Len Colby Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 http://letsibeledmondsspeak.blogspot.com/ AFAIK Edmonds never said that she suspected people in the US government were responsible for 9/11. It should be noted that she only worked for a few months as contracted civilian translator (i.e. not an agent) AFTER 9/11 (Nov. 01 – March ’02 and does speak Arabic orPashto (the language spoken by the Taliban) but rather Turkish, Persian and Azeri languages that would only have been of peripheral interest (at best) to the events of 9/11 As to some of the people cited in Jack's post Dr. Lynn Margulis is a an eminent scientist but her area of specialty, cellular biology, doesn’t especially qualify her to analyze any aspects of 9/11. J. Marx Ayres is a well-respected mechanical engineer but according to his own profile his area of expertise is “building air conditioning design and analysis, energy conservation, thermal energy storage, commissioning of HVAC systems, and earthquake damage to building mechanical systems”. Impresive as Margulis and Ayres credentials are I’d be more impressed if the truthers turned up a “run of the mill” structural engineer who had actually 1) worked on buildings more than a couple of stories tall and 2) had read the NIST report and indicated why he thought is didn’t adequately explain the collapses. Dr. James Quintiere is very well qualified to analyze the collapes that day but has made it clear that though he objects to specific point of the NIST investigation he doesn’t back theories that the towers were brought down via controlled demolition. His comments seem to suggest he didn’t carefully read the report. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Drago Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 There have always been suckers willing to fall for anything as long as it fits neatly into their warped worldview. [sTAGE DIRECTION: Hands on hips, foot stomp on fourth word.] [DIALOGUE DIRECTION: Theatrically petulant and scolding tone.] It's always about you, isn't it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 There have always been suckers willing to fall for anything as long as it fits neatly into their warped worldview. [sTAGE DIRECTION: Hands on hips, foot stomp on fourth word.] [DIALOGUE DIRECTION: Theatrically petulant and scolding tone.] It's always about you, isn't it! No, as can be seen from your posts, its clearly about you. Wanna try again? Oh wait, why ask I know you will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 http://letsibeledmondsspeak.blogspot.com/ AFAIK Edmonds never said that she suspected people in the US government were responsible for 9/11. It should be noted that she only worked for a few months as contracted civilian translator (i.e. not an agent) AFTER 9/11 (Nov. 01 – March ’02 and does speak Arabic orPashto (the language spoken by the Taliban) but rather Turkish, Persian and Azeri languages that would only have been of peripheral interest (at best) to the events of 9/11 As to some of the people cited in Jack's post Dr. Lynn Margulis is a an eminent scientist but her area of specialty, cellular biology, doesn’t especially qualify her to analyze any aspects of 9/11. J. Marx Ayres is a well-respected mechanical engineer but according to his own profile his area of expertise is “building air conditioning design and analysis, energy conservation, thermal energy storage, commissioning of HVAC systems, and earthquake damage to building mechanical systems”. Impresive as Margulis and Ayres credentials are I’d be more impressed if the truthers turned up a “run of the mill” structural engineer who had actually 1) worked on buildings more than a couple of stories tall and 2) had read the NIST report and indicated why he thought is didn’t adequately explain the collapses. Dr. James Quintiere is very well qualified to analyze the collapes that day but has made it clear that though he objects to specific point of the NIST investigation he doesn’t back theories that the towers were brought down via controlled demolition. His comments seem to suggest he didn’t carefully read the report. Len, you are using a rational thought process and attempting to apply that to the works of those who find rational thought impossible. They trade in blind belief..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 (edited) The title of this thread is "Recent additions to Patriots Question 911 website" among others the group lists former senator and current presidential candidate Mike Gravel. He said the following about 9/11: "I do not believe 9/11 was a governmental conspiracy. But I know that our government was partly at fault by engaging in polices that inspired it, failing to take aggressive steps to stop it, and sacrificing the liberty and safety of our citizens after it. It's time we find out why and do something about it." I highly recomend reading his complete essay. Too bad this guy has a zero chance of getting elected, I pretty much agree with everything he said. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sen-mike-gra...11_b_63733.html Gravel and Dr. Quintiere are just 2 of the many people the group lists who don't agree with their position. Edited October 26, 2007 by Len Colby Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Drago Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 How onanistic an exchange. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted October 27, 2007 Share Posted October 27, 2007 (edited) How onanistic an exchange. What's the matter? You have sticky fingers? Edited October 27, 2007 by Craig Lamson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Greer Posted October 27, 2007 Share Posted October 27, 2007 The title of this thread is "Recent additions to Patriots Question 911 website" among others the group lists former senator and current presidential candidate Mike Gravel. He said the following about 9/11:"I do not believe 9/11 was a governmental conspiracy. But I know that our government was partly at fault by engaging in polices that inspired it, failing to take aggressive steps to stop it, and sacrificing the liberty and safety of our citizens after it. It's time we find out why and do something about it." I highly recomend reading his complete essay. Too bad this guy has a zero chance of getting elected, I pretty much agree with everything he said. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sen-mike-gra...11_b_63733.html Gravel and Dr. Quintiere are just 2 of the many people the group lists who don't agree with their position. An interesting read that's pretty much on the money as far as I'm concerned. The last paragraph sums up my feelings (as a non-American) quite well:- I do not believe 9/11 was a governmental conspiracy. But I know that our government was partly at fault by engaging in polices that inspired it, failing to take aggressive steps to stop it, and sacrificing the liberty and safety of our citizens after it. It's time we find out why and do something about it. That's where the true 9/11 conspiracy lies. Focussing on death rays from outer space and cruise missile attacks on the Pentagon helps the Government by distracting attention away from the real issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted October 27, 2007 Share Posted October 27, 2007 How onanistic an exchange. How coproful a comment That's where the true 9/11 conspiracy lies. Focussing on death rays from outer space and cruise missile attacks on the Pentagon helps the Government by distracting attention away from the real issues. Exactly the truthers were a wet dream come true for the likes of Bush, Rove and Chenney. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hogan Posted October 27, 2007 Share Posted October 27, 2007 That's where the true 9/11 conspiracy lies. Focussing on death rays from outer space and cruise missile attacks on the Pentagon helps the Government by distracting attention away from the real issues. Exactly the truthers were a wet dream come true for the likes of Bush, Rove and Chenney.(sic) Makes one wonder just who was responsible for propagating many of the wilder and more irresponsible theories in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hogan Posted October 27, 2007 Share Posted October 27, 2007 Peter, if you're going to use my post to respond to someone you have on ignore would you please take my name out of the quote? Otherwise it seems as if you are responding to me. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted October 28, 2007 Share Posted October 28, 2007 That's where the true 9/11 conspiracy lies. Focussing on death rays from outer space and cruise missile attacks on the Pentagon helps the Government by distracting attention away from the real issues. Exactly the truthers were a wet dream come true for the likes of Bush, Rove and Chenney.(sic) Makes one wonder just who was responsible for propagating many of the wilder and more irresponsible theories in the first place. That has been speculated on before here and elsewhere. Some with in the "'truth' movement" suspect intentional disinformation from the CIA/ZOG/MICC/PTB/MIBH/ASPCA/PTA etc etc. I think they are just the products of the over active imaginations of paranoid delusionals. Peter wrote: What (pray tell) are the 'real issues'?! That a bunch of two-bit amateur pilots, most of whom were not on the flights, not on the passenger manifests, not found as DNA, some still alive and well, all funded by CIA - Pakistani assets and many living in or near and interacting with intelligence assets of the USA pulled off the most daring and impossible feat against the greatest military/security apparatus in the world Presumably the question was rhetorical since Peter has me on ignore. Is there a point he mentions that hasn't been gone over ad infinium on this board? Like most truthers he shows a remarkable ability to lock out any information that contradicts his fantasies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Drago Posted October 28, 2007 Share Posted October 28, 2007 I think they are just the products of the over active imaginations of paranoid delusionals. Emphasis added. Citation for the origin and validity of the anonymous diagnosis, please. Or documentation of your medical qualifications to validate your diagnosis, please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hogan Posted October 28, 2007 Share Posted October 28, 2007 ....the truthers were a wet dream come true for the likes of Bush, Rove and Chenney. (sic) Some with in the "'truth' movement" suspect intentional disinformation from the CIA/ZOG/MICC/PTB/MIBH/ASPCA/PTA etc etc. I think they are just the products of the over active imaginations of paranoid delusionals. The total lack of logic is inescapable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Drago Posted October 28, 2007 Share Posted October 28, 2007 ....the truthers were a wet dream come true for the likes of Bush, Rove and Chenney. (sic) Some with in the "'truth' movement" suspect intentional disinformation from the CIA/ZOG/MICC/PTB/MIBH/ASPCA/PTA etc etc. I think they are just the products of the over active imaginations of paranoid delusionals. The total lack of logic is inescapable. And, in an odd way, reassuring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now