BFP Special Video Report with James Corbett: The Gaza Emergency Fund

James Corbett reports live on location from Kuala Lumpur where the Perdana Global Peace Foundation has just launched a new fund to provide emergency medical aid and supplies to the people of Gaza.


This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by SUBSCRIBING, and by ordering our EXCLUSIVE BFP DVD .

FB Like

Share This

This site depends….

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by SUBSCRIBING, and by ordering our EXCLUSIVE BFP DVDs.

Comments

  1. James,

    Appreciate and admire what you do. I advise you to not be so gullible when you listen to the *experts* tell you what happened on 9/11 aside from the usual lies to push us into war. I listened to Prof Eric Larsen last night and practically puked to hear this man who is a lit professor wagging his finger and declaring Judy Woods the best scientists or something to that effect in the world. I just love it when people go on about science when they haven’t a clue and think they are uber logical and see the truth because they can see the lies and the BS. Richard Gage means well, but he is not a scientist, a researcher, a physicist, engineer, nor has be intimate / professional technical knowledge about the world trade center buildings. He’s a spokesperson.. a talking head who has been doing the exact same dog and pony show for 5 yrs now. He’s a legend in his own mind.

  2. How does one respond to a theologian writing a book explaining one of the most complex and least studied technical events and reaching a conclusion that it was controlled demolition?

    One needs to look back at the Challenger disaster study which Richard Feyman was involved in and he was the lone voice (of dissent) and turns out to have correctly figured it out. Feyman is one of the most brilliant thinkers and physicists of the 20th century. David Griffin is no Richard Feyman, nor is Niels Harrit, Kevin Ryan or the high school physics teacher, David Chandler.

    I think it’s fine that there are citizen journalists and researchers… but there is research and there is research. And citing supposed experts and using their statements strung together to make a conclusion is hardly fundamental science or research. Someone like Griffin cannot debunk a technical report that wrong because he doesn’t know engineering or physics or fire science or chemistry. Yet this man is touted as father of the 9-11 truth movement… the gold standard for excellence. This is a very unfortunate development. The blind leading the blind comes to mind.

    My criticism is not meant to be the backdrop for advancing my ideas as correct, superior or the truth. It is simply meant to demonstrate that the truth movement is inhabited by largely unqualified experts and the few who are technically qualified don’t seem to have studied the actual building movements and extracted data from them… but leap frogged to a conclusion ignoring the crucial building movement data. In its place they have advanced a complex yet unspecified in ANY detail conspiracy theory (the event WAS a conspiracy by definition) naming all sorts of guilty parties without the direct evidence to connect them to the conspiracy… other than they may have had means motive and opportunity. That is hardly evidence and would never convict anyone in a court proceeding.

    If the truth movement does somehow manage to stage trials… I can’t imagine anything very different from a soviet style show trial. If this happens it will make it harder for the truth to come out and for real accountability and justice to prevail.

  3. Hi SanderO,

    I appreciate the amount of comments you have been submitting lately, regarding the 9/11 Truth Movement (TM) and specifically the destruction of the WTC. I want to offer some constructive criticism of your comments, in the hope that it will enhance the conversations around the issues by keeping them positive and progressive.

    First, I would say that you are using some broad generalizations about the TM. Not everyone who could be considered a part of the movement is a proponent of controlled demolition or of blind faith in any so called leaders of the TM. Take a look at Jon Gold, for instance.

    Second, you seem to be very driven to create a dichotomy between MIHOP and LIHOP. I don’t find this division very useful as it only serves at just that – a division. You attempt to bridge the division by saying that either one deserves the same kind of attention, but it is not clear to me just what the point of focusing on these definitions is, especially since they are both speculative.

    Third, pertaining to your comment above, I usually see the scientists you mentioned in your comment trying to distance themselves from naming guilty parties, especially when they are writing about the technical aspects of the WTC destruction. They try hard to keep the discussions technical. At the same time, Kevin Ryan, in particular, has done a lot of non-scientific writing about possible suspects and associations within the establishment. But those articles are completely separate from his technical articles.

    Finally, we are all “Truthers”. Everyone. Are we not? I really don’t appreciate the focus on labeling or how it furthers the search for truth.

    That said, I want to keep this positive and say that I do appreciate your willingness to bring other information and analysis to the table. I know that people can get too comfortable, once they have perceived some answers. It’s important to keep challenging the perceptions and either making them stronger or letting them go. I would suggest again that you try to write a technical argument and show that you are submitting it to the Journal of 9/11 Studies, as that seems to be the place where many of the scientists you mention are using for such discussion. If, as you say, they won’t even read it, or won’t respond, I think it would be valuable to show the other readers here that you are making an attempt. These are important issues to be challenged and trying to publish there might be the best way to add to the strength of their arguments or help others let go or modify their perceptions of the answers to consider.

    I hope you don’t take my criticism personally. It’s meant to help us avoid unnecessary pitfalls in conversation.

    Thanks for your consideration and efforts.

  4. Xicha,

    Thank you for the last comment. I have no problem receiving any criticism… I seek it. It’s how we learn. Keep it coming!

    There is essentially a false dichotomy re 9-11… CD vs NIST’s version. I am aware of some such as Jon Gold who is rather shuned by the mainstream truth movement. I think Sibel is as well. She doesn’t seem to want to step into the quicksand either.

    I will repeat… I have no intention of writing a formal paper and submitting it to the Journal of 9/11 Studies for many reasons… one of them being I don’t consider Steven Jones an honorable person.. nor them any sort of neutral body… but one with a clearly identified *truther* view of the event. I am not an expert… nor an academic. I am a semi retired architect… not a physicist nor a chemist nor a structural engineer. I’ve put out all sorts of materials in various forums over the years and produced many graphics and so forth all created no to be part of a formal presentation, but for my own use, study and understanding when some aspect of the event interested me and I was able to explore in. My study of the reserve strength and the factor of safety of the twin tower steel is an example. One reads and hears all manner of claims about how incredibly strong the towers were… that they were over designed as much as 20 times and one never hears/reads that they were less than 5x as strong as they needed to be… much stronger than any other steel high rise. But are these claims backed up? Where did they come from?

    I was able to produce an analysis of the FOS from materials available in the public record… Of course I am assuming that this material is accurate… I can personally guaranty that the information is accurate. My study revealed that the FOS of the twin towers steel was as low as 1.65 and not more than 1.85. This is an aggregate average and any member may be higher or lower. But it is not 3 nor 5 and this clearly impossible because for the steel to be THAT strong it would weigh 2 or 3 times the weight it was. It’s that simple.

    There are many implications to the FOS being as low as 1.65-1.85 especially when considers that the planes destroyed a number of columns and this instantly lowered the aggregate FOS closer to the FOS 1 where a collapse would begin. Obviously any FOS of 1 or more would not collapse. But it is also a fact that once steel heats to about 400° it starts to lose strength and by 700° it’s lost more than 50% of its strength… that means that steel designed at FOS 2 heated to 700° would have its FOS reduced to 1!!!

    The take away from my FOS study is that it would take a lot of heat to fail a column or connection and one that column failed its load would ten be picked up by other columns in the structure. This too effectively reduces the FOS… not by a weakening of the steel but by adding more load to the column.

    It seems to me that this sort of analysis is lacking in the truth movement… most of which sees CD as destruction and dismisses heat weakening as not possible.. that progressive cascading failures are not possible. Giving examples of frames which were on fire and did not collapse is interesting. But the analysis is clearly not there. It’s like.. see X was on fire and it didn’t collapse… ergo fire cannot collapse a steel frame. Of course it can and is why steel frames have fire proofing applied to them and sprinkler systems are there to cool the steel in addition to suppress the fires. Heat DOES weaken steel. Progressive failure are COMMON in all systems linked by nodes… electric grids… information… structure and so forth. Why the denial and the willful ignorance?

    I need to publish this? It’s *settled knowledge* accessible to anyone. I simply point some of this out on 9-11 forums.

    And believe me when I have written to the 9-11 truth experts about such things as FOS… I receive no replies.

    That is telling.

    Why? Because their whole house of cards (false beliefs) is in jeopardy of collapse. Don’t what that to happen do they?

  5. Xicha,

    The reason why I see a larger difference between MIHOP and LIHOP comes from my tentative hypothesis about what happened before, during and after 9-11.

    If we are to accept Sibel’s and other accounts there was intel about some sort of attack on the US by Islamic terrorists prior to the event that seemed to be suppressed. This makes no sense unless someone(s) did not want the attack to not happen.

    Anyone understands that any attack on US soil will result in a massive retaliation for many reasons… first among them is that this is how the US is set up… fight fire with fire. We have a trillion $ DOD just for that purpose. And we have one only because the MIC has made sure that there is a threat and a need for a huge defense establishment. But talk is cheap and so occasional violence against US interest seals the deal On the MIC appropriations. And then there are the trouble spots around the world. The West (MIC) pumps arms into these struggles and then can use the conflict as an excuse to intervene and still some goodies in the process. The MIC is in a constant hunt for reasons to use its weapons, then get more and there’s nothing like an attack to have the nation PATRIOTICALLY lined up throwing cash at them and giving their lives to defend freedom fries.

    So an attack on the US does not mean it was a self inflicted wound BECAUSE of the reaction… the so called false flag inside job reasoning. If there was an actual attack the reaction would be precisely what we saw.

    With the chatter of something cooking and the fog of why it wasn’t prevented it looks more like a LIHOP and that’s a treason in itself. If it was revealed that our MIC is involved in supporting insurgencies including those aimed at the USA that would pretty much be the end of the CIA, etc. as we know it. Hence the coverup and having everyone look forward and not back… You do recall that theme? No accountability… no justice … no time to retool the DOD BECAUSE we had to fight the war we had and not the one the army was designed for. What the heck.. take out Iraq… we had a plan on the shelf for that. We have plans on the shelf for 100 different conflicts. What we need is the excuse… Out behavior around the world is creating that excuse constantly… it’s been labeled blow back and terrorism.

    You do recall all the nasaying to those who wanted to understand why we were attacked by terrorists… It was our freedom we were told. They hate us because we have rights and freedom. That makes perfect sense.

    The attacks were directed to the MOST obvious symbols of US hegemony… the WTC and the DOD head quarters. That would end our freedoms! Knock the towers down and nick the DOD’s command and control center.

    Did intel let this happen? Did they know precisely what was going to happen? Or did they piggy back on top of the plan and make sure there was real shock and awe?

    Why did the WTC have to be destroyed? And why building 7? Why not go for the PR by getting a few targets hit? Who would ever work in two towers which has been slammed by jets and burnt to a crisp.. but repaired at enormous expense… to show the world that it was a superficial wound? Two burnout towers standing as monsters.. unoccupied for the forseeable future would be all the PR either Islamists or Insiders would need to kick start a war and drag the US into battle 10k miles from her shores. The DOD could care less… they expected a never ending stream of cash after that… The Islamists knowing history have learned that the insurgents ultimately win as they did in Vietnam. Wars in the ME will drain the US and make a few richer than all get up.

    Oh… I forgot… the inside job also had to be done to destroy SEC files and get rid of an asbestos abatement problem. Since when have such things ever stopped corporations from doing it again and again…terminal serial repeat offenders. It’s in their blood. They don’t have to conspire to destroy the evidence.. they just pay off the people involved and it goes away. Money takes care of most problems. Money they have… they don’t need to hatch complex plots such as what the MIHOPers want us to believe.

    If you go back the the JFK coup you can see it was a tiny op and a much larger cover up. JFK was in the process of closing down Vietnam, wanted to shrink the DOD and give a big haircut to the CIA. These guys weren’t having it and so they simply offed him and got LHO to be the patsy… The Warren commission could not reveal that we had a coup by the DOD which essentially delivered a message to LBJ… our way or the JFK way… and they proved that they want no opposition and took out pesky MLK and RFK all anti war charismatic leaders. The MIC is untouchable by the civilian government and they’re pretty much got their people all through it and keep the revolving door well lubed. The laws have been neutered… our rights LEGALLY taken away… we are a democracy in name only. The MIC /CIA pretty much control the MSM… look at the NYTimes… it’s a organ or propaganda for the MIC and the real estate establishment and the rest of corporatism… They don’t even report on LABOR… labor … remember labor… has been rendered invisible… only finance and wall street matter.

    Why would such a power small collection of powerful interest which get whatever they want and there is never accountability or justice or investigations into wrong doing… have to hatch up some complex plot… killing so many people in a unrehearsed drama that had to come off with Swiss watch precision…when they couldn’t even win the Vietnam war fighting against geurillas with no planes, ships, naplam, cluster bombs, tanks etc…. and several war colleges presumably which teach how to wage war and win it? We’ve now seen that the US has lost in Iraq… and Afghanistan. If the US has no presence in these countries they will surely not be US allies.

    The LIHOP was the more likely explanation and the cover up had to conceal this and the fact that the operation got out of control and all the death and destruction ensued. I’ll wager that they do termination with prejudice as part of their MO… but not mass murder. Project Northwoods or even Gladio were little ops with maximum PR value. Even the attack on the USS Liberty was a small action in terms of loss of life.

    Why would they not blow up a bridge and declare it was a terrorist attack? Or the Washington Monument?

    9-11 was likely allowed to happen and they did not expect the destruction. In fact they probably expected very little destruction… Weren’t the towers supposed to withstand plane strikes? SURE let them fly planes into them and we’ll kick their ass anyway.

    So the cover up of the stand down and the fog the DOD and with the back door to the enterprise software enabled a small group could clear the way for the planes to get to their targets… no matter of who flew them. But they were caught off guard when the towers collapsed. They weren’t supposed to. Was that an engineering issue? And why did 7 go down? It wasn’t even hit by a plane? Well if it had all sorts of vulnerable structural design… and it was subject to a domino collapse.. you don’t want THAT getting out… it would drop some of the blame on the designers and planners. That too would have to be swept under the rug. And NIST complied with that request.. taking 7 yrs to do it. Didn’t matter anyway… the wars were well underway… the plan was being implemented.

    The Israeli’s were fine… The USA was dropping their enemies off the map and their illegal treatment of Palestinians was off the radar. Land grab was on full steam ahead. Right… the Mossad pulled a fast one on the US making us think it was the Islamists when it was a Mossad plot. Uncle Sam or Unbelievable Stupid?

    And of course the usual suspect made out handsomely from 9/11. They always do no matter what.

    Do we need an investigation? You betcha.

  6. SanderO,

    “…someone(s) did not want the attack to not happen.”

    I think that you are trying pretty hard to explain a difference between the M(ade) and L(et), which I think originally became associated with the TM by DRG.

    Also, you seem to have worked out quite a lot of assumptions about the ethical boundaries of a bunch of psychopaths, as well as the details of their operations and black budgets, not to mention their relative size.

    Since you agree that we need an investigation and that “letting” is just as treasonous as “making”, why not avoid pushing the idea of L&M teams to bicker back and forth about SEC paper destruction straw men?

    Do you get my drift, like, where I am coming from? Do you sense that the creation of divisions is an important tool of the same said psychopaths?

    I’m not saying you don’t make any points (that’s L-speak); it’s just that the anti-M sentiment in your comments seems to BE the goal, almost instead of the truth.

    Again, is the division-speak practically worth it? After all, only psychopaths are not truthers.

  7. This lady (from the same conference) says a lot about what the psychos are making happen – the massive killing and crimes against humanity are not passive:

    http://www.corbettreport.com/niloufer-bhagwat-presents-to-the-911-revisited-conference-in-kuala-lumpur/

    I think it’s important to look for patterns of behavior/MO when investigating crimes – did you listen to the Corbett interview with Sibel from 12/2/11?

  8. Xicha,

    Patterns are interesting. Not a basis for making a suggestion of guilt. I am not attempting to cause bickering or further a debate between Ls and Ms.

    My own study reveals that there was no CD and so the M position loses its main raison d’etre. I will qualify that in saying there is no evidence yet for a CD… and what is suggested as evidence is either incorrect… or ambiguous or simply does not imply CD… such as symmetry of collapse. With the main force of destruction of a CD and a natural collapse being gravity… it will more or less bring all structure straight down. Nothing knocked the tower over… did it? Symmetry is often cited as a unique finger print of CD. The same for the speed of collapse argument. It’s not a artifact soley of a CD and no CD collapse at free fall regardless. That is an urban legend!

    Even with a CD 98% of the destructive energy gravity… and so it MOST of the CD destruction is perfectly explainable by engineering and natural causes of mechanical destruction. It’s just the initiation. And so I can’t see what started it all and so I will not rule out CD charges to initiate a gravity driven destruction.

    But Xicha.. LOOK at the reasons given for a CD… all about POST initiation artifacts… except the unproven/undemonstrated/ and disputed nano thermite.

    If the truthers would focus SOLEY on what began the collapse and prove THAT was not a natural phenomena… the REST of it hardly matters… would it? Prove bombs kicked it off and I don’t care about anything after that… case closed. But they don’t… they try to read the collapse as CD ONLY artifacts. I call BS.

    My study and others at the 911 Free form have pretty much concluded that everything seen POST initiation was not from CD (as truthers claim). I want further study of the initiation process.

    I have done some theoretical study about Factor of Safety and cascading progressive failure and this STRONGLY suggests that CD was not even required to kick it off. BUT THIS DOESN’T PROVE IT WASN’T USED.

    I remain open to CD and therefore to MIHOP, but it’s not a good case to make as LIHOP is because there is POLITICAL not technical evidence of THAT sort of activity.

    Does this make sense?

  9. Xicha,

    I speak as an individual. I don’t represent a group which has talking points. I am not a force to bring together nor cause dissension. I post my understanding from my own independent work. It appears to me that most people in this debate are not actually referring to what happened but what they want to see.. and few are equipped with science and engineering backgrounds to solve this including me. But this does not prevent a theologian from telling why bldg 7 collapsed or from all sorts of intelligent people such as James Corbett to simply accept what he perceives as an expert is telling him. This sort of herd mentality… is what is most troubling.

    And yes there is ample evidence that the authorities (1%ers) lie. But their lies does not lend any credence to other theories which seek to explain the event and the lies.

    I am disappointed that so many critics of capitalism and the status quo are shunned and labelled gate keepers and worse because they have no jumped on the truther MIHOP bandwagon. I don’t think, for example, that Amy Goodman or Chris Hedges, or Noam Chomsky has what it takes to understand a highly technical event and perhaps they choose not to open their mouths about something they are not equipped to speak about. Reporting or stenography? All three mentioned have major problems with the MIC and the corporate state… but the charges of MIHOP are one that they wisely will not support based on the evidence presented.

    There are many explanations for the deceit aside from covering up CDs.

  10. Thanks for the resoponse, SanderO. Yes, it makes some sense, but I have some replies, in bold, with yours in quoted italics:

    “Patterns are interesting. Not a basis for making a suggestion of guilt.”

    Agreed. Interesting means we should consider them, correct? Should we consider people, who have such an MO and gained from the event, to be suspects?

    ” I am not attempting to cause bickering or further a debate between Ls and Ms.”

    Thanks!

    “…no CD and so the M position loses its main raison d’etre”

    Got any data to support that? I was M before even considering or hearing about CD and I’m sure I have company. Not withstanding your double negative explanations of motive, I would venture to say that any L is inherently M. You can call it an assist instead of a score, but I think that would belie your position of not causing bickering or debate, since you don’t have all the facts and if you see an assist, you investigate it as part of the score.

    “… and what is suggested as evidence is either incorrect… or ambiguous or simply does not imply CD… such as symmetry of collapse. With the main force of destruction of a CD and a natural collapse being gravity… it will more or less bring all structure straight down. Nothing knocked the tower over… did it? Symmetry is often cited as a unique finger print of CD. The same for the speed of collapse argument. It’s not a artifact soley of a CD and no CD collapse at free fall regardless. That is an urban legend!”

    “LOOK at the reasons given for a CD… all about POST initiation artifacts… except the unproven/undemonstrated/ and disputed nano thermite. If the truthers would focus SOLEY on what began the collapse and prove THAT was not a natural phenomena… the REST of it hardly matters… would it? Prove bombs kicked it off and I don’t care about anything after that… case closed. But they don’t… they try to read the collapse as CD ONLY artifacts. I call BS.

    My study and others at the 911 Free form have pretty much concluded that everything seen POST initiation was not from CD (as truthers claim). I want further study of the initiation process.

    I have done some theoretical study about Factor of Safety and cascading progressive failure and this STRONGLY suggests that CD was not even required to kick it off. BUT THIS DOESN’T PROVE IT WASN’T USED.”

    Thanks for the additional analysis. I understand that you don’t want to get into it with JONS, but it would be a way to offer readers of JONS more to think about. Just in case you change your mind someday.

    “I remain open to CD and therefore to MIHOP, but it’s not a good case to make as LIHOP is because there is POLITICAL not technical evidence of THAT sort of activity.”

    I think you’re confounding CD with MIHOP, and that’s just not logical. You can’t tell me how many people are non-CD and M. Please stop this.

    And to be clear, I think you are a truther. Please stop letting others own that word or defining it as a group of CD supporters. Becuase the world is not just a battle between you and them. There are others involved. CD is something to investigate. MO is something to consider. Let’s agree to agree.

  11. Xicha,
    I am an orphan of / from the truth movement. I am considered a Sunstein dis info agent, a NIST shill and worse. I don’t care. I am interested in accountability and justice. We’re far from there.

    My reading from a listserve, monthly teleconference etc. is that there is no difference between LIHOP and MIHOP… the inside job. And the inside job means to them CD and there is no ambiguity about that from the people I associate MIHOP with… including Gage et al.

    My present understanding of the difference would be that Ls may have let the planes get to their targets… but it stops there… until the cover story narrative resumes. The Ls did not lace the towers with explosives, and didn’t expect them to collapse. They were after insurance settlements, or getting out of asbestos abatements, or trying to destroy SED files or distract the bean counters trying to balance the DOD books, or taking out Israel’s enemies. The L position is simply that a terorist strike in the USA would be the cassus belli for a long GWOT and lots of cash for the MIC.

    This is very different though no less treasonous… from MIHOP. MIHOP as I understand it was a huge complex conspiracy which had to involves hundreds if not thousands of actors, the most advanced and sophisticated technology, infiltration of scores of businesses and take precision timing and have not a single person open their mouth. It’s just not credible in total. It’s several orders of magnitude beyond the complexity of the JFK assassination… whereas the LIHOP can be run with back door access to enterprise software by a few right wingers who wanted at the ME oil and endless MIC procurements ($$$).

    I want nothing to do with Jones or his ilk. I had respect for Graham MacQueen and his talk on Anthrax was excellent. But he’s off the reservation when he discussion CD and foreknowledge of it. And he’s got balls to co write a paper on *the Missing Jolt* as he has no background in physics or engineering.

  12. “And the inside job means to them CD and there is no ambiguity about that from the people I associate MIHOP with… including Gage et al.

    You are now associating with different people. I, in particular, see a logical difference between the two – like “Is every rectangle a square?”. Do you understand? Your simplification, combined with vilification of your former associates causes concern. Please drop the equating of M = CD.

    “This is very different though no less treasonous… from MIHOP. MIHOP as I understand it was a huge complex conspiracy which had to involves hundreds if not thousands of actors, the most advanced and sophisticated technology, infiltration of scores of businesses and take precision timing and have not a single person open their mouth. It’s just not credible in total. It’s several orders of magnitude beyond the complexity of the JFK assassination… whereas the LIHOP can be run with back door access to enterprise software by a few right wingers who wanted at the ME oil and endless MIC procurements ($$$).”

    Lots of people talk. Haven’t you heard any? Lots of people talked to the 9/11 Commission too. Didn’t quite make it to the report. Please don’t build another straw man about thousands of sneaky conspirators wearing secret decoder rings and not telling their spouses. It’s a BS fantasy that doesn’t represent the reality of criminals operating our govt right now, right in our faces. Right now, there are compromised criminals operating the govt and lots of people talk about it. Were some of these criminals’ crimes related to 9/11? That’s a more realistic concept to think about.

    We don’t know how complicated or simple these false flag operations are. We don’t know how many of our criminal govt were involved. I don’t mind that you have some assumptions or ideas, I just wish you could find a way to express them without the illogical labeling. Because I want to stop bickering about it and I’m not sure if you get what I’m saying because your responses keep repeating the same equation, in the middle of some context or another that may or may not be worth reading. DO you get what I’m saying or not?

  13. [forgot to bold]
    You are now associating with different people. I, in particular, see a logical difference between the two – like “Is every rectangle a square?”. Do you understand? Your simplification, combined with vilification of your former associates causes concern. Please drop the equating of M = CD.

  14. xicha,
    I confess to not seeing the thrust of your critique of my understanding of what M actually means.

    Of course there are criminals in the gov now… It’s the best place to be to do this. Think cops committing crimes… especially the top cops. They’re the ones we go to fight crime!.. And so we would think of getting rid of the cops after a huge crime spree.

    Research has moved forward since the last *big one* the truth movement got behind… nano thermite. But you would never know. You don’t see the big *expert researchers* or talking heads… showing up at the 911 free forums, for example where stellar work has been done since 2009 where the ROOSD hypothesis was advanced to explain the collapse motions/mechanism of the twin towers. I bet you never even heard of ROOSD? And there are published technical papers which support the concept. You don’t have ROOSD advocates being asked to explain them at 911 Truth conferences. Dwain Deets tried to summarize it in a few minutes in Vancouver (he’s a friend I I have corresponded with him about ROOSD) and Fetzer went ballistic when Deets mentioned the topic. How’se that the being interested in ideas? Tolerant of them? And especially evidences based idea? This is not a truth movement… or one I would be associated with. Every forum I’ve attempted to introduce the concept has ended up with others being so hostile and aggressive and of course irrational… as they cling to their beliefs.

    You obviously don’t see this taking place and it’s divisive. One of the supposed reasons given for my expulsion from the AE board… disruptive and divisive …simply for trying to examine closely the building movements and performance and not touting the party line. (scientology?)

    Yes all squares are rectangles but not all rectangles are squares. That sort of logic.. it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck is offered as proof for CD. I call rubbish.

    Visit the thread Smart Idiots at the 911 Free Forums which aside from the excellent technical work there… it’s the most informative meta discussion of the 911 problem bar none.

  15. MIHOPer’s Logic

    “No mention has been made of the fact that it would have been impossible for those plane crashes and fires to have destroyed the buildings or the abundant evidence of controlled demolition. The defense attorneys could make an affirmative defense of this argument and exculpatory evidence.”

    “9/11 Truth activist Mark Graham sent a letter to the 12 insurance companies for the airline defendants sued by Larry Silverstein informing them about evidence of controlled demolition of the Twin Towers and Building 7 and offering to put them in touch with building experts who could provide expert testimony.”

    What experts Mark? What abundant evidence? See what I mean xicha? These guys are not looking for the truth… They’re convinced they found it. The reasoning / logic is absurd.

  16. Yes all squares are rectangles but not all rectangles are squares. That sort of logic.. it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck is offered as proof for CD. I call rubbish.

    I have to say, I still don’t know if you understand my point. Nothing to do with the analogy about ducks.

    MIHOP is the RECTANGLE

    CD is the SQUARE

    Can you agree?

  17. Xicha,

    Perhaps I don’t understand but can you answer this…it may help.

    If the CD is not the only MIHOP that is the MIHOPers carried out the CD of the 3 towers… then WHAT DID THEY MAKE HAPPEN ON PURPOSE?

    I am guessing that you will suggest they literally organized and flew the planes.

    BTW. I do think the LIHOP explanation might involve a the MIHOPERs (CIA???) staging Shankeville for PR purposes a la Jessica Lynch… and might have staged whatever happened at the pentagon. The pentagon seems to be a big divide in the movement between the NOC flyover and the 911blogger people who claim a jumbo hit the pentagon.

    The DOD was petty active in fogging the scene about what happened there whatever it was for whatever reason they did it. Pretty embarrassing to say the least.

  18. To answer your question, one thing that I keep saying interests me, and has flown right by you, is the MO of using terrorists for hire or brainwashed terrorists to do our bidding. Remember that interview I keep mentioning? 12/2/11 Sibel on Corbett. I call it Talking Turkey. Here’s a link, in case you missed it:

    http://www.corbettreport.com/interview-422-sibel-edmonds/

    I think you must get the picture now, about squares and rectangles. So, I bet you will stop equating MIHOP with CD. And you may as well stop talking about MIHOP vs LIHOP, since there’s no point, except to be divisive.

    Thanks! This will be my last attempt at saying this.

  19. Frankly Xicha… I don’t really get into the debate between M and L and have been mostly focused on the technical aspects of what happened. I’ve moved passed the official account and the truther ones are no more accurate describing what happened to those buildings. They have not convinced me of the CD explanation, but I still remain open to it.

    As I expect that intel is listening and watching and supposed to prevent such things as 9-11… if they don’t or if 9-11 happens one has to at least suspect that someone dropped the ball big time.. and more likely wanted it dropped. And that’s as far as I will go. If you want to call a stand down, or blocking intel reports a MIHOP… go for it.

    A rose with another name has just as sharp a prick.

Speak Your Mind