Len Colby

Bill I agree with you that the "stand down" or "run around" was far more likely to have been due to bumbling than something more sinester. I said this on another thread: (Ron as I explained on the other thread the Illuminati reference was a joke) Len

Because we have to consider what they heard (and saw) in conjunction with all the other evidence for government complicity in 9/11. And for the conspirators and their agenda, hitting those towers with planes wasn't enough. Those towers had to come down, spectacularly. (It's called "shock and awe.") And the people who put together such a well-planned military/intelligence operation were not going to leave catastrophic collapse of the towers to (very slim if non-existent) chance. Very little if any of the "evidence for government complicity in 9/11" is at all convincing. I don't hear any NYC first responders saying they believe it was contolled demo. Of the thousands of people who were in the towers that morning only 3 have come forward. They were maintainence workers who said they heard "bombs in the basement". The more likely explaination is that something else exploded. Bombs exploding in the basement long before the towers collapsed from the top down doesn't fit a CD senario very well.

What difference does that make? I'm talking about the "coincidence" that they just happened to hit that least vulnerable spot of the building, whether they knew what they were hitting or not. That's according to the official CT, of course. I think whoever was behind it knew exactly what they were doing, hitting that spot for an obvious reason: the military doing the least damage possible to its own (and making sure Rummy and the big brass were nowhere near the point of impact). It makes a difference because YOU had just argued that terrorists would have chosen to attack a different part of the Pentagon. I imagine the only intelligence they had was where the Pentagon was. Striking at the center as you suggested wouldn't have made any sense, it's an open field. It is far more than a coincidence that they struck the west side of the Pentagon since that was the direction they were flying from. Not having any reason to do so the pilot didn't circle around to hit the building from another side I don't know but it's likely, as the technology was available. Why wouldn't they use it? In fact, as I've posted elsewhere, the Chief Financial Officer of the Pentagon at the time was Dov Zakheim, whose job before then was in the remote controlled aircraft business. Another coincidence!! Only a coincidence is the remote control scenario made any sense. Such technology does exist but AFAIK it is only used on specially designed drones (and expensive toys) adapting that technology to retrofit it to huge passenger jets would not be so easy. Also when would such retrofitting of the planes have been done? It's not like some "black opps" guys could have slipped into the hangars and quickly plugged in some "black boxes" that would have taken control of the plane away from the pilots. Such retrofitting could only have been done with cooperation of the maintenance people in four different hangars and management from two different companies. It is hard to believe this could have been done without drawing the suspicion of people not involved esp. after the fact. The problem with the "inside job" theory is that too many people would have to be involved for it to be plausible. The conspirators didn't think the towers were enough. But after hitting the Pentagon, apparently they did call off the last plane (shooting it down over PA). But I'm not here to discuss all this. Your derisive reference to the Illuminati is a perfect example of why not. It's a complete and total waste of time. I just wanted to put my two cents worth in about the demolition question. I think the long-suppressed NYC oral histories are important in that regard, which is why the NYC politicians tried their damndest to keep the histories suppressed. My reference to the Illuminati was meant to be humorous not derisive, sort of like your Florshiem shoe analysis. Ron you didn't address the question. Knocking down the Towers obviously would have been enough. The icing on the cake attacks (the Pentagon and Capitol or White House) better fits the terrorist attack scenario. There is nothing conspiratorial about NYC trying to suppress the oral histories. Why would they have commissioned them in the first place if they wanted to cover up what happened? Do you think the Giuliani and Bloomberg administrations as well as the upper management of NYFD and NYPD were all in on it? Again you are involving too many people for the story to be believable. A conspiracy that dozens or hundreds of people are "in on" won't remain secret very long. There were 2 reasons not to release them 1) There release was blocked due to an order from a federal court in Virginia, 2) the privacy rights of the emergency personnel who were told their interviews were not going to be released. There is precedence for this ATC and CVR transcripts and tapes from plane crashes normally are not released to the public.

Piper, that is the opinion of a professional. Steve is a psychological councilor.

The problem with TGZFH is that most of the supposed experts do not know what they are talking about. Even Healy admitted thay none of them are "photo experts" Most of what Sherry said seemed like common sense to me but since I don't have any expertise I didn't say any thing. Once again when experts voice there opions the contradict the fantasies of Fetzer's "hand wavers"

I never said that about Piper. He's controversial and forthright, that's what I said. Maybe he has witnessed the American Government's treatment of native Americans and compared that to the Government's especially favorable policy towards Israel, leaving him with a jaundiced view of American foreign policy. I don't dismiss his theory about the assassination, not by a long stretch. Although he wasn't here long and didn't really address the assassination sufficiently, not one point raised by the howling mob caused me to doubt my suspicion of Israeli Government involvement. And none of Piper's inquisitors can answer the question first raised by Jeff: What is the justification for the huge annual financial and military aid program for Israel ? Mark - I read too much into your comments. You said he's "not a debater" and that his evidence was "only circumstantial". Since I wasn't sure I said you "...seem(s) to recognize...". You refer to his critics as "the howling mob" and his “inquisitors” but don't criticize his atrocious behavior. He did of course provoke anger and I suspect that was intentional. I assume he realizes that his case is weak thus he prefers to have his critics focus in him and his controversial views than his evidence. I propose that we (any interested forum members) read through the chapters he annexed and evaluate them on their merits. The last thing he wants is that people knowledgeable about the assassination find flaws in his research or analysis. This might even draw him back here. Hopefully if he comes back he will return 'toliet trained'. Also if any one finds other excerpts on the Web to post them here. America's policy in the Middle East is an important issue but really should be debated in another thread. The most appropriate place would be "political conspiracies" but I suggest that a new section be added "politically controversies" for issues like this that don't fit into any of the existing categories in the "Controversial Issues in History" sub forum. Len

Jeff I think you live a parallel universe with a different Ed. Forum and 2 different Piper threads. The First Amendment does not apply here because this is a private forum based in England. Piper however was granted free speech rights and basically shat on this forum. He revealed himself to be the bigot that he is and left because he choose too and is free to return until John or Andy say otherwise. Interestingly some of the most furious reactions to him didn't come from the Jewish/pro-Israeli members of the forum but from members that are neither. Even Mark seems to recognize that Piper has his head firmly implanted in his bowels. His version of events of course will be that he was hounded out of here by the Jews and "Israel lobby" and you to for reasons unknown echo that "Twilight Zone" version of reality. Len

Steve do you think you could make an objective psychological profile of Herr Piper?

This is not racism as Owen already pointed out but a religious principle. Orthodox members of most religions would not want their children marrying outside the faith. If the other party converts there is no restriction on "inter marriage". There is also no racial restrictions on conversions, I met a very dark skinned African American woman in NYC who had converted to Orthodox Judaism and was engaged. I saw a photo in the NY Times of a group of Hasidic (ultra-orthodox) Jews and one of them was Black! I know several converts one of whom is Japanese. There was even a case of a former Grand Wizard of the Klan who converted to Judaism. Piper's huffing and puffing is extremely hypocritical. Christopher Bollyn, who like Piper writes for the American Free Press and has worked for Carto for years is a frequent guest on David Duke's radio show. During one such interview Duke complained about how the Jews than run the media promote misogyny. He called an inter-racial relationship in one movie "disgusting". Bollyn concurred and said "They (the Jews) do it so that no one knows who they are any more". This fits with one of the reoccuring themes of Carto's publications, that Jews are responsible for most of America's (and the World's) social problem and moral decay. So to be morally consistent Piper should shun Bollyn and Duke as well as his boss! The only thing constant about Piper is his stupidity!!

God save us indeed from your ilk. Didn't you promise to leave and never return? Who said anything about Sharon all that you brought here was strawman arguments, hate and libelous charges. It makes sense you would work for Carto. ================================================================================ ======================================= John – I think we agree that in a democratic society all citizens have the right to freely air their concerns about their government. By extension in a democratic Internet forum don't the members have the right to raise their voice when they feel the moderator is wrong? I think the word "attacked" is too strong to describe the points I've raised which I think were legitimate. You have yet to reply to them. I may have over reacted a bit in the Piper threads but if I am 'touchy' about the Holocaust I think it's for understandable reasons . You suggested that I start a new forum with Tim, "that will include only allowing people to join who agree with your views". Let's not forget that I defended Piper's right to join and that John Dolva joined Tim in calling for his exclusion and that Andy seemed very uncomfortable with the idea of him becoming a member. If I have raised questions about the way it is run that is because I very much value this forum and my participation in it. I have dropped out of other forums because I didn't feel they were worth my time - because the level of discourse was low. I wish to remain a member of this forum in good standing but I won't refrain from making comments when I think some one even you or Andy are wrong. I also appreciate that you wear two hats, one as moderator who has to run this forum fairly and the other as other as a member with very strong convictions and that this is not always an easy balancing act. John Dolva said on the other thread he would be a very good forum moderator because as I understood it he would get too emotional. I don't think I would be a good moderator for the same reason, I don't know how impartial I could be. You do a very good job here in that regard, far better than I could do. But as I said before if I think you are wrong I won't hesitate from saying something if I think you are wrong. Peace, Len

Where exactly did you "endorse(s) the work of Deborah Lipstadt" Andy? Not on this forum apperently. http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...ghlite=lipstadt I am not familiar with Lipstadt's work but such a view is not necessarily based on the view that one ethnic group is better than another but considered important for cultural survival. Similar views are or were held by most ethnic groups. A Catholic friend of mine's parents were unhappy because she married a Protestant but a few years later they were accepting when her younger brother married a Jewess. I have a lot of contact with Native Brazilians, many of them don't allow marriage to members of other tribes or worse yet to "Brancos" ("Whites" a generic expression that applies to non-Natives independent of skin color) are they racists too? Piper - A confessed anti-Semite who works for Willis Carto (who said he considered "hating Niggers" normal) is hardly one to lecture someone else about racism.

I read those 2 chapters and youur case seems vary tenuous, people believed by some to have been involved in the assassination may have has some sort of connection to the Mossad. Your research was a limited number of secondary sources. Isn't it possible that you prefer that people talk about the Holocaust rather than the paltry evidence in your book? JFK was going to make a deal with Nasser? Could be but it sounds very unlikely to say the least!! Avram Cohen's book didn't stir up any near as much controversy, doesn't this undermine your point? Less than friendly or resistant to them developing atomic weapons? It was only Jews after all! May be if it was 6 million dogs you'd be more concerned. To bad he didn't finish the job! But wait you just said it was all a lie. Don't forget that your hero Hitler was also responsible for the deaths of several million non-Jews in the death camps including about 1 million Roma (Gypsies) I really doubt you'll be missed everyone here is a member of the "Israel lobby" or under it's sway My impression is that outside a circle of people who are already anti-Semitic or anti-Israel (no not the same thing) your book doesn't have much of an audience. You're preaching to the converted. Unfortunately thier is a worldwide market for hate

No one on this forum said you "originated" Higham's theory. I said "alleged or CITED", I've held my tongue up to this point but are you such an idiot that you didn't catch that? So the war in Iraqi is due to Israel? Can you prove that Herr Piper? So it's official now you are a Holocaust denier!! You're right never trust Jew!! The Sabbath is coming I have to go out now to kill a Christian baby. Even if you are right benefiting from a crime does not equal culpability. I don't think you've impressed many people on this board with your intellectual abilities. That type of phraseology should get under the skin of any decent person who cares about his fellow man independent of his race or religion etc. It is people like you who promote such ideology who are despicable. How true!. Yes but your book was next to the others has a similar theme and was released by the same publisher. Your boss for the last 25 years. Can you cite any examples? Even if it true I doubt the have it in the front. Relevance??? An author's biases are germane if there is reason to believe they affected his research or conclusions. You of course "stoked the fires" by citing Jewish involvement in various other crimes that are not related to the JFK assassination. You've accused other members of this forum of lying about you and I asked you to provide evidence. Instead of doing so you merely repeat the claim. Seems like you took lessons from Gobbels

Those of you following the Z-film alteration debate should remember that Healy after being asked repeatedly was unable to name a single movie made around the time of or before the assassination that use compositing as extensive as alleged in TGZFH*. He instead cited "Techniques of Special Effects Cinemaphotography" apparently the standard reference on the subject with out quoting a single word from the book itself. The book was written by Raymond Fielding, I got an e-mail from Mr. Fielding yesterday. Healy's own source says he is totally WRONG!! LOL!! Let's see: Robert Groden, considered by many to be the top photo and Z-film expert in the JFK research community, closely examined the original Z-film and says he has no doubt it was the original and show no signs of alteration. Roland Zavada the man who invented Kodachrome II, the type of film Zapruder used, closely examined the original Z-film. He said 1) it's definitely a cBottom of Formamera original 2) that any duplication or compositing would have been easily detected 3) the alleged alterations were not possible at the time. Oliver Stone who probably knows more about the assassination and the Z-film than any major film maker after consulting with his special effects people said the alleged alterations were not ´possible at the time and would have easily detected. And now Ray Fielding whose book Healy cited said the alleged alterations were not ´possible at the time and would have easily detected. Buy hey David Healy a VIDEOgrapher who refuses to discuss what film post production IF ANY he has, admits he is not a photo expert, refuses to answer numerous questions regarding holes in his theory, can't cite a single movie with similar compositing and uses strawman arguments say's it would have been a cinch, no problem. Hey they could make those alterations that appeared in Life in a few hours in a lab that couldn't even process Kodachrome, simple as pie!!! David unless you can come up with a source OTHER THAN YOURSELF who says such alteration was possible at the time and could escape detection your theory is in the words of the munchkins of Oz, "legally, morally, ethically, Spiritually, physically, Positively, absolutely, Undeniably reliably, and really most sincerely dead." Ding-dong! Ignore the load of BS between the covers!! Len *According to Costella the arms and legs of the limo's occupants were make to move around differently.

You didn't answer Bill's point. Being evasive is another sign that some one is on the loosing side of an argument. Relevence???? Do YOU? Without a computer I mean. 1) LOL so you want us to believe that this program suffers from all the limitations that were in place in 1963? After 42 years of amazing technological improvements this program which only runs on a supercomputer can't do the job any better than a WW2 era optical printer!?!?!? You think they could have made Lord of the Rings in '63? Yeah right! If you really believe that David send me you life saving to invest for you down here, you interested in buying into an ostrich farm? ROTFLMHO!!! (PS I can't be extradited till my youngest child turns 18). 2) Nothing there about alterations being undetectable. Len

More BS It has already been done by Roland Zavada the man who invented Kodachrome II. His conclusion was that the film is an "in camera" original and that any duplication would have been easily detected (a composited Z-film would have been a 2nd generation copy at the least) and that the alleged alterations were not possible at the time.

Jewish plots alleged or cited by M.C. Piper The Lincoln assassination. The JFK assassination The MLK assassination The RFK assassination Watergate Monicagate The pedophile priests scandal The hijacking of American foreign policy The hijack of the American media Him being cheated out of his security deposit Did I miss any? I guess it is just a coincidence that he has spent his entire career working an admirer of Hitler who sells “Mein Kampf”, “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion” and the “International Jew” books that Piper himself called “significant”. Mr. Piper, You say that people have “lied” about you on this forum, I suggest you look at the forums rules since the use of that word is forbidden. Please offer evidence to back this accusation or retract it.

I thought the issue wasn't whether optical film printing couldn't be done, but rather could it be done where experts would not be able to see signs of it. One should try and remember that there is a difference. Bill Miller JFK assassination researcher/investigator Having few legitimate arguments Healy resorts to 2 strawman arguments 1-Saying that the anti-alterationist are all 'lone nutters', which is BS and he knows it. Some believe that Oswald was the only shooter but most don't. 2- Saying that the anti-alterationist deny that optical printing existed back in '63 which is absurd. What is in dispute is whether such alterations could have been done undetectably, whether alterations as complex as alleged were posssible back then and whether the 'initial' alterations could have been done in a few hours at the NPIC as alleged. Various experts said no only Healy says yes but as he freely admits he is NOT an expert. People who have the truth on their side don't need to resort to deception.

It's not what is being said as much as who is saying it that I think bothers me and the others. None of the three people who objected to Mr. Piper's presence here, John Dolva (I assume), Tim Gratz or Andy are Jews

if your so sure of your position re the Zapruder film, why bring in Moon Hoax comments? -- personally I could give a xxxx less whether you or anyone else is handing out compliments, whose looking for them anyway? Mr. Colby? roflmao! Perhaps you might spend some time dealing with "fruitful" areas of research instead of "diverting' your time and mine with the above Dave you are probably the least charming member of this forum. You don't care for his opinion? Why is his worth any less than yours since you don't have any FILM post production experience?

I agree with you David there are NO REAL PHOTO OR FILM EXPERTS on this board and by extension in TGZFH. The question is why Fetzer didn't get one for his book, probably he couldn't find one to back his theory. All the experts who studied the question said alteration would have been IMPOSSIBLE. Speaking of which, I just got an e-mail from Fielding LOL More on that tommorow ROTFLMHO. Give it up!!!!

The circumstantial evidence is overwhelming. To buy the official 9/11 conspiracy theory, you have to buy more unlikely coincidences, not to mention mind-boggling, across-the-board military and civilian incompetence, than my natural cynicism will allow. To mention just one "coincidence": Flight 77 just happens to hit the one spot at the Pentagon that is both the strongest structurally and the least populated. That section had been recently reinforced, and the offices in that section were not fully reoccupied yet. This suggests an obvious attempt to minimize both damage and loss of life, which of course is the last thing that Muslim terrorists would want to do. Such terrorists would have struck the other side of the building, where Rumsfeld and the other top brass were, or the center of the Pentagon to kill as many people as possible. Instead, in a virtually flawless plan, they hijack an airliner and fly it all the way to the Pentagon, only to hit the least vulnerable spot in the whole building? Sure. Ron did you ever consider the possibility that they didn't know that that part of the Pentagon was being renovated? They didn't exactly have security clearance and I doubt that information was available to the general public. I have question for you, how did the planes end up hitting the Pentagon and the Twin Towers, remote control? As for the supposed incompetence much of that has been exaggerated by "CTists" and is based on hindsight. The US military is basically set up for protecting the US from external rather than internal threats, it is virtually prohibited from acting on US soil, and all the flights were all domestic of course. Part of the problem was 'interagency' communication. It took a while for the FAA to inform NORAD and then a while for NORAD to inform the relevant air force bases. Let's not forget the last time a plane had been commandeered in the US was in the 80's (IIRC) and that the elapsed time between the attacks was only 51 minutes. .Other than shoot the planes down there is little fighter jets could have done. The first attack obviously could not have been prevented because a shootdown can only be authorized by the President. There wasn't really enough time (18 minutes) to stop the second plane. The failure to stop the third plane was a mixture of being taken by surprise, inadequate procedures and probably some incompetence. A bigger question is, if it was all a sham - why attack the Pentagon at all? The attacks on the Towers would have been enough for the 'Illuminati's' casus belli.

You keep making this same point, without even mentioning the name of the murdered "main opponent," suggesting that you know little about this matter. His name was Francisco Javier Arana. He and Arbenz had been among those who toppled the previous dictator to bring about the first democratic elections in Guatemala, won by their candidate Dr. Juan José Arévalo, a philosophy professor who had lived in exile in Argentina. When Arevalo's government stalled, both Arana and Arbenz emerged as candidates for the Presidency, the former representing the extreme right, the latter the more extreme left. Based on past track record, Arana had little chance of winning the election, a fact that made Arana's demise virtually irrelevant to Arbenz's ascension to the Presidency. While it is true that Arana was murdered, you've yet to offer a single source or citation claiming that Arbenz was responsible for his demise. I don't know if it's true but I found this in Wikipedia If this is true and if Arbenz was involved in Arana's death then it would be hard to argue this deligimitized his victory. If Arana led a coup attempt he brought about his own death. Tim you repeatedly complain that people through around accusations of various peoples involvement in the JFK without citing any evidence. Aren't you guilty of that in your accusation against Arbenz? You could try to argure that eliminating a political rival was an obvious motive but you have stated repeatedly that MM & O are no sufficiet to make an accusation. If you have any evidence of Arbenz's involvement in Arana's death let hear it. Len

John -There are now 2 cross threads relating to Piper and his book, wouldn't it be better to combine them into one? Tim already directed a question to him on the other thread. You could move the old thread over here to the books section. You could then edit your first post of the old thread to add a link to a new post on page 13 where you ask him the question above. IMO that would be the best solution. Len This is part of the book section where authors defend their writings. The other thread, taken over by Tim Gratz and now appears to be about his views on Michael Collins Piper's political opinions and judgements on the Second World War. 1 - Saying that the other thread has been "taken over by Tim Gratz" is silly and easily debunked quantitatively. There were 32 posts on the last three pages of the thread when you posted the message above. Of those Tim made only 5 or about 15%, I made 8, John Dolva 4, Andy 3 and Mark 5. My impression is that you "have it in for" Tim which causes you to be unable to admit he has a point even when he's right. 2 - The consensus of forum members seems to be that Piper's prejudices are germane to discussing his book. Several members including your fellow moderator have expressed views similar to Tim's in that Piper's presence here causes them discomfort. 3 - I think (hope) that all members of this forum, even the ones like you who disagree with almost every thing he says, would agree with Tim's "views on Michael Collins Piper's political opinions and judgments on the Second World War". 4 - Piper did request membership in this forum and I don't see why he should be shielded from answering legitimate questions about his hateful views and career long connections to abominable people. By creating this thread you are in effect creating a buffer between where he can promote his thesis and where questions about his probable bias are raised. Piper is an adult and should be able to fend for himself with out your help. He has chosen to spend his entire career working for and with neo-Nazis and there is no reason he shouldn't be held to account in the same thread were he attributes authorship of some of the most infamous crimes of the century and other misdeed to Jews. 5 - If I am not mistaken this is an unprecidented step or are there other cases where you created to different threads to discus the same book? For the above reasons I believe the proper thing to do is lock this thread or do you feel that some who has worked for America's leading promoter of Nazi ideals for 25 years needs or deserves you protection?

Of course to many their support of 9/11 "conspiracy theories" is just one more nut-case idea they support. Fetzer and Jones have a track record for supporting ' "nut-case" ideas' like cold fusion, 'Jesus visited Mesoamerica after his resurection', 'the Moon landing were a hoax' and 'the rain sensors in DP are really listening devices, DP is under constant survellance'