My final argument - a clincher, in my view - is that the Arabs have screwed up everything - militarily, politically, diplomatically - they have tried to do in the Middle East; so how on earth could they successfully bring off the international crimes against humanity in the United States on 11 September 2001?

I just love the enthusiasm and confidence that so many people (many with intellectual pretensions) suddenly have for something published in "Popular Mechanics". They then proceed to ignore the judgement of the premier firefighting publication in the nation, "Fire Engineering", that denounced the 9-11 investigation for a "half-baked farce". Tony Vodvarka, Hartly DE

I actually believe the official story. I do however believe with all my heart that Israeli intelligence knew it was going down and deliberately did nothing to warn us. Google- dancing Israelis 9/ll. The truth always comes out and I just hope I live long enough to see it.

"tlescpk" NAILS IT!

It's all about fear.

What ever happened to the investigation into the anthrax attacks, once it was revealed to be American sourced weaponized anthrax?

9-11 was brought to you by the same people who murdered JFK, RFK, Paul Wellstone and JFK Jr... The last three shoe-ins for a progressive (possibly not buyable or controllable) presidency.

What more would YOU need to keep quiet and behave yourselves and sign that damn Patriot Act, or shut up about the explosions you heard, then having you and your children threatened with an "accident"? Maybe not now, maybe in 10 years, but some day? For sure? And when you least expected it?

So, for all those that accept the government's version of physics, do this little thought experiment: Imagine a nice sturdy steel I-beam, standing upright. Now imagine your woodstove placed atop the I-beam. Full of whatever you want burning, I don't care..., wood, kerosene, jet fuel, desks, chairs, people. Whatever. Wait an hour. Feel free to imagine it still burning merrily. Does the steel I-beam collapse? Melt? Fall down onto itself from the (slightly) warm area down into the cool and still solid and uncompromised area? Into it's own footprint? Turning the entire contents of the woodstove into dust before ever hitting the ground?

I didn't think so.

Well for crying out loud, why would 47 massive steel beams and acre's worth of interconnecting bolts and beams collapse like that?

I think we should torture Cheney until he tells us what really happened. Shouldn't take much more than a few minutes... they're all really cowards if you take away their Secret Service protection. They proved that during the Vietnam War when they all had something 'better' to do...

http://rigorousintuition.blogspot.com/2004/08/coincidence-theorists-guide-to-911.html

joecommon there'll NEVER be a serious investigation into 9/11, let alone Bush and Cheney found guilty in a court of law of being behind it. Stop dreaming.

Get real and use your energies to get these criminals out of office first, by voting for candidates like Cindy Sheehan.

tetti_tatti,

Listen to what evan_viewer (August 27th, 2007 11:49 am) and Ken Hausle (August 27th, 2007 7:18 am) have to say.

Court or no court, the "9/11 card" will be played. You can't stop it from being exploited again and again - unless - you prove, one way or another, that the card is fake. You have to. Once the O.J. simpson played the "race" card, you know all accusation and criticizm instantly became irrelevant.

You sounded like voting for candidates like Cindy Sheehan would make a difference...

-BeingSpied 24/7

No, as an ex chemistry and physics teacher, your understanding is not wacked. There is no plausible theory for the near free fall velocity of the twin towers collapse. Even if the pancaking theory from fire weakened girders were plausible, which it is not, there would be serious delays in the giving way, particularly of the higher floors, and additionally, the 47 core girders would have been left untouched and still standing. What is most amazing is that people who call themselves engineers buy this shit. I donated to the Kevin Ryan defense found, a former management engineer at Underwriters Laboratories, Inc., who was unjustifiably fired when NIST came out with their cock and bull story about how the fires weakened the beams that UL certified, and he protested in a public letter to the Director of NIST. I am particularly incensed as I played on their mixed gender softball team in Boulder 10 odd years ago :-)

If you want to deal further with the physics of the Twin Towers collapse on a level that a lay person can follow, check out Steven Jones, "Why Indeed Did the Twin Towers Collapse." Dr. Jones, a formerly tenured professor of physics at BYU in his early 60's, who had done laudible work in particle theory, was forced into early retirement for the plublication of this paper on the web.

I happy to admit that I do not know what happened on 9/11, but I came across one argument that seems to make it clear that the official version cannot be true. This referred to the time that it took the the first two towers to collapse. According to the official record it took around 10 seconds for the first tower to collapse. The cause of the collapse apparently due to structural failure, but from what I understand about basic physics it would be impossible for the building to collapse that quickly under its own weight. If you do the calculations a building of that height could only collapse that quickly if there was no resistance, which is not the case when a building collapses due to an explosion. This was not refuted in the Popular Mechanics article, in fact it was not dealt with. What I am I missing here. Is my understanding of physics whacked or is there a blatant lie staring us in the face in the "official" version.

More unanswered questions:

http://www.livevideo.com/video/340E8D4416664C539A4C1FE4B80AF9EE/are-the-criminals-frightened-.aspx

I wonder if we would have a 'theory' of gravity if Newton believed the apple tree had 'conspired' to drop one on his head. Eventually, all naysayers about the reality of a 911 cover-up will be dropped on their heads because of the 'gravity' of the situation.

"You can fool some of the people some of the time, all of the people some of the time, but not all the people all the time"---A. Lincoln

BRAVO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Evan_Viewer

How Pathetic ….

Why do the media seek to demonize and label those who question the government's conspiracy theory about 19 hijackers fooling everyone from the FBI to NORAD? Your acceptance of such a plot makes you a conspiracy theorist.

There are countless contradictions, lies and evidence that point to the US government…and yet you write as if these inconsistencies require answers only to satisfy some naive curiosity of your own; when these inconsistencies clearly show that the official theory is a lie. You discredit yourself by making apologetic remarks about Bush (a screw up) being incapable of pulling off 911. Bush has done everything perfectly…he accomplish all that the PNAC wanted. His appearance of incompetence is the old "rope-a-dope" strategy to give the opposition overconfidence in thinking that he is weak. He has…in fact…further legalized a policy that promotes genocide 100 times more severe than the Nazis. He is not only killing a nation of people…he is killing the morale of those who approve of it, and the welfare of those who sustain it. Make no mistake…Iraq is a holocaust…as was Vietnam.

But why go any further? All is lost. Every article on this site and other so-called truth sites (like alternet) about Iraq /War on Terror/ Patriot Act etc is undermined by the acceptance of official 9/11 theory . There can be no correction to any of these issues until we properly deal with lies of 9/11 as the catalyst that brought us these issues .

The only thing more sinister than the one committing the act is the one telling the story (the media) as a lie to conceal it. Unfortunately, those seeking the truth look to the Amy Goodman(s) and Noam Chomsky(s) that appear to be gatekeepers of that truth but actually deny the truth of 9/11. This is as if a professed Christian would deny the birth of Christ. In any case, your article has shown that you have no merit and therefore no positive impact on exposing the truth…at the very least…that the official story is a lie.

You say spare me the "Ravers"…I say spare me the "journalists."

Does anyone know if the air space over Washington is protected by the Pentagons missile defense,meaning only planes admitting a friendly signal are allowed in this space.If so why was the plan that hit the pentagon not shot down.Was this just another failure do to incompetence that happen on that day on such a grand scale.Considering that there was so much incompetence that day such as the military/norad not being able to get planes up to protect the nation,was any one ever held responsible for all the incompetence.It just seem to strange that the strongest and most sophisticated military in the world was shown to be completely incapable of protecting the nation in a time of crisis. So the billions of dollars our government spends on defense does what?
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8545414779301935419

I wonder if Mr. Fisk ever watched the video below, talk about conspiracy with a capital C. Or at least that's what I thought at first. After watching it many times, however, I don't think it's that far fetched:

http://www.livevideo.com/socialservice

If the link above doesn't work, go to LiveVideo.com and search for SEPTEMBER CLUES.

Conspiracy is not a dirty word - despite what so many think. I have studied history and it is riddled with conspiracies. Here are some:
- - The American Revolution which was a conspiracy between Northern Traders / Factory Owners and Southern Cotton Farmers to overthrow a system they believed oppressive.
- - The authoring of the U.S. Constitution was a conspiracy against the supporters of the Articles of Confederation. Remember, they had to keep it secret.
- - Vitamin Price-fixing conspiracy by BASF and others to make sure their profits kept going up.
- - Various election frauds throughout the world - including the USA.
- - The start of WWI came from a conspiracy to assassinate a royal. Succesfully, in this case.

Conspiracies are the result of a group of people conspiring to do something. To conspire is to agree to commit to some end, usually in secret - whether legal or not, but in common usage, tends towards an illegal or "evil" end.

Do I think there was some grand scheme other than the one they published themselves? (PNAC anyone?) Not really. I think they took advantage of the circumstances knowing full well there was an opportunity to boost the war profiteering machine. The problem? It got out of their control as these things often do. The reason it got out of their control was simple, the Middle East is complicated and, sorry, my fellow Americans, the USA is rather naive in foreign policy.

The love of money is the root of all evil and there has never been an administration as enamored of material wealth as this one. I think people who love money first will do all sorts of evil things in its pursuits. I do not put it past this group to have conspired to allow the planes to fly into the WTC through complacency.

Of course, there is the little discussed fact that OBL was from a CIA funded organization set up to counter the Soviet incursion into Afghanistan. But that is not something to be looked at too closely.

Now that Gonzales has resigned, Cheney is next in line.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070827/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/gonzales_resigns;_ylt=AryOfVTYcx3cnbfF34ghzNSs0N...

Peace,
Ken Hausle
* I support HRes333 - Impeach/Convict/Put Away for Good

If there is NEVER a serious investigation into 9/11 (as well as other past transgressions), it will just mean that america has abandoned any semblance of moral or ethical behavior, and frankly, the US of A will only exist in the imagination of sickos such as current "imaginary unitary executive believing" office-occupiers in DC and folks who choose not to utilize their senses.

I agree though that energies initially ought to be focussed on removing the criminals from office. A major unprecedented "cleaning" is called for, and just talking about it won't make it happen. I don't think we can wait for the 2008 elections - by then it will likely be too late. Many already think it is too late, but that seems hopeless to me. For those who feel hopeless, all I can say is: Get of your ass and stop feeling sorry for yourself.

I'm so tired of fear, apathy, fear, misdirection, fear, and anger that lashes out with no focus. Fear sucks, and if we are all going to die soon enough, then whats there to be afraid of. Why not choose to live with integrity and gusto, and then each can do their own part towards achieving remedy.

I mean come on the fires are burning all around the ancient greek olympics site, mean hurricanes are about and more are probably coming, floods in the midwest, and so on and so forth. It is only going to get worse unless we start facing reality and taking matters into our own hands. Let me ask you this. How important is one years salary when if "business as usual" continues, none of us will even have any descendents?

I suppose whoever said "money is the root of all evil" knew what they were talking about. Wake Up People.

Peace,
Ken Hausle
* I support HRes333 - Impeach/Convict/Imprison the VP then tar and feather his butt
** If pp pelosi won't do it, get her out
*** If conyers is too angry and resentful or turning it into a bargaining position, then get him out of the way
**** If the complicit, enabling dems want to continue their ways, then end their party once and for all
***** If the publicans think they are superior, well when they are all dead and we are all dead who will ever know....

joecommon there'll NEVER be a serious investigation into 9/11, let alone Bush and Cheney found guilty in a court of law of being behind it. Stop dreaming.

Get real and use your energies to get these criminals out of office first, by voting for candidates like Cindy Sheehan. We must expose Democrats and Republicans for what they are: twins separated at birth.

One of the most trumpeted themes in the post-9/11 world has been a blanket assertion that such a large conspiracy (if conducted within the U.S. government) could never be concealed from the American people or the people of the world before the crime was committed….From the Manhattan Project to the Stealth fighter, the U.S. government has successfully kept secrets involving thousands of people. Secondly, in order to execute a conspiracy of the size and type I am suggesting, it is not necessary that thousands of people see the whole picture. The success of the U.S. maintaining the secrecy around the atom bomb and the Stealth fighter, or in any classified operation, lies in compartmentalization. A technician in Tennessee refining uranium ore in 1943 would have no knowledge of its intended use, or any moral culpability in any deaths that occurred as a result of it. Another technician in Ohio, mixing polymer resin in 1985, would have no knowledge of what an F117A looked like or what it was intended to do.
The government routinely protects itself against disclosure by compelling millions of employees to sign security agreements and secrecy oaths which would make them subject to immediate incarceration or loss of benefits if they talked, even about criminal behavior. Perpetrating the murders of 9/11 required only a few people inside a small circle who did indeed "need to know" the entire plan, or most of the plan, in order to complete their tasks. For reasons of physical safety, freedom from legal sanction, and job security, participants would be motivated – and therefore, guaranteed – not to inform on one another….After two and a half years of investigation my estimate is that the number of people with complete foreknowledge of the attacks of September 11th would likely not exceed two dozen, all of them bound to silence by Draconian secrecy oaths.

–Crossing The Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at The End of The Age of Oil by Michael C. Ruppert(2004)

I said finding out if Bush was behind it was irrelevant.

The 'relevant' thing is to stop this administration NOW, through legal means.

tetti_tatti,

Why throw accountability out the window?

Why exclude Bush's or Cheney's involvement in 9/11 in legal proceedings?

To stop them is to reveal the whole truth. They will use 9/11 as a selling point to undermine any legal means. They will bring up 9/11 again and again as justification for their past action.

If you don't even make an attempt to prove their complicity in 9/11, you will end up seeing people being more than motivated to support their agenda and their innocence due to their deep-seeded fear (i.e. bias).

It's time for the public to realize their deep-seeded fear was caused by none other than this administration in, to borrow dakotalin's term, the ultimate Reality Show, 9/11.

-BeingSpied24/7

joecommon you missed both Chomsky's (and my) point. I didn't say 9/11 was irrelevant, I said finding out if Bush was behind it was irrelevant.

We all know that Bush is capable of much worse things than planning a fake terrorist attack and that history teaches us that dictators orchestrate events in order to start wars. If 9/11 hadn't happened, Bush and Cheney would've concocted something else to justify Iraq, Afghanistan, destroying the US Constitution and spying on Americans, etc. That's the way fascism works.

The 'relevant' thing is to stop this administration NOW, through legal means.

"Meanwhile, the ravers keep talking about 9/11 instead of doing any real political work."
________________________________________________________________________________

Thanks for the tough love, safiyyah. And you've reassured me that I'm doing more than my bit just by keeping out of your way. I'd only be a burden, whereas it's clear that you'll get the job done single-handedly, if it comes to that. Good luck.

PJD August 26th, 2007 12:13 pm wrote:
"Don,

Actually, if you look at that security camera footage closely, remembering that the plane was in the shiny-aluminum finish used by American Airlines, you will see the plane.

Also, why do you need evidence from a camera when hundreds of people in the densely populated area around the Pentagon clearly saw an American Airlines airliner fly into the pentagon? ..."

I've never seen any of these people interviewed. Did I miss that on TV or the net? Could you direct me to a archive of some of these eye witness accounts so I can read them for myself? There must be some news footage with the eye witnesses talking, the MSM always is putting some in front of the camera in these disaster reports.

Egads... Fisk's raver commentary followed by a deep soup of raver rants! The American liberal is too busy raving and ranting about Bush and conspiracies to ever seriously go about creating an alternative to the corporate Tweedle Dee/ Tweedle Dumb game it seems. One thing is for sure, the Democrats and Republicans have a conspiracy going to keep democracy from ever breaking out spontaneously. Meanwhile, the ravers keep talking about 9/11 instead of doing any real political work.

joecommon: ya know, let em. Let em try to spy on everyone. Can't be done (the spying part that is - of course, the "trying" part can always be done).

And as long as you are doing your best at doing your best then who gives a flip if anyone is trying to spy. Let em.

In the end, time will tell.

Peace,
Ken Hausle

Chomsky is correct. Even if 911 is an inside job, this would be irrelevant. 9/11 only killed 3,000. The Iraq war for instance has killed close to one million people so far.

tetti_tatti,

Without the horrific deaths of the 3,000 in the staged attack, can the Bush regime kill close to one million people?

Without the next staged attack (another 3,000 perhaps), can the Bush regime launch a thermo nuclear attack against Iran?

You lost your constitution because of 9/11.

You are under surveillance because of 9/11.

And you call 9/11 irrelevant?

-BeingSpied24/7

Many investigative questions are found in this thread; however, except for questions based on media evidence, how can we be certain any premise is valid?

Until there is a study done by "disinterested" third parties - establishing fact, hearsay & conjecture; establishing engineering similitudes to describe each event - until that is done, all discussion around 911 is faith-based.

So, best means to force the issue?

Well, Fisk presented some fine points, such as with respect to what Mohamed Atta, if it indeed was him, supposedly said, quoted from the Qu'ran, etc., and which is news to me; as is also the "bit" about "the body of a female air crew member was found in a Manhattan street with her hands bound", which I had never heard or read about before.

But he's off in some respects, and one reader comment by someone with a username indicating the person is either in or of the UK, fills in on some of the lacunes Fisk has left. F.e., his argument about how it is that the Bush or Cheney-Bush administration and U.S. govt could not have possibly been responsible for the 9-11 attacks, because of having, as Fisk sees it, only botched, messed up in the Middle East, which is only an assumption on Fisk's part, for it's speculative; not based on [facts]. The Cheney-Bush administration is clearly enough proceding according to their plans, which have been long enough documented, and since reported on.

He should do well to read Peter Dale Scott's new book, 'The Road to 9/11', while I have also read that David Ray Griffin's book, 'Debunking 9/11 Debunking', is another Fisk and others should be able to find very useful to read.

But I appreciate his article wherein it is sensibly questioning and criticising the "official story".

As for Usama Bin Ladin having claimed responsibility for the 9-11 attacks, and which I believe is something only a reader posted here, there are two critical points to keep in mind in this regard.

Firstly, UBL FIRST denied responsibility, and early on, and when he supposedly came to claim responsibility, which I believe was in Nov. 2001, terrorism experts said that this was very incredible. They argued that for people planning acts of terrorism and based on reasons like those UBL, et al, would've had for committing the 9-11 attacks, had they been responsible, such "terrorists" will claim responsibility, for they strategically need for their act to be known to be by them and for the causes underlying the attacks.

So it's very incredible that UBL would first deny responsibility and then, a couple or few months later, turn around and reverse his first statement. I think the terrorism experts are reasonable on the reasons for this.

However, in Nov. 2001, there was a videotape broadcast and supposedly of UBL, but even people who did not know UBL well, had only seen pictures of him a few times, could easily tell that the man in the video was NOT UBL; and it was indeed not him. The Bush administration and U.S. govt had to know this, for they've known UBL for decades, the CIA is the party that trained UBL, and the U.S. govt and CIA are the ones who backed the Taliban and UBL, and Al Qa'ida, during the 1980s, in their war against invading Russian forces and the North Afghanistan Alliance that fought with the Russian forces. The U.S. govt has definitely known UBL more than enough to have known right away that the man in the Nov. 2001 video was definitely NOT UBL, but nonetheless claimed that it was him.

Much can be said on 9-11 and all of the related matters that have gone on since, but I'll rhetorically present a question to readers.

Do you know where UBL was on Sept. 10, 2001, very most likely again on Sept. 11, and that the U.S. govt most surely knew where he was on Sept. 12, 2001? The U.S. govt must have known, for on Sept. 10 and 11, UBL was receiving medical, dialysis care in a Pakistani military hospital, and the CIA and U.S. military are very "tight" with the Pakistani govt, military and ISI; and the Pakistani govt was already fully on board as an ally of the Cheney-Bush administration in the bogus WoT or GWoT.

Anyway, Kurt Nimmo presents a very interesting article on this latter matter, 9-11 Blame Game: CIA Falls on Its Sword Again, by Kurt Nimmo, ADEReview.com, Aug 23 2007. In this, Nimmo also provides information (from Le Figaro, I believe it was) on where UBL was from July 4-14, 2001, in a hospital in Dubai, UAE, where a CIA agent visited UBL, as did also members of his Saudi family and prominent Saudi emirates. On July 15, UBL returned to Pakistan, and the CIA agent returned to CIA h.q.

As for Al Qa'ida in Iraq, Dahr Jamail provides information, and based on what an Iraqi who is there in Iraq, and this is perspective to not neglect or disregard. Dahr Jamail, Iraq Reporter Schizophrenic in Disneyland: 'Iraq on My Mind: Thousands of Stories to Tell; & No One to Listen', by Dahr Jamail, July 12 2007.

And as for explaining Bush's location and manner when the 9-11 attacks were happening, I figure that we can consider that Cheney has directed Bush far more than the reverse, which is something we have rather NO examples of having happened.

As for NORAD not having intercepted the hijacked aeroplanes, and from what I've read, Cheney very oddly self-appointed himself head of NORAD and not many months before 9-11; while on that morning, he ordered STAND DOWN.

Cheney is the real president, just that he uses Bush as the officially named or appointed president, in order to dissimulate, hide, cover up; but Cheney hasn't been competent, for he's been really and very obvious. And Bush rarely says anything sensible for anyone of political office, except when he's speaking based on speeches prepared for him by his "brain(s)", like Karl Rove provided for, f.e. Bush, on his own, has MOSTLY if not solely been IDIOT. He clearly does still have a lust for evil though.

That's to be expected. A psychiatrist, as Ray McGovern recently posted, has analysed Bush and determined that he's psychopathic, etc., the psychiatrist who wrote 'Bush on the Couch'. The only thing I'd change is that I'd add that pretty much the WHOLE Bush administration consists of psychopath[s], in the plural; but also many others are also that. F.e., many military officials are psychopathic ... en masse. Gen. Tommy Franks was during the launch phase of the war on Iraq, f.e.; and there are other examples from other U.S. military generals who served in Iraq during 2003 and 2004, if not also others since.

The White House, Pentagon, CIA (operations side anyway), etc., have MANY psychopaths. We could only wish that they'd be at worse sociopaths, but no, they're the far worse psychopaths.

Lastly, here's a very, very interesting book that is definitely and very relevant to our world and what the U.S. govt, etc., are doing to our world today. Diplomacy by Deception, by Dr John Coleman, 1998; and that's a Google search link providing, last week anyway, a single result, which is for downloading the PDF copy of the book, which the author forbids posting publicly, the contents of the book, that is. I only heard of him for the first time around a week ago, and have only read from this book by him; so far, having completed up to and including chapter 5. But based on those five chapters, this definitely strikes me as a book that should be treated as a MUST READ.

Oh, a reader here mentioned the U.S. being in the Middle East, Asia or Eurasia, and a number of other places, but omitted Africa. The U.S. is definitely there and big time, too. Again, the sub-saharan and oil and energy subindexes at GlobalResearch.ca provide good articles on what's going on in African countries.

I agree with those who believe that, however the Bush administration seems in dealing with certain challenges that do not interest them, the Bush administration has certainly been smart enough to pull off an inside job on 9-11. In his book, "W" Bush clearly expressed disappointment in his father for not going all the way to the capital of Iraq during the 1990's war there, and vowed that if he were the wartime president, he'd spend his dividends. The Bush family had Saudi ties to the bin Ladens. W's brother Marvin was on the board of the company that had the security contract for the WTC towers, and it has been reported that the bomb-sniffing dogs were called off, and the security system down, in the months just before 9-11-01. The reports of explosions were not simply reports of beams breaking, but reports of explosions involving fire, one of the occurring before the first plane struck. Then the oral histories/testimonies of NYC fire fighters taken shortly after the event were suppressed by NYC officials, and their release had to be secured by a lawsuit.

And that's only the tip. Far too much suspicious evidence, too many conflicting details.

Moreover, there's what legal folks would call "guilty demeanor" written all over the administration's attitude regarding testimony before the stacked commission: We waited 411 days while Bush and Cheney resisted, then finally agreed and constructed a commission with personnel to their liking. They under-funded it, they gave it too little money, they resisted releasing relevant documents. It was a sham. Then to top it all off, they insisted on testifying together; no recording of the testimony allowed, no transcripts, no notes of the meeting not approved by the White House, and above all, no testimony under oath.

We should all have been holding vigils in the streets around our capitals and city halls. We should have been striking, and boycotting every advertiser on the FOX network. Instead, too many liberals and progressives, who often tend to be reasonable and moderate, contrary to their reputation in right-wing propaganda, stayed home, went to work, and acted as if we were not in a state of national emergency.

One day, if the military-industrial-media-congressional complex survives and continues to exploit the rest of the world on behalf of the US economy and multinational corporate interests, history may be rewritten to say that, like FDR in dealing with Pearl Harbor, an American president perceived a future threat and, in spite of allowing or causing the deaths of innocent civilians, and the manipulation of public opinion, the US was saved from extremist Islam. In other words, if the truth eventually came out, it would be rationalized as something a forward-thinking president had to do to save the country and our great American way of life.

Like a page from the start of Milan Kundara's "The Book of Laughter and Forgetting," we'll be left not with the clear view of what happened, how, and why, but with an air-brushed caricature.

I agree with those who call for impeachment. It can't start too soon.

So the point is simple: Stop them NOW.

Peace,
Ken Hausle
* Step 1: HRes333 - Impeach/Convict the VP
** Step 2......

Another good journalist calling Bush incompetent. Incompetent at what exactly?

Does Fisk actually believe that Bush WANTS real democracy, stability or peace in the Middle East? I guess Fisk needs to read Naomi Klein's new book... because most academics don't think Bush has failed at his objectives.

Bush has actually accomplished everything he wants! Profits for Defense contractors are up. Defense spending is up. Oil companies have limited supply and are price-gouging by reducing oil refinery capacity, and they stopped Iraqi oil from going on the market. Insurance and pharmaceutical companies own health-care. New coal and nuclear plants are being built. The electric car is not in the mainstream, and the hydrogen scam seems to have fooled everyone but those paying really close attention. Bush stole the election without winning, Cheney laughs at Democrats when they speak of possible troop reduction, and the police-state is pretty much complete... including a recently passed wire-tapping law with Democrats approval.

What has Bush not accomplished??? Where was the BIG WIN for progressives in the last 7 years? Can anybody think of one?

Calling people who want someone/anyone to investigate the real truth on 9/11, "ravers", is not helping either. Fuck journalists... they're all too busy investigating one little topic, in Fisk's case, the Middle East, and can't look outside their little box to see the big picture. The big picture is that we are fucked. Global warming is going at about 10 times faster, than worst-case predictions by the IPCC, http://www.universetoday.com/2007/08/17/arctic-ice-coverage-will-shrink-to-2050-projections-this-summe... , and we're putting all our resources into wars over oil resources in the Middle East. Usually I think Fisk is a great reporter, but 9/11 isn't his specialty and it shows in this article.

Chomsky is correct. Even if 911 is an inside job, this would be irrelevant.

His point being that Bush and his cabal are capable of much worse crimes, and that we'd never be able to bring these criminals to justice anyway, etc.

9/11 only killed 3,000. The Iraq war for instance has killed close to one million people so far. 9/11 is but one small crime out of Bush's multiple crimes.

Oh yes, one more damning little bit on the puts and calls, 2.5 million dollars worth of puts were mysteriously NEVER cashed in after the attack...Someone just abandoned 2.5 million in profit? Uhm yeah, okee....More like were afraid to cash in because the sec was being forced to ask questions about all the other strange trading prior to 911, of course all the SEC investigators have been silenced as to the identitity of the benefactors of these windfall profits but I certainly recall the Carlyle Group being thrown around before it was swept under the rug...HMMMMMM

As a former admirer of Noam Chomsky, I no longer take him seriously. Though not a physical scientist, he is a brilliant logician. I don't know why he is not willing to deal with the reality 9/11, but whatever the psychological motivations, I no longer respect him. He claims that even if 9/11 were an inside job, it's really irrelevant and inconsequential. Inconsequential? He is just too freaking smart not to see the truth unless he is really f*cked up.

Amy Goodman, while very hard working and well intentioned, is just not that brilliant. It's possible that she really can't connect the dots. For Amy "free fall" probably means an October picnic in Central Park. So I forgive her - for what it's worth.

I tried to post a link to a pretty good article outlining ALL of the puts and calls that were way out of the scope of normal trading just days before the attack. It wasn't just the airlines, it was Calls on Raytheon, Puts on the airlines and the investment firms that had their offices in the towers. Way dispropotianate to normal trades. Google
911 puts on airlines and you should come up with the link, CD will not allow my post to go through with the link in it.

This thread has given me some hope that many people realize the truth about 9/11. But who said it had to be BushCo that did it, maybe the just enabled it? Maybe it was foreigners that came over, planted the explosives, controlled the planes... Remember, mossad was caught videotaping the crashes at WTC. Ultimately, the proof is building 7. There is no other explanation that controlled demolition, which must lead to prior knowledge.

Oh, and thanks for listing the Zeitgeist movie. I have seen this many weeks ago and now use it as my bible.

Never give up, lets change minds 1 at a time.

OK I'm not being allowed to post this link WHY?

I for one am not convinced that W knew what was coming at all. Consider an alternate hypothesis, that his disoriented, almost catatonic state of fear was genuine.

broken robot,

One consideration is whether Bush actually saw the first hit on 9/11. If he did (as he claimed), Bush would be closer in the loop than you think.

1. Consider Bush's remark: "The tv was obviously on."

2. Consider the meeting: George W. Bush's father met with Osama bin Laden's brother, Shafig bin Laden, in the Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Washington, on the morning of 9/11.

I also believe that "disoriented, almost catatonic state of fear was genuine." I don't know whether it was due to the fear of getting caught or something else.

-BeingSpied24/7

Sorry Fisk--Sounds like you've thrown in your lot with the ravers. Unfortunate.

I think some of the most damning evidence is the puts on the Airlines involved. If I remember correctly the "Fund" that did this was tied to the Bush family but for the life of me cannot remember the name, maybe one of you remembers?
Of course that was all swept under the rug and never brought back up...I'll try to look it up

Elroy thinks 9/11 can't be an inside job because it hasn't produced a Deep Throat in six years. The Reichstag fire took place 75 years ago and hasn't produced a Deep Throat either.

Then, "wouldn't simply blowing the building up made a perfectly believable terrorist attack?" No, it wouldn't. Only a new, spectacular Pearl Harbor would terrify the nation into going along with 2 illegal wars (and counting).

You are assuming the web of people involved would be too large and hard to silence. Wrong. Let's not forget these people, unlike Richard Clarke and ordinary whistleblowers, would be incriminating themselves if they ever spoke out.

It's superficial thinking like yours that allows criminal behavior in government to flourish. And they're counting on people like you for the next 9/11, coming soon to a theater near you.

hundreds of people in the densely populated area around the Pentagon clearly saw an American Airlines airliner fly into the pentagon

PJD,

Among these hundreds of people, can you provide the interview of just one or two of the people?

Names please. And their association, if any, with the US government.

Thank you.

Whew! I guess I'm not the only raver left in the world.

But none of this will amount to a microgram of difference if "we, the people" allow the Masters to foist Hillary, Obama, or any of the other front runners on us as our next leader.

Time to get together on a viable candidate and get up off our collective butts and organize for Change.

Ready? Willing?

Hate to contradict you, PJD, but the first reports about the Pentagon said that witnesses had seen a "commuter plane". If you were to go over the available information critically, you would probably find the the problem is not a lack of witnesses that contradict the official version of events, the problem is spreading the word when the popular media have blacked it out. Tony Vodvarka, Hartly DE

You will not see an "airplane" at the Pentagon no matter how hard you look. WHERE are the "eyewitnesses" who saw an airliner hit the Pentagon? Who thinks that if surveillance camera-films SHOWED any airliner, we would not have seen it 1000 times by now? Instead, NONE of that film has ever been released. NOTE: If you want to see an example of reactionary right-wing screed, turn on the HISTORY CHANNEL (and not just for the usual Bible-crap etc.). Last night they ran the most shamefully manipulative "rebuttal" you could imagine. They say "in fact it's only 2 miles" from the PA crash site to where the engines etc. fell---OH! I guess that's OK then, that makes sense! A few close-ups of airplane parts that could have come from ANY crash ANYwhere. They call the WTC collapse "a classic example of progressive collapse." FLASH---How could the WTC be a "classic" example when IT HAS NEVER HAPPENED BEFORE, ANYWHERE? EXCEPT in controlled demolition cases? "Experts" who say that critics are "emotional," or are after "Bush and Cheney personally" etc. A woman who lost her brother says "it's like a knife in my heart when people question the official story of 9/11." Nothing could demonstrate more clearly how DESPERATE officialdom is to simultaneously exploit 9/11 and cover up, ridicule and dismiss every inconsistency. Did you ever try writing to the History Channel? Good Luck! As you'll see from their websites, they do not want to hear from you....

Don,

Actually, if you look at that security camera footage closely, remembering that the plane was in the shiny-aluminum finish used by American Airlines, you will see the plane.

Also, why do you need evidence from a camera when hundreds of people in the densely populated area around the Pentagon clearly saw an American Airlines airliner fly into the pentagon? Why is something true only if it appears on TV?

In fact all this conspiracy theorizing seems to focus on things that these amateur detectives see on their computer screens while ignoring the thousands of eyewitnesses. Or do you believe that these eyewitnesses, along with hundreds to thousands of gov. employees, technicians, airline employees, explosives contractors - not to mention nineteen people who gave their lives -not for any religious or political passions, but simply for the personal plans of GW Bush - were part of the plot too? Imagine all of these people, carefully orchestrated to corroborate perfectly, then completely silenced afterward. This is complete comic-book level fiction - not reality. This explains why the conspiracy kooks manifesto is the comic-series turned movie "V is for Vendetta".

Jaded Proles assessment - passive complicity makes the most sense to me.

The truth wants out....

Peace,
Ken Hausle

PJD said:

"Also, why do you need evidence from a camera when hundreds of people in the densely populated area around the Pentagon clearly saw an American Airlines airliner fly into the pentagon?"

A lot of the eyewitnesses said it wasn't an AA plane at all, so eyewitness accounts aren't reliable testimony to convince those who weren't there about anything. The confiscated films ought to settle the question once and for all.

Thank you all for the nice read this morning. Bottonline, Jack37 said it the best "I don't know about conspiracy theories—I do know that the official story is absolute BULLSHIT."

Was there ever a conclusion as to where the anthrax came from?

PJD at 11.09 wondered: "…how do the suicide-hijacked airliners figure in the plot? Wouldn't simply blowing the building up made a perfectly believable terrorist attack?" Good thinking PJD, although consopiracy types tend to swipe away such rational thoughts as they would pesky flies.

Here's some of my own pesky thoughts.

If this was an inside job, it would have to envolve quite a large web of people, including ordinary civil servants linked to military, aviation and immigration officials; add engineers, demolition experts, crash searchers, whatever.

But such an elaborate plot does snot respond to reality. It takes a very tight cabal to keep a secret in Washington, as we have witnessed for the past seven years. Richard Clarke, FBI and CIA agents and dozens of other insiders have blown whistles about a lot of dirty tricks, while prosecutors and congressional leaders keep peeling away the onion skins. People are no longer afraid to denounce this government.

And yet, the 9/11 conspiracy lines have not produced even a Deep Throat. Six years is a long time to keep a total damper on a plot that would have to have involved scores, maybe hundreds, of people. (Apply this to the "JFK" hallucinations too.)
------------

This comment indicates the old Someone Would Have Talked argument. As testimony from three JFK investigations indicates people DO talk... and then are intimidated into silence or ignored by the media. People who make the Someone Would Have Talked argument, have almost never, in my experience done any reading into the JFK assassination. (Larry Hancock's Someone Would Have Talked is perhaps the most heavily refferenced book ever on this topic)

Secondly there are inevitably a lot of misleading "flies" flying in misleading tangents, in order to gain credibility as "critics" only to eventually lend credibility to the main government narrative. Check out the CIA's penetration of the Garrison Investigation as described in Joan Mellen's book A Farewell To Justice. Remember, the CIA has been involved in Communications research since its inception in 1945 ( see Christopher Simpson's excellent Science of Coercion, about the birth of the Communications discipline on American University campuses after 1945). At the heart of the JFK assasination-- it is surely significant-- were COMMUNICATIONS experts like David Atlee Phillips. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE READ THIS THREAD ALL THE WAY TO THE BOTTOM BECAUSE THERE ARE MANY QUOTES FROM MANY DIFFERENT PUBLICATIONS SO THAT YOU ARE NOT RELIANT ON JUST ONE POINT OF VIEW ON THIS VERY IMPORTANT GUY FROM US HISTORY Thank you! http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKphillips.htm

"People who have already come to the conclusion that 9/11 is an inside job can be pretty pushy when it comes to confronting others who haven't reached the same conclusion. While I understand the frustration, I think it's still best to let others reach their own conclusions without being accosted by people like us who already accept that 9/11 was orchestrated at least in part by elements of the Bush regime."
_______________________________________________________________________________

Yes, but this is another difficulty that cuts both ways; allow me to rework your statement: People who have already come to the conclusion that 9/11 is an anomalous and isolated feat of a small cadre of terrorists executing a plan devised exclusively by super-criminal Osama bin Laden can be pretty pushy when it comes to confronting others who haven't reached the same conclusion. While I understand the frustration, I think it's still best to let others reach their own conclusions without being accosted by people like them who already accept that 9/11 was, as the Official Version explains, an unprovoked and unassisted terrorist attack.

I've too often seen 9/11 skeptics-- pejoratively referred to as "conspiracy theorists", a not-so-subtle put-down which has regrettably settled into general use-- post questions or doubts on seemingly progressive/left websites, and immediately be set upon by hostile and exasperated "anti-conspiracy" voices. It's obvious that one reason this thread has drawn such extensive comments is because skeptics are grateful for an opportunity to express abiding criticisms and doubts in a relatively neutral venue that doesn't simply quash skeptical positions and reject them out of hand. (Yet.)

Incidentally, I generally deplore the habit of branding commenters as trolls or paid operatives. So I agree with those here who object to reflexively being branded "trolls". But again, that cuts both ways; it's an attractive defense mechanism. Earlier in the week, I and others posted legitimate (or at least honest) scathing criticisms and denunciations of the enabling Democratic Party leadership (pardon the oxymoron) on another article here. Predictably, horrified and appalled Democratic lesser-evilist partisans promptly "outed" me and the others as obvious trolls or Republic/wingnut operatives.

When I responded that such charge was laughably far off the mark, one dogged "outer" found it curious that I would be so offended by the suggestion. (In truth, I was only offended that the blinders of partisan loyalty would prompt this narrow-minded and frankly dim-witted suspicion.) Naturally, he concluded that even if I wasn't a fanatic Republic wingnut or a paid troll, I amounted to one anyway due to my intolerable and inexcusable habit of puffing at the accuser's lesser-evil pro-Democratic house of cards.

So it may be true that 9/11 skeptics will catch more flies with honey than heavy-handed pouring of vinegar-- but it's hard to limit oneself to sweet reason when one has been smacked so many times with a rolled-up copy of "Popular Mechanics".

sierra states:

"In the age of nuclear weapons either we talk to each other or we all die"

I think that captures it in a nutshell. Plus, when talking lets just agree that: "everything should be on the table" including both hands.

Peace,
Ken Hausle
* I support HRes333 - Impeach the VP

One of the bloggers was an engineer....who stated that there were "4" steel support columns in each of the twin towers.

Correction:

There were FOURTY SEVEN huge steel columns in the core of each of the twin towers.......47...not 4.

Most all of the "official reports" including the "9/11 Commission Report avoided any discussion of this fact that there were those massive 47 core steel columns.

Also the 9/11 Commission Report doesn't touch the "collapse" of either tower with "...a ten foot pole." Their "official" (conspiracy?) report stops at the brink of the collapse.

I have accumulated over 150 pages of research into this disaster (more than 55,000 words all on first responders eyewitness accounts, Fire Marshalls' and official police accounts, personnel in the buildings.....

I am also well aware of "False Flag Operations," as part of the history of governments and of course the USA.

We have now been able, after 9/11 to conduct "covert and black operations" overtly......That's what this is all about.....

Knowing the abonimable history of our own country the first thoughts in my mind when I watched the attacks on the Twin Towers was,...."There's the Third World's Cruise Missiles." I know that is harsh, but when you occupy militarily over 130 countries and disregard anyones' aspirations to a decent life, whether thru religion, ideology or just plain theft of others' natural possessions, what do you think is going to be the result??

Senator Arlen Spector was the creator (author) of the, "Silver Bullet Theory" of the Kennedy assassination......

The "official" reports of the tragedy on 9/11 is the modern, "Silver Bullet Theory."

The "official" story is the conspiracy theory run amok....Not those who question that theory.....

The NPR, History Channel broadcasts were typical lashing out at those of us who question that silver bullet theory....

Oh, and just a reminder...on 9/11 there were three (3) official war games going on in the New York area dealing in just what actually happened......That's one of the reasons that the air traffic controllers were "confused" and was a "contributing" factor in the slow NORAD response times........

We need more inquiry which will take years.....maybe we don't have "years" left....

In the age of nuclear weapons either we talk to each other or we all die.

sierra

Why the airplane scenario, why not just blow up the buildings? The poster referred to lack of a credible "storyline," and I think "story" is a big part of the answer. Most people fear dying in an airplane because of the utter lack of control. In this story, we have the eyes of the entire nation--the entire nation--fixed on television screens, identifying with the vulnerability of those poor souls in those airplanes. An entire nation has the time--because there are four planes involved, there is amazingly time for 4 planes to be tracked and feared--an entire nation has the time to get to television screens, mostly surrounded by others sharing the same emotions, and watch the ultimate Reality Show. Follow that up with pictures of swarthy, frightening faces plastered across newspapers the very next day, faces to associate with the horror, to blame for the horror--and to provide a focus that is an escape from the sense of helplessness. Those are the guys, go get 'em. Got proof, an intact passport in the rubble (if the buildings were just blown up, no need for any of them to bring a passport).

And, a year or two later, when demands for investigations rise, there is that "damning" report ignored by Bush: al Qaeda determined to strike in U.S. using airplanes. What more proof do you need? (Yet another BushCo "failure" that actually works to their advantage.)

Thanks for the clarification, Madhoosier. That, to me anyways, points a finger in an interesting direction. As one oftens hears, "follow the money."

Thank you Fisk for bring this topic up. I've read all the comments. Now I will add my own. I watched the coverage on C-Span. After both towers were hit there was much confusion, firefighters were being sent up and many people not leaving the area. C-Span let people call in like they often do. A man who said he was an engineer had called in, and was frantic saying, get everybody out of there , the buildings are coming down. He was immediately cut off. Now, I'm sure C-Span must keep records. I have often wanted to call in myself and ask about this man who knew way in advance that the towers would fall. No one has ever commented on the warning this man provided. That in itself seems strange.

Hybridoma,

The trades you recall were called "put options", a put option is a bet that the price of a certain stock will fall and if that happens put options are very profitable. In the 2 or 3 days prior to 9/11/2001 there were abnormally large quantities of put options on both United and American Airlines stock. To this day the buyers of these options have not been identified, the trail ends at a bank that has several Ex-CIA bigwigs in upper management.

"Put options" are never mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report except in the testimony of one of the 9/11 widows.

Think about profiteers of "War on Terror" - Weapons industry(Carlyle Corp, etc.) and OIl Industry - both strong supporters of Bush pre-9/11.

*sidenote - Bin Laden family held 10% of Carlyle stock pre-9/11

amandala said:

I think the evidence for the use of explosives in all three WTC buildings is the most plausible and rational theory, but everyone should be allowed to decide on their own.

=====

But this doesn't get to the truth, letting everybody decide for themselves. What we really need is a powerful investigation by an agency with no interest in the outcome to find out what really happened without any input from the Bush administration. The Bush administration has had their chance and are worse than useless if anybody tries to get the truth from them.

Such an investigation would include sending someone to China to analyze the debris that was sent there, subpoenas to get those pictures of the Pentagon when it was attacked, an analysis of that debris, too. An analysis of the debris of the plane that crashed in PA, an a lot of other things that I can't think of off the top of my head. America needs irrefutable evidence of what happened, not conjecture.

Thank you, Robert Fisk, for at least having an open and questioning enough mind to weigh the evidence without a priori assumptions about whom the guilty are. I think the evidence for the use of explosives in all three WTC buildings is the most plausible and rational theory, but everyone should be allowed to decide on their own.

People who have already come to the conclusion that 9/11 is an inside job can be pretty pushy when it comes to confronting others who haven't reached the same conclusion. While I understand the frustration, I think it's still best to let others reach their own conclusions without being accosted by people like us who already accept that 9/11 was orchestrated at least in part by elements of the Bush regime.

Well, I've finally reached the end of this very interesting thread. I've always had one question on my mind about the 9/11 disaster. For one, maybe two, days, did I read in The San Francisco Chronicle about "unusual" speculation in the market of people buying up stock or the reverse - I know nothing of how Wall Street names certain transactions but the bottom line is that some people knew about this a day or two before whatever happened that day.
And then the story disappeared. Who profitted from this act? What are their names and have they ever been questioned.
To me, this is evidence that people knew before hand that the Twin Towers would be destroyed. Who and where are these people? Why has no jounalist followed this path to see where it leads?
This fact alone convinces me that people knew it was going to happen, and they let it happen.
Surely there must be a record of these buyers and sellers because there's records of every other transaction.

rebelnow August 26th, 2007 3:26 am

And thanks for not even attempting to answer my question.

wow! 911 gets people typing.

Their is of course the interview of Larry Silverstein admitting on a PBS station that he said "pull it", (WTC 7).
Then their is the question of the $100,000 that was wired to Atta by the head of Pakistani intelligent, the (ISI).
And all the 9/11 commission could say is that didn't find it important to follow the money?

When you are looking for a "true" motive in a crime you always follow the money.
So, the only conclusion I can draw from that, is that they were not looking for the true motive. Only to snowjob the public.

I am not a conspiracy theorist either but there are indeed many unanswered questions that point, at very least, to passive complicity with foreknowledge. That it in itself would be a terrible crime against the U.S. What is needed is a truly independent investigation by credible experts. We have a right to know.

Whatever the mechanics involved -- it was the Reichstag Fire this cabal needed for a pre-planned reign of aggression

PJD at 11.09 wondered: "…how do the suicide-hijacked airliners figure in the plot? Wouldn't simply blowing the building up made a perfectly believable terrorist attack?" Good thinking PJD, although consopiracy types tend to swipe away such rational thoughts as they would pesky flies.

Here's some of my own pesky thoughts.

If this was an inside job, it would have to envolve quite a large web of people, including ordinary civil servants linked to military, aviation and immigration officials; add engineers, demolition experts, crash searchers, whatever.

But such an elaborate plot does snot respond to reality. It takes a very tight cabal to keep a secret in Washington, as we have witnessed for the past seven years. Richard Clarke, FBI and CIA agents and dozens of other insiders have blown whistles about a lot of dirty tricks, while prosecutors and congressional leaders keep peeling away the onion skins. People are no longer afraid to denounce this government.

And yet, the 9/11 conspiracy lines have not produced even a Deep Throat. Six years is a long time to keep a total damper on a plot that would have to have involved scores, maybe hundreds, of people. (Apply this to the "JFK" hallucinations too.)

If more people knew the real history of our government, they would see how obvious it is that 9/11 was an inside job.

Agreed, Madhoosier: bushslut knew something was coming -- but for reasons of plausible deniability (and because he's a cretin), he was insulated from that reality in the months prior to D-day.

Recall how he told an FBI agent who travelled to Crawford in August, "okay, now you've covered your ass,you can go back to Washington..." etc.

Condi's role at the time was to protect bushslut from knowing/hearing/seeing too much. But he, in the classroom with cameras on him, sat nodding and nodding his head while his beady eyes shifted rapidly from side to side as the situation slowly became clear to his sociopathic mind: "Oh, I get it...this is the big one I was told to expect. Careful now, remember to look shocked and traumatized but "strong." Not even a good actor.

And when the sluts finally left that school in Florida (after dawdling for a full 27 minutes), "secret" codes on a radio requency known only to WH insiders warned that "Angel is next." Angel is their code for AirForceOne. This threat was passed on to bushslut, just to remind him that his role now was to follow orders, or else.

Yes, he went along because he's an evil coward, and of their same ilk. That's why they picked him in the first place. That's why they hit him upside his ugly head a few months later when he "choked on a pretzel and fell." That's why he will do their bidding even if it means WWIII and total melt-down for the rest of us.

What about "the weird letter allegedly written by Mohamed Atta" and his reminder to his friends "to say the first Muslim prayer of the day"?
If you know anything about Islam, and I'm sure Robert Fisk knows a lot more than I do, it should be clear that this was not an Islamist, but a political attack by Middle Eastern political radicals posing as moslims.
The response of the political radicals in the White House ensured that the political radicals -- on both sides -- got what they wanted: a continued state of irrational fear in the US, and abroad, which served and still serves to undermine civil liberties based on the dangerous premise of a 'clash of cultures'.
Any scriptwriter in Hollywood who would have come up with a plot like this would have had a hard time ever being taken seriously again...

"clarity" is a fruitcake. but i really want to get the answers - NOT from this goverment. similarly, in russia, they orchestrated the bombing of several apartment buildings in moscow, in order to get a "reason" to fight war in chechnia.

purvis, thanks for proving my point.

Madhoosier August 25th, 2007 2:21 pm

"To me the only thing that explains W's reactions in the classroom that morning is foreknowledge of the attacks."

I for one am not convinced that W knew what was coming at all. Consider an alternate hypothesis, that his disoriented, almost catatonic state of fear was genuine. Consider that what happened on 9/11 was in effect a coup d'etat and that Bush himself is only a patsy in the grand game, given a choice to continue functioning as a spokesman or die.

rebelnow August 26th, 2007 2:41 am

What is this? A fascist troll convention? Please explain to me how four, count 'em, four steel frame buildings collapsed within two hours because of fire when no other steel frame building had ever collapsed because of fire.

FredWol August 26th, 2007 1:28 am

"And why do you keep bringing in the Mossad?"

Trolling for anti-semites.

Kem, yes I agree dougwagner is correct, as well as dichterfreund, and madhoosier and others. It's refreshing to read their sober, insightful, comments. It's sad to see such vehemence directed at those who try to be rational (and scientific) in this debate. Personally I'm tired of all these fanatical attempts to "convert" those who doubt. Doubt and skepticism are healthy in all debates and soon as they are thrown out, or the doubters attacked, the debate is over.

Only a nation of zombies would believe 4 planes would be allowed to change their trajectories and fly for up to one hour after being reported hijacked.

Only a nation of sheep would believe 2 buildings would fall that neatly because of fire.

Only a nation of robots would accept building 7 falling for no reason whatsoever.

Only a nation of idiots would believe a plane crashed into the Pentagon with no fuselage to show for at the crash site.

Only a nation of retards would believe flight 93 crashed in PA with its engine ending up miles and miles away.

Only a nation of morons would believe that Bush really wanted to catch Bin Laden after giving him a 2-month head start before finally invading Afghanistan.

Only a nation of stooges would (please tell me when to stop....)

webwalk: You're on it! In a much earlier post I wanted to know why anyone would want 9/11 to happen beyond the financial benefits. I think the Russian General is on to something. It's the big picture/wide angle view that I was looking for.

Now the question becomes, if the General is right, where are the weaknesses in the International Terrorism theme for world domination? Do the international oligarchs only work with the U.S.? How do Russia and China fit into this picture? What are their options to either stop this train wreck or to get on board? And do the people of the world, especially Americans, have any options left?

I need some help here. This is just too big and complex for me to get my brain around it.

I think I'll go and sleep on it.

Nite

Journalistically, there were many odd things about 9/11.

Journalistically, why is the same old picture of Bin Laden shown on TV repeatedly hundreds of times since 9/11?

Journalistically, why isn't the -odd- collapse of WTC 7 shown on TV across the networks for public scrutiny?

Fisk, you have failed as a journalist. Obviously, your priority is: "Let me repeat. I am not a conspiracy theorist."

It's past the time to ask questions, Fisk. You don't walk up to a murder suspect and ask: Did you kill anyone?

Let's stop wasting time on figuring: How weak will steel get? Folks, 110 floors of concrete was pulverized.

And in the case of WTC 2, there wasn't the tremendously massively heavy top section came crushing down sitting squarely on top of the lower section. Sorry, the truth of the matter is: The top section was tilting and twisting -away- from the lower section. Detached. Gone. To the side. No matter, 110 floors of concrete was pulversized. Two different scenarios (WTC 1 & 2), yet identical effects. Yes, the two scenarios share 'something' in common - the same cause.

And so many people ask: Why make it so complicated? Why didn't they just simply blow up some office buildings? Don't you get it? Now everytime -millions- who get on a plane, they are supposed to fear. A box cutter -is- a WMD. A bottle of water -is- a WMD. Even a silicon gel bra -is- a WMD. That's the world they want us to live in.
Green, Yellow, or Red Alert. Just push a button. Fear level calibration (mission) accomplished, Mr. Vice President.

-BeingSpied24/7

Dougwagner is correct.

dougwagner:

"tower 7 more than likely fell down because of fire damage caused by the falling of fires on it and the location of internal diesel generators that acted as backup for the building's electricity." More than likely it didn't.

Didn't you already say all that silly stuff in your first paragraph once before? And why do you keep bringing in the Mossad?

"And also, I still believe 9/11 conspiracy theorists ultimately detract from moving forward the progressive, socialist, trotskyist, etc. agendas." Why? If you are worrying that revealing the truth about 911 is getting in the way of your practical work on a trotskyist agenda, perhaps you shouldn't be wasting your time here. Seriously, I can understand the fear that focusing on a particular event can draw energy from important long range struggles. But 911 is such a pivotal event, one that Cheney, et al, refer to themselves over and over again to draw strength from their version of what happened. I think there is great value in turning the tables on them. Besides, if they did it (and I'm pretty sure they did), it's just common concern for truth and justice to tell the truth about it.

"Probably a sizeable number [of conspiracy theorists] are right wing hacks." One of the many good reasons for focusing on 911 is that it attracts people from a wide range of politics.

dougnwagner August 26th, 2007 1:05 am

Why don't you mention WTC 8, the Customs Building, another steel frame structure that also collapsed into its own footprint? Why don't you mention that no steel frame building prior to 9/11 had ever collapsed because of fire? Then you get four of them within two hours. My only suggestion is you change your name to Pollyanna.

Re: The pentagon video footage.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. The whole issue is an ace card for those involved. I've seen overwhelming evidence with regard to the explosive demolition of the towers. I haven't seen any evidence that indicates something other than a passenger jet hit the pentagon. Most anomalies are explainable and a large cadre of witnesses describe the jet clearly.

Sure, a 20 year old yeehaw (who couldn't fly a cessna 2 wks earlier) spiral diving and skim striking the pentagon in a passenger jet sounds fishy. It doesn't mean the jet wasn't there, however.

Most important to this discussion is the ace card factor. Should things start to get a little dicey for the fellas, why not just pull out the secret footage of dozens of cameras that clearly show a jet hitting the building? See, we told you clowns Flt. 77 hit the pentagon.

PJD:

"If the building were taken down through carefully-place explosives, what were the hijacked airplanes for?" Obviously, to provide the ostensible reason for the collapses. Since planted explosives implies expertise beyond a Bin Lauden plot, another reason needed to be provided. Also, hijackings and plane crashes are much more dramatic.

"And why do you continue to ignore the fact that steel doesn't have to melt - just get hot enough to soften. I've seen burned-down buildings where steel columns were bent over like hairpins from simply the heat of burning wood." (1) And yet, molten steel WAS found in the remains of several of the buildings. What caused it? (2) Several other characteristics of the collapses make "softened steel" an insufficient cause: the symmetric quality of the collapse including no toppling, the free-fall speed, the many explosions heard and seen, including in the basements, and the visible explosions of debris arcing hundreds of feet.

"And why, in films of the collapse, does the collapse clearly start at the impact-damaged floors - where the impact would have knocked off and disabled those carefully placed explosives?" Have you seen the films of the top of the building above the impact area (not sure if WTC1 or 2) exploding into dust and flying debris? What's with that?

"Building #7 was badly damaged and on fire from the collapse of the other buildings." Damaged on one side and hardly on fire. Why would it collapse the way it did?

"Sure! I for one think the "let it happen" hypothesis is a very strong possibility." Glad you think so. So you join in the call for further investigation of 9/11?

"But hint of the method to this loonyness arises in the conspiracy kooks' attacks on Noam Chomsky; they are showing their true colors as cointelpro-style agent-provocateurs, or stupid dupes of them." Chomsky has done a lot of good work, but he's wrong about this one, just as he refused to consider the Kennedy assassination as other than the work of a "lone nut." I think he is congenitally unable to contemplate such things, because of a commitment to "historical forces" versus "great men" as causes of change. Contrast this to Bill Moyers' "The Secret Government." By the way, calling people you disagree with "loony conspiracy kooks" and "agent-provocateurs" or their "stupid dupes" probably shows more about your "true colors" than anyone else's.

RP Welker, above, raises what i think is the basic point, no matter what anyone thinks of any particular theory of precisely who did it and precisely how. Look at who benfits, in what contaxt, and see how they have reacted to the opportunities presented by the events of 911.

The people who benefited, the neo-CON PNAC Bush gang, are intent on world domination, "globalization", and they are happily dancing on the chaos and throwing fuel on the fires, because they think they can come out on the other side as the rulers of the New World Order. Nuclear war, dictatorship and martial law are all steps on their path they are clearly willing to take if they must, and they are still moving forward with their plans.

i'm not certain that everything the quoted Russian General Leonid Ivashov says about the particulars is true, but the basic picture clearly is.

Which brings us to the question raised by tlescpk: what are we doing about it? Mostly, nothing, for the reasons tlescpk offers: facing these monsters feels too dangerous. The fact is that NOT facing them will not save us, but we can't imagine actually putting our lives on the line to try to rally a sleeping public. So we look for safe virtual havens, where we can dispute over interpretations.

Somehow, we must move to action. Working for impeachment is a good way to talk with people about the need to organize against these gangsters, and supporting Kucinich for President is a good way to talk with people about possible futures for the U.S., but time is tragically quite short, and there is urgent need to move to effective action to STOP these gangsters from continuing on their path.

We need more than resistance - as posted on other threads, we need Permaculture design, sustainable food systems, etc. - but WE NEED RESISTANCE. Look at yourself, family, friends, communities - what are you doing? What are we doing? What steps can you take?

i hate to be rude, but time is short - Get Off Your Ass (GOYA) and do something!

The 757 is 155 ft. long so the frame update rate would have to be ≥2/sec. for us to see part of the aircraft in the CNN footage assuming the field of view at the impact point is ~150' wide. It's really hard to tell from the pictures because the shadow in the foreground moves while the fireball builds. How long does such a fireball take to grow as we've seen it, seconds? I don't know, I haven't timed one, ...yet.

The conspiracy theory ad hominem attack on those who say that the questions any rational person would have (given the expanations provided thus far, and the evidence we've seen) is nothing more than a logical fallacy. The point is, there is too much that has been put out there that is total crap.

I am a mechanical engineer with some background in structures, materials used at elevated temperatures, and explosives. As such, I will believe fatigue failure accelerated by the fires for the twin towers. But you can't get me to believe they just happened to be able to rig Bld 7 that very day after some seemingly minor fire and impact damage. So what gives?!! I too remember hearing the reports about getting all the fire dept folks out because they were "bringing it down."

Same kind of questions that I've had since OK City. There were explosives found rigged to multiple other structural columns in that building found by a police robot that were reported by the local media. What happened to that footage? And the footage of the 12 cameras that had an angle on the truck used by McVeigh and his passenger... where is that tape, and why is it sequestered as a matter of national security?

Our government has a seedy and lengthy track record of playing agent provocateur and attacking our own in order to justify an attack on someone else. Afghanistan, you should have let that pipeline from kreblechistan or whatever its freaking-stan name is without being greedy. Our oil companies and money markets don't like fair competition!

Where is the picture of a 757 hitting the Pentagon? The fireball doesn't prove diddly to me. If that plane was traveling at 350 MPH (513 ft/sec) and there were security cameras (camera or video?!!) what was there rate of frame update? It just seems to me that we should see a portion of a jumbo jet somewhere in at least one frame from some camera or video around that secure site. And that's all I'll say on that, except for this: if it wasn't a plane, then what happened to that aircraft and those people on board?

This is supposedly an active left wing forum, with a large slice keen to the obvious domestic terror attacks. Of those with critical thinking skills, I'll bet 99% haven't moved past their keyboards with regard to this issue.

Why? Fear.

The truth, as evidenced by mountains of data, is that we live in a hybrid state: unrestrained capitalism bordered by democracy at the local level, and a quasi/military dictatorship at the top. The federal level is complex, with a sophisticated doublethink system of control over both government and private citizens.

Control is sometimes overt- ask Sen. Leahy how deeply he dug his heels against the patriot act after that weaponized anthrax was sent his way.

Most of the time, it's just implied, either by marketing the population (WMD), or by winking to the congress- why do you think the democrats just rolled on domestic spying etc.? They're not stupid. The implied threat was that the administration's covert arm will hit us again if the administration doesn't get its way. It had nothing to do with "we'll look weak in the elections, vis a vis terrorism". They look like greater cowards for bending when the public told them not to.

If the administration was not a threat, don't you think at least some representatives would have stood to orate a defense of the Constitution as an effective political strategy, for a population that wanted it, against an administration that is perceived as an abject failure?

A huge chunk of America knows something is seriously wrong with that thing called "911" (OBL sure is crafty/lucky to have landed his op on the one number Americans dial for help, in an emergency)

A significant percentage knows the details.

Yet, there are literally 5 people out on the streets, at individual protest events. Why?

Because a system that employs:
demolition teams, weaponized anthrax, perception management, domestic spying (now with satellites!), torture, prison camps, show trials, etc etc etc

...is not one to fuck with.

We all know it so the only people out there are a few progressive radicals with nothing to lose, and a few professionals (Kevin Ryan, Dr. Jones, etc.) delusional enough to think that they can somehow escape being marginalized or completely destroyed if the public eye really starts to yawn open.

Who among the professionals in this forum are willing to call in to work tomorrow and tell their boss they're off to march because the WTC was blown up? I didn't think so. See you online.

Anyone care to dispute?

Face the facts. Fisk would not have written this article if not for the "ravers" who disturb his speaking engagements.

All you "ravers" out there, rave on! Maybe we will get some truth.

I'll admit to not being totally convinced by the "planned demolition" theories either, but to tell the truth, at the same time I wouldn't put it past them. The very fact that so many people are theorizing the worst about this administration says so much about their legacy. That in itself is troubling.

I still think they simply let the attacks happen. That's a lot easier and cleaner to pull off.

In 100 years, Bush and co. hopefully will be looked upon as a bunch of Benedict Arnolds. There's no defending them.

And stop with the bashing of Chomsky. To suggest that he's purposely stifling truth and is in someone's back pocket is silly.

Again, I think the idea that our gov't let the attacks occur or actually carried them out in some way is like swallowing castor oil to many people. Either because it's too scary to think about (and it is) or because they just think they're dumb and incompetent.

Like others have stated, look at who has benefitted. If this has all been coincidence, then everyone involved is luckier than Lucifer.

Projectiles burn up under the kinetic force of a plane flying hundreds of miles per second at a stationary building. Where's all the tarots fired by tanks? Steel doesn't have to burn, only weaken, for it no longer to be able to support the structure above it. This is all documented by Popular Mechanics magazine. Also, no debris flew 6 miles in PA, it flew less than 1 mile- go out there instead of reading the yahoo maps miles on your computer. Also, where's the wiring to "blow up" the towers? That's never been found. You have to be pretty credulous to believe there's a conspiracy, (if you study special forces operations you would know that the more people that know, the less likely the operation is to succeed), rather than the fact that 9/11 terrorists found unconventional ways to take over the planes, and had unconventional goals of using them to commit suicide. There just wasn't precedence for this kind of an attack. (That doesn't let the Bush administration off the hook for not hypothesizing such a scenario. Thats what competent law firms do all the time with case law).But it doesn't suggest terrrorist-Mossad-Bush Administration conspiracy. Move on with your life.

www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/4220721.html

And also, I still believe 9/11 conspiracy theorists ultimately detract from moving forward the progressive, socialist, trotskyist, etc. agendas, (probably a sizeable number are right wing hacks), and I think we should all close the books on this one. Unless you have a degree in a relevant subject, (which the 21 year old filmakers of the 9/11 movie don't), what are you really talking about? Where are all the peer-reviewed articles? books? etc. It would have to be a pretty VAST conspiracy people. Use your brain. Honest people make mistakes. Dishonest ones blame conpsiracies against them for their shortcomings. (like Hillary).

4 u Tower 7 Nuts

tower 7 more than likely fell down because of fire damage caused by the falling of fires on it and the location of internal diesel generators that acted as backup for the building's electricity.

You can't compare fires of other buildings, you have to look at the actual buildings and circumstances. Comparing fire damage to a building in Madrid or Philadelphia to the wtc's (hit with the kinetic force of multiple airplanes travelng at hundreds of miles per hour from known angles)is like comparing a space shuttle to an airplane :) Coincidence 9/11 conspiracy theorists think a space shuttle is built like a commercial airplane? or conspiracy? :) You be the judge :)