BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: Bill D
Date: 19 Feb 08 - 05:34 PM

Jim Garrison didn't 'prove' diddly-squat. He 'interpreted' data to fuel his theories...There have been so many hi-tech disproofs of his theories in the last few years, that it is a laugh to revive them....Have you seen the very, very detailed computer simulations of the JFK shooting?

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: CarolC
Date: 19 Feb 08 - 06:16 PM

Have you watched the video I posted a link to in my 13 Feb 08 - 11:42 PM post, Don?

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 19 Feb 08 - 07:49 PM

I watched the video, and I'm not sure what the point was. He basically rehashed the same ideas and offered no evidence, certainly nothing that would sway an opinion either way.   I'm not disclaiming his theories, but there was nothing really convincing.

What bothered me was a simple websearch about the speaker. Try it and see what you find. Interesting how some people can make a decent living off of this.

It is also interesting that there are no structural engineers who have supported this conspiracy. I know Willie Nelson has been high a few times, but I don't think he has worked on a high rise.   It seems that structural engineers realize that the building collapse actually follows the laws of physics.   I read a good experiment on one of the sites when I was researching Richard Gage.    Place a brick on top of your head. You can feel the weight, but you can easily support it. Have a friend hold the brick, and then kneel down - your friend keeping the brick at the same time. Now ask you friend to release the brick. You will quickly discover that the same load in "free fall" can actually do some damage.

Who knows?

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 19 Feb 08 - 07:56 PM

By the way, I did check his resume. He never worked on a high rise and the firm that he works with does not show up in any search. I'm sure the firm exists, but it is not a large company.

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: Don Firth
Date: 19 Feb 08 - 10:52 PM

Pretty much as I suspected, Ron. I've watched about eleventy-umpteen videos purporting to be absolute proof of a government conspiracy, all of which were made up of supposition, bad physics, and lots of free-floating anger, but none of which were really convincing. But before anyone gets on my case about being closed-minded and accuses me of being good for nothing but "cheap shots," I will watch it. All two bloody hours of it.

I grow somewhat jaded by this current wave of conspiracy theories and the nut-balls who insist on peddling them. The latest one I've had laid on me was by a family friend who was all a-twitter about a Near Earth Object, an asteroid recently discovered by astronomers. She was convinced that the asteroid, 2007 TU24, shaped a bit like a potato some 800 feet long and weighing megatons, was going to collide with the earth and destroy it in the wee small hours of the morning of January 29th. She'd heard it on Art Bell's radio program. NASA, she said, was suppressing any news releases because it would cause a worldwide panic. I checked a few astronomy web sites I visit from time to time and found that asteroid 2007 TU24 was going to come close by astronomical standards, but it would miss the earth by some 334,000, miles. Somewhat beyond the moon's orbit. Astronomers were interested, but not concerned.

That wasn't good enough. Follow-up reports, she told me, said that the asteroid would indeed miss the earth, but that it was "ionized," and as it passed the earth, it would cause a "plasma discharge" which would set fire to the earth's atmosphere. We would all be vaporized!

You just can't let a good reason for panic—or a good conspiracy theory—die!

Asteroid 2007 TU24 passed the earth uneventfully at 3:33 Pacific Standard Time on the morning of January 29th.

I've seen her since. Being a kindly fellow, I didn't point out that we're still here. I made no mention of it. Neither did she. But she still listens to Art Bell. Religiously. I think she likes the excitement it brings to her life.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: Don Firth
Date: 19 Feb 08 - 11:03 PM

Addendum. Apparently Art Bell is semi-retired. George Noory now hosts the program.

I don't listen to it. I'm usually asleep by then.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: CarolC
Date: 19 Feb 08 - 11:09 PM

It is also interesting that there are no structural engineers who have supported this conspiracy.

You may not be aware of them, but there certainly are structural engineers who support this version of events. I know their names (and even their words) have been posted numerous times in these threads.

Pretty much any time people post the accounts of people like that, they get ignored, and then later on people say that such people don't support this version. It's simply not true.

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: CarolC
Date: 19 Feb 08 - 11:19 PM

By the way, Ron, I hope you don't think the opinion you expressed about the Richard Gage video qualifies as an expert debunking of anything he said. Or even as a layman's debunking of it. You did not provide any counter arguments for anything he said, other than to vaguely characterize it as "offering no evidence". Opinions vary on this obviously, since I think he did offer evidence. A lot of it.

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: Big Mick
Date: 19 Feb 08 - 11:21 PM

Carol, you are a master of obfuscation.

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: CarolC
Date: 19 Feb 08 - 11:47 PM

Mick, I think it's you and the other people who are using these kinds of emotionally charged, but intellectually bankrupt tactics that are the "masters of obfuscation". Some of us don't believe the government's version of events. We are entitled to discuss this without being attacked by you and the others who think they have a right to tell us what to think.

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 20 Feb 08 - 08:35 AM

What was there to debunk that hasn't already been brought into question? He really did not offer anything new that has not been discussed and already debunked in this and other threads. Actually, debunk is a strong word - these are all theories after all. I did offer counter-arguements and I would like to know what other "structural" engineers have supported this theory.

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: Bill D
Date: 20 Feb 08 - 12:02 PM

"Some of us don't believe the government's version of events."

It is one thing to not automatically believe the government's version of things ....it is quite another to automatically DIS-believe everthing. That way, you can fill your entire life with investigations and speculation.

(...and make a good start on dragging many others into pointless speculation...*wry smile*)

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: Don Firth
Date: 20 Feb 08 - 12:48 PM

GUEST,Guest posts a couple of times, reopening a subject that has already been beaten to death several times, then sits back and watches the fun. Undoubtedly laughing up his/her sleeve.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: bankley
Date: 20 Feb 08 - 01:04 PM

Ol' Willie just doesn't care to drink the Kool-aid.... I don't blame him.... and of course he was smeared in the 'responsible' media for his recent comments... 'that long haired, dope smokin' bearded weirdo said... blah, blah.. and what does he know anyway ?' Kinda sounds like some folks around here.... but he's an honest man, down to earth, admits that he doesn't come close to having all the answers... but ,like many, he has his suspicions... and why shouldn't he ,given all the official bullshit that's been dished out in the not too distant past.... it's ongoing.... I like his music and his stance and his questioning mind.... I don't have to agree on all of it, but I can sense that he's a good man....

In other related news, he just turned down an offer from the Gov't of Texas to name a toll highway after him...saying that he'd rather have an electric chair named after him.....

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: Big Mick
Date: 20 Feb 08 - 01:22 PM

Actually, Carol, it was more of an observation than an attack. But you like the term attack, so go ahead and believe it. For clarification of what you do, see Bill D's remark of 20 Feb 08 - 12:02 PM. That fits very well,I would say.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Feb 08 - 07:12 PM

Well, Mick, and Bill, I didn't disbelieve the government's version of events at first, so Bill's characterization is nothing more than extremely dishonest psychobabble. And I would suggest that he's not qualified to make such an analysis of my thought processes anyway. For one, because he doesn't live inside my head, and secondly, because he's simply not qualified to be making those kinds of analyses on anyone, for any reason.

I began to wonder if the government version of events wasn't entirely right when they began to use 9/11 to justify invading Iraq. I didn't automatically believe that the government was directly responsible right away either. Originally I figured they just "allowed" it to happen. It wasn't until at least a couple of years after 9/11, and possibly more, that I began to suspect that the government was directly responsible, and I came to that way of looking at it as a result of all of the things that didn't (and still don't) add up in their story. There's just too many of them. And there's too much evidence that points to government complicity. Not the whole government, probably, but certainly some sort of rogue element within the government.

But you guys have this deep seated need to use ad hominem means of discrediting anyone who doesn't see it the way you do. And Mick... it is and was an attack.

Ron, I don't have time to hunt them down right now. I'll get to it when I can, and respond to your post then.

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: Bill D
Date: 20 Feb 08 - 08:33 PM

My gracious, Carol ..."dishonest psychobabble"?...I am not 'analyzing' anyone! I'm responding to a post I found upsetting. And I'll guarantee that dishonesty is far from MY motives! YOU made the sweeping, un-modified remark suggesting that the govt. (noting you mean mostly higher administration) was not to be trusted about anything.

Even *I* certainly didn't believe for a minute that they hadn't planned to go into Iraq on ANY pretense, but to suggest/imply they had some sort of complicity in EITHER planning or covering up the 9/11 attacks... or enough foreknowlege to be involved in engineering part of the building destruction is a VERY serious charge. It not only belies belief, it gives 'them' credit for more abilities than I think they have!

   The problem is that, once you posit several things as likely, an amazing list of other things can 'seem' to follow, and you fall into the trap of needing to doubt all contrary evidence in order to maintain your original theory. History is full of examples of well-meaning people getting caught up in 'theories' which could not stand without resort to various other unproven ideas and/or data.

I have never doubted your sincerity and concern...only your choice of presumptions about facts. It ain't easy in today's world to walk in the 'gray' areas, but that's where most issues lie.

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: Big Mick
Date: 20 Feb 08 - 08:53 PM

Carol, you have a need to feel "attacked" whenever anyone disagrees with you specifically, or generally. You then try to turn the argument and make yourself out to be the victim, and take high road status. I hope you don't mind that I don't play along. You need to grasp a concept. When you post an opinion, or adopt a specific type of debate tactic, you have to be able to take the heat, or praise, for those. The fact that someone disagrees does not necessarily constitute an attack. It is my opinion that, in this thread, you are resorting to the tactic of obfuscation. Bill, and others, have answered each of your assertions, and your response is to try and turn that back on them, using the "oh yeah" kind of strategy.

Your attempting to portray Bill D, a man you have met and know, as dishonest is an example of this. For those that don't know Bill, he is as straight a shooter as there is. While he and I have disagreed on certain topics, sometimes mightily so, he is as honest and honorable a person as you will ever meet. Toss in a healthy dose of likability, and the fact that he married far above his station ***chuckle***, and you understand why CarolC deserves to get knocked for this tactic.

I am no fan of this administration. I believe that impeachment hearings are in order for the actions which led us into Iraq. But there is not a shred of credible evidence to show that they were complicit in the 9/11 terrorist act.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Feb 08 - 09:15 PM

YOU made the sweeping, un-modified remark suggesting that the govt. (noting you mean mostly higher administration) was not to be trusted about anything.

Where did I make this comment? (I'm not necessarily saying I disagree with it, but I don't recall making it.) Nevertheless, although I don't trust the government any more, I used to trust the government, but I learned the hard way that this is not a good idea. So you're still making unwarranted assumptions if you are suggesting that I arrived at this way of looking at things prior to encountering empirical evidence.

Even *I* certainly didn't believe for a minute that they hadn't planned to go into Iraq on ANY pretense, but to suggest/imply they had some sort of complicity in EITHER planning or covering up the 9/11 attacks... or enough foreknowlege to be involved in engineering part of the building destruction is a VERY serious charge. It not only belies belief, it gives 'them' credit for more abilities than I think they have!

This is your opinion, and you are entitled to it, as I am to mine.

The problem is that, once you posit several things as likely, an amazing list of other things can 'seem' to follow, and you fall into the trap of needing to doubt all contrary evidence in order to maintain your original theory.

More assumptions. It's not logic. In order to make such a statement, you have to assume that the reason I doubt the contrary evidence is specifically because I want to maintain my original theory. There are two glaring flaws in this reasoning. The first is that you are assuming that the theory I have now was my original one, and not one that I arrived at after examining a lot of the evidence on both sides of the argument. I already pointed out to you that this is the opposite of how I arrived at my current stance, but yet you are still clinging to it. This is dishonest.

The second flaw is that you have to assume that my reason for rejecting the evidence that you, yourself accept is only because it contradicts a theory that you agree with, rather than because I found the evidence that you accept to be fundamentally flawed. This is not logical (and it's not particularly honest). I have said that I find the evidence that you accept to be fundamentally flawed, and that is the reason I don't accept it. For you to suggest that what I am saying about my motives is not true, simply because you disagree with my conclusions, is dishonest. I have already pointed out many of the flaws that I see in the official versions of events. You may not accept these as valid, but that is your opinion. I am entitled to my own opinion, and if you try to suggest that you know better what my motives are for holding the opinions I hold than I do, you are being dishonest.

I have examined the evidence on both sides, after coming from my original stance of accepting the government's version of events, through a long and fairly exhaustive search of all of the evidence I could find, on both sides of the argument, and I have arrived at the conclusion that the government's story has too many holes in it, too many inconsistencies, too many convenient coincidences, and too many improbabilities to be even remotely believable. This is my opinion and I am entitled to it.

I have never doubted your sincerity and concern...only your choice of presumptions about facts.

You are making presumptions about what you are calling my presumptions. You are the one who is guilty of flawed reasoning. Really, Bill, for someone who studied and champions the virtues of logic, you are one of the less logical people I've ever encountered.

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Feb 08 - 09:26 PM

Mick, you're making stuff up. People disagree with me all the time, and it's not really all that often when I say I'm being attacked. You have not been arguing the merits of whatever your opinions are on this subject. What you have been doing is attacking people whose opinions you don't like. When people make arguments about the actual subject, even when they disagree with me, they are not making personal attacks. When people, as you have been doing, make comments about the people who are discussing the issue, that are derogatory in nature, as you have done, that is an attack. You can't say that you have only been disagreeing with me, because you haven't really been discussing the subject at all. You've been discussing the people who are discussing the subject. And you have been doing so in a derogatory manner.

Present your evidence. Let us discuss it and decide for ourselves if we agree with it or not. Defend your arguments, and let us decide for ourselves if we think you have done so to our satisfaction. But don't call us the "tin hat brigade" and tell us that we are "married to our delusions". That is not an argument, it's an attack.

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: Little Hawk
Date: 20 Feb 08 - 09:47 PM

Oh, they have the ability to do something like that, Bill. They definitely do. They have the personnel, the expertise, the equipment, and the means. The only question is whether they had the will to do it, whether they were that ruthless and ammoral.

And another question would then be, who specifically knew about it and who didn't? Who was in the loop and who wasn't?

I also fully believed the offical story about 911 at the time it happened and for a long time afterward...until I became aware of a lot of very troubling aspects to the official story. I gradually came around to a suspicion that the official story was a coverup, and that there had been the use of controlled demolitions on 911...at least in Building 7, and very likely in Buildings 1 & 2.

As for the Pentagon, the physical evidence there did not support the notion that a huge twin engive airliner hit the building. The photographic evidence did not support it. There should have been two large holes in the building on either side of the central strike area...holes made by the engines. There were no such holes. There should have been extensive damage caused by the wings and tail unit. Again, it wasn't there. There should have been extensive damage to the lawn. Again, it wasn't there.

Something made one single central hole that pierced through a whole series of strong walls. What was it? I don't know, but I sure don't think it was the central fuselage of a large twin-engine airliner. And if it was...where did the engines go? They are the heaviest and hardest things on one of those planes by far. They would have made 2 large holes on either side of the central hole.

There are a huge number of surveillance cameras mounted on the Pentagon, covering every angle. Enough of them to show without a doubt what happened. We haven't seen those films. All we have seen is one really poor video from a camera in the parking lot which shows a brief white "something" (which is absolutely unidentifiable) and a sudden flash of fire.

Why have we not seen any of the video from the many other cameras on that building which would have provided evidence?

Probably because it would compromise the official story, I would think.

Think about it. If something had happened on 911 that would compromise some of the highest levels of government and military to the extent that the public would utterly lose faith in their leaders....well, I can understand why they would cover it up! Bloody right they would. Even if many of them were in no way guilty of participating. They simply could not afford the hell that it would raise in the country, the loss of faith, the effects on foreign policy. It would be unthinkable.

Suppose Bush himself was not in the loop...but some of his people were. He would not want it to come out. He wants his war in Iraq, he wants foreign terrorists to be seen as the only enemy, he does not want a government-destroying scandal of Biblical proportions on the home turf. He would cover it up...even if he himself was in no way guilty of planning it.

That's my opinion, and it's just an opinion. The best guess I can make. I don't know what happened on that day, and I doubt that any of us ever will. These things usually remain buried forever, because too many heads would fall if they were uncovered. (as in the case of the Kennedy assassination/coup)

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: Big Mick
Date: 20 Feb 08 - 09:57 PM

Nah, Carol, I don't think so. You see, I have been around the old joint so long, that I have seen what engaging in that discussion with conspiracy folks yields. It is, quite frankly, a waste of time. I have presented my views on the subject at hand in a number of threads. I think I prefer, in this thread, to simply point out that I think certain folks are so caught up in their need for a conspiracy, that they simply cannot accept anything that doesn't agree with their need. It is kind of like the life long guerilla fighter that is faced with peace. If they accept it, they are out of a job. For some, that is a daunting prospect and they look for all kinds of reasons and justifications to "keep up the struggle".

Anyways, carry on....... and on ....... and on.......

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 20 Feb 08 - 10:37 PM

It's all opinion. None of us know squat about this, other than what we clip from other websites - often without fully researching. We seem to find posts that fit our theories and stop thinking. Simply finding a post does not make it a fact.

Everyone is trying to figure out WHAT the towers was brought down and WHO did it, but no one is really concentrating on the HOW and WHY. There has not been a single conspiracy that can logically explain HOW the criminals did the supposed deed without being caught or eliminate potential failures. It is one thing to spout bullshit about dynamic loads, laws of physics and other crap that the writer knows less than nothing about, but try to figure out and explain how the conspiracy worked and who pulled off the job.   Then try to figure out a motive - and I'll scream if I hear the lame excused that the goverment wanted to start a war.   Even though I see the logic in them trying to create a war, you cannot come up with a logical reason why they would choose such a risky path that could backfire with extreme consequence - when a war could have been provoked with less risky and more effective means.

There are hundreds of questions that need answered, but I don't see most people buying into theories without some logical and basic questions answered.

Even Willie Nelson backtracked on what he was quoted as saying.

Face it, we are all having a good time in this playground, but the reality is - nobody gives a rats ass what any of us say beyond the border of Mudcat.

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: Bill D
Date: 21 Feb 08 - 12:01 AM

Carol...it is beyond me how you got to those conclusions about my answer...I give up.


Little Hawk....you make me shake my head in disbelief that YOU are still repeating that tired, 14 times disproven and explained nonsense about the Pentagon!
   It has ALL been explained, documented and photographed! INCLUDING pieces of those engines! Holes? The wall collapsed! The wings folded on impact and helped the fuselage make that ONE entry point. Pieces of wing & engine were found both inside AND outside the building. Photos were posted of them...did you look at them?

And the 'controlled demolition' crap has also been,,,,,,

...I....never mind...my wife is telling me I have to quit this and go to bed.

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Feb 08 - 01:00 AM

Yeah, yeah... ;-)

Hell, guys...Bill, Mick, Ron, whoever...I also gave up discussing this on Mudcat a long time ago for the very same reasons you give...it's no use. People have their minds all made up, whichever side of the fence they're on...and no one outside cares a rat's ass what any of us thinks anyway, and it won't change anything, and it all becomes futile sounds in a little echo chamber called "Mudcat Cafe". That's why I barely ever even post on this subject lately.

So, see, I feel exactly the same way you guys do about it, only from the opposite angle, that's all.   We mystify each other in exactly the same fashion. We are all amazed, almost dumfounded that the other guy can't see it as we do, given available information. I DO think it was done to provide an excuse for war (and a financial windfall for certain key players). For those reasons and none other. (Go ahead, Ron...scream...)

But so what? I don't KNOW that, it's only what I think is most probable, and it's useless talking about it here. It makes no difference to anything or anyone. It's totally blind dead dog useless. More useless than trying to glue an egg yolk to a cement wall or wrestle a jellyfish. All any of us knows is what someone else has said about it. We weren't there. We don't know who's lying and who isn't and we never will.

So let's all do what Spaw used to say with a big grin on his face, "Have a smile and a coke and shut up."

And Have a nice rest, Bill. ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 21 Feb 08 - 09:24 AM

You have your opinion, I have mine.   Neither of us have facts to back it up - but let's let common sense dictate. The rest of the world can make up their own mind, none of us are going to change opinion no matter what we think of ourselves.

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: bankley
Date: 21 Feb 08 - 11:30 AM

yeah and in the end , I think we're all on the same side around here.. it just gets a bit crowded and testy on a transcontinental trip in a minivan.....
at least ol' Willie has a Silver Eagle runnin' on home-made biofuel...

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Feb 08 - 12:05 AM

You are entitled to your opinions, Mick. I would only point out that if you think it's a waste of time to participate in these kinds of threads, it seems a bit counterintuitive (and a bit petty) for you to be posting on them just to make disparaging comments about those who don't see it as a waste of time.

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Feb 08 - 12:10 AM

Bill, it's beyond me to know how I could possibly come to any other conclusions about your post than the ones I did. If you have some other meaning that eluded me, I will be happy to see it explained.

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: GUEST,guest
Date: 04 Mar 08 - 02:15 AM

Been saving this to post here. Excellent piece. Explains why mudcat locks people out:

Think about what you allow yourself to know....

Nineteen men pass through airport security. Eleven of them are stopped and questioned but then allowed to board. Several large passenger planes wind up hijacked and flown at high speed into enormous buildings. None of these men had shown previous capacity to accomplish this feat. These men were armed with box cutters. No jet fighters were scrambled to intercept these planes, although the authorities in charge of such actions knew immediately what was happening. Airport traffic controllers were ordered to destroy all recorded evidence of the event. Some of them physically broke the CD's and scattered the pieces into different trash containers at the airports.

Within hours, three of the biggest buildings in the city, buildings designed to absorb the impact of the very planes which hit them, all crumbled into their own footprints at the speed of freefall....

...the ringleader of these men and some associates were observed by the FBI boarding a gambling boat belonging to Jack Abramoff. These men were tracked to Las Vegas and watched by the FBI, yet they passed through the airport security checkpoints. Even though eleven of them were stopped and questioned they still boarded.

On the day of the event several men were observed videotaping the attack as it happened. They were seen to be dancing and celebrating as well. The police stopped and arrested them. They were found to be Mossad agents. Some time later they were quietly released and returned to their home country with no reasons given....

As a result of this event, major wars have been launched. Over a million people have died with nearly another 5 million displaced....

In every event… in New York City… in a Pennsylvania field… at The Pentagon… all of the evidence is contradictory. The amount of evidence on every level that directly refutes what we have been told fills thousands of pages. Meanwhile, the administration and the [Democratic] congress belligerently oppose any inquiry into the matter....

Therefore… therefore… here is what you must know, given that the official story is patently absurd. Anyone… anyone who promotes the official story; who accepts the official story, who oppresses those who doubt the official story, who does not question the official story, is involved or too stupid to pat their head and chew gum at the same time. Any presidential candidate who does not dispute the official story is a traitor to their nation and a tool of those who accomplished the attack.

It all comes down to 9/11. Everything that has happened has happened based on a lie. Everyone in government; in the media, in entertainment, in organized religion, in the public eye and in the public who accepts and promotes the official story is either a traitor or a tool. Everyone who does not stand forth and speak truth to power is a coward, a liar and complicit in mass murder. Everyone- everywhere can be measured according to this litmus test.

http://smokingmirrors.blogspot.com/2008/02/911-is-litmus-test.html

It's primary day in Texas tomorrow, and I've been making the local candidates explain to me what happened on 9/11. Man o man. It is so freakin funny when the grayhairs stand up and start talking about boxcutters and caves in Afghanistan. At every event people have looked around at one another like children waking up after naptime. Blinking eyes, raised eyebrows...wondering if they're hearing right. Did their candidate for sheriff just gibber and stammer something about Sobamma Hussein bringing down the towers? Hilarious. I think it's something in the TV signals commanding people not to think about 9/11, and then when they try to articulate the govt position, it sounds absolutely ludicrous.

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: Bill D
Date: 04 Mar 08 - 10:59 AM

I count over 30...close to 40.... places this has been posted. Much easier than actually saying something of your own, huh? (and you left out the quotation marks)

I don't see how a piece with a few obvious by trivial truths can be mixed with 2/3 repetition of myths, out & out falsities and a total disregard for reason, and still get so many fools to fall for it.......well, yes I do.
"From false premises, anything follows" ... once suspicion & innuendo are your major sources, you can show that John Wayne was a commie.

No, I will NOT re-argue each little point. You **BELIEVE**, so you wouldn't see reason if it sat in your lap.


bye....

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Mar 08 - 12:02 PM

Guest Guest's cut'n'paste:

9/11 is the Litmus Test.

There is one thing that defines everyone over the course of these early years of this new century. That thing is the 9/11 attack. Everyone in government and every field of endeavour the world over is defined by their position on this event. It is not necessary to know the truth. It is only necessary to know the extent of the lies in order to define any leader in any position anywhere in the world. By what they have said and by what they have not said, one can accurately judge who is an enemy of the people's of the world. One can accurately determine who is a tool of the psychopaths or one of them.

Think about what you allow yourself to know. Think about what you pass by; ignore, deny and defend ...that defines you. It defines the degree of your personal courage, your relationship to the truth, your values, your principles and what you will pass on to your children and everyone you meet. It tells you in that place where your conscience must once have lived whether you are a hypocrite and a fool or whether something greater still lives within you.

Point 1: "Nineteen men pass through airport security." – Yes GG, utterly remarkable – millions do it each day.

Point 2: "Eleven of them are stopped and questioned but then allowed to board." – Another common everyday occurrence even happened to me on a number of occasions.

Point 3: "Several large passenger planes wind up hijacked and flown at high speed into enormous buildings." – Matter of recorded fact.

Point 4: "None of these men had shown previous capacity to accomplish this feat." – Now then GG can you explain how they could demonstrated any "previous capacity to accomplish this feat".

Point 5: "These men were armed with box cutters." – Not discovered when they boarded because these men who had "shown no previous capacity to accomplish this feat" had done their homework, they had thoroughly reconnoitred the airports and their security arrangements beforehand.

Point 6: "No jet fighters were scrambled to intercept these planes, although the authorities in charge of such actions knew immediately what was happening." – All that was known at the time was that aircraft had been hijacked. Please provide links that prove that at the time the aircraft were taken over that authorities knew they were going to be deliberately rammed into buildings. The writer of the article also displays a remarkable ignorance of the realities of interception, it is no simple matter and nowhere near as easy as shown in the movies.

Point 7: "Airport traffic controllers were ordered to destroy all recorded evidence of the event." – Then perhaps "smokingmirrors" a far from objective blogg can tell us all who it was that fictitiously ordered all recorded evidence destroyed. Apparently the only thing that was destroyed was one single tape recording (Note tape recording GG not a CD) that was made on the condition that it was never to entered as evidence and was only made as an aide-memoire for the ATC's on duty for when they gave their official witness statements later. Here is what the FAA, the 9/11 Commission and their Union Representatives said about it, as reported in the Washington Post:

START QUOTE - The FAA said it has provided thousands of documents to government investigators and the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, known as the 9/11 commission.

"We believe the audiotape in question appears to be consistent with written statements and other materials provided to FBI investigators and would not have added in any significant way to the information contained in what has already been provided to investigators and members of the 9/11 commission," said FAA spokesman Greg Martin.

The 9/11 commission does not allege that FAA employees were attempting to cover up information related to the terrorist attacks. A spokesman for the commission yesterday said that it has received all information it sought from the FAA and that it interviewed controllers involved with the tape.

Evidence in the report and from the air traffic controllers union suggests that the decisions to make the recording and later to destroy it were meant to conform to traditional protocols following a plane crash. The actions also were aimed at protecting controllers who were under excessive stress and emotion, according to union officials representing the controllers.

According to union officials representing air traffic controllers, it is almost unheard of to tape-record an air traffic controller's account of an accident. The normal procedure is for controllers to provide written statements after reviewing radar and other data. A union official representing the New York controllers agreed to the tape recording on Sept. 11 because the union wanted to help law enforcement officials, but only on the condition that the tape was to be a "temporary" document, a union official said. – END QUOTE

Point 8: "Some of them (Air Traffic Controllers) physically broke the CD's and scattered the pieces into different trash containers at the airports." – Now that would be rather difficult wouldn't it GG as there were no CD's there was only one single tape recording destroyed by a Federal Aviation Administration manager called Delaney.

Point 9: "On the day of the event several men were observed videotaping the attack as it happened." – I would rather imagine that a far, far, greater number than several could have been observed videotaping the attack as it happened, particularly by judging the cell phone camera coverage of the event.

Point 10: "They were seen to be dancing and celebrating as well." – Unproven opinion only not established fact; the men themselves denied this emphatically.

Point 11:   "The police stopped and arrested them. They were found to be Mossad agents. Some time later they were quietly released and returned to their home country with no reasons given." – There were over 1000 people rounded up that day, most like the Israelis were held for approximately 71 days before being released.

Point 12: "The men videotaping and celebrating had to have known about the attack in advance in order to have been in a position to film it." – does that apply to CNN, CBC, BBC, I believe that they all filmed the event too. GG can you shed any light on who forewarned them?

Point 13: "Bin Laden denied any connection to this attack. Direct evidence of this exists and no evidence of his admitting his involvement exists." – Strange that GG OBL admitted responsibility for the attacks on 29th/30th October 2004 in an authenticated message. According to interviews by Al-Jazeera as well as United States interrogations of al-Qaeda members Ramzi Binalshibh and Khalid Shaikh Mohammed (captured in 2002 and 2003 respectively), Khalid Mohammed was the instigator and prime organizer of the attacks. Binalshibh may have been picked as a hijacker but he failed to get into the U.S. - None of which is fabrication and hearsay.

Point 14: "As a result of this event, major wars have been launched." – Really GG "major wars launched" – Where have these major wars been launched?? Who are the protagonists??

Point 15: "Over a million people have died with nearly another 5 million displaced." – Nothing remotely like GG

Point 16: "The wreckage (WTC Debris) was gathered together and shipped overseas. No one was allowed to investigate it." – Just read the the US Navy's newest Amphibious Assault Ship USS New York was made from steel salvaged from Ground Zero. Also here's what one engineering major said about that:

New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg insisted there are better ways to study the tragedy of September 11.

"If you want to take a look at the construction methods and the design, that's in this day and age what computers do," said Bloomberg, a former engineering major. "Just looking at a piece of metal generally doesn't tell you anything."

Point 17: "In every event… in New York City… in a Pennsylvania field… at The Pentagon… all of the evidence is contradictory." – No it does not.

Point 18: "Any presidential candidate who does not dispute the official story is a traitor to their nation and a tool of those who accomplished the attack." – Now that would be good one, a real litmus test, for you to put to both Obama and Hilary GG, I somehow tend to think that in the wake of their answers they will find themselves classified as being too stupid to walk and chew gum at the same time.

Point 19: "Everyone in government; in the media, in entertainment, in organized religion, in the public eye and in the public who accepts and promotes the official story is either a traitor or a tool." – Clearly the ravings of a paranoid barking lunatic

Point 20: "Everyone who does not stand forth and speak truth to power is a coward, a liar and complicit in mass murder." – As above, how pathetic, "Everyone who doesn't agree wholeheartedly with what I say is a coward, a liar and complicit in mass murder.

Point 21: "I have included here only a very small portion of the damning evidence that runs counter to the official lies. The preponderance of evidence that refute the official lies is overwhelming." – In fact no "evidence" has been produced at all.

Point 22: "Hear me people. We know who you are and we know who we are. We see you lie and we see you murder. We see. You are going down. It may not be today and it may not be tomorrow but you are going down. And you… all of you who know and who abet and serve the empire of darkness; all of you who have sold your honor and integrity for a place at the table, for the opportunity to run your mouths about banal tripe and be a hearty-fellow-well-met among the psychopaths, who lurk like jackals among the lions, who are complicit in this evil… you will be shamed beyond endurance for having been such a whore and a fool for table scraps at the cost of your humanity." – Now then GG that I found absolutely hilarious, whoever wrote this is obviously as mad as a March hare.

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: GUEST,JTS
Date: 04 Mar 08 - 12:42 PM

Mick,

You haven't changed a hair since the first words I ever read from you. In that case you didn't mention me by name but made it clear that anyone who said what I said was a horse's patoot.

When you bluster onto a thread like this you are amusing, controversial, often sarcastic and always judgemental. It is your obvious that your tactic is ridicule and your object is to get people to give up their stances. It is certainly NOT an observation. You do not make a convincing case that it is not an attack. Is it a personal attack? I don't know. Is using an RPG as personal as a sniper rifle?   

I'm not asking you to stop doing this as I once did in the name of Mudcat harmony and to preserve a patina of fairness to protect your status as a defacto moderator. That horse has long left the barn. Also I like you the way you are. But please don't pretend that you are not on the attack when you do so. It is obvious, on the face of it, to any third party reading the words below, that an attack is taking place.

To continue to call this a planned demolition clearly indicates that evidence means nothing to you. You are so married to your delusions that evidence, no matter how clear and irrefutable, will not move you off your position. But your use of the old conspiracy tactic, which is to switch the burden of proof to those who don't buy into your delusions, won't work here. Scientists and engineers with no dog in this show have answered all your assertions and questions. These are not country and western singers, or comedians. They have laid out exactly how this happens.

There has yet to be given, by the tin hat brigade (many of whom inhabit these hallowed cyberhalls) a decent explanation of what motive there would be, nor has there been plausible rationale advanced as to how this planning could have gone on with absolutely no prior indication of it out there. Neither have there been an explanation of how the responsible media that would dearly love to uncover a conspiracy has yet to be able to find one ounce of anything that indicates one.

I just reread what I have typed and found myself shaking my head at why I bothered to waste the time.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: GUEST,JTS
Date: 04 Mar 08 - 01:19 PM

I, like Willie, find it difficult to believe that a couple of planes did all that damage. I am also certain that certain things were covered up. Certainly two things that were buried were the involvement of certain Saudi Allies of the Bushes and the danger to rescue workers from the fumes. Why were Israeli Mossad members dancing on to of theri van as they witnessed the destruction? Why was that story buried? But I am as skeptical of the various theories put forth as I am of the official version.

Ron and Bill, though I am somewhat with you about the science. We differ greatly about motives and capabilities. The Rangers and Marines have trained hundreds of men capable of the demolition. I've met a couple of them. I believe that given a small few tons of plastique, cell phone detonators and access to the buildings, the charges could have been placed over the labor day weekend. Why that would be done given the damage the planes themselves would have done eludes me. More drama? Easier cleanup? Destruction of evidence? Neocons do not think small.

As per motive isn't the PNAC enough? Anyone who would sign such a document is obviously a lunatic. The WTC/Pentagon attacks are so similar to the historic Pearl Harbor event that it is uncanny.   Why couldn't they have simply found a few more lunatics to set the charges? It seems very likely to me that those religio-patriotic fanatics who share a belief that God is order them to make America rule the word for their own benefit would talk to each other. On the other hand, Why couldn't the Bushes have enlisted their family friends, the Bin Ladens to find warm gullible bodies to fly those coincidentally nearly empty jumbo jets into those buildings? It seems to me that opportunity and motive are the most plausible components of these theories.

They couldn't keep a secret? Another red herring from you two. That is a non sequitor and not a particularly plausible one. Certain parts of the government are FANTASTIC at keeping secrets. Were the F117s flying for ten years before the general public knew. About half the Shuttle flights since the start of the program have been military. Can you tell us specifically the objectives of more than a few of those missions and whether they were accomplished? Those were "conspiracies" involving far more people and technology than demolishing a few buildings.

I don't think it happened that way. But it is not as implausible as you gentlemen are suggesting. There is one thing that I find very curious. If you three, Ron, Bill, and Mick feel that this ground has been covered enough, why, are you ridiculing those who do not? Why don't you give up the taunting and let the irrefutable facts as you see them speak for themselves?

You seem to imply that you do not like rancor, yet you say things that seem to feed it.

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: GUEST,JTS
Date: 04 Mar 08 - 01:34 PM

Point 15: "Over a million people have died with nearly another 5 million displaced." – Nothing remotely like GG

The 5 million displaced is certainly a low figure. From the News reports I have heard, nearly five million refugees have left Iraq. That does not include internal displacement and displacement within Afghanistan from the Taliban fight and a million in Lebanon from Neocon sponsored aggression.

I'm not sure about a million dead. But bodies, hundreds per day victims of violent death, have shown up at the Baghdad morgue that US propagandists will not count as war victims. Apparently they do not want to take credit for the chaos and civil strife that their carelessness allowed.

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: irishenglish
Date: 04 Mar 08 - 01:37 PM

So I'm stupid, a coward and a liar and complicit in mass murder because I believe the planes alone caused the destruction of the Towers? Funny, I had no idea I was such a bad person.
Seriously, for anyone who would accuse me of such bullshit, I raise my fist with middle finger proudly raised and say a loud fuck you. I do not believe any of this. One thing no one has addressed. If the government wanted this to happen, and knew about it, why didn't they take care of the "rebellious" passengers on the flight that crashed in Pennsylvania (sorry, forgot the flight number)? If some of you believe that all aspects of this were planned, targets chosen, etc. then why didn't that flight carry out its misssion? Surely your planners must have thought of the eventuality of passengers bravely fighting back and dealing with them. What's that? They didn't think of that, well that would mean that those passengers really did fight back, and they really did cause the plane to crash in rural Pennsylvania. Now where's the conspiracy threory in that?

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 04 Mar 08 - 01:39 PM

I will only speak for myself JTS. I am NOT taunting anyone. I will admit that early on in this discussion I allowed myself to get riled up and I said some personal comments that I regret - and took back.

I am of the belief that it is important that people like you, guest:guest, Carol and all others are allowed to speak your opinion.

However, when someone refutes what you consider "irrefutable facts" you tend to attack the individual making the point. IF you were truly being honest and keeping an open mind, you would see that while all of your points have not been disproven - there is enough information to the contrary.

You have also twisted Willie Nelson and Walter Mondale's words.   Please show me EXACTLY where Willie or Walter said that it would take more than a plane to bring down the buildings. That kind of twisting of words is EXACTLY what the conservative government has made a practice, leading me to believe that anonymous posts may have ulterior motives and are simply trying to cloud people from discovering the real truth.

I'm sorry if you feel that being challenged is "taunting", but if you are not prepared to discuss facts and opinions - there really is no discussion.

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 04 Mar 08 - 02:03 PM

"Rangers and Marines have trained hundreds of men capable of the demolition. I've met a couple of them. I believe that given a small few tons of plastique, cell phone detonators and access to the buildings, the charges could have been placed over the labor day weekend."

First, when did they have such access? While many enjoyed a holiday, there were simply too many people that were working and tourists visiting the building over that weekend that some people claim it was dark.   I am guessing it was a type when you wrote "small few tons", because a ton is a ton no matter the size. That is not an easy task for a handful of people. I would give our Rangers and Marines some credit - even if they have the skills, they still have the morals to realize that what they would be doing is a crime - and most would have balked.   

"The WTC/Pentagon attacks are so similar to the historic Pearl Harbor event that it is uncanny. "
It sounds like you are blaming the United States for committing Pearl Harbor, and I am sure you are aware that was not the case and has been proven false. If anything, both attacks caught our country with its pants down and showed the weaknesses of our military and lack of attention.

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: irishenglish
Date: 04 Mar 08 - 02:40 PM

Ron- did you ever notice that most conspiracy theories would have to have a supporting cast of thousands of people-planners, agents, etc all working on a cohesive task? Yet when you bring this up to the people who believe in said theories they just balk and go back to the conspiracy (in this case, the way the buildings came down). In other words, Oh, I don't know how they pulled it off, but I know our government was responsible!

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 04 Mar 08 - 02:53 PM

Irish- I have yet to see any evidence that our government was responsible for 9/11, but I do see plenty of signs that our governments irresponsibility led to 9/11 happening.    The theories that exist tend to support the Bin Laden Boys theory of creating the incident, building construction issues helping the downfall, and the George Bush Boys were responsible for our bumbling reaction to the events as they were taking place. Sure we were looking for an excuse to go to war, but there are less complicated and less risky plots that could have made it happen. Sorry, but I disagree when people say the motive was enough to pull off a Rube Goldberg-style demolition.

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: irishenglish
Date: 04 Mar 08 - 03:02 PM

Ron, I wasn't suggesting otherwise. I think our irresponsibility was a key cause, you're right. I was saying that the people who believe in these vast conspiracies seem to think that there were if not thousands, than hundreds of culpable people involved directly in 9/11. I don't believe that either.

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 04 Mar 08 - 03:18 PM

I'm not sure if they think that there were 1000's - I don't think they have figured out how it was done - which to me is a reason not to accept any theory.

Our irresponsibility was not a "cause", but a reason that prevented the operation from being stopped and the bloodsuckers used the event for their own gain. That doesn't mean they allowed it to happen, they were just chasing the ambulance.

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Mar 08 - 09:53 PM

Ron,

You haven't read what I said, not carefully enough to understand it anyway.

Read carefully and you might see what I intended to say, that your arguments are not plausible.

One argument was that the secret was too big to have been kept.

The US government can, and has kept lots of big secrets. It is not so implausible that certain agents could keep secrets about neocon involvement in 9/11.

Another of your arguments is that they couldn't find anyone to do it.

They have always been able to find a Gordon Libby or an Oliver North to do illegal things. Lots of misguided patriots have done evil things for what they thought was the greater good. The two I have just mentions are presently the subject of hero worship. North has his own frikkin TV show.

You have no way of knowing who had access to that complex of buildings in the months and years leading up to the disaster. The data you are pulling out of your ass is no more valid than that of the people you ridicule. You seem to be arguing things you can't possibly know. I have no idea why you would do so. But my lack of understanding of why you have done so does not prove to me that you haven't done it. Which is another one of your arguments. You Ron Olesko do not understand the conspirators motives therefor there can be no conspirators.

My inability to understand the motives of the neocons does not make me believe that they are innocent of coverups or even some measure of complicity in 9/11. Surely you saw the bald faced evil audacity of the lead up to the Iraq war. Do you honestly doubt their capacity to lie, cheat and sacrifice American lives for their own sordid ends? Where have you been for the past 7 years?

I haven't made up my mind about 9/11. I don't believe most aspects of the alternate theories. I certainly do not believe all of the official stories. I do know that there have been many coverups, but that is par for the course for the present administration. I would like to see an independent investigation, but that does not seem likely. Maybe Dick Chaney and Donald Rumsfeld should be waterboarded to find out what they know. After all, both insist that waterboarding isn't torture. Of course they both would also insist that there has been no coverups of issues surrounding 9/11.

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: GUEST,JTS
Date: 04 Mar 08 - 09:57 PM

The above
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Mar 08 - 09:53 PM
was me.

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 04 Mar 08 - 10:36 PM

JTS, you can try to spin words and tell me that I am supposedly pulling facts out of my ass, but as anyone who reads all of these posts can clealy see - you are putting up a smokescreen.   IF you can't argue my points without resorting to your pal Rush Limbaugh's tactics, then it is pointless.

Read and try to comprehend what everyone is telling you. You are not standing on anything of substance.

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 04 Mar 08 - 10:39 PM

"You have no way of knowing who had access to that complex of buildings in the months and years leading up to the disaster. "

I just had to point out your big, laughable, example. There were 20,000 people that worked in those buildings. There was always someone there. For you to be so presumptious to assume that YOU know who had access is an example of your flawed thinking. You've got to try to think for yourself and not spurt out the clippings that you find on flawed websites. Think!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: GUEST,JTS
Date: 05 Mar 08 - 01:57 AM

Olesko,

I haven't been presuming to know who had access to the building.   That has been your tactic. I have been saying that I don't know. That it is unknowable but that it may be plausible that illicit access was gained. You, fool that you appear to be, have called others foolish because you know that no one could have had access.    That knowledge is what you have pulled out of your ass. You are ridiculing people on the basis of information that at this point is unknowable.

Now you appear to be claiming that 20,000 people working in the offices somehow were constantly watching for government agents setting clandestine explosive charges and would somehow have known what the charges were if they saw them. Unless those buildings were almost totally unlike any I am familiar with, the office workers knew next to nothing about the framing and HVAC of the building. Yet you show supreme confidence that these office workers would have spotted anyone up to no good.

You continue to pull data out of your ass. What you say defies the simplest common sense. Look at the people who got on the planes. You no doubt will admit that they gamed the system to get past trained airport screeners with weapons. Yet you claim it to be impossible that a few men, dressed as janitors could have slipped a few dozen shaped charges past office workers?

Again, I am not saying that is what happened. I am saying that it is impossible for you to know that it didn't. But apparently it is not impossible for you to bluster that you do know.

Again, I am not endorsing any particular theory. I'm just confident, based on this government's record that we have not heard the whole story. 9/11 has been the centerpiece of the worst presidency in this country's history. Don't you think it deserves more scrutiny?   

I haven't looked at a single website.   I'm just talking about what could have happened. I'm using common sense. After your last few points, I'm not surprised that you don't recognize it. You don't appear to have any interest in what other people say or in the accepted facts of the case. You just grab a buzzword or two and attack with ridicule.

Stop making things up and using ridicule instead of knowledge or data to support your ass data. Knock it off. Grow up.

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 05 Mar 08 - 08:41 AM

Sorry JTS - I'm not falling for you chump tactics. I don't have knowledge of who had access, but I do have knowledge - public knowledge - that the building was occupied and heavily traffiked. No one can explain how "several small tons" could be brought in and wired up in a building as accessible and visible as the WTC.   I was in those buildings a number of times.

I've said before and I will say it again - the 9/11 story deserves more scrutiny, but I don't see any evidence - substantial or circumstantial - that would support the deliberate demolition of these buildings. The scrutiny is deserved for our preparedness, building construction, and reaction to the event.

You can play spin doctor all you want, but it isn't working. Anyone with a brain can see EXACTLY what you are trying to pull, and it doesn't work. You can attack ME all you want, but your smokescreen diversion from the real story does not change the truth. You aren't working.

JTS - stop making things up and using ridicule instead of knowledge or data to support your ass theories. Knock it off. Grow up.

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: CarolC
Date: 05 Mar 08 - 11:16 AM

Actually, there were service areas between the public access floors where workers could and did do their maintenance without ever coming into contact with the people working in the offices. It would have been a very simple thing to use those areas reasons other than maintenance. They could to it 24 hours a day, 7 days a week without the public ever knowing.

Subject: RE: BS: Willie Nelson, Walter Mondale & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 05 Mar 08 - 11:49 AM

You are right Carol, there were service areas, but to bring in that much explosives would have to assume that building security and others would have turned their heads. If you knew the buildings, the layout for not ever coming in contact with the public or being discovered by SOMEONE in the building seems remote. Yes, it COULD have happened, but it does not appear logical or practical when alternate means to accomplish a goal would have been safer and easier to pursue. In addition to these criminals having access to the building, the building was occupied 24/7 by regular employees and support staff.

Nothing is beyond the realm of possiblity, but for some people to say with such confidence that this is the way it happened is a real stretch.