There are many thoughtful comments. People are coming out fighting for the truth! Keep it up everyone!
US News and World Report 911 hit piece backfires against the Propagandists 
http://digg.com/politics/US_News_and_World_Report_911_hit_piece_backfiresMay 29, 2009 – 10:53 am
No Gravatar
U.S. News and World Report ran an article on May 26th entitled “The Inner Worlds of Conspiracy Believers”]“The Inner Worlds of Conspiracy Believers”
http://www.usnews.com/articles/science/2009/05/26/the-inner-worlds-of-conspiracy-believers.html. The intention was to demonize the truth/freedom movement by implying that anyone who doesn’t believe the official story of 911 or anyone who mistrusts the government all-together is mentally ill. But the real story isn’t the obvious moronic drivel concocted by this yellow-journalistic rag of disinformation, it is the collection of well-informed comments left on their site…. 147 so far, the overwhelming majority of which are critical of the official conspiracy theory and also of this collection of nonsense that tries to pass itself off as news. Here are the comments…
9/11
Blueprint
Anyone who believes in the scientific
method owes it to themselves to see, once and for all, that the 9/11 collapse
of the WTC buildings 1, 2 & 7 were all done by explosives. Watch "9/11
Blueprint" found at
http://www.ae911truth.org or on YouTube searching for
the video title. From there, it’s not hard to figure out who stood to gain, and
what they had to lose by doing it. I take GREAT offense to this report. Just
because people question an "official" story doesn’t make them
mentally ill. Everyone around the entire world should be demanding the TRUTH be
told about 9/11.
C.
C. of AZ
May 29, 2009 03:00:59 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
But
Popular Mechanics would never lie!?!?
I thought Popular Mechanics were the
final authority! set the record straight by pretending to debunk all of our
questions!
They are obviously paid off to lie and
divert us re: 9/11.
It’s amazing to hear social climber
types like Randi Rhodes use that pack of laughable lies as a legit debunking.
Have you heard about how some of the
NIST scientists who didn’t happen to check for nanothermite happen to be
pioneering experts in such high-tech paint-on explosives?
And how a Bush brother was in charge of
WTC security? Shhhh. don’t mention the Bushes are Nazis! That’s a conspiracy
theory, right?
Brian
of ME
May 29, 2009 01:16:05 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
But
Popular Mechanics would never lie!?!?
I thought Popular Mechanics were the
final authority! set the record straight by pretending to debunk all of our
questions!
They are obviously paid off to lie and
divert us re: 9/11.
It’s amazing to hear social climber
types like Randi Rhodes use that pack of laughable lies as a legit debunking.
Have you heard about how some of the
NIST scientists who didn’t happen to check for nanothermite happen to be
pioneering experts in such high-tech paint-on explosives?
And how a Bush brother was in charge of
WTC security? Shhhh. don’t mention the Bushes are Nazis! That’s a conspiracy
theory, right?
Brian
of ME
May 29, 2009 01:06:49 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
The
Facts are rather interesting.. try Them.
If US News would please stop pretending
we don’t know that the 9/11 commission was a sham, that the evidence doesn’t
point to some kind of inside job, etc. we’d all be better off.
It’s rather suspicious when people and
corporations are sooo sure there was no inside job. How are they so sure that
there wasn’t some mole that scheduled the wargames that day?
Stop kidding yourselves: 9/11 was
clearly covered up and Kean and Hamilton admit it in a New York Times op-ed.
Ignore the facts if you must, but you’re
not going to convince us that building 7 didn’t collapse that evening, that the
molten metal flowing from the towers wasn’t possible without high-tech
explosives.
We’ve got eyewitness testimony. See
Jason Bermas’ Fabled Enemies for a detailed look into the spy networks that
were involved. If only you had 1/10th the integrity of Jason Bermas.
Brian
of ME
May 29, 2009 00:54:44 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Admittedly
my second comment…
I first am inclined to applaud all of my
awakened like-minds for their intellect, competence, logic and articulation.
You, Americans, have proven to be a passionate group of free-thinkers and
truth-seekers. Now, before I gerund myself into a hole, I’ll make my point.
I would like to bring to all of your
attention the conspiracy the researchers supposedly concocted to prove that all
9/11 Truth believers subscribe to most any other conspiracy they hear. Here’s
the passage:
…"both psychologists, asked
volunteers about eight common conspiracy theories and one that researchers made
up: “The government is using mobile phone technology to track everyone all the
time.”
The only way to argue that this
conspiracy is "made up" by psychologists is the usage of vague,
general terms. "The government" is only applicable to the audience
who hears it. Also, not all people revere their nation’s government as the only
government anymore. Since the rising of the UN and EU, many people are apt to
refer to "the government" meaning any one or combination of various
groups with authority over that certain nation. The use of "mobile phone
technology" could potentially be an argument based on the technicality
that the technology used in mobile phones is not mobile phone technology
exclusively. Lastly, the ridiculous phrasing, "to track everyone all the
time" is far too general to expect a comprehensive response from a
layperson. Obviously, "the government" is NOT tracking
"everyone" nor are they doing it "all the time," largely
because not everyone even has a mobile phone. Even if they did not only would
it be pointless, but it would be far beyond the funding available at this
current state for a nation’s government — or even more absurd, an
international authority — to fund the tracking of everyone with a cell phone
24 hours a day. The intentional vagueness was a not-so-clever trick on the
author’s part.
Now, for my opinion:
I do believe that technology used in
mobile phones - namely, the widely-spreading and recently popular feature, the
GPS - may potentially be used to track individuals personal trends, habits, and
whereabouts. Cell phones without actual comprehensive GPS features have
previously been used to track callers in aid to bringing criminals to justice.
To suppose that "the government" will never use these devices to
track citizens’ actions is foolish. To do so would place far too much trust in
powerful people who express authority over large masses of people.
So, had these conspiring researchers
called MY home and spoke to ME, I would have been another statistic, as I would
have most likely heard the general terms used and immediately attached connotation,
resulting in my answer, "yes."
Take that.
Tiffany
Trouble of TX
May 29, 2009 00:21:05 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
I
Can’t Believe it!
Are there still people that believe the
outrageous "Official Story"?
Mike
Baldwin of CA
May 28, 2009 23:45:19 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Very
interesting article
Notice that the writer — and the
university researchers he cites — don’t include the government among those
alleging conspiracies. (Even though thousands of people in the U.S. alone are
charged with by prosecutors and indicted by grand juries for conspiracy every
year.) Only those alleging conspiratorial actions by governmental institutions
and the political establishment are rated "conspiracy believers."
Notice that the writer makes not even a
token attempt to evaluate the evidence of a single "conspiracy
theory." The reader is expected to assume that such theories are
self-evidently preposterous and unworthy of any consideration.
Notice further that the reader is
expected to assume that the only proper response to "conspiracy
believers" is to psychologize as to what motivates such perversity.
Notice that the author doesn’t provide
any specific quantification about the trick question that’s supposed to
demonstrate "conspiracy believers’" prejudiced thinking. For all we
know, "conspiracy believers" are only 2% likelier to buy the faked
conspiracy asked by the pollster, but, whatever the actual figure, we’re told
"that conspiracy believers displayed a greater propensity than
nonbelievers to jump to conclusions based on limited evidence."
Notice further that such "jump[ing]
to conclusions" is limited to those who disbelieve the government. No
evidence is provided as to whether non-"conspiracy believers"
"jump to conclusions based on limited evidence" when that limited
evidence is proclaimed by official sources.
Very, very interesting. Thanks, U.S.
News & World Report, for including this important article by a reporter for
Science News.
Randy
McCosker of CA
May 28, 2009 23:38:03 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Their
"Inner Worlds" . . .
Well Bruce, have you read all these
comments? It appears there is an abundance of examples into the "Inner
Worlds of Conspiracy Believers". Hundreds of them in fact.
I have to agree with Goertzel’s
assertion that the, "arguments advanced by them tell you more about the
believer than about the event”.
These so-called "conspiracy
theorists" seem to be completely rational, intelligent, thoughtful
Americans that share the common trait of using their own intelligence and
cognitive skill as opposed to blindly believing an anemic, commissioned report.
If you are attempting to develop the
argument that "displaying an inquisitive outlook" and questioning the
official government account of the crime of 9/11 is "psychologically"
equivalent to superstitious, paranormal-seeking skeptics, these hundreds of
response comments alone have most clearly destroyed any argument that your
pathetic article endeavored to make.
Rod
Tataryn of WA
May 28, 2009 22:32:07 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Red/Gray
Chips
PatrickSMcNally: "Well, cows don’t
contain large amounts of aluminum and iron rust, whereas the World Trade Center
did. The presence of thermite is automatic on those grounds alone. The issue of
nanothermite is simply about the actual size of the aluminum and iron rust
particles, which is a question of how far would things be expected to break
down amidst such a titanic collapse."
So these red/gray bi-layered chips come
from which parts of the World Trade Towers?
"The red material contains grains approximately
100 nm across which are largely iron oxide, while aluminum is contained in tiny
plate-like structures…The iron oxide and aluminum
are intimately mixed in the red
material."
"It is also shown that within the
red layer there is an intimate mixing of the Fe-rich grains and Al/Si
plate-like particles and that these particles are embedded in a carbon-rich
matrix."
Active Thermitic Material Discovered in
Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe
So how did the aluminum and iron become
bound in a carbon-rich matrix during the destruction of the towers?
Should we expect to find red/gray chips
after any building containing iron oxide and aluminum is destroyed?
The paper also notes, "No red/gray
chips having the characteristics delineated here were found in dust generated
by controlled demolition using conventional explosives and methods, for the
Stardust Resort & Casino in Las Vegas (demolished 13 March 2007) and the
Key Bank in Salt Lake City (demolished 18 August 2007)."
Active Thermitic Material Discovered in
Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe
tanabear
of NC
May 28, 2009 21:36:03 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Architects
& Engineers
Richard Gage of Architects &
Engineers for 9/11 Truth was on KMPH Fox 26’s "Great Day" morning
show. They show the collapse of Building 7 multiple times, from different
angles, including side by side with a controlled demolition. The hosts were
pretty rattled.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oO2yT0uBQbMEditors at US News & World Report
are now (further) exposed as traitors. They are accessories to the cover-up of
the crimes of 9/11
We will never forget
Arthur
Fischl of NY
May 28, 2009 20:39:13 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
"Top
military brass met to discuss what really happened on 9/11"
"those who met did not believe, in
whole or in part, the official line that 19 Arabs nationals armed with box
cutters hijacked four U.S. passenger planes and flew three of them into the
World Trade Center and Pentagon.
The officers included veterans of Marine
Corps Special Operations."
http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_4741.shtmlFank
of AL
May 28, 2009 19:47:40 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
This
is crazy.
The twin towers and Building 7 were
brought down by controlled demolition. You can see and hear the bombs going
off. You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to figure it out. All you need is
eyes and ears. The "official" 9/11 story is a farce and not even
worthy of a comic book.
maddog
of CA
May 28, 2009 19:05:16 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Patrick
Nanothermite is an engineered material,
it would not create itself just because aluminum and rust were in the building.
It would be just as intellectually dishonest to find a ream of paper at the
base of a fallen tree and chalk it up to the force of collapse acting on the
pulp.
BenF
of CA
May 28, 2009 18:22:21 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Concrete
slabs
Patrick
Take your own advice and look at the
pictures and videos of the debris pile. The vast majority of concrete floors
were pulverized. Govenor Pataki talks about it in this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDuBi8KyOhwChris
Sarns of CA
May 28, 2009 18:08:17 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Concrete
Slabs
Patrick, I have teken the time to
examine the remains of the buildings & looked at your link in your latest
post. I am unable to find any photos of reinforced concrete floor slabs or the
steel structures they were attached to. Do you have a link?
Shawn
of AZ
May 28, 2009 18:05:30 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Your
assumption only
> the process to change the form of
the concrete floors to a particulate solid (powder and ash)
Going from making a general comment
about the emergence of dust from the collapse to claiming that concrete floors
turned into powder and ash is a big leap. A significant proportion of the dust
would have been generated from plaster, which has a much lower strength than
concrete. But there were concrete slabs among the wreckage after the collapse,
which even played a role in saving some lives:
http://www.papba.org/media-archive/usa/usa-020609-debris.html"20 people survived the collapse,
amid steel beams, concrete slabs and other wreckage. They escaped death in the
most unlikely of ways and in the most surprising of places. Fourteen people
survived inside the remnants of a stairwell at the center of the north tower.
One man remembers falling from a 22nd floor stairwell in the north tower and
regaining consciousness atop the 12-story-deep pile of rubble at Ground Zero.
Two police officers, trapped in debris between the towers, barely survived both
collapses."
Take some time to investigate the
remains of the collapse and you should find that the majority of concrete in
the buildings was not by any means pulverized. That’s an illusion which is
created by the dust from gypsum boards and related materials disintegrating
very swiftly.
PatrickSMcNally
of FL
May 28, 2009 17:32:36 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Don’t
make me puke at you
That’s all I need to insure mental
health? Okay, I believe.
No wait. I don’t.
Okay, I do.
Don’t.
Do.
Unuh….
Frank
of AL
May 28, 2009 17:10:45 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Another
false rumor
> 2 white elephants that were costing
billions in asbestos abatement
The cost of asbestos clean-up for the
World Trade Center was estimated at around 200 million:
“The suit sought recovery of the Port
Authority’s huge expenses of removing asbestos from hundreds of properties ranging
from the enormous World Trade Center complex-which represented more than $200
million of the abatement costs-to bridge and tunnel toll booths.”
That comes from Port Authority of New
York & New Jersey et al. vs. Affiliated FM Insurance Co. et al., U.S.
District Court for the District of New Jersey, No. 91-cv-2907, and is cited
here:
http://www.newswithviews.com/Spingola/deanna39.htmThe outlook for property at the WTC had
actually been very good in the years before 911:
http://www.nytimes.com/1998/05/31/realestate/commercial-property-downtown-at-the-world-trade-center-things-are-looking-up.html?pagewanted=print"As the market for office space in
midtown has tightened and rental rates increased, tenants have been looking to
downtown as a cheaper alternative. Over the last year, those seeking large
blocks of space have been finding them at the trade center, which had many
vacancies as a result of the 1993 terrorist bombing and the shrinkage of the
financial industry in the early part of the decade… But as a result of the
last year’s work, Ms. Nanninga, said the complex is over 90 percent occupied
and expects to it reach the 95 percent mark by the end of the year. That, she
said, would be about as full as the center is likely to get, since there is almost
always someone moving in or out."
No signs of any white elephant there.
PatrickSMcNally
of FL
May 28, 2009 16:55:27 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
All
falling object take the path of least resistance
In the spirit of Richard Feyman’s (PhD
Cal Tech) demonstration to the world on how the “O-Ring” failure caused the
Shuttle to disintegrate before our eyes.
I simply take a 40 pound chunk of
concrete. We can see that it is concrete. I can drop it from a height of 3 feet
and it will make a noise when it hit’s the floor but it will not break apart.
It does not disintegrate to gravel much less powder or ash. We know that if it
drops from 100+ feet it will break into more pieces but still not powder or
ash. Now we also know that it will break apart ONLY upon impact with the ground
depending on the hardness of the ground. It may also break apart if it hits
another object which is stationary or moving slower than it is moving or is hit
by a object moving faster than it is moving but again it will not become powder
or ash.
Below are two simple physic’s
observations:
First; All falling objects take the path
of LEAST resistance, (therefore not the path of greatest resistance)
and
Second; To change a material, from its
solid state to a particulate solid state,
1) takes time
2) takes a process where the solid is
changed (crushed or ground)
3) takes energy.
Now let us apply the second of these
simple physics observation to the collapse/disintegration of either of the Twin
Towers in NYC on 9-11-01.
First: time - We know the collapse is
completed in less than 15 seconds and that almost immediately the powder,
“dust”, appeared and within a few seconds the powder and ash had engulfed the
building. So we know the time is less than 15 seconds for the production of the
powder and ash. We also know that some of the powder and ash was produced
within a second of the start of the collapse.
Second: the process to change the form
of the concrete floors to a particulate solid (powder and ash) - There seem to
be 3 categories of processes that could be used for this purpose 1) natural 2)
mechanical and 3) explosive. By a simple process of deduction we can rule out
natural processes because we know they can take hundreds of years just to
produce a very small change, except for volcanic action, earthquakes, and
massive movements of air or water none of which occurred in NYC on 9-11-01. We
will address the “massive” movement of the “top” if you are sure that such an
occurrence happened.
This leaves us with either a mechanical
process or an explosive one to produce the powder and ash. Again by using the
simple process of deduction we can eliminate the mechanical process because of
the time it take to crush and or grind big chunks of concrete just to gravel.
(Think stone crushers) The random movement of the collapse elements will
produce chunks but never powder and ash. With the simple elimination of the
mechanical process we are left with only the explosive process and we know that
the explosive process could do what we saw happen as each of the towers
collapsed in less than 15 seconds on the morning of 9-11-01 in NYC.
Just as the “O-Ring” material did not
expand when the clamp was removed because the elastic property of the “O-Ring”
material was affected by the cold there is no natural or mechanical processes,
that in less than 15 second can produce the particulate solids (powder and ash)
that we witnessed as each tower collapsed
You say that my conclusion is impossible
because no scientist from any of the major universities have made this simple
observation. I suggest to you that yes, they have all remained SILENT but there
SILENCE does not supported the “official” government story it just demonstrates
to the world how bankrupt our Universities are.
Now some are wondering why I included
the first observation. I did that because two noted engineers Bazant of
Northwestern University and Stephen of the Cambridge University UK have peer
reviewed papers published in the Journal of Engineering Mechanics. Therefore
this is TRUTH! The essence of these two papers is that the “top” of the
building crushed the building below and then the “top” proceeds to collapse
into it own pile of rubble . While there is considerable debate about what
happens at the “top” it seems that these learned men must have skipped 6th
grade science where we (USA) all learned that “All falling objects take the
path of least resistance” not the path of greatest resistance. Yes we must
APPLY what we know as we watch each tower collapse to come to an accurate
understanding of what happened in NYC on 9-11-01. The “tops” if they existed
and that is debatable MUST fall to the side. There are NO restraining
horizontal forces to “keep” the “top” on the top of the lower tower structure
as it falls supposedly crushing the strongest part of the building on its way
to the ground.
Explosives had to be used to cause each
of the Towers to collapse in the manner that we all have seen them collapse.
A simple image is a bus and a pickup
truck. The pickup truck runs into the front of the bus, but it does not destroy
the bus.
Conspiracy
Theories
The relentless rant "Conspiracy
Theory" means "Nut job" is propaganda. Your article is
propaganda. You are entrusted and protected by the first amendment to inform
us. You have not only failed to do your fiduciary duty, you have effectively
committed treason by aiding and abetting the real terrorists.
We will not forget.
The FBI has NOT charged OBL with 9/11
because there is NO hard evidence that he was involved.
Any crime planned and committed by two
or more people is a conspiracy.
"OBL and 19 hijackers did it."
is a "Conspiracy Theory"!
Therefore: We are a nation of "Nut
Jobs" because we all believe in conspiracies.
Chris
Sarns of CA
May 28, 2009 16:31:59 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Bad
compasison
> All it takes to KNOW something is
wrong with what the government told the citizens is five minutes of studying
any commercial aircraft accident that resulted in fatalities besides the four
airliners claimed to have "vaporized" on 9-11-01
Actually the planes are not claimed to
have vaporized. Photos of what is claimed to be wreckage of Flight 77, for
example, can be found here:
http://911myths.com/html/757_wreckage.htmlEven if one wishes to argue that the
above wreckage was somehow planted, it would still be wrong to say that the
planes are claimed to have vaporized. What is claimed is that we have photos of
the wreckage, as above.
Apart from that, one should be careful
of making too many comparisons with normal accidents. Most accidents occur when
the pilot is lost and flying at a slowed speed trying to determine their
location. The flights on 911 were deliberately rammed at high speed by whoever
was in control of them. That much is just a fact, even if you wish to postulate
that the planes were taken over by remote control or some other hypothesis.
Since the flights were deliberately rammed at high speed, it’s only logical to
expect that they will be much more fully shredded than occurs in a usual
accident.
PatrickSMcNally
of FL
May 28, 2009 16:23:26 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Not
true
> A Boeing 757 is said to crash into
the Pentagon yet leaves a round hole only 16 feet wide
You may be confusing the entry hole on
the exterior with the exit hole in the interior. Here are the actual dimensions
of impact damage:
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/analysis/conclusions/damage.html"Regions in which the Pentagon’s
west facade were punctured were restricted to the first and second floors. The
puncture on the second floor was about 18 feet wide and extended to the top of
the second floor, about 26 feet above the ground. The region with punctures on
the first floor was about 96 feet wide."
That’s a bit wider than you’re
suggesting.
PatrickSMcNally
of FL
May 28, 2009 16:05:27 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
LOL
So people who question governments are
now officially crazy because: "they display an inquisitive, imaginative outlook"
?
i wonder what people like Socrates and
Aristotle would of thought of this?
but what makes me laugh even more is
that people were actually paid to come up with this ‘research’ and article,
lol.
oh well, i guess it seems now that all
governments are infallable theres not much we lowly people can do anymore but
blindly accept the harsh realities of our eternal servitude.
Keltik
of XX
May 28, 2009 15:54:41 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
9/11
WAS CARRIED OUT BY THE MOSSAD AND US GOVT
I know the truth. they cannot suppress
it. 9/11 was an INSIDE JOB by the MOSSAD and elements of the U.S. Govt and
Military (NORAD).
screw these bastard liars who know we
are right!
Dale
A. Sender of OR
May 28, 2009 15:49:07 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Turbines
found
> The odds that an entire plane cold
vaporize in a Pennsylvanian field without one piece of aluminum for evidence?
They did find two turbines. This is the
statement by the mayor of the town of Shanksville, Ernie Stull:
http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,265160-5,00.html"They just found the two turbines
because, of course, they’re heavier and more massive than everything else. But
there was almost nothing left of the actual airplane. You can still find
plate-sized parts out there. And Neville from the farm over there found an
aluminum part from the airplane’s outside shell behind his barn that must’ve
been about 8 by 10 or even 8 by 12 feet."
There are more debris photos from Flight
93 here:
http://911myths.com/html/flight_93_photos.htmlPatrickSMcNally
of FL
May 28, 2009 15:42:58 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
A
Follow-up Challenge for Psychologists
So we now have psychologists studying
the traits of "conspiracy theorists". I would like to encourage
psychologists to do a follow-up study on the derogatory connotations associated
with the "conspiracy theorist" label and how it is being used today
(much the same as "f*ggot" and "n*gger" were used in the
past) to intimidate and marginalize a segment of the population. That anyone
who openly questions the official account of 9/11 is stamped with a demeaning
label is a significant injustice. The reasons for this bigoted behavior need to
be studied and understood fully if we are to move forward.
Concerned
Citizen of MA
May 28, 2009 15:33:31 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Aluminum
cows
> If you drop a cow from a building
you will not find cheeseburgers at the bottom.
Well, cows don’t contain large amounts
of aluminum and iron rust, whereas the World Trade Center did. The presence of
thermite is automatic on those grounds alone. The issue of nanothermite is
simply about the actual size of the aluminum and iron rust particles, which is
a question of how far would things be expected to break down amidst such a
titanic collapse. There’s room for some valid scientific questions there, but
it doesn’t sound promising as case for controlled demolition.
PatrickSMcNally
of FL
May 28, 2009 15:20:41 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
More
attempts at head-faking gobbledy gook.
"Dana of MI ( where the Muslims
hang out in numbers) thinks 9/11 was cooked up by Israel.Hmmmm Must either be
that Jew Bin Laden again taking credit for the work of others or Dana of Mi has
skipped her meds. Wonder which it is." (Jimmy of NV)
Your reading comprehension is poor. I
didn’t say Israel cooked up anything and the Bin Laden "taking
credit" tape is obviously a fake (please, watch it people and judge for
yourselves).
The sad but beautiful thing about 911 is
that the clear picture is there for anyone who has the courage to look and the
will to research. Then, comments designed to put the masses back to sleep can
be seen for what they are.
dana
of MI
May 28, 2009 15:10:00 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Conspiracy
theory
What are the odds that three buildings
within blocks of each other could fall straight down without damaging any other
building in NYC? The odds that an entire plane cold vaporize in a Pennsylvanian
field without one piece of aluminum for evidence?
The government funded both sides of the
Iran-Iraq war in the ’80s, and funded both the Taliban and the warlords in
Afghanistan. 10,500 people per day die in America per day;
isn’t it possible a one day bump in the
death pool on 9/11 was considered a small price for a $3 trillion dollar payday
for the military industrial complex?
Patrick…
If you drop a cow from a building you
will not find cheeseburgers at the bottom.
BenF
of CA
May 28, 2009 14:45:27 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Nanothermite
> You also don’t understand (or
pretend to not understand) the difference between thermite and nano-thermite.
The difference arises from the degree to
which the composition materials have been broken down. Thermite appears to be
typically composed of iron, especially iron rust, and aluminum. There was
plenty of each at the World Trade Center. What has distinguished nanothermite
from plain thermite is that the particles are much smaller, having been broken
down much further. A nanoparticle has a diameter of between one billionth to
ten millionths of a meter. So because things are more fully broken down the
mixture between aluminum and iron rust can occur at a more intense level. That
seems to reduce this to a debate over whether or not the crushing impacts of
the collapses coud be expected to cause a sufficient breakdown in composition
to give us some nanoparticles. While I’m not enough of an expert in physics to
make any detailed argument on this point, it does seem plausible that this is
how the matter will be slowly resolved. Devastating collapse impacts cause
major decompositions of structural materials into nanoparticles; significant
presence of aluminum and iron rust in the builings leads to the formation of
nanothermite. While it’s worth keeping an eye on any further scientific debates
which may occur around this issue, it doesn’t sound promising for proving the
controlled demolition thesis about the World Trade Center.
PatrickSMcNally
of FL
May 28, 2009 14:10:37 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Conspiracy
You people know where you can go, and
what you can do to yourselves when you get there. You cannot present one shred
of evidence to prove that the "official" conspiracy theory about 9/11
is true. It’s not up to people who can see what’s right in front of their face
to prove that the story is a lie, it’s up to jerkoffs and disinfo artists like
you to prove that it’s true, instead of engaging in the time-honored, 5th-grade
practice of printing ad hominem attacks.
If the U.S. federal government had to
take this idiotic fairy tale into a courtroom and deal with due process, they’d
be laughed into the street for trying to convince a jury that Arabs hijacked
planes, when they don’t have any video of them boarding any planes on that
date, or that a plane crash and a kerosene fire could muster up enough kinetic
energy to take down a 110-story steel-framed building and reduce it to rubble,
while vaporizing the over-engineered central cores, and pulverizing millions of
square feet of concrete into fine powder in mid-air.
Those twin towers didn’t collapse –
they were demolished, floor by floor, in mid-air, with high-grade explosives.
There are plenty of photos on the Internet that show beyond any doubt that
those columns were cut at 45-degree angles, a hallmark of controlled
demolition.
Anybody who could still believe this
crap after seven and a half years doesn’t have enough brains to bait a fish
hook, or to get a job as a spellchecker in an M&M factory.
Have a nice day.
Big
M of AZ
May 28, 2009 14:08:47 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Pay
No Attention To The Man Behind The Mirror!
The Zapruder film clearly shows JFK
taking a shot to the right front portion of his forehead which knocks his head
back violently.
A Boeing 757 is said to crash into the
Pentagon yet leaves a round hole only 16 feet wide, devoid of any evidence of a
757.
Watch the clip of Building 7 fall and
then tell me that’s footage of a building burning down!
I could go on and on for hours.
Why don’t you write an article about
people who will believe whatever they are told by those in positions of
authority?
That would make for an interesting read!
Robert
Calton of MO
May 28, 2009 13:45:11 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
common
theme in my group
Interesting that this author tries to
lump people who don’t believe the governments version of things as somehow
different than normal people.
In this case there is a right group and
a wrong group..
The people who don’t believe the
government version have obviously done their homework and have very credible
questions. Why would our government of the people not be willing to satisfy
these people with further inquiries?
Why would people write articles like
this instead of spending their time carefully refuting claims with clear data
and research?
I personally am not into this fray to a
great degree, however I am sure that Bldg 7 did not fall like it did because of
fire.. Why would it fall? I don’t know… But that alone gives me, a thinking
man, pause to start to question why the government would lie about that. As I
pause and look at both groups I see the government in a cover up mode and i see
them being secretive and dismissive..
If there is something that was covered
up or if there wasn’t we should open up the investigation, put on rational,
distinguished people who are on both sides of the debate. It would not be hard
to conclude if Bldg 7 were taken down or not. It would not be hard to know if
thermite was present at the site and if so why? and if not it should be clearly
refuted and the public should feel comfortable about the results.. Right now
I’m not..
The 9/11 truth group on the other hand
has some very compelling evidence, studies and backing of a broad and
accomplished group of people all asking the same questions… Why would the
government not want to answer them? I don’t know..
david
Joshua of IN
May 28, 2009 13:39:40 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Shilly
Shillerson von Shill
I tried refuting your evidence, but I
couldn’t. That damn building seven and the paper on nano-thermite!
So, I
resorted to ad hominem attacks, but that has failed me. So, as of late I’ve
been posing like I agree with you, but adding in there that I’m basing it all
on bogus theories like no planes and space beams. As you know, I have been
doing this to discredit you, but I have been failing at this as well. People
have become more discerning. I’ve also been posting that I am conflating all of
this with the Jews. This is to sicken you and your friends into thinking
anti-semitism is at the root of your questions about 911. This is failing too.
So, I hope you don’t mind that I am trying to make you look crazy. It worked in
the Soviet Union and to shut down abuse victims of the church so my hope is
that it’ll be a smash hit here as well. I’m keeping my fingers crossed. In the
meantime, whereever you cry out for truth, I’ll be there beside you also demanding
the truth, but adding a little something about the Chupa Cabra to try to make
you look like a fool. See, I’m a shill, paid to discredit you.
Sincerely,
Shilly Shillerson von Shill
----------------------------------------------------------------
There are plenty more comments like this to be found here:
http://www.usnews.com/articles/science/2009/05/26/the-inner-worlds-of-conspiracy-believers/comments/
