CHOMSKY FEARS 9/11 DEBATE
Fool me once... | 15.09.2006 02:26 | Education | Repression | Social Struggles | World
When questioned about his stance on the 9/11 issue, Chomsky timidly regurgitates the official line by saying that the version we are force-fed by the mainstream media is "pretty much what happened. He claims that he hasn't seen any "credible evidence" to suggest otherwise
It's all fine and good that Mr. Chomsky confronts Israel for its phony justification for mass murder in Lebanon [ 
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/09/345826.shtml ]-- an obvious attempt by him to regain the trust of the anti-war movement, which is finally embracing the 9/11 Truth movement -- but let us *NEVER FORGET* where he stands on the most important issue of our time: the state-terror apparatus that is plunging the world into a totalitarian fascist nightmare.
When questioned on Dr. Hesham Tillawi's online video program about his stance on the 9/11 issue, Chomsky timidly regurgitates the official line by saying that the version we are force-fed by the mainstream media is "pretty much what happened", with 19 Arab hijackers responsible for the planning and execution of the attacks. He claims that he hasn't seen any "credible evidence" to suggest otherwise.
[ http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5515995256268661504 ]
At this point in the interview, the informed viewer and reader of his work will ask: "Where has Chomsky been for the last five years? Has he not heard of the work of Scholars for 9/11 Truth, particularly the work of engineer Dr. Judy Wood, physicist Dr. Stephen Jones, philosopher Dr. James Fetzer and theologian Dr. David Griffin? Has he not read about Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez's appeal to the world for an investigation into 9/11?"
CHOMSKY’S LACK OF EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT HIS 9/11 POSITION
How is it possible that he hasn’t “seen any credible evidence” when the Scholars” work has been posted all over the internet and has even made the corporate press because of the controversy it is spawning? Is it not arrogance on his part to dismiss these academics as "lacking credibility"? Where is Chomsky's evidence for this dismissal of his colleagues' work?
Instead he cites an imaginary and illusory body of "thousands of highly qualified engineers" with the "appropriate credentials" that can apparently prove how the official collapse model is scientifically sound. Who are these engineers? Why won’t they, along with the NIST engineers, debate the peer-reviewed science put forth by the Scholars? This group of brave scientists and intellectuals not only possess "appropriate credentials" and backgrounds, but, together, have systematically dismantled the FEMA, NIST and 9/11 Commission cover-up reports. Is it not revealing that these government "scientists" collectively refuse to publicly debate Scholars for 9/11 Truth!!!
[ http://www.teamliberty.net/id273.html ]
So where does Chomsky position himself within this debate? Why is he openly accusing the 9/11 truth movement of "wasting an enormous amount of time and energy", that "could be better focused on more important issues"? What issues are more important than the events that have led us into an era of "permanent war"? Why is he ignoring the world public's call for an international and independent public inquiry?
NECESSARY QUESTIONS ON UNNECESSARY ILLUSIONS
In light of all this, we are forced to ask some very unpleasant questions with regards to Chomsky's political and moral agenda, as well as his ideological allegiances. Does he know something about the Israeli connection to terrorism and 9/11 and is he afraid to make it public? (Do recall Sharon's explicit declaration on October 3rd, 2001, that "We, the Jewish people, control America and the Americans know it." [IAP News])
Is Chomsky an ideological supporter of Zionism, as claimed by Dr. Norman G. Finkelstein, author of The Holocaust Industry, in an interview given to Snowshoe Films? [ Watch "Straussians, My Behind" http://www.snowshoefilms.com/palestine.html ] If he is an ideological Zionist, then is he covering up the Israeli power-elite's involvement in international terrorism? Isn't it interesting, if not telling, that he avoids all discussion of the Federal Reserve and its Zionist control when he discusses economic power in America? Is this not lying-by-omission, something that he exposes with regard to the corporate media in his book, "Manufacturing Consent"?
Is his stance with regard to 9/11 and "terrorism" not an indirect means of "manufacturing consent" for the "War on Terror"? If so, Chomsky is complicit in the very power system and war machine that he has always condemned. Is it not significant that he has remained employed, despite his dissident activities, by one of the largest weapons developers in the United States, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), where he began working directly under the U.S. Army during the 1950s. [ http://www.questionsquestions.net/docs0209/0920_response.html ]
This leads us to this crucial question: is Chomsky's 9/11 position a result of his fear of power, do they have 'dirt' on him, or has he always been a high-level agent of state-propaganda working only within the acceptable confines of a specific, yet ambiguous ideological framework?
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/09/345826.shtml ]-- an obvious attempt by him to regain the trust of the anti-war movement, which is finally embracing the 9/11 Truth movement -- but let us *NEVER FORGET* where he stands on the most important issue of our time: the state-terror apparatus that is plunging the world into a totalitarian fascist nightmare. When questioned on Dr. Hesham Tillawi's online video program about his stance on the 9/11 issue, Chomsky timidly regurgitates the official line by saying that the version we are force-fed by the mainstream media is "pretty much what happened", with 19 Arab hijackers responsible for the planning and execution of the attacks. He claims that he hasn't seen any "credible evidence" to suggest otherwise.
[
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5515995256268661504 ] At this point in the interview, the informed viewer and reader of his work will ask: "Where has Chomsky been for the last five years? Has he not heard of the work of Scholars for 9/11 Truth, particularly the work of engineer Dr. Judy Wood, physicist Dr. Stephen Jones, philosopher Dr. James Fetzer and theologian Dr. David Griffin? Has he not read about Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez's appeal to the world for an investigation into 9/11?"
CHOMSKY’S LACK OF EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT HIS 9/11 POSITION
How is it possible that he hasn’t “seen any credible evidence” when the Scholars” work has been posted all over the internet and has even made the corporate press because of the controversy it is spawning? Is it not arrogance on his part to dismiss these academics as "lacking credibility"? Where is Chomsky's evidence for this dismissal of his colleagues' work?
Instead he cites an imaginary and illusory body of "thousands of highly qualified engineers" with the "appropriate credentials" that can apparently prove how the official collapse model is scientifically sound. Who are these engineers? Why won’t they, along with the NIST engineers, debate the peer-reviewed science put forth by the Scholars? This group of brave scientists and intellectuals not only possess "appropriate credentials" and backgrounds, but, together, have systematically dismantled the FEMA, NIST and 9/11 Commission cover-up reports. Is it not revealing that these government "scientists" collectively refuse to publicly debate Scholars for 9/11 Truth!!!
[
http://www.teamliberty.net/id273.html ] So where does Chomsky position himself within this debate? Why is he openly accusing the 9/11 truth movement of "wasting an enormous amount of time and energy", that "could be better focused on more important issues"? What issues are more important than the events that have led us into an era of "permanent war"? Why is he ignoring the world public's call for an international and independent public inquiry?
NECESSARY QUESTIONS ON UNNECESSARY ILLUSIONS
In light of all this, we are forced to ask some very unpleasant questions with regards to Chomsky's political and moral agenda, as well as his ideological allegiances. Does he know something about the Israeli connection to terrorism and 9/11 and is he afraid to make it public? (Do recall Sharon's explicit declaration on October 3rd, 2001, that "We, the Jewish people, control America and the Americans know it." [IAP News])
Is Chomsky an ideological supporter of Zionism, as claimed by Dr. Norman G. Finkelstein, author of The Holocaust Industry, in an interview given to Snowshoe Films? [ Watch "Straussians, My Behind"
http://www.snowshoefilms.com/palestine.html ] If he is an ideological Zionist, then is he covering up the Israeli power-elite's involvement in international terrorism? Isn't it interesting, if not telling, that he avoids all discussion of the Federal Reserve and its Zionist control when he discusses economic power in America? Is this not lying-by-omission, something that he exposes with regard to the corporate media in his book, "Manufacturing Consent"? Is his stance with regard to 9/11 and "terrorism" not an indirect means of "manufacturing consent" for the "War on Terror"? If so, Chomsky is complicit in the very power system and war machine that he has always condemned. Is it not significant that he has remained employed, despite his dissident activities, by one of the largest weapons developers in the United States, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), where he began working directly under the U.S. Army during the 1950s. [
http://www.questionsquestions.net/docs0209/0920_response.html ] This leads us to this crucial question: is Chomsky's 9/11 position a result of his fear of power, do they have 'dirt' on him, or has he always been a high-level agent of state-propaganda working only within the acceptable confines of a specific, yet ambiguous ideological framework?
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org
Fool me once...
Comments
Hide 6 hidden comments or hide all comments
This article CENSORED on Portland Indymedia
15.09.2006 03:51
The article itself was deleted from the server and is now unavailable.
Portland has been INFILTRATED by COINTELPRO moles, either cyber or real.
Fooled us all
oh no chomsky's a lizard too
15.09.2006 05:44
my keyboard is eating my fingers
the CIA are using their mind control satelite weapon on all free thinkers
chomsky has been replaced by a CIA lizard clone
...
lizard slayer
They're here ....
15.09.2006 05:49
Oh yes - the moles are alive and well and they are here too
a fly in their face
Chomsky's parrotting of Bush line is proof of racist media plan
15.09.2006 09:03
In Britain, all the 'liberal and tolerant' participants in the BBC, Guardian and Times platforms in the days before the current phase of the Blair-Bush genocide operation against Muslim populated, energy-rich states and territories, found no obstacle to their conversion to fully active backers of the genocidal line.
Chomsky's mask has lasted a bit longer than those of the lesser-protected propagandists for imperialist racist genocide.
All seekers of the truth must heave a sigh of relief at Chomsky's confirmation of his real identity.
Now, will those Muslims and other targets of racist imperialist genocide wake up and start to sort out the thoughts before rushing to the nearest racist media propaganda unit to line up behind George Galloway and others of his ilk to rubbish the truthful ones who have said all along that the terrorist atmosphere has been one of the strategic tools created by the Bush Blair axis.
Bush and Blair are not alone.
They are front men of the evil they represent.
They are as evil as the faceless forces that they represent and dance to.
Question: what is to be done about the so-called centres of objective learning and inquiry - the western universities?
There is nothing in the rest of the world that can match the evil that is preached against humanity by these centres of evil learning.
Chomsky has often been portrayed as being vindicated as being nearer the truth than his former detractors on the record. As 'proof' Chomsky has been shown as being equally popular among both Muslim 'radicals' and their supposed religious foes.
Justthought
Fugging Zealots
15.09.2006 09:46
Chomsky does what he does to affect the most people in the best way
yes i am sure he compromises his ideals to achieve change
however until you can put together your arguments for your position as well as he does
dont rant at him just coz he wont say bush and co are lizards.....
P.S.
once an individual person accepts the fact that 911 was at the least allowed to happen by people in power in the usa then you have to accept that if the 911 loose change stuff goes mainstream then there will be a world economic crash to beat 1929
which leaves the rich elite buggering each other ruperts still in charge with the rest of us fighting each other like cats in a bag,
so in order to keep my house and my pension and my families future i and people like me will believe whatever they say.
coz the alternative of the truth coming out is too horrendous for words
AND BY THE WAY EVEN IF THE DEMS TAKE BACK THE HOUSE AND GET THE POWER TO LAUNCH INVESTIGATIONS.........THEY WILL NOT COZ THEY ARE IN IT UP TO THEIR NOSES WITH COMPLICITY
noah
Paranoid bullshit
15.09.2006 10:17
The "article" above is a really good example of the delusions involved in stepping into that extremely nasty world. The idea that the ‘anti war movement’ is finally embracing 9/11 truth is self evidently delusional when looked at from the outside. How the fuck could anyone seriously believe that to be the case. Well the same way you get to be convinced that 9/11 was an inside job. You surround yourself by people who are similarly convinced, mutually reinforce your beliefs and dismiss anyone who disagrees as “working for them”. It’s partly a problem of the web, where people who believe pretty cranky things can find each other and create the delusion that everyone thinks that way. Bits of conjecture then become established fact upon which to place further conjecture, such ‘truth’ quickly becoming unexamined mantra. People get to identify with such ‘facts’ so much that no evidence to the contrary could ever crack their belief system. It is all extremely cultish.
Now all politics contains an element of this and it is important to fight against it. All the groups, social centres and movements in this country need to learn a lesson from this and constantly look outwards at the points where their world views stop making sense.
You can look here and see every 9/11 conspiracy argument comprehensively demolished:
And considering its looking at videos that seems to have intially convinced most of the the truthers if you look at this you can see the towers bowing in (don't worry yourself but this is scary stuff for truthers because it confirms that the towers fell because the impact and fires weakened the supporting trusses and made them bow out of shape).
I know, I know they weren't reasoned into this worldview so they won't be reasoned out of it but sometimes they provoke too much. And I also know that the response will be that the debunking website is run by the THEM or some shit and it'll provoke a huge swamping of 'evidence' all of which is debunked in the website above.
No Platform
I'm no Jew-hating, Conspiracy theorists!!!
15.09.2006 10:50
"I think these Bush-loving websites like the ones you've cited are all telling the truth. In fact, I get my truth from the same neo-Cons and CIA lackeys who said Saddam did 911 and was planning to nuke the Statue of Liberty. And as a result, I hate Muslims and think Iran should be nuked. (What are we waiting for!!!) Islam breeds violence.
There is no Jewish conspiracy. These 911 truthers are all anti-semites. But were it not for political correctness, we would speak the truth and say there is a Muslim conspiracy. The Muslims want to destroy civilization and take over the world. They hate our freedoms. We all know that because they have darker skins than white people.
But I'm not racist. Because I think those Muslims are clever enough to have done 911. I think bin Laden's a genius - an evil genius. He was financed and trained by the CIA and he tricked them all. And he must be a genius to bring down those Towers with airplanes when even the people who built the Towers hadn't a clue that that might happen. In fact, I'm so not a racist, that I think that the white people who run the US' multi-billion dollar air defence system are idiots and that's why the system quite clear messed up big time.
But those Jew-hating, Conspiracy theorists don't see that. They're racist nuts."
insidejob
Straw men
15.09.2006 11:36
The real problem with the 9-11 truth movement is that its most visible portion serves only to obscure truth.
Rich
I'm no racist but.....
15.09.2006 11:49
Then why the fuck are there muslims complaining about racial profiling and being pulled off planes?
Is it because you're regurgitating neo-con propaganda that doesn't actually compute?
Is it because, you resort to gross racial stereotypes?
Is it because you are in fact a racist?
We should be told.
Demolition Dan
Chomsky is great!
15.09.2006 12:13
To critisise him for not speaking out about 9/11 is plain daft. He might not think that there is enough evidence but that is his opinion and he is entitled to it. I personally think 9/11 bring up more questions than awnsers, but that is my opinion. However, nobody has overwhelming proof that there was a conspiracy, and until that happens don't critisise people who are not convinced.
Chomsky might not be a 9/11 convert but there are thousands of people out there who have been educated by his analysis of world events, and we should all be grateful.
Kevin
911 racists
15.09.2006 13:48
The 911ers are by definition racist. They are obsessed with a comparitively small number of US deaths while ignoring the far larger ongoing massacre of brown-skinned peoples by the US.
Many of the exact same people tried to disrupt the anti-Vietnam movement through brainwashing and violence - your 'movement' stinks of the CIA.
As for the peace-movement embracing the 911 truth movement, let me put my hands around your throat and embrace you. You are not the first far-right scum trying to recruit from the peace-movement, the BNP tried it first and they are demonstrably less Nazi than the scum like Rense and Larouche who you quote.
Danny
I do think 9/11 was probably an inside job
15.09.2006 13:50
However, if Chomsky disagrees, that's fine with me. Even if he turns out to be wrong, so what? He's a scholar, not a god. He doesn't have to be infallible. The fact that I disagree with him on one point doesn't mean his entire body of thought is invalidated. That's a childish and destructive way to look at it, surely? No philosopher was ever expected to give us The Whole Truth, just some.
semi-lucid
CIA
15.09.2006 17:38
the cia had nothing to do after the end of the cold war- it needed a new job you see otherwise people would say why do you need all those spooky guys
so they incited some goons to fly some planes and just look today - they can now be permitted to 'legally' torture suspects in secret prisons
wake up wake up
Barry
Chomsky is merely part of the zionist front
15.09.2006 17:41
People like Chomsky are essential to the ability of extremists to create holocausts in places like Iraq and Lebanon. At first this may seem counter-intuitive, but that is only because your are trained to see force from the 'push' perspective, never the 'pull'.
An equilibrium is the point of balance between two opposing forces. If this point of balance shifts, it will be because of changes in either force, or BOTH. Take pro-holocaust, and so-called anti-holocaust forces. Things will get worse if pro-holocaust forces strengthen, but the same will happen if anti-holocaust forces weaken.
Blair's success (obvious when you consider that this monster is the leader of the ***New*** Labour party) was in smashing to pieces anti-holocaust forces, so that the well established (but mostly unsuccessful) pro-holocaust forces would 'move forward' as the new equilibrium was established.
Chomsky's task was in ensuring that whatever Blair did, no effective action would be taken against Blair. Chomsky is not alone in this. Chomsky's own motivation is that Blair works to move events in favour of Chomsky's 'master-race'.
There are little Chomsky's all over the 'zionist' left. On this site, for instance, we have 'danny' and 'pirate'. However, neither of these two have the brains to sound like anything but what they are, and their obvious frustration at not having the intellect of Chomsky leaves their comments sounding vile and despicable, unlikely to influence anyone.
911 is, of course, a key issue. Those that have studied the history of the 20th century are all too aware of the literal genocide that recorded and verified false flags have enabled. How did the Rwanda genocide start, for instance. In the light of this fact, it is not suprising that Chomsky SCREAMS "ignore the 911 truth movement" (and extremist loonies like our resident sociopath 'danny' call those with an interest in the real history of the event 'racists').
911 followed Blair and Putin's program of bomb attacks against Moscow apartment buildings (where Putin was dumb enough to be caught red-handed), and Blair's failed attempt to get US forces to fight their first major ground campaign since Vietnam in Kosovo.
911 is directly responsible for the holocaust in Ahghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, and Gaza/West Bank.
Those that back Blair's pathetic conspiracy theory that 'muslims' did it have laid their cards on the table. Remember the 'push' AND 'pull' forces. Blair's conspiracy theory supporters (like 'danny' and Chomsky) are those that are PULLING as hard as they can from their embedded positions in the 'left' to move the current point of equilibrium as much as possible in Blair's favour.
There are so-called members of the peace movement that believe in only one thing, the peace of the grave for every muslim currently alive on the Earth today. They thus act on Blair's behalf to ensure that all protest is useless and wasted. Their first strategy is to scream to as many people on the left as possible that they MUST listen to, and obey their 'master-race' leaders. This is done by using the perverted claim of intellectual superiority for members of certain so-called races. Selling socialism as racism may sound unbelievable, but it is a very very old trick, mostly predicated on the idea that those who NEED socialism are in a situation in life that makes them very vunerable to racist ideologies disguised as socialist principles.
911 was created to fool the sheep into giving support to acts of absolute evil. A second 911 (an event of equal significance, I mean) has been prevented so far purely because of the attention given to the falsehoods of the original false flag. Blair is all too aware that a second 911 can only be used if the last remnants of Western democracy are IMMEDIATELY dismantled in the aftermath. The difficulty in co-ordinating the forces to do this have saved us so far.
However, the next stage is approaching. The world contains ZERO good news. Blair's power grows daily. The nazi pope (much to Chomsky's delight, I'm sure) has just launched an extraordinary racist attack against the muslims of this planet. Most of you are saying that the attack against Iran can't happen because the consequences are just too horrible to contemplate, but the convergence of events is undeniable.
Blair's thugs are busy telling you to ignore 911 and have yet another useless protest to "salve your conscience". Remember, they say, participating in events that achieve exactly nothing is always better than thinking up ways to effect change.
These thugs claim ownership of the anti-war movement, whose proudest achievement was ensuring that anti-war candidates stood in almost ***none*** of the seats available during the nationwide elections. REMEMBER, A UNIFIED ANTI-WAR MOVEMENT STANDING FOR ALL SEATS AT THE NATIONAL COUNCIL AND GENERAL ELECTIONS WOULD HAVE DESTROYED BLAIR.
The world DOES NOT accidently get itself into a state as bad as this. The previously established equibrium between the forces of 'left' and 'right' does not undergo the greatest shift seen in the history of Mankind by accident. The Israeli Holocaust of Lebanon saw EVERY significant official political force in the West, both 'left' and 'right', stand firmly behind the vile depraved crimes of Israel. Ordinary people, however, were disgusted by what they saw. That is why ***WE*** are firmly in the gun sights of those like Chomsky. If ***WE*** become effective, the official political forces of the 'left' and 'right' become insignificant.
The 911 truth movement is destroying the passive support for Bush and Blair. The more this continues, the more the agents of Blair will scream blue murder, slandering us every possible which way.
Blair's thug referenced the 'anti-vietnam war' movement. This is a favourite of the zionist left, since protest against the vietnam war in the US failed to shorten the war by even one day, but many of the zionist leaders in US politics today (the ones screaming in favour of Israeli genocide in Gaza and Lebanon) got their start in politics 'protesting' that war. Monsters taking advantage of the concerns of decent Humans. Parasites gaining power on the back of our decency.
Millions of Human lives butchered or ruined in Asia, and for the depraved scum, this was used a stepping stone in the gaining of political power. Of course, this genocide too had its 911, the false flag known as the "Gulf of Tonkin".
-forget the facts
-go on a march
-OBEY THE STEWARDS
-only hold approved inoffensive placards
-return home
-forget the facts
IS THIS REAL-LIFE, OR IS THIS A SCENE FROM THE FILM '1984' ??? Chomsky and 'danny' are telling you that it is your duty to make them one and the same.
twilight
Twi'ts frothing again
15.09.2006 20:57
First off Twilight lists me with Chomsky - well, I'm speechless and bemused. I refuse to be flattered by that but I'm sure Chomsky has many reasons to feel insulted.
Then he describes Chomskys prescription for change as
-forget the facts
I think it obvious to a neutral observer that Chomsky has recorded more facts than the 911 movement will ever recognise.
-go on a march
If you read any of my posts you'll know I recommend attending marches only for recruiting for nvda. Those of you who are anti-war activists rather than 'truthseekers'. I also applaud, defend and encourage targetted assasinations of pro-war politicians. Chomsky doesn't as far as I know, but he does encourage genuine, hard-work, dull and necessary activism of all shades. The 911 freaks can't even march, all they do is post a record of their personal mental decline on the internet while trying to disrupt and discredit genuine anti-war activist resources.
-OBEY THE STEWARDS
-only hold approved inoffensive placards
-return home
-forget the facts
What facts ? You haven't listed one nor attempted to.
You are a faker Twilight. You can't link to a single action you have taken. You have done nothing. Your words are as frothy as your fantasies.
Danny
... speaking as one ...
16.09.2006 10:25
... methinks a slight tweaking of their respective attitudes to each other might produce an interesting accord ...
... chomsky, however, is a difficult one to call. The chomsky that I have read, seems to be in order ... I have learnt much from his words. In fact, having seen him speak in public on a number of occasions I have been impressed by his zeal and committment to the cause of the underdog. I certainly have been suprised by the vermance of his responses to predictable fascist outrages by amerika, so on many levels I think he should be applauded.
However, his stance on 11/9 seems to be slightly out of kilter with my own ... this maybe the result of my own unhinged outlook ... or it maybe the result of chomskys unwillingness to put his 40 year track record on the line on the basis of - what must be called - a very unsatisfactory collection of ideas surrounding the 'truth' of 11/9.
Chomsky does not seem to be falling for the peddled line on iraq, iran or the war on terra - but shys away from an all out 'calling' of the criminals involved in the largest mass murder of white people in amerikan history.
So be it.
The clash of civilizations, the war on terra, the new religious confrontation does seem to be benefitting only one group - who have their fingers smeared in ever pie covered by these phenomena - the zionist troublemakers.
The words of bush, cheney, fieth, rumsfield, zhekheim etc can not be believed in the slightest. Anyone who bases their reading of the events of 11/9 on anything these zionists and bagmen for zionist world domination says, will be moving at speed away from plausiblity and understanding.
What is left however, is still confusing and wrought with danger - the path is strewn with falsehood and divertisments.
We need to eliminate the fluff, discard the comfortable illussions and recognise that technology and shear mendacity are converging in our time to produce the greatest danger for human civilazations ... total war, total enslavement & total domination are a real possibility.
Danny & Twilight, realise that your futures lie in working together - from my point of view, repeating again that I believe that you both hold interesting and honest opinions ...
... have a little faith in each other please.
jsl
OK, I am a racist, hypocrite
16.09.2006 11:09
But, I have to admit, when I support the official conspiracy theory about 911, I am a racist. But I'm clever at it.
Because I get on my high horse and start accusing people of racism if they start pointing the finger at the international banking cartel, Zionism or Israel. Because I say that 'international banking cartel' are fascist code words for all Jews. Then I say Nazism and Holocaust - OK, I don't even have to say Holocaust - and bingo, all those who point the finger at international bankers are really Jew-hating Nazis who want to gas all Jews!!!
By doing that, I can get my racism in. Because by definition I am defending the official conspiracy theory. And what does that say? It says that Islam promotes a section of violent, irrational, political Islam that uses WMD terrorism to commit Jihad by the sword. The theory says that the 'Muslim terrorist' justifies their actions through Islam and call on all Muslims to support them. Therefore, I can implicate all Muslims because their faith ' has brought nothing to the world but evil', as the Pope says. We then have to have special laws and measure we can use against Muslims. We can kick them off buses. We can divert planes. We can get the police to shoot them if they wear beards. Because there is no longer a Communist conspiracy, I can go around saying there is a Muslim conspiracy.
Aren't I clever? I can promote this anti-Muslim goobledygook and then say conspiracy theorists are tin foil hat mad people. And I can pose as an anti-racist who hates the idea that many Jewish people were massacred by Nazis and then promote racism against Muslims that encourages some idiots to say that Iran, Syria and Hizbollah should be nuked.
You've got to admire me.
insidejob
This article being CENSORED on American Indymedias
17.09.2006 00:14
Proof provided in the comments below the post here:
It seems that some people are going to a lot of trouble to stop the activists on US West-Coast from reading this post.
NoWm chOmsky
Chomsky's essay on the 1991 Gulf War
17.09.2006 10:16
excerpts from B. J. Sabri's article:
"By branding Iraq as an aggressor, Chomsky overlooked Kuwait's intransigence toward Iraq, pre-invasion disputes, Kuwaiti financing of Kurdish militia to harass the Iraqi central government, and Kuwait's close work with the CIA to overthrow the Iraqi regime. He only aimed at declaring Iraq as the sole culpable party for that invasion by calling it "aggressor." This is fine, except we need to establish culpability after investigating the case. To issue a judgment solely based on the reputation assigned by the United States to Saddam Hussein, while dismissing Iraq as a country and people, was a basic U.S. strategy. The similarity between U.S. policy and Chomsky's conclusion appears striking."
"It is unsettling to see countless writers of all progressive persuasions compete to highlight the excesses of the Saddam's regime without addressing the historical conditions of Iraq or verifying claims. Inevitably, this contributes, indirectly or directly, to the amplification of the ideological wave to invade Iraq and a latent justification for the same. . . . After the invasion, most of the progressive crowd ran to denounce the empire, the cloths of the emperor, and the machinations of the coterie."
maria
Homepage:
http://www.onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_378.shtml
JSL,
17.09.2006 11:39
As to working together, Twilight doesn't work, Twilight posts opinion here, I hope that's not your idea of work. Occassionally pissed-off IM volunteers delete threads like this reminding us this is a news-wire and if you want to chat about stuff go to U75 or wherever. The stuff that they don't delete on days like that is a good definition of work - direct actions for the most part, but also organising, investigating, training, all the dull yet vital stuff. There are few things more annoying than someone who calls for others to take actions but who themselves refuse to act. If I state an opinion then I've generally thought about it or investigated it regardless of what anyone elses opinion is. I find Twilights mad and sad' style to be discrediting to many of the opinions that they espouse, but their inaction and jeering at those who act is pitiful
You say 'total war, total enslavement & total domination' are real possibilities, and I fully agree, I'm sure Twilight would too. Twilight admits to having no hope, seems scared to death to act, jeers at those who do. I don't know if you are an active yourself, but given your beliefs then you should be. Chomsky entitled a chapter of one book 'Pascals Wager' which can be surmised as 'You are probably fucked anyway, but you are certainly fucked if you don't act".
You'll notice folk of all intellectual abilities taking pot-shots at Chomsky, from the Twi'ts upwards, mainly cos he is voted as the 'world's favourite intellectual' and everyone resents that. BJ Sabri in Marias post is getting up his own arse. Chomsky documented the Kuwaiti behaviour. It would seem reasonable to call the country who invades another country the aggresor and by Sabris own logic we could now call Iraq the aggressor against the US and the UK ? Cuckoo-logic, but that is th sort of sniping Chomsy has always suffered from.
The best criticism of Chomsky on IM that I've seen was someone saying 'Why quote middle-class wankers opinions ?', which is a fair point, why quote anyones opinions though it wouldn't stop me from quoting his research if it suited me. Because Zionist is such a loaded term you should be careful and accurate when you use it, and perhaps reading more Chomsky would help. I'd certainly agree with Chomsky that Israel is subservient to the US. I think the notion that US foriegn policy is controlled by Israel is as absurd as saying the Soviet Union was controlled from Cuba. I can understand why Arabs on he front-line of Israeli aggression might fall for that, but it's not rational or plausible.
As for 11/9 ( 1/3 of Americans don't know what year it was ), it wasn't a world changing event, It wasn't even the worst event of that week ( more people died in flash floods in Africa that week), it wasn't the most significant event on that date for the anti-globalisation crowd ( still Chile 73), it didn't herald a major change in US from passive to aggressive. It certainly didn't justify the illegal invasions and slaughter since. Now, the wars are my main issue, everyones got their own priorities and maybe some folks investigating historical crimes is a priority, fair enough. Once you solve 911 then let me know who ordered Kennedys death etc. But if you are just going to vegetate inactively for 5 years only to blame Bush and Co. for those deaths while Bush and Co. are obviously guilty of far more deaths since, then it seems an exercise in futility at best, an excuse for inaction.
Danny
Dunno what Pirate thinks being listed with me
18.09.2006 01:17
It is interesting that he also compares me to the poster known as Pirate, especially since JSL recommended some sort of accord between me and Twilight. In fact, when I investigated Twilights compalints against Peter Tatchell, I found them to be of substance and was the only poster who posted in support of that opinion. And still, and yet, even though I disagree with Pirate and agree with Twilight on the question of Outrage! challenging Irans attitude to gays in this current climate of war, I am still happy that Twi't lumps me and Pirate together, as the only opponents worthy of smearing. I'm happy with that, it proves my point about Twi'ts sanity. I'd still rather be lumped with someone like Pirate, if they dropped their verbatim reports for Outrage! and responded with their own arguments, than to be lumped with a paranoid hypocrite like Twilight who most often espouses sensible views in a silly fashion. If I was paranoid then I'd assume Twi't was paid to discreditably report sensible views, but I'm not and Twi't obviously is.
Although I oppose Pirates viewpoint, and appreciate Twilights helpful and obvious parnoia in this matter, I could have a rational or at least sane debate with Pirate if they dropped the press releases and argued their case, whereas Twilight is beyond logic even if many of Twi't's arguments started off as true.
If you want to bark at the moon, read Twi't. If you want to bite back, then don't wait for permission or recognition from any other poster , just bite and then write it up after on your own terms, while bewaring the bullshitters.
Dan
Chomsky's Cognitive Bipolarity
18.09.2006 16:32
"'Terror' is a term that rightly arouses strong emotions and deep concerns. The primary concern should, naturally, be to take measures to alleviate the threat, which has been severe in the past, and will be even more so in the future. To proceed in a serious way, we have to establish some guidelines. Here are a few simple ones:"
"(1) Facts matter, even if we do not like them."
"(2) Elementary moral principles matter, even if they have consequences that we would prefer not to face."
"(3) Relative clarity matters. It is pointless to seek a truly precise definition of "terror," or of any other concept outside of the hard sciences and mathematics, often even there. But we should seek enough clarity at least to distinguish terror from two notions that lie uneasily at its borders: aggression and legitimate resistance."
[End quote]
If you open your mind to serious criticism of Chomsky, and if you dig through the archives of his works and interviews, you will find striking, if not telling, inconsistencies, contradictions and the repetition of unsourced right-wing propaganda. The above quote is a example of the two former irregularities.
With regards to 9/11, Chomsky ignores EVERY SINGLE *FACT*--including the HARD SCIENCE of the unquestionable and absolute constants of gravity (free-fall)--that pertain to the collapse of the three WTC buildings. Even a respected engineer, Jeff King, one of Chomsky's colleagues at MIT, has lectured on the FICTITIOUS SCIENCE that NIST spins in its report.
King proves, in engineering terms, how the collapses due to "aircraft impact" and "fire damage" were physically and structurally IMPOSSIBLE.
Furthermore, Chomsky ignores the calamitous social and cultural impacts of the 9/11 myth for the Western World, and thus ignores the MORAL implications of the "war on terror", which is resulting in this present holocaust of Arabs.
It seems that Chomsky cannot confront and apply his own moral truisms!
So who, by his own definitions, is one of those "terrorists in the mirror"?
Fool-osopher?
Irony ala AliG ?
18.09.2006 17:00
No it isn't. It is a perfectably sensible quote and your accusation is so silly as to be indistinguishable from humour. Are you pastiching Chomsky's critics or do you have a serious point ?
Danny
Danny is obviously a troll
18.09.2006 18:37
Take Danny's tactics as perfect examples: not once does he deal with the FACT of free-fall and the time it took for the WTC towers to disintegrate and for building seven to implode; not once does Danny discuss Chomsky's arrogant dismissal of such scientific facts.
Danny, and those like him, just *prefers* not to face these facts and moral considerations, and in the place of rational debate, he resorts to rhetorical bullying.
"What's your point", quite coincidentally, is a favourite of Chomsky's. I've heard him attack, with shameful arrogance, intelligent critics at his lectures with "what's your point?", while totally ignoring their questions!
So why do trolls take such an interest in internet forums? Why don't they just ignore these "ridiculous" threads?
Damage control??
say "no" to troll
Can the truly stupid be considered mad ?
18.09.2006 20:01
A troll is most often the person who flits from name to name in a single conversation simply to avoid answering their critics points. And that describes your behaviour rather than mine.
Rhetoric is the art of persuasion, the sister of dialectic and grammar. It consists of ethos, pathos and logos, with logos being a reasoned argument. While it may be a pejorative term you wish upon me, it is obvious you don't even understand the supposed insult. You may mean my words are empty but I act on my words and can prove it and you don't act on your words. Call me a rhetorician if you wish but my rhetoric is as poor as my grammar, though your ability to persuade is even worse than mine. You make no attempt on reasoned argument. You don't act on what you say. You are froth.
The reason we don't ignore these ridiculous threads is this is more than your normal ridiculous forums, this is a news wire and is is a sad indictment of the state of IM that threads like this are allowed to stand. Chomskys scared of my intellect ! Pitiful playground delusions, certainly not news.
You want me to address the question of why some US building collapsed five years ago ? Why should I ?
I'm not the least bit interested. But I will answer that or any other question if you tell me, how can you have the nerve to do nothing in the face of your governments genocide and then condemn others for not gazing up your own arsehole logic with you. Faker. Fraud. Hypocrite.
Danny
More zionist propaganda
18.09.2006 22:39
All science and criminal investagtion is primarily initiated by informed hunches, but those hunches have to be tested and corroborated with tested and corroborated theories/evidence.
9/11 Truth is a commercially driven affair with no regard for evidential scrutiny or hypothesis testing. It is based on selective quotation, inexpert testimony and outright lies.
9/11 Truth is an excuse to be inactive. Like its close conspiracy cousin the Zionist Occupational Government it rebuffs all attempts to impose an evidential process on it by citing a grand sprawling secret conspiracy that enslaves the unenlightened. Thus there is no point in action as we are all impotent in the face of ZOG or the Bilderberg Group, the Rosicrucians or whomsoever.
9/11 Turth is like wanking on LSD you start off with good intentions and get lost in the patterns that don't really exist in the wallpaper.
Be active or be silent.
Spook Plant
Incredible, how soulless a man can become
18.09.2006 22:58
You know nothing about me.
To say such a thing about an act of state-terrorism and the ensuing bloodshed that it so fraudulently justified makes you an insensitive and selfish person. You do not merit a genuine polemic because it is now obvious where you are coming from: you care not about death, mayhem and destruction, and you admit it. You deserve only ostracism.
I bet you wouldn't have the nerve to make such a statement publicly. If you did have, then you would be a good candidate for your local fascist party.
say "no" to troll
Science
18.09.2006 23:43
Read it and weep, if you can find the moral fortitude to do so.
Scientist
Bauxite sell sell sell!
19.09.2006 00:55
Just because some of us are whollly undistracted by conspiracy theories that are stuck in mobius loops of self-denial, doesn't make us your notional enemy ("with us or against us!"- sound familiar?)
What you been up to then?
Share!
Spook Plant
Science?
19.09.2006 01:01
Self-agrandising tosh!
Do also a bit of reading on serial conspiraloon Fetzer.
I've seen more science at a Creationists convention.
Spook Plant
Free Falling Arguments
19.09.2006 03:02
"What you been up to then? Share!"
Okay, officer! I'm sure that you already know everything about me, so I guess I should just give myself up!
I'm a thought-criminal from you-know-where and I've been engaged in all sorts of thought-crimes like thinking, studying, writing, sharing ideas, educating people, you know: crimes punishable by torture and death in the "post-911 world".
Thanks to "radicals" like Chomsky the governments of the World have been able to transform society in to technofascist police states! I'm sure that I've made the four-hundred-thousand-strong list of "terrorists" and "free-thinkers". But, you already know that, right officer?
BTW:
Structural engineers are essentially PHYSICISTS! Engineering DOES NOT EXIST without PHYSICS and its FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES (such as free-fall, structural resistance, physical constants, the law of increasing entropy, and the laws of conservation of energy and momentum).
These are the precise things that are studied by physicists and engineers alike when they look at structural failure and structural collapse. You have no idea of what Science really is, that is painfully obvious.
You think that an “expert” in mechanical engineering can’t form a professional opinion on matters pertaining to physics and vice versa!!!!????
Hilarious!!
___________________________
"...structural engineers and architects are practitioners of static physics [like yourself, Dr. Jones] although we use different terminology peculiar to our professions to elaborate on our designs."
More comments from numerous engineers and scientists:
___________________________
Fire Engineers, you asked??
“William A. Manning, editor of Fire Engineering magazine, said the “official investigation…is a half-baked farce that may already have been commandeered by political forces whose primary interests, to put it mildly, lie far afield of full disclosure.”
___________________________
“Perhaps most compelling for me were the words of a genuine expert on the WTC. This was John Skilling, the structural engineer responsible for designing the towers. (...Skilling was known at the time to be the engineer in charge.) In 1993, five years before his death, Skilling said that he had performed an analysis on jet plane crashes and the ensuing fires and that ‘the building structure would still be there.’”
___________________________
“Frank DeMartini, project manager for the WTC's construction, who died on 9/11, explained long ago that the towers were designed with sophisticated load-redis- tribution capabilities, where the impact of aircraft on the buildings would be ‘like sticking a pencil through mosquito netting’.”
________________________
“Judy Wood, a mechanical engineer from Clemson, has studied alternative models of their collapse and has found that, for them to have come down so rapidly, there cannot have been any resistance between one floor and the next, which means that tremendous explosives had to have been used to blow out one floor under another.”
________________________
“Pentagon C Ring Exit Hole Mystery” by Michael Meyer, Mechanical Engineer
__________________________
There are more engineering and physics experts that are members and/or supporters of Scholars for 9/11 truth than you realize and that Chomsky is willing to admit:
Source:
David Griscom (FM) Physics of optical materials, Materials science and engineering, Author/co-author of nearly 200 publications.
Jack Keller (FM) Civil Engineering, Irrigation Engineering, Agricultural Engineering
Kenneth Kuttler (FM) Mathematics, Brigham Young University
Joseph M. Phelps (FM) Structural Dynamicist Charter Member, Structural Engineering Institute of the American Society of Civil Engineers
Jean-Pierre Petit (FM) Aeronautics, astrophysics, engineering
Doyle Winterton (FM) Civil Engineering Structural Engineering
Victoria Ashley (AM) Architecture and physiological psychology, 911research.wtc7.net
Frank Carmen (AM) Physics Ph.D., BYU
Dominic Dudzik (AM) Physics simulations, Electrical engineering
Brian Duncan (AM) Fire Protection Engineering
Scott Fenton (AM) Physics, Chemistry, Information Technology
Joel Ferrell (AM) Pilot, Aeronautical engineer, physics911.net/spine.htm
Patrick Gallagher (AM) Mechanical engineer
Michael Gass (AM) Air Force Explosive Ordnance, Disposal Specialist, Bomb disposal technician
Eric Hermanson (AM) Engineering Physics, Nuclear Engineering, Software Architect
Nick Hull (AM) Particle Physics, geocities.com/CapitolHill/
Paul Landis (AM) Industrial engineering, Author of "A Real 9/11 Commission"
Spero Larres (AM) Physics and Mathematics, Rutgers University
Michael Maguire (AM) Mechanical engineering, Aeronatutical engineering, Prognostic Health Monitoring
Ted Muga (AM) Naval aviator; Commercial pilot; Structural engineering
RC Oliver, Jr. (AM) Chief Engineer
Gordon Ross (AM) Mechanical engineering, Production engineering
Tom Spellman (AM) Civil engineering, architecture, non-profits, activism
Judson Witham (AM) High Rise/Mid Rise/Low Rise Construction/demolition, Civil Rights Laws
Ken Wrenn (AM) Civil engineer
Kyle Michelson (SM) Engineering, University of Delaware
Rick Rajter (SM) Materials Science and Engineering, Emerging and Fundamental Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
_____________________
Members of the Scientific Panel Investigating Nine Eleven (S.P.I.N.E.) involved in engineering, physics and mathematics:
Source:
A. K. Dewdney: PhD (Mathematics)
Derrick Grimmer: PhD (Physics)
David Heller: BS (Physics), MA (Architecture), Architect and Builder
Jerry Longspaugh : MSc (Aerospace Engineering)
Donald Eckhoff : Engineer and Manufacturer
_____________________
My point: Chomsky is a liar if he says that there is no “credible evidence” to support the views of all of these highly qualified experts in the field.
As for you, Spook, I’m afraid that you’re out of your league, officer.
Sir Isaac Newton
Answer
19.09.2006 03:20
Yes. I have proof:
As for Chomsky? Well, if he believes Bush's lies, then we can be sure that he is suffering from something similar, if not worse.
Sigmund Lacan
Jones' publications
19.09.2006 03:32
I guess that's what happens when someone specializes in sub-atomic particle energy generation theory--they forget everything they've learned about simple Newtonian Mechanics!
Read below. From the looks of it, he's conducting research into titanium tin-foil hats.
He must be one of those conspiracy kooks!
_________________
Jones, S.E., et al. Charged-particle Emissions from Metal Deuterides. in Tenth International Conference on Cold Fusion. 2003. Cambridge, MA: LENR-CANR.org.
"We present evidence for energetic charged particles emanating from partially-deuterided titanium foils (TiDx) subjected to non-equilibrium conditions."
_________________
Jones, S.E. and J. Ellsworth. Geo-fusion and Cold Nucleosynthesis. in Tenth International Conference on Cold Fusion. 2003. Cambridge, MA: LENR-CANR.org.
_________________
Tiny Tin
Plant lives ! IM however is getting sicker by the day
19.09.2006 04:46
Glad to see you're not dead yet, hope you're on the mend. The nutters do seem nuttier now don't they ? Despite me naming you Plant in argument I am seemingly now the same person as you - classic. Don't you dare use that argument on my latest trophy girlfriend next time I'm at the camp or I'll stop bringing girls by !
You can judge Twi'ts medication by their punctuation - I think the !!!!???? above indicates foaming at the mouth. Seemingly I don't care about people and should be ostracised for not caring how building seven fell, despite noone dying in there as I know, and for wasting my time on non-American victims of the war of terror. How fucking anti-american of me. The whole of the Bush administration and their minions here have just ostracised me, what will I do for a social-life ?
Still, it is slightly worrying to see IM volunteers acting like Larouche cadre-school drop-outs and allowing SHITE LIKE THIS THREAD to stand, while Sheffield IM even publish their own inactivist 911 shite. Maybe we shouldn't post actions here anymore, what is the point after all, it is probably better to post them on forums where some folk may be argued into taking Direct Action. I suggest we think about taking the actions and requests and info to an activist forum instead, one that applies it's own guidelines and doesn't let itself get so easily infiltrated by fakes, frauds and the mentally deranged. I was out tonight getting some of the Traffic Master stuff, you can have a solar panel if you want, and I took a few photos to post here and encourage others as I'd promised, but fuck this for a game of soldiers. What do the padded-jacket keyboard-warriors require solar panels for since they never leave their houses ?
Alternatively, we could try and trawl through the other IM sites for one that isn't so obviously compromised, they can't all be as shite as IM UK has become. I know French and you know German, and with the rest of the gang we probably could cover half the IM's in existence. I'm sure most of the newbies here will eventually figure out that if deranged nuts are decrying Chomsky every few posts then he must have something going for him.
To any of you 911ers who aren't crazy or stools, one question from the original article does deserve a serious answer. 'What issues are more important than the events that have led us into an era of "permanent war"?'
And the blindingly obvious answer is : 'The permanent war itself and it's ongoing daily victims' And so why are you prevaricating ? It really has to be either cowardice or stupidity.
IM Volunteers - Can one of you please show me a single piece of news in the original thread or explain why non-911 related posts are deleted why utter diarrhea like the original article stands ? And how many of your fellow volunteers also passed through a cadre-school - do you even know ?
Danny
...
19.09.2006 05:59
You reveal your naivity by supposing that Physics is obviously superordinate to Structural Physics. Perhaps the fact one has an extra word should hint that it is more subject intense than the other.
That aside Jones's hypothesis has problems in many other areas: the logistics of planting that much thermite undetected and controlling it in concert let alone the pure common sense aspect of his suggestion being more bloody obvious than elephant footprints on custard.
Furthermore, I personally suspect it is inspired by a jpg of "obviously thermally cut girder" which obviously has no timestamp let alone witness & physical corroboration.
In other words, it only stands up if you believe that every single subject-matter expert in the world has been got at... except of course the tenuous Prof Jones.
A load of old hot air.
I'm sure if someone was able to demonstrate these nutty theories evidentially, Chomsky would be singing a different tune. No one has; he doesn't.
For that matter, I'm sure even Fox News would be ditching Bush like a leper if anyone could and lawyers would be falling over themselves to get their name attached to the 'indictment of the century'.
They haven't; they haven't.
Quid pro quo
Spook Plant
Danny
19.09.2006 07:52
Isobel Ringing
An apologia
19.09.2006 15:18
Please someone sign me up for the next cadre-school, I'd like to be programmed now, you seem so much happier in your absolute certainties than I could ever be with my doubts and questions.
Death to Chomsky and all unbelievers - long live IM-911 !
Danny
mmmmmmm
19.09.2006 15:18
1"5.09.2006 22:57
A typical 911 post Twilight, childish and false. you know, I have a few criticisms of Chomsky, but they required some effort on my part to identify. It takes no effort to criticise Twilight et al, they are so fucking obvious - he describes Chomskys prescription for change as
-forget the facts
I think it obvious to a neutral observer that Chomsky has recorded more facts than the 911 movement will ever recognise.
-go on a march
If you read any of my posts you'll know I recommend attending marches only for recruiting for nvda. Those of you who are anti-war activists rather than 'truthseekers'. I also applaud, defend and encourage targetted assasinations of pro-war politicians. Chomsky doesn't as far as I know, but he does encourage genuine, hard-work, dull and necessary activism of all shades. The 911 freaks can't even march, all they do is post a record of their personal mental decline on the internet while trying to disrupt and discredit genuine anti-war activist resources."
Targetted assasinations? Applaud, defend?
You have just proven yourself to be unfit for any form of co-operative, humane governance, perhaps even emotionally blind.
Are you really unaware of the existing technologies for building community, facillitating conflict resolution and grass-roots organisation that have had such a powerful measureable effect in South America, in Cuba and elsewhere? Do you really think your bullet would in the long-term, create a safer future for my childrens grand children?
Based upon what evidence? 15,000 years of 'civilisation'?
The only way to defeat the system is to not buy into it, to turn from it, one by one, community by community, and that will only happen if the seeds of understanding, to facillitate full comprehension of THE FACTS : Adults are responsible for ALL THE CHILDREN WHO SUFFER ...be they in state schools, people's homes, hospitals or on the street - all these wars ARE CHILD ABUSE on a massive, institutionally industrialised scale.....as are the poisoned foods, the logged forests and all that goes with what we erroneously call 'Western Civilisation'.
From that point of view much of what Chomsky makes sense, he has his eye on the children, a feeling of what they might inherit, by way of governance, environment and consequently their quality and freedom of life....
As regards 9/11, well what about 3/30 or any other date. Blood is spilled on all days, what makes anyone more special than the next. They are all banal horrors, uneccessary, unwelcome and in-humane.
The issue is we must take full responsibility for our part in the culture that behaves so horrifically, that justifies it all on the basis that a profit is made by corporations, whose prime legal obligation is to do so, and this from the creation, supply , distribution and use of weapons of mass destruction, chemical weapons, biological weapons, assault weapons on largely civilian populations......
WE ALL KNOW HOW WRONG IT IS! that's not rocket science, and discussing the pros and cons of this and that is all well and good, and when do we get down to the nub of the matter? How do we stop it, NOW! remember, all the while we're chatting, children are being terrorised, shot at, blown apart, by people using weapons our government supplies, and subsidises, all this paid for by you and I, your Mum, my Sister, all my friends ...... so it's a good question!
A question worth answering.
corneilius
Homepage:
http://ww.corneilius.net
corneilius
19.09.2006 16:12
If you are interested of really opposing international crime, then we know a few people just like you. The downside you'll occassionally have to get arrested and spend time in police custody (the food sucks and its very boring), be fined or even do some prison time depending on the legal repercussions of certain actions.
Hypothesising about tea leaves on the Internet is literally a hiding to nothing.
Spook Plant
Faster pussycat, kill, kill kill
19.09.2006 16:31
Damn. As an anarchist I don't exactly strive for governance. Ask me to do something, I'll do it with a smile. Tell me to do it and I'll punch you.
"Are you really unaware of the existing technologies for building community, facillitating conflict resolution and grass-roots organisation that have had such a powerful measureable effect in South America, in Cuba and elsewhere?"
=
I am aware that Cuba was taken from the Mafia by the bravery - and violence - of a few. Oh, perhaps I am wrong, please correct my mistaken intepretation of Che the negotiator ?
"Do you really think your bullet would in the long-term, create a safer future for my childrens grand children?"
Yes I do. I think until war-mongerers are punished for their actions the world will be a more dangerous place for your grand-children. You might not agree, but you must admit it is arguable.
"Based upon what evidence? 15,000 years of 'civilisation'?"
Yes. Tyrants who fear consequences tend to be more circumspect than the all-powerful. Politicians who fear for their own lives tend to slaughter less.
"The only way to defeat the system is to not buy into it, to turn from it, one by one, community by community, and that will only happen if the seeds of understanding, to facillitate full comprehension of THE FACTS : Adults are responsible for ALL THE CHILDREN WHO SUFFER ...be they in state schools, people's homes, hospitals or on the street - all these wars ARE CHILD ABUSE on a massive, institutionally industrialised scale.....as are the poisoned foods, the logged forests and all that goes with what we erroneously call 'Western Civilisation'."
Are you aware that random SHOUTING is a sign of madness even on the internet ? You are starting to come across a bit 'Twilight', and there is a touch of the night about them...
"From that point of view much of what Chomsky makes sense, he has his eye on the children, a feeling of what they might inherit, by way of governance, environment and consequently their quality and freedom of life...."
I agree, I do admire him, but I note his position on violence isn't the same as yours - would you like a quote to prove this point or can you search for it yourself ?
Basically he justifies or rather refuses to demonise violence that reduces the overall level of violence. I interprate that as targetted assasinations. Like the Nuremberg Tribunal, I applaud everyone who attempts to kill any tyrant. I would refuse to condemn or convict anyone who killed a cabinet member even if I am unable to do so myself, and I condemn anyone who refuses to try. The 'White Rose' approach to Hitler failed.
"As regards 9/11, well what about 3/30 or any other date. Blood is spilled on all days, what makes anyone more special than the next. They are all banal horrors, uneccessary, unwelcome and in-humane."
I fully agree. Some folk here seem to think history started on the 11th Spet 01 and stopped the next day. 911 meant nothing to the people of Afghanistan or Iraq and only brainwashed western fools see it of prime import.
"The issue is we must take full responsibility for our part in the culture that behaves so horrifically, that justifies it all on the basis that a profit is made by corporations, whose prime legal obligation is to do so, and this from the creation, supply , distribution and use of weapons of mass destruction, chemical weapons, biological weapons, assault weapons on largely civilian populations......"
"WE ALL KNOW HOW WRONG IT IS! that's not rocket science, and discussing the pros and cons of this and that is all well and good, and when do we get down to the nub of the matter? How do we stop it, NOW! remember, all the while we're chatting, children are being terrorised, shot at, blown apart, by people using weapons our government supplies, and subsidises, all this paid for by you and I, your Mum, my Sister, all my friends ...... so it's a good question!
A question worth answering. "
I do remember, and I will try to answer, although bear in mind most of my posts on the subject get hidden for daring to slang the IMCistas and therefore you have to view all posts to get my drift. Well, there are lot's of ways to stop the killing +now+. One peaceful way would be a general strike, but that won't happen because the TUC is as corrupt and self-serving as any political party. Another would be mass peaceful direct action, but thanks to a controlled media - and a compromised independent media - that isn't happening. So another way is for the few folk who realise the urgency of stopping the genocide to ignore the long-term efforts and take matters into their own hands, even it means getting some new Labour blood on our hands.
Danny
On Naïvety, Scientific Methods, and Bad Faith
19.09.2006 16:32
I suppose nothing of the sort.
Your supposition, on the other hand, is absurd as what you falsely accuse me of. As if physics is less intensive than structural engineering. Both fields have specializations that require a profound grasp of the fundamentals--nuclear physics included.
You know nothing. You are guilty of sophistry.
Furthermore, you obviously haven't read Jones, for he utilized his expertise to focus on the impossibility of the collapse sequence AFTER collapse initiation. A general physicist is all that is needed to assess the likelihood and possibility of the collapse characteristics.
And the structural engineers??? The WTC designers??? Their opinions don't seem to matter to you either?
You may baselessly accuse me of being naïve, but it is clear that you are guilty of self-delusion and bad faith.
"That aside Jones's hypothesis has problems in many other areas: the logistics of planting that much thermite undetected and controlling it in concert let alone the pure common sense aspect of his suggestion being more bloody obvious than elephant footprints on custard."
Oh, really? Now who is being naïve?
_________________________________
Bush-Linked Company Handled Security for the WTC, Dulles and United
_________________________________
[begin quote]
Killtown: Scott, you have an interesting story to tell. Where were you working the week before 9/11?
Scott Forbes: In my office on the 97th floor in WTC 2 (South Tower), as usual except that myself and a lot of my colleagues were also working the weekend of 9/8 and 9/9.
KT: Why were you working the weekend before 9/11?
SF: Because of a "power down" notified by the Port Authority. Power was being switched off for a 36hr period in the top half of tower and as I work for a Financial Institution and Bank in the Technology Group I was working on the shutdown and eventually the startup of all our systems.
[...]
SF: ...I remember that we were notified some 3 or 4 weeks in advance by the Port Authority-NY/NJ that there would be a power outage - so we had to co-ordinate and plan efforts in the IT departments to ensure we had everything shut down in time and ready to restart...
[...]
SF: I didn't think that one group specifically were the cause, but I immediately was very suspicious about the power down. The timing was so coincidental.
KT: I guess at what point did you start to feel that the plane crashes were some sort of inside job? Did you think it was an inside job?
SF: Again that's putting it a little too specifically. I put together what I saw with my own eyes and the knowledge of the power down and came up with a great deal of suspicion on the "official" story. It just doesn't seem to be the total truth to me.
KT: When the towers came down, did that just create a ton of more suspicion for you?
SF: When the first tower collapsed, that's when my suspicion started.
[...]
KT: When did you start trying to tell your story to government officials? Have you tried to contact the media also?
SF: I've sent emails and letters to the 9/11 commission and the Port Authority of NY/NJ, without response, and I've emailed, IM'd and spoken to several independent authors and broadcaster. No mainstream media outlets.
KT: So the 9/11 Commission and Port Authority never even contacted you back?
SF: No.
KT: Did that just make you feel that there might be a cover-up going on?
SF: Sure - that's natural isn't it - though it could just be inefficiency. All I am looking for is an acknowledgement that the power down did take place and that it has been investigated.
KT: So no "officials" have acknowledged the "power down" in the South Tower that you witnessed?
SF: Not that I know of.
[end quote]
__________________________________________
"Furthermore, I personally suspect it is inspired by a jpg of "obviously thermally cut girder" which obviously has no timestamp let alone witness & physical corroboration."
Stop making us laugh, dude!
Jones and OTHERS, ENGINEERS even, have had access to actual steel samples (given to them by various official 911memorials and other sources) and they have done the appropriate studies.
I don't know which jpg picture you are referring to, but there are several and they only serve to substantiate the work he and the other have done with the samples.
This is what scientists do. Haven't you ever spoken with any? Have you even stepped foot in a university or a research laboratory?
____________________________________
[begin quote]
There is no indication that any of the fires in the World Trade Center buildings were hot enough to melt the steel framework. Jonathan Barnett, professor of fire protection engineering, has repeatedly reminded the public that steel--which has a melting point of 2,800 degrees Fahrenheit--may weaken and bend, but does not melt during an ordinary office fire. Yet metallurgical studies on WTC steel brought back to WPI reveal that a novel phenomenon--called a eutectic reaction-- occurred at the surface, causing intergranular melting capable of turning a solid steel girder into Swiss cheese.
Materials science professors Ronald R. Biederman and Richard D. Sisson Jr. confirmed the presence of eutectic formations by examining *STEEL SAMPLES* under optical and scanning electron microscopes. A preliminary report was published in JOM, the journal of the Minerals, Metals & Materials Society. A more detailed analysis comprises Appendix C of the FEMA report. The New York Times called these findings "perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation." The significance of the work on a sample from Building 7 and a structural column from one of the twin towers becomes apparent only when one sees these heavy chunks of damaged metal.
A one-inch column has been reduced to half-inch thickness. Its edges--which are curled like a paper scroll--have been thinned to almost razor sharpness. Gaping holes--some larger than a silver dollar--let light shine through a formerly solid steel flange. This Swiss cheese appearance shocked all of the fire-wise professors, who expected to see distortion and bending--but not holes.
A eutectic compound is a mixture of two or more substances that melts at the lowest temperature of any mixture of its components. Blacksmiths took advantage of this property by welding over fires of sulfur-rich charcoal, which lowers the melting point of iron. In the World Trade Center fire, the presence of oxygen, sulfur and heat caused iron oxide and iron sulfide to form at the surface of structural steel members. This liquid slag corroded through intergranular channels into the body of the metal, causing severe erosion and a loss of structural integrity.
[end quote]
__________________________________
“We are studying residues found in solidified slag as well as in dust from the WTC
collapses, in order to determine the nature of the reactions which produced this molten material. We have performed electron-microprobe, X-ray Fluorescence and other analyses on samples of the solidified slag and on the WTC dust. The provenience of the WTC dust sample is an apartment at 113 Cedar Street in New York City, NY. A memorial constructed from structural steel from the WTC Towers located at Clarkson University in Potsdam, New York, is the source of previously-molten metal samples. Porous, solidified splatter found with the compacted dirt from this memorial is being analyzed. Results from these studies were presented at the 2006 meeting of the Utah Academy of Science followed by the American Scholars Symposium (Los Angeles), and are made available here:
____________________________________
More on use of aluminothermics (thermite and thermate):
___________________________________
"In other words, it only stands up if you believe that every single subject-matter expert in the world has been got at... except of course the tenuous Prof Jones."
Your argumentative tactics are transparent. You sound just like your soulless buddy, Danny. BTW, it is funny that Dannyboy suddenly dropped out to allow you to take over!
I posted proof of numerous experts and their doubt of the official NIST-sponsored story and you want to push the idea, regardless of proof to the contrary, that Jones is some sort of lone crusader. He was the first to stick his neck out, that is all. He is the bravest of the bunch. There are many more, but they are scared to say anything.
Terrorism tends to sow fear--hence its nomenclature: terror-ism. People are scared for their "professional reputations", their careers, their lives and the lives of their loved-ones. People have been, and are being, murdered.
Your arguments are hollow and weak. The only reason I am responding is to expose the self-delusional blind faith of you official-conspiracy theorists.
Bad faith is a powerful and dangerous aspect of human consciousness, which can easily evolve into a full-blown character disorder, even madness.
Take care.
Fahrenheit 5000
Fahrenheit 5000
19.09.2006 17:07
Now, you really are going for it. You are trying to tell me that a general physics lecturer and molecular physics researcher has the same quality of opinion of a time-served structural engineer or forensic engineer?
I'm a linguist, most of my work was in the field of translation and applied linguistcs. Now, does that mean if I wrote a crit of leading computational linguistic theories that my opinion is at all relevant? If it were a credible piece, my paper would be published for peer review in the computational community. The likelihood however is my work would be a pile of embarressing cack and no-one would even return my e-mails. So, even under the wing of linguistics the gulf can be enormous.
Similarly, Prof. Jones has no history of work in the area he is hypothesising and curiously enough the relevant community has not paid him any attention, let alone any significant support. Looks more like him and his conspiraloon colleagues has spotted a nice way to earn a few bucks on the guest lecture circuit.
Give it up before you have to sit in the corner with the pointy hat on.
Spook Plant
... hello people ...
19.09.2006 20:17
To Danny, you have made a number of points that I heartily agree on, namely in regards to the 'white rose' approach to hitler and [his] modern imitators ...
... although I sympathise with the sentiments [of] cornelius, violence in pursuit of freedom [from state] oppression is inevitable in that the state itself is violent and defends its interests violently (its interests being the military industrial complex and the resultant meme can most definately, therefore, be called facistic - the alliance of state and corporate power) ...
... history also sadly shows the truth behind that great line in true romance (the film):
... "it is better to have a gun and not need it, than need a gun and not have it" ...
A critical fact that the Lebanese people have recently demonstrated.
However, I am quite prepared to conceed to the notion that I might be wrong on this as a result of my own peculiar psycological make up (bitter, twisted, cynical unreconstructed ananchist).
To spook plant, I have had run ins with you before on the subject of conspiracy theories and conspiracy theorists ... I accused you of living up to your moniker ... sorry!
It is clear to me now - following instruction from others - that you are a sincere activist ... respect to you for your heart and for puttng yourself on the line. Unfortunately, not every one has the chance (family/carer responsibilities) or the ability to cope with the psychological stress of dealing with the consequences of righteous action in our currupt era.
For those who look to see a way beyond this limitation, writing and research are valuable tools and outlets - as well as being crucial to widening the understanding of our plight "here down on dark earth", to borrow a phrase from kerouac.
I think that your dismissal of '5000's studious analysis is premature ... and in danger of splitting hairs.
... the science behind the denial of the government line on 911 is unfolding ... that is to say it is only now making its way to the proper arena for absorbtion by the wider community and the qualified personel to discribe it.
Please put aside the notion that those who wear white coats are beyond self delusion and self aggridisation ... they are not. Nor does the particular qualification presented to the demanding world of commercial explotation of scientific knowledge preclude deep understanding of other 'areas' and [seemingly] unlinked phenomena ...
... my own scientific qualifications rest on my understanding and the sufference of those with 'higher' qualifications in ecology ... that does not mean to say that I can not see a valid scientific point made about the structual responses of materials under stress ...
... the level and bredth of tests being carried out in controlled experimentation, where the resultant data and calculations are made FULLY public are growing in number and complexity with regards to the likelyhood of controlled demolition.
If you re-read '5000's post, there you will find an interview with a named and traceable employee of a company based in the WTC in the weeks LEADING UP TO the event ...
... the unprecendented access allowed to the top third of the towers and the compleat removal of oversight in terms of both electronic apparatus and 'traditional' security personel, should indicate that there is a reasonable point to be made regarding the possibilities of EXTENSIVE and PROTRATCTED preparations for the UNPRECEDENTED collapse (I'm not SHOUTING really, just emphasising!!!)
I'm not sure how far Chomsky has investigated the science ... he does not explicitly state it.
... I should imagine that the dangers of weighing in on less than bankable info, outweigh the likely impact of doing so - especially for a man who has so many important issues depending on his 'fame' to gain audiences and ears ...
... still, I think twilights ananlysis useful - if not entirely in keeping with my own beliefs - remembering again my own dismissal and paranoia regarding 'who to trust' ...
... its a hard call, but in the end I will give chomsky the benefit of the doubt and continue to hold myself the veiw that, the events of 11/9 (and here, corneliuses point about the everyday onslaught against humanity from humanity resonates) were self inflicted - or rather inflicted by the amerikan zionist PNAC upon the impressionable minds of the sleeping people of those shores ...
... tired now, and this blunt won't smoke itself ...
Peace and Love to yer all (almost)
jsl
jsl
19.09.2006 21:22
Ii accept the official stories on 9/11 and 7/7 are suspiciously lacking, but I am still very disappointed in 99.9% of work that has been done by the so-called "truth" movement. It really is just prejudice padded out with pseudo-evidence.
Like Danny I see ther importance attached to 9/11 as merely of being symptomatic of America have never been hit so hard on home turf.
Personally, I can totally believe that any number of foreign nationals could feel inspired to hit America or the UK. And strangely 9/11 Truth pays no attention to the propaganda output of so-called "al-qaeda". I guess the fact that there is a virtual media blackout of their message doesn't sit well with the "FLASE FLAG" wavers. Al-Qaeda propaganda heavily emphasises the Palestinian, Saudi and Iraqi situations as being their motivations.
Nor does the fact that the alleged attackers were mainly Saudi get much scrutiny by conspiracy theorists... according to them they didn't really exist.
That the CIA, ISI and Saudi bankrolled the mujahadin in Afghanistan is well-documented, but there is no hard evidence out there that Al-Qaeda are just a CIA/Mossad from- this is 100% speculation.
There really is no hard evidence of an inside job. I'm not ruling it out, but stating what is being paraded as "evidence" is so sad and pathetic it is actually very damaging to any credible calls for independent investigation.
As for activism. Sorry, I wasn't trying to sound smug. I know fine well that many are not in position to get too hands on. But any kind of action is better than just rehashing crap on IM.
In fact, you'd be very surprised at how many people in general would like to be able to more but feel held back by family responsibilities. It's how Thatcherism got this country by the balls.
First rule of hypothesis: can I break it?
The second rule of hypothesis: If I can't break it is it because I made a mistake?
9/11 Truth ignores these principals and embraces any old shit that appeals to prejudice.
Spook Plant
I already sourced engineers...
20.09.2006 22:55
You are a sophist because you keep ignoring crucial points. You try to channel the debate into a tit-for-tat type competition -- as jsl so rightly pointed out, into a splitting of hairs.
Engineers? Here they are, again and for the last time. Now quit ignoring the fact that Jones is not at all alone.
___________________________
"...structural engineers and architects are practitioners of static physics [like yourself, Dr. Jones] although we use different terminology peculiar to our professions to elaborate on our designs."
More comments from numerous engineers and scientists:
___________________________
Fire Engineers, you asked??
“William A. Manning, editor of Fire Engineering magazine, said the “official investigation…is a half-baked farce that may already have been commandeered by political forces whose primary interests, to put it mildly, lie far afield of full disclosure.”
___________________________
“Perhaps most compelling for me were the words of a genuine expert on the WTC. This was John Skilling, the structural engineer responsible for designing the towers. (...Skilling was known at the time to be the engineer in charge.) In 1993, five years before his death, Skilling said that he had performed an analysis on jet plane crashes and the ensuing fires and that ‘the building structure would still be there.’”
___________________________
“Frank DeMartini, project manager for the WTC's construction, who died on 9/11, explained long ago that the towers were designed with sophisticated load-redis- tribution capabilities, where the impact of aircraft on the buildings would be ‘like sticking a pencil through mosquito netting’.”
________________________
“Judy Wood, a mechanical engineer from Clemson, has studied alternative models of their collapse and has found that, for them to have come down so rapidly, there cannot have been any resistance between one floor and the next, which means that tremendous explosives had to have been used to blow out one floor under another.”
________________________
“Pentagon C Ring Exit Hole Mystery” by Michael Meyer, Mechanical Engineer
__________________________
Source:
David Griscom (FM) Physics of optical materials, Materials science and engineering, Author/co-author of nearly 200 publications.
Jack Keller (FM) Civil Engineering, Irrigation Engineering, Agricultural Engineering
Kenneth Kuttler (FM) Mathematics, Brigham Young University
Joseph M. Phelps (FM) Structural Dynamicist Charter Member, Structural Engineering Institute of the American Society of Civil Engineers
Jean-Pierre Petit (FM) Aeronautics, astrophysics, engineering
Doyle Winterton (FM) Civil Engineering Structural Engineering
Victoria Ashley (AM) Architecture and physiological psychology, 911research.wtc7.net
Frank Carmen (AM) Physics Ph.D., BYU
Dominic Dudzik (AM) Physics simulations, Electrical engineering
Brian Duncan (AM) Fire Protection Engineering
Scott Fenton (AM) Physics, Chemistry, Information Technology
Joel Ferrell (AM) Pilot, Aeronautical engineer, physics911.net/spine.htm
Patrick Gallagher (AM) Mechanical engineer
Michael Gass (AM) Air Force Explosive Ordnance, Disposal Specialist, Bomb disposal technician
Eric Hermanson (AM) Engineering Physics, Nuclear Engineering, Software Architect
Nick Hull (AM) Particle Physics, geocities.com/CapitolHill/
Paul Landis (AM) Industrial engineering, Author of "A Real 9/11 Commission"
Spero Larres (AM) Physics and Mathematics, Rutgers University
Michael Maguire (AM) Mechanical engineering, Aeronatutical engineering, Prognostic Health Monitoring
Ted Muga (AM) Naval aviator; Commercial pilot; Structural engineering
RC Oliver, Jr. (AM) Chief Engineer
Gordon Ross (AM) Mechanical engineering, Production engineering
Tom Spellman (AM) Civil engineering, architecture, non-profits, activism
Judson Witham (AM) High Rise/Mid Rise/Low Rise Construction/demolition, Civil Rights Laws
Ken Wrenn (AM) Civil engineer
Kyle Michelson (SM) Engineering, University of Delaware
Rick Rajter (SM) Materials Science and Engineering, Emerging and Fundamental Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
_____________________
Members of the Scientific Panel Investigating Nine Eleven (S.P.I.N.E.) involved in engineering, physics and mathematics:
Source:
A. K. Dewdney: PhD (Mathematics)
Derrick Grimmer: PhD (Physics)
David Heller: BS (Physics), MA (Architecture), Architect and Builder
Jerry Longspaugh : MSc (Aerospace Engineering)
Donald Eckhoff : Engineer and Manufacturer
_____________________
What kind of academic, linguist or whatever, only looks at what he wants to see?
A fraud?
Fahrenheit 5000
9/11 and Structural Engineers
20.09.2006 23:22
In fact, I have heard second-hand that many structural engineers question the official story, but are afraid to say so publicly for fear of losing their jobs and their funding.
But that's not very satisfying, is it? Hopefully, a structural engineer will have the courage to speak out, even in these times where whistleblowers are punished instead of protected. But so far, there have been none.
So I wrote to Jim Fetzer, co-chair of Scholars for 9/11 Truth (made up of professors of physics, mechanical engineering, fire engineering, etc., as well as former congressmen, and former high-level military and intelligence officials, as well as air traffic controllers and pilots). I asked Jim whether people should question the official story of why World Trade Center 1, 2, and 7 collapsed on 9/11, given that no structrual engineers have come forward yet.
Here's Jim's response:
"Have no fear! Even structural engineers cannot violate the laws of nature!
That structural steel melts at around 2,750*F, that the maximum temperature of jet-fuel based fires is only 1,800*F, that UL certified the steel used in the towers to 2,000*F for several hours before it would even significantly weaken, when the fires burned for less than an hour (South Tower) and about ninety minutes (North Tower) at low temperatures because it was oxygen-starved, means the steel neither melted nor weakened.
The impact of the planes was negligible because they had sophisticated load-redistribution capabilities built into them. As World Trade Center construction manager Frank DeMartini observed, the impact of a plane on the buildings would be like sticking a pencil through mosquito netting!
Even THE 9/11 REPORT itself conceded that the towers fell in about 10 seconds, which is the same as a grand piano in free fall would have taken, if it had been released from the top of one of them at the same time it began to collapse, which would have been impossible under any scenario other than controlled demolition removing lower floors before falling mass impacted with them.
So some source of energy other than the planes or the fires was necessary to bring the buildings down.
You can actually see massive explosions on floors at the start of collapse before they were enveloped with clouds of debris, fine dust created by pulverizing the concrete flooring material, and steel beams are thrown outward and even upward! You would expect to see clouds of debris from the ground up when the buildings fell, but in this case, they were exploding from the top down! This effect could only have been the result of previously positioned demolitions exploding in series.
That conclusion, supported by multiple kinds of evidence, including even observational evidence (see "9/11 Revisited" -- www.911revisited.com -- for example), receives additional reinforcement from the pools of molten metal found at the sub-basement level of all three buildings. (Don't forget WTC7, which was hit by no aircraft, only incurred very modest fires, and was "pulled" at 5:20 PM following the suggestion of Larry Silverstein.)
It really doesn't matter if structural engineers are afraid to speak out because they think they will be ridiculed or otherwise punished by the loss of funding, say. Even structural enginnering cannot violate natural laws!"
Relevant sources of information substantiating Jim's statements can be found here:
ProgressiveDemocrat
Source for last comment
20.09.2006 23:23
Source
Structural Engineer
20.09.2006 23:31
Post-structuralist
Guess What?...
20.09.2006 23:38
Surprise!
Do your math
20.09.2006 23:47
I guess those structural engineers that support the official line can break the laws of physics in their analyses!!
Funny how none of them will debate the math done here:
Do we need to perform an autopsy on Reason?
Fancy that: more engineers!
20.09.2006 23:53
Judy Wood, (a professor of Mechanical Engineering at Clemson University)
Engineers falling on deaf ears?
Noah tried to spread the word about the flood....
21.09.2006 05:22
"so in order to keep my house and my pension and my families future i and people like me will believe whatever they say."
How noble! How courageous! How progressive! How philosophical!
It makes me sick to think that this is what 500 years of Reason -- from the Renaissance to the Enlightenment, from Marxism to the rise of the proletariat -- has brought us: back to the bloody, wretched, and cowardly cynicism that defined the serf mentality of the feudal age.
Forget about Truth, Reason and everything else that was supposed to bring us out of the dark ages of the tyranny of the upper-classes; we've all resigned ourselves to the servility of the rigged exploitation system.
And why? Because the elite have reminded us who is in charge. And to think that all it took was the controlled demolition of three American skyscrapers and an unprecedented corporate media propaganda campaign!
Let us remain slaves forever!! Why? Because we have to worry about our mortgages, pensions, and every little piece of trash made out of plastic that our credit cards have bought us!
Let us forget about creativity and co-operative action! We all need the middle man to survive! We need rulers to bark orders at us. The producers have forgotten how to organize themselves, is that it? Is that the reason for this wholesale capitulation?
Let us let History be rewritten before our very eyes! Let us never look back unless there is a happy or amusing story to recall!
Let us let THEM rewrite the natural laws of the universe! We won’t need them anyway once the super rich decide to spread a virus and get rid of the bulk of us “useless eaters”!
And when that happens, we’ll all go silently to the camps to receive our forced “vaccinations”, and we’ll all slip gently into that dark night.
And the wicked shall inherit -- only to destroy -- the Earth.
Spartacus?
Hey Noah!
21.09.2006 05:36
Enki
Please stay on the ground, I'm not enjoying hitting you!
21.09.2006 07:25
So, show me all those amazing theses being peer reviewed by the subject matter community... assuming of course you can demonstrate they have even been published thus. I'll not hold my breath.
Soooo, you believe the global professional community has been held vocally hostage by whatever sprawling cabal you think "demolished" the twin towers in broad daylight (without a single whistleblower!). Even in Stuttgart, Lyons, Krakow, Oslo, Dublin, Glasgow, Tripoli, etc. the evil reach of Doctor Conspiracy and his henchmen are feared...
All except the brave Jones, Fetzer and a tiny handful of fellow brave infowarriors?
A more egocentric deluded line I have yet to encounter.
Let me guess, they aren't scared for the lives or their professional careers because... becuase they know fine well what they are peddling is conspiracy snake oil and no-one's going to come from them in the night... except maybe a bunch of disgruntled anarchists who are sick of their stupid shit being spammed all over their community.
Come back when you have either been through university or have been medicated please. We'll accept your apology gracefully.
Now, don't make me actually redo a list of the respected institutions that do not subscribe "Scholars'" hypotheses.
Spook Plant
I really don't get you ...
21.09.2006 12:22
Fair enough, you are an activist. Yes that gives you a leg up in my book ... but from then on you will have to do a little bit more work to convince me that yours is a worthy attitude ... especially when you write this:
... "Come back when you have either been through university or have been medicated please. We'll accept your apology gracefully.
Now, don't make me actually redo a list of the respected institutions that do not subscribe "Scholars'" hypotheses." ...
I have been to university and I was then, as I am now 'medicated' (by Jah) ...
... it is interesting from a simple mamallian politic standpoint, the fact that you ... essentially ... dehumanise a certain group of people in seeking to dismiss their argument (and lets face it, dismiss it you are, I see no attempt to deconstruct it, reductionist or otherwise) when you introduce the notion of respected institution [no parenthesis] verses 'scholars' [parenthesis].
... are you a snob when it comes to universities?
... can you remember the time when these respectable institutions rejected ideas that have now reached the fullness of their acceptance and face a future of subsumation from the 'next great idea'? ... it's called paradigm change, it happens slowly and inevitably ...
... it is a mistake to reject the opinion of these structural engineers ... the structural engineers that the naysayers in the 11/9 'arena' have been requesting urgently[sic] before any more time is spent[sic] ... or is it hubris?
Can you state clearly your [simplfied] take on 11/9 please before any further communication, you have me confused.
All the best.
jsl
Ego protocogito sum
21.09.2006 14:26
actually I'm not aware I did dehumanise them- perhaps generalised (inescacpable habit of pattern regocnition) but I certainly don't hold the belief that 911 Truthers are subhuman through their error. I'm sure my complete world view will be laughed at if our spieces gets another 100 years to move on.
I aspire to be many things amongst which is an anti-authoritarian anarchist (I even try to walk the walk by living in a non-heirarchical community- you'll be pleased to know the only major difference is that no-one gets to use ego as a bargaining tool too easily).
My point about education and mental health isn't to my best knowledge authoritarian. It is based on personal logic:
1a.) The professional community is a very good indicator of whether something is at all viable. Take the GM debate for example, where I know personally that Downing St and the Dirty Tricks Department tried to railroad debate and aggressively coerce academics. As psyop it was dysmal failure. There was a very public and terse debate about the safety and ethics.
This kind of scenario has not happened RE: (11 Truth hypotheses. The logical conclusion: no significant currency is to be found.
I like the poster, and most posters, have no significant understanding of the science of buildings collapsing due to whatever. But I do know when to spot when a hypothesis has no currency.
1b.) The poster seems totally oblivious to the basic mechanisms of the research community.
2.) Mental health. A lot of the arguments surrounding 9/11 and related conspiracy theories are totally in step with the symptoms of very real conditions such as "schizophrenia"/paranoia/psychosis/neurosis.
I'm not suggesting that I anyone who disagrees with me is insane. But it's pretty obvious that people with certain medical conditions are in turn attracted to like-(dysfunctionally-)minded people.
The bit about failing to deconstruct the argument: this has been going on here for five years, I have now a tendency to assume that certain aspects are well-worn... plus I'm always seeking to identify the weakest link at the lowest point of a hypothesis.
Jones has been trashed elsewhere regarding his ignorance of the subject matter. Fetzer can't make his mind up from one minute to the next.
My take on 9/11? I don't really have much of one, but here goes.
There seems to be issues regarding the intelligence failings that haven't been adequately explained- this in itself indicates too many things to offer a thesis.
The logistics involved of rigging three skyscrapers with explosives/incendiary coumpound and deceiving the public is way too big to be actionable. It'd take literally thousands of people willingly lying about an act of mass murder and treason to work.
Much of the so-called evidence in 9/11 Truth is non-eveidence. It is news analysis that focusses inexplicably on non-trends for leads, that inexpertly evaluates jpegs and avis and in all cases fails to even arrive at a solid joined up thesis (one where hunch a, fits with data a,b,c,d and witness statement e and confession f )
I don't know what happened on 9/11 except that it is most likely four aeroplanes were hijacked 3 hit buildings. That thousands of witnesses and as many professionals who saw, experienced and agree with that happening is a very logical reason to support that theory.
The notion that anyone who thinks this is so is either stupid (not seeing the flase reality), a liar (in denial of the false reality for personal gain), a plant (for corporate gain), or scared for their wellbeing (from the master of the false reality) is by defintion mad as fuck.
Why has 911 Truth come about? I guess it is a complex thing like many. First we have the shock and denial in US culture where they have never had to deal with much terrorism on their doorstep which has bred a hysterical reaction and the denial of what could give the world a reason to want do such a vile thing.
This machanism has produced a denial culture which global appeal to certain prejudices amongst many groups.
All in all, it's a bit like the notion of plague carrying jews & cats.
At any rate, I think what happened on 11th Sep. is so profoundly unimportant to the issues that lead to the forming of IndyMedia in the first place, that it has become a pathetic distraction.
Why so? Even if 9/11 had been an inside job why are people wasting time talking about it and doing nothing?
It hasn't moved a micron closer to proving anything and these people are disengaged from the real issues, namely what is being done off the back of 9/11.
There was no case presented to the Taliban to extradict Bin Laden. There were no WMDs in Iraq. There were no links between Al Qaeda & Saddam Hussein. Civil liberties are being eroded in the name of 9/11. Public money is being pilfered to pay for illegal wars. There is likely going to be a war in Iran.
People, innocent men women and children are dying right now, right under our noses. This is being supported by our governments supporting companies right down our streets. And what exactly are these conspiraloons doing about? Sweet fuck all, except spamming places like here with mad crap and attacking activists.
I would try to recruit them, but to be honest, they are a fucking liability... and if they can't translate their mad ideas into direct action, I ain't going to elect myself their cult leader.
Thankfully, my sciatica is almost better and I can take my research into the International Criminal Court obligations I am preparing for my trial back to the woods.
Sorry about the long post... normally indicates the work of a loony... but you did ask heehee!
Keep an open and enquiring mind JSL.
XXX
Spook Plant
Methinks, mesmells a rat
21.09.2006 15:14
If I were you jsl, I'd begin rethinking Danny's/Spook's authenticity.
What kind of an "activist" states openly that he couldn't care less about the people that died on 9/11? What kind of an "activist" ignores the fact that 9/11 is the omnipresent justification for War, domestic spying, the world Police State, and the holocaust of Arabs??
Think about it.
Cointelpro isn't dead. After 9/11, the State ANNOUNCED that it would spend unprecedented amounts of taxpayer money on INFILTRATION, sabotage, disinformation and surveillance. That means sending agents to infiltrate every significant activist organization and/or paying off the less authentic and more self-serving existing "activists".
Remember how many Vietnam era "activists" turned about 180 degrees and RAN to join the system after the end of the Vietnam war.
What kind of an authentic "activist" tries to turn a ctritique of Chomsky into an INTERNET discussion on violence and assassination??
Agents provocateurs??
No fool
Free-fall? Structural resistance? Deny, Ignore, Deny, Ignore!
21.09.2006 15:30
Show us a legitimate and scientific rebuttal of Jones' work -- one that doesn't break the basic laws of the universe: like GRAVITY.
Any attack on Jones that doesn't address this simple fundamental is delusional and/or fraudulent.
BTW I am well versed on academic procedure, but I don't need to prove anything to the trolls.
Their posts don't even mention free-fall and structural resistance (in addition to air-resitance).
I guess they don't teach you any of this stuff in the informant/provocateur academy.
Disillusioned Academic
What kind of activist?
21.09.2006 15:37
I'd be embarressed to call myself a 9/11 Truth activist: what actions do they actually do???
Go on take some direct action against an Bechtel, Haliburton, BAe Sytems target! Even if it is just leafletting employees at the end of their shifts or holding a vigil if you are worried about getting more than asked to move on or a fine for Breach. Write a few paragraphs take some photos (blur the faces if you want!)
If you want some organisation help then e-mail me.
Come on in; the water's fine. Direct action is better for the soul than any Internet Lourdes.
Don't you remember Dr John Reid telling us all we need to be more active for the sake of our hearts?
Empower yourselves!
Spook Plant
e-mail:
prinzerle@hotmail.com
... mostly agree ...
21.09.2006 15:39
... it is good that you put the first in quotes, as I believe it has no currency in mind science circles nowerdays, but the rest could discribe any of us on a bad day no? ...
"The logistics involved of rigging three skyscrapers with explosives/incendiary compound and deceiving the public is way too big to be actionable."
To big a statement to hold oneself up to I would think. I have never moved 1/5 million troops around the world, but imagine that I can't imagine the logistics ... it still happened and 1.5 million Iraqis died as a result ... and there are still those who beleieve the lies paraded that time ...
"Why so? Even if 9/11 had been an inside job why are people wasting time talking about it and doing nothing?"
I really don't agree that they are wasting their time talking here. It is false logic to assume that they cannot both talk and do (although not perhaps simualtaneously!), and the need for humans to engage in meaningful information exchange will not be negated - hence our prolonged exchange.
All good says I, spec. considering that such talking action often produces positive change and renewed effort ...
... anyway got to go, my daughter is refusing to reveal the whereabouts of the bath plug in open revolt against my authority ...
... take care ... bad backs are buggers ...
jsl
Pick me, pick me for leader! I'm not an opportunist! I swear it! REALLY!
21.09.2006 15:42
Of course, an "anarchist" that thinks of himself as a potential leader.
Recruit people to what? Your CIA-sponsored fake anarchist group, so we could travel the globe gathering information on sincere activists, breaking up effective protests and giving the police the excuse to attack dedicated demonstrators?
I've known neo-nazis that have posed as "anarchists". They invaded the Genoa G8 demos, remember?
If you do a little research on the subject, you would see that 9/11 activists are just as dedicated, just as vocal, just as anti-war, just as anti-imperialist, just as anti-fascist as the dedicated anti-war activists.
The only difference is that false-flag truthers possess a hightened sense of self-honesty and a more advanced recognition of the importance of History, not to mention Reason and Science.
The agents, such as Danny and Spook Plant, oviously care about nothing other than themselves and fall into a totally different category.
Disillusioned "Activist"
Disillusioned "Activist"... and JSL
21.09.2006 16:11
Blimey are there such a thing as anarchist groups? Sounds dreadful. What do they do quote 19th ccentury dogma to each other and then go home?
You sound like Special Branch giving me fags and asking me intel gathering questions "Who is the leader of your group?" "Do you receive money to do this?"... and before you ask there's no way I can afford to pay a private army on incapacity benefit (and still afford to drink!).
JSL:
Fair points; except that I'd be interested to see some 9/11 Turth direct action posts. Are there any???
If there are, point it out and I'll do a quick ratio of action posts to nutty theory posts.
Hey don't oppress the girl! I know some very nice girls that smell of sweat and pee. Plus no-one pesters them on public transport.
XXX
Spook Plant
... its not the smell ...
21.09.2006 17:21
Agree w/ the notion that the ratio between dross and interesting is bad .. what can you do? Apart from kiss a lot of frogs!
However, methinks we should all stand back form making bigger and bigger statements ... made that mistake before ... lets get to know each other more ... there is no faking a sincere heart and an enquiring mind. Real spooks find it harder to operate on those levels (perhaps they are human after all).
There have been a few activists posts and when I have a little more time in a few days I will try and compile them etc
jsl
jsl
21.09.2006 18:08
I hope it isn't that nasty Derbac organophosphate stuff? I got misdiagnosed with scabies- stereotyping if u ask me, turned out to be "bacterial folliculitis"- and they gave me this spunky gloop that made me feel like I had asthma.
All the best!
Spook Plant
Disillusioned "Activist": how to spot a faker
21.09.2006 18:21
Fakers will pretend that they don't want to incriminate themselves.
A real activist will be able to cite something they aren't scared of being knicked for- often because they have already been nicked for it.
I reckon most people are scared of getting active because they are scared of the legal process. That's fair enough and I reckon everyone has been there.
The thing is you'd be truly amazed at the amount if things you can get away with, even out in the open and accountably. We set up a tent camp right outside Prestwick Airport in their car park and were there for about 11 hours without any arrests.
The police are mostly okay with you so long as you are okay with them (though you can get the odd arsehole; I'm sure the feeling is mutual); the arrest process is plain old boring, best take a book with you (nothing too political or they'll not let you have it (subversive literature))- and hide nicoine gum somewhere unsearcheable.
The crappest pasrt of custody seems to be the court holding cells: full of what the Daily Mail would describe as "The Dregs": tramps; loonies; homeless; chavs; protestors.
I have as yet no experience of prison, but from what I gather it sounds like an extended period of police custody.
Spook Plant
Do you want my mugshot, too?
21.09.2006 21:24
I didn’t post here and rebut the smear comments so I could enter into an arrest-tallying competition. I will let words and facts speak for themselves. The purpose of Indymedia is to educate, inform and organize, and not to hold little personality pageants.
”A real activist will be able to cite something they aren't scared of being knicked for- often because they have already been nicked for it.”
Oh really! Do you know this from your experience as a troll on Indymedia? Or are you quoting directly from your manual?
It’s funny, but I’ve been involved in online discussions before, and I’ve never encountered such an online braggart.
It must be because I’ve spent too much time discussing with “fake activists”.
Celsius 2800
Do you want my mugshot, too?
22.09.2006 00:36
Spook Plant
herbie H.
12.12.2006 13:14
Robert Stuart
Hide 6 hidden comments or hide all comments