"Merry Christmas to all, and to all a good night!
(You Too Jake)"

Thanks.

"Please go back and review the quotes from the architects and engineers that I recently included in these comments."

Thay look like repetitions of various points that are debunked elsewhere. The link I posted makes the case that the authors of the site are hardly representative of the industry and in no case are they practicing in the field.

Also, no one has ever had a peer reviwed paper published in a scientific journal stating that the towers could not have fallen from fire and collisions. OTOH the article regarding the WTC7 single point of failure was.

"You should brush up on logical fallacies for starters. There are a lot of good websites for that."

Indeed there are. Please go back and review the quotes from the architects and engineers that I recently included in these comments.

Colin Powell admits misleading the UN about WMD and so does his chief of staff. He calls it his darkest day and a mark on his record.
Merry Christmas to all, and to all a good night!
(You Too Jake)

"dishonest counterpoint"

What's your very best evidence I have been dishonest?

Frankly munch1, you seem to be new at this. You should brush up on logical fallacies for starters. There are a lot of good websites for that.

Agreed. I give up.

Those who want to know what happened have plenty of access to honest information as well as the ability to simply watch the demolition for themselves.

And the existence of a 'jake' thinking that all responsible commentary is simply a personal prompt for him to engage in dishonest counterpoint should further underscore the point that disinfo is taken seriously in this corporate/military tyranny (the 'need to know' society) administered by people tested and proven to be sociopaths.

The 'debunkers' are pathetic. And I am not going to waste my time addressing their absurd (and quite criminal exercises in a cover-up) spins.

From the Downing Street Memo, which was supposed to be a Smoking Gun":

" ...CDS said that we did not know yet if the US battleplan was workable. The military were continuing to ask lots of questions."

"For instance, what were the consequences, if Saddam used WMD on day one, or if Baghdad did not collapse and urban warfighting began? You said that Saddam could also use his WMD on Kuwait. Or on Israel, added the Defence Secretary."

So if they "knew" they were no WMDs, why are they expressing concern about them? Therefore the participants in this meeting were not lying.

"we were lied into the war in Iraq"

And what would be your "very best" argument that this is true?

Lying about WMDs and conspiring to cause the events of 911 are what critical thinkers would call "two different things". Your question was irrelevent to the 911 question, as is my opinion about it. Wise up!

munch1, you should just give up on Jake, as he is not the least bit interested in seeking the truth. The clue to Jake's motivation here was revealed when I asked him,

"Do you think that George Bush, Dick Cheney and all the others in his administration lied to the American people and to the UN to sell them an illegal war of choice in Iraq?"

and he replied,

"I have yet to see proof that they lied. The so called Downing Street Memo seems to show the opposite, that is, that they believed there were WMDs in Iraq."

It's not about the truth for him. Even the most ignorant of my republican acquaintances accept that we were lied into the war in Iraq, as do most Americans. If he can deny the evidence regarding the invasion of Iraq, it shows either a level of cognitive dissonance that can not be overcome with facts or reason, or just plain dishonesty, and I suspect that the latter is actually the case.

Even if all the info debunking the 911 truth movement were true, and that is far from the case, all it takes for this administration to be complicit, would be for them to have known about it and done nothing to stop it, and there is no question about that.

"The portrayal of the media on your 'debunk' site is far from accurate. "

To state it as such without explaining why is unimpressive. You are supposed to present a counter argument.

"And it forces a noxious experience upon the rest of us "

*tap tap* Dude, you are in a small minority!

The portrayal of the media on your 'debunk' site is far from accurate.

I find such psycho-babble-nonsense insulting.

Why do you people bother? It isn't funny. It does not make you look 'smart', 'clever' or even 'cute'.

And it forces a noxious experience upon the rest of us because we are forced to acknowledge that insanity (and disconnection) is so widespread and so complete in so many members of government and their disinformation agencies and agents.

Also from the architects' and engineers' site are items that further indicate that the towers did not fall due to fire:

(Trade Towers) exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire, i.e.

1. Slow onset with large visible deformations

2. Asymmetrical collapse which follows the path of least resistance (laws of conservation of momentum would cause a falling, intact, from the point of plane impact, to the side most damaged by the fires)

3. Evidence of fire temperatures capable of softening steel

4. High-rise buildings with much larger, hotter, and longer lasting fires have never "collapsed"

"Mid-air pulverization of all the 90,000 tons of concrete and steel decking, filing cabinets & 1000 people – mostly to dust."

The quote above appears on the right column of the architects and engineers webiste for 9-11 truth.

There are a number of other aspects to the collapse listed that prove the towers came down by planned demolition such as

"Vertical progression of full building perimeter demolition waves"

"The operation's scope was known to the BBC before the actual events unfolded."

Scroll to near the bottom to read about BBC:

http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm

"The only theory that is supported by the evidence is controlled demolition with explosives," Gage says. "You could never get a collapse event of that speed through 80 floors of intact steel structure. The laws of physics simply don't allow it."

I have posted three comments regarding the construction of the trade towers. They have not as yet appeared (I just saw that they are also 'awaiting moderation'). If they do not, it is a clear indication that facts regarding the towers' actual structures are being censored in the vain attempt to prevent the general public from realizing that:

1) The towers were imploded.

2) The operation involved several US government and 'private' agencies and involved long term planning.

3) The operation's scope was known to the BBC before the actual events unfolded. (This supports the idea that this was an attack planned by international police/military agencies, not just US, as a means to affect civl rights in the US.)

"At 9:49 a.m., the ten-ton, B-25 bomber smashed into the north side of the Empire State Building."

Apples and oranges. Maximim take off weight of a 757 is 125 tons. 757s fly much faster than a B-25. 35 times as much fuel. Furthermore, the Empire State Building is a reinforced masonry structure in which the structural steel beams are encased within limestone walls or slabs of concrete 8 inches (20 cm) thick.

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/history/q0311.shtml

"And all the other skyscaper fires that did NOT result in a building pulverizing itself and then falling neatly into its own footprint"

Basic fallacy of logic, that since something never happened, it didn't or couldn't happe. 911 was a day of mant "firsts".

"Most people in the community who take social responsibility seriously "

In the case of 911 truthers, it is not their seriousness that is the problem.

"Remember the game of blockhead?"

Bad analogy. Solid wooden blocks do not compare well to the internals of the WTC towers which were mostly air, limiting the resistance substantially..

"Again, this part of the demolition proof has been well covered elsewhere and it is unlikely that you are unaware of it."

You and I should both avoid any analysis that thinks of the WTC towers as being internally solid.

Nice try jakenewton. Lol!
Danny Jowenko's statements are more proof of a coverup than anything you've provided to the contrary.

And tell me just what is it that you've added?

I'm still cracking up over your statement:
"…the weakening of support structures by sawing and torchwork, etc."

Anyone that can argue against controlled demolition at wtc7 probably also believes (or supports the fable) that a Boeing 757 went completely into that 14 foot hole at the Pentagon, engines, tail section, fuselage, wings and all. Most people add it all up and come to the conclusion that the official story of what happened that day is full of holes.
911lies.org

Thanks again for the laughs jakenewton, I've thoroughly enjoyed it.

"Google danny jowenko. He's a demolitions expert and knows much more than most people about controlled demolitions."

So what. I can find many more who are on record as saying that it didn't happen. Are you saying they *don't* cut and torch support structures?

"Thanks for the comic relief jakenewton."

I'll just note that you haven't effectively countered anything I wrote which *I* think is funny.

"...the weakening of support structures by sawing and torchwork, etc."

Google danny jowenko. He's a demolitions expert and knows much more than most people about controlled demolitions.

Thanks for the comic relief jakenewton.

"To think that a building being struck by debris on one side can cause it to collapse straight down is ludicrous. "

There was also a large, not small, fire, remember?

"The building did not fall over in the direction of the gouge damage from the tower debris, "

You seem to want it to fall over like a tree. Extremely large buildings covering large amounts of ground do not behave like trees.

If you insist that the building was imploded, than you are stuck with the various implications, such as the preparations required to do such a thing. Thousands of pounds of explosives, large crews, the weakening of support structures by sawing and torchwork, etc. You should read up on building demolition.

Without 1 and 2, WTC7 itself would have been an acheivement in the industry orders of magnitude above the last largest job acheived.

One of the major problems you guys have is the idea that "it collapsed AS IF from controlled demolition, therefore it WAS controlled demolition". A basic fallacy of logic.

"In the case of WTC7, I doubt the criteria included a requirement involving large pieces of another building falling on it."

To think that a building being struck by debris on one side can cause it to collapse straight down is ludicrous. The building did not fall over in the direction of the gouge damage from the tower debris, but rather, collapses onto its own footprint. There's the first clue.
That requires all four sides of the building to structurally fail simultaneously. That can only be explained with controlled demolition.

Google building 7 smoking gun

"possibility of a single point of global failure?"

Buildings are designed against a schedule of design criteria. In the case of WTG7, I doubt the criteria included a requirement involving large pieces of another building falling on it.

"trying to show how crazy lefties are. "

911 conspiracy thinking does not equate to "lefty" or "progressive". Many are on the right, and most prominent left wing thinkers do not beleive in the conspiracy theories about 911.

"One of the major problems you guys have is the idea that "it collapsed AS IF from controlled demolition, therefore it WAS controlled demolition". A basic fallacy of logic."

And one of the major problems you guys have is the laws of physics.

Since those have been rewritten by government establishments in times past, I am sure we can expect a rewrite anytime soon.

Until then though, the buildings collapsed not by fire and not by structural failures due to impact (s) but rather by expertly planned and controlled demolitions.

Think about steel columns, think about a fire, think about a building almost pulverizing itself and then falling INTO the path of MOST resistance at free fall speed. See the problem? Anyway, now that you know what your new laws of physics must explain... stop wasting time here and get busy with the rewrite... the National Bureau of Standards awaits your submission... until then, the gov is cooked... it's just a matter of time before the buzzer announces it's done.

"All I would like to know is does this sort of work pay well?"

*blush*

munch1 - That was a great question for Jake - "All I would like to know is does this sort of work pay well?"
Wouldn't you really like to know why they do what they do?
I've been on a few other blogs where trolls and moles engage you in coversations like this, then copy responses and take them back to post on right-wing blogs, trying to show how crazy lefties are. I guess for them, it's kind of a way to "make your bones" so to speak, with others who get their daily pablum form Rush, Boortz, Savage, O'Really and all the rest. Oh well, I hope at least he has the decency to copy all of it, maybe it will open some eyes over there, but I doubt it.
And you are right, they have been planning Iraq since well before the 2000 elections, as evidenced by the letter sent to Bill Clinton in January of 1998, asking him to invade Iraq. That letter was signed by all the criminals in this administration including the former and now the newest head of the world bank.

Jake, Mike did not admit defeat. He realized you were not engaging in an honest discussion...

the 'never acknowledge when the opposition makes a valid point, always pretend as though the point has never even been properly addressed...' tactic.

In other words, your position appears completely untenable. And quite amazing that you persist. All I would like to know is does this sort of work pay well?

I would also like to point out that when we speak of the administration's complicity or Bush's war, we do ourselves an injustice. The current program to invade Iraq was already in the planning stages years before Bush was even elected.

How do I know? I was working on NSA and CIA sponsored projects in the nineties. Many of the solicitations we reviewed were understood to be seeking developments for use in Iraq, meaning when we invaded Iraq. So, the NSA and the CIA do plan ahead. If events have to be massaged to make deployment of new weapons systems possible, well, that is a particular expertise.

(I am going to try and insert a piece from one of the comments that was 'moderated' and see if I can get an important point across, that Israel is not the key to understanding 9/11 or the invasions that followed but Israel's (and other crafted states of the Middle East) parentage is.)

Insertion:

Israel, like Saudi Arabia, present day Iran and Iraq and other Middle Eastern states enjoy their present borders largely due to British Imperial designs for the Middle East. Those states were created to bolster the British Empire's hegemonic interests (which can always be best served by factioning, a basic divide-and-conquer principal of government).

In the case of Iraq, Saddam was assisted to power by MI6 and the CIA. Also, his foe (Khomeini) in the Iran/Iraq war was assisted to power by not only US state department machinations but also those of the secret services of France, Germany and England.

The Middle East is politically precisely as controlled as it was during the heyday of the British Empire by foreign interests. Key national players in the Middle East are integrated into (and participate in) the US/Euro programs.

So, we did NOT go to war for oil. We already controlled not only the oil in Iraq but also the oil in Iran and Saudi Arabia if the 'we' is taken to mean the predominant Euro-based corporate/military/banking establishment.

off the flow but a correction to my last comment:

"Another recent example was the 'low-intensity' operation against Chile."

should read: ... 'low-intensity' operation against Argentina.

Someone brought up the debunking911 website and I apologize if I'm straying a little off topic but had to add my .o2.
The debunking911 website supports the theory that ONE steel column and ONE column alone could lead to the global collapse of Building 7. In other words, that site supports a "single point of failure" theory.

Does anyone actually believe that a 47 story steel-framed high-rise housing the CIA, Secret Service, Securities and Exchange Commission, as well as a bunch of financial institutions would have been built with even a remote possibility of a single point of global failure?
Regardless of who the tenants were.

Don't take my word for it, check it out. You be the judge.

"Go away Jake, I'm through talking to you."

Looks like an admission of defeat to me. Anybody else?

Go away Jake, I'm through talking to you.

"Do you think that George Bush, Dick Cheney and all the others in his administration lied to the American people and to the UN to sell them an illegal war of choice in Iraq?"

I have yet to see proof that they lied. The so called Downing Street Memo seems to show the opposite, that is, that they believed there were WMDs in Iraq.

Of curse my opinion on that has nothing to do with what happened on 911 so I have no idea why you would ask. I would rather you debunk the debunkers.

jakenewton
I've got a question for you Jake.
Do you think that George Bush, Dick Cheney and all the others in his administration lied to the American people and to the UN to sell them an illegal war of choice in Iraq?

"PNAC (Project for the New American Century), that states plainly that what is needed is a New Pearl Harbor event to get authorization for the funds needed to carry out their plans for Americam Empire?"

Demonstrate that it actually says that. Of course, it does not.

You repeat the same stuff over and over. Your charges have been answered, you have to acknowledge them and counter them.

In regard to the rewrite... more problems to be considered such as this historical account of another military plane hitting a New York skyscraper:

(http://history1900s.about.com/od/1940s/a/empirecrash.htm)

The Crash

At 9:49 a.m., the ten-ton, B-25 bomber smashed into the north side of the Empire State Building. The majority of the plane hit the 79th floor, creating a hole in the building eighteen feet wide and twenty feet high. The plane's high-octane fuel exploded, hurtling flames down the side of the building and inside through hallways and stairwells all the way down to the 75th floor. ...

... The plane crash killed 14 people (11 office workers and the three crewmen) plus injured 26 others. Though the integrity of the Empire State Building was not affected, the cost of the damage done by the crash was $1 million.

(And all the other skyscaper fires that did NOT result in a building pulverizing itself and then falling neatly into its own footprint but go on perversely standing (perverse in that they did not avail themselves of secret service demolition expertise before having a fire party on their premises).)

"Danny Jowenko's statements "

A guy with an opinion is all.

"I'm still cracking up over your statement:
'"…the weakening of support structures by sawing and torchwork,'

Why? You are publicly denying that this technique is routine in building demolition? Good luck to you.

"INTO the path of MOST resistance "

Or rather, towards the center of the earth from where *gravity* originates?

"Anyone that can argue against controlled demolition at wtc7 probably also believes (or supports the fable) that a Boeing 757 went completely into that 14 foot hole at the Pentagon, engines, tail section, fuselage, wings and all."

No, a lot of that ended up scattered about on the grounds in front, as phtos clearly show.

The "more serious" conspiracy types don't push the no airliner theories.

"The "more serious" conspiracy types don't push the no airliner theories."

I know. Most people in the community who take social responsibility seriously learn quickly that the CIA also works at selling its right to 'peer review' of our facts as well.

BTW, it works the same in all arenas including the veg movement. 'Ex'-cops are promoted as savvy activists and common folks motivated by genuine concern are slandered and maligned.

It does help identify who is who though.

munch1, sorry, I didn't see your response before I posted mine.

Jake. it wouldn't be hard to have "coordinated disappearance of *hundreds* from many backgrounds."
Especially when they were only on four planes on a day of great confusion regarding air travel. Look at the number of flights that were in the air that day, and all of them were diverted and forced to land at locations other than their original destinations. Your government was running war games simulating hijackings, with false radar blips at the same time. Don't be so naive Jake, if they wanted to do it, they could have done it.
I'm not trying to tell you how they did it because I don't know, and munch1 doesn't know either, but the evidence, a lot of it destroyed, points to the goverment having a hand in it. Why did BushCo resist an investigation into it for a year and a half? Why did Bush and Cheney refuse to testify separately under oath in the ultimate bipartisan whitewash, that was the 911 commission report, in which the only information released, was that which all members agreed to unanimously, and much evidence and testimony was excluded? Why is it that nobody seems to know that Bush's brother ran the company that provided security for the airline and the WTC on 911? Why is it not common knowledge that the owner of the WTC had asked for permission to demolish the WTC before 911, and was denied permission by the port authority? Why did Silverman's new lease on the WTC contain that special terrorism clause that allowed him to make billions on the disaster, instead of having to pay billions to fix the asbestos problems with the building, which they were under orders to do? Why was building 7 "pulled"? Why have they not released the video tapes from the businesses around the pentagon, that were confiscated after the event, that would have shown what actually happened there? Even if the passengers and hijackers were on the planes that hit the buildings, do you not understand that the technology for flying those planes remotely has been around for decades? Those planes were fly-by-wire aircraft, meaning all the controls work through computers, not mechanical interface. Why did the 911 commission not care where the money originated, that was supposed to have financed the hijackers.
These are just a very few questions, I could go on for pages with questions that remain unanswered, but in the final analysis, how did this administration USE this event, and the antrax attacks that followed shortly thereafter, to further their foreign policy goals that were stated many times previous to 911 in documents like PNAC (Project for the New American Century), that states plainly that what is needed is a New Pearl Harbor event to get authorization for the funds needed to carry out their plans for Americam Empire?
Only a totally naive person could objectively look at all the information and evidence, knowing how our government and the CIA have misled our people in the past to get us into wars, and just accept the government's conspiracy theory regarding the events of 911 without question.

" "serious" truther types"?!

Interesting. Everyone should be capable of ascertaining the truth. Yes, there has been a deluge of disinfo starting even before the attacks, but enough physical evidence has been provided by enough people to disprove the absurd Arab hijacker claims.

Also, I do NOT believe that the CIA/MOSSAD allegations are anything but a fail safe. It is unquestionably true that a number of agencies were involved in the planning, execution and aftermath 'selling' of the event as a terrorist attack. And one of the later fall back positions was that a rogue CIA group under the direction of Israel was responsible. Poppycock!

9/11 follows an historical pattern of powerful military/corporate interests preparing events to bring about conditions of war and the restructuring of society more favorable to its greater control (Homeland Security, Patriot Act, etc.).

There are numbers of examples.

That these military sponsored and trained terrorist organizations (Gladio, Taliban, etc.) operate throughout the world has again been very credibly reported.

That massive operations are launched is not unusual. Nor that these operations are then spun by the same organizations that plan and execute them.

Another recent example was the 'low-intensity' operation against Chile. It also resulted in a consolidation of police state powers. Basically, the operation was an attack on the Argentinean peso. And in this particular case, a 'retired' naval officer told me of his personal role as a chief conspirator in the plot.

This particular officer, Jim Sass, also served in China (a connection that helped him arrange the sale of his wines to China from his newly acquired Argentinean winery) and Russia and following the collapse of the peso, he became a key player in the buy up of lands... last I saw him he was preparing to move onto one of the oldest and most impressive estates in the Mendoza region.

So, the military is in power around the world and that military power is the Euro/US. And, it does carry out all manner of secret operations to consolidate its interests around the globe, the US is clearly not immune, though its citizens would like to believe otherwise.

Serious 'truthers'? Lose the arrogance. It underscores dishonesty. And, GET REAL!

The basic military infrastructure (with a decided and lawless power elite) of society is unquestionable. Contingency plans crafted by military think tanks are not inventions nor do they all remain 'contingencies'... some are in fact enacted with widespread, and massively damaging consequences.

"Amelia Earhardt or Jimmy Hoffa"

Comparing the disapearance of single individuals to the idea of a coordinated disappearance of *hundreds* from many backgrounds. Wise up!

"What you are asking munch1 is akin to me asking you, where is Amelia Earhardt or Jimmy Hoffa?"

He is asking me toi believe that CIA and Massad planned it without presenting any reasonable evidence.

"With secret CIA prisons, bases and bunkers all over the world, you don't think that your government could disappear a few hundred people if they were of a mind to?"

I would ask you to suggest a method by which they did this. I would ask you to spot check freinds and families of the victims regarding what was going on in the hours leading up to when they boarded the planes.

I think it's *much* more reasonable to think 19 guys with boxcutters hijacked airliners. The alleged CIA plans where we we fly missles and military jets into buildings, make four airliners disappear along with the people on them, and plant tons of explosives into buildings to achieve intentional implosions *way* beyond anything that that particular industry has ever done before is just plain ludicrous by comparison.

You guys should know BTW that the more, ah, erm, uh, "serious" truther types don't really go for the no airliners version.

"Or rather, towards the center of the earth from where *gravity* originates?"

Remember the game of blockhead? Blocks are stacked on top of each other until one fails to balance correctly and usually causes the whole structure to fall... all over the place generally... not into a neat little footprint of itself?

In all my times playing, I never saw the top block fall 'through' the blocks below.

Get it? The blocks cannot fall through each other unless the lower ones have been compromised such that they are no longer impediments to the fall (meaning their ability to resist has already been removed. In a controlled demolition, this is done by thermite charges such as were clearly evidenced in the steel girder remains of the trade towers.)

Now, I'm sure you already do know this. Most who attain to kindergarten can see this principle operating pretty much everywhere.

If the blocks are in place, another one cannot fall 'through' it; it will bounce or tumble to the side. In such a case (non-controlled demolition), buildings fall helter skelter and remains scatter over much wider areas than was the case with the controlled demolition of the trade towers.

Again, this part of the demolition proof has been well covered elsewhere and it is unlikely that you are unaware of it.

I guess it is time to raise the question:

If NATO sponsored the Gladio program to bring about stricter police state controls across Europe, then could our own 9/11 (which had a well conceived Patriot Act encased in its immediate aftermath) have similar parentage?

And finally, what is the nature of this international corporation that arrogates the right to commit acts of terrorism across the globe so that it may assume an expediency to implement its concept of 'order' (what some would call complete chaos in that this order serves only to destroy the very rudiments of natural and communal life)?

We need to deeply question our concept of society and order. We need to realize that much of what we accept as 'society' is simply a convenient myth that serves an order not scripted by us nor for us.

We must overcome our inculcation to accept what we have learned is 'order' and realize that real order is not arbitrary, elitist (wherein the elite and those who serve them are chosen for very shortsighted reasons by decidedly traditional/conventional rather than reasoning minds) nor destructive.

We must see that the 'orders' that arise out of all the smoke invariably lead to greater and greater break down in community and natural potential and are in fact nothing but pyramids based upon the illusion that most people's lives are best lived when completely controlled. And the elite life is best lived when cut off from all natural feedback and artificially indulged to produce undying loyalty and deep neuroses.

9/11 should be a wake up call. So wake up already. How long can you pretend that wars without end will be supported by the encroaching deserts? The dying oceans, the disappearing biospheres?

Military order is literally killing us. And, better ideas are well articulated. http://www.allinharmony.com

(edited comment after making post: My post was written before seeing the answer immediately above so it is basically a repeat of that logic.)

I think you are mistaken.

Proof that the towers were imploded does not in itself indicate what happened to the passenger planes or the passengers.

Proof that a missile struck the Pentagon also says nothing about what happened to passengers (clearly they were not riding the missile).

The US military was actively involved in an attack on innocent people and then telling a lie to the world and using that false flag attack to get the majority of US citizens to rally behind two invasions.

Now, an investigation into what happened to the planes and passengers reported to have struck the towers is certainly warranted.

But, this case is still like getting a video of a bank robber robbing a bank; We may be able to see that a robbery took place, and we may be able to see who did it or at least, who did not. But, that will not necessarily indicate what those robbers did with the money after they left the bank.

(So, even though we are now in the position of knowing that our military (and others in the US government and corporate sector) was involved in a false flag attack on the American people that has resulted in further usurpation of civil rights as well as another raid on the treasury, we do not yet know the full extent of the crimes committed nor the names of all those who actively participated.)

Kapische?

jakenewton you said, "And if they designed it without using passenger airliners, than you have to address 4 missing airliners and passengers."

What you are asking munch1 is akin to me asking you, where is Amelia Earhardt or Jimmy Hoffa? Just because he can't tell you where they are does not mean that they were on the planes that struck the buildings. With secret CIA prisons, bases and bunkers all over the world, you don't think that your government could disappear a few hundred people if they were of a mind to? If in fact, if the government WAS complicit in the killing of some 3000 people on 9/11, what difference would a few hundred more make?

"It would be harder to get closer to 9/11 than to correctly identify those who planned and executed it."

And if they designed it without using passenger airliners, than you have to address 4 missing airliners and passengers.

It would be harder to get closer to 9/11 than to correctly identify those who planned and executed it.

Digressions into relevant history are made to enable others to have the wherewithal (if they do not already possess it) to see for themselves how these operations are planned, by whom and why.

Most people who have looked at the evidence conclude that there was US government complicity. But, the spin is that it serves the interests of Israel.

The truth is that it serves the interests of the elite international corporate order and Israel itself, also serves this order and in fact, was established to serve the war-making interests of this order, just as Saudi Arabia was and just as modern day Iran and Iraq do.

I hope my comments will not be construed as anti-Semitic, anti-Israel, etc. I am neither. I believe that the Jewish people like the Moslem people are being (and have been) used as pawns in an elite war-maker's game (for purposes of genocide, meaning to keep the majority downtrodden) that is easy to understand once you know the rules, the objectives and the nature of the game board they set up to make the playing of the game possible (factioning, divide and conquer, etc.).

"Maybe we should digress further, "

Personally I am losing interest as we digress away from 911 itself. And if this digression is OK, it strikes me that disappearing airline passengers should be worthy of discussion, an issue closer to 911.

According to Cossiga, the former president of Italy, Mossad planned the attacks on the trade towers with the help of the CIA.

We are going to show how this allegation can not be true.

Regardless, let's learn a little about Cossiga who "…was forced to resign after revealing the existence of, and his part in setting up, Operation Gladio. This was a rogue intelligence network under NATO auspices that carried out bombings across Europe in the 1960s, 1970s and '80s. Gladio's specialty was to carry out what they termed "false flag" operations—terror attacks that were blamed on their domestic and geopolitical opposition." American Free Press

and :

"In March 2001, Gladio agent Vincenzo Vinciguerra stated, in sworn testimony, "You had to attack civilians, the people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple: to force … the public to turn to the state to ask for greater security." " American Free Press

Now, Gladio itself was a major project of Gehlen, a high level German Nazi who also helped form the CIA and helped select those Nazi scientists and technicians (9,000) who would enter the US to work in the CIA and other notable US academic, military and scientific establishments.

In other words, following WWII, there were immediate moves to consolidate Nazi talents and use them to implement and further develop many of the technologies including mind control that had been investigated during Hitler's reign.

Maybe we should digress further, all the way back to Hitler's selection… and who exactly selected him to play the role of Fuhrer during the militarization of Germany in the thirties and forties… and we find at the root the German army and its leader, Wilhelm, the grandson of Queen Victoria.

We also discover that Hitler's 'new' philosophy of eugenics had an English root and an English coach and to deliver it more forcibly, a drama coach paid for by the German army.

Still with me? I hope so. More to come. In the meantime, you may want to check on all the similarities between the Reichstag fire and 9/11. It ALMOST appears to have been written by the same author…

The overwhelming evidence indicating that 9/11 was planned by our own military and secret service organizations with the clear participation of international secret services has been made available by many people on many sites, and some of those have already been mentioned in comments contributed by others.

I did not come here to engage in a purposeless/distraction debate with irresponsible and misguided members of some high school debate team.

I made my comments to point out the inherent dishonesty of the article itself and also to point to the dishonesty of Common Dreams in offering it as an 'alternative' item.

This is classic disinfo. And, it is important to recognize it and begin to see how it works. This is a very good example of creating a 'discussion/dissension' around already proven-to-be mute points to bolster the false assumption that Arab terrorists, and not our own government, planned and executed the atttacks on the trade towers.

[Removed by me, duplicate of above post]

"None of the facts of a US military attack on the trade towers on 9/11 have been debunked. "

*sigh* Pick your *very best* example.

None of the facts of a US military attack on the trade towers on 9/11 have been debunked. That is patently ridiculous.

Furthermore, my comments that have been so far officially censored obviously annoy those who monitor these discussions. They did not have embedded links, there were no swear words or names of people not already dead and known to the general public.

9/11 is nothing more than (or less than) another Reichstag fire and planned and executed by the same institutional interests that created that false flag event.

What my post showed was that the British Empire's program of regional factioning (including the introduction of Israel as a major factor in this 'divide and conquer' scenario) continues to drive Middle East policies and is also a root of 9/11.

Very few people have demonstrated the clear and obvious connections that exist between Euro power stratagems and the unfolding of these 'terrorist' events within the 'US'. And that is why there is concern on the parts of those who control the media and this comment board.

"His questions seem to be aimed at dividing those with different views of 911."

I was kidding, but many of those views are incompatible.

"willfully ignorant"

To simply repeat points that have been countered without dealing with the counter is either ignorant or disengenuous. I've been through these before and no one seems to do that.

"His questions seem to be aimed at dividing those with different views of 911."

Thank you munch1 but I don't see where any of that shows that the buildings were imploded.

Freefall speeds, no airliners, planted explosives, no scrambled jets, melted steel, WTC7 "pulled", all of these point and the others you are likely to raise have been debunked years ago. What you need to do instead of just repeating them is acknowledge and counter the debunking argument that we can just find in a few seconds. What "truthers" do *that* instead of just repeating the same points that have been dubunked already?

David Ray Griffin seems to be a more "serious" debunking debunker, but guess what? The ideas in his books and papers have problems and have been dubunked.

Am I saying that the debunking arguments have no problems? No, but you can't just ignore them.

Even after the tragic events of 911, they didn't think that they had an ironclad case for passing the Orwellian named "Patriot Act", so attacks on the media and Democratic leaders of congress were orchestrated using weaponized anthrax from our own government labs. It was genetically linked to there, and yet no one has been arrested. It even came in letters with faux islamic threats. In just a few weeks the Patriot Act was passed almost unanimously.
Check this out -
http://www.anthraxinvestigation.com/index

Here's another informative link -
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5948263607579389947

There is no link, nothing embedded. The censorship regards the facts (how-to) of US/EURO war-making in the Middle East.

I make the point that we could not have gone to war in Iraq over oil since it was already controlled by the CIA who had in fact ushered Saddam into power and guided his efforts during the Iran-Iraq war (consider that he also checked with the US state department before invading Kuwait).

I also make the point that not only the Shah was ushered into power by MI6 and CIA machinations but so was Khomeini and the people who surrounded him. In other words, the Shah's departure was a scripted 'changing of the guard' (words spoken to me by an Iranian now living in the US).

In other words, Euro/US interests have been driving Middle Eastern political, economic and social realities for quite sometime. Many in the Middle East are quite aware of it but people in the US still find this hard to believe.

I even personally know people who worked at the highest levels in predominantly Moslem countries while partnering with the Israelis and US state department.

In any case, the post was important for anyone who wants to understand the deception game being played by the creation of 'competing' 'nation' states (and their directing) to allow for the mainstream illusion that wars simply 'arise' over latent and regional conflicts when they are in fact carefully orchestrated by elitist corporate/banking/military interests.

munch1
Ah Yes, Moderation!
I have been moderated a time or two when trying to make reference to or link to certain movies that can be viewed free on the internet. You know, like the Z movie. jakenewton is either a troll or just plain willfully ignorant. His questions seem to be aimed at dividing those with different views of 911. Most people don't want to believe that their own government could have been complicit in the 911 tragedy, regardless of all the evidence that points to exactly that. Check out this link -
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5547481422995115331

Try rephrasing. :-)

It is not the blank one. I deleted that myself since it was a mistake. It has to do with the history of the Middle East and the British Empire, prompted by the post that mentioned Israel..

There is no link in the post. So... it is a piece of history that is being censored.

Actually, I see a blank post from you earlier. FYI.

"I have tried to post a follow-up comment that is being 'moderated' so I do not know if you will be able to see it. "

I don't see it. Might have to do with an embeedded link? It's happened to me. Maybe someone can direct us to the right FAQ.

"Agreement Festival where ideas go unchallanged"

I have tried to post a follow-up comment that is being 'moderated' so I do not know if you will be able to see it.

Considering that Common Dreams employs the 'moderation' principal when ideas submitted challenge the various 'acceptable' ways to dissent... well, you could be onto something here;(

"jakenewton is mentally ill neanderthal."

Name calling. Classy! Everyone getting this from TheLorax? Meanwhile, my *points* about Durang's piece and the conspiracy sideshow stand because you have ignored them. That's what I notice about your last contribution.

" can only conclude he's a complete moron."

You can conclude anything you want but I'll bet you can't *prove* it and "show your work".

"Stop feeding the "jake newton" troll."

You have no idea what a troll is do you? I'll agree that I am a troll the minute you agree that the Common Dreams public comment area is nothing more than a high-fivin' back slappin; Agreement Festival where ideas go unchallanged. What say?

Stop feeding the "jake newton" troll. He's got a hard-on for Holy Joe that just won't quit. After reading all of his above comments, I can only conclude he's a complete moron.

jakenewton is mentally ill neanderthal.
There's no sense trying to talk reason to a person incapable of it. He is already set in his ways. He lives in the World of Fox and probably has a picture of bush on his wall. He stands tall and proud that he voted for him (probably twice). He's one of the 10% of the neocon nutballs that thinks bush is the 'best of all presidents'. He thinks the Iraq conflict is about freedom and is fully prepared to murder millions of Iranians of their non-existant nuke program. Right jake? Kill them all for Israel! Liebermann is my hero!
Don't bother talking to him about the WTC. Physics mean nothing to him. Fuel temperatures and metal fatigue statistics are meaningless to him. It takes an intelligent person to figure all that out. Whatever bush says is the way to go in his world. He will believe whatever the government says regardless of science, eyewitness accounts, photographs, video, or physical law.
I would bet some major dough that jakenewton is hopped up on religion as well.
It's sad that some people are just lost. They can never be reached. They live in continual paranoid dementia. jakenewton is the person we are trying so hard to save the world from.

BTW, those chunks of column (displayed in your site's photographs) have been shown to have been blown outwards at an arc that also proves the use of explosives being placed in the buildings (and publicly admitted in the case of bldg 7) prior to any of the plane hits.

The site you quote grossly mis-represents the facts. The building fell at free fall. The core steel columns were given a power boost (outward and downward thrust) by the detonating charges which explains their positions in the pictures.

Pictures of the cuts made by those charges are widely available. Charges were placed in the building as is normal in a planned detonation/demolition.

Interesting discussion, with jakenewton the devil's advocate.

I think the 911 truthers of all colors should be encouraged, but instead, Sen. Harman's HR 1955 will brand the Truth Movement as a risk to national security, and ultimately, its proponents, terrorists. Why would that be unless truthers are getting close to exposing covert data regarding 9/11?

Truth is stranger than fiction.

Nice try.

As I said, this is a very important war-justifying, civic-liberty-destroying propaganda event. And, there was and is plenty of resources being spent on protecting this false flag propaganda asset.

The building fell at free fall speed. The matter of a second or two (it is actually 10-11 seconds) is immaterial to the discussion.

As to the fall of the building's center as opposed to perimeter, there is a dust cloud (hmm... and that is because the entire structure is virtually reduced to dust but that in itself is abnormal and indicates advanced deconstruction technology at work) that obscures the bottom but in no way prevents us from seeing the speed of the fall which can reliably be called free fall.

"The towers fell at free fall speed."

* In every video and photo you can see the perimeter columns far outpacing the collapse.

* The building took over 12-16 seconds to completely collapse. The actual event was covered by debris so no one can say for sure. One rare video has the south tower collapsing at about 22 seconds.

* Conspiracy theorists cut their videos out when the perimeter columns hit the ground and not the building.

http://www.debunking911.com/freefall.htm

The evidence that is available to the public proves that this was a US military operation.

The towers fell at free fall speed. Please give me the 'we let it happen' explanation for that (also please include the steel columns since my last encounter with a 'we let it happen' spin doctor, an Indymedia founder and 'activist', said that they did not really matter since they would have 'cracked', jumped out of the way I presumed he meant of their own accord; etc., etc., etc.)

Information that is only available to the perpetrators (or cooked by them) is kinda suspect. Don't ya think?

The DNA evidence was found at the three crash sites for must of the victims. "We". meaning munch1 and jakenewton, aren't on th list to be able to personally examine those remains.

"We do though."

Please provide a specific definition for 'We'. Thank you.

"The fact that we do not know about the passengers"

We do though.

First deal with what we DO KNOW. Then after you have acknowledged it, the other questions can be asked. The fact that we do not know about the passengers does not mean that a military plane is a passenger plane. I think that is obvious.

Next, people DO disappear. And, the CIA is quite expert in MAKING people disappear. So, though I have not dealt with this issue since it is actually unnecessary to proving that the US military attacked the citizens of the US on US soil with determined and long term premeditation, it does not prove the infeasibility of my assertion.

We know about MK-Ultra and other human experimentation exercises by agents working for the US military. We know about the CIA world-wide drug trade. We know about secret arms and human trafficking and complicity by various military agencies.

Just because the crimes are heinous and not what most people want to consider as being normal business procedures by 'US' military agencies, it does not change the facts that we know about this case in particular nor what is known about other instances involving US military and secret services abuses of power, including renditioning.

Sun Tzu also knew the wisdom of battle plans that were not needlessly complex.

You sticking with the "there were no airliners" theory?

"The 'let it happen' guys are paid spin doctors. "

misanthrope? What do you think?

"Anyone who has seen the films has realized that only the US military could have been behind a missile attack on the Pentagon. Furthermore, 'In Plane Site' reveals that the plane that hit the tower in the video was not a passenger plane."

So those "passengers" on those "planes" were spirited away to an undisclosed location, right?

The 'let it happen' guys are paid spin doctors.

Anyone who has seen the films has realized that only the US military could have been behind a missile attack on the Pentagon. Furthermore, 'In Plane Site' reveals that the plane that hit the tower in the video was not a passenger plane.

The US military had also taken pains to avoid the possibility of interception. And, the demolition was done by military experts and in the minds of many physicists also required certain top secret weaponry to accomplish the impeccable timing of the fall.

So, yes, the CIA is seeding the discussion with lots of 'let it happen' people. I recently had a vist from one but, the 'let it happen' absurdity/hoax is just a lot of noise in the lame attempt to prevent the truth from being exposed.

The US military attacked the last vestiges of sovereignty and recourse of the American people. This action is and was absolutely criminal and any who make light of it or spin it are traitors to the people of this country and to the peoples of the world.

These state sponsored acts of terrorism are in support of the programs of genocide that have maintained elitist interests since ancient times. And, false flag terrorism is as old as the pyramids.

"By deception, you will make war."

and

"All war is based on deception." Sun Tzu

Finally, war-making is the manner in which kings, and the elite have ruled down through the centuries. It keeps the majority in fear and downtrodden and increases the power of the ruling class.

So 'No', we did not 'allow' it to happen! Who would have wanted to design such a great plum for the US and European military and ruling elite? Don't be ridiculous! Also, add to this that Bin Laden was another convenience funded by the CIA! And, do you think with the aid of even Mapquest the US (actually funded to the tune of many many billions of technolgy dollars) could not see where Bin Laden was?

Give me a break!

Making popcorn...

So munch1, you are a "made it happen" guy. What do you say to the "let it happen" guys?

On 9/11 the US military attacked the people of the US to convince them to give up all their rights as private citizens and to solidify them into a nation in perpetual war.

The US military is not guided by the interests of the people of the US but rather by international secret services, banking and political interests.

The US fights 'wars without end' for the sake of the profiteers of war who do include some Americans but are still principally based in Europe.

The staging of 9/11 has been very profitable for the major military/power-elite stake holders around the world. For this reason and this reason alone, little that is true about 9/11 will ever be revealed on the pseudo-progressive and mainstream supported sites such as Common Dreams.

There were no hijackers. That is proven. This is classic CIA disinfo. It has the appearance of being an alternative 'truth' piece and attacking the official propaganda but it actually solidifies the core of that propaganda; that we were in fact attacked by a foreign terrorist group called 'Al Qaeda'. We were not. 9/11 is unquestionably and clearly and without doubt a high level US military inside job which also involved the participation of foreign secret services such as MI6.

Here are the indisputable facts:

The towers fell at near free fall speed, INTO the path of MOST RESISTANCE by collapsing into the columns of steel core. They did not fall from fire but by planned demolition.

The hole, in the pentagon was only large enough for a missile, not a plane. And, there was no indication on the lawn in front of the hole to indicate a plane crash. These facts were evident to everyone at the Pentagon that day which makes the absolutely irrefutable and conclusive point that it was the US military/Pentagon (and not an ad hoc independent Arab terrorist group) and other secret service conspirators that planned and executed and quickly removed evidence (CLEANED UP) on 9/11.

Building 7 which fell did so after; it was reported to have already fallen by a BBC correspondent! The plans for that day were apparently widely known inside certain international secret services and their prepared media assets.

Common Dreams has never accurately reported on these events though numerous films and reputable individuals have presented the overwhelming evidence of an inside, high level and well-planned job. And, that in itself makes Common Dreams very suspect as a CIA supported and crafted spin site to guide the 'progressive' movement by seeding it with false facts, ideas and dead end projects.

These are very serious issues and propagandists don't just wear Neo-con clothes. They are running most of the 'alternative' sites, at least those not being censored. Think. Think hard. Many people have had their lives threatened for speaking out on this issue including myself. Think.

durgaya: I send my support to you in your travails. Just keep telling yourself: "It's not a train, it's just a solar flare. It's not a train, it's just a solar flare. It's not a train, it's just a solar flare."

Of course, the end result is the same, but for myself, going out with a smile on my face is the plan. Thank the goddess for 24-hour 7-11 stores with plenty of whiskey here in Taiwan! Well, my liver doesn't thank them, but my addled brain certainly does. In the end, even Prometheus would have chosen Johnny Walker, methinks.

"The bush adminstration has already been proved to have lied about the existance of WMD to start the Iraq conflict. "

Just curious if the Downingstreet Memo is your best example.

"You are clinging to tiny scraps of 'evidence' and bits and pieces of superfluous information in a desperate effort to provide credibility to Liebermann,"

You are way off track. I discredited Durang by showing he created a straw man. My argument there stands.

What I really want to see is you Truth guys debate "made it happen" vs. "let it happen". That would be interesting.

LIEberman is one big lying blowhard SOB and is hated by most of the usa but he is adored by the israeli lobbyists who can't get enough of their team leader

Why doesn't ole Joe just come out of the closet and admit he's a neo-con republican? And, most importantly, why don't other dems just simply disown him? Where is Paul Welstone when you need him? Sigh.

Americans need to realize that the Democratic Party is also owned by the corporatocracy. Those people don't like us "People." We're "the mob" that must be controlled. It has ever been so -- that's why we created a government that originally was supposed to keep us from being enslaved by these sons-of-bitches. Guess what? Anyone out there struggling with onerous debt? Jefferson called that slavery, and he was right.

And incidentally, attacking Iraq was about stealing their oil and establishing American control of affairs in the Middle East. 9/11 provided the pretext. You can read about this at www.cooperativeresearch.org; or you can read how American foreign policy works in John Perkins, "The Secret History of American Empire," or "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man." Or, you can get it from the horse's mouth at www.aei.org -- the website of the American Enterprise INstitute, the architects of current Middle East policy.