Is anyone interested in Apollo missions...

[Nathaniel Heidenheimer]

I think the medias failure to mediate is the main reason for conspiracy theories. You never see a leading researcher on mainstram media debating a leading researcher.

Instead you see people like the NYT columnist Frank Rich slander the entire movement, by claiming that

9/11 truthers believe that no planes hit the twin towers. Almost none of the 9/11 truthers belive this, but for MILLIONS OF PEOPLE THIS HALF A LINE IS ALL THEY WILL EVER READ AND THEY TAKE IT AS THE EXCUSE TO DISMISS IT. The mainstrem media engages in conscious disinformation strategies like this. They are the only ones with the circulation to creat a real ENLIGHTENMENT PUBLIC SPHERE IN WHICH BOTH SIDES MIGHT BE RATIONALLY DEBATED.

They chose not to do so.

Instad they slander, and this in turn inspires more scepticism from those who have read more than thier snide little left-gatekeeping snippet.

The media' failure do mediate a public discussion. This is the true cause of "conspiracy theory" Enough of the soviet stype psychologizing about those who don't swallow the governments propaganda.

[John J. McCarthy]

He mostly practices flying in the air, not taking off or landing (although reports claiming he did not want to take off or land at all appear to be an exaggeration). [New York Times, 2/8/2002; Slate, 5/21/2002; Star-Tribune (Minneapolis), 12/21/2001; New York Times, 5/22/2002] Failing to get much initial interest from the FBI, the flight instructor tells the FBI agents, “Do you realize how serious this is? This man wants training on a 747. A 747 fully loaded with fuel could be used as a weapon!” [New York Times, 2/8/2002]

Above citation is related to Moussaoui.

citation for 'they had id'?

citation for 'there names were on the manifests'?

citation for 'they didn't have explosives' (what are those funny blasts throwing multi ton steel girders into adjacent buildings?) I don't have the time to be your research assistant, len, so if you really want to view the photo evidence of this you might just want to google the info yourself or look at the URL posts already cited in this and other threads on the WTC.

citation for 'it was captured by two cameras' can you provide the film of this claim showing any type of flying aircraft?

citation for a 75 foot hole are you sure you don't mean a 14 foot hole?

"please provide photo...."

http://rense.com/general70/3o.htm see photos 4, 5, and 6.

"because you got your facts wrong" Don't think so len, and who are you protecting, anyway?

Bests,

John McCarthy

[Sid Walker]

From day one, CNN & co had the 'perpetrators' named and more or less convicted - so Americans knew who to hate before they went to bed on September 11th 2001.

With such remarkable 'intelligence' in the mass media, one wonders why we need spooks at all?

IIRC the names were only divulged a day or two after the attacks. On some of the flights stewardess identified the seat numbers of the hijackers. The authorities also found a bag belonging to Atta which wasn't transfered from the Portland flight to flight 11. That's the official story any way. No rmarkable intelligence needed. CNN got the info from the Feds not vice-versa

I also recall that Atta's passport came fulttering down onto a dusty Manhatten street on that day of many miracles.

You're right the 'intelligence' isn't remarkable, Len. I was being facetious. Telling sordid lies to disguise the real perpetrators of mass murder - and pin the blame on innocent patsies - isn't really intelligent.

It's just plain evil.

What's remarkable is that anyone out there still believes the lies of the mass media concerning false flags ops such as 9-11... and that any of us on this forum with independent minds bother to debate with the likes of you.

[Len Colby]

He mostly practices flying in the air, not taking off or landing (although reports claiming he did not want to take off or land at all appear to be an exaggeration). [New York Times, 2/8/2002; Slate, 5/21/2002; Star-Tribune (Minneapolis), 12/21/2001; New York Times, 5/22/2002] Failing to get much initial interest from the FBI, the flight instructor tells the FBI agents, "Do you realize how serious this is? This man wants training on a 747. A 747 fully loaded with fuel could be used as a weapon!" [New York Times, 2/8/2002]

Above citation is related to Moussaoui.

Emphasis added; provide a citation for Moussaoui stating he was not interested in talking off or landing. You said it was their "stated purpose". Also it is not 100% clear he was part of the 9-11 plot.

"citation for 'they had id'?"

You're the one making a claim they did the burden of proof is on you you want a citation see the 9/11 Commission report. Also don't forget the "magic passport" from the WTC, one the flt. 93 hijackers documents was found in Shanksville. See also this article "Hijackers got state IDs legally:Florida and federal officials are reviewing policy after the terrorists traveled on state identification" http://www.sptimes.com/News/091601/State/Hijackers_got_state_I.shtml

"citation for 'there names were on the manifests'?"

Once again the burden of proof is on you but hey why not,

http://www.911myths.com/html/passenger_manifests.html

http://www.911myths.com/html/cnn_passenger_lists.html

http://www.911myths.com/html/autopsy_list.html

http://www.911myths.com/html/missing_arabs.html

"citation for 'they didn't have explosives' (what are those funny blasts throwing multi ton steel girders into adjacent buildings?)"

You are supposedly debunking the "official story" according to it no explosives were planted. Citation that they did have explosives? See the ASCE, NIST, Berkley and 911 Commission Reports.

As for the debris being ejected, come back when you've calculated how much KE would be released by a 1360 foot plus 500,000 ton building collapsing and show that it would not be sufficient to project those chunks of steel.

" I don't have the time to be your research assistant"

Nor does anybody here have time to be yours if you are going to make an extraordinary claim its up to YOU to back it up. This not the JFK forum but I think the same general rules are expected to apply, it up to the claimant to provide evidence not the skeptic.

"len, so if you really want to view the photo evidence of this you might just want to google the info yourself or look at the URL posts already cited in this and other threads on the WTC."

I've already seen a good deal of the photo and video evidence and all the 911 threads here. You seem to have missed where no names on the manifests BS was previously debunked a few days ago.

"citation for 'it was captured by two cameras' can you provide the film of this claim showing any type of flying aircraft?"

You said it wasn't captured at all. The two cameras were low resolution, slow shutter speed cameras with fisheye lenses meant to photograph objects traveling at low speed about 5 feet away. The plane was traveling at about 500 mph and was about 100x further away. Provide evidence that the plane should have been clearer under the circumstances.

"citation for a 75 foot hole are you sure you don't mean a 14 foot hole?"

You missed this elsewhere on this forum as well. The American Society of Civil Engineers estimated that the hole was 75 feet wide based on pre-collapse photos. Even Hoffman acknowledges that the hole was that big if not bigger (he thinks it could have been up to 90. Even Gerarad Holmgren estimated the hole at 65 feet wide

""please provide photo...."

http://rense.com/general70/3o.htm see photos 4, 5, and 6."

LOL they show the 1st floor still standing quite aways in from the impact point

http://rense.com/general70/Pentagonroof.jpg

""because you got your facts wrong" Don't think so len, and who are you protecting, anyway?"

The truth, john.

Len

passport came fulttering down onto a dusty Manhatten street on that day of many miracles.

What's remarkable is that...any of us on this forum with independent minds bother to debate with the likes of you.

Sid it WASN'T Atta's passport. Why are the inside jobbers always so misinformed?

LOL By independant minds you mean people who believe everything they read on Rense, Infowars and What Really Happened as uncritically as the supposed sheeple do everything they see on FOX etc

[Len Colby]

I think the medias failure to mediate is the main reason for conspiracy theories. You never see a leading researcher on mainstram media debating a leading researcher.

Instead you see people like the NYT columnist Frank Rich slander the entire movement, by claiming that

9/11 truthers believe that no planes hit the twin towers. Almost none of the 9/11 truthers belive this, but for MILLIONS OF PEOPLE THIS HALF A LINE IS ALL THEY WILL EVER READ AND THEY TAKE IT AS THE EXCUSE TO DISMISS IT. The mainstrem media engages in conscious disinformation strategies like this. They are the only ones with the circulation to creat a real ENLIGHTENMENT PUBLIC SPHERE IN WHICH BOTH SIDES MIGHT BE RATIONALLY DEBATED.

They chose not to do so.

Instad they slander, and this in turn inspires more scepticism from those who have read more than thier snide little left-gatekeeping snippet.

The media' failure do mediate a public discussion. This is the true cause of "conspiracy theory" Enough of the soviet stype psychologizing about those who don't swallow the governments propaganda.

Provide a citation for Rich saying or implying all or most "9/11 truthers believe that no planes hit the twin towers". Then prove that it was an intentional dection. What about all the times leaders of the " 'truth' movement" make mistakes like claiming the Pentagon has anti-aircraft batteries (Griffen, Messeyen) or that passengers can be heard planning to use the beverage cart to knock down the cockpit door on the flt. 93 CVR (Fetzer) or that the steel from the WTC was certified by UL to withstand 2000F for 6 hours (Fetzer and IIRC Griffen and Jones) the CEO of the company that handled security for the WTC was a cousin of GWB (Fetzer, Griffen et. al.)

Do you really think that Rich who has been one of Bush's most vocal critics "is in on it"?

DO you want to know why the MSM doesn't pay "inside jobbers" more attention? It's probably because they are journalists and NOT sci-fi writers. As it is they have gotten coverage on most MSM outlets often more than once.

As for Peters list mosts if not all of those are a) unproved or widely acknowledged.

In anycase none of them chage the fact that there is no credible evidence backing the MIHOP theory.

Edited October 1, 2006 by Len Colby

[John J. McCarthy]

My Nickels worth....

In the United States, conspiracy is a crime. Conspiracy is two or more people (hey Oswald, where are you?)

who plan to commit a crime, WHETHER OR NOT the damn crime is committed!

A Conspiracy is the EASIEST crime for the DOJ/FBI to prove, in a court of law. They rely on 'reasonable men and women' who can view the evidence presented and reach a conclusion for a verdict of guilt.

A Theory, as in mathematics, is a given, without proof, but something we rely on for calculations unless and until we find conclusive evidence that the theory is wrong, and we change it accordingly.

A Theory is not a crime. And will never be prosecuted.

A Conspiracy Theorist, CT, is a tag, a moniker and or a label provided by the media post JFK assassination when strange things began to come to light. "Strange Things", indeed. I almost hear music from the Twilight Zone.....

CT is NOT a crime. But, those who dare to ASK ANY QUESTION which challenges the status quo of what the government says, and the media prints and broadcasts, thereby mutually providing each other with another Great American Hand Job, is soon to be villified as a CONSPIRACY THEORIST whose motivation for daring to question the set in concrete rendition of the stated position of the government, is immediately cast as a communist, leftwing wing cult fanatic son of a bitch. And all that for just asking a question such as; "who shot all those bullets in Dealey Plaza?"

Fast forward to today's free speech First Amendment advocates who dare to ask, not conspire, mind you, a simple question such as; "did you hear the explosions coming from the basement area of the WTC and see the explosions preceding the cascading upper floors during the collapse?"

Fast forward to presidential, vice presidential, and all those who serve at the pleasure of the president "THEORIZING" that Weapons of Mass Destruction will soon be appearing in the form of "mushroom clouds"

unless we preemptively attack Iraq and remove Saddam Hussein before his WMD come down upon our heads. Additionally, 'we gotta fight them over there rather than fight them over here". Now, that is a CONSPIRACY THEORY!

When does the 'theory' fall apart? Just as soon as we find, in spite of UN already determining, that no WMD exist. But we have already preemptively invaded a sovereign nation in spite of UN vehemently condemning such action in violation of the Nuremberg findings which resulted in hanging those defendants who committed crimes against peace and humanity during WWII.

President Truman appointed Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson as the US representative prosecuting those Nazi's charged with War Crimes. In his opening remarks to the Jury, Justice Jackson said, "The standards by which we judge these defendant's today are the standards by which we shall be judged tomorrow."

Then the "Blame Game" starts. Must be the CIA. No, the State Department. OOPs, wait a minute, now we know of the Office of Special Plans run by dual passport carrying Pentagon Neocon's who have 're-engineered' the CIA's findings that the source for the WMD 'intelligence' is a hoaxster who would benefit by a regime change for his own purposes, and funneled this information in the form of 'intelligence' to the vice president, outside existing channels for such information to be transmitted and reviewed along the way. More music, please!

Dare we ask questions about such revelations without being labelled as a 'CONSPIRACY THEORIST'? Isn't it amazing that someone with a concience provided this information to a courageous media type?

With all this information floating around the world, is there any chance that 'reasonable men and women' would not question the veracity of any statement from the United States that Iran has a nuclear weapons program?

The burning question of "how could this happen in this day and age the way the government says it happened?", providing the person who dare ask such an inquiry with a shove into the cellar of "conspiracy theorist's", just for ASKING the damn question!

A homicide investigator never carries the results of one investigation into the next. Those sort of theories don't work although there are certain guide lines which are used. WHO has the motivation, opportunity and means to commit the crime.

If we apply such a standard to asking the same QUESTION about all of the incidents of 911, would that be a 'CONSPIRACY THEORY"? Stop the Presses! Arrest All Homicide Detectives In Amerika!

Let's stop this nonsense and have the moral courage to ask the questions that are being deflected by this absurd CT catch-all excuse to shelter the crimes of the century.

And for those who don't yet know it, there is no requirement for enriched uranium (plutonium) to construct a nuclear weapon. Material located in any peaceful nuclear power plant will do just fine, thank you. The end result will be a fission bomb. And could be a whopper! But the actual yield is yet another 'theory'. Determination can only be made upon detonation.

Which means, all this 'consiracy theory' posturing for the necessity for attacking Iran, with or without bunker busting nukes, is irrelevant, outmoded and must be addressed before someone becomes a nuclear wartime president.

That's my nickel, and I don't need any change, thanks.

Bests,

John McCarthy

Edited October 1, 2006 by John J. McCarthy

[Sid Walker]

Sid it WASN'T Atta's passport. Why are the inside jobbers always so misinformed?

LOL By independant minds you mean people who believe everything they read on Rense, Infowars and What Really Happened as uncritically as the supposed sheeple do everything they see on FOX etc

Len... this Guardian journalist thought otherwise

But perhaps we should both defer to your apparent certainty that it wasn't Atta's passport planted in the streets of NYC soon after 9-11.

You appear to be closer to the falsifiers of evidence than either of us.

[Nathaniel Heidenheimer]

I think the medias failure to mediate is the main reason for conspiracy theories. You never see a leading researcher on mainstram media debating a leading researcher.

Instead you see people like the NYT columnist Frank Rich slander the entire movement, by claiming that

9/11 truthers believe that no planes hit the twin towers. Almost none of the 9/11 truthers belive this, but for MILLIONS OF PEOPLE THIS HALF A LINE IS ALL THEY WILL EVER READ AND THEY TAKE IT AS THE EXCUSE TO DISMISS IT. The mainstrem media engages in conscious disinformation strategies like this. They are the only ones with the circulation to creat a real ENLIGHTENMENT PUBLIC SPHERE IN WHICH BOTH SIDES MIGHT BE RATIONALLY DEBATED.

They chose not to do so.

Instad they slander, and this in turn inspires more scepticism from those who have read more than thier snide little left-gatekeeping snippet.

The media' failure do mediate a public discussion. This is the true cause of "conspiracy theory" Enough of the soviet stype psychologizing about those who don't swallow the governments propaganda.

Provide a citation for Rich saying or implying all or most "9/11 truthers believe that no planes hit the twin towers". Then prove that it was an intentional dection. What about all the times leaders of the " 'truth' movement" make mistakes like claiming the Pentagon has anti-aircraft batteries (Griffen, Messeyen) or that passengers can be heard planning to use the beverage cart to knock down the cockpit door on the flt. 93 CVR (Fetzer) or that the steel from the WTC was certified by UL to withstand 2000F for 6 hours (Fetzer and IIRC Griffen and Jones) the CEO of the company that handled security for the WTC was a cousin of GWB (Fetzer, Griffen et. al.)

Do you really think that Rich who has been one of Bush's most vocal critics "is in on it"?

DO you want to know why the MSM doesn't pay "inside jobbers" more attention? It's probably because they are journalists and NOT sci-fi writers. As it is they have gotten coverage on most MSM outlets often more than once.

As for Peters list mosts if not all of those are a) unproved or widely acknowledged.

In anycase none of them chage the fact that there is no credible evidence backing the MIHOP theory.

_______

Do you think that "Left Gatekeeping" is a myth Len?

If so I urge you read The CIA and Culture by Francis Stoner Saunders. It shows that the CIA is much more

likely to be in the liberal, left press ( in fact often writing the articles that will serve as the firewall between liberals and leftists) than in the right press. Please read the book. I find it convincing and before you dismiss it id like you to give it a try.

The above comment also answers your comments about Rich. can i prove scientifically that he deliberately did this. OF COURSE NOT. I dont own tv networks the way your narrators of reason do. But I have read a lot about disinformation theory and have studied media disinformation of the corporated media in severals cases extensively: the assassination of JFK, and the artivities of the Salvadoran Death squads, which were entirely organized by the U.S. With a lot of background research in corporate media disinformation, I am able to make that accusation about Rich. Anyone who reads the least amount of 9/11 knows that he cited a position of such marginality as typical of the movemnt as a whole. On the other hand COckburn and CHmpsky have no problem dismissing Kennedy assassination work without reading a single chapter, so maybe your right: rich probably didnt read a single line either. go on defending that type of utterly professional journalism that gave us tonkin Gulf and WMDs. Do you read as fast as you type?

i dont think rich said all or most. He didnt need to. THIS WAS THE ONLY SAMPLE OF 9/11 TRUTH THAT HE OFFERED HIS READERS. oh, and it wasn't a sample. The purpose was to give one more opportunity for those rational liberal readers of the NY times to shrug off 9/11 truthers as seething idiots, while they simpred off to NYU to quietly teach history to the upper class children and keep their jobs by seeming as normal as possible.

Maybe they did the same about the El Mozote massacre in 1982 when NYT printed reagans firm denials that more than 600 peasants were killed in ahlf hour by a US trained elite battlion of the Salvadoran army we wre funding to the tune of 82%. It would have been very comforting to belive our president and keep your job and go home and watch back to the future.

Then around 1991 they dug up the bodies. This was of course after the democratic congress had restored funding to those freedom lovers in the slavadoran army. Your trust in our corporate lapdogs is almost religiously charming.

Why dont you site some Popular Mechanics articles on El Mozote. That will turn what I type into "conspiracy theory" and we can all rest assured in the abilities of our professional journalists, who have turned the mind of a nation into aged lime jello.

len--

when you say that most of these theories are

"a) unproved" just what do you mean by proved? How do you define proved? Did the Warren Commission prove anything for you?

If four big networks seem to agree that North Vitnamese boats shot at an american desotryer,does this prove

it for you. Undoubtedly the network anchors in august of 64 were wearing nice suits. What if they were anchors for Pravda in nice suits? would this "prove" anything in your dense of the word?

Then there are courts of law.

In 2000 two juries in Memphis, were persuaded by William Pepper that james Earl Ray did not act alone. The NYT burried this story on page 17. We say we are a society that takes trials and the legal system seriously. I guess not. I guess these trials didn't "prove" anything BECAUSE OTHERWISE THE TIMES WOULD NOT HAVE BURRIED THEM ON PAGE 17

circular logic liscences for "responsible journalists" available at the Columbia University Turner Gannet building Wednesdays around tea time.

[Len Colby]

Nathaniel - Please provide Rich's quote in context.

Peter - You love tossing out long lists. Why don't you start some threads and spell out your cases for those various "secret" "conspiracies"

[Len Colby]

Sid it WASN'T Atta's passport. Why are the inside jobbers always so misinformed?

LOL By independant minds you mean people who believe everything they read on Rense, Infowars and What Really Happened as uncritically as the supposed sheeple do everything they see on FOX etc

Len... this Guardian journalist thought otherwise

The Guardian columnist sounds like and inside jobber to me was unfortunately quite misinformed. See what I was saying. It was widely reported on forums and less reliable Inside jobs sites that it was Atta's passport. AFAIK The Guardian was the only 'MSM outlet' to make this error

Mainstream sources

911 Commission Report – Chapter 2

Suqami's passport survived the attack: a passerby picked it up from the World Trade Center and handed to a New York Police Department detective shortly before the towers collapsed.109

PDF pg 16

http://www.9-11commission.gov/staff_statem...errTrav_Ch2.pdf

ABC News

ABCNEWS sources identify another hijacker as Satan Suqami, a Saudi national on American Airlines Flight 11, whose passport was recovered in the rubble.

<A href="http://web.archive.org/web/20010913195826/http:/abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/WTC_MAIN010912.html">http://web.archive.org/web/20010913195826/http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/WTC_MAIN010912.html

Investigators discovered the passport of Satam al Suqami, one of the terrorists aboard American Airlines Flight 11, the first plane to hit the World Trade Center.

http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/disinfo/...osurvivors.html

New York Magazine

Laying out his scenario, Tarpley touched on many of the "unanswered questions" that make up the core of the 9/11 Truth critique of the so-called Official Story.

[…]

And why, if the impact destroyed the planes' supposedly crash-proof flight-recorder black boxes, was the FBI able to find, in perfect condition, the passport of Satam al Suqami, one of the alleged American Airlines Flight 11 hijackers?

http://newyorkmetro.com/news/features/16464/

The Independent

Suqami's passport was discovered in the rubble of the World Trade Centre. Along with Ahmed al-Ghamdi, he has been tied by the FBI to a former cab driver now on trial for a series of foiled bombings in Jordan.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_...21/ai_n14420622

The Telegragh

Suqami's passport was discovered in the rubble at the site of the World Trade Centre.

http://web.archive.org/web/20030105091516/...20/wterr120.xml

Note that even some of the mainstream sources reported incorrectly that the passport was found in the rubble, according to the "official story" it was found before either tower collapsed.

Inside Job sources

911 Research

According to ABC News and the Associated Press, the passport of hijacker Satam Al Suqami was found a few blocks from the WTC. 1 ֲ 2 ֲ The Guardian was skeptical: "the idea that Atta's passport had escaped from that inferno unsinged [tests] the credulity of the staunchest supporter of the FBI's crackdown on terrorism." 3 ֲ Note the passport did not belong to Atta, as is commonly claimed.

http://911research.wtc7.net/disinfo/deceptions/passport.html

Cooperative Research

It is reported that the passport of hijacker Satam Al Suqami has been found a few blocks from the WTC. [ABC News, 9/12/2001; Associated Press, 9/16/2001; ABC News, 9/16/2001] Barry Mawn, the director of the FBI's New York office, says police and FBI found it during a "grid search" of the area. [CNN, 9/18/2001] However a senior counsel to the 9/11 Commission later claims it was actually discovered by a passerby and given to an NYPD detective, "shortly before the World Trade Center towers collapsed." [9/11 Commission, 1/26/2004] The Guardian says, "The idea that Mohamed Atta's passport had escaped from that inferno unsinged [tests] the credulity of the staunchest supporter of the FBI's crackdown on terrorism." [Guardian, 3/19/2002] (Note that, as in this Guardian account, the passport is frequently mistakenly referred to as Atta's passport.)

http://cooperativeresearch.org/context.jsp...01passportfound

Rense & Artic Beacon

the unscathed passport of Satam Al Suqami, one of the alleged 19 Arab terrorists, turned up several blocks from Ground Zero.

Although ABC News and the Associated Press played up the importance of the Suqami passport,

http://www.rense.com/general68/moremir.htm

http://www.arcticbeacon.com/23-nov-2005.html

Team 8 Plus

Suqami's passport survived the attack: a passerby picked it up from the World Trade Center and handed to a NYPD detective shortly before the towers collapsed

http://team8plus.org/e107_plugins/forum/fo...wtopic.php?2480

There are a lot more, wow that took me about 10 minutes.

But perhaps we should both defer to your apparent certainty that it wasn't Atta's passport planted in the streets of NYC soon after 9-11.

You appear to be closer to the falsifiers of evidence than either of us.

LOL When being sarcastic it's best to make sure what you're saying makes sense. How can I "be closer to" anything "than either of us"?

As for falsifying evidence that is the specialty of the truth movement who continuously make up facts and take quotes out of context to fit their theories

Len

[John J. McCarthy]

To me, it essentially boils down to this:

If the 9/11 report is so wrong, where are all the crowds of structural engineers & their professional organisations saying a building could not collapse like that?

Where are all the waves of professional airline pilots and their organisations crying out that a poorly-trained terrorist could not have flown the aircraft used in such a fashion?

Where are all the aeronautical engineers and their professional organisations protesting that an aircraft could not withstand being flown in such a way?

Where are all the crash investigators pointing out that wreckage found is not consistant with the claimed incidents?

Where are all the demolitions experts saying that the incidents look exactly what a controlled demolition would look like?

Now, I know Jack will probably raise his mis-named Scholars for 9/11 Truth. Generally, they are people talking outside their field, and have a strong aversion to having their work peer-reviewed by people that can evaluate the validity of their claims.

Dr Jones is a particle physicist with expertise in cold fusion. His infamous paper was reviewed by sociologists, not engineers. Their pet engineer is an expert in dental materials.

When I see a paper raised by an expert in that field, I pay attention.

When I see a paper raised by an expert in that field and peer-reviewed by other experts in that field, I pay very close attention.

If I see a group of experts, talking about matters in which they are experts, supported by other experts, and they claim 9/11 was an "inside job" or a "hoax" or other such claim.... then I will quite prepared to revise my stance on the matter.

http://johnmccarthy90066.tripod.com/id807.html

Bests,

John McCarthy

[John J. McCarthy]

From day one, CNN & co had the 'perpetrators' named and more or less convicted - so Americans knew who to hate before they went to bed on September 11th 2001.

With such remarkable 'intelligence' in the mass media, one wonders why we need spooks at all?

IIRC the names were only divulged a day or two after the attacks. On some of the flights stewardess identified the seat numbers of the hijackers. The authorities also found a bag belonging to Atta which wasn't transfered from the Portland flight to flight 11. That's the official story any way. No rmarkable intelligence needed. CNN got the info from the Feds not vice-versa

I also recall that Atta's passport came fulttering down onto a dusty Manhatten street on that day of many miracles.

You're right the 'intelligence' isn't remarkable, Len. I was being facetious. Telling sordid lies to disguise the real perpetrators of mass murder - and pin the blame on innocent patsies - isn't really intelligent.

It's just plain evil.

What's remarkable is that anyone out there still believes the lies of the mass media concerning false flags ops such as 9-11... and that any of us on this forum with independent minds bother to debate with the likes of you.

Len,

I support your Right to 'nit pick' on any reply of mine. Say what you will. Draw your own conclusions. Debunk all you can.

This ain't no court of law. It is an educational discussion forum.

I am glad you were born in North Carolina in 1965. I was then killing communists and protecting your Constitutional Rights to Free Speech because one of the stated reasons for the War in Vietnam was to 'fight them over there so we didn't have to fight them over here'. Sound familiar?

I have taught various courses in various countries around the world with one axiom in mind; "If the student failed to learn, the instructor failed to teach'.

The nay sayers in my classes who disregarded the cold hard facts ended up dead from hard headed ignorance.

Fortunately for you, New York and Brazile have provided you the opportunity to grow and become the worldly person you are. It is noted, however, that diplomacy was not a part of your curriculum.

For you to draw a conclusion that "you got your facts wrong" is a statement even the OJ Simpson Jury could see through.

Bests.

John

[Len Colby]

Len,

I support your Right to 'nit pick' on any reply of mine. Say what you will. Draw your own conclusions. Debunk all you can.

This ain't no court of law. It is an educational discussion forum.

Not exactly nitpicking I showed that all your points were wrong.

"I am glad you were born in North Carolina in 1965. I was then killing communists and protecting your Constitutional Rights to Free Speech because one of the stated reasons for the War in Vietnam was to 'fight them over there so we didn't have to fight them over here'. Sound familiar?"

I agree both wars, Vietnam and Iraq, were unjustifiable based on their pretexts and their costs in blood and money both to us and our allies and the countries we were supposedly 'saving'. How does that bolster your argument?

"I have taught various courses in various countries around the world with one axiom in mind; "If the student failed to learn, the instructor failed to teach'.

The nay sayers in my classes who disregarded the cold hard facts ended up dead from hard headed ignorance."

We'll have to take your word for it but I don't doubt you are a specialist in combat operations (or what ever term you wish to use). This doesn't mean that you are an expert in everything you theorize about. Fetzer resorts to the same logical fallacy known as appeal to authority.

"Fortunately for you, New York and Brazile have provided you the opportunity to grow and become the worldly person you are. It is noted, however, that diplomacy was not a part of your curriculum.

For you to draw a conclusion that "you got your facts wrong" is a statement even the OJ Simpson Jury could see through."

Diplomatic or not it was an accurate statement. You can insinuate otherwise all you want but such denials are meaningless unless you can show your were right and I was wrong.

More on you "no IDs" claim. I found the following in the few minutes it took me to debunk Walker's claim that Atta's passport was found near the WTC. Obviously like most "inside jobbers" you never read the 911 Commission or NIST reports in a similar vein I doubt most "creation scientists" ever studied evolutionary biology. To debunk a theory you have to know what it purports but most "inside jobbers" don't understand this.

From the 911 Commission Report

July 2001

July 2. Hamza al Ghamdi obtained a Florida driver's license; Mohand al Shehri, a Florida identification card. Moqed and Salem al Hazmi acquired USA identification cards in July.157 The Hazmi brothers' identifications were found in the rubble at the Pentagon and appeared genuine upon examination.158

Pg. 22

202 FBI records of airline personnel indicate that some recall specific hijackers presenting U.S. identification documents with their airline tickets. The American Airlines ticket agent at Logan Airport recalls the al Shehri brothers presenting drivers' licenses at check-in. FBI report of investigation, Elvia C., Sept. 13, 2001. When Hamza al Ghamdi and Ahmed al Ghamdi checked in at Logan Airport in Boston, Hamza al Ghamdi used his Florida driver's license and Ahmed al Ghamdi used his fraudulently obtained Virginia identification card. FBI report of investigation, interview of Gail J., Sept. 21, 2001. At Dulles, Khalid al Mihdhar and Majed Moqed provided their fraudulently obtained Virginia identification cards at the ticket counter. FBI report of investigation, interview of Susan S., American Airline ticketing agent, 44

Sept. 13, 2001. A "Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Student Identity Card" was found in the rubble at the Pentagon with Moqed's name on it. Forensic examination indicated that it may have been fraudulent.

United States Secret Service Forensic Services report for the FBI PENTTBOM investigation regarding the physical examination of forensic science research request, Oct. 10, 2001. Hijackers Omari, Wail al Shehri and Hanjour also had international driver licenses and Jarrah had an international student identification card.

Pgs 38 -39

http://www.9-11commission.gov/staff_statem...errTrav_Ch2.pdf

From the Senate Intelligence Committee Report

The only hijacker that we know did not use a U.S.-issued identification was Satam Al-Suqami, who was the only person who knew he was in the United States illegally. He used his passport instead.

http://judiciary.senate.gov/testimony.cfm?...amp;wit_id=4067

To me, it essentially boils down to this:

If the 9/11 report is so wrong, where are all the crowds of structural engineers & their professional organisations saying a building could not collapse like that?

Where are all the waves of professional airline pilots and their organisations crying out that a poorly-trained terrorist could not have flown the aircraft used in such a fashion?

Where are all the aeronautical engineers and their professional organisations protesting that an aircraft could not withstand being flown in such a way?

Where are all the crash investigators pointing out that wreckage found is not consistant with the claimed incidents?

Where are all the demolitions experts saying that the incidents look exactly what a controlled demolition would look like?

Now, I know Jack will probably raise his mis-named Scholars for 9/11 Truth. Generally, they are people talking outside their field, and have a strong aversion to having their work peer-reviewed by people that can evaluate the validity of their claims.

Dr Jones is a particle physicist with expertise in cold fusion. His infamous paper was reviewed by sociologists, not engineers. Their pet engineer is an expert in dental materials.

When I see a paper raised by an expert in that field, I pay attention.

When I see a paper raised by an expert in that field and peer-reviewed by other experts in that field, I pay very close attention.

If I see a group of experts, talking about matters in which they are experts, supported by other experts, and they claim 9/11 was an "inside job" or a "hoax" or other such claim.... then I will quite prepared to revise my stance on the matter.

http://johnmccarthy90066.tripod.com/id807.html

Bests,

John McCarthy

How does your webpage refute what Evan said?

Edited October 2, 2006 by Len Colby

[John J. McCarthy]

Len,

I support your Right to 'nit pick' on any reply of mine. Say what you will. Draw your own conclusions. Debunk all you can.

This ain't no court of law. It is an educational discussion forum.

Not exactly nitpicking I showed that all your points were wrong.

"I am glad you were born in North Carolina in 1965. I was then killing communists and protecting your Constitutional Rights to Free Speech because one of the stated reasons for the War in Vietnam was to 'fight them over there so we didn't have to fight them over here'. Sound familiar?"

I agree both wars, Vietnam and Iraq, were unjustifiable based on their pretexts and their costs in blood and money both to us and our allies and the countries we were supposedly 'saving'. How does that bolster your argument?

"I have taught various courses in various countries around the world with one axiom in mind; "If the student failed to learn, the instructor failed to teach'.

The nay sayers in my classes who disregarded the cold hard facts ended up dead from hard headed ignorance."

We'll have to take your word for it but I don't doubt you are a specialist in combat operations (or what ever term you wish to use). This doesn't mean that you are an expert in everything you theorize about. Fetzer resorts to the same logical fallacy known as appeal to authority.

"Fortunately for you, New York and Brazile have provided you the opportunity to grow and become the worldly person you are. It is noted, however, that diplomacy was not a part of your curriculum.

For you to draw a conclusion that "you got your facts wrong" is a statement even the OJ Simpson Jury could see through."

Diplomatic or not it was an accurate statement. You can insinuate otherwise all you want but such denials are meaningless unless you can show your were right and I was wrong.

More on you "no IDs" claim. I found the following in the few minutes it took me to debunk Walker's claim that Atta's passport was found near the WTC. Obviously like most "inside jobbers" you never read the 911 Commission or NIST reports in a similar vein I doubt most "creation scientists" ever studied evolutionary biology. To debunk a theory you have to know what it purports but most "inside jobbers" don't understand this.

From the 911 Commission Report

July 2001

July 2. Hamza al Ghamdi obtained a Florida driver's license; Mohand al Shehri, a Florida identification card. Moqed and Salem al Hazmi acquired USA identification cards in July.157 The Hazmi brothers' identifications were found in the rubble at the Pentagon and appeared genuine upon examination.158

Pg. 22

202 FBI records of airline personnel indicate that some recall specific hijackers presenting U.S. identification documents with their airline tickets. The American Airlines ticket agent at Logan Airport recalls the al Shehri brothers presenting drivers' licenses at check-in. FBI report of investigation, Elvia C., Sept. 13, 2001. When Hamza al Ghamdi and Ahmed al Ghamdi checked in at Logan Airport in Boston, Hamza al Ghamdi used his Florida driver's license and Ahmed al Ghamdi used his fraudulently obtained Virginia identification card. FBI report of investigation, interview of Gail J., Sept. 21, 2001. At Dulles, Khalid al Mihdhar and Majed Moqed provided their fraudulently obtained Virginia identification cards at the ticket counter. FBI report of investigation, interview of Susan S., American Airline ticketing agent, 44

Sept. 13, 2001. A "Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Student Identity Card" was found in the rubble at the Pentagon with Moqed's name on it. Forensic examination indicated that it may have been fraudulent.

United States Secret Service Forensic Services report for the FBI PENTTBOM investigation regarding the physical examination of forensic science research request, Oct. 10, 2001. Hijackers Omari, Wail al Shehri and Hanjour also had international driver licenses and Jarrah had an international student identification card.

Pgs 38 -39

http://www.9-11commission.gov/staff_statem...errTrav_Ch2.pdf

From the Senate Intelligence Committee Report

The only hijacker that we know did not use a U.S.-issued identification was Satam Al-Suqami, who was the only person who knew he was in the United States illegally. He used his passport instead.

http://judiciary.senate.gov/testimony.cfm?...amp;wit_id=4067

To me, it essentially boils down to this:

If the 9/11 report is so wrong, where are all the crowds of structural engineers & their professional organisations saying a building could not collapse like that?

Where are all the waves of professional airline pilots and their organisations crying out that a poorly-trained terrorist could not have flown the aircraft used in such a fashion?

Where are all the aeronautical engineers and their professional organisations protesting that an aircraft could not withstand being flown in such a way?

Where are all the crash investigators pointing out that wreckage found is not consistant with the claimed incidents?

Where are all the demolitions experts saying that the incidents look exactly what a controlled demolition would look like?

Now, I know Jack will probably raise his mis-named Scholars for 9/11 Truth. Generally, they are people talking outside their field, and have a strong aversion to having their work peer-reviewed by people that can evaluate the validity of their claims.

Dr Jones is a particle physicist with expertise in cold fusion. His infamous paper was reviewed by sociologists, not engineers. Their pet engineer is an expert in dental materials.

When I see a paper raised by an expert in that field, I pay attention.

When I see a paper raised by an expert in that field and peer-reviewed by other experts in that field, I pay very close attention.

If I see a group of experts, talking about matters in which they are experts, supported by other experts, and they claim 9/11 was an "inside job" or a "hoax" or other such claim.... then I will quite prepared to revise my stance on the matter.

http://johnmccarthy90066.tripod.com/id807.html

Bests,

John McCarthy

How does your webpage refute what Evan said?

No 'authority' required, Len. You, of all people, should know there is no substitute for experience. And don't take my word for my experience, just google my name and nit pick what you find there. Perhaps you will debunk this movie for us. Jim Fetzer liked it so I can assume you will 'nit pick' it for both of us. Your saying my conclusions are wrong is just you saying so, not substantialted, just mean spirited and baseless, conclusions spewed forth with the debunker mindset you are adicted too.

Bests,

John

Edited October 2, 2006 by John J. McCarthy

[John J. McCarthy]

That comment was basically added as an after thought. Nathaniel missed the part where I said the quick destruction of steel was largely a myth.

The steel wasn’t removed as quickly as the “inside jobbers” make out. The last steel wasn’t even removed from Ground Zero until 8 ½ months after the attacks

http://www.wndu.com/news/052002/news_14322.php

During this period numerous volunteers as well as emergency personnel and construction crews etc had access to GZ. Many of the clean up workers came from controlled demolition companies. I don’t know of any reporting they saw anything suspicious.

A controlled demolition expert said “Our team, working at Ground Zero, including myself, never saw indication of explosive use that would have been evident after the event, You just can’t clean up all the det cord, shock tube, blasting cap remnants, copper backing from explosive charges, burn marks along clean-cut edges of columns, etc., nor is there any evidence in the thousands of photos taken by the press and dozens of agencies over the following days. I just can’t see how it happened that way.” http://www.wconline.com/CDA/Archive/24ae78...000f932a8c0____

An architect who doubts “the official story” who visited GZ a few weeks after -11 report he extensively examined and photographer structural steel from the towers and saw “no signs of melting” http://www.angelfire.com/ult/znewz1/wtc.htmlh

A Professor of structural engineering at the University of California Berkeley who study the collapses said he was given full access to wreckage of the towers http://www.designnews.com/article/CA636342...ndustryid=43653

The same controlled demolition expert quoted above spoke to the people who handled the steel and the told him there was no undue rush to remove the steel from GZ or the landfills where numerous forensic engineers and others had access to it. http://www.jod911.com/WTC%20COLLAPSE%20STU...rd%208-8-06.pdf pg. 8

Exerts who had access to the debris at the Fresh Kills Landfill came from 24 local, state, and federal agencies including 1000 FBI agents specially trained in evidence recovery from 55 cities. But hey they were all probably in on it. http://www.fbi.gov/page2/nov03/nyhs112703.htm

Dr W. Gene Corley, head of the American Society of Civil Engineers / Structural Engineers Association of New York ASCE / SEAoNY) Building Performance Assessment Team (BPAT), which produced the so called FEMA Report told the House of Representatives:

“There has been some concern expressed by others that the work of the team has been hampered because debris was removed from the site and has subsequently been processed for recycling. This is not the case. The team has had full access to the scrap yards and to the site and has been able to obtain numerous samples. At this point there is no indication that having access to each piece of steel from the World Trade Center would make a significant difference to understanding the performance of the structures".

www.house.gov/science/hearings/full02/mar06/corley.htm

The National Fire Protection Association, the Society of Fire Protection Engineers also participated in that initial study. Did any of the numerous highly qualified structural, civil and fire engineers from the ASCE, SEAoNY, NFPA or SFPE who participated in that study complain that inadequate access to the steel hampered their report? No. A few engineer who did not participate in that study the recyling of the steel compromised the final result but none of them challenged the collapse theory. One of them assistant fire chief, professor of fire science and (former) associate editor of Fire Engineering magazine Glenn Corbett worked on the more comprehensive NIST Report (also with about 200 other engineers most of who didn’t work for NIST or other federal agencies. Another was Corbett’s boss at the magazine, former chief editor Bill Manning (who isn’t a fire a engineer but a journalist) but he welcomed the NIST report.

http://fe.pennnet.com/Articles/Article_Dis..._NUM=1&p=25

Over 1300 pieces of steel from the towers are still in a hanger at JFK Airport where I believe they are fairly available for inspection.

http://www.amny.com/entertainment/news/am-...gallery?index=1

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/NISTNCSTAR1-3BDraft.pdf

The theory that a combination of impact and fire damage caused the towers to collapse has yet to be challenged by anyone with relevant expertise and has been back by literally hundreds of highly qualified engineers.

For all the talk of people who believe just about every CT under the sun that they are free of mental conformity normally the exact opposite is true. Instead of conforming mentally to what they hear on Fox and see on other “MSM outlets” they do so with the CT cites they spend so much time on. It doesn’t seem to occur to them to independently verify what they read on them.

Nathaniel your coworkers and the "tweedy professors" you so disdain are right.

Len

So, Len

Turn things around a bit and debunk the government's 'conspiracy theory'. You can choose the 911 Report and the Warren Commission Report or any other comic book transparencies you hold so dear, keeping in mind, of course, that folks who have studied them don't really owe you an explanation of their opine.

Then again, disruputers are only successfull if they can defer the purpose of the continuing discussions on the lies that led us to wage wars. And while you're at it, have any of your friends and associates in New York been affected by the invironment created by the collapse of the WTC?

Bests,

John

Edited October 2, 2006 by John J. McCarthy