Stop the War Coalition: Conspiracy Groups Distraction At Best, Antisemitic At Worst

31 Responses to “Stop the War Coalition: Conspiracy Groups Distraction At Best, Antisemitic At Worst”

1. Victor Posted: Aug 29th, 2009 at 4:51 am

   First Item: Quote: StWC meetings and events are still attended by conspiracy theorists, albeit not to the same extent as seen in previous years, which involve conspiracy theorists, such as Justin Walker, proclaiming the world is controlled by Zionist shape-shifting reptiles - widely regarded as conspiracy code for Jewish. End quote When J W says shape-shifting reptiles, it is nothing to do with Jewish people although one does accept that some people do thinks so. When J W says shape shifting reptiles, he means, shape shifting reptiles who are able to alter their appearance to some degree. It does sound rather odd admittedly, that is until one has the opportunity to study ancient texts from all around the world with accounts which beggar belief as in the case of Zacharia Sitchen (Jewish chap). For that reason alone one should stay open minded, does RINF understand that human DNA is over 33% identical to that of a Banana? Does RINF know that Human DNA has 23 Chromosome pairs were as all primates without exception have 24, and that Human DNA has been gene spliced - this is a hard scientific fact - so who did it? Mmmmm? Second item: Quote The StWC have always ignored the theorist, even when one theorists, Steven Williams, repeatedly begged the coalition to join forces with conspiracy groups, in front of hundreds of StWC meeting attendees. The use of StWC’s name and logo on conspiracy promotional material signals a new degree of desperation for these groups. End Quote I have always found Mr Steven Williams to be a hard working family man who loves his family & wants to protect them. It would not be the first time his name has been slandered by leftists largely due to the fact he is centre right & does not support many of the leftist viewpoints on a whole raft of issues. It appears as though S W has made every effort to approach StWC in an attempt to form some sort of working cooperation. It would also appear that this quite reasonable approach has been rejected by at least some within the StWC. Let me make this point perfectly clear to the StWC if I may. Mr Steven Williams view in relation to 911 is shared by some 798 Fully Qualified Architects & Engineers. Indeed, is not the official 911 story of which the StWC supports a “Conspiracy Theory” whereby a guy in a cave outsmarted & out flew the entire US air-force and then defied all the known laws of Physics - all on the same day! Now that sounds like a NUTTY “Conspiracy Theory” to me! So, please give these guys a break - they do not bite &, you know what - they may be right. Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

2. Molotov Cocktail Posted: Aug 29th, 2009 at 6:02 pm

   (proclaiming the world is controlled by Zionist shape-shifting reptiles - widely regarded as conspiracy code for Jewish.) United Nations General Assembly Resolution 3379, adopted on November 10, 1975 by a vote of 72 to 35 (with 32 abstentions), “determine[d] that Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination”. The resolution is often referenced in debates of Zionism and racism. The resolution was revoked by Resolution 46/86 on December 16, 1991. Source Wikipedia United Nations General Assembly Resolution 46/86 passed on December 16, 1991, revoked Resolution 3379 with a vote of 111 to 25, with 13 abstentions. Israel made revocation of resolution 3379 a condition of its participation in the Madrid Peace Conference, in progress in the last quarter of 1991. “Under pressure” from the administration of President George H.W. Bush in the United States, the UN passed the resolution. Source Wikipedia Under pressure from the administration of George H.W Bush Now there’s a name you can trust. “If the people were to ever find out what we have done, we would be chased down the streets and lynched.” - George H.W. Bush, cited in the June, 1992 Sarah McClendon Newsletter Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

3. Loster Posted: Aug 29th, 2009 at 11:56 pm

   So, Molotov, are you saying that because the Israelis wanted reference to Zionism being equivalent to racism (which I disagree with, though I do think that anyone who believes they deserve anything, including a “homeland”, for religious reasons is a fool) that they are actually shape-shifting reptiles? Now, Victor, where should I begin. When Justin Walker says he thinks shape-shifting reptiles are controlling the world, I would not be surprised if he meant it. But, you should be aware that a lot of people do use words like that to (thinly) disguise their deep-seated antisemitic views. Now, on to Zacharia Sitchin, Erich von Däniken, etc. The problem with the “Ancient Astronaut” hypothesis is the same issue that Creationism and New Chronology proponents have; lots of little “maybes”, no hard models and the inability to explain previously known knowledge. For example in Creationism, the eye was previously held to be the model that could not have evolved over time (i.e. it must have been fully formed from day one and it could not have functioned otherwise), but once the entire evolutionary history of the eye was put together with plenty of in-between (transitional) forms in there, they mostly shut up about it and instead started going on about bacterial flagella. Now we’re almost done with mapping the evolution of the flagella and creationists are looking for a new organ to latch on to without ever accepting that their previous claims were wrong or taking the new information in to account. The New Chronology people are even more blunt in their assertions. For example, Chinese, Indian and other Asian records contradict their opinion of history, so they say the records must be wrong or faked. The Ancient Astronaut proponents do similar things. For example, they are quick to point out that South American pyramids and African pyramids are similar in shape (i.e. kind of big at the bottom, smaller at the top). So then they hand wave and say “Look, they’re the same thing. Only something that could cross the ocean could bring this knowledge to both cultures, therefore, aliens”. What they then forget to point out is that while pyramids are similar on both sides of the Atlantic (because, gasp!, Euclidean solids make for very simple but sturdy construction projects) they forget to mention the fact that the pyramids differ in just about every other way (construction method, size, where the entrances are located, use, internal structure etc.). And, lets not forget that, much like Creationists and New Chronologists, the main “academic” proponents of the Ancient Astronaut hypothesis had neither credentials or credibility, and so never published actual academic papers, but produced mass market books with lots of publishing hype. Not only that, but most of them made claims the were testable (like the existence of Nibiru) and either died before a test for confirmation could be designed, or just ignored contradictory evidence. By the way, Victor, were you aware that Human Beings share about 50% of their DNA with Bananas? Do you know what that means? The answer, is of course, that we are all being controlled by shape-shifting Jewish bananas! No, wait, my mistake. It actually means that humans and bananas share a common ancestor, as per evolutionary theory. Also, your assertion that all non-human primates have 23 chromosome pairs in their genome is just plain wrong. There are 233 species of primates (including humans) and their diploid numbers range from 16 to 60. Now, humans do have 23 chromosomes while chimpanzees (our closest cousin on the evolutionary bush) have 24, that is true. If we look at human chromosome 2, we find that it is a fusion of chimpanzee chromosomes 12 and 13. “Hurrah,” shouts Victor, “it is true, humans have had their genes spliced! Who did it I ask you? Who could it have been but the banana Jews?” Well, I hate to burst your bubble my friend, but the answer to who spliced (not the correct word in this context but I’ll use it anyway) our genes, is that our great…-great-grand parents did it. Just like every other example of chromosomes splitting or fusing, it was all down to good old natural selection. I’ve been typing for a while now so I’ll hit the last two points quickly. In relation to Steven Williams 800 architects and engineers, may I point out that the number of architects and engineers who disagree with them equals x-800, where x equals the total number of architects and engineers alive on the planet Earth. I think you may be a little confused as to what happened on 9/11. Bin Laden was probably in his home in Afghanistan when he was plotting the attacks, probably with a few very well informed advisers, while surrounded by the wealth of probably the most well funded and staffed terrorist group in the world (I think pre-Good-Friday-Agreement IRA was probably No.1, but they’ve been slipping recently). I’m fairly certain he did not personally hijack and fly four planes. From what I understand, 20 smart, well-educated and fanatical men entered the US and avoided detection through bureaucratic loopholes (the same ones that illegal aliens still use today), avoided arousing suspicion took flying lessons before booking seats on 4 flights. Now, despite what you might think, in 2001, and even still today, the US is not London, and there are not thousands of people watching you via CCTV every minute of your day. And even if it was, it’s not like you can see 20 nondescript Muslim men on CCTV and instantly know they’re going to hijack planes and attack the US mainland. As for outsmarting the air force, do you mean switching off the transponders? Because that’s just a basic thing anyone would do if they didn’t want to be followed. Plus, most hijackings involve waiting for the hijacker to get on the ground, distract him while finding out his demands, then rushing in a blowing shit up. So, they really were doing what would be expected. As for defying all known laws of physics, I’m amazed that anyone could destroy that much and still be able to decrease entropy. Here is why I accept the mainstream account of what happened on 9/11; if Al-Qaeda did it, they did it in a very smart way. If the US government did it, they did it in the most convoluted, ass backwards way imaginable. Al-Qaeda’s plan: Get 20 people in to the US (easy, slightly expensive). Get them flying lessons (easy since they wont be registering licenses, not too expensive). Get fake passport and other documents required to fly (easy, relatively cheap). Get them some easily concealable tools/weapons (easy, I’ve never been stopped once in an airport even though I always have a Swiss army knife in my jacket, cheap). Buy plane tickets (easy, cheap as there’s no need to splurge for business class). At this point, everyone assumes the hijacking is just like every other hijacking and that the plane will land and demands will be made. They are wrong, but it makes the passengers easier to control, except on Flight 93 where they knew about the previous suicide attacks and so fought back. Now, if the US did it: Secretly budget the money to fund the attacks (moderately hard) Hire workmen to go in to the WTC buildings and pentagon every night for a couple of years, while bribing night watchmen to not say anything, and hope nobody chooses to spill the beans anyway (damn near impossible, very, very, very expensive) Either actually “hijack” the planes and kill everyone on board (relatively easy, cheap) or intern all the passengers and fly the empty planes via remote control and hope nobody finds your secret interment camps (hard, expensive) Fly planes in to buildings and detonate all the charges because you want the buildings to definitely fall because… I don’t know, drama, maybe? (easy and cheap now that all that hard work has been done) Pay off firemen, policemen, paramedics, survivors and all other miscellaneous people who may have seen something “odd” on the day and hope none of them talk about how the US government killed their co-workers and friends (this “” close to impossible and stupidly expensive) Pay off anyone directly involved (CIA, FBI, TSA, etc.) and hope they don’t talk (see above) Pay off all the worlds physicists, investigative reporters, Russian and Chinese politicians (or anyone else who’d like to dehumanize the US government), scientific journals universities with any engineering/architectural schools and x-800 architects/engineers, and hope no body talks (see above) Simple US government conspiracy: Get someone to pretend to represent Al-Qaeda (easy, maybe a little pricey) Get him to approach a fanatic who wants to bring down the corrupt American giant (easy, maybe costs the price of a flight to the Middle East) Fly the candidate to the US (easy, cheap) Give him homemade explosives, for that authentic look (easy, cheap) Bring him to New York and as him to go in to the World Trade Centre, shout “Al-Qaeda Rocks” and then blow himself up (easy) Pay off the six or seven people involved (easy, fairly expensive) For a better effect, get several people to do it at the same time. There you go, if you ever need to plot a conspiracy, I’m available and I’m cheap. Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

4. Victor Posted: Aug 30th, 2009 at 5:51 am

   The first post has not appeared so here is what should have presented itself: Thanks for that Loster. So, you obviously buy the official 19 Muslim Hijacker “Conspiracy Theory”. So now let me see if I have this correct: You are saying that Asymmetrical ballistic damage, followed by Asymmetrical Fire damage - of 2 high rise buildings - can cause 3 high rise buildings to collapse Symmetrical through their own footprint some 5+ hours apart despite the 3rd tower (building 7) suffering Asymmetrical ballistic damage & Asymmetrical fire damage. Are you saying this is your working Hypothesis Loster? Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

5. Loster Posted: Aug 30th, 2009 at 11:13 am

   You are almost right except for the collapsing into their own footprint part. I don’t know if you’ve seen video or photos from the site of a demolition versus ground zero, but I can assure you they are nothing alike. There was no symmetrical collapse. You may recall the photos from the aftermath showing debris spread across the entirety of the WTC plaza and the big, jagged, jutting pieces of building still half standing in the rubble. If it was a controlled explosion, it was done poorly and unnecessarily. Now, as I have responded to your rebuttal, would you be prepared to defend your original post after taking in to account the new information I have provided. If I misinterpreted any of your comments, please let me know so I can prepare a response based on those changes. Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

6. Victor Posted: Aug 30th, 2009 at 11:24 pm

   Thanks for that Loster. I have too much work this week to be draw into debate about 911 or any ancient A hypothesis. Thank you for your posts & with a little luck if there is another formal investigation then any new evidence will hopefully be presented in an open & unbiased way so whatever the truth is, it can be sort & closure for all can be found. Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

7. Loster Posted: Aug 31st, 2009 at 8:27 pm

   Victor, there was already a formal investigation in to the events of 9/11. Just because their conclusion did not match yours, does not mean that a second investigation needs to take place. Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

8. peace Posted: Sep 2nd, 2009 at 11:07 am

   where do i start? money is created by banks out of thin air, so cost doesnt even come into it. i admit it’s easier and less scarey to believe the OCT (official conspiracy theory). norad tracks most flying objects without transponders & switching one off would trigger the scrambling of fighter jets. which happened 60 times in the year previous for planes going slightly off course. enemy aircraft/missiles dont use transponders. modern steel buildings dont just fall down like that. those towers were over-engineered. three down in one day due to fire? wtc7 dips in the middle and goes down in 7 secs. three huge buildings full of steel & concrete do not collapse and pulverise due to fire. even if you believe a plane can bring down buildings like that, they wouldnt come down so fast or so straight. a falling object will take the path of least resistance, that is not through many thick concrete floors. in order to fall so fast, the floors below need to be removed first. the pancake theory would take minutes. wtc7 housed many government clients including an emergency response office. are they going to put them in a building which could just fall down? when it had no gas to prevent explosions. molten steel was present at the site for weeks after. firemen said it was like a foundary. ordinary fires even with jetfuel dont melt steel. even the OCT admits ordinary fires only weaken steel. they say fire weakened the steel trusses so that they just collapsed. even if possible, quite how it weakened them all the way down is unexplained. and the impact cant have dislodged all the fire-proofing. there’s a peer reviewed science paper on nano-thermite particles found in the dust. that’s military grade explosives. a bit like the military grade anthrax that was sent to important people. the company which removed the rubble and also demolished what was left of the oklahoma fbi building was ‘controlled demolition inc’. the bush/bin laden business connection? the fact that the bin ladens flew out of america when no other planes could fly? fbi might have some questions? many people including architects have never considered anything other than the OCT. many who see richard gage’s ‘blueprint for truth’ have second thoughts and that’s why that number grows so quickly. these are not conspiracy theorists, they are highly qualified people with reputations & careers to think about. bush has said some pretty dodgy things regarding 911. he’s never denied having prior knowledge. he said he saw the first plane hit on 911, which is impossible. he failed to respond for ages after the second plane hit. standard ’secret service’ procedure would be to whip him out of there quick-smart. like they did to cheney. 911 hero william rodriguez who worked there for many years and saved hundreds of lives that day, says there were explosions in the basement and other anomolies. his testimony was heard in secret and removed from the commission report. i’ve looked at the 911 report itself and it’s more of a narrative than an investigation. a lot of history and suggestions with relatively little on the events that day and no mention of the collapse of wtc7. the chair and vice chair of the commission now say that norad and faa lied, so the report is inaccurate. the commission had a tiny budget compared with the clinton/monica scandal. a leading fire magasine said it was ‘a half-baked farce’. the pentagon is the biggest and most protected building on earth. norman mineta was with cheney that day. he testified that the vp was warned several times of an approaching plane and when asked ‘the plane is 30 miles out, does the order still stand?’ replied ‘of course the order still stands, have you heard anything different?’. the plane hit the most recently reinforced section with fewest military employees, at the exact opposite end to rumsfeld. the plane both disintegrated and left an exit hole. rumours are that it hit where there was an investigation into the $2,300,000,000,000 pentagon black-hole, announced the day before. a flight tutor said one of the hijackers could barely fly a sesna and that he wouldnt fly with him. pilots for 911 truth say you would need to be a an expert pilot to perform the spiral descent on the pentagon. the flight data recorder from the pentagon plane shows that, by two seperate readings, it was 200 metres up when it supposedly hit the lamposts. the plane would break apart before it would hit the building the way ’something’ did. where’s the cctv, it’s covered in it. it had missile defences. maybe they hadnt tested them? the cctv of one hijacker has two different time-stamps. one hijacker’s bag didnt make it onto the plane and had loads of evidence in it. not very smart. patriotsquestion911.com has a massive list of senior military and other highly qualified people who question the oct to varying degrees. need i go on. peace, love, compassion, forgiveness & abundance to all beings. Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

9. Subject X Posted: Sep 2nd, 2009 at 11:35 am

   So The Stop the War Coalition is an organisation of ‘Uncle Toms’ and supporters of ‘Ridiculous Wacky Conspiracy THEORIES’ i,e; civilian air liners travelling at 550 mph at 700 feet altitude. What a real sad joke these sick clowns are. Do they also pander to the viability of the three main ‘Corporate Fascist’ Political Parties in the U.K.? Not to worry, at least they are showing their TRUE colours. Has anybody in the 911 truth organisation heard of the patsy Nick Kollerstrom, I know I have not and if he is a holocaust denier he would fit well into the British Establishment. Remember 300 escapes from the Birkenau camp which 100 or so were successful to the west and east. You see one can not fix the solution/reaction until one has identified the PROBLEM. As for the alleged repeaters George Monbiot, Nick Cohen, Robert Fisk, Jon Ronso and silly moo Rachel North, well ask Albert Einstein who professed that ‘to condemn without investigation is the absolute PINICLE of ignorance’. People in the truth movement should take solace in that during the 1930’s like minded German and Italian Peoples were asking similar questions, unfortunately their voices were stifled or ridiculed with Patsies. Does Monbiot and co still preach that the Reichstag fire that was set in 1933 was the work of a Polish comunist Jew? Well on the evidence so far one must wonder. Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

10. peace Posted: Sep 2nd, 2009 at 1:35 pm

    do chomsky & co or stw or swp ever talk about the role of the unaccountable private banking cartels that are the central banks? this is the main control mechanism. money has no intrinsic value but people will kill for it. people get caught up in arguements about money when those at the top just type numbers into a computer and the computer says ‘YES’. see aaron russo’s ‘america: freedom to fascism’ and his ‘interview - reflections and warnings’ (96mins). then watch ‘the corporation’ (with chomsky), then ‘bursting bubbles of government deception’(menard), then ‘the corporation’ again. peace & love to all Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

11. Loster Posted: Sep 2nd, 2009 at 2:08 pm

    “money is created by banks out of thin air, so cost doesnt even come into it.” That statement is wrong for a number of reasons. Simply look at the entire economic situation in the US at the moment because banks could not come up with the money they needed to pay debts. If banks could create money out of thin air, there would be no need for banks. “norad tracks most flying objects without transponders & switching one off would trigger the scrambling of fighter jets. which happened 60 times in the year previous for planes going slightly off course. enemy aircraft/missiles dont use transponders.” NORAD primarily monitors for foreign military aircraft and missiles by watching areas of the world where they are likely to be launched from. In those situations, or when a foreign airline’s plane passing over US airspace goes off course, they will scramble jets. A domestic US flight going off course would probably alert NORAD now because of 9/11. Without that precedent, there would be no reaction. Though, assuming NORAD was involved in a cover up, I have to add an extra cost to my original post. “modern steel buildings dont just fall down like that.” In what manner did the buildings fall that other steel buildings hit by a plane would not fall? “those towers were over-engineered.” What exactly do you mean by over-engineered? Do you meant they were well designed to stand up to a large amount of different stresses? If so, do you really think the designers of the WTC really could have predicted a plane crashing into one or both towers? “three down in one day due to fire?” Not just due to fire, but two of the buildings got hit by planes and one got battered by debris coming off the other two. That caused wide-spread structural damage which weakened the structure and prevented firemen from putting out long burning fires, which weakened supports further. And with a fire burning in a relatively small building, as the worst of the fire would mostly be contained to only a limited area of the building, you’d expect parts of it to start dipping before it collapsed. “wtc7 dips in the middle…” See. (A controlled explosion would bring down the building more or less evenly). “…and goes down in 7 secs.” 7 seconds is within what gravity allows. I don’t see the problem. “three huge buildings full of steel & concrete do not collapse and pulverise due to fire.” Actually, a lot of buildings do. Mostly they are smaller than the WTC so firefighters can access all the floors with less risk and so put out the fire eventually. The WTC, being so tall, and having had planes fly in to them, were pretty dangerous for firemen and police to enter which meant evacuation of the hit buildings was priority over putting out the fires. “even if you believe a plane can bring down buildings like that, they wouldnt come down so fast or so straight.” You’re right, they wouldn’t come down straight or cleanly, and the WTC certainly did not fall straight. It started to tilt as it fell and spread debris everywhere. I’m not sure why you think they fell quickly, I think they fell as fast as a collapsing building would, but then speed is subjective. “a falling object will take the path of least resistance, that is not through many thick concrete floors.” That is true if you think of a building as one solid mass and if it is weakest at the base. Here’s an experiment for you. Build a tower of playing cards, 5 or 6 tiers high just to see the effect clearly. Pull out the middle two cards from either the second of third tier. What you’ll notice is that few, if any, of the cards fell off the building without first hitting the cards below. The path of least resistance is not the one with the least physical resistance, but the one that requires the least energy to achieve. “in order to fall so fast, the floors below need to be removed first.” What is your obsession with “too fast”? What do you mean? Are you saying it accelerated faster than gravity allows? Because because short of strapping rockets to the roof that wouldn’t happen. The buildings took longer than the 9 seconds required by gravity, as this video shows http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZ8wlKK15JM&feature=related “the pancake theory would take minutes.” Please provide evidence for this assertion. The pancake theory is the only one that explains why the buildings fell like they did. Compare the video above to one of a real controlled demolition http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=IE&hl=en-GB&v=7Ng5qwtR59A “wtc7 housed many government clients including an emergency response office. are they going to put them in a building which could just fall down?” No, they wouldn’t. And they didn’t. As I recall, it didn’t just fall down, there was something to do with a fire, and debris and poor plumbing that brought it down. “when it had no gas to prevent explosions.” I’m not quite sure what you mean. Do you mean that it wasn’t connected to the gas mains? If so, what does that have to do with anything? “molten steel was present at the site for weeks after. firemen said it was like a foundary.” Please provide sources for these claims. A lot of stuff was melted in that fire, many plastics and other metals included. Did you consider that maybe they saw these? It’s worth noting that in a buliding brought down by fire you’re more likely to see melted material than in demolished buildings as explosives used in demolitions are not designed to melt steel and so melted material in a demolition site is a rarity. “ordinary fires even with jetfuel dont melt steel.” So, people behind this conspiracy have a time machine and planted all the evidence we have of medieval knights using swords forged from steel? And they didn’t even have jet fuel to help melt it. “even the OCT admits ordinary fires only weaken steel. they say fire weakened the steel trusses so that they just collapsed. even if possible, quite how it weakened them all the way down is unexplained.” You are correct, in most cases a fire will only be hot enough to weaken steel, but it will be hot enough to melt it in certain areas if there is enough fuel (like plastics, fabrics etc.) around. I don’t believe anyone claimed that the trusses were weakened “all the way down”. I think the idea is more that the trusses on the floors where the planes hit were weakened and had the fire-resistant material knocked off. The fire spread to most of the upper floors and to some of the lower ones, causing further weakening. When the roof gave way, it collapsed on to floors weakened further by the fires. By the time the top of the building had smashed down to a point where the trusses weren’t weakened, there were probably a dozen floors sitting on top of these trusses, which were not designed for the weight, and so they collapsed. “and the impact cant have dislodged all the fire-proofing.” It only needed to dislodge some. “there’s a peer reviewed science paper on nano-thermite particles found in the dust. that’s military grade explosives.” Source please. A nano-thermite explosion would have been preceded by a very loud explosion and a lot of light. In fact, nano-thermite explosions can not be viewed directly as they give off so much UV light that they permanently damage vision. “a bit like the military grade anthrax that was sent to important people.” Important people like the editor of the National Inquirer. And only one person has ever referred to it as weapons-grade. And even if it was, that does not mean manufactured by a military, it mean of quality the military would use. “the company which removed the rubble and also demolished what was left of the oklahoma fbi building was ‘controlled demolition inc’.” So? They’re one of the demolition companies that has a contract with the US government. Who else would you expect to come cleaning up? “the bush/bin laden business connection? the fact that the bin ladens flew out of america when no other planes could fly? fbi might have some questions?” Would it not have made more sense, and have drawn less suspicion, if they’d been flown out earlier? If the Bush administration was so smart, why didn’t they think of that? Besides, you’re giving way too much credit to a man who was nearly outwitted by a pretzel. “many people including architects have never considered anything other than the OCT. many who see richard gage’s ‘blueprint for truth’ have second thoughts and that’s why that number grows so quickly. these are not conspiracy theorists, they are highly qualified people with reputations & careers to think about.” They have 800 people. In September 2007, they had 130. That may seem like rapid growth until you consider the fact that that still makes up less than 1% of all the architects and engineers in the world. Have any of these highly qualified people published any papers on what “Blueprint” claims? Many more people than that have debunked “blueprint” as nonsense. “bush has said some pretty dodgy things regarding 911. he’s never denied having prior knowledge. he said he saw the first plane hit on 911, which is impossible. he failed to respond for ages after the second plane hit. standard ’secret service’ procedure would be to whip him out of there quick-smart. like they did to cheney.” The Bush administration was as incompetent as Bush himself. You put way too much faith in to reading in to what that bumbling fool said. Cheney, being in Washington, was probably seen as being in more danger than Bush. And, even if they were to whip Bush away quickly, they had to decide where to bring him seeing as Cheney was in Washington and it would have been dangerous to bring Bush there too. Not to mention that they weren’t sure of how safe the skies would be. “911 hero william rodriguez who worked there for many years and saved hundreds of lives that day, says there were explosions in the basement and other anomolies.” Those are merely his claims which do not corroborate the testimony given by other survivors, including those he allegedly saved or his manager. “his testimony was heard in secret and removed from the commission report.” Most witness testimony was heard in secret. Most people would find it hard to relive a terrifying day, especially on public record. And the commission report was only a summary and did not include a lot of witness testimony. Just because he was labeled a hero, does not mean that his testimony, which contradicts that of the rest of the survivors, is more likely to be correct. “i’ve looked at the 911 report itself and it’s more of a narrative than an investigation. a lot of history and suggestions with relatively little on the events that day and no mention of the collapse of wtc7.” The published report is only the summary. The NIST report goes in to WTC 7 in more depth. “the chair and vice chair of the commission now say that norad and faa lied, so the report is inaccurate.” He said that the Pentagon (no NORAD) and the FAA were trying to hide their mistakes, which caused the report to take longer to compile. That does not mean the report is inaccurate. A lot of people cocked up on 9/11 and they wanted to cover their asses. Kean took that in to account and battered people down until he got answers. “the commission had a tiny budget compared with the clinton/monica scandal.” That statement makes no sense. The “Lewinsky Scandal” didn’t have a budget. There was no formal investigation in to Bill Clinton’s perjury charges. The 9/11 commission budget was $9 million. There was no money put in to investigating Clinton. Besides, at the start of your piece, you said “money is created by banks out of thin air” so why would money matter to you now? “a leading fire magasine said it was ‘a half-baked farce’.” Source please. “the pentagon is the biggest and most protected building on earth. norman mineta was with cheney that day. he testified that the vp was warned several times of an approaching plane and when asked ‘the plane is 30 miles out, does the order still stand?’ replied ‘of course the order still stands, have you heard anything different?’.” You can be the biggest and well protected SWAT team officer in the world, but that doesn’t matter if someone runs you over with a tank. As for Mineta’s testimony, I say, so what? Cheney gave an order to do something, possibly involving the plane heading towards the Pentagon (he was VP after all), and said that the order still stood. Maybe he was planning on shooting the plane down. Maybe he had given an order to evacuate the Pentagon. Maybe he was confirming that he did want that Latte. One throw away line does not make a conspiracy. “the plane hit the most recently reinforced section with fewest military employees, at the exact opposite end to rumsfeld.” It’s the Pentagon. The plane had a 1 in 5 chance of hitting that side. If Rumsfeld was in on it, why was he there? “the plane both disintegrated and left an exit hole.” The plane broke apart as it hit. Bits ended up in the building, on the grass, on top of the building and some parts (probably the cockpit) pierced the first outer ring. What’s so odd about an exit hole? “rumours are that it hit where there was an investigation into the $2,300,000,000,000 pentagon black-hole, announced the day before.” Please provide facts, not rumours. But again, I thought “money is created by banks out of thin air” so why would it matter anyway? “a flight tutor said one of the hijackers could barely fly a sesna and that he wouldnt fly with him.” 20 people went to flight school. Just because one was a poor pilot didn’t meant they’d have to call the whole thing off. “pilots for 911 truth say you would need to be a an expert pilot to perform the spiral descent on the pentagon.” Pilots for 9/11 Truth has maybe 100 people. That’s an even worse percentage than Richard Gage’s architects and engineers. Still, they might be right about a spiral decent, so he terrorists were lucky they decided just to fly roughly straight in to the Pentagon weren’t they. Their approach was so bad that they destroyed things like lampposts and stuff around them. That was not a well flown plane. “the flight data recorder from the pentagon plane shows that, by two seperate readings, it was 200 metres up when it supposedly hit the lamposts.” I think those lampposts would beg to differ. Can you give me a source for this as I have not heard this claim before. “the plane would break apart before it would hit the building the way ’something’ did.” Please rephrase this sentence. I can’t quite understand what you mean. “where’s the cctv, it’s covered in it.” Did you try looking on youtube? Wikipedia even has an animated gif made up from the CCTV footage. “it had missile defences. maybe they hadnt tested them?” Missiles work differently to planes. Missiles can be fooled easily by using lasers, radar jammers and other technology. They don’t work on pilots. “the cctv of one hijacker has two different time-stamps.” This is quite amusing footage from a failed jewelry store robbery: http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1920111 You may notice that the timestamps are different, probably due to human error. Doesn’t mean that a couple of idiots tried to rob a jewelry store. “patriotsquestion911.com has a massive list of senior military and other highly qualified people who question the oct to varying degrees.” So, don’t trust civil servants and government officials when they disagree with you, but the second anyone does, put them up on a website? Plus, quite a few of the people listed do not actually support the 9/11 truth movement, they’ve just had quotes taken out of context that seem to support your beliefs. Need I go on? Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

12. Loster Posted: Sep 2nd, 2009 at 2:20 pm

    Subject X: Can you perhaps explain why “civilian air liners travelling at 550 mph at 700 feet altitude” is so unbelievable? The rest of your post contains not claims, so I have no reason to ask anything else of you, though I will say I got a bit of a chuckle at the idea of “the three main ‘Corporate Fascist’ Political Parties in the U.K.” when it’s the ‘Actually Fascist’ political parties who are on the rise. Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

13. peace Posted: Sep 2nd, 2009 at 3:54 pm

    Loster, i notice you dont address any of the points i made. actually, fascism is the merger of corporations and state and that’s what we’ve got. have you seen ‘the corporation’? it’s a non conspiracy doc with lots of prominent people including chomsky. the fasces (fascist symbol) can be seen in the US congress or senate (i forget which). nobody is more enslaved than someone who falsely believes they are free. you are free to do what they tell you. earn & spend. Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

14. peace Posted: Sep 2nd, 2009 at 3:59 pm

    let me reiterate one point. ‘the company which removed the rubble on 911 and also demolished what was left of the oklahoma fbi building was ‘controlled demolition inc’. just a coincidence of course. Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

15. Ron Posted: Sep 2nd, 2009 at 6:57 pm

    Loster, some of your points here suggest to me that you have not read much from our side, but a fair amount of skewed debunking material. In fact you don’t really have the official side straight either. For example you’re still under the impression that falling debris had anything to do with WTC7’s collapse when even NIST themselves have repudiated this. You’re in basic factual error in too many ways to make a debate time well spent. You seem to be unaware that kerosene and office materials can’t melt steel or that even FEMA and many expert witnesses documented it. Rather than spoon feeding you, you’ll find this information easily if you look for it. You don’t have to rely on interpreting dodgy photos. Your whole diatribe is a facetious mess brother. Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

16. Loster Posted: Sep 2nd, 2009 at 7:49 pm

    Peace: Did you read my long post where I addressed all your points. I notice you haven’t cleared up the points where I asked for some clarification. Yes, I have seen the Corporation. I have also seen Zeitgeist, Loose Change and I just finished watching Blueprint for Truth. While I am impressed with their polish and zeal, the actual content leaves a lot to be desired. They’re more like Fahrenheit 911 and Expelled than An Inconvenient Truth; quite happy to feed you 99% of what you need to know and leave out that one important tidbit that would turn the entire thing around. The Fasces is found on a lot of things. It’s been around much longer than fascism. “‘the company which removed the rubble on 911 and also demolished what was left of the oklahoma fbi building was ‘controlled demolition inc’. just a coincidence of course.” Are you seriously suggesting that 60 years ago, just in case they’d ever need to secretly destroy buildings on American soil and then dispose of the remains, the US government (or whoever you think is in charge, I haven’t figured that out yet) founded a publicly traded company, and decided that the best name for this covert company, in order to avoid suspicion, would be “Controlled Demolition Inc.”? And these same geniuses pulled off numerous conspiracies throughout the years? You have way too much faith in people. Ron: Hey look, a video on the official NIST website explaining why WTC 7 collapsed, including a little bit on how falling debris started the fires. But you are correct that I did not make that clear in my original post. The melted steel claims started due to a misquotation of Vincent Dunn. There was melted material at ground zero, but it was not confirmed to be steel. As has been stated numerous times, the steel did not have to melt for the towers to collapse, they merely had to weaken. The only mention of molten material from FEMA was of aluminium from the plane embedded in WTC 1. http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian2/wtc/WTC_ch2.htm (Section 2.2.2.3) You claim I have made basic factual errors and I concede that occasionally I do misread or misinterpret something, as I am only human. If you see any, please inform me. Though, your incorrect points about FEMA and NIST here suggest to me that you have not read much from our side, but a fair amount of skewered, quote mined, poorly researched and generally falsified material. Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

17. Loster Posted: Sep 2nd, 2009 at 7:50 pm

    Whoops, I forgot to link to the video on the NIST site. Silly me. http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/wtc_videos/wtc_videos.html Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

18. Mick Meaney Posted: Sep 2nd, 2009 at 8:50 pm

    Loster, you gotta become a mod on this site man. If you join the forum I’ll edit youtr account to mod settings, that is if you got the time to mod here. Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

19. Loster Posted: Sep 2nd, 2009 at 9:46 pm

    Mick: I was planning on creating an account and lurking around the forums for a while. I’d be happy to moderate, though I will be on holiday for a few days and then college starts on the 14th so I can’t promise I’ll be checking the forums 24/7 or frequently posting responses the same length as the ones above. I assume you can see the email address I use when posting these comments, so feel free to contact me using that. Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

20. Subject X Posted: Sep 2nd, 2009 at 9:47 pm

    Let’s look at it like this; If an air liner has a max speed of 568 mph (mach .86) @ 35,000 feet then we can assume that it is using its Engines to the maximum thrust (as there is no reason to assign larger engines to a commercially viable vehicle.). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_767 This vehicle or moving object will reach an equilibrium when its Maximum thrust force is equalled by the same drag force. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drag_equation It is the case that the max speed of this vehicles is limited (by automation) to the given value because of the structural strength of the air frame as newer designs of similar commercially viable air liners can fly at 595 mph (mach .9) @ 35,000 feet but again there is no reason to fit more powerful engines as the 767/200 or other air liners are used as a commercially viable vehicle. (we shall return to air frames later.). Now the drag of a body in air (or any other supercritical fluid/gas) is DIRECTLY PROPORTIONAL to the DENSITY of the fluid it is travelling through and the density is also DIRECTLY PROPORTIONAL to the pressure of the same gas at constant temperature. Any temperature corrections are also directly proportional but remember the corrections are relative in degrees of KELVIN from absolute zero (ideal gas laws.). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drag_(physics) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideal_gas_laws We can now determine a ratio of density @ 35,000 feet to that at ground level or 700 feet of altitude. From; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_pressure Height Above Sea Level Static Pressure Standard Temperature (K) Temperature Lapse Rate m) (ft) (pascals) (inHg) (K/m) (K/ft) 0 0 0 101325 29.92126 288.15 -0.0065 -0.0019812 1 11,000 36,089 22632 6.683245 216.65 0.0 0.0 2 20,000 65,617 5474 1.616734 216.65 0.001 0.0003048 3 32,000 104,987 868 0.2563258 228.65 0.0028 0.00085344 4 47,000 154,199 110 0.0327506 270.65 0.0 0.0 5 51,000 167,323 66 0.01976704 270.65 -0.0028 -0.00085344 6 71,000 232,940 4 0.00116833 214.65 -0.002 -0.0006097 Air pressure at ground level = 101325 pascals Air pressure at 36,089 feet =22632 pascals Temperature at ground level = 288.15 Kelvin Temperature at 36,089 feet = 216.65 Kelvin So the pressure ratio is 101325/22632 = 4.477 And the temperature correction is 216.65/288.15 = 0.752. As the cooler air is the MORE dense. And again DENSITY is DIRECTLY PROPORTIONAL to PRESSURE at constant TEMPERATURE. So 4,477 x 0.752 = 3.366. (0.752 is the temperature correction factor.) This value of 3.366 is the DENSITY RATIO between ground level and 36,089 feet. Now from; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Density_of_air Air density at ground level equates to 1.2 kg/m cubed. Then air at 36,089 feet is 1.2kg/m cubed divided by 3.366 = .3565 kg/m cubed. We still have a discrepancy of 1,089 feet + 700 feet = 1789 feet so although it is not pedantically correct we can multiply this out to get the 35,000 feet figure. 3.366 x (36,089 - 1789)/36,089 = 3.2. [ (36,089-1789)/35,000 = .95 ] =discrepancy correction factor. So now we have established a DENSITY RATIO of 3.2 between 700 feet and 35,000 feet of Earth atmosphere. Good stuff me thinks. So if a moving object @ 35,000 feet requires two engines to maintain a speed of 568 mph then according to our calculations it will need a combination of 3.2 times two engines to develop the required THRUST to do the same at 700 feet. This gives us a number of 6.4 engines or of that equivalent magnitude to accomplish the debated events of Flight UA175. I am of the opinion that the corporate media is leading us astray somewhat. I personally have not ever been a fanatic of ‘trial by television’. There will always be the deluge of ’second guessers’ who will whine on about the 6 degrees of incline that was portrayed by the cartoons/graphics on that fateful day but this depends on which broadcast one was watching. It is not hard to calculate that theoretically one would need an incline of 85 degrees to accomplish such speed at 700 feet due to the resistance of drag but today we will stick to the elementary school sums. Just look at it like this, if one is driving ones car on the level and one then descends an incline of 6 degrees one does not get the feeling of a motive force of 3.2 times the prior motive force does one? Now then, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drag_equation Lets cut to the chase, If the drag force is DIRECTLY PROPORTIONAL to the velocity squared, we can work out the theoretical speed at 700 feet given the same effective thrust from 35000 feet. We can all agree that the square root of 3.2 is 1.788, so a body travelling at 568 mph will have the capability of travelling at 568/1.788 mph at 700 feet. This gives us 568/1.788 = 318 mph at 700 feet. Or if you like the mach 0.9 figure; speed of sound at 35,000 feet = 660 mph, so 660mph x 0.9 = 594 mph this will give us ; 594/1.788 = 332 mph @ 700 feet. This works both ways ; If the jet liner could travel at 590 mph @ 700 feet (F.E.M.A.’s figure not mine) then it would develop enough thrust to attain a speed of 590 mph x 1.788 = 1,055 mph at 35,000 feet. 1,055 mph !!!! surely a supersonic 767/200. Me thinks not on this one. We can also evaluate what is known as the ‘EQUIVALENT AIR SPEED INDICATOR’. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airspeed_indicator This instrument or meter gives the true air speed at ground level and the equivalent air speed through all altitudes. This instrument or meter is important not only for the ‘Stall Speed’ but also for the ‘DO NOT EXCEED SPEED’ and is effective at all altitudes. On modern Jet liners the DO NOT EXCEED SPEED is monitored by the ‘MACH METER’ at altitude we know but they all have the equivalent air speed indicator for the stall speed. These meters do not meter more than 450 mph because they dont get any where near to this figure in any case. (except for Hollywood). Again a jet liner travelling at 550 mph at 35,000 feet will register 550/1.788 = 308 mph on the same meter. Its not too difficult is it. And so to top out at 35,000 feet one would have to be making 805 mph. 450 x 1.788 = 805 mph. The authorities do not want any nosey parkers seeing this for them selves on civilian flights so the cabin doors have to be locked closed. Now then back to the air frame structure and strength. You may do your own research on this by examining the phenomenon of ‘FLUTTER’. Google it, You tube it or read about it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flutter_(aircraft)#Flutter It is all to do with the ‘TORTIONAL resistance of structure’, it is why your bones are round and hollow (See nature had this figured out millions of years ago) it is also the phenomenon that destroyed the ‘Tacoma narrows bridge’. this is why we now build Bridges or the main girders of ‘Box Section’ as opposed to open section girders. This is well known by aircraft design engineers, if you fix, for example the end of a ‘hacksaw blade’ and then try to bend it along its stiffer axis eventually it will start to ‘buckle’. Now if you imagine an aircraft wing doing the same the buckling will offer resistance to the air flow thus buckling it in the opposite direction. This will increase until the wing fails or is ripped from the main fuselage. So now you know why the equivalent air speed indicator is so important, not only for the stall speed but also the do not exceed speed. Do not worry, air frame designers are well aware of this and all is in hand. As we know no person died whilst taking a flight on 9/11, they may have been disappeared or paid off. The UA175 was identified by the tail numbers some 4 months after the event by a group of plane spotters. The reality is that you have more chance of being killed in a plane crash than Moses Obama making a difference to the World, so with this thought in your mind I think you will sleep soundly. P.S. Thanks for asking Loster, by the way it is racism that is on the increase, fascism has been with little england for centuries. latin—-fas—-divine law or gods law. ——–jus—-man’s law or common law. from fas we get fascism and from jus we get justise. Rember, Benito said that we should not call it fascism we should call it corporatism. benito’s words not mine. Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

21. Ron Posted: Sep 2nd, 2009 at 10:13 pm

    ‘The melted steel claims started due to a misquotation of Vincent Dunn. There was melted material at ground zero, but it was not confirmed to be steel. As has been stated numerous times, the steel did not have to melt for the towers to collapse, they merely had to weaken. The only mention of molten material from FEMA was of aluminium from the plane embedded in WTC 1.’ Sorry but you’re dead wrong. So predictable. Leslie Robertson himself, the WTC structural engineer described molten steel as well as many others qualified to recognise what they saw: http://www.historycommons.org/entity.jsp?entity=leslie_robertson. This is not a comprehensive list btw. Fortunately we don’t have to rely on eyewitnesses though because Appendix C of the FEMA report conducted preliminary testing of the few steel remains from building 7 and discovered ‘intergranular melting’ of steel.(their own words. FEMA asked NIST to do further tests to establish how this might have happened but NIST flushed it down the memory hole) http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/metallurgy/index.html So, you’re flat wrong that I made a false claim about FEMA? And NIST?. I made no false claim about them. You even conceded that NIST’s explanation for the collapse is solely fire based so wtf? This is why I don’t debate extensively with people like you any more. A 5 second google search would have confirmed what I claimed. Furthermore previously molten iron droplets were discovered by the US Geological Survey and the RJ Lee company. The report was obtained under FOIA. http://www.journalof911studies.com/articles/WTCHighTemp2.pdf Yes I’m well aware of NIST’s black box tweaked computer simulation of the collapses. They have conceded free fall acceleration for 2.25 seconds or over 100 feet of its collapse. This is strictly impossible and defies the law of conservation of momentum. Once this is more widely known it’s completely over for the official story. NIST’s model is ridiculous in so many ways. Firstly just look at the graphic reenactment. It’s so far removed from observable reality in the way the external walls collapse it isn’t funny. Did you know that NIST didn’t factor for thermal conductivity in modelling their ‘dislodged beam’ brought down a skyscraper theory? If you really want to challenge your beliefs you will find that the NIST reports are thoroughly unscientific, although voluminous in all the wrong places. They stopped their analysis at ‘collapse initiation’ on the twin towers for crying out loud and for the rest deferred to a back of the envelope paper written by Bazant/ Zhou TWO DAYS after 9/11. Their model is provably false as their ’sledge hammer’or ‘pile driver’ disintegarted in mid air before it could exert the uniform transfer of momentum their model requires for that to be possible. I have certainly pored through all the debunking material and it’s just bunk at the end of the day. Good night Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

22. peace Posted: Sep 3rd, 2009 at 2:15 pm

    thanks for the extensive reply Loster. i didnt see it either because it’s the same ending or it hadnt gone through yet. i’ll work on a reply now. two other points: the planes were at 20% capacity which is well below average. at least one had mainly miliary personel. the credentials of the commission are questionable. i think at least one had links to blackwater, which has done fairly well from the war of terror. they tried to appoint kissinger until he refused to reveal his business connections. is there anyone who trusts him? Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

23. peace Posted: Sep 3rd, 2009 at 3:59 pm

    banks create money out of thin air by lending money they dont have. it’s called fractional reserve banking. and this economic crash is engineered like so many before it to further consolidate the real wealth in the hands of a few. if you think this wrong, how is money created and what is it that banks lend? is fractional reserve banking a myth and if so, what is the system they use? norad did track those jets because there’s an official recording between faa & norad. and what about missiles launched from within the US? dont tell me the world’s most sophisticated military was too stupid to expect any domestic threat. although they’ve done a marvellous job of acting stupid, the military is not staffed by people with the same intellect as gwbush. although, he’s not as stupid as he acts. modern steel buildings do not fall straight down at near free-fall speed. actually the towers were designed to withstand multiple air plane hits, albeit from a slightly smaller but faster plane. the designer said it would be like a pencil in a mosquito screen/mesh. ie. it would puncture but hardly affect the structural integrity. he died on 911. another coincidence, nothing to worry about. of course they had to be designed to take planes into account. they’re like mountains! what physics qualifications do you have? i have none but wtc7 fell in about 7 seconds!! how i wish i had enough money to build a replica and fly a plane into it and let it burn for days. i bet my life it wouldnt fall down. buildings have burnt for days without any collapse. watch any CD video, they always dip to make sure they fall in on themselves. they also wrap sheets around to keep the debris and dust from going too far. obviously this was impossible on 911. i think we need to get video of buildings collapsing and CDs and compare them. i wish fred dibnah was still alive. comparing cards to steel & concrete is not really sensible. but if we use your analogy, i dont believe any building would fall at that speed without explosives. the collapse is pretty fast, certainly under 11-12secs. whilst not quite free-fall it’s pretty close. there is no way on earth that is possible without explosives. the nist(?) computer simulation of a pancake collapse would have taken much longer, if allowed to complete. they only show a few floors. i’ve seen pictures of the towers during construction. they were a mesh of steel. that’s what i mean by over-engineered. nearly all supports would have had a backup. think of the weight the bottom sections had to hold. there’s no way on earth they could be destroyed without explosives. ‘poor plumbing’ brought down wtc7. i’m beginning to think you’re having a laugh. so with wtc1&2 it was planes & fire. with wtc7 it was debris & fire. no modern steel building has fallen due to fire. some have burned for days and after 911, people thought some buildings that caught fire would fall, but they didnt. wtc7 had no gas supply to make the building safe from gas explosions. it means they paid extra attention to making the building ultra-safe. firefighters saw molten steel, running like rivers under the debri. it melted their boots. molten plastic looks nothing like molten steel which glows somewhere between red & white hot. nasa IR photos show temperatures were 1000s of degrees for weeks afterwards. i can dig out sources if i must, but you really should research yourself. the nano thermite which was used in this CD would produce liquid steel. no office fire will melt steel even with jet fuel added. and those fires were inefficient as testified by the black smoke. oh dear this is getting silly. of course a blacksmith’s furnace & bellows can heat steel enough to work it. i doubt he’d try to melt it though. swords arent poured into a mold, they are beaten out and folded numerous times to make them strong enough. plastics, fabric & even the mythical jet fuel dont fuel a fire hot enough to melt steel. right, let’s take your pancake hypothesis. there’s no way all that can happen in under 12secs. show me a proper computer simulation from a science lab. surely a uni somewhere must have done one by now. i’ll get a source for the peer reviewed nanothermite paper. the anthrax was at least 100 times finer than anything known outside the military. you would need very hitech labs with proper contamination chambers and air locks to make or handle that stuff. what evidence do you have that bush was ever in charge? surely the binladens would have been sent to guantanamo? especially when even 15yr old boys & tourists with nothing to do with it were sent there. i dont agree blueprint has been debunked. show me a significant number of architects or engineers who have debunked it. richard gage is a respected architect and has designed some very big buildings. why would he risk his reputation? likewise those architects & engineers that support him, why would they risk the reputations and careers? as for bush on 911, surely they’d have somewhere far safer than a school where anyone could know where he was? you paint a picture of complete incompetance that’s just not true. many of these people are very bright indeed otherwise they’d hardly be the world’s only ’super power’. re:william rodriguez, which claims are you questioning? why would he lie? if you’re going to say it was for money, then why not take the government job he was offered and why did he have to sleep in his car for sometime afterwards? he was a decorated hero and welcomed as such around the world because he was insanely brave and went back into the building several times to save hundreds of people. he had the only master key available. many fire doors were locked to prevent a chimney effect in the event of fire. i suppose i’ll have to look at the nist reports. although i saw a press conference with the lead investigator and he was very shifty and raised a cheap laugh instead of addressing the question properly. as you say there were many mistakes on 911, was anyone disciplined or demoted? i think you’ll find many were promoted instead. that’s just nuts. re: investigation & cost, i’ll source the taxpayer cost of the lewinsky scandal. and of course money means a great deal to most people and it still has to be accounted for at most levels of government. i’ll get the source for the fire magasine. if the VP was warned that a plane was heading for the pentagon why on earth wouldnt it be shot down and the pentagon evacuated. neither of which happened. are you really comparing a swat officer with the pentagon and a tank with a plane? have you heard of missile defence. the pentagon had missile defence which would shoot down anything with the pentagon in it’s sights. i didnt say rumsfeld was in on it, although he probably was. the pentagon is a massive building and he said he felt ‘a jarring thing’. this demonstrates how vast that building is. neither he nor general myers, who was with him i think, were told of any plane impacts. there’s nothing in a plane which would penetrate three thick concrete rings of the pentagon. and certainly not the cockpit. i’ll dig out the national geographic doc to confirm. i’ve already explained why money matters at the public level. i’ll try to dig out the sources. the rubbish pilot was said to have flown one of the planes on 911. how many architects & engineers would it take to convince you? i’ll get you the data recorder source. i dont believe a plane hit the pentagon as i’ve seen no conclusive evidence. if the data recorder is correct, the plane would have broken apart before it could achieve the collision in the OCT. i think the poor quality cctv of the pentagon impact is from the gas station across the road? where’s the footage from the hi quality cams around the building? are you saying the pentagon had no defense against a plane they knew about when 50 miles away? are you also saying they had no way to intercept a missile headed for the pentagon? who are you saying made a mistake with the cctv timestamp? are you comparing a jewelry raid with 911? i dont generally trust government officials and certainly dont need them to tell me something is very wrong with 911. but when many of them question 911, surely even people who find a government conspiracy hard to swallow must have second thoughts? phew! Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

24. peace Posted: Sep 3rd, 2009 at 4:46 pm

    just to add that there’s been no proper flight crash investigations and the faa status of the planes is not consistant with crashes. also, where are the flight data recorders for all the planes? there’s 2 on each and they’re virtually indestructable. especially when a hijacker passport supposedly survived intact! Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

25. peace Posted: Sep 3rd, 2009 at 8:30 pm

    fyi: the science in al gore’s inconvenient truth have been widely discredited. his graphs are skewed for a start and then he flys around promoting it. and vague intangible terms like ‘global warming’ and ‘climate change’ are now widely used as opposed to pollution, deforestation, desertification and environmental destruction. globes warm and cool, climates change, that’s what they do. eco bulbs which are now being rammed down our throats along with wood paper, cotton, plastics and oil. what action has been taken to tackle corporate waste? the plastic and food waste, car use and corporate energy use is obscene. many offices are still lit all night and i’m sure many computers & psus are left on overnight. it’s just nuts and we need to stop now! Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

26. peace Posted: Sep 4th, 2009 at 3:22 am

    in any crime one must ask ‘qui bono’ or who benefits? you can also follow the money. who benefited from 911? was it the taliban,alqeada,afghanistan,sadam,iraq or: the crooks who run america from behind the federal reserve. those seeking global domination in the form of world bank, imf, UN, WHO, cfr, trilateral commission, RIIA, etc,etc. military, haliburton, blackwater, bae, lockheed martin, carlyle, bechtel, pentagon, cia, fbi, nsa, mi5, etc,etc,etc,etc. larry silverstein who collected twice (2 planes) totalling $7,000,000,000 on an insurance policy taken out just prior to 911. he’d recently purchased the entire site after several applications for demolition, due to asbestos, were declined. Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

27. pingback: Posted: Sep 6th, 2009 at 5:00 am

    Ancient Astronaut Theory » Blog Archive » Stop the War Coalition: Conspiracy Groups Distraction At Best … [...] Read the rest… [...] Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

28. Dr. F Posted: Sep 8th, 2009 at 11:34 pm

    Who is this ridiculous creature, named “Loster”? Drop the “t” and maybe we have some accuracy for a (loose) change, pardon the pun. Mr. Los(t)er is a tremendous text book example of those quasi-intelligent North Americans who watch a little too much TV, and have bitten the bait, hook, line, and sinker of the “official version of everything”. And once within the “majority view”, feels very comfortable and safe, which is then just re-enforced and pandered to by just about everything on said TV and in mainstream print every second of every day. This has traditionally been labelled propaganda and/or misdirection and/or distraction and/or psy-ops and/or cover-ups, and it really does fool most of the people most of the time, which leads to a very powerful form of brainwashing, which is then automatically kept in check by the tremendous pain / confusion / anxiety that a phenomina called “cognitive dissonance” creates when said individuals come face to face with reasonable and sensible information which contradicts their engrained and dogmatic “World view”. These people are also called “sheeple” and represent about 90% (or more) of the North American population, poor creatures. Thus, Los(t)er is a sheep and cares very, very, much about maintaining status quo, and vitually cares nothing about the truth, regardless of how reasonable and sensible, and regardless of any proof, or any evidence, or any eye witness, or any common sense. Period. It just doesn’t matter with most sheeple, and one can get a sense of Los(t)er with his extremely long-winded replies that he is more desperate than most to preserve his World view. It would be laughable if it wasn’t so pathetic, and if the “stakes” were not so high, especially at this time in history. I was similar to Los(t)er about 10 years ago, thanks to my upper middle class family, my 1st class education / indocternation, and the fact that I seemed to be BENEFITTING FROM THE STATUS QUO. A Mercedes and a Rolex??? I seemed to be rewarded for all my arrogance, and apathy, and general self satisfaction of ALWAYS BEING RIGHT, so I cruised along for years, and sometimes even snickered at those crazy “conspiracy theorists”. But, I guess somewhere deep down inside, the truth mattered to my bloated carcass, and I went through 2 big bouts of cognitive dissonance, which really hurt; my life really got upended; everything changed and at times it was excruciating. But, now I see the World more as it is, which is ugly, but it must be exposed to the light before it can all be changed. Again, the Truth matters; it always has, and it always will, but it is often a very rare commodity and never within the majority view in any given culture or in any era. The controlling Elite have always done a great job of ensuring it, but now we have the internet…. Woops. So people, we don’t need Loster; we don’t need to convince him as he is an entrenched sheeple and just not worthy of our efforts, at least not yet. It would appear it is not his time to go down the rabbit hole. As Morpheus in The Matrix said, (paraphrase) “These people all around you are so hopelessly dependent on the System that they will actually fight to preserve it, and until we can defeat the Matrix, those good people will also be our enemies.” Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

29. Victor Posted: Sep 13th, 2009 at 3:41 am

    I have been given a link to a very good vid which sets out how things really are and is relevant to this particular discussion, please give this video your valuable time as I guarantee you will not be disappointed. The Calling - Full HD Version http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-3765505738069202111&hl=en# Loster, from my research perspective, most of what these chaps are saying is sound & of good judgement, however I have not had time to read every post unfortunately. What is in this video is what is going on. At the beginning for the first few minutes it is slow to start so please be patient. By the time you have watched this you will understand how we are being systematically shafted on every level. Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

30. Victor Posted: Oct 8th, 2009 at 2:16 am

    here is the vid: http://www.rinf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12077 Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this

31. tim Posted: Dec 4th, 2009 at 1:34 pm

    hello, re: loster and co. arguing about all the details of 9-11. Bear in mind that the “9-11 truth movement” is controlled opposition which positively encourages absolutely all conspiracy theories and debates on the minutest details of 9-11. WHat they neglect to offer is the truth, that 9-11 is principally an event of Television Fakery!! (see the film September Clues by SImon Shack) Once this understood, most of the debates on the physics of what you see on the screen fall away. You are left asking, What other events are nothing but TV fakery? Is seeing believing? Reply | Quote selected text | Link to this