Quote:

---

Originally posted by fivver:

Here's a link to an article that was published in Popular Mechanics magazine that does an excellent job of debunking the comspiracy theories surrounding 9/11. It was made into a tv special and an expanded version is also available in book form.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/1227842

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

As crazy as John Boy is, he is correct - that was a straight up "hit piece" penned by Ben, and he was fed more than a couple juicy bits by his familial relation that since they've not been released to anyone else (or hadn't at the time) were impossible to fact-check, and they ran it anyway.

---

Quote:

---

Guilt by Association

Soon after the Popular Mechanics report appeared, conspiracy buffs began parsing the names of the various researchers who contributed to the article, noting the odd coincidence that Benjamin Chertoff, then the head of the magazine's research Department, has the same last name as the then newly appointed head of the Department of Homeland Security, Michael Chertoff. In a rare instance of reportorial initiative (most 9/11 "Internet researchers" rarely venture beyond Google), Christopher Bollyn phoned Ben's mother, who volunteered that, yes, she thinks Michael Chertoff might be a distant cousin. "Chertoff's Cousin Penned Popular Mechanics 9/11 Hit Piece," read the headline on Bollyn's next American Free Press story. "This is exactly the kind of `journalism' one would expect to find in a dictatorship like that of Saddam Hussein's Iraq," he concluded. Later, a headline was added to his article: "Ben Chertoff: Propagandist & Illuminati Disinformation Tool."

As often happens in the world of conspiracy theories, a grain of truth--it's possible that Ben and Michael Chertoff are distantly related--was built into a towering dune. In fact, Ben and Michael Chertoff have never spoken. And no one at Popular Mechanics had any contact with Michael Chertoff's office while preparing the article. Moreover, Ben was one of many researchers on the story, not the author. (Then, of course, there's the question of why Ben--and his colleagues--would be eager to get involved with one of the greatest crimes in history.) But in the world of 9/11 conspiracy theories, coincidence is proof of collaboration.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Geeze, I file that claim right up there with a suspected bank robber, covered in dye-bomb, screaming "I didn't do it!".
Seriously, you really think imma take the word of someone who penned an obvious hit-piece at face value ?

And yes Krel, many of the terrorists who have come back to haunt us are folk our intel people trained or materially supported in the first place, mostly in response to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, which found our black bag boys supporting the Mujas quite a bit, and there's at least one FOIA document which mentions a Tim Osman in reference to USAMA/OSAMA - and appears to be some discussion about anti-aircraft weapons being supplied to the Mujas via a CIA front company.

Khalid-Shiek-Mohammed and Ramzi Youssef on the other hand, not enough evidence to say, but Emad Salem was directly working *for* the FBI when he handed over a working bomb to them back in 1993 (the one that blew the hell out of the WTCs basement) which was given to him by the FBI, then helped them wire it - without which the incompetent shitheels would have almost certainly been unable to accomplish anything.

More interesting is that the FBI handler SPECIFICALLY ordered Emad Salem *not* to sabotage the bomb when he became concerned over the fact that he just handed a bunch of nutters with real intent a live munition...

And then the FBI tried to pretend he was just another terrorist and set him up as a patsy, which failed because he became suspicious of his handler and had begun tape recording those conversations - USDOJ took him in and shoved him into WITPRO (Witness Protection Program) to shield him from FBI retaliation, and the whole matter was glossed over - but if you look, you can find those recordings and listen to em your own self, it's pretty clear that the FBI is more responsible for that explosion than the terrorists, cause left on their own, their chances of successfully building a bomb or even getting the materials for one without drawing attention were pretty pathetic.

In fact, many of our "Enemies"... Noriega, Saddam, Osama - were guys we set up in the first place, real bastards who were set up in opposition to other bastards, or put in place to maintain US control of various resources.

The Saddam Hussien problem, again, goes back to our participation in the 1953 assassination of Mossedeigh, followed by installation of The Shah, who was a complete scumbag - this was done to maintain control of the oil supply and keep a sweetheart deal for the involved corporations, without regard to how many would die for it...

That directly lead to the Islamic Revolution in 1979, the Hostage Crisis, and all that mess, plus the rise of the Ayatolla Khomeni, who hated our guts and for damn good reason, since we'd installed a brutal, murderous puppet-dictator and gave material and other support to his secret police, SAVAK - who the CIA outright admitted teaching torture tactics to.

So, in response we propped up Saddam Hussien, and provoked a war in hopes of crippling Iran and deposing the Ayatolla.... and so forth, and so on.

And if this dumb shit reminds you of the faery tale of the old lady who swallowed a spider, you are not alone in that assessment.

As for Osamas current fate, well...

He's dead, straight up - we nailed his ass the week of December 12th 2001, we'd been blowing the shit out of his main base for a while, and had finally gotten a lock on his transmitter and hit the tent it was in with a missle or artillery shell, which badly wounded him and critically damaged his portable dialysis machine, which wasn't working too well by the time anyway due to a shortage of fresh water as a result of our blockade of the area.

We hadn't been expecting to get him directly, but he was bunking in the same tent as the radio (tactically stupid, I know) cause it helped keep his tent warm and as you well know he loved to hear himself talk... so he caught a buncha shrapnel and being in poor health already, with a now broken dialysis machine, he succumbed shortly thereafter to death via respiratory/cardiac failure - most of the rest of the planet even carried his obituary, it was just suppressed here.

His flunkies of course didn't want it getting out that he was dead (even though it did, people talk, even and especially when they're not supposed to!) for reasons of their own, not the least of which was an attempt to prevent their pocket empire and alliance with the Taliban from collapsing - and our intel boys SURE don't want it getting out that he's dead, cause they wanna use him as a kind of eternal Emmanuel Goldstein to keep up the booga-booga, but the only folk buyin that are the ones who haven't bothered to do even the most cursory checking of their own.

But hey, don't take my word for it, I've given you plenty enough to do your own verification if you like - in the end of it however, the truth is that no one involved in this in any way is innocent, and it's the desperate attempts to avoid actually admitting anything which lead to the lies, you see.

Again, all we KNOW, is that the official story is bullshit, that the folks in power lied to us, and continue to lie to us - about specifically what, and how much, is again a matter of conjecture.

But that they felt the need indicates SOME level of guilt, complicity, or incompetence that is completely unacceptable.

-Frem

Truth overcomes all bonds!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Geeze, I file that claim right up there with a suspected bank robber, covered in dye-bomb, screaming "I didn't do it!".
Seriously, you really think imma take the word of someone who penned an obvious hit-piece at face value ?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Geeze, I file that claim right up there with a suspected bank robber, covered in dye-bomb, screaming "I didn't do it!".
Seriously, you really think imma take the word of someone who penned an obvious hit-piece at face value ?

---

Nope. I think you're gonna use all the denials that all the 9/11 truthers use.

Have fun with it. I don't argue religion, so I'm out.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

Krell, Geezer is offended that I refuse to take at face value, without a whit of evidence, the mere word of a person with every reason to lie, who already displayed suspicious behavior by failing to disclose up front the relation.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Geeze, I file that claim right up there with a suspected bank robber, covered in dye-bomb, screaming "I didn't do it!".
Seriously, you really think imma take the word of someone who penned an obvious hit-piece at face value ?

---

Nope. I think you're gonna use all the denials that all the 9/11 truthers use.

Have fun with it. I don't argue religion, so I'm out.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Well, unless that "religion" happens to be capitalism and The American Way™, of course.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:
Krellek, I don't know which docu-drama you are talking about. But there are several documentaries and many websites out there questioning the official 9/11 story.

Here are some of the classics.

Loose Change

Loose Change, 2nd Ed.

Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth
http://www.ae911truth.org/

Pilots for 9/11 Truth
http://www.pilotsfor911truth.org/

Firefighters for 9/11 Truth
http://firefightersfor911truth.org/



-----
Disclaimer: I say what I mean, and I mean what I say. I don't imply things. So if you make an inference from what I said, it is probably wrong. Posting a link doesn't automatically mean I agree with the contents. If you're not sure about where I stand, please ask, preferably politely, before jumping to conclusions. Thank you.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

Krell, Geezer is offended that I refuse to take at face value, without a whit of evidence, the mere word of a person with every reason to lie, who already displayed suspicious behavior by failing to disclose up front the relation.

---

Okay. So do you have any actual evidence of the two Chertoff's being related, especially being related so closely that one would try to cover up the crime of the century for the other, besides the two of them having the same last name?

"Keep the Shiny side up"

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:
Okay. So do you have any actual evidence of the two Chertoff's being related, especially being related so closely that one would try to cover up the crime of the century for the other, besides the two of them having the same last name?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Still, this is deflection over a nitpick point, especially since one might notice out of all the info I posted this is the only bit anyone cared to dispute.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

Ok then, perhaps you would offer some other explaination as to why the Pop Mech hit piece contained substantial information which had not at the time, been released to the public - which also coincidentally made assessment of it's accuracy impossible since they were unwilling to share that information.

---

Quote:

---

Still, this is deflection over a nitpick point, especially since one might notice out of all the info I posted this is the only bit anyone cared to dispute.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
As for you Geeze, much of the info they put in eact "Fact" refutation was not publicly released prior to the article, and some of it has been dis-proven, yet it offers a 100% correlation with the shovel job offered to the commission assigned to investigate the matter, who themselves expressed doubts.

---

Quote:

---

You want a point by point refutation, in order to bog the discussion down and cause folk to lose interest so it all goes away, being that sophistry and disinformation are your primary tactics

---

Quote:

---

On 9/11 there were only 14 fighter jets on alert in the contiguous 48 states. No computer network or alarm automatically alerted the North American Air Defense Command (NORAD) of missing planes. "They [civilian Air Traffic Control, or ATC] had to pick up the phone and literally dial us," says Maj. Douglas Martin, public affairs officer for NORAD. Boston Center, one of 22 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regional ATC facilities, called NORAD's Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS) three times: at 8:37 am EST to inform NEADS that Flight 11 was hijacked; at 9:21 am to inform the agency, mistakenly, that Flight 11 was headed for Washington (the plane had hit the North Tower 35 minutes earlier); and at 9:41 am to (erroneously) identify Delta Air Lines Flight 1989 from Boston as a possible hijacking. The New York ATC called NEADS at 9:03 am to report that United Flight 175 had been hijacked—the same time the plane slammed into the South Tower. Within minutes of that first call from Boston Center, NEADS scrambled two F-15s from Otis Air Force Base in Falmouth, Mass., and three F-16s from Langley Air National Guard Base in Hampton, Va. None of the fighters got anywhere near the pirated planes.

---

Quote:

---

While heading a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) probe into the collapse of the towers, W. Gene Corley studied the airplane wreckage. A licensed structural engineer with Construction Technology Laboratories, a consulting firm based in Skokie, Ill., Corley and his team photographed aircraft debris on the roof of WTC 5, including a chunk of fuselage that clearly had passenger windows.

---

Quote:

---

Following up on a May 2002 preliminary report by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), a major study will be released in spring 2005 by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), a branch of the U.S. Department of Commerce. NIST shared its initial findings with PM and made its lead researcher available to our team of reporters.

---

Quote:

---

But jet fuel wasn't the only thing burning, notes Forman Williams, a professor of engineering at the University of California, San Diego, and one of seven structural engineers and fire experts that PM consulted. He says that while the jet fuel was the catalyst for the WTC fires, the resulting inferno was intensified by the combustible material inside the buildings, including rugs, curtains, furniture and paper. NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

Apparently you're unfamilar with editors, and I bloody told you that you were going to have to wait a bit, did I not ?

Look, I know your game, ok, push folk into spending countless hours running stuff down that you will dismiss out of hand to waste their time and frustrate them for your amusement,...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Yeah, I'd like to see that NIST report, cause I ain't seen a one of em sayin that - but lets give the benefit of the doubt for a moment, and just point out this wasn't public at the time neither, and it's somewhat contradictory to statements made by NIST even as late as Feb 2004.

---

Quote:

---

In no instance did NIST report that steel in the WTC towers melted due to the fires. The melting point of steel is about 1,500 degrees Celsius (2,800 degrees Fahrenheit). Normal building fires and hydrocarbon (e.g., jet fuel) fires generate temperatures up to about 1,100 degrees Celsius (2,000 degrees Fahrenheit). NIST reported maximum upper layer air temperatures of about 1,000 degrees Celsius (1,800 degrees Fahrenheit) in the WTC towers (for example, see NCSTAR 1, Figure 6-36).

However, when bare steel reaches temperatures of 1,000 degrees Celsius, it softens and its strength reduces to roughly 10 percent of its room temperature value. Steel that is unprotected (e.g., if the fireproofing is dislodged) can reach the air temperature within the time period that the fires burned within the towers. Thus, yielding and buckling of the steel members (floor trusses, beams, and both core and exterior columns) with missing fireproofing were expected under the fire intensity and duration determined by NIST for the WTC towers.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

I bloody told you that you were going to have to wait a bit, did I not ?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:


the psychology of conspiracy theories

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by out2theblack:

It's like the famous George Carlin quote about how stupid the 'average' person is , and the reality of how many people are stupider than THAT !

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by out2theblack:


Anyone else here think it an oddity that it was alleged that the WTC7 building was 'pulled' by the NYFD , and it exhibited the same freefall characteristics as Towers 1 & 2 at the WTC complex ?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
the world may be a mean, vicious, self serving place, and groups of people are in each others pockets, but basically it is also chaotic, disorganised and just not that capable of pulling this sort of stuff off.

---