Len Colby

If you are going to insinuate that I’m not credible perhaps you can cite examples of when I have been intentionally deceptive or major errors in my posts. I have made a few mistakes but have owned up to them when pointed out. As far as the paper I wrote about Rodriguez is concerned my credibility or lack there of isn’t that relevant because there are very few instances where the reader has to trust me everything is documented he contradicted himself on numerous occasions. So go ahead keep an open mind regarding Rodriguez, as Groucho said “I can feel the breeze from here”. Thanks for pointing out his site for me, I see he has a store, asks for donations and continues to go on junkets around the world, perhaps I will update the paper and suggest a possible profit motive. He seems to be one of the few people from the NYC area who is better off now than on September 10, 2001. I just e-mailed him I wonder how he’ll respond. I find it amazing how most “truthers” find it impossible to dismiss any of their so called “evidence” even after it has been debunked, Fetzer and others are still going on about there being “no Arab names on any of the flight manifests” years after this has been shown to be in error, Alex Jones and others still take Lauro Chavez seriously even though he claims to have flown into Kabul airport on a USAF C-130 September 16, 2001 which was a few months before the US invaded Afghanistan let alone the fall of Kabul and reopening of the airport.

Yes Sid I wrote it, do you still think this guy is credible?

The Ever Changing Story of William Rodriguez [NOTE -The Forum's software cut out my endnotes and endnote numbers, the complete version can be downloaded] Most backers of the “theory” that the Twin Towers collapsed due to controlled demolition (CD) put a great deal of weight on the claims of William Rodriguez that he and his co-workers heard and felt a loud explosion from below which threw them upwards and made the walls crack and sprinklers go off etc a few seconds before flight 11 crashed into the North Tower. There are two principal problems with his account: 1) It doesn’t make sense. 2) It differs substantially from earlier accounts he gave of what happened that morning and there are contradictions between his various retellings. 1 – Rodriguez’s story doesn’t make sense. Flight 11 crashed into the North Tower at 8:46 AM and the building collapsed from the top down almost two hours later at 9:28. I and other skeptics have asked “inside jobbers” on a few forums how setting off explosives in the basement fits into the scenario of a top down CD 102 minutes later and why the plotters would have set off the charges just before the impact. The best explanation I’ve seen is ‘maybe they screwed up and accidentally set the charges off early’. These are supposedly the same people who set off charges on all 110 floors of each tower over a period of 8.4 – 16 seconds precisely enough that the buildings collapsed with out any noticeable pauses. If we calculate for the most commonly cited time 10 seconds it comes to an average of 0.09 seconds per floor and since the collapse was accelerating the interval between floors at the end would have been close to 0.04 seconds. Any destruction of structural supports in the basement serious enough to facilitate a later collapse would presumably have made the towers unstable yet there are no reports (that I have seen) of either rocking or swaying except in the immediate aftermath of the impacts. Nor has anyone else AFAIK reported a pre-impact explosion, a few of his co-workers joined his RICO suit none have backed this part of his story. His version is contradicted by Mike Pecoraro who was in the 6th subbasement Rodriguez was in the 1st said he thought the explosion came from the 2nd or 3rd. He makes no mention of him or his co-worker feeling even a vibration when the 767 struck the top of 1 WTC, his coworker but not Pecoraro himself noticed the lights flicker. That is not to say there weren’t explosions in the subbasements as Pecoraro and others have attested. There are believed to have been caused by jet fuel which had traveled down elevator and utility shafts being ignited. This was discussed in both the 9/11 Commission and NIST reports. It is very much part of the “official story”. Only Rodriguez party to a multi-billion dollar lawsuit against the Bushes and various other defendants claim these explosions proceeded impact. A few other witnesses described feeling explosions in their proximity in the basement only Rodriguez (AFAIK) claims to have felt an explosion on another floor. There is no record of him making such claims before late May 2005 almost four years after the fact and months after the lawsuit had been filed. 2) It differs substantially from earlier accounts he gave of what happened that morning and there are contradictions between his various retellings. He gave one of his most recent and most embellished retellings of what happened that morning at a “truther” event organized by Alex Jones on June 25, 2006 he said: “As I was talking to a supervisor at 8:46 like chitchatting and all of a sudden we hear PAAH very strong BOOM!!! An explosion so hard that it pushed us UPWARDS, UPWARDS!!…The explosion was so hard that all the walls cracked the false ceiling fell on top of us, the sprinkler system got activated and when I was going to verbalize it was a generator we hear BOOM! All the way at the top" However when he was interviewed over the phone live by Aaron Brown on CNN at 1:30 PM, September 11, 2001 he gave a very different much less dramatic account of what had happened only a few hours earlier: “RODRIGUEZ: I was in the basement, which is the support floor for the maintenance company, and we hear like a big rumble. Not like an impact, like a rumble, like moving furniture in a massive way. And all of sudden we hear another rumble, and a guy comes running, running into our office, and all of skin was off his body. All of the skin.” He recounted his actions up to the point he took cops and firefighters up to the 39th floor and made no mention of hearing any other sounds or explosions though he would later claim he heard “many explosions” including one so strong he “thought it was an earthquake” and heard strange noises like people “moving heavy equipment and furniture” (gee where have I heard that before?). CNN posted a story the next day in which he gave a very similar account. He said nothing about sprinklers going off or walls cracking or ceilings falling. The “rumble” that sounded like “moving furniture in a massive way” had not yet been transformed into a “BOOM!!” that sounded like a generator exploding (or a truck bomb as he would later claim he thought the first noise was) and was so strong it pushed him and his co-workers upwards and cracked the walls etc and notably he said nothing about the direction the noise had come from. In my many years living apartment buildings I’ve frequently heard people moving furniture on the floor above me but never from the floor below, it’s an odd way to describe a sound from below and wouldn’t remind me of a generator exploding or a truck bomb. Nor did he say anything along those lines during another interview that day. It is interesting to note that even in the complaint for his famous RICO suit filed October 21, 2004 against the Bush Administration, PNAC, the 9/11 Commission and numerous other defendants nothing is ever said, either in the part where his actions that day are described or in the outline of the “evidence” against the defendants, about an explosion from below pushing him upward, cracking the walls, setting off the sprinklers or causing the false ceiling to fall etc. In fact there is no mention at all of what he experienced at the time of the impact. Nor is anything said about his testimony before the commission. The parts below are especially telling (emphasis added): 2. Rodriguez, at great risk to his own life, re-entered the Towers three times after the first, North Tower impact at about 8:46 A.M., and is believed to be the last person to exit the North Tower alive… <snip> 10. Plaintiff avows at the outset that he does not know all the facts of the catastrophes of 9-11, but his study of facts available in the public domain — most of which come from “conventional” or “mainstream” news media, or agencies of the U.S. government — have convinced him, to a moral certainty (as they have convinced millions of Americans who, regrettably, are being ignored by Congress and establishment media) that the “Official Story” is a government propaganda exercise, and a “Big Lie” in the ugly tradition of Joseph Goebbels, to maintain the control of the elite over the masses. 11. Plaintiff’s study of 9-11 leads him to conclude, and therefore to allege upon information and belief as set forth below, that President George W. Bush, his father, former President George H. W. Bush, his brothers, <snip> Senior Political Advisor Karl Rove, and others of the Defendants had actual knowledge, prior to September 11, 2001, that on or about that date one or more commercial airliners would be commandeered or diverted, flown into a landmark building or structure within the territory of the United States, and that the deaths of all or most of the passengers on the airplane(s), as well as hundreds or thousands of people in and about the targeted building(s), would result. In other words his belief that 9-11 was an "inside job" didn't stem from his experiences on 9-11 but rather from his "study of 9-11" based on “facts available in the public domain”. He listed the 23 “facts” upon which he based his belief 1, 2 and 7 WTC had been subject to controlled demolition on pages 42 – 52 and no mention is made of his personal experiences that day or unusual noises or explosions heard by anyone in the towers even where he stated his belief that “the true perpetrators of the attacks placed and detonated explosives below ground level beneath each of the towers, where the columns were affixed to bedrock. ” In fact he stated the explosives were detonated “1-1/4 to 1-1/2 hours after” the crashes. An article from the American Free Press (AFP – an extreme rightwing “inside job” paper and websute) about the lawsuit also fails to mention his testimony or any noises or explosions Rodriguez heard or felt. Excerpts of an interview with his lawyer are included and as in the complaint he says that the case is based on publicly available information . Apparently his 1st first recorded mention of an explosion from below came in a May 25, 2005 interview with which was quoted in an article published in mid June. He made no mention of the force of the explosion pushing him and others upward, he only added that into the mix about a year later: At 8:45, he was talking with his supervisor in the first basement level, B1, when he heard and felt a tremendous explosion. Rodriguez told AFP that he felt the first explosion come from a lower basement level. The towers had 6 basement levels. The building shook, the ceiling fell, and some of the sprinklers began spraying. "Oh my God, what happened?" Rodriguez, who survived the first bombing of the WTC in 1993, told AFP he recalled saying to his boss. "I think it was the electrical generators." No sooner had he spoken these words than a second explosion shook the building, this time coming from the upper part of the tower. This second shock, Rodriguez said, shook the building and cracked the walls. "The building moved," he said. <snip> Rodriguez then felt a third explosion coming from above. "The ground was shaking," he said. "I thought it was an earthquake." <snip> Thinking that a bomb had been exploded in the building, Rodriguez checked the trucks he passed. <snip> [Referring to the period he was in one of the North Tower’s stairwells helping firefighters] "I heard many, many explosions," Rodriguez said. Odd that he forgot to tell Aaron Brown about the third explosion which was so hard he thought it was an earthquake, he didn’t mention it in any other account. There are inconsistencies between this and future retellings of what happened. In this one the walls cracked after the SECOND “explosion” but later he said this happened after the FIRST one. He told the AFP he told his boss he though "…it was the electrical generators" just before the second “explosion” but in his other retellings said the plane impacted before he could “verbalize it”. Shortly after his first AFP interview he spoke to Greg Szymanski, another reporter for the far rightwing weekly, for an article released June 24, 2005. Even though cracking walls are mentioned he seems to have forgotten about the ceiling and sprinklers he in fact left those out of most accounts until the speech he gave a year later. He had yet to mention being pushed upwards only saying that the floor had “vibrated” and “rattled”: "When I heard the sound of the explosion, the floor beneath my feet vibrated, the walls started cracking and it everything started shaking," said Rodriguez, who was huddled together with at least 14 other people in the office. Rodriguez said Anthony Saltamachia, supervisor for the American Maintenance Co., was one of the people in the room who stands ready to verify his story. "Seconds after the first massive explosion below in the basement still rattled the floor, I hear another explosion from way above," said Rodriguez. "Although I was unaware at the time, this was the airplane hitting the tower, it occurred moments after the first explosion." A July 2005 article from an “inside job” site indicates that Rodriguez’s ‘explosion from below’ story 1st appeared in “late last June”. In a September 2005 interview on INN by Lenny Charles with him and Szymanski he gave a similar account, he made no mention of being pushed upwards, walls cracking, sprinklers going off, false ceilings collapsing or an earthquake like third explosion (though he said he felt explosions while going up the stairs). I am not sure of the date of the interview but when he spoke to the makers of Loose Change the second noise was only a light “poooh” and no mention is made of being push upwards, walls cracking, sprinklers going off or false ceilings collapsing: “All of a sudden we hear BOOM! (claps hands together at waist level loudly) and I said to myself ‘Oh my God! I think it was a generator’ and I was going to verbalize it and when I finish saying that in my mind I hear poooh (claps hands less loudly than before over head) right on top pretty far away…” In his January 2006 affidavit for his RICO the version stayed pretty much the same a loud explosion from below which sounded like a generator exploding preceded the impact from above. Walls cracked after the first “explosion” and the floor vibrated but there is no mention of sprinklers, ceilings, being pushed upward or an earthquake like third explosion felt before leaving the basement: Less than a minute before the plane struck the North Tower, as I later learned, between approximately the 93rd and the 98th floors, I heard a very loud, explosive sound. I was still in the maintenance office on B1 at the time. From my long familiarity with the sub-basements, I believed that the explosion came from below, from level B2 or B3. My thought was that an electrical generator on one of those levels must have exploded. Not only did I hear what I believe to have been a large explosion in a lower-level basement of the North Tower, but I felt the floor beneath my feet vibrating, I saw the concrete walls of the maintenance office crack, and everything started shaking. Seconds later, there occurred a second, distinct, and large explosion which caused the maintenance office to shake for some seconds. This, I later learned, was an aircraft striking the north façade of WTC1 above the ninetieth floor. On the day of the attacks Rodriguez said the first noise was a rumble that sounded like “moving furniture” a few years later it was transformed in a loud and violent “BOOM!” which cracked the walls but he still remembered noises like moving furniture but the time and place had now changed: “On the 33rd floor, I went into a maintenance office. I found a woman on that floor, conscious but laying in a fetal position, apparently frozen with fear and not knowing what to do. I spent a few moments on the 33rd floor. It impressed me as very strange that, immediately above, almost certainly on the 34th floor of the North Tower, there was much noise, as if workers were moving heavy equipment and furniture around on that floor. One reason this impressed me as highly peculiar was that the 34th floor was supposedly vacant. The floor was off-limits, supposedly due to ongoing construction on that floor, and elevators did not stop there. It was at about this moment that I began to feel afraid.” He gave a similar account in the Szymanski article: “I heard strange sounds coming form the 34th floor, loud noises like someone moving and thumping heavy equipment and furniture. I knew this floor was empty and stripped due to construction work” But on another occasion when he was interviewed on St. Louis radio station he said: “On my up, something very strange happened on the 34th floor, which was a completely vacant floor, gutted for construction. As I was walking by the stairwell door, I heard these very loud noises like somebody moving heavy dumpsters or office furniture. I don’t know what it was but it was very strange because I know it was supposed to be a vacant floor.” Uuuum, so did he hear the “strange noises” when he was in the 33rd floor maintenance office while he was helping the woman or when he “was walking by the [34th floor] stairwell door”? One could he argue both were true but then it would be odd that he wouldn’t have said this and it doesn’t make sense as per the first account that he wasn’t sure which floor the noises were coming from if he also heard them through the door. A few other things are odd about this account: 1) There was indeed construction work being done that morning . Why would he think it strange to hear such noises coming from a floor undergoing construction? It can’t have been completely “off limits” how would the “on going construction” work get done? 2) The floor wasn’t completely stripped, vacant or off limits because in addition to the construction work the PANYNJ had offices there . In fact that’s where John O'Neill, the ex FBI agent who started his job as head of security the day before and died when the tower collapsed had his office and the elevators stopped on that floor . He claims to have earlier left “his backpack in his closet on the 33rd floor” as he presumably did every day, he had worked (indirectly) for the PA for nearly 20 years how could he not have known the PA had offices on the floor above the maintenance office where he had his closet? If the area above his closet and the maintenance office was the part undergoing construction presumably he would have heard noises of people moving heavy equipment before. 3) The story doesn’t really make sense from a CD perspective, are we to believe the plotters’ henchmen were still planting heavy explosive charges at that point? What if somebody walked in on them? He doesn’t explain why he didn’t the door wasn’t he there to give the NYFD access to the locked floors? I’ve been asked why Rodriguez would so embellish and alter his story. That is something I can only speculate about, all that I can say is that his version of events changed radically sometime between October 21, 2004 and May 25, 2005 and there are inconsistencies in his versions since then. His supporters claim that he tried to tell or told his story earlier, that he says “that in countless interviews with mainstream reporters his words have either been deleted, manipulated or made to fit the official government account” included among those who did this were the NY Times, NBC the authors of the best selling book “102 Minutes” and the 9/11 Commission . They all, he claims, omitted his accounts of “bombs in the basement”. He claims in fact that it was being censored by the “main stream media” and the commission’s ignoring of his testimony in the final report that led him to speak out publicly and file the RICO suit . Though hard to disprove this doesn’t fit the known facts: - He spoke live on CNN at least twice on 9/11 less than 5 hours after flight 11 crashed into 1 WTC and told a very different version of events. - The complaint for the RICO suit makes no mention of the noises he heard or his testimony before the commission. - He didn’t tell any alternate media and/or truthers about what happened until May 2005. - He claimed to have testified before the commission “behind closed doors” but the makers of a documentary about him claims to contain “archival footage … [of] his appearance in front of the 9/11 Commission” the website for the film apparently made primarily before he “went public” makes no mention of a ‘bomb in the basement’ etc. His testimony was covered by the press and reports his claim to have seen a hijacker casing the towers a few month before the attacks but nothing about a pre-impact explosion . Are we to believe his live comments we some how altered? Are we to believe he filed the RICO because the 9/11 Commission omitted his telling them about the pre-impact explosion but failed to mention the explosion or his testimony before the commission in the 237 page complaint? He also claims that “his interviews [were] edited by the English-speaking (but not the Spanish-) media” . If this is true perhaps he or one of his supporters can point out an example of a Spanish interview from before May 25, 2005 where he said something about the “explosions”, as of February 22, 2007 no such clips were available on the two biggest internet video hosts YouTube and Google Video . Additionally his claims of censorship don’t explain why he hadn’t previously told any “truther” media about the explosion or the inconsistencies of story since “speaking out”. In the 17th century Algernon Sidney said “Liars need to have good memories.” Mr. Rodriguez it seems is the former but doesn’t have the latter. What are Rodriguez’s motives for embellishing what happened that morning? My best guess is a desire for fame and fortune especially the former. When he was a young man in Puerto Rico he dreamed of becoming “…a magician, the greatest illusionist in the Caribbean basin” and had been “featured on TV escaping from a chained straight jacket while hanging from a burning rope” and “he became a fixture on television and stage all over Puerto Rico” and was even featured on the Italian TV network RAI . According to the makers of a film about him “William Rodriquez… moved from Puerto Rico to New York with the dream of a career on stage…. As a young man, William trained to become an escape artist… In 1982, he moved to New York City with the dream of making it on the biggest stage of them all...” Since coming to the mainland semi-fame and statute came and went a few times. He was an assistant to the Amazing Randi for a while but was unable to find work as a magician’s and became a janitor at the WTC . For a while he worked as sort of an assistant to NY State Governor Mario Cuomo who many people speculated would make a formidable presidential candidate. But George Pataki defeated Cuomo in 1994 and was an anonymous janitor again, then after 9/11 he was proclaimed a national hero honored by the president and congress of the United States. But then like many other people who became well know for their actions that morning his “15 minutes of fame” faded. He was unemployed for three years and was even homeless for a while having to sleep in his car . Then he discovered the “ ‘truth’ movement” or the “ ‘truth’ movement” discovered him and he became well known in the movement but he was just one of many truthers of note, his tale of a pre-impact explosion however turned him into one of the movements stars. He went on speaking tours around the world and even met high level government officials in countries such as Venezuela and Malaysia; to millions of “truthers” he is a hero, sure beats being a homeless unemployed ex-janitor sleeping in your car. It seems odd that he would have accepted an award from Bush if he suspected the President’s involvement in 9/11. He might well be convinced that 9/11 really was an “inside job” and believes that his “sexed up” version of events will help the cause. It’s also possible he embellished his story due to his post traumatic stress disorder for which he received therapy People have asked me how I could doubt the word of a nationally and internationally recognized hero like Rodriguez. I have two answers for that, one is that there is no direct action between heroism and honesty the other is that I do believe him, I believe the 2001 – 2004 William Rodriguez not the post May 25, 2005 William Rodriguez. There are also problems with his accounts of what happened while he was in the stairs, but those will have to wait. Rodriguez__s_ever_changing_story.doc

Actually I've made it clear I doubt the LNT regarding the JFK assassination though I don't believe the Z film was faked and that I beleve there was more to the October Surprise (or actually the lake their of) that we've been told nor do I believe James Earl Ray alone killed MLK jr. What CT don't YOu believe? The evidence overwhelmingly indicates the "official" versions of 9/11 and the moon landings are (a least for the most part) what happened. What does any of this have to do with the topic of this thread?

So now Nichols claims that McVeigh told him (perhaps let slip out) that a high ranking FBI agent was directing the bombing. In the 12 years since the incident this is the first record of him saying such a thing. Though its exculpatory he said nothing during either trial even during sentencing phase even when he was facing the death penalty. Smells like 100% unadulterated USDA approved grade AAA bull manure to me!

OBL isn't your typical mass murderer and he had good reason to have denied carrying out the attack a confession would have left the Taliban without an excuse not to extradite him There is speculation the tape was the product of a sting operation see the TBS link from my previous post and the 911myths link from Matthew's Also two people who bear strong resemblances to two know OBL associates appear in the tape http://911myths.com/html/ghaith_and_zawahiri.html

1) Who besides Alex Jones and Barrett think Lawrence is “America's top academic Bin Laden expert”? - He isn’t the “author of Messages to the World: The Statements of Osama Bin Laden,” but rather the book’s editor, he wasn’t the person who translated OBL’s ‘wit and wisdom’ into English so we can’t be sure of his command or Arabic. http://www.nybooks.com/articles/18750 - He has edited, authored or coauthored about 16 books mostly about Islam, “Messages to the World” was the only one concerning OBL only one other, “Defenders of God”, is seems deals with fundamentalist Islam but doesn’t seem to focus on ‘Jihadists’ and also examines fundamentalist Christianity and Judaism. http://tinyurl.com/2apka5 - There is no indication in his extensive CV of any interest in OBL beyond having edited the book. http://www.duke.edu/web/muslimnets/mcw_bio/bruce/cv2005.rtf 2) Nor are we ever told why he thinks “It's bogus”. So all it boils down to an expert on Islam with no apparent expertise in OBL, Jihadists o fundamentalist Islam who edited a book of OBL’s speeches thinks the tape was a fake but we aren’t told why. Is this really compelling enough to start a new thred, esp since the tape has been discussed elsewhere on this forum? I think not. Al Jazera’s London bureau chief and the editor-publisher of an academic journal about Arab and Islamic media both agreed the tape is authentic My intuition as a journalist told me when I watched the tape on CNN that it was authentic and that it was Bin Ladin <snip> Until I got to meet Ramzi and Khalid there was a lot of doubt as to the possibility that that tape might have been fabricated. But I got it on videotape from one of the other people from Al-Qa'ida who were there at the apartment that the tape was legitimate. I asked him whether that tape was genuine and he said it was. And in the end when I went back I put that Saudi Sheikh's video tape with Bin Ladin on and listened to it for four or five times, and certain bits and pieces that Bin Ladin said on that tape fit in very nicely with what Ramzi and Khalid had said to me. You know like the first time that they knew of the zero hour. SAS: I understand what you are saying and I've been convinced of that tape's authenticity since the beginning. And your experience just confirms it. http://www.tbsjournal.com/Archives/Fall02/Fouda.html As for the images both sides will see what they want to see. Other stills from the same tape look very much like OBL to me.

It comes from a section of the report dealing with military transformation, creating a dominant global military force, including "radically new designs" of weaponry, the suggestion that aircraft carrier production be ended, etc. The section makes no mention of "telecommunications systems," except insofar as such systems might conceivably be included under "new operational concepts," whatever those might be. It is this transformation of the U.S. military, the report says, that can take a long time, absent "a new Pearl Harbor." You’re right Ron I did misremember and misstate that. The quote came from a chapter concerned with modernizing the military and the first paragraph emphasized “information technologies”. It’s been a while since I read it (OK skimmed just that chapter) and I transposed ‘information’ to ‘communications’. The quote comes from section V (five) “CREATING TOMORROW’S DOMINANT FORCE” The first paragraph reads: “To preserve American military preeminence in the coming decades, the Department of Defense must move more aggressively to experiment with new technologies and operational concepts, and seek to exploit the emerging revolution in military affairs. Information technologies, in particular, are becoming more prevalent and significant components of modern military systems. These information technologies are having the same kind of transforming effects on military affairs as they are having in the larger world. The effects of this military transformation will have profound implications for how wars are fought, what kinds of weapons will dominate the battlefield and, inevitably, which nations enjoy military preeminence.” The actual quote cames four paragraphs later “Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor. Domestic politics and industrial policy will shape the pace and content of transformation as much as the requirements of current missions…” Latter it goes on about the need for: “Global missile defense”, “Control of space and cyberspace” and “transforming conventional forces.” http://www.newamericancentury.org/Rebuildi...casDefenses.pdf PDF pgs 62-3 My basic point still stands nowhere did the report (not memo) indicate “the(y) needed a “a Pearl Harbor incident”” Len

Assertions - evidence + $ 1 will get you a cup of coffee in New York!

I am sorry if I offended you by calling you a “wide-eyed extremist”. That was my genuine impression of your performance. Of course the BBC wanted the audience to get this impression of you and no doubt by skilful editing they got what they wanted. You were set-up. It is normal for newscasters, film makers etc to shoot more footage than they use. I don't think there is any evidence Fetzr was "set up" even in the "truth movement" he is seen as an extremist Jones and Ryan and most of the other scientists left his group after he started backing “the towers were destroyed by ‘star wars’ beams” and other, in the word of the ex-members "unscientic theories". http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2006/...rs-for-911.html http://stj911.org/faq.html http://stj911.org/scholars_for_911_truth.html I don’t understand why you think this was deceptive if Avery was deceptive he deserves to be ‘unmasked’. Quite true however the "Pearl Harbor" has been taken out of context. It came from a section of a report calling for modernizing telecommunications systems and stated barring such an incident it would take many years for this to happen.

___________________________ Il fait trois exactments (mon Francais, she is rouge)... What are you concuring with John (Gillespie)? John Simkin's contention that many 9/11 CTists (including some on this forum) appear to be lunatics and this makes other conspiracists look bad or Jack and Peter's misinterpritation, apperently thinkin he was saying the conspiracy skepticks were disinfo agents?

As you can see, I never called Jim Fetzer a "crackpot". Once again Jack demonstrates a problem understanding what he reads.

Is your stipend based on how many falsities you put in your posts, books, articles, interviews and presentations? According to Leslie Robertson the lead structural engineer of the WTC said the studies they carried out were for planes travel at approach speed about 180 mph. The planes that hit the towers were estimated to have flying at 470 – 590 mph thus imparting far more force and kinetic energy than anticipated. In 1964 the Port Authority claimed studies had been carried showing the towers could survive 600 mph crashes but Robertson denied ever having seen such a study. Unfortunately no documentation has been found to say who was right. DeMartini was the onsite construction manager not the project manager. Robertson they didn’t study the effects of fire on the structure. It is believed a combination of fire and structural damage is what caused the collapses. No one is claiming the steel melted Like Steve I’d like to see some evidence to back up this claim based on nothing more than the assertion of Kevin Ryan, a chemist who worked for a water testing company bought by UL a few months before 9-11 that his boss told him this. Please list the qualified structural engineers, fire engineers or metallurgists who agre with you on this. Basement explosions are part of the “official story” they are believed to have been caused by fireballs and/or unignited jet fuel traveling down elevator and utility shafts. The destruction of the press was not reported by Rodriguez but by Mike Peccorato (sp?) another maintenance worker. Rodriguez was not the tower’s senior custodian, he swept the stairs. ”Willie reported that the explosion occurred prior to the airplane's impact, a claim that has now been substantiated in a new study by Craig Furlong and Gordon Ross, "Seismic Proof: 9/11 was an Inside Job", which demonstrates that these explosions actually took place as much as 14 and 17 seconds prior to the airplanes impacts.” That not what “Willie” said on 9/11 nor when he filled his lawsuit, in fact he seems to have trouble keeping his story straight (more on this to come). No one else backs this claim. Neither Furlong or Ross have any qualifications in seismic analysis. Their theory is little more than a mountain out of a molehill. “Heavy steel construction buildings like the Twin Towers, built with more than 100,000 tons of steel, are not even capable of "pancake collapse", which normally only occurs with concrete structures of "lift slab" construction and could not occur in "redundant" welded-steel buildings, such as the towers, unless every supporting column were removed at the same time, as Charles Pegelow has pointed out to me.” Pegelow, one of only about 2 or 3 structural engineers to state publicly he thinks the towers were brought down with explosives, spent his entire career except for about a year as an intern in the early 70’s working on deep sea oil platforms thus one must wonder what his competency is to say how a building should have performed. There is no evidence he studied the types of welds and bolts etc used to join the various parts of the tower together. Numerous engineers with expertise in building construction disagree with him. “The destruction of the South and North Towers in about 10 seconds apiece is even faster than free fall with only air resistance, which would have taken at least 12 seconds, which, as Judy Wood has emphasized, is an astounding result that would have been impossible without extremely powerful explosives.” Free fall time in a vacuum would have been about 9 seconds, I’ve never seen a study indicating how much time air resistance would add. The collapses probably took 12 – 16 seconds. “The towers are exploding from the top, not collapsing to the ground, where the floors do not move, a phenomenon that Judy Wood has likened to two gigantic trees turning to sawdust from the top down, which, like the pulverization of the concrete, the official account cannot possibly explain.” Judy Wood’s area of expertise is dental fillings. The towers were 80 – 90 % air and made from small (compared to the towers themselves) pieces. Thus they were nothing like trees (or dental fillings). No studies have shown how much of the concrete was pulverized or to what degree. The KE released by the collapses was enormous. “WTC-7 came down in a classic controlled demolition at 5:20 PM/ET after Larry Silverstein suggested the best thing to do might be to "pull it", displaying all the characteristics of classic controlled demolitions, including a complete, abrupt, and total collapse into its own footprint, where the floors are all falling at the same time, and so forth, an event so embarrassing to the official account that it is not even mentioned in THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT” . The it Silverstein was referring to probably was the fire fighting – search and rescue operation around the building. Pull a building means to pull it down with cables. The building collapsed a bit to the side numerous firefighters said the building seem ready to collapses for hours before it did. The “pull it” theory implicates the NYFD in the demolition. No reasonable explaination as to why Silverstein would admit to insurance fraud (and probably murder) has been given “The hit point at the Pentagon was too small to accommodate a 100-ton airliner with a 125-foot wingspan and a tail that stands 44 feet above the ground; the kind and quantity of debris was wrong for a Boeing 757: no wings, no fuselage, no seats, no bodies, no luggage, no tail! Which means that the building was not hit by a Boeing 757!” Complete BS the hole was about 100 feet wide IIRC presumanbly the bomb proof wall was stronger than the planes aluminum wings. Numerous 757 parts were recovered as were numerous body PARTS as obviously complete bodies would have been unlikely to have survived such an impact. “The Pentagon's own videotape does not show a Boeing 757 hitting the building, as even Bill O'Reilly admitted when it was shown on "The Factor"; but at 155 feet, the plane was more than twice as long as the 71-foot Pentagon is high and should have been present and visible; it was not, which means that the building was not hit by a Boeing 757!” The Pentagon tapes are low frame rate low resolution and shoot from several hundred feet away. All they show is a blur. There is no way to tell what they show. Odd that if there was a conspiracy after havin the tapes in their possession the “plotters” didn’t alter the tape. “The aerodynamics of flight would have made the official trajectory--flying at high speed barely above ground level--physically impossible; and if it had come it at an angle instead, it would have created a massive crater; but there is no crater and the government has no way out, which means that the building was not hit by a Boeing 757!” This claim is only supported by one (ex) airline pilot who also happens to be a political extremist and someone who claims to be an aeronautical engineer. The supposed engineer claimed he was a pilot but isn’t listed in the FAA database and AFAIK has yet to say in which state he holds his engineering license so that claim can be verified. Numerous aeronautical engineers and pilots have said the trajectory is possible. “If Flight 93 had come down as advertised, then there would have been a debris field of about a city block in size, but in fact the debris is distributed over an area of about eight square miles, which would be explainable if the plane had been shot down in the air but not if it had crashed as required by the government's official scenario.” As already show on this forum the far-flung debris was all light weight items found beyond the planes flight path. The only exception was an engine part found 1000 - 2000 feet downhill from the crash site and like the rest beyond its flight path. There no reports of debris along the planes flight path. A few crash investigators say such dispersal in normal. “There are more, especially about the alleged hijackers, including that they were not competent to fly the planes;” This is only possibly true with Hanjour. All three pilots who hit their targets held commercial pilot’s licenses. Hitting tall buildings 50% wider than a runway would not have been mush of a challenge. No one who was actually familiar with Hajour’s piloting skill said he would not have been able to hit the Pentagon one even said he would have had “no trouble” doing so. “ their names were not on any passenger manifest;” BS they were on the manifests published by the Boston Globe of the Logan flights (11 and 175) a few days after the attacks and the manifests released after the Moussaui trial. “they were not subject to any autopsy;” They were autopsied as “John Does” because the medical examineer didn’t have DNA samples from their families. “several have turned up alive and well;” BS different people with the same name were located. “the cell phone calls appear to have been impossible” The flaws of the so called study carried out far from the flight paths has been pointed out elsewhere on this forum. Many of the calls were placed on AirPhones.

More smoke to cover-up your lack of evidence to support your previous claims. Is there any data to back up Foxman's claim? Might it have been a bit of hyperbole? If the Western media had played up “the Jews did it” theories you would complain that they were trying to paint the “truth movement” with the anti-Semitic brush by association

No John I understood that, you seem to have misunderstood me. reread my last post. You did seem to confuse Jack and Peter though. Having debated “inside jobbers” (i.e. people who think 9/11 was an “inside job”) on a few forums and visited their websites I have doubts about your theory that the Beeb ‘screened in’ the wackos, it might well have been a representative sample especially since Shayler believes that the Twin Towers weren’t hit by passenger jets an idea at the fringe even of the “truth movement”. I share your concerns about Fetzer making progressives who question the actions of the current American and British administrations look foolish. In fact Josiah “Tink” Thompson and I discussed this problem on another forum before signing up here and I discussed this with a member (now a moderator) here. Len Jack, John didn’t refer to Fetzer as a “crackpot” or “daft” nor “unscientific” or “irrational” though one could argue he insinuated the latter two. He did say your friend “APPEARED to be (a) wide-eyed extremist” but none of these expressions are ad homonyms. You could argue they constitute personal attacks but coming from someone who has labeled his opponents “accessories after the fact” to murder, “assholes”, “provocateurs” “stupid” and “goons” you don’t really have a leg to stand on. How different are “unscientific” or “irrational” or “appeared to be a wide-eyed extremist” from “ignorant” which you argued wasn’t a personal attack. Even after the moderator system was set up you referred to people who disagree with you as being like “hyenas”.

There is AFAIK no rule or norm against members who aren’t administrators or moderators from pointing out when they think fellow members have violated forum rules indeed it is not uncommon to see such complaints. And no wasn’t seriously suggesting myself a moderator since I have been involved in acrimonious exchanges with several members of this forum and am far from being John’s favorite member that would have been as likely to happen as Dennis Kucinich being elected president.

John How ‘tongue in cheek’ was (if at all) your post? Wouldn’t it have been easier and more effective to have called an abler opponent to debate Shayler?* Do you think the Beeb in conjunction with MI5 keeps faux wackos on call waiting to call in on such occasions? Unfortunately it seems that a good number of the people who back the inside job theory do sound like they are off their psych meds. Yes some suggest the Illuminati were responsible others that explosive charges were built into the towers or that the hole in Shanksville was dug the day before. This even applies to some the movement’s leaders who propose theories such as: - The towers were destroyed by satellite based energy beams - No planes were involved in any of the “crashes” etc etc. Shayler by the way is a “no planer” according to an article by a certain Brendan O’Neill*. Perhaps O’Neill thinking Shayler stark raving mad under estimated him. It's also possible Shayler appeared better informed because he made up or distorted facts as "truthers" often do and he did in the video linked below**. Since he backs one of the more “fringe” theories it isn’t surprising to me the show would have gotten a lot of fringe callers. How many people who supported O’Neill got through? Do you really think as you seem to suggest that some of the “inside jobbers” here really are agents sent to make other conspiracists look bad? Peter and Jack since you seemed to agree with John’s suggestion I was wondering who amongst your fellow 9/11 CTists you think are the disinfo agents? (Rhetorical question since answering would probably violate forum rules). Len Such as the guy who runs 911myths.com . He is English and IIRC a Londoner. * http://www.newstatesman.com/200609110028 ** he also supposedly expresses similar views in this video but I didn’t have the patience to listen all the way through. http://www.nopers.com/video/398/david_shay...eblower_on__911

Griffin’s credentials in his field of expertise are quite impressive. His work on 9/11 has been quite sloppy citing sources like video game manuals or sources that don’t document their claims, his understanding of fire engineering is embarrassingly poor and he seems not to have read the NIST report because he seems unaware that several of his objections were addressed in it. [Order of letters changed for clarity] Bryn Jones is confused/misinformed Steve Jones was a Physics professor at BYU his areas of specialty are particle physics and fusion. He thinks Wood is crazy. No one says that jet fuel was the primary fuel source in the towers. Numerous fire engineers, structural engineers, metallurgists and controlled demo experts agree that the building contents could have and did burn hot and long enough to initiate collapse..Wood was a professor of mechanical engineering specializing in dental fillings she recently released a “paper” comparing the structure of the Twin Towers, which were about 90% air, to trees. She believes that: 1) Jones is a xxxx and his theories nonsense 2) The towers were destroyed by a Star Wars beam 3) The collapses should have come to a complete halt at regular intervals. What if my name really is Dorothy Gale and I was blown along with my dog Toto to Oz? On what other occasions have jetliners fuel for transcontinental flights flown high speed into center core steel buildings and not collapsed? The buildings didn’t collapse at free fall speed as free falling debris outpacing the collapse wave plainly shows. Actually the collapses were shown repeatedly on all American and most (if not all) foreign networks. The top down collapses didn’t really resemble bottoms up CD collapses.

There is no real evidence of such a “spy ring” in general or that the movers in particular were Mossad agents. Even if they were Mossad agents there is no evidence they had foreknowledge of the attacks This was debunked in the first post of the linked thread, please try and stay current.How do you explain the evident failure of the US justice system to pursue this case of some 200 foreign (Israeli) spies operating in the USA - with quite remarkable apparent connections to the 9-11 disasters? It was, after all, the largest spy network ever to be busted in the USA. How could the US Government behave so irresponsbily as to release these spies so they could return to Israel, leaving behind so many unanswered questions relating to 9-11? As pointed out in the other thread (yes after you made the post above) 1200 foreigners were arrested after 9/11, mostly for immigration violations, only 61 remained detained a year later. Once again no evidence that they were spys or that if they were had any foreknowledge of the attacks. (Recall that the Israelis were released within weeks of September 11th - in stark contrast to the fate of my countryman David Hicks, picked up in Afghanistan around the same time the Israelis were going home - and incarcerated ever since at Camp X-ray for alleged links with 'Al Qaida'). Yes like most of the other foreigners arrested for overstaying their visas they were relesed after paying their fines. Hicks was “captured fighting alongside the Taliban in Afghanistan” http://www.themonthly.com.au/excerpts/issu...xcerpt_001.html It is only a loose end in the minds of those whoses pre-existing biases lead them to believe it is.

I’ve seen no evidence they (the 200) were Mossad agents. About 1200 foreigners were arrested after 9/11* including lots of Brazilians are we to assume following your “logic” that they were all spys working for their governments? Only 61 were still held in Sept 2002* Might we suspect Brazilian, Irish and Bangladeshi involvement too? http://citypages.com/databank/24/1182/article11417.asp see lie 24) Can you cite any examples where people proven to be (not merely suspected by CT of being) Mossad agents acting in such a conspicuous manner. What about black ops folk for other intel services? Can you name any of the “many of Israeli operatives have held and/or continue to hold key positions of power in the Administration or on Capitol Hill”? Any evidence they are indeed “Israeli operatives” or does merely being Jewish and a supporter of Israel suffice? I’ve twice asked to provide evidence the Israeli movers were “celebrating” before the 2nd crash and you have yet to oblige me, should we all take that as a tacit admission on your part you don’t have any?

See post # 5. You post violates the rules of this forum. Do you actually have any evidence to back your claim? If not I suggest you withdraw it. Len, I'm unsure about others but I don't see it that way. For my part, Brian was talking about people in forums in general, and then mentioned the IMDB and JFK. I don't see an accusation on an Education Forum member per se. IMO. It is the same that if I said most conspiracy theorists were nutty (which I am using purely as an example). I am not directing the comment at a particular forum member or group of forum members. If I narrowed it down to 9/11 groups or JFK groups or Apollo groups, etc, then I might run the risk - but it would be dependent on the post. If some people believe there are a large number of paid disinformation agents on the internet, they are welcome to hold and voice that opinion. To accuse a forum member of being one of that group is unacceptable unless the person has conclusive (and I do mean conclusive) evidence to the contrary. Thanks, Evan,1) Duane's post referred to several members of this forum by name, Jack concurred and said those who disagree with him are "like hyenas" and Brian seemed to concur saying most are “disinfo” agents. 2) Brian on 1 or 2 (or perhaps more I’m not sure)previous occasions accused members of this forum of being “disinfo” agents, in light of the above it seemed reasonable to assume he was referring to people here as well. I took his reference to the IMdB forum as evidence for the existence of “disinfo” agents. IIRC he referred to the same forum when accusing members of this forum. Len

"Why cannot evolution be discussed on its own merits rather than resort to the crutch of Darwinists that religion is involved and that all anti-evoltionists are religious nuts? My position does not involve religion nor science, and that evolution is not only anti-religion, it is anti-scientific." Jack you injected a religious argument when you complained that that Evolution promotes secularism as if that were a bad thing. You seem to alluding to that again thus you contradict yourself. I agree that your “position does not involve…science” One reason evolutions mention religion is that by and whole opponents to the theory religious people and the only alternative theories I’ve seen involve a God like spirit or ET’s. "This theory should be able to stand on its own. None of its defenders have answered any of the questions I raised." Actually several of your questions have been answered but you have chosen to ignore it. "The question is about where life came from and how...not what happened to it after it got here. Darwin wondered about the differing species; I wonder where life itself came from. Evolution does not answer that question.c?" These are quite separate issues as has already been pointed out to you. Darwin did however speculate about biogenesis. He believed it liked occurred in a “warm little pond” You complain that modern science explains biogenesis as theorizing (approximate quote) ‘something coming from nothing’ where exactly do you believe life came from? What created what created life? Was it created from nothing?

See post # 5. You post violates the rules of this forum. Do you actually have any evidence to back your claim? If not I suggest you withdraw it.

This from the guy who falsely claims never to initiate presonal attacks. Perhaps he is completely unaware that the administrators and moderators of this forum are trying to discourage such reprehensible behavior.

Sid I asked you for evidence they were seen celebrating before the 2nd crash*. Even if they were it doesn’t prove much people are @$$holes. When TV crews show up to film where some poor soul got murdered here (normally with a sheet tossed over them) people make a point of being behind the reporter waving their arms and/or jumping up and down for attention. Israelis like Palestinians and Brazilians have been largely desensitized to violence. The futures trading analogy just won’t cut it for a few reasons 1) if true an obvious profit motive was involved 2) if true OBL or people linked to him could have been involved 3) it’s probably not true http://911myths.com/html/put_options.html According to your theory these guys were Mossad black ops guys, if you’re ridht they sound more like Keystone cops, can you cite any other examples of Mossad agents or even agents of another major intel service acting in such an obvious manner *Yes I know about what the woman who called the cops was indirectly quoted as saying, I just think it's inconclusive.