Is anyone interested in Apollo missions...

[Michael Hogan]

Forum member Alfred McCloy has written a book on CIA torture. The Forum thread is here:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6114

Amy Goodman interviews McCoy:

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/02/17/1522228

[Len Colby]

A few pages back (or it may be on the Loose Change page) you dismissed the idea that folks had heard, seen or witnessed explosions going off in the buildings before they fell.

I think you misunderstood me or misremembered what I wrote. Perhaps I didn’t make myself clear, see if you can find the quote you were thinking of. It has always been my position that a) explosive like noises aren’t always caused by explosions and explosions aren’t always caused by explosives (as in demolition charges). Indeed post impact explosions caused by un-ignited jet fuel and fireballs traveling down the elevator shafts are very much part of the “official story” as spelled out in the NIST, ASCE and 9/11 Commission reports, which I assume neither you nor the “filmmaker” bothered to read. There were lots of other things in the towers that would or could have exploded, transformers, stores of flammable cleaning and photocopying supplies, cars in the garages etc and others that would have produced explosion like noises elevators crashing to the bottoms of their shafts, falling debris, windows being blown out, parts of the buildings collapsing, structural steel failing.

I also maintained that reports of explosions long before collapse especially in the lower levels don’t fit the top down CD scenario but rather undermine it. They don’t support it because in CD explosives are set off in sequence just before or during collapse. They undermine it because they confirm that reports of explosions can be caused by things other than demolition charges.

The YouTube piece has many more quick-shot testimonies from folks who all heard or saw basically the same thing, and suggesting that they all misheard, were duped, were in shock so didn't know what they were hearing or whatever, seems not to tackle the sway of the overall evidence. The higher number of similar testimonies shown here seems fairly persuasive.

Yes many of them say they head explosions only few said explosives or bombs, how many had actually ever heard explosives going off? Most head those noises long before collapse. Many heard them in the lower or even subterranean floors. Here I quote many people saying that things as diverse as tidal waves, collapsing viaducts, earthquakes and trees struck by lightning sounded “like a bomb”. Every one knew the buildings had been subject to a terrorist attack, it doesn’t seem unreasonable that people hearing explosions or loud noises would assume they were caused by bombs. Only two people who were in or near the towers between the time of the 1st crash and the 2nd collapse said after 9-11 they still believed explosive had been set off in them. One was Rodriguez who is a xxxx and the other is a guy he saved, neither of them said this until one to four years later. Salvatore Giambanco’s account is more consistent with a fireball than demolition charges he mentioned a surge of flames in the basement over 100 minutes before the building he was in collapsed from the 93rd floor downward. He supposedly said this in an interview on Colombian TV (not available AFAIK on the Net). http://www.propagandamatrix.com/articles/j...5claimbombs.htm

The very first shot of the clip has folks reacting to a loud explosion about 10 seconds in,

I think I saw somewhere that the explosion had been dubbed in or ‘enhanced’, I’ll see if I can find the reference. Even if it wasn’t, no one disputes there were loud explosions in and around the WTC. Funny thought that such a loud noise wouldn’t have registered on other video recording starting shortly after the first crash there were numerous TV crews and amateur cameramen in the vicinity and the Naudet bros. were taping before that. Also note that it was obviously shot after one or both of the towers and the noise doesn’t seem to faze let alone scar anybody

...and - probably most compelling to me - there are a few clips shown new to me where firefighters are clearly shown telling people to get away from the WTC as there are 'bombs in the buildings'. A guy on the street asks the firefighters to repeat what they just said, and they repeat it.

One thing I noticed is we never really see the people’s mouths when they speak, there is no guarantee they said what they were purported to. I think it’s authentic but the possibility that it’s not exists. In the end two different people (or perhaps it was the same person twice) said there were “reports of a secondary device”, so they don’t seemed to have observed the “bomb” themselves but heard reports of one.

There were numerous bomb scares that turned out to be false alarms perhaps one or more of the firemen in the clip is one of the firemen interviewed below or perhaps the incident is one of the ones they mention. Special thanks to Jay of the 911 Transcripts “blog” who posted these excerpts on another forum. http://jay-911.blogspot.com/ . Funny many “truthers” hem and hawed that the World Trade Center Task Force Interviews were suppressed by the Giuliani administration because they were so damaging to the “official theory”, but the truth is there is a lot in them that undermines “inside job” theories as well.

Source: World Trade Center Task Force Interviews

CAPTAIN JAY SWITHERS

Interview Date: October 30, 2001 pg. 15

At that point somebody yelled that there was a bomb in the building that we were in. The police officer opened up the door and let people out. I asked if there was anybody left in that building. They said there were a couple of people maybe in the basement. So I ran down into the basement, maybe three floors, and there were a couple of maintenance workers who apparently didn't speak English. I told them they had to leave the building and there was probably a bomb. They looked at me and said that they had to clock out first or check with their supervisor.

I said I'm telling you to leave. I'm leaving. You can stay as long as you want, but I'm leaving. I ran upstairs and I left the building. There was no bomb in the building.

http://hosted.ap.org/specials/interactives...pts/9110172.PDF

.

FIRE MARSHAL STEVEN HEAVEY

Interview Date: December 28, 2001 Pg. 7

At that point I didn't know the extent of the collapse. I didn't realize it was a big pancake. I can't say I recall the other tower collapsing. You know, needless to say the whole area took on a very sinister tone. We didn't know what was coming next. Suddenly every mailbox and city bus was a bomb. You know, every civilian was a terrorist and we made our way down to the battery.

http://hosted.ap.org/specials/interactives...pts/9110405.PDF

We came back down Stuyvesant. From this point we just went like a complete circle back down to Stuyvesant High School. Then they told us there was a bomb scare and we had to move the rig north from there.

http://hosted.ap.org/specials/interactives...pts/9110419.PDF

PARAMEDIC NEIL SWEETING

I n t e r v i e w D a t e : O c t o b e r 1 7 , 2 0 0 1 pg. 16

We got in there, and we were in the building like a minute when people just started screaming, "Run, run, run, run." I'm like, oh, my God, now what? It was one of those things, you just run when everybody's running. People are just storming out the back doors and just running up the highway, West Side Highway there. I find out that it was -- one, somebody said there was a bomb, but it turned out it was Con Edison was screaming that there was a gas leak and they were afraid something was going to happen, it was going to blow up.

http://hosted.ap.org/specials/interactives...pts/9110101.PDF

FIREFIGHTER MAUREEN MC ARDLE-SCHULMAN

Interview Date: October 17, 2001

Transcribed by Elizabeth F. Santamaria

There was a guy with a little TV, like a civilian, hooked it up to a building with an outlet. He said, there is eight planes all together and they only found four and, you know, we're getting bomb scares on this building and we're running for our lives.

http://hosted.ap.org/specials/interactives...pts/9110110.PDF

FIREFIGHTER FRANK SWEENEY

Interview Date: October 18, 2001 pg. 14

Then the rest of the day we just spent running from bomb scares and gas leaks. Stuyvesant school had a gas leak. The World Financial had a gas leak or bomb or something.

http://hosted.ap.org/specials/interactives...pts/9110113.PDF

FIREFIGHTER SCOTT HOLOWACH

Interview Date: October 18, 2001

Transcribed by Elisabeth F. Nason

Like I said, after the second collapse, and the dust started settling, we went back and grabbed whatever gear we could and headed north to the end of the Pier and then went back to the West Side Highway is where they were mustering everybody and they kept on pushing us north because they thought there was a gas leak and a bomb in the American Express building. They kept on moving us north of the high school there.

Q. Stuyvesant High School?

A. Yes, Stuyvesant High School, until they figured out, I guess, there was no gas leak or no secondary bomb. Or no bomb.

http://hosted.ap.org/specials/interactives...pts/9110114.PDF

FIREFIGHTER DEAN BELTRAI4I

INTERVIEW DATE DECEMBER 17 2001

TRANSCRIBED BY MAUREEN MCCORMICK

At that time, there was a bomb threat in Stuyvesant High School, and we evacuated that area and went further up West Street until we were a good distance away, probably – I'm not sure of the street it was on, but it was quite a distance away.

http://hosted.ap.org/specials/interactives...pts/9110359.PDF

I disagree with most of your comments about 9/11 but you do put in a lot of work responding…

Thanks

I think the clip is worth watching though if you haven't seen the exact footage I'm referring to.

That was one of the few clips (the firefighters) I hadn’t seen before. Most of these Youtube – GoogleVideo “documentaries” use the same clips over and over again.

One thing the documentary and others like it do is put a lie to the notion that news coverage that day was “scripted”. Speaking of which what do you think about the BBC’s “early” report that 7 WTC had collapsed?

Edit - link added

Edited March 17, 2007 by Len Colby

[Sid Walker]

My concerns about 'Mohammed's confessions have increased.

He has, apparently, now admitted to a role in some 30 atrocities. However, I have reason to believe he is has not come clean.

In Arpil 2002, one of my garden sheds fell over on a windy evening. Fortunately, no-one was hurt. Naturally, I suspected Al Qaida.

This atrocity is not, however, on Mohammed's list. I wonder what else might be missing?

Perhaps the Americans went too easy on him during interrogation?

Edited March 16, 2007 by Sid Walker

[Evan Burton]

In Arpil 2002, one of my garden sheds fell over on a windy evening. Fortunately, no-one was hurt. Naturally, I suspected Al Qaida.

Nah, that was me. Sorry.

[Sid Walker]

In Arpil 2002, one of my garden sheds fell over on a windy evening. Fortunately, no-one was hurt. Naturally, I suspected Al Qaida.

Nah, that was me. Sorry.

Well, Evan. I never guessed Al Qaida has infilitrated the moderating team! Just goes to show... one can't be too paranoid, eh?

I don't mind admitting my suspicions were first aroused when I heard an announcement that my shed had collapsed on local TV news, half an hour before it happened!

Fortunately, all worked out well in the end.

The insurers paid up handsomely and I've replaced the rusty old humpy with a 47-storey pagoda.

Please PM me if you intend to 'pull it' too, Evan.

I need a few days notice to up the premium.

[Sid Walker]

Here's an extract from a blog, written a day or so ago:

wtc 7

Posted by ro on March 15th at 4:38pm in in the news

at 5 30 pm

9 11 2001

wtc7 collapsed

for the third time in history

fire brought down a steel building

reducing it to rubble

hold on folks

here we go

• The fires in WTC 7 were not evenly distributed, so a perfect collapse was impossible.

• Silverstein said to the fire department commander “the smartest thing to do is pull it.”

• Firefighters withdrawing from the area stated the building was going to “blow up”.

• The roof of WTC 7 visibly crumbled and the building collapsed perfectly into its footprint.

• Molten steel and partially evaporated steel members were found in the debris.

[WTC 7]contained offices of the FBI, Department of Defense, IRS (which contained prodigious amounts of corporate tax fraud, including Enron’s), US Secret Service, Securities & Exchange Commission (with more stock fraud records), and Citibank’s Salomon Smith Barney, the Mayor’s Office of Emergency Management and many other financial institutions. [Online Journal]

The SEC has not quantified the number of active cases in which substantial files were destroyed [by the collapse of WTC 7]. Reuters news service and the Los Angeles Times published reports estimating them at 3,000 to 4,000. They include the agency’s major inquiry into the manner in which investment banks divvied up hot shares of initial public offerings during the high-tech boom. …”Ongoing investigations at the New York SEC will be dramatically affected because so much of their work is paper-intensive,” said Max Berger of New York’s Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann. “This is a disaster for these cases.” [New York Lawyer]

Citigroup says some information that the committee is seeking [about WorldCom] was destroyed in the Sept. 11 terror attack on the World Trade Center. Salomon had offices in 7 World Trade Center, one of the buildings that collapsed in the aftermath of the attack. The bank says that back-up tapes of corporate emails from September 1998 through December 2000 were stored at the building and destroyed in the attack. [TheStreet]

Inside [WTC 7 was] the US Secret Service’s largest field office with more than 200 employees. …”All the evidence that we stored at 7 World Trade, in all our cases, went down with the building,” according to US Secret Service Special Agent David Curran. [TechTV]

lets start here

ok…go slow

remember 2 breathe

use google

So what?

Not much there members of this forum haven't already seen - whatever their views about the collapse of WTC-7.

However, this is the blog of Rosie O'Donnell.

I am her most recent fan, having only just discovered Rosie for the first time.

But I don't watch The View...

Edited March 17, 2007 by Sid Walker

[Evan Burton]

In Arpil 2002, one of my garden sheds fell over on a windy evening. Fortunately, no-one was hurt. Naturally, I suspected Al Qaida.

Nah, that was me. Sorry.

Well, Evan. I never guessed Al Qaida has infilitrated the moderating team! Just goes to show... one can't be too paranoid, eh?

I don't mind admitting my suspicions were first aroused when I heard an announcement that my shed had collapsed on local TV news, half an hour before it happened!

Fortunately, all worked out well in the end.

The insurers paid up handsomely and I've replaced the rusty old humpy with a 47-storey pagoda.

Please PM me if you intend to 'pull it' too, Evan.

I need a few days notice to up the premium.

I'm sure we can work something out!

[Sid Walker]

Q: If 9-11 was a false-flag operation, why aren't more pilots talking about it?

A: They are!

Here's the homepage of Pilots for 911 Truth

Edited March 17, 2007 by Sid Walker

[Anthony Thorne]

Len, thanks for your thoughtful and detailed response.

Your comments about other items causing explosive sounds matches what I recall you writing previously, so I've probably misinterpreted you to an extent.

I also think the firefighters clip is authentic but can agree with your suggestion that the possibility for change or alteration is there. Why anyone would do this though is less clear to me, not so much with people perhaps trying to achieve certain aims in falsifying footage but with the likelihood that they would get caught out (i.e "I'm the guy in the clip, and I never said that" etc). Still I do take your point.

what do you think about the BBC’s “early” report that 7 WTC had collapsed?

As I lean towards the conspiratorial viewpoint with 9/11 I generally feel it's an indication of the 'official story' getting out there just a little too early. With that though, I can also agree with someone (probably yourself and or others) who might say that it's not rock hard definitive proof as there are other alternative explanations. Following the reading (books and websites) that I've done over the past four years there's little that will drag me back away from a conspiratorial reading of 9/11, though I can see that various points are open to debate or dispute. For what it's worth, I found a site recently that explained the 'fat Osama' pic often shown as being a result of a dodgy PAL>NTSC transfer. The same piece though then went on to suggest indicators of conspiracy due to other suspicious elements with the tape, i.e dates taken and some mainstream articles disputing parts of the official story that accompanied it.

The best books I have read on 9/11 are the David Ray Griffin volumes, Webster Tarpley's 9/11 SYNTHETIC TERROR and Jim Marrs' TERROR CONSPIRACY, the latter two being great reads with just a touch of problematic or skewered analysis that falls short of being something I can 100% support. I'm curious to read Peter Dale Scott's forthcoming book on the subject as he largely seems to avoid too much discussion of physical/technical anomalies and gets into discrepancies with timeframes and closer readings of testimonies instead.

Regarding the Rosie O'Donnell hands-up for conspiracy, I like her and am interested in seeing how she does or doesn't push things over the coming weeks. Her site though links to the 9/11 Scholars site run by Jim Fetzer, which most of the 9/11 researchers that I respect seem to be stepping away from (i.e with Fetzer's pushing of painfully nutty theories involving lasers, if I haven't misconstrued him).

[Anthony Thorne]

Sid, as a quick aside, some documentarians from Adelaide that I spoke to a few months back told me that a number of local Qantas pilots here in Australia also have substantial issues with the official story, and had a good grasp of the issues involved.

[Douglas Caddy]

Mohammed says responsible for 9/11

Wed Mar 14, 2007 8:22 PM EDT

By Andrew Gray

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Top al Qaeda suspect Khalid Sheikh Mohammed has claimed he organized the September 11 attacks on the United States and other major attacks, according to the transcript of a hearing released on Wednesday.

"I was responsible for the 9/11 Operation, from A to Z," Mohammed, speaking through a personal representative, said according to the transcript of the hearing on Saturday at the U.S. military's Guantanamo Bay prison camp in Cuba.

Mohammed, a Pakistani national, also said he was responsible for a 1993 attack on New York's World Trade Center, the bombing of a nightclub in Bali, Indonesia, and an attempt to down two American airplanes using shoe bombs.

U.S. officials have said Mohammed, who was arrested in Pakistan in March 2003 and handed over to U.S. custody, was the mastermind of the September 11, 2001, attacks which destroyed the World Trade Center and damaged the Pentagon.

"I was the operational director for Sheikh Usama (Osama) Bin Laden for the organizing, planning, follow-up, and execution of the 9/11 operation," he said through his representative, a member of the U.S. military.

The transcript, released by the Pentagon, showed Mohammed was present at the hearing, which is to determine whether he meets the U.S. definition of an "enemy combatant."

The transcript had been edited by U.S. officials. The Pentagon has said this is necessary to remove sensitive security information.

Full Story:

http://ca.today.reuters.com/news/newsArtic...OHAMMED-COL.XML

The Confession Backfired

by Paul Craig Roberts

3/17/2007

The first confession released by the Bush regime’s Military Tribunals – that of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed – has discredited the entire process. Writing in Jurist, Northwestern University law professor Anthony D’Amato likens Mohammed’s confession to those that emerged in Stalin’s show trials of Bolshevik leaders in the 1930s.

That was my own immediate thought. I remember speaking years ago with Soviet dissident Valdimir Bukovsky about the behavior of Soviet dissidents under torture. He replied that people pressed for names under torture would try to remember the names of war dead and people who had passed away. Those who retained enough of their wits under torture would confess to an unbelievable array of crimes in an effort to alert the public to the falsity of the entire process.

That is what Mohammed did. We know he was tortured, because his response to the obligatory question about his treatment during his years of detention is redacted. We also know that he was tortured, because otherwise there is no point for the US Justice (sic) Dept. memos giving the green light to torture or for the Military Commissions Act, which permits torture and death sentence based on confession extracted by torture.

Mohammed’s confession of crimes and plots is so vast that Katherine Shrader of the Associated Press reports that the Americans who extracted Mohammed’s confession do not believe it either. It is exaggerated, say Mohammed’s tormentors, and must be taken with a grain of salt.

In other words, the US torture crew, reveling in their success, played into Mohammed’s hands. Pride goes before a fall, as the saying goes.

Mohammed’s confession admits to 31 planned and actual attacks all over the world, including blowing up the Panama Canal and assassinating presidents Carter and Clinton and the Pope. Having taken responsibility for the whole ball of wax along with everything else that he could imagine, he was the entire show. No other terrorists needed.

Reading responses of BBC listeners to Mohammed’s confession reveals that the rest of the world is either laughing at the US government for being so stupid as to think that anyone anywhere would believe the confession or damning the Bush regime for being like the Gestapo and KGB.

Humorists are having a field day with the confession: "’I’m a very dangerous mastermind,’ said Mohammed, who confessed to the kidnapping of the Lindbergh baby, the Brink’s robbery, St. Valentine’s Day Massacre, and the Lincoln and McKinley assassinations. Mohammed also accepted responsibility for spreading hay fever and cold sores around the world and for rained out picnics."

If there was anything remaining of the Bush regime not already discredited, Mohammed’s confession removed any reputation left.

The most important part of the Mohammed story is yet to make the headlines. Despite having held and tortured hundreds of detainees for years in Gitmo, and we don’t know how many more in secret prisons around the world, the US government has come up with only 14 "high value detainees."

In other words, the government has nothing on 99 percent of the detainees who allegedly are so dangerous and wicked that they must be kept in detention without charges, access to attorneys and contact with families.

And little wonder. The vast majority of detainees, alleged "enemy combatants," are not terrorists captured by the CIA and brave US troops. They are hapless persons who happened to be outside their tribal or home territories and were kidnapped by criminal gangs or war lords who profited greatly at the expense of the naive Americans who offered bounties for "terrorists."

The US government does not care that innocent people have been ensnared, because the US government desperately needs both to prove that there are vast numbers of terrorists and to demonstrate its proficiency in protecting Americans by capturing terrorists. Moreover, the US government needs "dangerous suspects" that it can use to keep Americans in a state of supine fearfulness and as a front behind which to undermine constitutional protections and the Bill of Rights.

The Bush-Cheney Regime succeeded in its evil plot, only to throw it all away by releasing the ridiculous confession by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

Will Bush’s totalitarian Military Tribunal now execute Mohammed on the basis of his confession extracted by torture, or would this be seen everywhere on earth as nothing but an act of murder?

If Bush can’t have Mohammed murdered, the US government will have to shut Mohammed away where he cannot talk and tell his tale. The US government will have to replicate Orwell’s memory hole by destroying Mohammed’s mind with mind-altering drugs and abuse.

It is to such depths that George Bush and Dick Cheney have lowered America.

March 17, 2007

Paul Craig Roberts [send him mail] wrote the Kemp-Roth bill and was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page and Contributing Editor of National Review. He is author or coauthor of eight books, including The Supply-Side Revolution (Harvard University Press). He has held numerous academic appointments, including the William E. Simon Chair in Political Economy, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Georgetown University and Senior Research Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University. He has contributed to numerous scholar journals and testified before Congress on 30 occasions. He has been awarded the U.S. Treasury's Meritorious Service Award and the French Legion of Honor. He was a reviewer for the Journal of Political Economy under editor Robert Mundell. He is the co-author of The Tyranny of Good Intentions. He is also coauthor with Karen Araujo of Chile: Dos Visiones – La Era Allende-Pinochet (Santiago: Universidad Andres Bello, 2000).

Copyright © 2007 Creators Syndicate

Paul Craig Roberts Archives

Find this article at:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/roberts/roberts201.html

[Len Colby]

Q: If 9-11 was a false-flag operation, why aren't more pilots talking about it?

A: They are!

Here's the homepage of Pilots for 911 Truth

According to the FAA there are about 610,000 licensed pilots in the US* and about 106,000 of them are professional pilots 84,000 being employed by airlines**

As sited elsewhere on this forum according to a recent Scripts-Howard poll 16% of the population believes it is “very likely” that LIHOP or MIHOP theories are correct and 6 % (less than the % that believe Elvis is still alive!) believe it is “very likely” that the Pentagon was not stuck by a 757. If there were any truth to the theories that:

a) the alleged pilots could not have flown the planes

the hijackers could not have gained access to the cockpit

c) the “scrawny” hijackers are unlikely to have been able to overpower the flight crews

d) a 757 could not have flown into the Pentagon

e) Boeings pilots could be overridden from the ground

f) the hijacked planes should have been intercepted

etc etc.

…we would expect that pilots especially airline pilots would subscribe to such theories to a greater degree than the general population. Thus if for example a 757 didn’t hit the Pentagon more than 37,000 American pilots, and more than 5000 American airline pilots should believe this to be true. We would expect more than 100,000 American pilots (13,000 of them airline pilots) to believe that 9-11 was an “inside job” or was allowed to happen

By my count Pilots for Truth has only 26 airplane pilot members*** only 13 of them claim to be current or former airline pilots or have experience flying jetliners or other large planes and only 5 or 6 claim to be currently employed as airline pilots. Of the 26 three are foreigners one only gave his name as “Wes” and didn’t indicate where he’s from leaving 22 or 23 American pilots. Yeah pilots are questioning 9-11 in droves, nearly 0.004% of American pilots and 0.007% of American airline pilots have joined pilots for truth!

* http://www.faa.gov/news/testimony/news_story.cfm?newsId=7140

** http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos107.htm

*** http://pilotsfor911truth.org/core.html

I took a look at the forum there is no indication most of the members are pilots anyone can join and aviation issues are discussed very much if at all there.

[Evan Burton]

Q: If 9-11 was a false-flag operation, why aren't more pilots talking about it?

A: They are!

Here's the homepage of Pilots for 911 Truth

Sid,

That site was started off by a nutjob from the Loose Change forum. He is now marketing a DVD which purports to show why the DFDR data from the Pentagon aircraft is wrong. Despite being shown why he is wrong by a couple of people who field of expertise is DFDR analysis (1 x Canadian, 1 x UK), he ignores this and continues with his beliefs.

That site is also renown for banning anyone who holds a dissenting view.

You might be better off looking at a site like the Professional Pilots Rumour Network, probably the most well-known website for professional pilots around the world.

For my part, none of the 30+ pilots I have worked with have any doubt about the aviation aspects of 9/11. I'm not saying you will not find a professional pilot who has problems with the "official" version, but they are in the extremely small minority - small enough to be statistically insignificant.

[Sid Walker]

Q: If 9-11 was a false-flag operation, why aren't more pilots talking about it?

A: They are!

Here's the homepage of Pilots for 911 Truth

Sid,

That site was started off by a nutjob from the Loose Change forum. He is now marketing a DVD which purports to show why the DFDR data from the Pentagon aircraft is wrong. Despite being shown why he is wrong by a couple of people who field of expertise is DFDR analysis (1 x Canadian, 1 x UK), he ignores this and continues with his beliefs.

That site is also renown for banning anyone who holds a dissenting view.

You might be better off looking at a site like the Professional Pilots Rumour Network, probably the most well-known website for professional pilots around the world.

For my part, none of the 30+ pilots I have worked with have any doubt about the aviation aspects of 9/11. I'm not saying you will not find a professional pilot who has problems with the "official" version, but they are in the extremely small minority - small enough to be statistically insignificant.

Interesting, Evan. It occurs to me you must be a hard task master.

The Pilots For 911 Truth site - escpecially the forum - seems logically organized, well attended and quite busy from a brief encounter. An impressive achievement for a 'nut-job'. But I'm not a member.

Have you had direct experience of that forum?

Incidentally, one of the first people I corresponded with after 9-11 about the events of that day. who believed the official story was a crock from very easly days, was an ex-airline pilot.

Of course, most pilots - like most people in general - have a natural inclination to believe Government is truthful, especially on matters such as intentional mass murder.

It's a belief that takes a lot to shift... yet it does seem to me that public certainty about the essential truthfulness of government and the mass media on 9-11 is melting like a snowman in springtime.

A little more vanishes each day.

Incidentally, many pages earlier in this thread, when the story about the BBC's premature report of the collapse of WTC-7 first broke, you volunteered to see if you could find parallel cases in history. For instance, have there been other reports that towerblocks have collapsed, shortly before the event actually took place? Or is this yet another unique feature of the WTC-7 saga?

How are you getting along with that, Evan? Anything to report back?

Edited March 18, 2007 by Sid Walker

[Bob Goodman]

Watch Carl Cameron's 4 reports on Fox News and judge for yourself

http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/61.html