|
28 Aug 10 - 01:19 PM (#2974640) Subject: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Lizzie Cornish 1 The relatives of some of those people who lost their lives on 9/11 have come together, alongside the '1000 Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth' campaigners to ask for the truth to be told at long last...They've created an advertisement to this end and are asking for donations to get it into the TV media... The BuildingWhat.org Advert |
|
28 Aug 10 - 01:59 PM (#2974667) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: John on the Sunset Coast That advert is very misleading, mo, because it offers the impression that those deaths cited may have been in the WTC7. Apparently there were no deaths in WTC7, except, perhaps, a single Federal Officer (which is in itself bad). There is no evidence of foul play at WTC7, only the same type of conjecture (dare I say 'conspiracy theory'?) which was applied to the twin towers. Popular Science (or Mechanics) debunked those theories quite well as I remember. I would think the same forces might have been in play in WTC7 also. |
|
28 Aug 10 - 02:00 PM (#2974668) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Q (Frank Staplin) What truth? The "1000 architects......" and these people believe that "explosive controlled demolition" destroyed the buildings, not the jet plane impacts and fires. The architect who is behind the request for investigation says there was evidence of advanced explosive material in the remains. The Washington Times ran a short article. Another paper put it in their "Swill Bucket" (blogs and letters). Looks like one of those 'cover-up' conspiracy stories. |
|
28 Aug 10 - 06:14 PM (#2974820) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Bill D No, no, no, no, no,...please no...not THAT again. We have been thru that SO many times. Asking "... for the truth to be told at long last.." implicitly assumes the 'truth' has NOT been told. If all you read is conspiracy theories, that is what you will believe. If you read the many careful explanations and answers TO the conspiracy theories, it all is much clearer. But....'donations'...hmmmm... an appeal TO all those who want to believe the conspiracy theories might bring in some $$$$, whether any 'truth' gets told or not. Who.. me?, suspicious?.....nawwwwww... |
|
28 Aug 10 - 06:25 PM (#2974826) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Lizzie Cornish 1 ".....7 World Trade Center housed SEC files relating to numerous Wall Street investigations, as well as other federal investigative files. All the files for approximately 3,000 to 4,000 SEC cases were destroyed. While some were backed up in other places, others were not, especially those classified as confidential.[50] Files relating Citigroup to the WorldCom scandal were lost.[51] The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission estimates over 10,000 cases will be affected.[52] The Secret Service had its largest field office, with more than 200 employees, in WTC 7 and lost investigative files. Says one agent: "All the evidence that we stored at 7 World Trade, in all our cases, went down with the building."[53] The collapse of 7 World Trade Center is remarkable because it was the first known instance of a tall building collapsing primarily as a result of uncontrolled fires.[32]..." Taken from here.... No, you're quite right, Bill, it was simply that Building 7 'caught fire' all on it's own, probably in sympathy with The Twin Towers, over a block away...and there was absolutely no other possible reason on earth as to why it just er....fell straight down... |
|
28 Aug 10 - 06:26 PM (#2974829) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Lizzie Cornish 1 Unless....................................... |
|
28 Aug 10 - 07:05 PM (#2974843) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: gnu The fires were caused by the initial demolition of the two towers. The fire supression system didn't have the capacity to extinguish the fires due to the load on the water system (that fact is kinda up in the air, but I doubt the building could have been built with inadequate standpipe pumps). The building failed by reduced load bearing capacity of structural elements on the 13th floor. Read the documented evidence. Really... READ it. Don't listen to someone who says THEY read it and want your money to find out the truth. Or, send in your money and feel good. Better yet, send it to me and make me feel good. |
|
28 Aug 10 - 08:08 PM (#2974881) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Q (Frank Staplin) Briefly- On Sept. 11, 2001, 7 WTC was damaged by debris when the nearby North Tower of the WTC collapsed. The debris ignited fires, which continued to burn throughout the afternoon on lower floors of the building. The building's internal fire suppression system lacked water pressure to fight the fires, and the building collapsed completely at 5:21 pm. The collapse began when a critical column on the 13th floor buckled and triggered structural failure throught, which was first visible from the exterior with the crumbling of the east mechanical penthouse at 5:20 pm. Above from Wikipedia, but also can be found by searching newspaper archives. "As the North Tower collapsed....heavy debris hit 7 WTC causing damage to the south face....a large vertical gash on the center-bottom corner from the 8th to 18th floors and other damage as high as the 18th floor. The sprinkler system was not fully automatic but required manual initiation of the electrical fire pumps...water pressure was low with little or no water to feed the sprinklers. During the afternoon, fires were seen on floors 6-10, 11-14, 19-22 and 29-30. A bulge was noted by firefighters between the 10 and 13th floors, a sign that the building was unstable and might collapse. About 3:30 FDNY Chief Nigro decided to evacuate the area. No casualties were associated with the collapse. FEMA investigation- Fires on multiple stories exposed structural elements to high temperatures for a sufficient period of time to reduce their strength to the point of collapse. Further investigations by NIST expanded and somewhat altered the FEMA report, but the idea of thermite or other explosive was dismissed. The Secret Service and SEC lost unbacked evidence, as noted in Lizzie's post. |
|
28 Aug 10 - 09:25 PM (#2974907) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Bill D From someone who was there and made decisions ------------------------------------------------------------------ This is a message from Chief of Department (ret.) Daniel Nigro, addressing the conspiracy theories surrounding the collapse of WTC7. Thank you very much for this statement, Mr. Nigro. The work you and your colleagues did that day will never be forgotten. "Regarding WTC 7: The long-awaited US Government NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) report on the collapse of WTC 7 is due to be published at the end of this year (although it has been delayed already a few times [ adding fuel to the conspiracy theorists fires!]). That report should explain the cause and mechanics of the collapse in great detail. Early on the afternoon of September 11th 2001, following the collapse of WTC 1 & 2, I feared a collapse of WTC 7 (as did many on my staff). The reasons are as follows: 1 - Although prior to that day high-rise structures had never collapsed, The collapse of WTC 1 & 2 showed that certain high-rise structures subjected to damage from impact and from fire will collapse. 2. The collapse of WTC 1 damaged portions of the lower floors of WTC 7. 3. WTC 7, we knew, was built on a small number of large columns providing an open Atrium on the lower levels. 4. numerous fires on many floors of WTC 7 burned without sufficient water supply to attack them. For these reasons I made the decision (without consulting the owner, the mayor or anyone else - as ranking fire officer, that decision was my responsibility) to clear a collapse zone surrounding the building and to stop all activity within that zone. Approximately three hours after that order was given, WTC 7 collapsed. Conspiracy theories abound and I believe firmly that all of them are without merit." Regards, Dan Nigro Chief of Department FDNY (retired) |
|
28 Aug 10 - 09:38 PM (#2974911) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Bill D Sadly, those who wish to believe there was some complex conspiracy will read ALL explanations and simply refuse to accept them. They will find new rationalizations and ...umm... 'evidence' to support what they already are emotionally committed to. Experts have looked at building blueprints and photos, examined recordings, and conducted tests and SHOWN why WTC7 was an unusual building hit with never before seen combinations of damage. Those who shrilly keep crying "no building ever before has fallen like this!!" are just ignoring the relevant facts in favor of opinions of amateurs who viewed selected images from specific angles and heard out-of-context comments from other amateurs. PLEASE educate yourselves about how it really happened instead of endless repetition of speculation based on incomplete comprehension of the facts.....please? |
|
28 Aug 10 - 10:19 PM (#2974922) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: catspaw49 Must we have another of these gawdamned threads? Aren't the other 9673 enough? Like who the fuck is going to change anyone's mind? I gotta' mysterious explosion right here for you......... *******BOOM******* |
|
29 Aug 10 - 03:29 AM (#2974986) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Lizzie Cornish 1 Before I go, Spaw...I'll just leave this. You don't have to look at it. Firefighters for 9/11 Truth on the collapse of Building 7 You guys believe what you want. That's your freedom of choice. But it seems that many Firefighters disagree with Dan Nigro and feel the same deep unease that so many others do about this. I know we're not 'supposed' to feel that, or even think that, but hey, we do... And I've had the same kind of bad days that you had yesterday, Spaw. No reason to take that line with me over it, though. I'm sorry for your loss..been there, cried an ocean. |
|
29 Aug 10 - 04:48 PM (#2975394) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Mrrzy woof. |
|
29 Aug 10 - 05:33 PM (#2975413) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: gnu "woof."??? The boy? |
|
29 Aug 10 - 10:34 PM (#2975592) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: ichMael Jane Standley got ahead of the script on 9/11. The building collapsed about 20 minutes after that was broadcast, as I recall. |
|
29 Aug 10 - 10:50 PM (#2975608) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Bill D good god in freaking heaven! That again??? The BBC has SAID it was simple mis-communication in the furor... read all about it (near the bottom...but while you are there, read the rest also...and look at the pretty pictures) |
|
30 Aug 10 - 12:49 AM (#2975650) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: The Fooles Troupe QUOTE "You never find yourself until you face the truth." -Pearl Bailey UNQUOTE Now I think I understand why Bill didn't go home... :-P |
|
30 Aug 10 - 08:14 AM (#2975791) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: The Fooles Troupe "Those who shrilly keep crying "no building ever before has fallen like this!!"" ... obviously don't know about those that have .... sigh ... |
|
30 Aug 10 - 02:11 PM (#2976040) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Stringsinger Under the Bush Administration we have seen the biggest conspiracy theory ever perpetrated on the American public regarding 911. We have not been told the truth. It may take years for it to come out. If you believe what the major news sources are telling you about this (including the BBC) , I have a Bridge in Brooklyn for sale. |
|
30 Aug 10 - 02:31 PM (#2976060) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Little Hawk I very much doubt that it will ever come out, Stringsinger. There's too much at stake. Too many vested interests to protect. I also know that if anyone posting here managed to change the mind of anyone else who is posting here regarding what occurred on 9/11...it woudn't make any difference anyway. Nothing would change. No one who is in a powerful enough position to do anything about it would care...or even notice. Nothing would happen. That's why I intend to save myself further needless stress, and I will probably not be posting here. End of story. |
|
31 Aug 10 - 12:14 AM (#2976430) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: LadyJean There is nothing I would like more than to have the world know the Republican Party for the criminals they are. But it would have been impossible to keep something like the destruction of the WTC quiet for nine years. They would have needed a small army to accomplish what they are alleged to have done, and you can't keep a small army quiet. |
|
31 Aug 10 - 02:47 PM (#2976849) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Q (Frank Staplin) Glad to know my relatives (and 40 per cent the U.S. population) are criminals. |
|
31 Aug 10 - 03:24 PM (#2976879) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Greg F. Holy shit, and yet more World Trade Center Lunatic Fringe Bullshit. Don't these cretins ever get tired of shurning this garbage out? Now LISTEN UP, ALL OF YOU, Goddamn it- it' been PROVEN beyond a SSHADOW of a doubt that it was extra-terrestrial Space Aliens - using most likely Cardassian disruptor technology, also known as a Spiral-wave disruptor, that brought down the Towers. Get it? |
|
31 Aug 10 - 04:14 PM (#2976920) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Lizzie Cornish 1 >>>>>But it would have been impossible to keep something like the destruction of the WTC quiet for nine years. They would have needed a small army to accomplish what they are alleged to have done, and you can't keep a small army quiet. <<<<< JFK |
|
31 Aug 10 - 04:56 PM (#2976962) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Wesley S WHAT - JFK BLEW UP THAT BUILDING??????? |
|
31 Aug 10 - 05:39 PM (#2976993) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Ebbie Damn. I just knew they were exaggerating when they told us that JFK had died. |
|
31 Aug 10 - 06:52 PM (#2977060) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: The Fooles Troupe Actually, on the matter of JFK - have just seen an old ex FBIer claim that certain well know rightwingers, friends of one of the main guys doing the investigation ... oh look it up for yersleves ... ;-) |
|
31 Aug 10 - 07:02 PM (#2977069) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Bill D I have seen it 'proven' that LBJ aided & abetted the JFK death...and that the Mafia orchestrated it...and that the Cubans were behind it...and that various CIA operatives were involved. An army of that size could have done 9/11.... yessir! |
|
31 Aug 10 - 09:41 PM (#2977164) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: The Fooles Troupe Bill. I saw that doco - the Russians were in on it too.... |
|
01 Sep 10 - 02:06 AM (#2977225) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Amergin Well if anyone's seen the movie Bubba Hotep, you would know that JFK became a black man that looks much like Ossie Davis, and is now living in a retirement home in East Texas. |
|
01 Sep 10 - 07:37 AM (#2977370) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Wesley S Say - How old was Barak Obama when JFK was "assassinated"? |
|
01 Sep 10 - 06:18 PM (#2977928) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Ebbie Just over two years old. August 1961 to November 1963 |
|
01 Sep 10 - 06:19 PM (#2977931) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Ebbie Oh, darn. I'm sure that was a rhetorical question. |
|
01 Sep 10 - 06:37 PM (#2977940) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Amergin Hey he could have held the high powered rifle and shot the president! I see his evil plan now.....murder JFK and claim he was too young...such evil genius Obama has.... |
|
02 Sep 10 - 11:12 AM (#2978471) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Ebbie And then he went right home and fixed his birth certificate to say that he was born in the US. (No wonder people don't trust him.) |
|
02 Sep 10 - 08:42 PM (#2978927) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Little Hawk I don't trust him for much more prosaic reasons, Ebbie. He wants to pursue the war in Afghanistan. I regard that as a very poor idea. If the Republicans were in, it would probably be even worse, though! ;-) He also claims to be withdrawing from Iraq when there are still a huge number of American military personnel there, a whole series of huge American military bases that show no signs of going away, and some 75,000 "private contractors" (American mercenaries) there also. Again, if the Republicans were in, it would probably be even worse! Note that I am saying nothing about 911. Nothing at all. Why throw tomatoes or eggs at a brick wall? Would the wall care? Would it fall down? Would it go away? No. But my arm would eventually get tired, and it would be a waste of good food. Actually, I stopped in here this time just because I'm momentarily at loose ends and it was fun typing this for a minute or so. Just idle amusement, nothing more... So feel free to carry on vigorously in my absence...(all those choosing to post here, I mean) ;-) I'm sure you will. |
|
02 Sep 10 - 10:02 PM (#2978959) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Bill D "He wants to pursue the war in Afghanistan." Wants?? He inherited it, and is faced with having to let go a tiger's tail in some reasonable way. You don't just pack up & go home after all that's transpired...especially when Bush let it deteriorate while he played in Iraq. (Idle amusement can lead to all sorts of things) *grin* |
|
04 Sep 10 - 09:25 AM (#2979868) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Lizzie Cornish 1 Around 47 minutes and 15 seconds in.... Kevin McPadden, First Responder, you may want to listen to him, you may not. Either way, Kevin was *there* when Building 7 came down, and he saw what happened... The 9/11 Chronicles - Full Film |
|
04 Sep 10 - 10:22 AM (#2979886) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Lizzie Cornish 1 BBC Film - 'The Third Tower - Part 1 of 6'(all Parts on Youtube) Isn't it amazing that the ONLY building EVER to have just fallen straight downwards, because of 'fire', had all the metal from it taken away to be melted down, rather than investigated by every scientist on the planet.... Isn't it amazing that Larry Silverstein who owned the building gave the order to 'pull it' rather than saying "Get everyone the hell out of there!" Anyway..no-one has to watch this, or question anything, if they so choose.....And of course NOT questioning *anything* but simply believing all you are told is what The Good Citizens do... Lizzie...(one of the Insubordinate Citizens, thank God!) |
|
04 Sep 10 - 10:40 AM (#2979896) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Ebbie You are a johnny-come-lately, I must say. Broaden your reading, OK? |
|
04 Sep 10 - 10:44 AM (#2979900) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Amergin Ebbie, pay her no mind....it is just another Horny Blizzard rant.... |
|
04 Sep 10 - 10:51 AM (#2979905) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Bill D ...and no, it's not amazing at all if you read something OTHER than sites which confirm your paranioa. |
|
04 Sep 10 - 11:06 AM (#2979916) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Lizzie Cornish 1 Bet you lot believe there really *were* Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq too, huh? |
|
04 Sep 10 - 11:11 AM (#2979920) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Amergin There were....the SAS smuggled them out after Hussein fell...and they are now hiding them in the London Underground....I know this because I read it on the internet. |
|
04 Sep 10 - 11:38 AM (#2979931) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: VirginiaTam now climbing under my school desk and looking up with bewilderment and fear at the ugly yellow and black fallout shelter sign. This is a test of the imploding thread network. The posters in involuntary cooperation with the MMC and other "authorities" have developed this test to keep you entertained in the event of nothing happening. If this had been an actual event, you would have been instructed to think up and write down some seriously scary shit. .... followed by test pattern of some weird circles and a Indian chief in profile on a graph..... beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep |
|
04 Sep 10 - 11:40 AM (#2979932) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Bill D As soon as WE arrived in Iraq, there were WMDs there....sort of a self-fulfilling hypothesis. |
|
04 Sep 10 - 02:06 PM (#2979995) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Lizzie Cornish 1 HA! Nice try, Bill. But just remember, the same folks who told you there WERE WMD's there, also told you the 'official' story of 9/11, whilst letting every Bin Laden going, leave the country.....but then most of them were family buddies of Ma and Pa Bush. Just watching 'Loose Change' at the moment... |
|
04 Sep 10 - 02:11 PM (#2979997) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: VirginiaTam that MMC above should read MMF (Mudcat Mucis Forum) |
|
04 Sep 10 - 02:13 PM (#2979998) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: VirginiaTam awwww feck... MUSIC not Mucis I give up. |
|
04 Sep 10 - 02:21 PM (#2980001) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Lizzie Cornish 1 I rather like the idea of a Mudcat Mucis Forum, Tam. LOL A place to visit when your doze is dripping.. :0) |
|
04 Sep 10 - 02:39 PM (#2980006) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Q (Frank Staplin) Bin Laden is no longer in Waziristan whatever. He is working for BP as a safety inspector. |
|
04 Sep 10 - 05:01 PM (#2980053) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Bill D "...the same folks who told you there WERE WMD's there, also told you the 'official' story of 9/11,... No, that's not the case. "During the same administration" does NOT equal "the same folks". Bush and Cheney & Wolfowitz are far different than the members of the 9/11 committee. and "Loose Change" was 2 kids with an agenda and a pre-conceived outcome. |
|
04 Sep 10 - 05:33 PM (#2980070) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Ebbie Incidentally, let's make that 'mucUs', not mucis. Assaults mine eye. |
|
04 Sep 10 - 08:32 PM (#2980141) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Q (Frank Staplin) Let's make beautiful mucus together. |
|
05 Sep 10 - 12:16 PM (#2980421) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Lizzie Cornish 1 Tenet testified before a public hearing of the Sept. 11 Commission investigating 9/11, that he did not meet with Bush in August 2001, the month before the September 11 attacks. The same evening after the hearings, a CIA spokesman corrected Tenet's testimony, stating that Tenet did indeed meet with Bush twice in August.[17] Tenet in his memoir writes of his memorable visit to Bush at Bush's ranch in Crawford, Texas, August 2001.[18] >>>>From me:"...the same folks who told you there WERE WMD's there, also told you the 'official' story of 9/11,..." From Bill: No, that's not the case. "During the same administration" does NOT equal "the same folks". Bush and Cheney & Wolfowitz are far different than the members of the 9/11 committee.<<<<< John Farmer, senior counsel to the Commission stated that the Commission "discovered that...what government and military officials had told Congress, the Commission, the media, and the public about who knew what when — was almost entirely, and inexplicably, untrue." Farmer continues: "At some level of the government, at some point in time … there was a decision not to tell the truth about what happened...The (NORAD) tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public."[19] Thomas Kean, the head of the 9/11 Commission, concurred: "We to this day don't know why NORAD told us what they told us, it was just so far from the truth."[20] Taken from here.. |
|
05 Sep 10 - 08:18 PM (#2980660) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Bill D That doesn't say very much, actually...even IF it were true. a "decision not to tell the truth about what happened." does not signify that they KNEW the whole 'truth'. It could mean that the vague phrase.."...some level of the government, at some point in time …" merely indicated an attempt to cover up "someone's" inefficiency or slow response. NOTHING in that phrase asserts or indicates any knowlege of or participation in planning the attacks...or even in any significant cover-up. You have to be VERY careful what you read into remarks that are (currently) inserted at the bottom of an article of an editable Wiki. If those sentences you quote were that significant AND true, at least one of the 23,217 conspiracy theorists would have done something more with it..... What's that you say? You are going Googling to find out? Have fun... |
|
06 Sep 10 - 03:53 AM (#2980792) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Lizzie Cornish 1 Noooooo...I've worked out your George W. Bill... ;0) I'll write out a thousand times "I believe *everything* any Government tells me" Course, it won't make a blind bit of difference, but hey, it might make you feel better.... |
|
06 Sep 10 - 11:28 AM (#2980949) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Bill D MY George W.??? not hardly... *I* wouldn't believe ol' George if he stated "the sun rose this morning". I wouldn't even believe him if claimed to BE part of a plot. His administration had nothing to do with 9/11...but they sure USED it to fuel their other agendas and vendettas. |
|
06 Sep 10 - 11:38 AM (#2980956) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Stringsinger Popular Mechanics or Science did not successfully answer all the questions that were posed by 911. They did a kind of spin as most popular magazines do who owe their allegiance to those pulling the strings. As to full reportage on 911, yes it is possible to keep facts hidden for years because it involves more than just Bush or the GOP. The Pentagon has never been forthcoming in its facts to the American public. Look how they tried to keep pictures of bodies off of the news media. The reasons for going into Iraq were successfully hidden also. Now, there is research that JFK was killed by organized crime in Texas. This is not popular in the news however. Check out Thom Hartmann and Lamar Waldron's book, "Ultimate Sacrifice". It is possible that the answers to 911 are not fully known and will not be because there is a vested interest in keeping it alive to justify foreign invasions into places like Afghanistan. The Taliban, (odious as they are) did not create 911. But the "boys must have their toys" and the generals have to be given something to do. So now it's fashionable to call people who want the real truth about this incident "conspiracy theorists". The question remains, who are the real conspiracy theorists and are they in the present administration? The facts need to come out before there can be a true assessment of what happened. |
|
06 Sep 10 - 11:58 AM (#2980965) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Bill D *sigh*.... and how will you determine if and when "the facts" have come out? There are as many JFK theories as 9/11 theories. I rather imagine that if Lee Oswald had lived and made a full confession the HE was the only plotter, there would still be doubters. ....as I have said before, there are those who still believe the "100 MPG carburetor" is being hidden, because obviously, we don't HAVE it. There's nothing one can say to the reasoning that says: "I'll know 'the truth' when it conforms to my suspicions." |
|
06 Sep 10 - 12:11 PM (#2980970) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Lizzie Cornish 1 So, Bill, how do *you* know the *truth* then? |
|
06 Sep 10 - 12:53 PM (#2980991) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Bill D What I 'accept' is the clearest explanations I can find that do not seem contradictory and do not require complex, unproven speculation. Most/many 9/11 conspiracy theories have been traced back to Stephen Jones, whose data gathering is random and self-serving. (all posted and explained before) These theories are de facto assertions, and assertions require the asserter to provide convincing evidence, not just circular reasoning using 'facts' which are often just-plain-wrong. (and yes, I HAVE read the purported 'evidence' in detail, and also the careful refutations of those faux evidence fueled theories. Many of those I debate with have NOT tried to absorb any facts which do not support their suspicions) |
|
06 Sep 10 - 02:38 PM (#2981037) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Stu The principle of parsimony fledged and fled this nest a long time ago. In fact, it was probably never here in the first place. |
|
06 Sep 10 - 02:54 PM (#2981046) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Q (Frank Staplin) Parsimony. 1. The quality of being careful with money or resources. 2. The quality or state of being stingy. 3. Economy in the use of means to an end. Yep, and moreover the Parsees probably had a hand in it since they are Zoroastrians. |
|
06 Sep 10 - 11:44 PM (#2981315) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: LadyJean Forgive me, I should have said Bush administration, not Republicans. Most of my family were Republicans, including two politicians. But they were PROGRESSIVES! My mom was green before it was cool to be green. My dad began my history lessons when I was 3, telling me stories about what he considered great moments in our nation's past. When we got to the Scopes trial, the heroes of that story, according to him, were Scopes and Darrow. Dad used to watch The 700 Club and laugh at the idea that people still talked that way in the 20th century. Mom was screamingly pro choice, and she saw no reason why gays shouldn't have the same rights as the rest of us. This is not my parents' Republican party. I wish it was. |
|
06 Sep 10 - 11:54 PM (#2981317) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Donuel Hmmm, where are all the mucis love songs and ballads? Lady JEan has grat parents. I just wrote in another thread that as the pendulum of power swings even the most divergent groups can switch their characteristics over time. The Repulbican party began its largest shift right with Goldwater, who now would be too liberal to be elected. |
|
06 Sep 10 - 11:56 PM (#2981318) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: Donuel Lets build a mudcat cafe 2 blocks from ground 0. We can sing where have all the muslims gone, oh well its getting late. |
|
07 Sep 10 - 10:16 PM (#2982019) Subject: RE: BS: Building What? 9/11 From: The Fooles Troupe QUOTE So now it's fashionable to call people who want the real truth about this incident "conspiracy theorists". UNQUOTE Pardon me! "people who want the real truth about ANYTHING" do not need to mindlessly repeat intellectual garbage, and do not NEED to rant on about 'conspiracy theories' - you offend me Sir! |
