Thursday, January 28, 2010

Jeanette's other legacy

There has been no shortage of tributes this week for Jeanette Fitzsimons, who has just left Wellington after serving for thirteen years as a member of parliament. Even Fitzsimons' political opponents have praised the long-time leader of the Green Party for the sincerity of her commitment to protecting the environment, and for her avoidance of the personal attacks, backroom manoeuvres, and populist politicking which are so common in parliament.

But Fitzsimons' principled record as an MP only compounds the recent error of judgement which saw her lend her support to one of the most obnoxious political movements to emerge in the West in the last decade. Last November Fitzsimons held a private meeting with Richard Gage, America's most prominent 9/11 'Truther', during his lecture tour of New Zealand.

Gage is the founder and leader of a group called Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, and a supporter of a closely-related outfit called Scholars for 9/11 Truth. Both organisations include numerous members of the extreme right, and in 2007 the Simon Wiesenthal Centre, which monitors anti-semitism around the world, included Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth on its list of organisations that promote hatred of Jews and support for terrorism.

At his Wellington seminar Gage, whose claims to have worked as an architect for twenty years in San Francisco have never been verified, argued that the 9/11 attacks were an 'inside job' perpetrated by an elaborate conspiracy, rather than an Al Qaeda operation. According to Gage, who likes to illustrate his arguments by setting a few empty boxes up on a table and knocking them over, vast amounts of explosives were placed unnoticed in the basements of World Trade Centre's twin towers, making the 'controlled demolition' of the buildings possible. Gage believes that employees of America's federal government were induced to sacrifice their lives by flying planes into the twin towers in an effort to obscure the real cause of the collapse of the buildings. Matthew Dentith, the University of Auckland philosopher who has devoted several years to analysing the delusions of Gage and his followers, summed up the intellectual level of the 9/11 'Truth' movement when he said that all its claims 'collapse' as soon as they are 'prodded'. Blogger Giovanni Tiso, whose PhD deals partly with popular (mis)conceptions of science, attended Gage's Wellington talk and was struck by the sheer size of the conspiracy that the 'inside job' theory of 9/11 requires:

most of [Gage's] presentation consisted in fact of a broad range of wild speculations. And the pieces of evidence thus accumulated...collectively implicate in the conspiracy and the subsequent cover-up the following organizations (at my own and likely very incomplete count): the CIA, the Pentagon, the United States Government, all major media as far afield as the BBC, the owner and insurer of the WTC, ACE elevators and the security company responsible for monitoring the coming and goings at the buildings, plus - in an accessory capacity - the boards of the major banks, military contractors, oil firms and really anybody who stood to make money and gain influence from the economic destabilisation that occurred and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Gage is cagey about the identity of the people who came up with the idea for the huge 9/11 conspiracy, but many of his supporters do not share his bashfulness. The Auckland-based conspiracy theorists who publish Uncensored magazine, for instance, blame 9/11 on a Jewish plot. The circle around Uncensored organised the appearance Gage made in an Auckland community centre, a few days after his Wellington gig. The Whangarei-based conspiracy theorist Clare Swinney, who blames Jews for ruining Hollywood and the media as well as staging 9/11, hails Gage as a hero, and vigorously promoted his visit to this country on a variety of websites. Along with several members of the Uncensored editorial committee, Swinney is a member of Scholars for 9/11 Truth.

Of course, Jeanette Fitzsimons could not be faulted simply for meeting Gage last November. False ideas should be confronted and criticised, especially when they are connected to a political agenda which is profoundly unhealthy. Matthew Dentith and Giovanni Tiso attended Gage's presentation because they wanted to criticise the man. Unfortunately, Fitzsimons did not have such honourable motives when she met Gage in Wellington.

Fitzsimons is far from being a critic of Gage. She had a private audience with the man before he gave his Wellington talk, had him sign her copy of his book, and complimented the work of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. When she was quizzed be the media about her meeting with Gage and her views on
9/11, Fitzsimons claimed that Gage had raised 'some unexplained matters', and said that she had 'an open mind' about whether the attack on the World Trade Centre might have been an 'inside job'.

Scepticism is often a virtue, but the evidence against 9/11 being an 'inside job' is so weighty, and the conspiracy alleged by 9/11 Truthers so vast, that it is simply not credible to keep an 'open mind' on the subject, any more than it is credible to keep an 'open mind' on the question of whether or not the Holocaust took place (it is not surprising that members of the Uncensored circle and many other supporters of Gage are Holocaust deniers). To suggest that the arguments of a Holocaust denier or a 9/11 'Truther' have some merit, and ought to be taken seriously, is to insult the serious scholars who have dealt with both subjects, as well as the families and friends of the victims of the Holocaust and of 9/11.

It is no surprise that Richard Gage was happy to grant Jeanette Fitzsimons an audience before his performance in Wellington. Almost all of the politicians who have endorsed the 9/11 'Truth' movement have belonged to small parties on the extreme right. The support of politicians like 'Commander' Bill White, the leader of America's Nazi Party, can hardly boost the credibility of the 9/11 'Truthers' amongst the general public. For Gage and his followers, the support of a high-profile, respected politician like Fitzsimons is a rare honour. On websites and at meetings around the world, 'Truthers' are hailing Fitzsimons' endorsement of Gage as a sign that their message is winning over the political 'mainstream'. Uncensored has hailed the Green Party's longest-serving leader as a hero of resistance to the Jewish-dominated 'New World Order'. Fitzsimons has become a poster girl for a movement mired in anti-semitism and paranoia.

It might be argued that Jeanette Fitzsimons' friendly words for Richard Gage are an aberration, and constitute a very minor blemish on an honourable political record. Fitzsimons' long career certainly gives us no evidence that she shares the anti-semitism and conspiratorial mindsets of many 'Truthers'. She is unlikely to be cheered by the endorsement of publications like Uncensored and people like Clare Swinney. But it is Fitzsimons' honourable record which makes her kind words for Richard Gage so pernicious. Whether she likes it or not, Fitzsimons' support for a movement dominated by anti-semitism is a part of her political legacy.

[In a follow-up to this post I'll discuss the endorsement of the cult leader and serial rapist Adi Da that appeared in the November issue of the Green Party magazine Te Awa, and consider why members of the Greens are promoting strange ideas like 9/11 'Truth' and 'Daism'.]

212 Comments:

Blogger arshad said...

its really very nice i enjoyed a lot to visit..Mobiles Handsets

5:42 am  
Blogger HORansome said...

I didn't think Jeanette actually went to the Te Papa presentation; she had a private audience with him prior to it but wasn't in the audience (well, that I recall).

8:45 am  
Blogger maps said...

Thanks for that, Matthew - I've adjusted the post accordingly. The crucial thing, for me, is the statement she made to the media suggesting that Gage was credible researcher, and that 9/11 might be an inside job. It is that statement which is being used around the world by the conspiracy theorists.

9:11 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Fitzsimons is still a firm supporter of the Troofers. She has signed a petition organised by 9/11 wackos calling for an investigation into the possibility that the US government 'did it'...
http://pl911truth.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=47&Itemid=53

And she has let her image be used on the site of this group of Troofers connected to the white nationalist movement...
http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/

The Greens are basically OK with this. No one has censured Fitzsimons. A lot of Greens probably agree with her...

9:24 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

'It is with great pride that I can announce that Jeanette Fitszimmons the co-leader of the Green party in New Zealand has signed the politicians for 911 truth petition.

Although Jeanette wishes to emphasise that she signed the petition as a private citizen first and politician second it remains a fact that she is the first sitting front bench MP of any country willing to make a stand and sign a petition demanding a new investigation into the events of 911. The Green party is currently in the opposition but until November last year was part of the governing Labour government and the third biggest party of New Zealand.

Jeanette Fitszimmons has repeatedly but off record expressed her sympathy with those of us who are working towards a new investigation but until this moment declined to speak openly about her doubts with regards to the official accounts of the events of 911, however when I e-mailed her with the news of the new website and the request that perhaps she would sign the petition I was pleasantly surprised to find my request fulfilled within hours.'
http://www.911oz.com/weblogid/285

9:31 am  
Blogger Giovanni said...

What are you doing, man? Were you afraid you might not fill your quota of hate mail before the end of the calendar month?

9:50 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Clare Swinney blames the Haiti disaster on a US earthquake machine.

10:36 am  
Blogger Edward said...

I had to see it to believe it, but Anon is correct. Swinney and the uncensored crowd do indeed believe a US earthquake machine caused the Haiti disaster. This has to be one of their weirdest claims. But then, I suppose the science of geology might be wrong, plate tectonics may be false, and the geologists might be in on a conspiracy to cover the US NWO? Or not.

Not a good look for the Greens and Jeanette who I otherwise hold in high regard. Things like this have the potential to push them into the wacky fringe.

12:12 pm  
Blogger maps said...

Swinney and many other, rather more sensible people are claiming that Hugo Chavez said that Haiti was hit by a US earthquake weapon. In fact, he said no such thing, as this blogger shows:
http://www.borev.net/2010/01/venezuela_rocked_by_72_magnitu_1.html

1:10 pm  
Blogger Giovanni said...

Knowing about my interest in this topic, Megan Clayton sent me this rather priceless xkcd cartoon: http://xkcd.com/690/

As for the earthquake machine, well, I guess that if you're ready to make a small leap of metaphor, it isn't all that far from the truth.

1:29 pm  
Blogger George said...

The Greens approach to this is similar to their approach to other complex issues that require expert knowledge, particularly genetic engineering. Throwing in seeds of doubt, without having to prove anything is how this kind of discourse on knowledge operates.

When you compare this to how the climate change deniers operate, it becomes somewhat bizarre, as the Greens staunchly stand on the other side of that divide.

Which can only be explained by the fact that most people are unwilling to accept facts that they cannot fit into their preconceived meta-narratives about how the world operates. It involves a repositioning, abandoning the original principles entirely, or an acceptance that the world is difficult to understand. The first two happen more often than the second, unfortunately.

There are members of the Greens who are very uncomfortable with the approach of the party to science, other individuals who have left, and still others who refuse to have anything to do with them for this reason. As a member said to me recently, do I have to choose between science and the Greens?

2:30 pm  
Blogger Edward said...

Interesting point you raise George, especially about the rather odd divide in approach between GE and climate change.

It reminds me of the situation with dams in Southern India - the government and other institutions support large dam programmes, yet there is an undercurrent by environmental agencies and other parties who reject these programmes as harmful and call for sustainable methods based on ancient or traditional South Indian dam techniques. Only problem is, archaeology has shown the idea of traditional dams as sustainable to be somewhat romanticised and at odds with reality.

That said, from what I can tell the Greens are one of the few parties who do usually base their policy on sound science or research. I think they have some good points on agriculture for example (at least as far as I can tell). And also some social policy which is backed up by academics. I do worry though when some of their members go off into what Keri Hulme might call 'woo-woo territory'.
But hey, at least one can say they're more on to it than the Act Party :P

4:03 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why the persistent assaults on His Majesty Adi da, the one true living Buddha of our age?

I hope that He has mercy on your sick soul.

To connect with Him, say I-FEAR-NO-MORE! and PASS INTO LIGHT!

http://www.adidam.org/

12:23 am  
Blogger Richard Taylor said...

I actually disagree here - not that the "Truthers" are or are not antisemitic and paranoid - they probably are (I've seen various videos) - but I think and have done since 9/11 happened that it was very possibly organised or at a least abetted by certain groups inside the US.

There is no certainly about this but it is certainly worth asking the question, very carefully, who really "did the Towers"?.

When the North Tower was bombed in 1993 - the year I went to NY in fact so I recall this - it was reported that the FBI flew a suspect over the Towers, pointed to them, and said:
"You haven't got them yet!"

Now this gives an indication of how these things work. There are a lot of people who would like to inflict damage on the US - and looking at the record of that Imperialist nation - who can blame them? We can start with the nuclear bombs dropped on Japan and then there is long list of actions overt an covert throughout the world. Korea, Vietnam, Indonesia, Palestine (by the US ally Israel,who have nuclear missiles BTW) Chile ..it goes on and on...(John Pilger is one who writes very well on all this and very revealingly) right up to now - the illegal invasions of Iraq and Iran...

But there are also organisations, businesses and politicians who would benefit (or think they would) from having a "terrorist attack" - as Hitler did when he was able to accuse the destruction of the Reichstag etc as the acts of - terrorists. (They framed Dutch boy, and hung him.) Or he dressed Polish men in German Uniforms, had them shot and then declared that the Poles were terrorists and then invaded Poland..

Basically the US was already in big economic trouble in 2001 (they owed,and always owe, a lot of cash, while simultaneously lending it out, and overproduction problems were occurring) - they wanted war - so in my view they probably infiltrated various left wing (or even "super right wing" and or terrorist groups and facilitated 9/11. I think they are in this way behind many if not all terrorist attacks of the "big spectacular kind".

Key point here is of course that I don't know of course (in fact what I said above the US being in economic trouble may in fact be wrong or irrelevant and so on...) but that I think it is a real possibility to be considered.

The Holocaust happened so did 9/11, but because some nutcases think it is ALL a Jewish plot doesn't mean, for example, that the Israeli Intelligence DIDNT assist the CIA (or other organisations relevant) in facilitating 9/11.

But who "did the Towers"? Maybe the Chinese or even the Russians were behind it, or assisted - who knows? Or some super right wing organisation inside the US?

Throughout the world the CIA and others have aided and abetted such actions...and it is relatively strange that no such action has re-occurred on US soil.

US reaction to it was ridiculous and rather hysterical also. 9/11, in the scheme of things was very tragic but not a big deal in military terms (sure it was Hollywood spectacular though -no doubt about that! But nothing else happened and there were no Amardas steaming toward the US...); the Holocaust was indeed a big deal of course as was the Vietnam war - but the IRA planted (and considering the British history of genocide and so on in that country who can blame them?) and detonated hundreds of bombs in Ireland and England and the British (cf. to US over reaction) at the time basically took it all in their stride (of course they didn't do nothing, nor was it "good" that it happened, but there reaction wasn't a massive invasion of - let's say - where can we go? - hmm... Spain! (Iraq) - as part of their (futile) revenge!)

12:38 am  
Blogger Richard Taylor said...

So whoever "did the Towers" some kind of conspiracy was involved - even if it was the terrorists who simply flew the planes into the towers, they had to "conspire"; and it is my thought that various agencies may have facilitated 9/11 - turning their various blind eyes to the event.

The events of 9/11 needed to be very openly investigated, unfortunately that hasn't happened, the US simply plunged into a whole lot of wars that had nothing to do with 9/11 and probably continued a secret policy of using agent provocateurs to keep "terrorism" as a threat - to keep people in fear, and to justify their adventures... (Terrorism has conveniently replaced "communism" as the big bogey")

One result is NZ's obscene involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan.

But it is bizarre that because questioning people ask if the US could have done this it implies necessarily that such questioners must "hate the US" and thus the US people themselves. That is nonsense...the opposite could be true. It's almost as if one was committing a crime, or one was mad, for simply asking questions of significant historical events.

12:39 am  
Anonymous mike said...

Maps, Your juxtaposition of photographs is a bit sensationalist. It suggests Fitzsimmons is anti-semitic. Bit mean really, for a two degrees of separation "guilt by association"-type argument.

Unfortunately, such is the nature of proven-many-times-over US secret interference around the world, uncertainty will always linger over 9/11 and the official reports.

2:34 pm  
Anonymous mike said...

And don't forget that the "rulers" of America have previously sanctioned and abetted the ruthless mass murder of their own citizens (albeit by different means and other historical contexts).

The main case in point is the destruction of Native American peoples, characterised by some as an ongoing genocide.

Black Americans too might express some scepticism about the "impossibility" of a 9/11 inside job.

3:15 pm  
Blogger maps said...

Yes, Mike, the US is an imperialist nation, with a history of doing dodgy things to other nations, often on the sly. An imperialist nation - like Britain. Like France. Like - on a much smaller scale - New Zealand.

There's no need to leap from a rather obvious observation about the nature of the US to a mad conspiracy theory that has to involve tens of thousands of people around the world.

Sadly, though, the decline in rationality in contemporary Western society means that increasing numbers of relatively-sane people are unable to think systematically about the world.

Instead of dealing in rational, empirically-based theories about reality, of the sort that the left has usualy produced (think Marx's Capital, Hobson's and Lenin's theories of imperialism, WB Sutch's writings about NZ development, and thousands of other examples) a new generation is turning to the essentially magical thinking represented by conspiracy theories.

In New Zealand, Jeanette Fitzsimons and other Green leaders have encouraged this wilful ignorance, by insisting that the political categories of left and right are obsolete - look up Fitzsimons' and Russel Norman's speeches to the 2006 Greens conference for classic examples of this rhetoric - and can be discarded without loss.

Even in our muddled age, though, the 9/11 Truthers are too irrational for the vast majority. Recent surveys have found that only 1-2% of Americans believe 9/11was an 'inside job'. Given that similar polls often find half the US populace disbelieves in evolution, that's a pretty serious indictment of the of the Truthers.

In my experience, the people who do embrace Trutherism are either very foolish, or else motivated by some sort of bigotry. Some are anti-semites, but others are actually so Amerocentric and so contemptuous of the Third World that they say things - and I'm quoting here - like 'a few Arabs could never have brought down those towers on their own'.

My post bent over backwards to defend Fitzsimons from accusations of anti-semitism, but the information conveyed by commeter #5in this thread makes me suspicious of how close her association is with the Truthers. If the information commenter #5 linked to is accurate, then Jeanette was sending sympathetic communications to the anti-semites long before Richard Gage washed up on these shores last November. I think she should be asked some questions about the extent of her involvement in the Truther movement.

3:55 pm  
Anonymous mike said...

Yes, Maps, 'tis certainly a muddled world. The 9/11 debate is just one boring muddled corner of it - I suppose I shouldn't have even commented.

Unfortunately I have to agree that the Greens can be flaky and display fairly shallow analyses. But I'm not sure a classical Marxist analysis is the only answer either.

Writers from Ivan Illich to John Ralston Saul have provided some fairly trenchant critiques - in my view anyway - of the destructive effects of "rational" thinking of whatever flavour. I would not put all my eggs in that basket.

As for "magic-think" - it can certainly have its negative side, but maybe its what gets us through the day, in Western society as in any other. Jonathan Raban make a good case that surviving urban environments, with their pageant of visual ciphers and soundbite philosophies, is essentially a "magical" operation.

4:17 pm  
Blogger maps said...

Perhaps we're not as far apart as I thought Mike. And Lenin did say, in his most interesting (and fragmentary) work, The Philosophical Notebooks, 'It would be foolish to ignore the role of fantasy in the strictest science!'

I go for art over magic, though:

http://readingthemaps.blogspot.com/2009/04/virtues-of-ambiguity-or-why-im-still.html

4:31 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Richard Taylor
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Astrological Sign: Aquarius
Zodiac Year: Boar
Occupation: Poet
Location: Auckland : New Zealand
Audio Clip
About Me
I am 57, I have worked as lineman/cable jointer and a technician and have done many jobs (freezing works, a cheeze factory, etc etc) - I am divorced - have three children - my daughters are in a music group called The Nudie Suits ( find via Lil Chief Recordings ) - I am a poet. I play a lot of Chess at my 'peak' I beat a few International Masters...but I'm not there now! I'm frequently on Chessgames.com. I have lived in Auckland all my life and -only visited Fiji (1973) and NY (1993).

Oscillate my metallic sonatas with your plan for the Panama canal:
The shovel is fixated on becoming a wonderful ocean - and who can blame it?

12:00 am  
Anonymous 60 MPa said...

Maps, I have some good friends who have fallen for this Truther malarky and I though I'd like to send them that excellent XKCD cartoon they'd only start ranting.
It's better not to talk about these things sometimes though I note the similarities between Birthers and Truthers.
Reminds me of how anti-abortionists have rebranded themselves as "pro-life".

8:12 am  
Blogger Richard Taylor said...

I contradict myself, I contain multitudes, I am 57 AND 61...

Of course it was an inside job...

10:21 am  
Blogger tanabear said...

...and in 2007 the Simon Wiesenthal Centre, which monitors anti-semitism around the world, included Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth on its list of organisations that promote hatred of Jews and support for terrorism.

Please, give me an example of when Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth has promoted hatred of the Jews and terrorism?

"Gage believes that employees of America's federal government were induced to sacrifice their lives by flying planes into the twin towers in an effort to obscure the real cause of the collapse of the buildings."

Please, provide the source/link to where Richard Gage made this comment.

"Gage is cagey about the identity of the people who came up with the idea for the huge 9/11 conspiracy."

That is why Richard Gage favors an investigation into the massacre of innocents on 9/11, unlike some people.

"False ideas should be confronted and criticised, especially when they are connected to a political agenda which is profoundly unhealthy.."

Why is the Truth unhealthy?

'Almost all of the politicians who have endorsed the 9/11 'Truth' movement have belonged to small parties on the extreme right."

9/11 Truth is a non-partisan issue. Currently, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth has over 1,000 signatories.

2:54 pm  
Blogger Giovanni said...

"Gage believes that employees of America's federal government were induced to sacrifice their lives by flying planes into the twin towers in an effort to obscure the real cause of the collapse of the buildings."

Please, provide the source/link to where Richard Gage made this comment.


I don't normally enagage with idiocy, but I'll take this one. In his Wellington talk, Gage poo-pooed the idea that the conspirators would allow Arab hijackers who had barely gone to flight school to carry out the plan. That by implication, unless you believe that planes can be radio-controlled, suggests that the CIA had some operatives at the controls, and then obviously they had to be suicide operatives.

3:07 pm  
Blogger Richard Taylor said...

Aircraft can be remotely controlled. Since the 60s commercial aircraft have had the capacity and in fact have landed with "no hands" on by the pilots at Heathrow and elsewhere - this facility for fog conditions.

You are saying, I hope, WERE they controlled remotely. (A of course setting up remote controlled commercial aircraft is pretty difficult there is no doubt about that!) But that is under question.

Some of the real issues are

1 Who "did the towers and why"?

2 Was it, if done by "others" , justifiable in the light of the atrocities committed over most of the second half off the 20th Century by US Imperialism?

3 Why hasn't an exhaustive forensic open and honest inquiry occurred? (The FBI were unable to question Arabs from Saudi Arabia as they were quickly all flown home right after 9/11.)

These are some of the issues and your reply here doesn't answer "tanabear" at all.

It is quite arrogant to call his comments "idiocy". Idiocy is "head in the sand" and "forget 9/11 and who did it - just blame it all on the Arabs that is easier - then we can all be happy about our wars."

The fact that people are questioning Blair and Bush and other war criminals is great. It also means that, as the questioning of the events of 9/11 is seriously going on by informed people, this shows the real distrust people have with the authorities in Britain and the US - and other countries.

7:11 pm  
Blogger Richard Taylor said...

It seems to me perfectly jutifiable to inquire. I want to sign that petition. BUT

That said - take the Kennedy assassination. I recall that happening, and the news at the time. Everyone was pretty shocked.

Later I watched a TV documentary about it and there were a lot of contradictions and and complications.

But in the end I decided (myself) that Oswald did it and was quite able to as was a marksman and had fairly clear shot - Kennedy was in an open car which was stupid of course - and that made it easier.

The other problem was that whoever you came up with who might want to kill Kennedy, they were either on the right, the left or they were mad or all three or whatever. It all made no sense. The motives were contradictory. There are always people wanting to kill Presidents or famous people - some just to say they did it and so on.

Now Bruce Andrews (a US Language Poet) teaches a course on conspiracy theories etc and some Fox News crack pot accused him of being un-American to do that. But Andrews point was that he was teaching students how to analyse and question events in history. So they could make an informed decision about such cases and indeed I imagine about other political events. The Fox moron thought he was saying or teaching that the assassination of Kennedy was good!! And he really bullied Andrews but Andrews stood his ground and the moron Fox goon just looked stupid.

7:31 pm  
Blogger Giovanni said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

7:41 pm  
Blogger Giovanni said...

Aircraft can be remotely controlled. Since the 60s commercial aircraft have had the capacity and in fact have landed with "no hands" on by the pilots at Heathrow and elsewhere - this facility for fog conditions.

Airports have a very limited ability to guide a plane in its landing phase.

The World Trade Center isn't an airport.

7:42 pm  
Blogger Richard Taylor said...

I noticed that as I went there.

I was talking about autopilot and controlled landings, very much the same kind of tech is required and is there.

But it would be technically very easy to rig up remote control. If it was needed. Especially if you don't care about what happens to the plane!

After all it was a one way ticket so to speak!

Now I know I have flown a plane but I didn't get to try a jetliner so it wasn't me! Actually it would be fairly easy also for a human, even without huge training, to fly into the Trade Towers. And pretty easy for a "robot". As to the Pentagon it is not far for a large jet.

But whoever "did the Towers", I feel the events of 9/11 and subsequent invasions by the US of Iraq and Afghanistan need to be thoroughly investigated.

So we do need an investigation.

I am no strong Green supporter nor am I supporter of Gage or whoever he is associated with - I don't know him. But your previous answer was meaningless.

You are clutching at straws and deviating from the main subject, and focusing frantically on trivia.

Do you support these US wars?

10:01 pm  
Blogger Giovanni said...

But it would be technically very easy to rig up remote control. If it was needed.

No, it really really would not be. I realise that speaking through a hole in one's head is customary in these instances, but let's distinguish ourselves.

But whoever "did the Towers", I feel the events of 9/11 and subsequent invasions by the US of Iraq and Afghanistan need to be thoroughly investigated.

So we do need an investigation.


We have had an investigation. We've had several, in fact. Now a large and growing group of idiots is fixating on finding a different explanation for the aspects of the attack that we know everything about, when what we (they) should be investigating is how the US government failed to act on the intelligence they had that Al Qaeda was going to carry out that very attack. Plenty of scope for conspiracy theorising there, or at very least for asking the truly hard questions, as John Farmer has. But then because of the workers of the Truthers he too gets lumped in with the idiots.

You are clutching at straws and deviating from the main subject, and focusing frantically on trivia.

Do you support these US wars?


Surely you weren't asking me, were you? It's hard to tell.

10:10 pm  
Blogger Giovanni said...

make that "work" of the truthers.

10:11 pm  
Blogger Richard Taylor said...

So you automatically believe this crap about there being an Al Qaeda?
Or that if they exist they are necessarily "bad"? Nonsense.

I don't support US Imperialism.

You seem to want to take this to personal level - there is almost a panic - "idiots" "hole in the head"...charming. Too long head buried in post modern books? Pull it out and think, be objective for once.

I would use the term "naive" or "gullible" - now then for an investigation we need openness and fairness: this hasn't happened. Only US and British lies.

Instead of Guatanamo Bay which you are probably in favour of and the invasion of Afghanistan. I have stated I am opposed to that - what is your position? be open now - stop this personal stuff, be honest... Dave and I and Minto and many others protested the SAS going there...

All angles need to be covered - not just this garbled Fox News and CIA propaganda or US propaganda which you seem to be in favour of...

Next you'll say Hongi Hika was in the Al Qaeda.

12:50 am  
Blogger tanabear said...

"That by implication, unless you believe that planes can be radio-controlled."

Yes, planes can be.

"Using signals from orbiting GPS satellites and the ground-generated pseudolite signals, 110 autopilot-in-the-loop landings of a United Airlines Boeing 737 were completed. The integrity beacons provided consistent accuracies on the order of a few centimeters during each of the autopiloted runway touchdowns. The successful series was sponsored by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as part of that agency's satellite navigation program."
http://www.sti.nasa.gov/tto/spinoff1998/t2.htm

"Guided entirely by autopilot, an Air China Boeing 757 jet last month snaked along a narrow river valley between towering Himalayan peaks.

"Pilots and passengers looked out to mountains left and right as the airplane automatically followed the twists of the valley, descending on a precisely plotted highway in the sky toward a runway still out of sight."
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2003316294_naverus22.html

5:59 am  
Blogger tanabear said...

Richard Gage responded to the Simon Wiesenthal's attack against them,

"Also, you made no apology, explanation, or correction for your words which you stated precisely during the time in which you displayed the 911sharethetruth.com and AE911Truth.org websites:

"And then finally we end with a site that literally talks about the bombing of – 'soon, soon, soon the attack on Manhattan'."

This part of your presentation can be reviewed at the 45:50 mark in the video located at:

http://homeland.edgeboss.net/wmedia/homeland/chs/internetterror.wvx

The C-SPAN Archive version of the video is in two parts. The sentence above occurs at the 28:20 mark of the second portion of C-SPAN's version. I am aware of no page on our site ever having contained this sentence or any sentence like it. Our staff has researched the matter, and the phrase appears nowhere on our site, nor was it found by an internet search. Curiously enough, we find the phrase only when you are being quoted."

6:12 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So these "conspiracy theorists" are part of a grand antisemitic conspiracy?

Delicious irony indeed.

As an aside, the first round the world unmanned remote control flight occurred in 1964.

8:23 am  
Blogger Giovanni said...

As an aside, the first round the world unmanned remote control flight occurred in 1964.

And there are drone recognisance aircraft, yes. It's just not the same thing as rigging up a commercial airliner to be commanded from the ground, let alone without the pilots or the airline company knowing about it.

So you automatically believe this crap about there being an Al Qaeda?
Or that if they exist they are necessarily "bad"? Nonsense.

I don't support US Imperialism.


I don't care if you consider this uncharming, this is quite simply the anti-imperialism of fools. Being against American foreign policy doesn't authorise you to make up your own reality, confuse paranoid lunacy with healthy scepticism. There is nothing in Gage's theories that makes a gram of sense, they've been demolished (in a controlled fashion) by people with more patience and time than myself in fifteen different ways. To the point that frankly I've lost all patience for the people who still choose to believe, and then cloak their elucubration in political progressivism.

Do you want to ask relevant questions? Ask why an intelligence memo entitled "Al Qaeda wants to attack the US with planes" was not investigated by the Bush administration. This is a simple fact that leaves you with two possibilities: either they were incompetent, or they thought such an attack would be an opportunity to wage a couple of wars abroad and restrict civil liberties at home. Seeing as the project for the new american century is a public document written before 9/11, this is not a major leap of fancy, now, is it? And in any case either charge would be very damning indeed. But it's much more fun (and Gage has a great time, you should see him speak) to make up a whole different and completely ludicrous story about a conspiracy at all levels of the state and corporate machinery. A story that actually hurts the anti-imperialist cause, of course, because then anybody who says that there should be an investigation on how the Bush administration handled its intelligence gets lumped up with the Gages of this world, and thus much more easily dismissed.

Instead of Guatanamo Bay which you are probably in favour of and the invasion of Afghanistan. I have stated I am opposed to that - what is your position? be open now - stop this personal stuff, be honest...

I'm not going to answer this, because it's just too stupid a question. In fact it probably deserves to be flipped on its head: why would thinking that Al Qaeda exists and carried out the attacks on 9/11 mean one should be in favour of the war in Afghanistan? If you think there is such a connection, I'd say you support American imperialism.

8:51 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

what a shithead.

11:00 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The 911 conspiracy theory is one of the looniest ever created. Think about it. As a non-scientist and non-engineer I happily confess to not understanding all the technical and scientific arguments put forward by each side. But a lot of scientists and engineers have looked at the claims made by the "truthers" and have discredited them. That shows that, at best, the technical and scientific arguments of Gage and others are highly questionable. At worst they're utter nonsense.

But what makes the theories loony is the conspiracy that must exist for them to be correct. The US military and secret services are simply too incompetent to put together something so elaborate. And why has not one person come forward to admit their involvement?

I hope Fitzsimons' party gives her a ticking off for allowing the Greens to be associated with this lunacy.

For the promotion of crackpot theories Jeanette Fitzsimons is the latest Imperator Fish Fool of the Moment.
http://www.imperatorfish.com/2009/11/latest-fool-of-moment.html

11:20 am  
Blogger maps said...

It's a bit sad to see antipodeans endorsing this particular conspiracy theory, since Gage washed up in NZ because the movement he leads has run out of steam in the US. Here's a piece on the role that rational debunkers have played in the defeat of the delusion:
http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/08-06-04 (scroll down) Some lessons for how to deal with the likes of the Celtic NZ crowd?

Excerpt:

'Skeptics today bemoan the overwhelming proportion of people who claim to believe in all manner of conspiracy theories from the JFK assassination to the origins of HIV-AIDS. For that reason, it may be worthwhile to take a moment to stop and celebrate one area in which skeptical advocacy has been overwhelming successful: the world of 9/11 conspiracies. Through the work of scholars like Michael Shermer and James Meigs, along with everyday skeptics on the grassroots level, critical inquiry has been overwhelmingly successful in calling these conspiracy theorists to task.

A tragedy on a scale at least comparable to Pearl Harbor or the Kennedy assassination was bound to inspire a conspiracy subculture, but the takeoff success of the viral Internet documentary Loose Change and the movement it created was unprecedented. Looking out on the world in 2005 when Change became one of the most-watched Internet videos of all time, with over ten million unique viewers1, it was hard to anticipate a future that was anything but bleak for those who felt it was their duty to defend history from such pseudohistorians.

Yet, in just under four years, the 9/11 “truth movement” has ground to a halt. Apart from the fundamental incoherence of their theories, the downfall of the 9/11 denier juggernaut was good old-fashioned skepticism at its finest, the kind that conjures visions of James Randi challenging psychics and faith healers on their home turfs and winning. Skeptics are better at their jobs than they think, and its important to give credit where credit is due.

Staking their fortunes almost solely on Internet-based content may have been the 9/11 deniers’ biggest mistake. What seems like a perfect place for pseudoscience — the Internet is un-edited, without fact-checkers or minimum publishing standards of any kind — also became a perfect place for a rapid-response system of blogs and forums to fight back. Drawing on the freely available technical information from the NIST, FEMA, and academic journals which most colleges let their students access for free, skeptical sites like ScrewLooseChange.blogspot.com and debunking911.com are able to defuse 9/11 denier claims as they arise.

The Internet forced many “ground-level” 9/11 deniers — those who spread the gospel on popular social networking sites like Facebook and in their own blogosphere — into a rhetorical corner.

Instantaneous information traps old, well-discussed claims into sheer redundancy. In three years of debating 9/11 deniers, I have encountered almost the exact same laundry list of claims on dozens of occasions. The same resources have been successful in debunking 9/11 myths since their inception, tipping the debate against them. The first Loose Change was a sweeping work that, by this author’s estimation2, implicated roughly 578,000 people in their version of 9/11; the “final edition,” though twice as long, has orders of magnitude less content and almost zero positive claims, drumming up a meager 8,200 suspects3. This is almost certainly a result of Internet-based skeptics bombarding Loose Change’s makers with the facts...

12:05 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"And there are drone recognisance aircraft, yes. It's just not the same thing as rigging up a commercial airliner to be commanded from the ground, let alone without the pilots or the airline company knowing about it."

So surely they'd have made sure that nothing was known about it. There is no irrefutable evidence that the planes that hit the towers were those alleged to have. Certainly no plane hit the Pentagon.

It's all very well to burn down strawmen but it really isn't an argument against the skeptics that understand that the official conspiracy theory is an unsupported and illogical load of hogwash.

All the ad hominem in the world may make you feel superior but doesn't wash with those who just know a lot more about it than you. And always will.

12:05 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It is ironic that the JFK issue keeps coming up. Few people in this day and age realise that the congressional inquiry made a finding that there was indeed a conspiracy.

The Warren Commission was trashed.

12:08 pm  
Blogger Giovanni said...

It's a bit sad to see antipodeans endorsing this particular conspiracy theory, since Gage washed up in NZ because the movement he leads has run out of steam in the US.

It depressed me to think that the Te Papa event was the largest audience Gage had ever got, but it comforts in absolute terms since hey, it wasn't that large an audience.

12:12 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Here's a piece on the role that rational debunkers have played in the defeat of the delusion:"

What has mostly been "debunked" are the strawmen.

The real questions haven't.

The "internet information" critique can be easily debunked by any sane person by merely thinking it through for 30 seconds.

Anyone who'd use it is clearly not rational.

12:13 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

One has to consider the chain of command were this a government-sponsored act. The sheer number of complicit parties needed would make this impossible without someone having been taken over by the enormity of it and blown the whistle. Conspiracies of silence and lone voices being polished off by the secret services only happpen in Hollywood movies, folks. I guess some people must really struggle to tell the difference between films and real life.

12:25 pm  
Blogger Richard Taylor said...

I don't necessarily believe in any conspiracy theories, my dear Professor Giovanni, I am simply stating some of the obvious facts. It seems to me you are avoiding issues and are wary of making a stand as such as John Minto does.

I will help you - you are deeply terrified of "terrorism" (as we all are, who wouldn't be?) so you are in support of the US attack on Afghanistan as that is a part of the anti-terrorism as it is quite obvious the Arabs "did the Towers." (we wont use the name most people use for "Arabs" here!) And the Arabs are terrorists (I mean the _bad_ Arabs, not all of them), the Israelis et al are good as they are progressive and civilised, and they never bombed Iraq ever, as are the US (if they are a little inefficient and often cant "join the dots") and they only bomb places to help the inhabitants of those places to get freedom and democracy which we all need so badly, and when your ideas of "freedom" etc are challenged you abuse the others who challenge your ideas with personal attacks. But you are right to this as all those who challenge you are all bad.

You are thus by implication clearly in favour of such things as Guantanamo Bay and torture as we need to be sure we stop terrorism by any means. And of course we must! I agree!

For you, theories opposed to the CIA and US Govt are dangerous and should be disallowed. (Not an unreasonable view...)

You believe everything the wonderful Yanks say about 9/11 as they are good and civilised, while anyone who critcises them, are bad. And why should we doubt the wise leaders of that great nation?

I sincerely hope I am wrong on all (or much) of this as you seem such a charming and complex person.

12:28 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"One has to consider the chain of command were this a government-sponsored act. The sheer number of complicit parties needed would make this impossible without someone having been taken over by the enormity of it and blown the whistle. Conspiracies of silence and lone voices being polished off by the secret services only happpen in Hollywood movies, folks. I guess some people must really struggle to tell the difference between films and real life."


This is another strawman. Any power organisation is ultimately ruled by the few at the top and overall strategy can be compartmentalised.

It is no mystery, it merely is how all organisations run.

What better organisation to run a covert operation than inside a covert organisation like the CIA or Mossad. These agencies do black ops all the time.

12:33 pm  
Blogger Giovanni said...

Conspiracies of silence and lone voices being polished off by the secret services only happpen in Hollywood movies, folks. I guess some people must really struggle to tell the difference between films and real life.

It's not so much that per se, it's the fact that it makes no sense.

For an inside job, all you need to do is infiltrate Al Qaeda, or train a dozen or so Arabs to stand in for Al Qaeda operatives. Then you fly the planes into the buildings, with great loss of life, and you leave them to either fall ungracefully on their own, or having to be demolished by the municipality at a later stage (nobody thinks they would have been salvageable, indeed a lot of surrounding buildings not hit by planes had to be destroyed). There's your conspiracy. It would still have been the most spectacular attack in the history of humanity, and would have been grounds enough for whatever imperialist adventure the administration wanted to enter into.

It's only if you posit that the towers had to come down (and by the way: why in a controlled manner? Why not topple whichever old way, and do more damage?) that you have to involve thousand of people outside of the secret service. So much risk, and for no gain whatsoever.

12:34 pm  
Blogger Giovanni said...

You are thus by implication clearly in favour of such things as Guantanamo Bay and torture as we need to be sure we stop terrorism by any means.

I would stop now before I made even more of a fool of myself. But perhaps you don't care.

12:37 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"It's only if you posit that the towers had to come down (and by the way: why in a controlled manner? Why not topple whichever old way, and do more damage?) that you have to involve thousand of people outside of the secret service. So much risk, and for no gain whatsoever."


No gain? You really are not thinking this through.

The buildings were white elephants that required billions of dollars worth of work to bring them to code.

They were insured against terrorist attack a few weeks beforehand.

The Empire State building was hit by a fully laden bomber in the 30s.
It's still there.

12:42 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

lone voices being polished off by the secret services only happpen in Hollywood movies, folks

WHAT ABOUT CLARE SWINNEY NEWZEALAND'S COURAGEOUS 9/11 TRUTH-TELLER SHE WAS CONFRONTED ON THE MAIN STREET OF WHANGAREI BY A NEW WORLD ORDER ASSASSIN AND THEN PUT IN A 'MENTAL' HOSPITAL FOR QUESTIONING 9/11 AND THE NEW WORLD ORDER!!!!!

12:42 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

By Clare Swinney, Member of Scholars For 9/11 Truth & Justice.

I was wrongly diagnosed as delusional by the psychiatric staff of Ward 7 at Northland Base Hospital in Whangarei and held against my will for 11 days in mid-2006, because I maintained the attacks of 9/11 were orchestrated by criminal elements inside the US Administration.

A definition of delusional: relating to, based on, or affected by delusions. A delusion: a false belief strongly held in spite of invalidating evidence, especially as a symptom of mental illness.
In light of the definition, one of the most astounding aspects to the ordeal was that when I met with the chief psychiatrist, Dr Carlos Zubaran for two formal mental health assessments, I held Issue 3 of Uncensored, which is shown in the picture above, and asked him to look at information related to the 9/11 attacks. This magazine contained an article I’d written entitled: Why Does TVNZ Lie To Us About 9/11?, which cited evidence that proved the official fable was a lie – yet reminiscent of the fabled vampires afraid of the light of day, he refused to even cast his eyes over it, during both of the so-called “assessments.”

Another astounding aspect to what occurred was that Section 4 of the New Zealand Mental Health Act makes it clear that no one can be judged to be mentally ill solely on the basis of their political beliefs. The District Inspector for Mental Health – Northland said that

12:47 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"We have had an investigation."

The 9/11 commission worked on the basis that the official conspiracy theory was true based on being admitted to by KSM.

They were unaware that he had been waterboarded at least 183 times and had signed a document that he had not read.

The commissioners have largely disowned the report which was written by Philip Zelikow, a Bush aadmin. insider.

The most damning thing about the report is the sheer lack of will on the commissions part to investigate extremely important evidence and whole avenues of what would comprise a genuine investigation of what was a crime.

12:50 pm  
Blogger Giovanni said...

The buildings were white elephants that required billions of dollars worth of work to bring them to code.

They were insured against terrorist attack a few weeks beforehand.


Hah - so it was an insurance scam! Nothing to do with imperialism then?

And the wheels keep spinning and spinning and yet the car does not move.

12:51 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Hah - so it was an insurance scam! Nothing to do with imperialism then?"

And the wheels keep spinning and spinning and yet the car does not move."

Of course it did. It was the PNAC's iconic event. That Larry Silverstein and Frank Lowey made a bundle on it doesn't preclude that.

These people are very clever and very resourceful. In the end it's ALL about profit.

12:57 pm  
Blogger Giovanni said...

...and there's your antisemitism.

We were saying?

12:58 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"..and there's your antisemitism.

We were saying?"


That's utterly pathetic and quite offensive.

You obviously have no leg to stand on in this.

Perhaps your islamophobia is blinding you?

1:06 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"But what makes the theories loony is the conspiracy that must exist for them to be correct. The US military and secret services are simply too incompetent to put together something so elaborate."


And yet they've managed 200+ "regime change" operations since 1949.

Incompetence can be a good smokescreen.

Like say, causing a civil war in Iraq would be viewd as incompetence as opposed to a war crime.

1:28 pm  
Blogger Richard said...

"Anonymous Anonymous said...

It is ironic that the JFK issue keeps coming up. Few people in this day and age realise that the congressional inquiry made a finding that there was indeed a conspiracy.

The Warren Commission was trashed."

I knew this. It is in my Oxford Encyclopedic dictionary. But although I watched the documentaries on it I decided that they were wrong - that is from my own view. I decided Oswald did it himself for reasons only known to him as he was killed by another mad man.

I don't believe as strongly as I did that the Towers were attacked by "insiders"...

My position is that we need to stay alert and skeptical - but not totally - in fact I think we have to take, quite seriously, many things on trust.

However political events of the 20th Century leave one "paranoid"...

I think that either a mad group of terrorists in fact did do exactly as it was said they did* (by the FBI and other in the US...but I wouldn't quote Bush ...

OR it was much as has been reported (Some young arabs learned to fly, believing they will go to heaven etc and fly into the towers (which in itself is pretty crazy! But it seems it did happen.) to ...well no one is sure why they did it but it was a blow against Imperialism and Capitalism or a blow against The Unbelievers or some complex of that...

But I am open to ideas. I used to strongly believe in the controlled demolition (but you don't need a controlled demolition for it to be conspiracy! Whoever did it had to be part of some kind of conspiracy no matter how they did it...) - as early as a day after 9/11! I am also still dubious, but the Kennedy example is good as it was one where there were so many people who might have for all kinds of contradictory reasons assassinated JK ... and the same kind of conflicting motivations surround the Towers...

That is, it seems a pretty extreme way to go to either provoke a war or to engineer one. If arabs or "radicals" did it, then it maybe seen to have rebounded, or is that good that war happens as they are now able to recruit more and throw more bombs and so on, or was it just an act of faith which has nothing to do with politics?, or if the "insiders" did it (or did they not actually DO it but aid its implementation by encouraging it?), has it also rebounded on their heads, or is it "just the ticket" for them, as they are still in Afghanistan, Iraq etc, alhto they seem to be losing, but they might feel they are at least controlling that part of the world and so on...or was it all about oil and drug trafficking? That also seems dubious but possible. (WE recall that Bush senior was in the CIA an involved with facilitating drug business in Latin American and so on... and the Bush's etc were "in" oil and weapons.)

So every theory seems to have a mirror counter theory!!

* But that also raises problems - how the hell did they get onto those planes so easily?

1:28 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Gage said in Auckland that the BBC were in on the plot. What motive did they have?

1:40 pm  
Blogger Giovanni said...

Gage said in Auckland that the BBC were in on the plot. What motive did they have?

Obviously they were in it for the imperialism but not for the insurance scam. C'mon, learn to read between the lines, man.

1:42 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oswald didn't shoot JFK. He was shot twice from different angles to the book depositary.

You should look at the recently declassified film of it.

It was most likely Dulles and a rogue element of the CIA including one George HW Bush that organised it. E Howard Hunt was almost certainly a shooter.

As to the "hijackers" there is no evidence that they were on the planes, and they certainly weren't extremist muslims. They were barely muslims at all.

The overwhelming evidence of thermite being used to bring the towers and building 7 down to me is the kicker.

The cover up afterwards is clearly a conspiracy. The conspiracy to invade Iraq is unquestionable.

And so it goes on. Why people believe that these types aren't capable or criminal enough to do these things is beyond my ken.

1:46 pm  
Blogger Edward said...

wow Maps, this post certainly attracted the loonies. 9/11 apparently involves:

An American/Jewish cable who wish to establish a NWO;
about ten thousand conspirators with not one individual spilling the beans;
robots or cyborbs or some such flying planes;
hundreds of eye witness accounts apparently being wrong;
post-crash invisible planes that fly into pentagon buildings;
architects becoming "authorities" about physical science instead of pyhsical scientists;
'Engineers' becoming "authorities" about physical science instead of physical scientists (hell, engineer could mean geotech, civil, mechanical, undergrad, post-grad etc.);
Laymen becoming "authorities" about physical science instead of physical scientists (apparently a trend emerges where trained experts are the only ones who don't know what they're talking about...gee, I haven't heard that before);
Controlled demolitions happen when they don't need to anyway;
The international community are in on the conpiracy for no apparent reason;
People who don't know the difference between critical thinking or healthy scepticism and a big 'ol pile of Gage shit going out into the world to transmit thier beloved masters 'knowledge' to the masses - kinda like a cult in some ways!?

I'm sure i've missed a few things, probably something about Aliens or Jews having horns or American Zionists or maybe earthquake machines or psychic warfare? Maybe the infamous Celts were behind the attacks!? Whatever the answer, i'm going to assume I know - just know - the answer due to my amazing child prodigy powers. Anyone who challenges me must therefore be one of 'them', that ellusive cable with that ambiguous goal. It's a conspiracy I tell you, just like the Holocaust and the spherical earth idea!

3:09 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just another series of strawmen and a diatribe about critical thinking.

The irony.

3:18 pm  
Blogger Edward said...

Oh so clever anon, are you too a child prodigy? Welcome to my exclusive club. Together we can sit around on cold wintery nights exchanging quite conversation about how special we are and how stupid are the whelps who challenge us. As if they might know more than we do. It's our powers of knowledge-osmosis which makes us so unique. I'm getting all warm inside just thinking about it. Perhaps you could bring your irony with you? One so brave and clever shouldn't need to hide behind an anonymous identity, but come forth into the light so that all may cry with joy in the glory that is people like us. Come, and we shall spread Gage's word like pollinating bees.
Until then my brother/sister, keep up the good work.

3:57 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Strawmen and ad hominem all you've got?

Poor substitutes for skepticism I'd say.

And the passive aggressive thing never does it for me either.

You'd have to ask blogger why my username won't work. I've given up trying.

4:16 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Does anon think that the eyewitnesses who saw the hijackers training, getting on the planes etc are part of the conspiracy?

Exactly how many people are in on this conspiracy? What about all the people who saw the plane that supposedly never existed hit the Pentagon...are they getting some of the insurance $?

4:19 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

it was reported that 95% of the plane debris was recovered. (http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/24/inv.pennsylvania.site/index.html) Now, a Boeing 757-200 operating empty with engines attached is a little over 127,000 lbs. (http://www.airliners.net/info/stats.main?id=101). That means that if 95% of this plane was recovered, these folks managed to plant at least 120,000 lbs, or 60 tons, of evidence in that morning.

Think of how much debris that is. 60 tons! That's a lot!

Of course, it wasn't all just found in one spot. Workers had to dig 45 feet into the ground just to dig up all of the debris. (http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/emergency/pictures/091201f.htm) Picture the height of a 3 or 4-story building, and you'll get an idea of how deep that is.

60 tons of debris, some of which was buried through about 45 feet of dirt.

And, of course, the debris was very widespread. Again, look at your video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KulZQfEheyQ&NR

Take a look at the small pieces of debris that were EVERYWHERE, not just close to the crash scene. The debris was very widespread, and there were a number of reports of that, too. Remember Lyle Szupinka, one of the guys who saw an engine "a considerable distance from the crash site"?

Szupinka said most of the remaining debris, scattered over a perimeter that
stretches for several miles, are in pieces no bigger than a "briefcase."
Source: http://www.flight93crash.com/whole_engine.txt

Authorities also said another debris site had been cordoned off six to eight miles away from the original crash debris site. But [FBI spokesman Bill] Crowley said the debris was "very light material such as paper and thin nylon -- things that in the air with the wind would easily blow."
Source: http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/13/inve...rism/index.html

Also, from that source:

Crowley said archaeologists have been brought in to search the impact crater, which has been covered by a layer of dust.

Wow, so they did such a good job of embedding tons and tons of debris into the crater that they even had to bring in archaeologists to help dig the stuff up? That's one hell of a job in just one day. It wasn't even a whole day anyway, was it?

I don't want to speculate on the amount of time you give them to set this up, but you said that the homeowner had already left for work, meaning they would have to wait until he left at the very least. Now two civilians said they ran to the scene immediately following the crash:

Bob Blair was completing a routine drive to Shade Creek just after 10 a.m. Tuesday, when he saw a huge silver plane fly past him just above the treetops and crash into the woods along Lambertsville Road.
Blair, of Stoystown, a driver with Jim Barron Trucking of Somerset, was traveling in a coal truck along with Doug Miller of Somerset, when they saw the plane spiraling to the ground and then explode on the outskirts of Lambertsville.
“I saw the plane flying upside down overhead and crash into the nearby trees. My buddy, Doug, and I grabbed our fire extinguishers and ran to the scene,” said Blair.
Source: http://www.flight93crash.com/flight93_eyewitness.html

4:23 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

That info concerns the plane that crashed at Shanksville after hijackers were confronted by hostages...Troofers say the plane never existed...so who is paying Bob Blair, who saw the crash?

4:26 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It came in low over the trees and started wobbling," said Tim Thornsberg, a resident of Somerset County, who was working near an old strip mine when he saw the plane.

"Then it just rolled over and was flying upside down for a few seconds ... and then it kind of stalled and did a nose dive over the trees. It was just unreal to see something like that."
Source: http://www.flight93crash.com/flight93_eyewitness.html

Eric Peterson, 28, was working in his shop in the Somerset County village of Lambertsville yesterday morning when he heard a plane, looked up and saw one fly over unusually low.

The plane continued on beyond a nearby hill, then dropped out of sight behind a tree line. As it did so, Peterson said it seemed to be turning end-over-end.

Then Peterson said he saw a fireball, heard an explosion and saw a mushroom cloud of smoke rise into the sky.
Source: http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010912crashnat2p2.asp

“I saw the plane flying upside down overhead and crash into the nearby trees. My buddy, Doug, and I grabbed our fire extinguishers and ran to the scene,” said Blair.
Source: http://www.flight93crash.com/flight93_eyewitness.html

"We didn't hear that plane coming until it was right on top of us," she said. "Then there was a roar." She said the plane appeared to be gliding into the ground. "All at once it just stopped. There was no engine noise, nothing. Someone hollered, Oh my God!' and then there was a real loud thud."
Source: http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/xml/story.ssf/html_standard.xsl?/base/news/100028703529429109.xml

A witness told WTAE-TV's Paul Van Osdol that she saw the plane overhead. It made a high-pitched, screeching sound. The plane then made a sharp, 90-degree downward turn and crashed.
Source: http://newsandviews.tripod.com/news/091101tv2.html

4:28 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

and what about the people on flight 93 who made calls by cell or airfone to loved ones? 37 calls were attempted, 17 were successful. callers explained that their plane had been hijacked: were they lying? were the people who took the calls lying? why?

4:35 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

http://911myths.com/html/mobiles_at_altitude.html

4:36 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The story...

There were no hijackers on the 9/11 planes. Instead they were flown by remote control.

Our take...

Remote control of large planes isn’t in itself a new idea. Successful tests have been carried out long ago, for example this experiment in 1984. However, some go further and say the Boeing 757 and 767 come with this ability already.

Unfortunately, it's mostly nonsense. The Boeing 757 and 767 do have autopilot, but turn it off and you can do what you like. What's more, the 757 and 767 do not have "fly by wire" capabilities (their control systems are mechanical, not electronic, with cables and hydraulics to move the control surfaces). The only plane that did at the time was the 777, and even this could be overridden by the pilot.

But okay, let’s take this further. Maybe the planes were modified to be remote controlled. After all, America has remote controlled planes like the Predator and Global Hawk, so why couldn’t the technology be applied here?

Some people point to the planes final movements as indications of remote control. They talk about last minute corrections as planes flew into the WTC, or the difficulty of flying low-level into the Pentagon, as being far beyond the capabilities of the inexperienced hijackers. So is this really plausible?

We say no. Problem #1 is the major modifications that would be necessary to the plane, and the control system. You’d need some form of feedback to show the “remote controller” what was going on, perhaps several cameras, then a transmission system to send that fedback, and receive commands. All to be achieved without anyone noticing.

http://911myths.com/html/remote_control.html

4:40 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Does anon think that the eyewitnesses who saw the hijackers training, getting on the planes etc are part of the conspiracy?"

They were seen at flight schools yes. Some of those flight schools were CIA fronts too. Like the Venice Fla. one for example.

If you can provide witnesses as to them getting on the nominated flights please do so.

It's odd that they weren't on the passenger manifests though and that all video surveillance was apparently faulty at all the airports in question.

"Exactly how many people are in on this conspiracy? What about all the people who saw the plane that supposedly never existed hit the Pentagon...are they getting some of the insurance $?"

Who saw it? Some people saw A plane but to my knowledge the low flying plane was on a different path to whatever hit pentagon.

The comptroller general's office was hit. The guys in charge of accounting for the $2.3 trillion of unaccounted for spending announced by Rumsfeldt the previous day.

There was no aircraftwreckage at the pentagon and all the surveillence video has conveniently disappeared.

4:43 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"and what about the people on flight 93 who made calls by cell or airfone to loved ones? 37 calls were attempted, 17 were successful. callers explained that their plane had been hijacked: were they lying? were the people who took the calls lying? why?"

There were no cell phone calls made from any of the planes.

4:50 pm  
Blogger Giovanni said...

See, you cannot win with the Truthers, because if you pick one point at random, say this one

There was no aircraftwreckage at the pentagon

and say no, look, you're full of crap, then instead of defending the claim (except perhaps by saying that the evidence was planted, as Gage does on occasion) they come up with more spurious evidence. And there's no agreement on it either. Some people believe that there were four planes as documented, others two or none. It's not really that far from the xkcd carton posted upthread, really. It's like a conspiracy theory pinhata.

4:59 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

'It's odd that they weren't on the passenger manifests though'

Bullshit. http://www.911myths.com/html/no_hijackers_on_the_manifests.html

'video surveillance was apparently faulty at all the airports in question'

So airport staff are in on the conspiracy too? Does it ever end?
Anyway, there is footage of the hijackers at the airports, but I guess you think it's faked...

'Dulles International Airport, where American Airlines Flight 77 originated, had video surveillance at security checkpoints. Video was captured, showing each of the five hijackers (Khalid al-Mihdhar, Majed Moqed, Nawaq al-Hazmi, Salem al-Hazmi and Hani Hanjour) passing through security shortly before Flight 77 departed. Portland International Jetport also had security cameras at its checkpoints, with images of Mohamed Atta and Abdulaziz al-Omari captured.'
http://debunk911myths.org/topics/Hijackers

5:02 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To see the passenger manifests complete with the names of the hijackers scroll down to links on this page:
http://debunk911myths.org/topics/Hijackers

Sample manifest
http://debunk911myths.org/t/images/a/a4/Flight_11_Manifest_a.jpg

5:05 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Giovanni said...

See, you cannot win with the Truthers, because if you pick one point at random, say this one

There was no aircraftwreckage at the pentagon

and say no, look, you're full of crap, then instead of defending the claim (except perhaps by saying that the evidence was planted, as Gage does on occasion) they come up with more spurious evidence. And there's no agreement on it either. Some people believe that there were four planes as documented, others two or none. It's not really that far from the xkcd carton posted upthread, really. It's like a conspiracy theory pinhata."


OK. So where is the photographic evidence of this wreckage?

So far all you have to support the government's theory is that the government says so.

The fact that you are reduced to slurs and ad hominem exposes your lack of facts to support your belief.

The most pathetic example being "antisemitism". You simply lack anything in the way of honesty or integrity.

5:06 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

'There were no cell phone calls made from any of the planes.'

So...all the family members who swear they got calls on their cells from loved ones on a hijacked plane are lying?

5:08 pm  
Blogger Giovanni said...

OK. So where is the photographic evidence of this wreckage?

In the link provided.

5:10 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

To see the passenger manifests complete with the names of the hijackers scroll down to links on this page:
http://debunk911myths.org/topics/Hijackers

Sample manifest
http://debunk911myths.org/t/images/a/a4/Flight_11_Manifest_a.jpg

5:05 PM


The problem being, of course, that these new "manifests" are not the same as the originals released in the days after 9/11.

It's hardly supporting evidence when it's so clearly fraudulent.

5:10 pm  
Blogger Edward said...

Anon @ 4:16

"Strawmen and ad hominem all you've got?"

What is that, like your catch phrase or something? I would think you'd need something else to say other than just a catch phrase? I'm not so sure I want you in my exclusive club anymore. I thought you were a child prodigy like me, but instead all i'm getting from you is a repetitive statement from your wiki education which doesn't neccessarily point out why the statement might be appropriate to the situation.
Maybe you should try using a new catch phrase like "the truth is out there" instead, that would be awesome. Plus we would all immediately hear the eery music in our heads worthy of such a profound statement.
Heck, if you could do that and maybe buy yourself a super-skeptic power ring, then maybe i'd let you back in my exclusive club! Oh and btw, don't worry about making bold statements while hiding behind an anonymous id, i'm starting to be able to identify you by listening out for your sweet catch phrases.

5:13 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Photo of and info on wreckage of Flight 77 at the Pentagon:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/
1227842.html?page=6#flight77debris

But I guess 'they' faked it?

5:15 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Blogger Edward said...

Anon @ 4:16


You're just a kid. And you have nothing.

That's why you resport to ad hominem and personal insults.

5:16 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

'The problem being, of course, that these new "manifests" are not the same as the originals released in the days after 9/11.'

The lists were not released at first. The US held on to them for some time. So what are you talking about?

5:19 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

Photo of and info on wreckage of Flight 77 at the Pentagon:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/
1227842.html?page=6#flight77debris

But I guess 'they' faked it?"


That particular piece of wreckage is clearly not from a large aircraft. There simply isn't anything like it on one.

Likewise the famed rotor photograph did not come from a Rolls Royce engine.

5:20 pm  
Blogger Richard said...

Giovanni - I didn't realise you had actually gone to the lecture by Gage.
I haven't been to your site for sometime I just had a look - it is very good - I just thought you were holed up in some University - and I imagined you with a vast beard and smoking a pipe - pontificating about memory and art..lol

You at least went to the lecture.

I was being the devil's advocate a bit - I didn't realise so many crazy bastards were around (as well as me) - I don't really known about 9/11 one way or the other - but these people are absolutely sure - that is a worry!!

I have a more complex view of things. I've seen videos and so on about 9/11 but I also checked them against other views.

It a pity the US rushed in to print and bombed the crap out of other places in useless revenge.
In the light of Iraq and Afghanistan it is hard to feel much for 9/11 I am afraid. And even on the day I didn't feel much for the victims as they are called [or deep down are we not all responsible for history?]...sorry but I didn't the spectacle just was too good. It was always a huge Hollywood circus in any case - a wonderful spectacle of a kind. It was kind of exciting like Guy Fawkes! Or like seeing a volcanic eruption. I was depressed at the time and it cheered me up...

The US have got away with so much for so long ,so many atrocities, one felt a feeling of relief, even excitement and elation - they are not invulnerable! Not unbeatable!

5:21 pm  
Blogger Richard said...

Perhaps I am inherently evil?

5:22 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...

'The problem being, of course, that these new "manifests" are not the same as the originals released in the days after 9/11.'

The lists were not released at first. The US held on to them for some time. So what are you talking about?

5:19 PM


On the contrary. They were released quite quickly. And then taken down.

5:27 pm  
Blogger Edward said...

Oh there you are again, speak of the devil. Proving Giovanni's point brilliantly by countering his point head on by avoiding it alltogether and firing back with the tried and true:

"The fact that you are reduced to slurs and ad hominem exposes your lack of facts to support your belief."

Excellent! Truely magnificint form anon of the innapropriately used catch phrases! I see you went to the same critical thinking classes Gage attended. The one where they teach you to throw the phrase "ad hominem" when there isn't a reason to, as you just did with Giovanni. I give you an A+ and really do insist you join me in the battle against humility everywhere!

'The Truth is out there' (woo woo woo woo wo wo...)

5:27 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The entire claim of them not being on the manifests, is based on the CNN published list of "Victims" in which the hijackers (not VICTIMS) names were not included.

All complaints and theories stem from this one article/webpage/list.

Sad.

5:28 pm  
Blogger Giovanni said...

I was being the devil's advocate a bit

No, sorry, that’s unacceptable. You werent’ playing devil’s advocate at all, you were railing and not for the first time. It’s a bit late to get cute.

Amongst other things, you accused me of being in favour of torture and the wars of aggression (aren’t they all?) in Iraq and Afghanistan based on my belief than a group of terrorists from an organisation called Al Qaeda staged the attacks in New York and on the Pentagon in 2001.

But now it turns out perhaps you think that way too. So all of a sudden I suppose that believing it might have been Al Qaeda after all no longer means being in favour of torture and war? Just curious.

5:31 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Blogger Edward said...

Blah blah.

Try practising a bit of self awareness.

If you don't like your abuse and adhominem pointed out, don't use it.

5:39 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The entire claim of them not being on the manifests, is based on the CNN published list of "Victims" in which the hijackers (not VICTIMS) names were not included.

All complaints and theories stem from this one article/webpage/list.

Sad.

5:28 PM
Blogger Giovanni said...

I was being the devil's advocate a bit

No, sorry, that’s unacceptable. You werent’ playing devil’s advocate at all, you were railing and not for the first time. It’s a bit late to get cute.

Amongst other things, you accused me of being in favour of torture and the wars of aggression (aren’t they all?) in Iraq and Afghanistan based on my belief than a group of terrorists from an organisation called Al Qaeda staged the attacks in New York and on the Pentagon in 2001.

But now it turns out perhaps you think that way too. So all of a sudden I suppose that believing it might have been Al Qaeda after all no longer means being in favour of torture and war? Just curious.

5:31 PM


But baselessly accusing people of antisemitism is acceptable is it?

Sheer brass balls to display such hypocrisy.

5:41 pm  
Blogger Edward said...

Anon @ 5:16

"You're just a kid. And you have nothing.

That's why you resport to ad hominem and personal insults."


Oh, case in point yet again with the catch phrase. Sweet debating skills there anon. Loving it. Oh, and I didn't realise you knew me well enough to know i'm a kid with nothing - that's right, I live on the street and have no idea about anything. In fact, i'm wearing a cardboard box right now and need someone to translate my snarls and grunts into english. Oh but I guess that's the benefit of being able to click on my name to see who I am, not like the awesome courage that is you, right, Anon?
But I know you're just kidding Anon, I know you too you see. I know you're thinking about that super-skeptic power ring I mentioned earlier.
And I also know you must be aware of what my mother told me once, seen as you know me so well, that sometimes stupid ideas from stupid people deserve nothing more than a good 'ol piss take.

The truth is out there anon.

5:43 pm  
Blogger Giovanni said...

Baseless, huh. Let's replay the bit in question, shall we:

That Larry Silverstein and Frank Lowey made a bundle on it doesn't preclude that.

These people are very clever and very resourceful. In the end it's ALL about profit.

5:44 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...

The entire claim of them not being on the manifests, is based on the CNN published list of "Victims" in which the hijackers (not VICTIMS) names were not included.

All complaints and theories stem from this one article/webpage/list.

Sad.

5:28 PM

That simply is not true. The manifests were on the www in the days afterwards, whatever CNN did.

This is not the "basis for all" in any case.

There are thousands of anomalies in the official conspiracy theory.

Not least that Bin Laden denied it.

The official fable just doesn't stack up. Why no investigation?

5:45 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anon @ 5:16

"You're just a kid. And you have nothing.

That's why you resport to ad hominem and personal insults."


Oh, case in point yet again with the catch phrase. Sweet debating skills there anon. Loving it. Oh, and I didn't realise you knew me well enough to know i'm a kid with nothing - that's right, I live on the street and have no idea about anything. In fact, i'm wearing a cardboard box right now and need someone to translate my snarls and grunts into english. Oh but I guess that's the benefit of being able to click on my name to see who I am, not like the awesome courage that is you, right, Anon?
But I know you're just kidding Anon, I know you too you see. I know you're thinking about that super-skeptic power ring I mentioned earlier.
And I also know you must be aware of what my mother told me once, seen as you know me so well, that sometimes stupid ideas from stupid people deserve nothing more than a good 'ol piss take.

The truth is out there anon.

5:43 PM
Blogger Giovanni said...

Baseless, huh. Let's replay the bit in question, shall we:

That Larry Silverstein and Frank Lowey made a bundle on it doesn't preclude that.

These people are very clever and very resourceful. In the end it's ALL about profit.



How is that antisemitic?

Absolutely stark raving baseless.

5:46 pm  
Blogger Richard said...

" Giovanni said...

I was being the devil's advocate a bit

No, sorry, that’s unacceptable. You werent’ playing devil’s advocate at all, you were railing and not for the first time. It’s a bit late to get cute.

Amongst other things, you accused me of being in favour of torture and the wars of aggression (aren’t they all?) in Iraq and Afghanistan based on my belief than a group of terrorists from an organisation called Al Qaeda staged the attacks in New York and on the Pentagon in 2001.

But now it turns out perhaps you think that way too. So all of a sudden I suppose that believing it might have been Al Qaeda after all no longer means being in favour of torture and war? Just curious."

Heil Hitler!!

5:52 pm  
Blogger Giovanni said...

This is not the "basis for all" in any case.

There are thousands of anomalies in the official conspiracy theory.


See what I mean? There is no point in debunking any of this, because there will still be thousands more things that the Truthers can point to. And who has the time to debunk them all?

The flipside of that is that Truthers very often get a little carried away, and in their rush to get to the next thing after, say, the nanothermite bullshit has been put to bed, they start subtracting planes and stuff like that. Which you can only do for so long before people on the sidelines who might have previously thought hey, maybe these guys do have a point, begin to realise the game that is being played.

HORansome may correct me on this, but I believe that this is how the moon landing hoax conspiracy ended up dead - people just tired of it. I suspect the 9/11 Truth will end up like that too, although no doubt it will take longer. And in the meantime, I agree with maps that there is very little that is idle about the speculations. They damaage us culturally, impoverish the public conversation.

5:55 pm  
Blogger Giovanni said...

How is that antisemitic?
Absolutely stark raving baseless.


Yes, you're right. It's got nothing whatsoever to do with this, you came up with it all by your pretty anonymous self.

Heil Hitler!

Richard, you're a fool.

5:57 pm  
Blogger Richard said...

Blogger Giovanni said...

" How is that antisemitic?
Absolutely stark raving baseless.

Yes, you're right. It's got nothing whatsoever to do with this, you came up with it all by your pretty anonymous self.

Heil Hitler!

Richard, you're a fool."

Speak for yourself... your arrogance is infinite...

6:04 pm  
Blogger Edward said...

Giovanni,
I know exactly what you mean. The constant ignoring of counter points and the ever present shifting of goal posts pretty much sums up the Truther method of debate. And I agree with you, while it does damage critical debate within the population, I think it will, or in fact is, getting old already. There is only so much people will take before the ten millionth premise will break the camel's back so to speak.

6:10 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Blogger Giovanni said...

How is that antisemitic?
Absolutely stark raving baseless.

Yes, you're right. It's got nothing whatsoever to do with this, you came up with it all by your pretty anonymous self.

Heil Hitler!


No. It had nothing whatsoever to that you presumptuous intellectual coward.

6:10 pm  
Blogger George said...

Giovanni, you have much more patience than I do.

Richard, if you have to stoop to the level of a five year old, then I suggest that you stop and take a look at yourself. You made bold claims, then when your claims were challenged took to attacking Giovanni.

6:13 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So. The nanothermite particles have been "debunked" now have they?

Don't tell me, some journalist from Popular Mechanics done it.

6:15 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Blogger George said...

Giovanni, you have much more patience than I do.

Richard, if you have to stoop to the level of a five year old, then I suggest that you stop and take a look at yourself. You made bold claims, then when your claims were challenged took to attacking Giovanni.

6:13 PM


The classic authoritarian projection gambit.

Clearly Giovani started the smearing. And then you piled in.

6:17 pm  
Blogger Edward said...

"So. The nanothermite particles have been "debunked" now have they?

Don't tell me, some journalist from Popular Mechanics done it."


So. The nanothermite particles haven't been "debunked" now have they?

Don't tell me, some architect/civil engineer/builder/physiotherapist/[insert other irrelevant qualification here] proved it?

6:20 pm  
Blogger Richard said...

George's occupation is Religion in Afghanistan!! What religion - CIA? Tower Toppling Conspiracy Theory Religion?

Oh I could laugh! Oh dear, Giovanni's sense of humour is massive!! Ha ha ha!! HO ! HO !

6:21 pm  
Blogger Giovanni said...

So. The nanothermite particles have been "debunked" now have they?

Don't tell me, some journalist from Popular Mechanics done it.


Another typical gambit: if something has been disproven, it must have been done by people under shadowy instructions, which is your implication here.

But it's hard to say that the nanothermite has been debunked in fact because it's not very clear it was ever "bunked" in the first place. You have to take Gage at his word that the stuff was even found, which he based on a single paper whose contributors were known conspiracy theorists from a journal whose editor resigned after said paper was published without his approval. And even they didn't conclude that they had found nanothermite, just that they found some materials that might be part of nanothermite, if in fact we even knew what it was exactly made of (which we don't, it's a military secret and may never in fact have been produced).

So, to sum up: we're not sure that nanothermite exists, or that it was found. But we do know that somehow it wasn't set off during the fire following the plane hits, and that the seismographs in Manhattan never registered the explosions that Gage claim took place.

6:22 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Physicist actually.

Has there been a "debunking" or not?

Last I saw NIST were being strangely coy bordering on telling blatant lies about it.

6:23 pm  
Blogger Richard said...

"To sum up" (like a judge !! "...we're not sure"

We being him and God!

"... that nanothermite exists, or that it was found. But we do know..."

Because he went to NY and dug up samples!!

"... that somehow it wasn't set off during the fire following the plane hits, and that the seismographs in...."

What a lot of crap! Blah blah blah!!

6:25 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

We do know it exists because there is a patent on it. And NIST owns the patent.

But don't let that worry you.

They really wouldn't lie to you and governments never ever commit flase flag terrorism. Ever!

Except governments we don't like of course. Those buggers do it all the time.

6:27 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Known conspiracy theorists".

I love it. You can see that logic circle pulling into the station.

You guys are known clowns.

6:29 pm  
Blogger Edward said...

Right. So one or two physicists claim one thing, which is then challenged by many others within their profession and is eventually discredited.
Then you hold up the one example of said people who said nanothermite was present and reject all of the other physicists who disagree? I'm not a physicist. But from where I sit, if a certain claim is posited, and if that claim is tested and found incorrect by the positer's peers, then I tend to take the view of the wider scientific consensus as i'm not really qualified to comment myself.
As for the majority of the other claims, have a scratch around and you will bacially find people like Gage who really at the end of the day aren't qualified and don't know what they are talking about.

6:38 pm  
Blogger Giovanni said...

So one or two physicists claim one thing

They didn't even do that, they said that what they found "resembled" the explosive nanomaterial thought to have been produced at Livermore Labs and elsewhere. It's Gage who turned into a positive finding and who even calculated the amount that the buildings must have been laced with using the most outrageously generous projections. It was tons!! Whoooppeee!

6:43 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Let's see a link to this "debunking by thousands" then shall we?

So far we have.......

Former Brigham Young University physics professor Dr. Steven E. Jones and almost 1,000 scientific professionals in the fields of architecture, engineering, and physics have now concluded that the official explanation for the collapse of the World Trade Center (WTC) buildings is implausible according to laws of physics. Especially troubling is the collapse of WTC 7, a forty-seven-story building that was not hit by planes, yet dropped in its own “footprint” at nearly freefall speed in the same manner as a controlled demolition.

To support his theory, Jones and eight other scientists conducted chemical research on the dust from the World Trade centers. Their research results were published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal Open Chemical Physics Journal. The authors write, “We have discovered distinctive red/gray chips in all the samples. The properties of these chips were analyzed using optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray energy dispersive spectroscopy (XEDS), and differential scanning calorimetry (DSC). The red portion of these chips is found to be an unreacted thermitic material and highly energetic.” Thermite is a pyrotechnic composition of a metal powder and a metal oxide, which produces an aluminothermic reaction known as a thermite reaction and is used in controlled demolitions of buildings.

6:56 pm  
Blogger Edward said...

Funny thing for me is that the Truthers say the more you dig the more it all 'makes sense'. Well, as someone who wasn't very interested in 9/11 due to the conspiracy claims merely sounding so absurd (it just made me think of moon landing deniers), I must say the more I did dig the more the conspiracy theories seem a complete joke. Every single website i've come across (of course no legit articles, its all powered by the wonder of info that is the internet) looks and feels like a muddled, unprofessional joke written by people who are invariably poorly qualified to make the various claims they do or else making such dizzying leaps of logic as to give me motion sickness. Even the so called "peer reviewed" article about nanothermite seems to come from a rather dodgy pay-for-publish journal and doesn't, as Giovanni says, really back up the Truther claims very well anyway.
I'm very confused how such "irrefutable proof" seems to be a house of cards.
Oh well, the truthers are boring me now. Good luck Maps and Giovanni.

6:56 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This data raises significant critical questions about the events of 9/11, regardless of what one believes. This should be a part of our political discourse given how much of the policy in the past eight years has been based on assumptions about 9/11. In a free society, this type of inquiry would be a matter of civic principle, not national ridicule, which it what it has largely been when it has not been totally ignored by corporate media. To challenge the official narrative of 9/11 in the US is akin to denying the existence of god, the ultimate blasphemy or heresy, in a theocratic culture.

6:59 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And I'd bet Edward, that you never once asked "who benefits?".

I actually came to disbelieve the official theory because of what I know about some of the financial crimes that occurred on the day.

Tens of billions of dollars worth and never investigated.

7:04 pm  
Blogger Edward said...

I'll just say I for one aren't against questioning things, especially not American foreign policy, and as Giovanni said earlier, there are seemingly legitimate things to question such as the US government's competency over 9/11. But surely you can question these things without going into woo-territory about robots and conspiracies involving thousands of people etc.? It seems like a legitimate questioning exaggerated to titanic and simply silly proportions.

See ya.

7:08 pm  
Blogger Richard said...

"Richard, if you have to stoop to the level of a five year old, then I suggest that you stop and take a look at yourself. You made bold claims, then when your claims were challenged took to attacking Giovanni."

Listen Mr Professor CIA George I made a lot of statements but I didn't say it was a conspiracy as such - my point was that there should be an investigation etc - when I take the time to study what Giovanni has said on his Blog (and I praised that Blog) etc, and I did not then attack - my claims were NEVER debunked - in fact you cant have read what I said was I didn't make any claims - I SIMPLY DO NOT KNOW

But Giovanni KNOWS - he knows it all, he;s as bad as the anti Semitic "Troofers" of 9/11... he sees Gage, who is probably a bit loopy I concede, but we have to take HIS - PROFESSOR GIOVANNI'S word for it all (o.k. I beleive him, I know the Gage types, and a few others of his mates (o.k. it was a great anlaysis of what happened ... , but his trouble is his massive arrogance, and his abusiveness to others, HE knows HE IS right because he has a (Baudrillard inspired) sob story of some some wanker falling off the Towers and we are expected to cry like bubbas about it...whereas he knows that the US have carried out thousands of murders and massacres, and are now engaged in an illegal and murderous war in Afganistan and Iraq (he down plays all that)....one wonders why he is so concerned - he is postmodernist and mad (no compassion towards me - note that!) - he has hated me for ages - George you don't know the history. He really hates me and attacks me. I praised his site!! But no, his arrogance is infinite ... Let's get real. Whom the Gods would destroy for Christ sake. He is very devious. He could even be an agent himself - who knows. There are as many who attack him as defend him and many of them are making great sense, I am afraid.

Where do you come in Mr Professor square the circle George? Eh?

7:10 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And I'd bet Edward, that you never once asked "who benefits?".

I actually came to disbelieve the official theory because of what I know about some of the financial crimes that occurred on the day.

Tens of billions of dollars worth and never investigated.

7:04 PM
Blogger Edward said...

I'll just say I for one aren't against questioning things, especially not American foreign policy, and as Giovanni said earlier, there are seemingly legitimate things to question such as the US government's competency over 9/11. But surely you can question these things without going into woo-territory about robots and conspiracies involving thousands of people etc.? It seems like a legitimate questioning exaggerated to titanic and simply silly proportions.


You've invented the "woo territory" all by yourselves.

You've smeared people following legitimate lines of enquiry, which you haven't explored, with all these silly strawmen.

Your statement is not a representation of your actual position.

7:26 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

'what I know about some of the financial crimes that occurred on the day.

Tens of billions of dollars worth and never investigated.'

So it was an insurance scam, an excuse for war, and an opportunity for banking scamsters? This conspiracy just keeps getting bigger!

The claim that Lowy was involved in 9/11 for financial gain comes from anti-semites, as Giovanni showed. What's the bet the latest claim about billions being scammed has the same history?

And still no answer to the question of why so many people with no motive, like the family members of hijacking victims who swear they got calls from loved ones on Flight 93, would lie again and again...

7:37 pm  
Blogger George said...


my point was that there should be an investigation etc
...
in fact you cant have read what I said was I didn't make any claims - I SIMPLY DO NOT KNOW


I make this comment not addressed to Richard, or the truthers, because it is irrelevant to them.

This approach to knowledge is an interesting one, and ultimately a fruitless one. It starts from a point where there are no fixed points, and asks us to discount everything accepted as true. It then proceeds into asking questions in the form of "what if" and "it would make sense if", positing alternative theories that would make sense if a missing piece was found.

It then seeks to establish the missing piece of evidence, and posits that studies that do not find the evidence are themselves evidence of a cover-up. You see very similar style argument at the climate change denial blog WattsUpWithThat, where weather station data that shows one thing is used as evidence that climate scientists are hiding the opposite.

It suggests that scientific knowledge is challengeable on the basis of ascribed motives, and that scientific inquiry is fundamentally flawed - that by looking for what scientists have not found such things can be found. More extreme forms take aim at the idea of expert knowledge itself.

This fundamental skepticism towards the idea of knowledge itself is the opposite of Occam's Razor. Instead of assuming that what we know (the simple explanation) is true until positive evidence is provided otherwise, it asks us to discard what we know in favour of a more complex explanation.

7:48 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So it was an insurance scam, an excuse for war, and an opportunity for banking scamsters? This conspiracy just keeps getting bigger!

The claim that Lowy was involved in 9/11 for financial gain comes from anti-semites, as Giovanni showed. What's the bet the latest claim about billions being scammed has the same history?

And still no answer to the question of why so many people with no motive, like the family members of hijacking victims who swear they got calls from loved ones on Flight 93, would lie again and again...


Antisemites. Pathetic. Lowy was a terrorist. I don't care what his ethnoreligious make up is. Giovani showed nothing. He made an offensive allegation is all, in a blatant get out of gaol attempt. He's a fraud.

There were billions of dollars went missing in scams and frauds committed while it was all happening.

Billions of dollars in gold bullion went missing from the site, while it was happening.

Records of multibillion dollar frauds went missing when building 7 was demolished. Not to mention the investigation into the 2000 Florida fraud.

7:54 pm  
Blogger Giovanni said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

8:43 pm  
Blogger Giovanni said...

This fundamental skepticism towards the idea of knowledge itself is the opposite of Occam's Razor.

I'm not sure that this is in fact the issue. For one thing, Occam's Razor applies poorly when humans are involved. History is full of actual conspiracies, and in a conspiracy what you do is cover your tracks by arranging evidence in a manner that points to another, more compelling, simpler explanation. So you can't simply say this is the simpler truth, therefore it must be right.

What Gage does is pervert the scientific method. He establishes a hypothesis - the WTC came down by means of controlled demolition - and then proceeds to select (most often to the point of fabricating) the evidence that supports that hypothesis, discarding everything else. Except by discarding all contrary evidence he has to make up an ever greater conspiracy, which will eventually ruin his edifice.

It's like in CSI, where investigation is reduced to forensic scientific work, except carried dishonestly or plain insanely.

And it never ends. You see that now we have discovered gold! and the Florida elections! Nobody has even brought up yet the SEC investigations whose documentation was supposedly destroyed (as per Gage). So you see it was the NPAC who wanted to invade Iraq and Afghanistan plus the Jewish bankers and property owners who wanted to scam the insurers, plus it was the theft massive amounts of gold bullion, plus it was the cover up of electoral fraud, plus it was corporations eager to quash lawsuits. Plus it was the BBC because... oh, we'll come up for a reason for the BBC being involved, you don't worry about that. We have people on it ALL THE TIME.

8:46 pm  
Blogger George said...


I'm not sure that this is in fact the issue. For one thing, Occam's Razor applies poorly when humans are involved. History is full of actual conspiracies, and in a conspiracy what you do is cover your tracks by arranging evidence in a manner that points to another, more compelling, simpler explanation. So you can't simply say this is the simpler truth, therefore it must be right


Oh absolutely. Postulating more complex theories, and then testing out the actual and available evidence for them is sound practice.

What is problematic is asking us to assume the basis of unknowns, and then basing a theory around those unknowns. Those unknowns require large assumptions about things for which there is no evidence (many large assumptions in the case of Truthers).

The difference between these two blurs when there is a fundamental mistrust of the evidence given, and the reliability of those giving the evidence. Given the closeness of this event to United States history in the last decade, and the chequered history of that country in engaging in violence under false pretences, it's only logical that people would engage in extreme levels of skepticism, to the extent where they turn skepticism against itself and challenge all truth-claims about the towers and their collapse.

8:58 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So, we go from antisemitic to further baseless allegations against knowledge.

You're a complete fraud mate. get over yourself.

Either come up with some rational argument ot admit you're just a bigot throwing accusations and allegations around.

You're the one saying that you know it all. You know how the whole thing went down.

So why are you reduced to merely insulting those who question?

Because you're a fraud. That's why.

9:03 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What is problematic is asking us to assume the basis of unknowns, and then basing a theory around those unknowns. Those unknowns require large assumptions about things for which there is no evidence (many large assumptions in the case of Truthers).


You guys are the theorists though. You haven't tested any evidence. You just believe that the govt couldn't possibly lie about such a thing.

The big lie etc.

9:06 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And it never ends. You see that now we have discovered gold! and the Florida elections! Nobody has even brought up yet the SEC investigations whose documentation was supposedly destroyed (as per Gage). So you see it was the NPAC who wanted to invade Iraq and Afghanistan plus the Jewish bankers and property owners who wanted to scam the insurers, plus it was the theft massive amounts of gold bullion, plus it was the cover up of electoral fraud, plus it was corporations eager to quash lawsuits. Plus it was the BBC because... oh, we'll come up for a reason for the BBC being involved, you don't worry about that. We have people on it ALL THE TIME.

OK. Where did the NY Fed store gold?

You must know. You do know everything it seems.

Building 7 was a government building. It housed the SEC, the CIA's biggest field office and the office for the Prosecutor for the 6th District of the Federal Court.

This should not be a mystery for you all knowing types.

Apparently these are revelations.

Says it all really.

9:13 pm  
Blogger Giovanni said...

You just believe that the govt couldn't possibly lie about such a thing.

Actually, no, both George and I are quite concinved that governments lie and that they lie all the time, believe me. But knowing that it is the case is not sufficient to make every allegation of government conspiracy correct. Gage's theories, and the assorted garnish that has been dredged up on this thread (there were no planes! they wanted gold!) hasn't been proven at all, and in fact comprehensively debunked insofar as various people have been willing to devote time to it. This doesn't matter to the Truthers because every time a detail, not matter how central to the theory, is proven to be incorrect (remember when the nanothermite was supposed to have been added to the WTC's external paint? priceless stuff) you simply latch onto something else. There's absolutely no winning these arguments. Just as there used to be no way to win an argument with a moon landing hoaxer. We all just had to wait until people tired of that crap.

9:17 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Actually, no, both George and I are quite concinved that governments lie and that they lie all the time, believe me.


Except when it comes to muslims right?

It's absolutely clear that your views on this are based entirely on hatred of arabs and islam,

Or did you just invent your views yourself? And it all just happened to coincide with the Bush regime's theory.

I think it's pretty obvious that outright vicious racism is at the heart of your tale.

9:25 pm  
Blogger Richard said...

"Professor CIA in Afghanistan George" In that you are making general point about skepticism I agree.

But that isn't my position - there are many things provable by science.

In this case though, like Descartes, we need to START from skepticism...Descartes wasn't a skeptic himself, he used that method to in fact prove that there was a God - or prove it to himself and so on.

I have no reliable data myself to conclude that here was (or was not) an inside conspiracy by the agents etc or that it was done by some crazy Arabs or what. I personally concur with much of the ideas that to a large degree that it is pretty unlikely but I simply don't know anymore. Anymore than I know who killed the Bains in the Bain murder.

But we are always talking probabilities in science and in any other forms of knowledge
I believe the US went to the Moon, and that the speed of light is constant but as to 9/11 the truth of that is in the hands of those who may well want to distort it (we will probably never know what the CIA etc had done with evidence...we will probably never know who were on the planes or why - true the US is more open than say Russia. But as soon as the fireworks started that was the end of truth. First casualty of war or Tower toppling is truth. It is even possible the CIA are fueling theories of Conspiracy & that a Gage is himself a CIA agent.

The deep danger is arrogance. That of Giovanni our Memory Boffin and resident Postmodernist from Italy who simply never listens to those such as myself who try to help him ...thus in fact he plays into the hands of the Nazis and Troofers.

One wonders...

But an inquiry, real one will help us to see...but evidence will have been destroyed by now by evil ones...the gullible will believe to their peril.

9:33 pm  
Blogger Giovanni said...

Or did you just invent your views yourself? And it all just happened to coincide with the Bush regime's theory.

There goes Richard's brilliant insight again. If you believe it was Al Qaeda, then you must be anti-muslim. Also, pro-Bush, pro-American imperialism.

Right.

Except, wait: why would believing that an organisation called Al Qaeda exists and is actually responsible of acts of terrorism be a slight on all Muslims? Do people blame Nazism and Fascism on Christians?

Also, riddle me this: do you in fact believe that Al Qaeda does not exist? Do you therefore think that the attacks in Madrid, Bali and London were also fabricated by Western agencies as well? Think about it, I'm giving you a terrific opportunity to branch out.

9:38 pm  
Blogger HORansome said...

You don't look at a thread for a few days and woosh, it explodes in content.

I think Giovanni has hit the nail on the head in all of this and I can't really add much other than 'I agree with that guy!' to the proceedings, but, I have to say, Richard, you're not doing yourself any favours. You accused Giovanni of holding some really awful views and committed fallacy after fallacy in the process. Just because someone doesn't think 9/11 needs yet another investigation, it does not follow that they think that everything that followed from that fateful day was justified. I think American's imperialist ambitions are terrible and that the invasion of Iraq, et cetera, were unjustified acts of aggression. I also think 9/11 was an Al-Qaeda plot; these views are not incompatible. To argue that they are is to engage in the kind of rhetoric that Bush and Blair used to smear the people who said the invasion(s) were unjustified, and I'm sure you wouldn't want to be accused of such correspondence.

11:09 pm  
Blogger Richard said...

Go and shit yourself in a corner

11:22 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And still no answer to the question of why so many people with no motive, like the family members of hijacking victims who swear they got calls from loved ones on Flight 93, would lie...

11:58 pm  
Blogger Giovanni said...

And still no answer to the question of why so many people with no motive, like the family members of hijacking victims who swear they got calls from loved ones on Flight 93, would lie...

I wouldn't hold my breath.

12:01 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Maybe state agents called family members, pretending to be loved ones calling from a plane being hijacked?

12:08 am  
Blogger Giovanni said...

Maybe state agents called family members, pretending to be loved ones calling from a plane being hijacked?

Yes, because if agent Johnson phoned pretending to be your husband you wouldn't notice. Maybe they used actors skilled at voice impersonation. Somebody check what the cast of The Simpsons was doing at the time.

12:11 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

'Do you therefore think that the attacks in Madrid, Bali and London were also fabricated by Western agencies as well?'

Ron Paul does
http://www.ronpaulwarroom.com/?p=515

12:11 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

OK. What if they took the real people who were sposed to be on the plane to a base and forced them to make calls and pretend to be on the plane?

12:14 am  
Blogger Giovanni said...

And then, let me guess, they shot them, right?

12:16 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

'Lowy was a terrorist.'

Why? Because he fought in the Israeli army in 1948 as a kid?
Wow...just the training to set up to bring down the towers...

but hey - you're not an anti-semite, it's just a coincidence that bonehead neo-nazi sites are the only ones that make the claims you're making...

12:18 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

boneheads...
http://crimesofzion.blogspot.com/2007/05/frank-lowy-zionism-and-911.html

12:22 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

good comment under bonehead post I gave:

What is the point of this argument?Just because Frank Lowy has many ties to the Jewish community doesnt make him a terrorist or that he knew about septemeber 11th. Ever thought that he has many Jewish ties is because he is Jewish? Most Jews have the same ties to the same communities and foundations. That means all Jews are terrorists and knew about Sept. 11th right? According to your argument, yes! Many of you are just jelouse because of how rich he is also. If you think this is the "truth" on this subject, go find factual websites with sources and dont believe this stuff.

12:24 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

http://aotearoaawiderperspective.wordpress.com/2010/01/30/jeanette-fitzsimons-and-911-thank-you-for-your-courage/

12:33 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Blogger Giovanni said...

Or did you just invent your views yourself? And it all just happened to coincide with the Bush regime's theory.

There goes Richard's brilliant insight again. If you believe it was Al Qaeda, then you must be anti-muslim. Also, pro-Bush, pro-American imperialism.

Right.

Except, wait: why would believing that an organisation called Al Qaeda exists and is actually responsible of acts of terrorism be a slight on all Muslims? Do people blame Nazism and Fascism on Christians?

Also, riddle me this: do you in fact believe that Al Qaeda does not exist? Do you therefore think that the attacks in Madrid, Bali and London were also fabricated by Western agencies as well? Think about it, I'm giving you a terrific opportunity to branch out.



You don't recognise your own logic it seems.

If you are to reduce my argument to baseless allegations of "antisemitism" then surely it is hypocrisy not to accept that same tactic used against you.

I'm merely demonstrating just one aspect of the hypocrisy in your chatter.

7:31 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...

And still no answer to the question of why so many people with no motive, like the family members of hijacking victims who swear they got calls from loved ones on Flight 93, would lie...


We have no evidence that they did. The Olsen calls have been proven to be false for starters.

The story of passengers saying "Let's roll" is clearly a hoax.

A lot of "evidence" is myth.

7:35 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...

'Lowy was a terrorist.'

Why? Because he fought in the Israeli army in 1948 as a kid?
Wow...just the training to set up to bring down the towers...

but hey - you're not an anti-semite, it's just a coincidence that bonehead neo-nazi sites are the only ones that make the claims you're making...

12:18 AM



Lowy was a terrorist fighting for the fascist Golani Brigade of the Haganah. A group of very vicious racist thugs.

Your neonazi smear is childish and pathetic.

7:41 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Blogger Giovanni said...


Actually, no, both George and I are quite concinved that governments lie and that they lie all the time, believe me. But knowing that it is the case is not sufficient to make every allegation of government conspiracy correct. Gage's theories, and the assorted garnish that has been dredged up on this thread (there were no planes! they wanted gold!) hasn't been proven at all, and in fact comprehensively debunked insofar as various people have been willing to devote time to it. This doesn't matter to the Truthers because every time a detail, not matter how central to the theory, is proven to be incorrect (remember when the nanothermite was supposed to have been added to the WTC's external paint? priceless stuff) you simply latch onto something else. There's absolutely no winning these arguments. Just as there used to be no way to win an argument with a moon landing hoaxer. We all just had to wait until people tired of that crap.

9:17 PM


Waffle. You're not trying to use facts or argument. You have a fixed position and you are merely smearing and sneering at anyone who dares to introduce new evidence or knowledge and ridiculing any newly introduced (to you)aspects of what happened.

Like any crime, the motive is important in the understanding.

Who benefits?

You can't ask this question yourself because you don't have the intellect or the courage to confront the answers.

7:47 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...

good comment under bonehead post I gave:

What is the point of this argument?Just because Frank Lowy has many ties to the Jewish community doesnt make him a terrorist or that he knew about septemeber 11th. Ever thought that he has many Jewish ties is because he is Jewish? Most Jews have the same ties to the same communities and foundations. That means all Jews are terrorists and knew about Sept. 11th right? According to your argument, yes! Many of you are just jelouse because of how rich he is also. If you think this is the "truth" on this subject, go find factual websites with sources and dont believe this stuff.

12:24 AM



You've obviously lifted this logical fallacy from one the extreme right wing islamophobic sites.

8:03 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So our Truther friend thinks that the people sho swear they received calls from loved ones on Flight 93 saying the flight was being hijacked are either lying or else were listening to 'state agents' imitating their loved ones.

Yeah, right. And you wonder why Truthers aren't taken seriously.

10:02 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

'Lowy was a terrorist fighting for the fascist Golani Brigade'

The Golani brigade is an infrantry unit of the Israeli army. Lowy was a member of it during the 1948 war. So that makes him a 'terrorist' and a 'fascist'? To label ordinary soldiers in the Israeli army fascists and terrorists is just anti-semitic. They don't make the state's foreign policy. They're grunts. You wouldn't call ordinary US soliders who serve in Iraq and Vietnam 'fascists' and 'terrorists' would you even thought they fight in wars that are wrong?

You have definitely got some issues with Jews.

10:15 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

According to the Troofer and his sidekick Richard Taylor, all these calls were hoaxed, or else fabrocated by the people who swear they got them. What a lot of ordinary motiveless Americans caught up in the conspiracy! Maybe they're being paid off with insurance money or Jewish gold??

'Altogether, the passengers and crew made 35 airphone calls and two cell phone calls from the flight.[37] Ten passengers and two crew members were able to successfully connect, providing information to family, friends, and others on the ground.[21] Tom Burnett made several phone calls to his wife beginning at 09:30:32 from rows 24 and 25, though he was assigned a seat in row four.[31][38] Burnett explained that the plane had been hijacked by men claiming to have a bomb. He also remarked that a passenger had been knifed and that he believed the bomb threat was a ruse to control the passengers.[38] An unknown flight attendant attempted to contact the United Airlines maintenance facility at 09:32:29. The call lasted 95 seconds, but was not received as it may have been in queue.[19] Flight attendant Sandra Bradshaw called the maintenance facility at 09:35:40 from row 33.[31] "Jack, pick up sweetie, can you hear me? Okay. I just want to tell you, there's a little problem with the plane. I'm fine. I'm totally fine. I just want to tell you how much I love you."

Mark Bingham called his mother at 09:37:03 from row 25. He reported that the plane had been hijacked by three men who claimed to have a bomb.[41] Jeremy Glick called his wife at 09:37:41 from row 27 and told her the flight was hijacked by three dark-skinned men that looked "Iranian", wearing red bandanas and wielding knives.[21][38] Glick remained connected until the end of the flight.[31] He reported that the passengers voted whether to "rush" the hijackers.[19] cont in next comment...

10:23 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Joseph DeLuca called his father at 09:43:03 from row 26 to inform him the flight had been hijacked.[19] Todd Beamer attempted to call his wife from row 32 at 09:43:48, but was routed to GTE phone operator Lisa D. Jefferson.[38] Beamer told the operator that the flight was hijacked and the pilots were on the floor dead or dying. He revealed one of the hijackers had a red belt with a bomb strapped to his waist.[42] A United employee in San Francisco, California, sent an ACARS message to the flight at 09:46: "Heard report of incident. Plz confirm all is normal."[19] Linda Gronlund called her sister, Elsa Strong, at 09:46:05 and left her a message saying there were "men with a bomb".[43]


Flight attendant CeeCee Lyles called her husband at 09:47:57 and left him a message saying the plane had been hijacked.[31] Marion Britton called her friend, Fred Fiumano, at 09:49:12. Fiumano recalled, "she said, 'We’re gonna. They’re gonna kill us, you know, We’re gonna die.’ And I told her, 'Don’t worry, they hijacked the plane, they’re gonna take you for a ride, you go to their country, and you come back. You stay there for vacation.' You don’t know what to say—what are you gonna say? I kept on saying the same things, ‘Be calm.’ And she was crying and—you know—more or less crying and screaming and yelling."[24] Flight attendant Sandra Bradshaw called her husband at 09:50:04 and told him she was preparing scalding water to throw at the hijackers.[31] Passenger Lauren Grandcolas called her husband twice, once before take off and once during the hijacking. He missed both of her calls. She then passed her phone to Honor Elizabeth Wainio.[24] Wainio called her stepmother at 09:53:43 and concluded, four and a half minutes later, by saying, "I have to go. They're breaking into the cockpit. I love you."[44] Jarrah dialed in the VHF omnidirectional range (VOR) frequency for the VOR navigational aid at Reagan National Airport at 9:55:11 to direct the plane toward Washington, D.C.[27] Bradshaw, on the phone with her husband, said "Everyone is running up to first class. I've got to go. Bye."[45]'

10:25 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2009/01/five-more-questions-for-troofers.html

"To those who believe that the airphone calls by passengers to their loved ones were “morphed”: how exactly did the conspirators know how to get voice samples for the 59 crew and passengers aboard AA77, and the 40 aboard UA93? How did they predict which passengers would be aboard - notably Jeremy Glick (scheluded to take a flight the day before he boarded UA93) and Lauren Grandcolas (who was supposed to board a later flight on 11th September, but actually found a seat on UA93)? How did they anticipate (and prepare the appropriate responses for) questions their loved ones would ask once they received the calls? And how is it that their relatives didn’t notice anything untoward about the comments and responses their loved ones made (other than the obvious fact that the latter were due to die in a grotesque terrorist attack)?


Let me add here the case of Linda Gronlund, passenger on Flight 93:


Joseph DeLuca called his Dad; his girlfriend, Linda Gronlund, called her sister, Elsa Strong.

Elsa Strong says, "She said, 'Hi, Else, this is Lin. I just wanted to tell you how much I love you.' And she said, 'Please tell Mom and Dad how much I love them.' And then she got real calm and said, 'Now my will is in my safe and my safe is in my closet. and this is the combination.' And she just told me the combination of her safe. and then she just said, 'I don't know if I'm ever going to get a chance to tell you again in person how much I love you, but I'm really going to miss you.' And she said goodbye."


How did the government know the combination to Linda Gronlund's safe, and where it was located?"

10:30 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Mark Bingham called his mother at 09:37:03 from row 25. He reported that the plane had been hijacked by three men who claimed to have a bomb."


Mark Bingham said "Hi mom, this is Mark Bingham............

lol

And fyi, I am not a truther. I am an economist with many years of dealing with large scale fraud and market manipulation.

10:42 am  
Blogger Giovanni said...


Mark Bingham said "Hi mom, this is Mark Bingham............

lol


Wow, that was just amazing. You debunked all that evidence, just like that. You are so impressive, oh anonymous economist.

10:44 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"The Golani brigade is an infrantry unit of the Israeli army."


Nope.

The question here is why you've siezed upon Lowy anyway.

What is the agenda here?

I merely mentioned that he and Silverstein had done the deal a few weeks before the attack.

Is it now "antisemitic" to merely mention people who happen to be jewish?

Let's apply that same standard to those who mention alleged arab hijackers and see how the conversation goes.

10:47 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Giovanni said...


Mark Bingham said "Hi mom, this is Mark Bingham............

lol

Wow, that was just amazing. You debunked all that evidence, just like that. You are so impressive, oh anonymous economist.



More passive aggressive ad hominem. You're such a coward.

But you'd have us believe that you're a skeptic when it comes to government lies.

10:49 am  
Blogger Giovanni said...

More passive aggressive ad hominem. You're such a coward.

Ahaha!! You're the anonymous one, and I'm the coward. It keeps getting better and better.

And of course, still no answer on those call transcripts other than our "economist's" lol.

10:52 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Blogger Giovanni said...

More passive aggressive ad hominem. You're such a coward.

Ahaha!! You're the anonymous one, and I'm the coward. It keeps getting better and better.

And of course, still no answer on those call transcripts other than our "economist's" lol.

10:52 AM


We've covered that before. If you had anything beyond mere faith in your theory you wouldn't resort to this cowardly abuse.

I merely mentioned that I am an economist because it is relevant to how I came to disbelieve the official theory.

If mere statements like this are to be ridiculed then I sense that you are even less intellectually gifted than I'd previously thought.

Do you use your surname to identify yourself to your mother?

10:57 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So now you deny the Golani brigade is an infrantry brigade in the Israeli army? What do you think it is, an international organisation of shapeshifting reptilians? Doh.

10:58 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Giovanni, I think the Truther is saying that the calls from Flight 93 were made by 'state agents' in disguise on the ground - and the 'mark Bingham' thing was a 'slip up'. Amazing how the state agents fooled all those family members and knew private facts like the combination numbers to a safe...

And of course the same 'state agents' placed aircarft wreckage next to the Pentagon - that's how our Truther excplains the photos you pointed to.

11:01 am  
Blogger Giovanni said...

Do you use your surname to identify yourself to your mother?

Who knows what I would say at such time? I had the experience of making a call to my mother at a time of great distress, and I can assure it was barely coherent. But what interests me more is the callousness of your comment. You're not a sceptic: if you were, you'd have some reservation, a sense of shame. Just in the off chance that case those people had actually died in that particular way (a sceptic would allow for that possibility, if he hadn't made up his mind in advance like you have) you woulnd't LOL at somebody identifying himself to his mother in his final moments by his full name.

Besides, the notion that this little detail disproves anything is ludicrous, of course, and typical: you zero in ona tiny snippet that for you conclusively invalidates everything else. This again is the opposite of scepticism, or indeed of rational thought.

11:03 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...

So now you deny the Golani brigade is an infrantry brigade in the Israeli army? What do you think it is, an international organisation of shapeshifting reptilians? Doh.

10:58 AM

The Haganah were a seperately led fascist militia and the Golani Brigade were specialist terrorists.
There was no "Israeli Army" at the time because there was no "Israel".

Your "islamofascist" delusions are getting in the way of sense.

11:04 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Doh. If there was no Israel what was being invaded in 1948? And what about the UN vote recognising Israel that had just been held? Of course Israel existed. The Golani brigade was and is a bunch of grunts in the Israeli army, not some terrorist group. Do you think all the Jews who fought in the 1948war were fascists and terrorists? Lowy was just an anonymous grunt -and you want to pretend he was a en evil terrorist genius capable of helping plan the 9/11 atacks because of him being a grunt in 1948! How silly can you get...

11:10 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Blogger Giovanni said...

Do you use your surname to identify yourself to your mother?

Who knows what I would say at such time? I had the experience of making a call to my mother at a time of great distress, and I can assure it was barely coherent. But what interests me more is the callousness of your comment. You're not a sceptic: if you were, you'd have some reservation, a sense of shame. Just in the off chance that case those people had actually died in that particular way (a sceptic would allow for that possibility, if he hadn't made up his mind in advance like you have) you woulnd't LOL at somebody identifying himself to his mother in his final moments by his full name.

Besides, the notion that this little detail disproves anything is ludicrous, of course, and typical: you zero in ona tiny snippet that for you conclusively invalidates everything else. This again is the opposite of scepticism, or indeed of rational thought.



Awwww look at that. He plays the sympathy for the victims card.

It just gets crasser and crasser.

These people falsify evidence all the time my friend. The scale of riches involved in this whole bogus war of terror is beyond your imagination.

And the scale of the corruption at the top of the system is just unimaginable to you.

Trillions of dollars have been to the oligarchs and their cronies transferred through all this and an imperial presidency codified with executive power unhindered by any notion of law.

I'd think that fakery of some of this evidence would have been entirely possible.

Any investigation looks for inconsistencies and zeros in onthem. That is the nature of forensics.

11:11 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Doh. If there was no Israel what was being invaded in 1948? And what about the UN vote recognising Israel that had just been held? Of course Israel existed. The Golani brigade was and is a bunch of grunts in the Israeli army, not some terrorist group. Do you think all the Jews who fought in the 1948war were fascists and terrorists? Lowy was just an anonymous grunt -and you want to pretend he was a en evil terrorist genius capable of helping plan the 9/11 atacks because of him being a grunt in 1948! How silly can you get...

11:10 AM


Palestine was being ethnically cleansed of it's indigenes. That is terrorism and the Golani Brigade participated in some of the grossest acts against unarmed civilians to dispossess them of their lands and property.

"Israel" was unilaterally declared by Ben-Gurions zionist council.

It didn't legally exist and it was never attacked by anyone anyway.

But again, why are you focusing on Lowey?

11:16 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So ..... Bin Laden's denial then?

Thoughts?

11:18 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So the answer is...yes, you think all Israelis who fought as grunts in 1948 and since are fascists and terrorists. Even though almost all were conscripts.

Do you think all the Americans who fought in Vietnam and Iraq as footsoliders are/were terrorists and fascists?

Of course not. But they're not Jews.

11:20 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Maps is a hypocrite.

He attacks other people for anti-semitism but his own mte Richard Taylor says 'Heil Hitler' and he does nothing.

Hey, be consistent. When are you going to ban ranting Richard Taylor?

11:28 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

So the answer is...yes, you think all Israelis who fought as grunts in 1948 and since are fascists and terrorists. Even though almost all were conscripts.

Do you think all the Americans who fought in Vietnam and Iraq as footsoliders are/were terrorists and fascists?

Of course not. But they're not Jews.

11:20 AM



That's not even vaguely what I said. As strawmen go, it's a poor one. They need to be at least partially linked to have any effect.

Are you 12?

11:29 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

'These people falsify evidence all the time my friend.'

So how do you think all the calls from Flight 93 were faked?

Agents putting on voices?

The real people taken some place and tortured into making the calls?

Some kinda voice fabrication software that is so advenaced we don't know about it yet?

Or paying the people who say they got the calls to lie about their loved ones?

I don't know which scenario is more insane.

11:31 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

'That's not even vaguely what I said'

Nah. You said Israel didn't exist in 1948 and the Golan brigade wasn't an infrantry brigade in the Israeli army.

Sorry. You're a completley irrational individual. No alternate reality at all.

Be careful when that white van pulls up outside your house...could be, you know...THEM...their power is infinite, you know...

11:35 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

11:29 AM
Anonymous Anonymous said...

'These people falsify evidence all the time my friend.'

So how do you think all the calls from Flight 93 were faked?

Agents putting on voices?

The real people taken some place and tortured into making the calls?

Some kinda voice fabrication software that is so advenaced we don't know about it yet?

Or paying the people who say they got the calls to lie about their loved ones?

I don't know which scenario is more insane.

11:31 AM


It would merely be speculation. I simply don't know but the governments case is weak to the point of unbelievable.

Highly sophisticated voice technology has been aroound for quite some time though.

Maybe there was a landing of the Flight 93 passengers. We simply don't know other than the government's say so that there wasn't.

Saying that it is impossible is as silly as saying that remote control is impossible.

But, your silliness seems to know no bounds.

11:37 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

'Richard Taylor' should be the subject of a complaint to the Race Relations Conciliator.

Then we'll see if he thinks 'Heil Hitler!' is a joke.

11:38 am  
Blogger Giovanni said...

I think when Richard said heil Hitler it was aimed at me, for what it's worth.

11:39 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...

'That's not even vaguely what I said'

Nah. You said Israel didn't exist in 1948 and the Golan brigade wasn't an infrantry brigade in the Israeli army.

Sorry. You're a completley irrational individual. No alternate reality at all.

Be careful when that white van pulls up outside your house...could be, you know...THEM...their power is infinite, you know...

11:35 AM



It isn't irrational to know the facts.

The Golan Brigade were NOT merely an infatry brigade. They weren't infantry at all and they were part of no "Israeli" army.

YOU made the faalse claim that Israel was created by a vote at the UN AND that it was then attacked.

You are wrong on both counts. The paartition was never ratified because it was illegal under the UN charter and no arab army attacked it.

The violence resulted from the ethnic cleansing and mass murder of civilians that the zionists then carried out after their unilateral declaration of sovereignty.

These are the facts.

11:42 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...

'Richard Taylor' should be the subject of a complaint to the Race Relations Conciliator.

Then we'll see if he thinks 'Heil Hitler!' is a joke.

11:38 AM

For quoting Giovanni? This gets funnier by the minute.

11:45 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

'YOU made the faalse claim that Israel was created by a vote at the UN'

Nurse, the screens!

Of course the UN doesn't exist. That building in NYC is a hologram. There was no vote in 1948.

Next thing it'll be Poland invaded Germany in September 1939. And of course there's the moon landing hoax...

11:46 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The partition was never ratified you silly child. "Israel" is an entity created by an illegal self declaration.

11:54 am  
Blogger Giovanni said...

And of course there's the moon landing hoax...

Funny you should say that. There's a point in Gage's presentation when he makes reference to Apollo 11 and I remember thinking "ah, so he believes that people went to the Moon". I had a perverse desire to poll his audience on that one.

By our economist's logic, they would have saved trillions by not going so ipso facto they must not have gone.

11:58 am  
Blogger Giovanni said...

(also, it would have been a whole lot easier to fake, and didn't involve killing anyone. So in fact they CANNOT possibly have gone.)

12:00 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Blogger Giovanni said...

And of course there's the moon landing hoax...

Funny you should say that. There's a point in Gage's presentation when he makes reference to Apollo 11 and I remember thinking "ah, so he believes that people went to the Moon". I had a perverse desire to poll his audience on that one.

By our economist's logic, they would have saved trillions by not going so ipso facto they must not have gone.

11:58 AM


That bears no relation to my logic at all. Yet another strawman.

It's as baseless as your offensive "antisemitism" smear.

12:04 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Israel" is an entity created by an illegal self declaration.'

Unlike...Australia...the US...Canada...and about a million other countries that you don't deny exist. Did you read about the legal foundations of the US invasion of Indian land? Me neither. Nations are usually the product of some sort of war or injustice.

Funny how you obsess about the Israel's illegality, and want to kick the Jews into the sea, but never mention the US, Canada, Australia...

Or maybe not so surprising. Your anti-semitism couldn't be clearer.

12:10 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

"Israel" is an entity created by an illegal self declaration.'

Unlike...Australia...the US...Canada...and about a million other countries that you don't deny exist. Did you read about the legal foundations of the US invasion of Indian land? Me neither. Nations are usually the product of some sort of war or injustice.

Funny how you obsess about the Israel's illegality, and want to kick the Jews into the sea, but never mention the US, Canada, Australia...

Or maybe not so surprising. Your anti-semitism couldn't be clearer.

12:10 PM


Not at all. You made an assertion that I corrected.

You're backing down already so that would tend to prove my point.

Arabs are a semitic people too, and you clearly consider them to be non-human, so are you not the "antisemitic" one here?

12:16 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So...... this site is a hangout for islamophobes and anti-arab racists and neoconservatives?

1:03 pm  
Blogger Edward said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

2:49 pm  
Blogger Edward said...

I had put a rather venomous reply to our little economist-come-catch-phrase-wielding-anon and his/her minions, but then I realised it was a complete waste of time. Lets face it, those with super-skeptic truther power rings are never even going to entertain the idea that they might be wrong (and despite what they might think, I have - I just haven't seen a good argument or reason to think the official story is fundamentally wrong). It really does end up being a bit of an all-embracing conspiracy theory (to steal HORansome's usage) which just becomes weaker the more it is elaborated upon. Debate at this point is useless, 9/11 will just have to go on and die a natural death like the fake Moon landing conspiracy.

3:07 pm  
Blogger maps said...

'this site is a hangout for islamophobes and anti-arab racists and neoconservatives?'

You got me. My involvement in numerous anti-imperialist protests over the last decade and my fondness for halal meat are just ruses designed to cover my hatred of Arabs.

Even worse for you, sir, is the fact that I get paid, in gold, by wealthy Jews, for every comment made to this blog, and you've just driven us to a new record number of comments in this thread. So, you see, you're now a contributor, albeit as minor and unwitting one, to the construction of the New World Order. How does it feel to be one of 'us'?

3:11 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

How would you know if you'd seen a good argument? You're so busy sneering snarling and snivelling at the skeptics to see beyond your tiny authoritarian mindset.

Running around pointing the antisemite bone at people who won't swallow govt lies is about as intellectually honest as a Bernie Madoff accounting scheme.

Those nasty supermuslims must have done it. The gubmint told me and the gubmint never lies. Ever!!!!!

3:14 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

maps said...

'this site is a hangout for islamophobes and anti-arab racists and neoconservatives?'

You got me. My involvement in numerous anti-imperialist protests over the last decade and my fondness for halal meat are just ruses designed to cover my hatred of Arabs.

Even worse for you, sir, is the fact that I get paid, in gold, by wealthy Jews, for every comment made to this blog, and you've just driven us to a new record number of comments in this thread. So, you see, you're now a contributor, albeit as minor and unwitting one, to the construction of the New World Order. How does it feel to be one of 'us'?

3:11 PM



An anti-imperialist that supports zionism?

Errm, how does that work?

Seriously anyone who links to the vile Simon Weisenthal centre for "evidence" or intellectual back up really doesn't know much about imperial ambition.

Crooks, charlatans and thieves.

3:17 pm  
Blogger Richard said...

'Heil Hitler' was just me being silly buggers.

I used to say that everyday to these Dutchmen (fellow technicians) at work when I was with the NZED (Comms Section)...a fellow Polish tech said once he (when he was sailor (Radio Operator etc) came into a German town and some German sailor said they could all earn a beer if they shouted out, 'lustigkeit'... "Heil Hitler!" ... and who is going to turn down a free beer?? So they all complied.

Anyway it is obviously silly buggers...instead of good morning I used to say "Heil Hitler" every day...but not to my boss...but places I have worked I have heard worse than that... I worked with a Nazi once in the wool stores...

And very few of my worker "mates" in those days were very fond of those with of the “darker persuasion” shall we say...so racialism is not confined to places outside NZ and it is most intense amongst the working class.

But the whole thing has got mixed up... one problem is Giovanni's arrogant "Holier than Thou attitude"

3:36 pm  
Blogger Richard said...

But here is what I think:

1) I don't necessarily think it was an "inside job".

(But like a good detective I keep on my list of "suspects".)

so

1a) I don't rule out any possibilities. I think that anyone could have "done the Towers" we may never know who, or why.

2) I don't side with Troofers (or Nazis or Big Conspiracy theories) as many of their wider claims are ridiculous.

(I mean although I am not certain. For me, even if (I suspect) Israel was involved, it doesn't mean I am anti-Semitic - I don't believe in a Jewish conspiracy.)

3) On balance I think that, despite the strangeness that surrounds 9/11 and all these issues*, I feel that what actually happened was that
some fanatics trained to fly (and I have tried to flown an aeroplane it is not that hard
(landing is hardest but these guys didn't need to land!!), and they flew into the towers (and in fact once they crashed, indeed probably because of passenger heroics).

That is easy - attack and kill the pilot, surprise and terrify the passengers, take off to whatever height, turn left, aim for the towers. Washington? Well if you are high enough, and have a map, and clear view, it would be pretty hard to miss Washington! And they would have trained in navigation etc Flyi9ng at 30,000 feet is not much
harder to fly than 300 (especially if you’re acting as a missile as in the "assault” on the Pentagon.

4) My reactions the day of 9/11 were phenomologically or ontologically quite strange ... BUT I don't think there are many people who don't think now and then,
"Is this all happening?!" or "Did 9/11 happen?" Maybe I am a bit cuckoo, if so I am not alone in that, but there was a real (but not "articulated") sense that "this is not really happening" and any compassion for those killed was wiped out by the huge scale of it, and the extraordinary way it was presented. I don't mean that was a plot or part of it. But it SEEMED almost as if the BBC and so on or whoever were making the TV broadcast were actually sending us a wonderful entertainment. I was very exciting (O.K. my rational brain told me people were or had been killed but as with earthquakes etc for me it all seems far too remote. Tell me how one person dies and I can relate, feel compassion.
But zoom out and it is hard to care. The focus goes on the event itself. The (slightly crazy) composer Stockhausen called it one of the greatest works of art ever!
Fischer**, the ex World Chess Champion (and Jewish himself by the way - he was an anti-Semite to his dying days!!) and citizen although "exiled", said: "Good job!") And reactions were mixed somewhat in proportion to the way people heard about or were presented the news of 9/11.

3:39 pm  
Blogger Richard said...

5) At the time I was very non political. There are complex reasons I first a) was outraged and wanted the US to attack in revenge b) I then moved to a position of
belief that it was an "inside job" then I rethought it all and now c) I have now taken position of doubt.

6) However I suspect (don't know) that the various Govt. agencies are not behind (either by using agent provocateurs or other) many of these so-called terrorist attacks
BUT I think there certainly are people who are involved in such attacks (some of them I see as "justified” e.g. I feel the Iraqis and the Afghans have right to fight for their homelands as for the Palestinians. BUT I would not myself advise or be part of such an attack. That is not me (and in that it may be true that I am an intellectual coward), but I can't rule out those, who are, unlike me, fighting an enemy hugely better equipped in military hardware than they are.

7) N.Z. should not be involved in any US adventures in Iraq or Afghanistan...they shouldn't go anywhere near either of these places until those nations have kicked the US out.

*And for along time I was nearly completely convinced that the U.S enacted it. But the trouble is motivation.
It all seems so fantastic like the Bain case. Now who would want to kill 5 people, that is -one's whole family? (Or 3000 people as in the case of 9/11?)
And why? I have no idea. It could have, Bain himself, Bain's father, Bain's uncle, the milkman, the CIA (or other) on holiday in NZ,
a passerby with penchant for murders of a horrific kind...And ditto for the Kennedy assassination.
BUT I am well aware that the US (and other nations) has been involved in many "regime changes" and so on. So, as above I still wish to be able
to question whether it was "an inside job" so to speak.

** Fischer is an interesting case, (paranoid about being followed by agents etc) as both he and his mother WERE under surveillance by the FBI and the CIA. His mother as she was a left wing radical, and had alliances with at least one person on the Manhattan project, and Fischer (not his father's name), who was in frequent contact with the Soviets.

3:40 pm  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home