Thursday, 20 December 2018

Comments and debate over the 9.11 Skeptics versus logic and reason article

Comments and debate over the 9.11 Skeptics versus logic and reason article

I have copied comments from the original hit piece from the old site and put them below. Please add
new comments the usual way. You can read the article here.

136 Responses


  1. Paul says
    0
    1

    Rate This

    Non Existent Video
  2. Paddy says
    0
    2

    Rate This

    Can’t you accept islam is a screwed up bad heroin trip and Islamists are riding this funky story to the end!!!
    Remarkably, the 12th Imam theory plays heavily into the world’s current concerns with Iran. The Shiite Muslim President of Iran, Ahmadinejad, is deeply committed to the Islamic Messiah, al Mahdi. There have been many through the years claiming to be the Hidden Imam but Ahmadinejad believes he is yet to come. He claims that he is to personally prepare the world for the coming Mahdi. In order to save the world, it must be in a state of chaos and subjugation. Ahmadinejad claims he was “directed by Allah to pave the way for the glorious appearance of the Mahdi”. This apocalyptic directive includes some very scary proclamations.
    The 12th Imam: Why Is This Especially Important Now?
    While Christians look for Jesus’ 2nd coming, the Jews await the Messiah and Muslims await the 12th Imam. However, of the three, Allah’s designated Mahdi is the only one who demands a violent path to conquer the world. Mr. Ahmadinejad, and his cabinet, say they have a ‘signed contract’ with al Mahdi in which they pledge themselves to his work. What does this work involve? In light of concerns over Iran’s nuclear capabilities, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has reportedly stated Israel should be wiped off the map. He spoke to the United Nations in September ’05. During that speech he claims to have been in an aura of light and felt a change in the atmosphere during which time no one present could blink their eyes. Iran’s PM is also said to have spoken in apocalyptic terms and seems to relish conflict with the West whom he calls the Great Satan. This is while he proclaims he must prepare the world for the coming Mahdi by way of a world totally under Muslim control. He is working hard to bring about the world-wide horrors that must be in place for their al Mahdi to bring peace.
    This notion and goal, along with a violent hatred of infidels, America and Israel reminds us of Biblical prophecies of the coming anti-Christ and the pledges of millions to a deceiving False Messiah who will claim to bring peace. Could this 12th Imam Mahdi and his servant Ahmadinejad spark the last days of the coming true Savior?
  3. suz33 says
    1
    0

    Rate This

    Im responsible for sending “Paul” ( aka Johnny, aka Albury, ) here from this webpage.
    http://gothamist.com/2011/03/28/inside_the_911_wtc_building_7_truth.php
    He said he was interested in debating 9/11 and i remembered your site, so i sent him here.
    i was hoping for a slightly more verbose effort of a response to all the valid points you raised, than merely posting a much debunked fat fake bin laden video as a display of his self proclaimed superior debating style, but ive since found they/he is a pathetic shill, ( i posted more examples of his handy work at the above link ) so i wouldnt bother paying too much respect, if he does dare to ever continue here, which i really doubt, as your first response was probably way too much for him as it is. but like i said, too much respect and credibility paid to him than he deserves.
    Johnny has admitted to being Paul, but will probably deny being Albury, but if we follow the reasoning of debunkers, its ok for people to make allegations, with no evidence, ( official coincidence theory ) and then if others disagree, then they must prove to us that we are wrong. πŸ™‚
    anyway, i just wanted to apologise for sending such scum your way, ill try be more careful in future. thankyou.
    • darkpolitricks says
      0
      0

      Rate This

      That’s okay suz23, I just wish he had actually tried to answer the main question my article posed about a new investigation and WTC-7 rather than posting
      a discredited video of Bin Laden.
      I appreciated the backlinks though πŸ™‚ The more the better!
    • Paul says
      0
      1

      Rate This

      Suz, I’m getting tired of you repeatedly referring to me as “scum,” a “shill”, a “wanker” or any other of the dozen insults you attempt to hurl at me whenever I write any comment on that story. If you are not addressing the content of my posts, then please stop commenting on them. As you can clearly see, I go to the sources you link to, and am more than happy to have a reasonable debate. However, the personal attacks must stop.
      • suz33 says
        1
        0

        Rate This

        lol – youre offended are you? good, in that case you took my comments in the manner in which they were intended. Im sorry youre tiring of the fact that i call a spade a spade.. if you want me to stop calling you a wanker, then stop being one, and stop being a hypocrite, with your “holier than thou” attitude… youve made personal attacks yourself.
        now..youre a fan of political debate? πŸ™‚ thats nice.. but – the fact that all of building 7’s structural support was entirely wiped out across the entire building, over several floors, simultaneously, being the ONLY way for free fall acceleration to occur, is not politics.. its science. even bowing beams, sagging floors.. would have SOME resistance..
        a reasonable debate eh?
        a reasonable person wouldnt continue to ignore that fact, and keep referring to the nist report, as evidence, as that report is clealy incompatible with the laws of physics. ( one of the reasons a new debate is being called for, its kinda like pointing up at the sky continually as an argument against the fact that the sky is blue ) me, not being an expert, have concerns, and believe a new independent transparent investigation would be able to answer my concerns, not going round and round on ineternet forums with people like yourself and “Albury Smith 9/11”
        but maybe youll answer here the one question ive been asking of you from the start.
        what is it that offends you so much about people holding reasonable doubts regarding the official version of events, for reasons outlined in this article, but not limited to, and for the call for a new and independent investigation into the events of 9/11/01 by a duly constituted legal body with the authority to subpoena and require testimony under oath, and with authority to prosecute if criminal activity is discovered, so that the perpetrators of these crimes against humanity can at last be brought to justice.
        why do you argue so vociferously against such an investigation, that is so important to so many people all around the world? why are you so against it? is it the cost? please dont tell me thats it. not considering the cost of the wars in iraq, afghanista, pakistan, ( yes, youre in an another undeclared war there too ) all based on the continued lies of 9/11..
        not to mention the cost in human life, the hundreds of thousands of innocent men women and children who have lost their lives because of lies.. you cant put a dollar figure on that.
        considering the FBI doesnt even list OBL on its webpage as wanted in connection to 9/11, id have thought ten years later, its not unreasonable to want to get some answers.
        all ive ever stated, is my wish for a new investigation. why are you so against me for that? because i advocate for a new investigation, based on a laymans understanding of the facts presented above, you seem to expect me to have answers to every aspect of the events of that day, … and then if i cant answer all your questions, then i dont know what im talking about, and no investigation is needed. is that reasonable? logical? expecting me to be able to answer every engineering, scientific, philosophical detail of the events of that day? is it reasonable or logical to ignore the growing calls of many credible people worldwide simply by posting a link to popular mechanis or a 911myths website.. and say, there ya go? seriously?
        as well as not needing any help from me, i dont wish to deface this webmasters page with my particular commenting style ( borrowed it from the debunkers ) i also dont have the patience or the desire to continue here exactly what we have going elsewhere, but if you decide to finally answer my questions here, then good, but his will be my last comment here.
        ill be interested to see if you continue on the other page with your newfound polite respectful attitude.
        have a nice debate guys πŸ™‚
        • Paul says
          0
          1

          Rate This

          >ill be interested to see if you continue on the other page with your newfound polite respectful attitude.
          If I remember correctly, it was you who got banned for posting insults.
  4. darkpolitricks says
    1
    0

    Rate This

    Paddy, what has anything you just said have to do with the topic at hand e.g 9.11
    Even George Dubya Bush himself didn’t try and blame Iran for 9.11 even though that country was on his roadmap for Middle Eastern democracy / Israeli domination after Iraq & Syria.
    I also suggest you read this link about how the “wipe Israel off the map” comment was another mistranslation promoted by neo-con war mongers and their ilk which I guess you are a member of:
    You can also listen / read the full translation of his recent speech to the UN in which he questioned the official story of 9.11 here
    Did he really say anything that bad? anything that warranted the shit-storm it caused?
    As for Islam being a screwed up heroin trip I know that
    a) Islam is just another bull shit religion along with all the others
    b) Islam, Christianity and Judaism are just offshoots of the same Abrahamic faith (people of the book) and they have more in common than people would like you to believe.
    c) Every religion has it’s fair share of nutters. Many Christians only support Israel because they believe the Jews returning to the Holy Land (a self fulfilling prophecy by the way) is a sign that Jesus is about to return and either kill or convert them all.
    If it’s a choice between having a nutty Iranian president who believes in the 12th Imam or Sarah Palin / Mick Huckabee or any other right wing neo con Christian who believes in the 2nd coming of Christ and the end times with their hands on the largest nuclear weaponry arsenal in the world then I choose the former!
    If you have some relevant comments to make though I would like to hear them.
  5. Cindy says
    0
    0

    Rate This

    While I appreciate reading discussion of the WTC and 9/11, the real problem I have with the official version of 9/11 is that 10 foot by 20 foot hole in the Pentagon with no evidence of wing damage to the structure and no evidence of wings or engines in the wreckage. I’ve also been told by more than a few pilots that trying to fly a commercial jet airliner is like trying to land a 10 story building but, somehow, minimally trained pilots (who trained on Cessnas) were able to fly a plane at full speed at an elevation between 5-15 feet over the ground and into the Pentagon. That nice green grass at the base of the hole is disconcerting
  6. H4ngsi says
    0
    0

    Rate This

    id like to know some opinions on the following simple point. If any of the “conspiracy theories” are true or have an element of truth in them, then to their credit, the conspirators are a clever bunch. If thats the case, how can they overlook or misjudge any of the factors that are used to cast doubt on the official story on 9/11? ie how can these supposed highly intelligent and highly powerful people make it look like a controlled demolition with explosions before the collapse knowing full well some people will pick up on it? how can they over look the fact that we will question how 3 commercial jets evaded all security measures in one of the worlds busiest, supervised and secure airspaces? Surely they should/could have covered these bases? For the scale of the operation they conducted these amongst others, seem like amateur mistakes…..
    • wil says
      0
      0

      Rate This

      firstly, the belief in the truth and trust of the main stream media. if you tell a convincing lie enough, most under-thinking folks will believe it. secondly, brand any opposing view as “conspiracy”, and you immediately discredit any intelligent opposition to the official story. the winners write the history.
  7. H4ngsi says
    2
    0

    Rate This

    as a muslim, we all believe in the coming of the 12th imam. Shias and sunnis dont dispute this with each other. However, the coming of Imam Mahdi does not require the world to be in chaos and war. The prophecy merely suggests this will be the state of the world upon his arrival.
    This is just one of many prophecies. And as true believing muslims, we dont believe/agree in “self fulfilling” prophecies like the zionists do in their creation of israel in preperation for their messiah. (who by the way has come and gone – Jesus. We also believe Jesus was a prophet, but a human like us. Not an incarnation of God.) Fulfilling the prophecy ourselves would involve us breaking almost every single other aspect of our faith that makes us muslims. This would completely negate our intended goals! You cannot prepare for something good by doing something bad. Even if the goal is then acheived, you would put yourself out of the fold of any benefit.
  8. Albury says
    0
    0

    Rate This

    I think it’s time to investigate some of the bizarre and absurd claims made by Richard Gage, not the three WTC hi-rise collapses on 9/11, since they’ve already been thoroughly investigated by much more qualified, competent, and honest people. The NIST scientists and engineers were only able to time the top 18 stories, or 242′, of the collapse of WTC 7’s facade, and determined that it took 5.4 seconds, yet Gage and others in the 9/11 “truth movement” claim that the entire 610′ collapse only took ~6.5 seconds. Did the other 368′ fall in just over 1 second? How is he even able to give us a time to the nearest 1/10 of a second for the entire collapse when NIST couldn’t because buildings in the foreground blocked the view of video cameras?
    How can he claim that the towers nearly free fell when the loose, airborne debris from their upper stories was obviously falling much faster than the collapse zones, and began hitting the ground while at least 40 stories in each one were still intact? The North Tower was only down to the height of WTC 7 when debris from the upper stories first hit the ground. Was g miraculously increased on 9/11? They fell in ~15 and ~22 seconds respectively, nowhere near the ~9.25 seconds that free fall would have taken:
    yet he begins every presentation with his near free-fall claim. He’s also claimed that the dust clouds from the collapses were “pyroclastic,” but there are no reports of anyone’s skin being instantly peeled off, and he’s claimed that the fires in WTC 7 were minor, totally contradicting these NYC eyewitnesses:
    How could his claim that 400,000 yards of concrete were turned to fine powder be true, when there was less than 100,000 yards of concrete above grade in both towers combined? Does he know how to turn 400,000 yards of concrete to fine powder with explosives without leveling NYC?
    Has he ever seen a controlled demolition that left molten metal in the debris for months? Has he ever seen one that didn’t leave even one explosively-cut column in the debris? Since he claims that explosives were planted in the core columns to start the collapses, and that it was done from elevator shafts, has he even looked a floor plan of the cores above the 78th floor sky lobby? There were only 6 regular elevators above there, plus a freight and 2 express elevators, and they were only near 6 of the 47 core columns. Several of those were in the paths of the planes, and the perimeter columns collapsed first, so he’s not even making sense, especially considering the fact that 30 or more stories of core framing stood 15-25 seconds after each tower’s main collapse was over.
    We should investigate the nonsense coming from Richard Gage, as well as his “engineers.”
    • darkpolitricks says
      0
      0

      Rate This

      Hi Albury
      Thanks for your comments.
      A few points which follow on my earlier replies to another poster.
      a) The article was designed in a way to show that not only do governments throughout history commit such tactics to start profitable wars or further geo-political aims but our own governments do as well. History repeats itself. The veneer of progress in civilisation is a falsehood we like to project to convince ourselves that the human conciousness/soul/community/brain has progressed since a couple hundred years a go. Whilst our combined knowledge and technology have advanced it would only take a few days without electricity (communications, clean water, food, transport etc) for any major cities veneer of civilisation to fall quickly. Therefore I would say that past history is a good guide to future and current events and in some regards not much changes but the people involved.
      Some people claim 9.11 was just a massive example of lots of major co-incidences all coming together at the right time (perfect storm) and 9.11 was just a case of bad intelligence, major mistakes by key personnel, lucky hijackers with exceptional piloting skill and nothing untoward at all occurred by any domestic or foreign agency in the attack.
      Others believe there is no such thing as so many lucky co-incidences all coming together at the same time and see 9.11 either as:
      -a major false flag attack by the US government to bring about the “Age of Terror”, “Clash of Civilisations”, a Police State at home and expanded military presence abroad.
      or
      -an attack that was known about and allowed to happen for the same reasons.
      This could have been by a foreign power known to have antagonistic feelings towards the USA or wanting the USA to have the same antagonistic feelings towards the Muslim population as it had for various reasons. It is much easier to get away with your own acts of barbarity on Muslims once your big brother believes the same racist crude beliefs as you.
      This pre-knowledge could involve any number of intelligence members from various countries including the USA. Evidence exists for pre-knowledge from Israeli agents and as of yet I have not had any replies regarding the points raised earlier regarding the Israeli Art Student spy ring, the dancing Israelis, the “document the event” comment. the round-up of Israeli agents in the aftermath and the links between the writers of the PNAC and the Pro-Israeli lobby and the government of Bush at the time of 9.11.
      I would like to hear some thoughts on that angle please. Please remember this has nothing to do with Jews. You do not have to be Jewish to be a Zionist (as Joe Biden showed) and you do not have to be a racist to attack Israeli foreign policy. Please do not try and link the two together.
      I will not censor any comments on this site unless they are either racist, irrelevant or spam. Sometimes Akismet flags comments as waiting my approval before being made live and this is usually to do with certain keywords within the comment, the IP address the comment has come from or the number of links contained within a comment. If your comment does not appear immediately then it might be because of those factors so please do not think I am censoring you as I don’t get to check this site every day. If you want to check whether Akismet might think you are a spammer before posting then please check this tool out >> Comment Spam Tester
      Please remember that I am not someone who subscribes to theories that do not have some basis in fact or evidence that supports them. I do not believe in the no planes theory. I do not believe in lasers from space or missiles (although a plane flown by automated guidance mechanisms that have existed for some time would mean the plane was in fact a missile whether or not it had people on board at the time).
      I believe that primary source material and first hand witness testimony is important and cannot be dismissed at one point (e.g at the Pentagon for instance to say a plane didn’t hit it and then used at the WTC to support secondary explosives). Whilst I do question the ability of a bad pilot with no experience to fly such a large plane horizontally at such low altitudes with immense down-force for so long without crashing it. I have also seen videos of planes totally disintegrate when hitting stronger materials.
      Deep Penetration of said walls however is a cause for concern which is why I believe it is strange and serves the government no good purpose in not producing all relevant CCTV videos from the Pentagon and surrounding Hotels and Garages whether they show anything or not. Actions like this just lead to more speculation. The testimony of Norman Mineta also is interesting as well as the observed inaction of Dick Cheney to do anything to prevent the incoming bogey/missile/plane from hitting what was supposedly the most heavily defended airspace in the world.
      The collapse of WTC is not the be all and end all of the unanswered questions about 9.11 but as a major physiological punch to a countries psyche the fall of the Twin Towers were very effective in bringing about the desired effect on the countries population and the subsequent push for war.
      b) Whether you accept the arguments raised by AE911, BuildingWhat etc or not the fact remains that there are arguments over the collapse of Building Seven. This is not the only question surrounding 9.11 I would like to see cleared up once and for all but it is one of the most contentious. I would like to see a debate between the engineers you mentioned, NIST and the members of AE911 and BuildingWhat to discuss the issues you mention and the others raised and as you should be well aware there are a multitude of 9.11 victims families who support a new investigation into the events of 9.11. I would also like to see the computer code that was used in the model that the collapse of WTC7 was based on. Do you have a link to that key piece of the evidence?
      c) I think the best way forward to clear up issues like this that only lend credence to conspiracy theories is by having a government that is open and honest and prepared to have full independent inquiries into major events. If the 9.11 commission could have been given such a remit but wasn’t and thus problems of White House blocking tactics, denied access to key witnesses and a narrow terms of reference has led to more questions than answers.
      By the way the collapse of WTC could have been a cover-up totally independent of any overall conspiracy related to 9.11. The attacks could have gone off as planned by al-Qaeda and then a decision by X to bring WTC down could have been made and covered up for various reasons. The two do not have to be linked but most people would see it that way.
      Also now that people are answering my questions can someone with a knowledge of physics please tell me what is factually wrong in this video >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSyqfM-Rgy0&feature=player_embedded
      As far as I know this proves a freefall for a certain period of time and not a total freefall.
      • Morpheus says
        0
        0

        Rate This

        An explosion can be seen ejecting a massive object, it looks like it’s a person actually, beginning at about the 0;58 mark.
        I doubt you’ll get any “debate” from “Agent Albury Smith” just more of the same disinformation he posts all over the internet.
        • Albury says
          0
          0

          Rate This

          That was quite an explosion, Morph. Is blowing out a window ~5 stories below the collapse initiation floor and leaving even the aluminum cladding unaffected on the two adjacent columns a new controlled demolition technique?
        • jusme says
          0
          0

          Rate This

          How can people keep questioning with all the video evidence of explosions? I can’t understand how people are so stupid?
          • Albury says
            0
            0

            Rate This

            Why aren’t you questioning the fact that the sounds of explosions weren’t heard from more than a block away and not immediately prior to any collapse if you’re assuming that the only causes for explosions in major hi-rise office fires are demolition charges? How many of the FDNY and others who reported them are in the 9/11 “truth movement”? Here’s the petition at the “Firefighters” for 9/11 “Truth” site:
            http://firefightersfor911truth.org/?page_id=469
            Please feel free to count the number of signatories who even claim to be FDNY. They either don’t care what killed 300+ of their close friends, relatives, and colleagues, or they aren’t as smart as you are, apparently.
  9. Albury says
    0
    0

    Rate This

    re: nyccan.org/ and buildingwhat.org/
    To Whom it May Concern:
    If you need to mount a campaign to inform NYC council members and others of the fact that WTC 7 collapsed almost 7 hours after the North Tower came down on 9/11, then what was the reason for its alleged controlled demolition in the first place? Did the US government need an additional building collapse that day that took no lives, well after both towers, WTCs 3, 4, 5, and 6, four airliners, and part of the Pentagon had already been destroyed or badly damaged, and nearly 3000 innocent people had been violently murdered, to get its almost unanimous congressional resolution to go to war in Afghanistan where al Qaeda was headquartered and where President Clinton sent Tomahawk missiles in response to their previous coordinated and deadly suicide operations against two US embassies in Africa in 1998?
    How on earth do you “bring justice” to Mr. McIlvaine’s remarkable and beloved son Robert G. by libeling more than 210 NIST experts, Larry Silverstein, and countless others with absurd claims based on junk science by profiteering charlatans like Richard Gage and his “engineers,” and by harassing NYC council members for a new investigation when you obviously haven’t even bothered to read NCSTAR 1A, which is the product of a thorough and very competent investigation by people with real science and engineering credentials? Why do you urge people to “ask OFFICIALS to investigate Building 7,” when at least 125 of the scientists and engineers involved in the NIST investigation of WTC 7 were CIVILIANS from academia and private industry?
    Robert wasn’t even in WTC 7 when Muhammad Atta flew the hijacked Boeing 767 into WTC 1 ten stories below him on the morning of 9/11/01, and when he was suddenly and unexpectedly doomed to death along with everyone else in his group and everyone above the 92nd floor, nearly nine hours before the late afternoon collapse of WTC 7. The FDNY feared that it would eventually collapse, which is why they abandoned any effort to fight the fires and pulled everyone back a safe distance, preventing more “terrible loss of life,” as WTC 7’s owner later related in a PBS interview.
    Robert’s death was a tragic loss, and my profound sympathy for Mr. McIlvaine is hard to put into words, but I’d like you and anyone else who’s thinking of signing your petition to answer the following questions first, since you’ve fallen prey to the manipulative liars of the 9/11 “truth movement” and think Larry Silverstein destroyed his own property or knew about it:
    -Why would Larry Silverstein have publicly admitted even to knowing that there were planted explosives in WTC 7 in the first place?
    -What was Silverstein Properties’ and the FDNY’s motive for blowing up a perfectly good, 14 year-old building, losing hundreds of millions of dollars in cash flow from it for nine years and counting, spending ~$700 million, or most of the $861 million insurance settlement, on the replacement of it, and paying ~$500 million back to lenders?
    (note: it was built in 1986-1987, at least 15 years after asbestos was written out of all building codes, and it had no asbestos in its SFRM or elsewhere. There was some on the first 38 floors of the North Tower, most of which had been abated during various tenant fit-outs well before he won the lease by default when Vornado’s deal with the PA fell though, but none in the South Tower, which was built after the code change went into effect)
    -Why would any insurance company have paid him a dime instead of the $4.68 BILLION total he received if he publicly admitted to foreknowledge of or complicity in the alleged secret demolition of his property, but especially those based in Copenhagen, Zurich (2 of them), and London? They all contested his claim of two occurrences based on two separate plane crashes, and he won in court in a few instances based on individual contract wording, but there was never any question relating to the causes of any WTC collapse.
    -How did he or the FDNY know that flaming debris from a much taller collapsing hi-rise across the street would hit WTC 7, start multi-story fires in it, and break the water main to it, disabling the sprinklers and providing a cover story for the alleged controlled demolition?
    -If the explosives were pre-planted, which would have taken weeks or even months in a vacant building and have been completely impossible to do secretly in an occupied one, and Barry Jennings heard some of them go off around 10 AM, why was there any discussion at all in mid-afternoon about whether or not to demolish WTC 7 with the other apparently fireproof explosives allegedly planted a few stories higher?
    -Do controlled demolitions take seven or eight hours to collapse a building?
    -Do they leave no severed columns with copper residue on the ends, or any other evidence in the debris?
    -Do they leave ~12 stories on one corner standing?
    -Is the FDNY in the controlled demolition business? What other buildings, on fire or not, have they demolished before or since 9/11?
    -Please link me to a C/D contractor’s web site, and show me the use of “pull” or “pull it” to refer to building demolition using explosives, not one in which cables are used to pull an already damaged building over, as was done with WTC 6.
    -How does a “terrible loss of life” in the WTC towers affect a later decision to demolish a nearby building with no one in it?
    -A number of FDNY personnel were inside WTC 7 prior to the pullback order, presumably at risk from the alleged explosives, and most of the 343 FDNY fatalities resulted from the tower collapses, so why are there only a few FDNY in the 9/11 “truth movement”? You can count the number in this “truth” organization right here: firefightersfor911truth.org/?page_id=469Are they simply not as astute as you are, or don’t they care what killed so many of their colleagues?
    -There was a pre-existing ConEd substation at the Vesey Street WTC 7 site in 1986, and the building was designed to straddle it, requiring some of the extremely long ~45′ girder and ~52′ beam spans inside that contributed to the 9/11 collapse. It was powered up and in full use on 9/11/01, and the demolition of a 200,000 ton, 47-story building directly on top of it very likely destroyed it completely. Do you know whether ConEd’s insurers just absorbed the loss of tens of millions of dollars in infrastructure damage and restoration and then subrogated Industrial Risk Insurers, since Larry Silverstein’s firm was still the responsible party, especially if he deliberately caused the damage?
    You are not honoring the memory of Mr. McIlvaine’s highly successful and accomplished young son or any of the other victims of the 9/11 al Qaeda attacks on the WTC towers by demonstrating a complete lack of understanding of the events that occurred that day, and by falsely implicating people who were totally uninvolved in the planning or execution of the Planes Operation, as 9/11 was known to the al Qaeda terrorists behind it.
    Sincere best wishes,
    Albury
    • wil says
      2
      0

      Rate This

      you are one of the funniest humorists i have ever read. ever.
      • Albury says
        0
        1

        Rate This

        That doesn’t answer any of my questions.
  10. darkpolitricks says
    0
    0

    Rate This

    I would refer any readers of this article to the following article also posted on my site which lists a number of respected engineers and architects who would like to re-open the investigations into the collapse of WTC-7.
    As of yet I have not been provided with either of the following
    – the program / code used by NIST to demonstrate how WTC-7 collapsed from fire alone. As I have previously said it is easy to program a computer model that proves anything you want by loading the input parameters until the desired outcome is arrived at. Until we can independantly observe and analyse the NIST programming code that “proves” progressive fire induced collapse we only have their word that it happened that way and that no parameter loading occurred.
    – a detailed critical analysis disproving the conclusions asserted within the video that shows the 2+ seconds of freefall that WTC-7 went through by the Physics teacher David Chandler >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSyqfM-Rgy0&feature=player_embedded
    – details of the Israeli Mossad angle in the events of 9.11. Even if all 3 WTC buildings did collapse by fire alone (an amazing coincidence in itself ) this does not negate or disprove involvement by external intelligence agencies in the planning or execution of the attack itself i.e Mossad / ISI / CIA etc. Proof exists of Israeli spy rings following the 9.11 hijackers around the country along with pre-knowledge of the attacks. Why was this pre-knowledge not passed on to the US government and if it was who chose to ignore it.
    Obviously there are many more questions that I would like to hear answers for but if you could start with those 3.
    • Albury says
      0
      0

      Rate This

      NIST didn’t fully disclose the input data for their WTC 7 collapse model and cited provisions of the NCST Act as the reason, but there is nothing preventing Gage’s “800 engineers” or anyone else from modeling the collapse on their own, so why haven’t they even tried? Any competent group of qualified experts would reach the same conclusions as NIST did, and their purpose wasn’t to satisfy every conspiracy “theory” that anyone could dream up; it was to determine the cause of the collapse and make code recommendations based on their findings. To support the claim that explosives were involved, evidence would have to be produced, and there simply wasn’t any.
      David Chandler’s a one-trick pony who overanalyzed an aspect of the event that has no evidentiary value in determining the cause, and has yet to compare his high-school level empirical findings to a hypothetical based on the Probable Collapse Sequence in NCSTAR 1A, which is hardly the hallmark of a serious scientist. He also has no knowledge of structural engineering, construction, or the structural details of the WTC hi-rises, and thinks the towers’ corners were load-bearing. I’d put his “research” on a par with this:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-P-bEHKVIE
      but those performers aren’t libeling and slandering competent professionals who are simply doing their jobs. They’re both begging for donations, but Chandler isn’t looking for doggy treats.
      There is absolutely no evidence of any connection between al Qaeda’s planning for the “Planes Operation” of 9/11 and Jews, Israel, the CIA, ISI, or the Mossad, but claiming to know something that the majority of us don’t is something the 9/11 “truth movement” doesn’t seem to be able to resist. The evidence linking al Qaeda to the 9/11 attacks is overwhelming and irrefutable, and hasn’t been denied in the last 9+ years by bin Laden or any others involved in the plot.
      http://www.fbi.gov/news/testimony/the-terrorist-threat-confronting-the-united-states
      • wil says
        1
        0

        Rate This

        you are a doggy treat. crunchy yet chewable. i hope your dog knows this.
  11. darkpolitricks says
    0
    0

    Rate This

    Richard Gage and his engineers might have tried making a computer model for all I know but I doubt they would have had access to all the raw data that NIST had which is why it would be a lot easier to clear up any accusations of conspiracy or parameter loading if NIST just released the code for their model. They are the ones who used the model to prove the fire induced collapse therefore they should release their code for review.
    Albury, no-one mentioned Jews at all so I don’t know why you decided to bring that up at all.
    Trying to link any inquiry into the collapse of WTC-7 or control of al-Qaeda groups through infiltration, informers, patsies or the like by intelligence groups such as Mossad or the CIA to a Jewish Conspiracy just shows an attempt to try and delegitimise such inquiry by painting it as racist.
    You should be well aware of the Lavon affair? What do you call that if it was not a false flag attack by Israeli Mossad agents that attacked US and UK citizens in Egypt and aimed to pin the blame on the Muslim Brotherhood?
    There have also been many other cases of false flag attacks carried out by various agencies throughout the last century and beyond. Do you dispute this as well?
    Israel unfortunatley has a history of committing false flag attacks pinning the blame on Muslims and attacking UK / USA assets. They also had a lot to gain by 9.11 e.g one of their main enemies in the region was taken out and they didn’t have to lift a finger.
    I suggest reading the auto biography of Victor Osrovosky an ex Mossad agent who revealed some of these false flag attacks including the attack on Libya in the 80’s that ultimately led to the PAN AM bombing. You can read an excerpt here >
    We also know Israeli agents lived next door to many of the hijackers >
    http://www.darkpolitricks.com/israeli-mossad-agents-lived-next-door-to-911-hijackers/
    and had active spy rings engaged in spying on the USA in the year of 2001 > http://www.darkpolitricks.com/carl-cameron-investigates-israeli-spy-rings-and-their-connection-to-9-11/
    Trying to brush off all of these as some kind of false belief in a Jewish conspiracy is just sticking your head in the sand and drawing a false parallel. As I said in reply to some one else on this post I won’t accept racist comments and I won’t accept false accusations of racism or anti-Semitism just because Israel is being criticised. The two are unrelated.
    Personally I believe Islam and Judasim have more in common than most people would like to admit. Apart from both being foolish beliefs in old fairy tales they are both Abrahamic faiths and have a shared history. Therefore religion should pay not part in any of this.
    What is your primary objection to a proper investigation into 9.11. The original Pearl Harbour had 5+ investigations into what happened on that day and everyone knew the Japanese did it. The only investigation so far was limited in it’s scope, had blocking tactics employed by the White House, main witnesses were prevented from appearing and many of the commisioners on the inquiry have gone on record to say they believe that the inquiry should have been the first step and not the last in understanding the events on the day.
    Please explain (it’s almost 5am here so I am going to bed so if you reply and are not blocked like last time for posting words deemed racist by Akismet then I will reply tomorrow)
    Thanks for commenting
    • Albury says
      0
      0

      Rate This

      Since you’ve alluded several times to blocking my comments, and believe that your constant references to Israel, the Mossad, the Liberty incident, etc. have nothing to do with J**s, I’ll try to refrain from any further discussion of ethnicity.
      Gage and his alleged engineers “might have tried making a computer model”? Based on no evidence whatsoever, they’ve already concluded that explosives were involved in the collapses at the WTC, and if they really wanted to refute NIST’s WTC 7 Probable Collapse Sequence, they’d certainly have run models of their own by now, since it’s totally absurd to claim that a government that’s lying to them isn’t sanctioning their “new investigation.” NIST isn’t in the conspiracy debunking business; they investigated the WTC collapses and made code recommendations based on their findings, and I’m sure they’d be glad to reply to RFIs to explain those findings.
      There is simply no excuse for not at least starting the modeling process, but if Gage even has anyone who’s familiar with finite element analysis software, they’re probably bright enough to realize that whining about being deprived of information is easier and more effective than trying to disprove the NIST scenarios.
      • darkpolitricks says
        0
        0

        Rate This

        Albury, Thanks for commenting.
        The issue regarding Akismet and Jews as you put it is that Akismet is set up to mark certain comments as spam if they contain certain words. As I don’t want this site to turn into any kind of site that supports race bashing (of any kind) I have added lots of keywords to the “approve” list. This means that any comments posted to this site that either contain lots of links or have certain phrases or keywords within them will be marked as “pending” until I get the time to view them and decide whether or not they are actually spam or racist bullshit.
        Therefore I am just saying that
        a) I will not block any legitimate comments whether you agree with me or not.
        b) BUT Akismet is set up to hold comments in a queue that mention certain words and your last comment refering to Jews was one of these.
        Obviously I read the comment and allowed it, which is why it finally appeared on the article, but I don’t spend all my time on this site so I cannot assure everyone that comments containing such keywords will be posted quickly. Therefore (and this goes to everyone not just you) it is better to avoid such terms and cut down on the number of links contained within the comment if you want it to appear immediately.
        However, ignoring all that, I still don’t believe you have actually answered any of the questions I asked you in my last post. Can you please do so.
      • wil says
        1
        0

        Rate This

        albury, you are the walking definition of a probable collapse theory. as in collapsing in hilarity. how long have you been deaf, dumb and blind.
  12. suz33 says
    0
    0

    Rate This

    well, i wasnt going to post again, because i didnt want to detract from the “debate” but it looks like the self proclaimed debate lover has run off with his tail between his legs, only for the “debate” to be picked up by the self proclaimed king of debunking, who also seems to have run out of steam, as they do repeatedly all over the internet, in their hit and run attacks on all things reasonable.. Its pretty obvious agent allblurry smith, or paul, or johnny, have no real answers, just the general obfuscating bluff and bluster of all gormless shills.
    it seems your desire for any real debate is no closer than it was before i directed them here, again, for which i apologise, because though i understood beforhand, they would not add anything worthwhile, and though you’ll never get an acknowledgement of any reasonable logical, common sense fact from them, at least they have been exposed, once again, for the lame pathetic shills that they are, and people can view their comments understanding that these people do this day in, day out, as a job..
    as it seems to be all over bar the shouting, id just like to thank you for your site, thank you for even bothering with the likes of Johnny and Albury Smith, who spend their days trolling as many websites as possible, wasting peoples time posting the same incoherent diatribe of disinformation, with your patient, knowledgable interactions.
    thanks again for your work towards a clearer understanding of the events of that day that have had an impact on people all over the world, in terms of the misdirected response by world governments.
    in light of recent events, id just like to post this link too, calling for a similar common sense, logical approach, to a new independent investigation.
    thankyou, thankyou, thankyou.
    • Albury says
      0
      0

      Rate This

      In your own words, Suzie, could you explain what you just added to this discussion?
  13. suz33 says
    0
    0

    Rate This

    gee, two and a half hours to get another question from you, but the webmaster has been waiting days for an answer to his question to you… so.. there you are.. lurking in the shadows, typically, as always, but ever so light on, in the answer dept eh?
    what have i just added? quite obviously, my sincere thanks to the webmaster for his contribution to truth, logic and reason, while providing a link to even more compelling evidence of lies and misinformation, that is constantly peddled shamelessly by gormless shills like you.
    but i only commented because i thought youd given up, i thought you might have died! heaven forbid.. so please, pardon my interuption, ill just simply sit back and wait for your contribution of nonsensical answers to the questions posed to you days ago… though im sure, if i do a google search, it will simply be another copy and paste job youve posted all over the internet many times before..
    go on, prove me wrong.
  14. darkpolitricks says
    0
    0

    Rate This

    Hi Albury,
    Thanks for replying.
    I see that you feel that I am not responding to you however you complain about my non response on another article. An article that I didn’t write by the way ( notice the “View the original article at Washingtons Blog at the bottom).
    If you want to discuss the musings of Washington and his points regarding the fires and the number of highly regarded scientists, engineers, demolitions experts and architects that all would like to see a full investigation into the collapse of WTC-7 I suggest doing so over at his site as there are already some comments posted >> http://georgewashington2.blogspot.com/2011/05/permission-to-speak-freely-regarding.html
    One thing I did think was interesting was how there is quite a lot of first hand evidence of molten steel at ground zero which NIST denies. You can read the evidence here (another Washington article)
    Many people witnessed this molten steel and the very high temperatures at ground zero and even ex NIST employees want another investigation:
    The former head of NIST‘s Fire Science Division, who is one of the world’s leading fire science researchers and safety engineers, a Ph.D. in mechanical engineering (Dr. James Quintiere), called for an independent review of the World Trade Center collapse investigation. “I would really like to see someone else take a look at what they’ve done; both structurally and from a fire point of view. … I think the official conclusion that NIST arrived at [that fire and damage from the attacks brought down the buildings] is questionable.
    Washington has compiled a large list of people who witnessed this event and then at the bottom there is a video of someone asking NIST about it which is dismissed with a wave of a hand.
    It is exactly this type of re-action by NIST / US Government / Official Story believers, that many people want to see a new inquiry into 9.11. All these first hand witnesses cannot be easily dismissed and doing so only lends credence to those who believe the authorities have something to hide.
    You seem to suggest that “we the people” can just investigate the events on our own and there is nothing stopping us from just compelling Dick Cheney to truthfully explain what he meant by his “of course the orders still stand” comment as witnessed by Norman Mineta or compelling NIST to release their computer code that proved how WTC7 fell or putting Larry Silverstien on a lie detector machine or any other form of evidence collection that could be used to answer all the questions many respectable people have about the events on that day and hopefully come to a conclusion.
    Without having subpoena powers to call witnesses to account and without having the necessary authority to question ex or current government employees, review first hand evidence, interview witnesses that were blocked from appearing before the original inquiry and so on then this would not be a very full and fruitful inquiry.
    However these two articles were written by Washington and not myself and I cannot be held to account for the thoughts of all other authors that appear on this site. Instead of diverting the discussion could we stay on the one I actually wrote as this is where I would like the discussion to stay.
    Also I do not have the luxury of being able to spend all day on-line as I am not paid by anyone to write or to comment on others posts. I am just a part time blogger who is out of pocket each month from keeping this site running.
    I have to work full time which is why I cannot respond to every comment posted immediately and cross posting is only going to make it harder to continue any discussion on this article which was original aim.
    By the way (if you are actually interested) you can find all my own articles here >> http://www.darkpolitricks.com/darkpolitricks-articles/
    Anyway, leaving all that aside you still need to answer the questions I asked you to answer in my comments on May 20, 2011 and then again May 21, 2011.
    The question was regarding your primary objection to having a proper inquiry with full subpoena powers that cannot be blocked by the White House, have witnesses prevented from being presented and so on (covered earlier in this comment)
    As well as the knowledge of past Israeli false flag attacks on US/UK citizens (e.g the Lavron affair), the Cameron Investigates Israeli Spy Ring story and Victor Ostrovsky’s books on how Israeli Mossad agents regularly wage war by deception (see original links).
    Thanks
    • Albury says
      0
      0

      Rate This

      Do controlled demolitions now leave molten metal in debris piles for months? What explosive or incendiary is capable of producing extreme heat like that for more that ~5 minutes tops? NIST didn’t deny the existence of molten steel; they simply said that it was unverified and didn’t enter into any collapse scenario:
      http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm [question 13]
      The USGS flyovers recorded temperatures well in excess of the melting points of lead and aluminum, and both were in abundance in the towers.
      As for the article on the “engineers,” I simply pointed out one of many very obvious lies in it:
      http://www.darkpolitricks.com/2011/05/engineers-request-permission-to-speak-freely-regarding-world-trade-building-7/comment-page-1/#comment-19733
      How many have their 9/11 “theories” published or accepted by the ASCE?
      Don’t know what to tell you about your new and redundant investigation, but no competent one is going to disprove the NIST hypotheses or suddenly find C/D evidence when there wasn’t any found during the cleanup at GZ, regardless of how many people are subpoenaed. Gage has “800 engineers,” so why hasn’t someone run collapse models if they think the ones in NCSTAR 1A and 1-9 are wrong?
      • darkpolitricks says
        0
        0

        Rate This

        I notice you chose to swerve the questions I actually originally asked. E.G. The Lavon affair, FOX News’s Cameron Investigates series into 9.11 Israeli spy rings,
        Israeli agents living next door to some of the hijackers and Victor Ostrovsky’s time in Mossad where he reveals further false flag attacks that got the USA to do
        Israeli bidding for them e.g attack Libya in the 80’s and who stated in his book that “Iraq was next on the list”.
        However I think the main problem with the NIST investigation into WTC-7 apart from the fact they won’t release their computer code (which as I have attested to being
        a programmer I know that if you “put shit in you get shit out” – pardon the language).
        Is that they concluded before they even started their investigation that
        explosives (of any kind, thermate, thermite, standard demolitions, underground nukes, lasers from Mars, blokes with saws etc etc) wasn’t going to be even thought about
        therefore instead of starting with open minds to all possibilities and examining and then following the evidence they have given the impression that the conclusion
        was always going to be fire induced progressive collapse.
        Rightly or wrongly this decision is why many people who believe they have uncovered evidence (whether you agree with it or not) feel that an investigation open to all
        possibilities should be held.
        They want to know about the computer model that only partially heated parts of the building, the missing structs, the evidence of molten steel, the overheard countdown, the requests to “pull it” and the study that showed explosive materials in the dust.
        We can debate forever whether you or me agree with certain points regarding WTC-7 but what cannot be disputed is that:
        a) history of false flag attacks exist.
        b) evidence of pre-knowledge exists.
        c) many people including victims and families of victims, scientists, engineers, architects, demolition experts, and so on believe that enough evidence exists for a full inquiry into the events of that day. You obviously don’t fall into this category.
        The commissioners on the original inquiry have alluded to the fact that the full truth has not yet come out and I know that if I had of lost someone close to me in that attack I would want the full truth and nothing but the truth.
        History shows it is the covering up of events that lends credence to conspiracy theories and therefore full disclosure and openness is the way to put an end to them.
        Whether you agree with that statement or not is irrelevant as many people already do and as of yet the only inquiry into 9.11 was (as previously stated) narrow in
        its terms of reference, had witnessed blocked from attending and the reluctance of the White House administration at the time to even have an inquiry in the first place should at least raise suspcions of a cover up or a reluctance for the full truth to come out.
        Anyway thanks for commenting but could you still answer point one.
  15. darkpolitricks says
    0
    0

    Rate This

    This is a nice article about the death of Bin Laden, the US media, 9.11 and how anyone dissenting from the official view is termed a conspiracy theorist as well as discussing “paid commenters” i.e. people who are paid to comment on websites pushing a particular point of view:
  16. Bill McKay says
    0
    0

    Rate This

    Yes agent Albury, Mr paid stooge and commented du jour. Please explain who pays your wages and what your official job title is.
    Also please can you actually answer the questions asked of you instead of diverting the topic to another point or article. What is spurring you on to hide what many people believe is a major crime. An attack that has led to a decade of war, bankruptcy due to trillion dollar war incurred debts and the decimation of liberty and freedom at home ala the newly renewed patriot act. Do you support the destruction of the original principles that the USA was built on or not?
    • Albury says
      0
      0

      Rate This

      Please explain who pays your wages and what your official job title is, Bill, and then feel free to get back on topic and address my May 14 questions here concerning the claims made by Richard Gage. I don’t like liars, so what’s your excuse for tolerating them?
      • darkpolitricks says
        0
        0

        Rate This

        Albury
        Have you actually contacted the BuildingWhat and AE911Truth groups to ask them your questions? If not why not and if so what did they reply with. If you give me details of their reply I will happily print it on the site along with your initial questions.
        I have seen a number of debates online in which people from both sides of the argument have debated the points surrounding 9.11 and WTC including people from Popular Mechanics debate people from the 911 Truth movement. Have you tried contacting sites such as Democracy Now who would video and show such debates to see if you could setup a debate between yourself and Richard Gage for a similar debate?
        You don’t want an official inquiry for some reason and you don’t want to discuss the questions I have repeatedly asked you to so maybe you should try and debate Richard Gage and co directly?
        Seeing that you have still not answered my own questions I will raise this point. That the question of WTC collapse (whether it was planned, foreknown or controlled some-way) does not negate any other points regarding foreknowledge of the attack itself.
        The attack could have been a false flag or “allowed to happen” whether or not WTC was brought down deliberately or not.
        Evidence does exist for controlled demolition and needs to be examined and discussed in the appropriate setting which many people feel would be a proper inquiry. However the “conspiracy” regarding the collapse of WTC-7 could be totally unrelated to the conspiracy regarding the actual attack of 9.11.
        Having the primary symbol of American “masculinity”, their tallest edifice complex cast in steel collapse in real time on live TV must have served as a massive psychological punch to the countries gut and would have only aided in stirring the public in their desire for retribution.
        However, whether or not the collapse had to occur for such psy-op reasons, or was an unconnected conspiracy between owner and NYC power brokers for other reason (money, document destruction, insurance etc ) is unrelated to the question of the attack in itself.
        I have never agreed with any of those theories that would have involved lots of people to keep quiet, massive TV network manipulation of the coverage, or unnecessary complexity.
        However
        -false flag attacks do occur
        -our governments and other supposedly friendly governments engage in them
        -and the 9.11 attack was the catalyst for a decade of a war that fit in perfectly with PNAC plans outlined by people who were now in office and who were also linked to bringing Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu to power.
        As our freedoms and liberty have been one of the major victims (along with the hundreds of thousands of dead in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen) during this decade of PATRIOT Act and Anti Terrorism laws and unwarranted snooping and spying it is right to ask why as well as how and if this could ever end.
        Are we now stuck in a high tech surveillance state forever or will all these laws be rolled back at some point.
        Is the aim to defeat terror ( how do we defeat a word – a tactic?) and if so how do we know when we have won?
        Who will sit down and sign the peace treaty once “terror” has been defeated.
        Who will declare victory? And can victory against a word ever be won.
        In this respect it is fair to ask whether or not “terror” is the perfect enemy, one that can never be and never will be defeated and if that was the initial aim in the first place i.e to start the next and maybe permanent war.
        One that would replace the Cold War, that could feed the coffers of the big armament companies and keep the uncertainity that helps big powerful people make money from war very happy.
        As it is usually the working class youth that is asked to fight rich mens wars it is only right to ask how will this ever end.
        Bin Laden is now officially dead which was the primary reason for our attack on Afghanistan and the people we are fighting overseas are fighting us as any invaded populas would once invaded.
        So I will now ask whether or not we are doomed to fight the war on terror forever.
        • Albury says
          0
          0

          Rate This

          DP: “Have you actually contacted the BuildingWhat and AE911Truth groups to ask them your questions?”
          See May 14, 2011, 1:22 pm Reply
          Gage and Chandler just run away, Dr. Harrit won’t explain why they haven’t painted some MICs on an in-place steel column to show us how that works, and most 9/11 “truth movement” web sites with discussion “forums” immediately ban me from posting. Ex: my insurance questioned wasn’t deemed “sincere enough” by the Loose Change moderator, who banned me for it on my first day there.
          Chandler really got his tit in a wringer by claiming in an email response to me that NIST screwed up the distance calculation for his precious ~2.25 seconds of free fall acceleration, which he calculated from rest instead of considering the velocity after ~1.75 seconds of acceleration at less than g, and foolishly claimed that it should have been ~81′, not the ~105′ that NIST posited. When I wrote back, copying a dozen or more people, and explained to him very politely that he was wrong, he told me I was “spam” and said “good by.”
          He does great with people who’ve never taken even a simple high school physics course, and sit there without questioning his nonsense. A real scientist would compare the observed collapse data to a calculation based on NIST’s Probable Collapse Sequence, but he hasn’t gone there yet, for obvious reasons. How much more stupid can someone get than claiming that columns were cut with explosives when not one piece of steel in the debris had a melted or explosively-cut end on it?
          • darkpolitricks says
            0
            0

            Rate This

            All interesting stuff. Do you actually have any formal correspondence that could be posted in a question / answer format?
            You say that no evidence of explosive materials were found in the debris. What do you make of the peer reviewed Bentham study that did find such evidence >> Jones tells 9.11 Debunkers to put up or shut up, and would independent investigators have access to key parts of the debris from WTC now or in the past?
            Correct me if I am wrong here but wasn’t one of the reasons NIST relied on a computer model for their progressive collapse theory the lack of available physical evidence.
            Also what is your answer to the difference between their interim and final report e.g missing structs and the partial heating of the building.
            Also can you agree or disagree with my point regarding false flag attacks and how they have been used in the past e.g the Lavon affair.
      • wil says
        0
        0

        Rate This

        the same reason that your comments are tolerated here.

No comments:

Post a Comment