Eastern media. In his book The Big Lie, Meyssan concludes that the Pentagon was struck by a satellite-guided missile–part of an elaborate U.S. military coup. “This attack,” he writes, “could only be committed by United States military personnel against other U.S. military personnel.”
FACT: When American Airlines Flight 77 hit the Pentagon’s exterior wall, Ring E, it created a hole approximately 75 ft. wide, according to the ASCE Pentagon Building Performance Report. The exterior facade collapsed about 20 minutes after impact, but ASCE based its measurements of the original hole on the number of first-floor support columns that were destroyed or damaged. Computer simulations confirmed the findings.
Why wasn’t the hole as wide as a 757’s 124-ft.-10-in. wingspan? A crashing jet doesn’t punch a cartoon-like outline of itself into a reinforced concrete building, says ASCE team member Mete Sozen, a professor of structural engineering at Purdue University. In this case, one wing hit the ground; the other was sheared off by the force of the impact with the Pentagon’s load-bearing columns, explains Sozen, who specializes in the behavior of concrete buildings. What was left of the plane flowed into the structure in a state closer to a liquid than a solid mass. “If you expected the entire wing to cut into the building,” Sozen tells PM, “it didn’t happen.”
The tidy hole in Ring C was 12 ft. wide–not 16 ft. ASCE concludes it was made by the jet’s landing gear, not by the fuselage.
HOLE TRUTH: Flight 77’s landing gear punched a 12-ft. hole into the Pentagon’s Ring C. PHOTOGRAPH BY DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Intact Windows
CLAIM:Many Pentagon windows remained in one piece–even those just above the point of impact from the Boeing 757 passenger plane. Pentagonstrike.co.uk, an online animation widely circulated in the United States and Europe, claims that photographs showing “intact windows” directly above the crash site prove “a missile” or “a craft much smaller than a 757″ struck the Pentagon.
FACT: Some windows near the impact area did indeed survive the crash. But that’s what the windows were supposed to do–they’re blast-resistant.
“A blast-resistant window must be designed to resist a force significantly higher than a hurricane that’s hitting instantaneously,” says Ken Hays, executive vice president of Masonry Arts, the Bessemer, Ala., company that designed, manufactured and installed the Pentagon windows. Some were knocked out of the walls by the crash and the outer ring’s later collapse. “They were not designed to receive wracking seismic force,” Hays notes. “They were designed to take in inward pressure from a blast event, which apparently they did: [Before the collapse] the blinds were still stacked neatly behind the window glass.”
Flight 77 Debris
CLAIM:Conspiracy theorists insist there was no plane wreckage at the Pentagon. “In reality, a Boeing 757 was never found,” claims pentagonstrike.co.uk, which asks the question, “What hit the Pentagon on 9/11?”
FACT:Blast expert Allyn E. Kilsheimer was the first structural engineer to arrive at the Pentagon after the crash and helped coordinate the emergency response. “It was absolutely a plane, and I’ll tell you why,” says Kilsheimer, CEO of KCE Structural Engineers PC, Washington, D.C. “I saw the marks of the plane wing on the face of the building. I picked up parts of the plane with the airline markings on them. I held in my hand the tail section of the plane, and I found the black box.” Kilsheimer’s eyewitness account is backed up by photos of plane wreckage inside and outside the building. Kilsheimer adds: “I held parts of uniforms from crew members in my hands, including body parts. Okay?”
AFTERMATH: Wreckage from Flight 77 on the Pentagon’s lawn–proof that a passenger plane, not a missile, hit the building. PHOTOGRAPH BY AP/WIDE WORLD PHOTOS
FLIGHT 93
Cockpit recordings indicate the passengers on United Airlines Flight 93 teamed up to attack their hijackers, forcing down the plane near Shanksville, in southwestern Pennsylvania. But conspiracy theorists assert Flight 93 was destroyed by a heat-seeking missile from an F-16 or a mysterious white plane. Some theorists add far-fetched elaborations: No terrorists were aboard, or the passengers were drugged. The wildest is the “bumble planes” theory, which holds that passengers from Flights 11, 175 and 77 were loaded onto Flight 93 so the U.S. government could kill them.
The White Jet
CLAIM:At least six eyewitnesses say they saw a small white jet flying low over the crash area almost immediately after Flight 93 went down. BlogD.com theorizes that the aircraft was downed by “either a missile fired from an Air Force jet, or via an electronic assault made by a U.S. Customs airplane reported to have been seen near the site minutes after Flight 93 crashed.” WorldNetDaily.com weighs in: “Witnesses to this low-flying jet … told their story to journalists. Shortly thereafter, the FBI began to attack the witnesses with perhaps the most inane disinformation ever–alleging the witnesses actually observed a private jet at 34,000 ft. The FBI says the jet was asked to come down to 5000 ft. and try to find the crash site. This would require about 20 minutes to descend.”
FACT: There was such a jet in the vicinity–a Dassault Falcon 20 business jet owned by the VF Corp. of Greensboro, N.C., an apparel company that markets Wrangler jeans and other brands. The VF plane was flying into Johnstown-Cambria airport, 20 miles north of Shanksville. According to David Newell, VF’s director of aviation and travel, the FAA’s Cleveland Center contacted copilot Yates Gladwell when the Falcon was at an altitude “in the neighborhood of 3000 to 4000 ft.”–not 34,000 ft. “They were in a descent already going into Johnstown,” Newell adds. “The FAA asked them to investigate and they did. They got down within 1500 ft. of the ground when they circled. They saw a hole in the ground with smoke coming out of it. They pinpointed the location and then continued on.” Reached by PM, Gladwell confirmed this account but, concerned about ongoing harassment by conspiracy theorists, asked not to be quoted directly.
Roving Engine
CLAIM:One of Flight 93’s engines was found “at a considerable distance from the crash site,” according to Lyle Szupinka, a state police officer on the scene who was quoted in the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. Offering no evidence, a posting on Rense.com claimed: “The main body of the engine … was found miles away from the main wreckage site with damage comparable to that which a heat-seeking missile would do to an airliner.”
FACT: Experts on the scene tell PM that a fan from one of the engines was recovered in a catchment basin, downhill from the crash site. Jeff Reinbold, the National Park Service representative responsible for the Flight 93 National Memorial, confirms the direction and distance from the crash site to the basin: just over 300 yards south, which means the fan landed in the direction the jet was traveling. “It’s not unusual for an engine to move or tumble across the ground,” says Michael K. Hynes, an airline accident expert who investigated the crash of TWA Flight 800 out of New York City in 1996. “When you have very high velocities, 500 mph or more,” Hynes says, “you are talking about 700 to 800 ft. per second. For something to hit the ground with that kind of energy, it would only take a few seconds to bounce up and travel 300 yards.” Numerous crash analysts contacted by PM concur.
Indian Lake
CLAIM:”Residents and workers at businesses outside Shanksville, Somerset County, reported discovering clothing, books, papers and what appeared to be human remains,” states a Pittsburgh Post-Gazette article dated Sept. 13, 2001. “Others reported what appeared to be crash debris floating in Indian Lake, nearly 6 miles from the immediate crash scene.” Commenting on reports that Indian Lake residents collected debris, Think AndAsk.com speculates: “On Sept. 10, 2001, a strong cold front pushed through the area, and behind it–winds blew northerly. Since Flight 93 crashed west-southwest of Indian Lake, it was impossible for debris to fly perpendicular to wind direction. … The FBI lied.” And the significance of widespread debris? Theorists claim the plane was breaking up before it crashed. TheForbiddenKnowledge.com states bluntly: “Without a doubt, Flight 93 was shot down.”
FACT:Wallace Miller, Somerset County coroner, tells PM no body parts were found in Indian Lake. Human remains were confined to a 70-acre area directly surrounding the crash site. Paper and tiny scraps of sheetmetal, however, did land in the lake. “Very light debris will fly into the air, because of the concussion,” says former National Transportation Safety Board investigator Matthew McCormick. Indian Lake is less than 1.5 miles southeast of the impact crater–not 6 miles–easily within range of debris blasted skyward by the heat of the explosion from the crash. And the wind that day was northwesterly, at 9 to 12 mph, which means it was blowing from the northwest–toward Indian Lake.
Map by International Mapping
F-16 Pilot
CLAIM:In February 2004, retired Army Col. Donn de Grand-Pre said on “The Alex Jones Show,” a radio talk show broadcast on 42 stations: “It [Flight 93] was taken out by the North Dakota Air Guard. I know the pilot who fired those two missiles to take down 93.” LetsRoll911.org, citing de Grand-Pre, identifies the pilot: “Major Rick Gibney fired two Sidewinder missiles at the aircraft and destroyed it in midflight at precisely 0958.”
FACT: Saying he was reluctant to fuel debate by responding to unsubstantiated charges, Gibney (a lieutenant colonel, not a major) declined to comment. According to Air National Guard spokesman Master Sgt. David Somdahl, Gibney flew an F-16 that morning–but nowhere near Shanksville. He took off from Fargo, N.D., and flew to Bozeman, Mont., to pick up Ed Jacoby Jr., the director of the New York State Emergency Management Office. Gibney then flew Jacoby from Montana to Albany, N.Y., so Jacoby could coordinate 17,000 rescue workers engaged in the state’s response to 9/11. Jacoby confirms the day’s events. “I was in Big Sky for an emergency managers meeting. Someone called to say an F-16 was landing in Bozeman. From there we flew to Albany.” Jacoby is outraged by the claim that Gibney shot down Flight 93. “I summarily dismiss that because Lt. Col. Gibney was with me at that time. It disgusts me to see this because the public is being misled. More than anything else it disgusts me because it brings up fears. It brings up hopes–it brings up all sorts of feelings, not only to the victims’ families but to all the individuals throughout the country, and the world for that matter. I get angry at the misinformation out there.”
——————————————————————————–
REPORTING: Benjamin Chertoff, Davin Coburn, Michael Connery, David Enders, Kevin Haynes, Kristin Roth, Tracy Saelinger, Erik Sofge and the editors of POPULAR MECHANICS.
PHOTOGRAPHY RESEARCH: Sarah Shatz.
SOURCES: For a list of experts consulted during the preparation of this article, click here.
——————————————————————————–
PM consulted more than 300 experts and organizations in its investigation into 9/11 conspiracy theories. The following were particularly helpful.
Air Crash Analysis
Cleveland Center regional air traffic control
Bill Crowley special agent, FBI
Ron Dokell president, Demolition Consultants
Richard Gazarik staff writer, Pittsburgh Tribune-Review
Yates Gladwell pilot, VF Corp.
Michael K. Hynes, Ed.D.,
ATP, CFI, A&P/IA president, Hynes Aviation Services; expert, aviation crashes
Ed Jacoby Jr. director,
New York State Emergency Management Office (Ret.); chairman, New York State Disaster Preparedness Commission (Ret.)
Johnstown-Cambria County Airport Authority
Cindi Lash staff writer, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Matthew McCormick manager, survival factors division, National Transportation Safety Board (Ret.)
Wallace Miller coroner, Somerset County, PA
Robert Nagan meteorological technician, Climate Services Branch, National Climatic Data Center
Dave Newell director, aviation and travel, VF Corp.
James O’Toole politics editor, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Pennsylvania State Police Public Information Office
Jeff Pillets senior writer,
The Record, Hackensack, NJ
Jeff Rienbold director, Flight 93 National Memorial, National Park Service
Dennis Roddy staff writer, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Master Sgt. David Somdahl public affairs officer,
119th Wing, North Dakota
Air National Guard
Mark Stahl photographer; eyewitness, United Airlines Flight 93 crash scene
Air Defense
Lt. Col. Skip Aldous (Ret.) squadron commander,
U.S. Air Force
Tech. Sgt. Laura Bosco public affairs officer,
Tyndall Air Force Base
Boston Center regional air traffic control
Laura Brown spokeswoman,
Federal Aviation Administration
Todd Curtis, Ph.D. founder, Airsafe.com; president, Airsafe.com Foundation
Keith Halloway public affairs officer, National Transportation Safety Board
Ted Lopatkiewicz director, public affairs, National Transportation Safety Board
Maj. Douglas Martin public affairs officer,
North American Aerospace Defense Command
Lt. Herbert McConnell public affairs officer,
Andrews AFB
Michael Perini public affairs officer, North American Aerospace Defense Command
John Pike director, GlobalSecurity.org
Hank Price spokesman, Federal
Aviation Administration
Warren Robak RAND Corp.
Bill Shumann spokesman,
Federal Aviation Administration
Louis Walsh public affairs officer, Eglin AFB
Chris Yates aviation security editor, analyst, Jane’s Transport
Aviation
Fred E.C. Culick, Ph.D., S.B., S.M. professor of aeronautics, California Institute of Technology
Robert Everdeen public affairs, Northrop Grumman
Clint Oster professor of public and environmental affairs, Indiana University; aviation safety expert
Capt. Bill Scott (Ret. USAF) Rocky Mountain bureau chief, Aviation Week
Bill Uher News Media Office, NASA Langley Research Center
Col. Ed Walby (Ret. USAF)
director, business development, HALE Systems Enterprise, Unmanned Systems, Northrop Grumman
Image Analysis
William F. Baker member, FEMA Probe Team; partner, Skidmore, Owings, Merrill
W. Gene Corley, Ph.D., P.E., S.E. senior vice president, CTL Group; director,
FEMA Probe Team
Bill Daly senior vice president, Control Risks Group
Steve Douglass image analysis consultant, Aviation Week
Thomas R. Edwards, Ph.D. founder, TREC; video forensics expert.
Ronald Greeley, Ph.D. professor of geology, Arizona State University
Rob Howard freelance photographer; WTC eyewitness
Robert L. Parker, Ph.D. professor of geophysics,
University of California, San Diego
Structural Engineering / Building Collapse
Farid Alfawakhiri, Ph.D. senior engineer, American Institute of Steel Construction
David Biggs, P.E. structural engineer, Ryan-Biggs Associates; member, ASCE team for FEMA report
Robert Clarke structural engineer, Controlled Demolitions Group Ltd.
Glenn Corbett technical editor, Fire Engineering; member, NIST advisory committee
Vincent Dunn deputy fire chief (Ret.), FDNY; author, The Collapse Of Burning Buildings: A Guide To Fireground Safety
John Fisher, Ph.D. professor of civil engineering, Lehigh University; professor emeritus, Center for Advanced Technology; member, FEMA Probe Team
Ken Hays executive vice president, Masonry Arts
Christoph Hoffmann, Ph.D. professor of computer science, Purdue University; project director, September 11 Pentagon Attack Simulations Using LS-Dyna, Purdue University
Allyn E. Kilsheimer, P.E.
CEO, KCE Structural Engineers PC; chief structural engineer, Phoenix project; expert in blast recovery, concrete structures, emergency response
Won-Young Kim, Ph.D. seismologist, Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, Columbia University
William Koplitz photo desk manager, FEMA
John Labriola freelance photographer, WTC survivor
Arthur Lerner-Lam, Ph.D. seismologist; director,
Earth Institute, Center for Hazards and Risk Research, Columbia University
James Quintiere, Ph.D. professor of engineering, University of Maryland member, NIST advisory committee
Steve Riskus freelance photographer; eyewitness, Pentagon crash
Van Romero, Ph.D. vice president, New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology
Christine Shaffer spokesperson, Viracon
Mete Sozen, Ph.D., S.E. Kettelhut Distinguished Professor of Structural Engineering, Purdue University; member, Pentagon Building Performance Report; project conception, September 11 Pentagon Attack Simulations Using LS-Dyna, Purdue University
Shyam Sunder, Sc.D.
acting deputy director, lead investigator, Building and Fire Research Laboratory, National Institute of Standards and Technology
Mary Tobin science writer, media relations, Earth Institute, Columbia University
Forman Williams, Ph.D. professor of engineering, physics, combustion, University of California,
San Diego; member, advisory committee, National Institute of Standards and Technology
Links referenced within this article
here
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1230517.html
http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/lcsn
http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/lcsn
click here
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=9&c=y
Find this article at:
August 7th, 2006 at 9:53 amhttp://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html
Pallywood
The material we show here constitutes a tiny fragment of a much larger phenomenon, raw footage from Palestinian photographers working for major western media outlets. From this material, our news agencies prepare news reports that shape our perceptions of what is happening in the Middle East Conflict.
We think that a close analysis of this material defies all expectations of what such footage should resemble, and suggest that Palestinian photographers do not at all share the same production and journalistic values espoused by a free press. We leave the experience and the judgment to you:
HERE’S THE EVIDENCE; YOU DECIDE
What we present you here is raw material, and we invite you to help us analyze it.
We provide you with site maps http://www.seconddraft.org/maps_pallywood.php, and we have broken the material down into manageable and coherent segments http://www.seconddraft.org/movies.php, by the position of the cameraman. What you see here are the “rushes†taken by a Palestinian cameraman working with the equipment of, and for, a major western media outlet. This represents the second day of “rioting†in the territories, since Sharon’s visit to the Temple Mount. During that day, according to witnesses on both sides, the Israelis never left their compound (see map). At the end of the day, firing broke out, and the Palestinians claimed five dead and many wounded. In the Western press, this day appears as the beginning of the “Second Intifada,†the day both the West Bank and Gaza exploded in rage and violence against Israel.
The material is not easy to interpret. We therefore offer you three approaches:
1) CSI (Crime Scene Investigation): For those who want to take the time to examine the evidence themselves, and come to their own conclusions. http://www.seconddraft.org/rushes.php
2) Edited: For those who want to see the original material, but have it edited to bring the most relevant footage together. http://www.seconddraft.org/selections.php
3) Packaged: For those who want a quick introduction to the material that we have put together. http://www.seconddraft.org/movies.php
In all cases, people who have the ability to go back and see the original material we have taken our excerpts from. Then they are welcome to join the larger discussion of what this tells us about our media right now.
In any case, these rushes demand from us a CSI approach, the kind of approach a historian, or a forensic expert might employ. For those looking at the raw material, we recommend that you view it a number of times, with certain issues in mind:
- Where is the Israeli position?
- What role does its presence play in the behavior of the Palestinians?
- What of the bystanders?
- What characterizes their behavior both towards the wounded and towards the apparent source of the wounds (i.e., the Israelis)?
Then go back and look at the action figures, the wounded, those who evacuate, the ambulance drivers, the cameramen:
- What are they doing?
- What relationships do they have?
- Why are the evacuations so rough and hurried? Why do they run the wounded before putting them on a stretcher?
- What further damage would they do to a youth with a wound worthy of an ambulance evacuation?
- What do the bystanders do after the action is over?
- What’s going on here?
We invite your comment on all aspects of the dossier, from the details of in what sequence the segments were taken (how to judge the time of day), to who the key players are, and we provide forums for these discussions.
But the dossier suggests far more than what it specifically shows us about September 30, and raises larger questions to which we invite all of you, no matter how you’ve entered into the subject matter, to comment upon:
- How long has this been going on?
- What percent of the vast body of Palestinian camerawork for foreign media reflects the production values we see at work here?
- To what extent do western journalists, in producing their reports, show any sign of awareness that they are working with such material?
- How much of our news is shaped by such material and the oversight it suggests?
- Is this still happening?
- What are the consequences for the public and global culture of this oversight?
August 7th, 2006 at 10:00 amWe feel that the material you are about to see bears witness to a failure of our MSM culture comparable to that of the Emperor and his court when he paraded naked in front of his public. Moreover, that error is kept from us only by our media’s refusal to let the public see their sources. Only the chance circumstances that brought this material to a few people’s attention, and the existence of an open internet where we can post the material, makes it possible for the public to consider this costly media embarrassment. The consequences have been and continue to be detrimental to all involved – Palestinians, Israelis, all the people around the world who wish to see peace come to this troubled area and wish for the great encounter between the people’s of the world that now takes place to happen in peace and mutual respect.
May be all conspiracies started here !!
August 7th, 2006 at 8:23 pmhttp://www.tbrnews.org/Archives/a2449.htm#001
http://www.tbrnews.org/Archives/a1973.htm#001
This should be a mantra repeated by all the Democrats during their campaigns.
Comment by Larry from C — August 8, 2006 @ 8:12 pm
Except that the Democrats are just as much in bed with Big Oil campaign contributions and don’t wanna bite the polysorbate 80 hand that feeds them.
August 8th, 2006 at 8:15 pmMs Malkin is right on the money
August 10th, 2006 at 10:17 pm9 11 WAS WHAT IS WAS. Buildings brought down by Jihadist evil freaks
The bldg in Qana used, staged, & manipulated to make Israel look bad is now known as QANA 2. A fave Hizbullah spot that again came down 8 hours after it was suppose to. It’s called Hizbullywood… No fancy argument. The only conspiracy there is an old trick used by Muslim terrorists twice i.e. every time Israel fights back. Israel should stop apologizing and blind naive infidels who still can’t see that we are all next to kiss the Quran and speak Iraninian, are too busy looking for conspiracies instead of learning to speak the peaceful Arabic language sooner than you think
After reading the posts on this site for several months there seems to be some consistency as to the feelings of the “bloggers …..let me summarize……because somewhere in my following list you (yes, you the wacko “progressiveâ€) will find an answer to ALL of the problems that America faces today….or at least the person/persons that are responsible for such a miserable existence that we must trudge through in America…..America the damned!!! Each of the items below are just a snippet of what “think progress†stands for….so…in your words….
Bush and the Republicans are the devil reincarnate…
Fox News is Hitler’s SS version of propaganda…
The Democrats are waayyy too conservative and right-leaning….
The Republicans (gulp…I said the word Republicans) work for the Devil…
Lieberman is a Bush crony that never accomplished anything for the state of Connecticut…
Did I mention that Bush and the Republicans are the devil reincarnate?
The War in Iraq was certainly for the oil and making rich people richer!!!
Halliburton? Planning the war(s) for years before 9/11…
9/11? Bush not only knew exactly what/where/when/how…..he helped to plan it…..
9/11? The towers were not taken down by airplanes…American C-4 explosives were strategically placed to “take ‘em downâ€â€¦.
Bush planted the C4…along with the help of Cheney and Rumsfield…
The War in Iraq was certainly a follow-up to papa Bush….and his “failure†in removing Saddam…..
Terrorism is not that big of a deal…it should be monitored and controlled by our police agencies….not the government….
OBL is not that bad….hell, America created him!!
Saddam is not the bad…hell, America created him!!
Did I mention that Bush and the Republicans are the devil reincarnate?
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is not that bad….he does not want nukes for weapons…its all about the fuel baby!!!
Problems in the Middle East…Americas fault…
Darfur? Bush and Cheney are not fully responsible for the genocide—but at least 78%….
Did I mention that Bush and the Republicans are the devil reincarnate?
Try to resolve the problems in the Middle East??—Why does America feel it should stick its nose in others business…
Israel…America’s puppet….
Israel is the cause of most of the problems in the Middle East….Hezbollah is not a terrorist organization—they were “elected†into a position of power in a democratic government!!!
America did the worse job of evacuating its citizens from Lebanon…Denmark did the best…Denmark is #1!!! Denmark is #1!!!….
Did I mention that Bush and the Republicans are the devil reincarnate?
American flags are made for one purpose….to burn!!!!!!!!
The primary run off in Ct proves that the American people want an immediate withdrawal from Iraq….
AIDS in Africa killing scores? Bush’s Fault….well, maybe 82% responsible…
Socialism #1…Communism #2….Dictatorship #3…Democracy #4…as ranked by the bloggers on “Think Progress†as best form of govt….
Global Warming is a direct cause of Bush being the Chief-executive……
The short-comings of American schools…a direct cause of Bush being the Chief-executive……
The short-comings of Health-care….a direct cause of Bush being the Chief-executive……
Oil?….ever since man has been able to process it into a usable fuel….all the problems have been…..a direct cause of Bush being the Chief-executive……
Wal-mart=Capitalism=Bush cronies=Conservatives=devil
Did I mention that Bush and the Republicans are the devil reincarnate?
Mexican Immigration problem? No problemo…
Katrina?….a direct cause of Bush being the Chief-executive……not the response—the actual cause of the hurricane…a direct cause of Bush being the Chief-executive
Katrina…response to it?….Bush hates blacks…..it’s that simple……did I mention Bush hates Mexicans, Canadians, French, Italians, Spaniards, Russians, Irish, Germans, Chinese, Japanese, Filipinos, Aussies, Swedes, New Zealanders, anybody that might be of south American persuasion, anybody that might be a mix bred, anybody from Africa-even if they “look†white, and of course…all Muslims….
Did I mention that according to this site that Bush hates gays? And wants them dead?
The economy—-the worse it’s been in the history of America—-….is a direct cause of Bush being the Chief-executive……
International relations? well—before Bush we were loved from china to south America…but now—America is hated all around the world and we need to kowtow to the Europeans and Islam so they like us…..we want other people to like us…we really want other people to like us………please like us…..please?
Homeless problem in a city/town near you?…a direct cause of Bush being the Chief-executive…
Abortion is good (million+ innocents a year)…Death penalty is Bad (handful of convicted criminals a year)….
(Did I mention that Bush and the Republicans are the devil reincarnate?
Lines at the super-market….. a direct cause of Bush being the Chief-executive…
Howard Stern being fined for foul behavior/language…. a direct cause of Bush being the Chief-executive….
Katrina “evacuees†in Houston or other cities committing hideous crimes?… a direct cause of Bush being the Chief-executive……
Christian groups are bigots and things such as “faith day†(at a ball park after the game) are nothing more than the radical rights attempt at “christian-izing†us….
America’s military is weak and the Draft is right around the corner…
“God†should not be in the Pledge….
“God†should not be on our currency…
“God†should not be……….
Cindy Sheehan should not be questioned nor debated…..her son died for her right to hang out in Crawford dam it!!!
America went to war unprepared….look at the hummers!! They have absolutely no armor….and its Bush’s fault…
Democrats and Republicans are all the same…evil…out for themselves…slave-masters (its in their family history)…sex addicts…and of course out to kill Americans in a fake war that was based on purposely fraudulent intelligence…
The (mass) media is covering up everything!!!
Good policing and investigative work is called—racial profiling!!!
“Minimum Wage should be at least $18.00 a hourâ€
“Progressive†reporters get kick out of all the neo-cons news briefings…
“My phones have been taped because I went to an anti-war rally!â€
“My cable has been on the blink and my phone has been making weird noises since I went to a anti-war Rallyâ€
Anybody that makes money and lives a successful life MUST be doing something that hurts the poor or crippled….
Taxes and more taxes are good for the economy…tax cuts/breaks only help the millionaires…
SUV’s were created by conservatives that wanted to help out their “oil buddiesâ€â€¦
People should not be expected to take care of themselves!!! That’s the role of government…
People should not be able to invest their social security account as they wish!! That’s the role of the government…
If I forgot a topic or an issue please just fill it in with the following…
“BLAH-DA-DOO-DAA- BLAH-DA-DOO-DAA- BLAH-DA-DOO-DAA- BLAH-DA-DOO-DAA- WAA-WAA WAA-WAA WAA-WAA WAA-WAA..BUSH IS THE DEVIL BLAH-DA-DOO-DAA- BLAH-DA-DOO-DAA- BLAH-DA-DOO-DAA- BLAH-DA-DOO-DAA…REPUBLICANS ARE THE DEVIL… WAA-WAA WAA-WAA WAA-WAA WAA-WAA…AMERICA IS THE CAUSE OF ALL THE PROBLEMS IN THE WORLD…-DA-DOO-DAA- BLAH-DA-DOO-DAA- BLAH-DA-DOO-DAA…â€
IN CONLUSION::::::
I have posted this because it addresses nearly all the issues that “think progress†and its bloggers believe/state/dream about….in other words, this post can be placed on any of your blogs and it will make sense……thanks “think progress†bloggers for making this so easy….if you think my post is foolish….please remember—these are your words (with some editing liberties taken…oh I forgot—I should not mention anything about taking liberties)….dam America!!!
August 15th, 2006 at 2:05 pmthis cannot just be a coincedence.
1) New York City has 11 letters
2) Afghanistan has 11 letters
3) Ramsin Yuseb (The terrorist who threatened to destroy the Twin Towers in 1993) has 11 letters
4) George W Bush has 11 letters
This could be a mere coincidence, but this gets more interesting:
1) New York is the 11th state
2) The first plane crashing against the Twin Towers was flight number 11
3) Flight 11 was carrying 92 passengers. 9 + 2 = 11
4) Flight 77 which also hit Twin Towers, was carrying 65 passengers. 6 + 5 = 11
5) The tragedy was on September 11, or 9/11 as it is now known. 9 + 1 + 1 = 11
6) The date is equal to the US emergency services telephone number 911. 9 + 1 + 1 = 11
Sheer coincidence..?! Read on and make up your own mind:
1) The total number of victims inside all the hi-jacked planes was 254. 2 + 5 + 4 = 11
2) September 11 is day number 254 of the calendar year. Again 2 + 5 + 4 = 11
3) The Madrid bombing took place on 3/11/2004. 3 + 1 + 1 + 2 + 4 = 11
4) The tragedy of Madrid happened 911 days after the Twin Towers incident
Now this is where things get totally eerie:
The most recognised symbol for the US, after the Stars & Stripes, is the Eagle. The following verse is taken from the Quran, the Islamic holy book:
“For it is written that a son of Arabia would awaken a fearsome Eagle. The wrath of the Eagle would be felt throughout the lands of Allah and lo, while some of the people trembled in despair still more rejoiced: for the wrath of the Eagle cleansed the lands of Allah and there was peace”
That verse is number 9.11 of the Quran
Still uncovinced about all of this..?! Try this and see how you feel afterwards, it made my hair stand on end:
Open Microsoft Word and do the following:
1) Type in capitals Q33 NY. This is the flight number of the first plane to hit one of the Twin Towers
2) Highlight the Q33 NY
3) Change the font size to 48
4) Change the actual font to WINGDINGS
October 20th, 2006 at 3:07 pm