How Bad Is It?
It’s hard to find things to laugh about with the Iraq war, but this article that appeared in the Wall Street Journal the other day managed to do so: These U.S. Raids In Iraq Look Real, But They Aren’t.
It seems that we’re so badly losing the “hearts and minds” battle that even those who want to accept US reconstruction aid can no longer do so openly. So in order to inspect ongoing aid projects, some US troops have hit upon a clever idea: Stage a raid of the facility in question, rounding up the employees and going through the place ostensibly looking for things like insurgent weapons caches.
In another case mentioned in the article, they arrested an Iraqi man working as a translator and jailed him for several days — because he’d been receiving death threats from the insurgency.
“A lot of people there now think he’s a bad guy,” Capt. Cederman says. “It bought him a lot of street cred.”
There’s a single word that describes the current US effort in Iraq: doomed. Stories like this make that more obvious than ever.
March 24th, 2007 at 8:38 am
Jbc, you hit it on the head, we are winning the hearts and minds “those who want to accept US reconstruction aid can no longer do so openly”. So the Iraqi’s want our help, we want to help, who is standing in the way of progress. The Islamofascist pukes, and how are they trying to stop us from helping their fellow countrymen? By using terror tactics, killing the business owner, his family, friends, customers. And why do the pukes want to defeat us? If they wanted what is best for their fellow Arabs, they would be helping us rebuild not thwarting our efforts. They want to defeat us ,with your help, so they can rule the country and control the oil reserves. We have no intention of either.
I think this deception is a great idea, now that this has been reported in the WSJ, the pukes have to wonder every time they see American forces arresting someone, is this a real arrest or a fake one. So what do you do if you are a puke? Do you start attacking businesses of everyone that is arrested as well as everyone that is not? Remember the pukes are trying to win the hearts and minds just like we are. The tactics just differ between the good guys and the bad.
Quite to the opposite of the your desired outcome, this is how you win wars, you deceive your enemy in a defense to one of their successful offensive tactics. While they are confused and trying to devise a defensive action to cover your defensive action, you spring an offensive while they are off balance. Sorry guys, you may be willing to surrender, but we aren’t.
March 25th, 2007 at 1:53 am
Wow, that comment was insane.
March 25th, 2007 at 6:07 am
It is insane only if you refuse to look at an issue from more than one angle or you have been brainwashed as you always claim I have been. Do you not think our government would not plant a story like this to gain an advantage over our enemy, whether it were true or not? And I know lying to your enemy may not be fair, deal with it, we are at war with Islamofascists. We will and must do whatever is needed to defeat this enemy as quickly as possible. Ignoring them won’t make them go away. If I sound like a mouthpiece for this administration, maybe that is because they are right and you are wrong. Liberals have a long and storied history of being wrong about war and have almost always underestimated our enemies preferring to look at the ‘good’ side of the repressed peoples that just targeted a market full of women and children. Or just hacked the head off some poor chap, video taping it so their families can watch their loved ones’ final pleas and blood gurgled last gasps. And I’m insane?
Test me on just one or two points I made.
March 25th, 2007 at 9:19 am
Stop listening to Rush Limpbag. When you poison your mind with hate and stupidity, the rhetoric and nonsense above is what results. So things are going so great in Iraq that we have to conceal who is helping us and who is harming us eh? Brilliant. It doesn’t matter how many colossal fuckups shrubco gets us into, rightwingnutjobs like you will always blame The Other (any other at this point) and just Believe whatever nonsense you like. I am an American first and foremeost, I volunteered for my service and frankly you and TV make me want to puke.
Test you? Your partisan nutjobbery deserves much stronger language, but I’ll answer your bullshit ‘test’ with just three letters: FDR.
March 25th, 2007 at 10:01 am
We aren’t concealing who is harming us, it is the Islamofascists. Concealing who is helping you is of course normal military tactics, specially when the helpers are small in numbers because of the intimidating nature of the warfare. Remember the French Underground that fought Hitler so gallantly, we supported them any way we could including keeping their identities secret.
Why would I stop listening to Rush? As he has always said, he isn’t telling people what to think, he is just reinforcing what they already think. What would you like me to listen to? Maybe Air America? I already do listen to them. I just don’t find their arguments very convincing.
I have heard Randi Rhodes, Allen Combs and other liberal talk show hosts and politicians say we have accomplished all our objectives in Iraq so we should get out, so evidently they think shrubco is doing a good job, if accomplishing all your goals isn’t success I don’t know what is.
I never said you weren’t a good and loyal American, just that your methods or lack there of in fighting this war will lead to our defeat against the Islamofascists, and the kind of misdirection described in the WSJ, and the killing of as many Islamofascists as possible will lead to our victory. I don’t care if I make you sick. I just want to win.
You know you are making good progress dispelling liberal arguments when they resort to name calling to duck issues.
If you beat your swords into plowshares, you will soon find yourself plowing the field of someone who kept his sword.
March 25th, 2007 at 11:59 am
“I never said you weren’t a good and loyal American, just that your methods or lack there of in fighting this war will lead to our defeat against the Islamofascists”
Wait, seriously, could you describe what exactly this “defeat” scenario would look like in your mind? Let’s say we pull out of Iraq, cease wiretapping domestically, release everyone at Gitmo, shut down overseas CIA interrogation, etc etc. Tell me how we “lose”.
March 25th, 2007 at 7:16 pm
Hey Matt! Good to have you back.
Now see guys, that is how you ask a question, it is honest and too the point but he still got just a little dig in there with the ‘wait, seriously’ start of the question. At some point he may call me an idiot, but only after I have said something idiotic. He gave me only four points to answer if I choose, not a couple dozen. He is holding back others to use against me at a later date. The CIA interrogation and Gitmo are similar so he really only gave me 3, perfect, one or two is sometimes not enough, more than four is usually too many. In this case, I probably won’t answer any of the four items since the question is really what will happen if we loose and/or how we will loose.
Obviously, none of us knows what the future will bring if we win or loose. This is compounded by the fact this war may be hard to know when or if we have won or lost. So let me define when I think we can say “we have won”. When we can be reasonably confident no one of the Islamic faith is able to carry out an attack that will result in the deaths of thousands of American, European, or Israeli citizens, civilian or military. Or a series of smaller attacks having the effect of the same, even though the numbers of losses may be smaller. When the danger is such that it is just a few kooks or a few fringe groups that normal police and agents can control. Last but probably most importantly, when the Arab population en masse decries the actions of the Islamofascists as evil.
That is how we know we have won, the way we win is kill the ones who try and kill us and help the ones who don’t, and we do this until most of the Arab population comes to its senses. Anything less is a loss. I’m being overly simplistic of course, but you get the idea.
This is possibly what will happen if we loose. I’m going to base my predictions on what these people have done, said they are going to do, and what how similar events in history have ended. Sorry, I’m not using any wishful thoughts like “can’t we all just get along” or any sentence that starts with “in my heart I feel”.
1) I think we will have more terror attacks on western assets, including Israel. I base this on a comment Osama made, he said that after our defeat and “redeployment” after the Blackhawk Down incident, he decided America was a “paper tiger” and would do little more than mount a half hearted attack against the few who had perpetrated the attack, most of whom died in the attack. We loose this battle, they will be back.
2) The Iraqi people who have helped us will be slaughtered. I give you the Khmer Rouge and Pol Pot. Granted they weren’t Islamic, but the mentality is the same.
3) Israel may or may not be destroyed, but they would certainly come under intense attack, since the Arabs would see our withdrawal as a sign of weakness they would probably attack the Jews, whether it would be increased suicide bombings or an out and out invasion by Iran, I don’t know. If Iran has nuclear capabilities and they think we are afraid of them, they might save the suicide bombers for us and use the bomb for the Jews. Sure we might retaliate with a nuke attack, but Ahmadinejad has said he envisions his death as a mushroom cloud, or something to that effect. So that may not be a deterrent. And he knows he will have your guys on his side saying “it was just the Jews, the attack wasn’t directed at us, and anyway, if Israel hadn’t been formed after WWII none of this would have happened in the first place”.
4) Some of the Arab nations that are “on the fence” right now may join in the fight again seeing our defeat as sign of a chink in our invincibility. Giving more nation state abilities to the production of war making rescores. Maybe even ICBM capabilities. This help may be covert (Saudi Arabia) or overt Syria, Libya, and perhaps Egypt. I don’t think Egypt hates us. But I don’t think they would shed a tear over the demise of Israel.
That pretty much covers the gamete, before we get to outer limits of these scenarios, even you guys would probably be screaming for us to stop the Arabs, I just want to control the problem before you guys scream.
I hope that answers your question.
March 25th, 2007 at 8:39 pm
Okay, let me address your 4 loss scenarios.
1) I’ll point again to the extensive previous comments that Iraq has absolutely nothing to do with terrorist attacks on us or our allies. And I don’t see how we make Osama any stronger. Sure, he might release some nonsense statement about the West retreating, but since when did we give a damn what Osama has to say?
And I’ll go a step further. Lets imagine some fantasy scenario where leaving Iraq makes it easier for Osama to, say, train international terrorists. Let even say that we stop trying to kill al Qaeda operatives (which would of course be dumb). The greatest capability al Qaeda has yet demonstrated is the ability to hijack a plane full of people who knew no better than to sit quietly. He can’t do that again and I think America has sufficiently woken up to the fact that we need to keep an eye out for ways in which a few people can do harm to a large number of people that a 9-11 sized attack is much much less likely. And you know what? Even 9-11 size attacks are nothing at all like “defeating” America. We will still be here. We will still be entirely capable militarily and economically (and we could remain capable socially if the government would stop throwing away our freedoms).
This is not a defeat scenario.
2) This is entirely possible (although the slaughter would be a manifestation of the preexisting internal sectarian hatred). Setting timetables for withdrawl I think makes the Iraqi government much more likely to prepare to deal with the civil war themselves, but even if the worst and saddest were to happen, we’re talking about Iraq and for America’s part…
This is not a defeat scenario.
3) Ridiculous (and unrelated to the defeat of America). Invasion of Israel would certainly be answered with an overwhelming international response (most nations *can* agree on the correct conditions necessitating war), and I don’t see any connection at all between suicide bombers and our presence in Iraq. Worrying about “emboldening” evil-doers in other parts of the Middle East by pulling out of Iraq is a very weak argument, and relies on a mostly-racist assumption that this is a West-vs-Islam war.
This is not a defeat scenario.
4) This is so nonsensical that I don’t even know where to start. I’ll just say that the international community has a vested interest in keeping weapons of war out of the hands of unfriendly states. Witness the UN taking on the issue in Iran in unified fashion.
Hell, I think us floundering around in Iraq, clearly completely occupied just trying to keep the Iraqis from killing each other, makes other nations nearby *more* powerful, not less. I would surmise that Iran’s recent flouting of international nuclear non-proliferation is directly a result of us sinking most of our military resources into the Iraqi conflict. I mean… what can we do to them right now? We are weakened by this war, and they know it.
Unfriendly nations firing ICBMs at us would potentially be a defeat scenario. But there is no way in hell that’s happening — or at least it has nothing to do with the war in Iraq.
March 25th, 2007 at 11:39 pm
shcb says that the USA is not in the middle east to control the oil. LOL. Hasn`t even heard of the neo-con project for a new american century. And also the tax rates American companies pay to Iraq for oil are ridiculously low, but whaddya expect from Iraq`s US supported government.
It is insane that shcb tries to spin the story this way and that to make it seem that this new tactic is good news.
Sure, tactically it makes sense now that they have FUBAR`d Iraq, but that pales in comparison to the fact that they have failed so miserably to this point that now they have to adopt such tactics.
Things are not going well (e.g. look up the Camp Falcon destruction and see how the surviving troops have a different account than the MSM reports for deaths and casualities at Falcon.
ymat, thanks for the breath of logic. I hope this is not a waste of time arguing with shcb & his buddies.
Why would it be? Consider the NY Times snippet below which illustrates an extensive US info war against the public.
If the NYC police department has the resources to spy on this scale, just imagine the extent of spying and active disinformation now conducted by the CIA. Consider that psy ops are a big part of their mandate and that they have BILLIONS in unaccounted for funds to work with. Remember when you are arguing with shcb and his buddies that it is not about truth, it is about military tactics (including psy-ops).
The only time Rush Lim or shcb and his government funded buddies ever to stop their insane warmongering bullshit is to wave the flag or ridicule someone when their arguments are hitting too close to home or to “make nice” so as to deceive people into thinking that they are real folks and not spooks.
Now the snippet:
March 25th, 2007 11:05 am
City Police Spied Broadly Before G.O.P. Convention
By Jim Dwyer / New York Times
For at least a year before the 2004 Republican National Convention, teams of undercover New York City police officers traveled to cities across the country, Canada and Europe to conduct covert observations of people who planned to protest at the convention, according to police records and interviews.
From Albuquerque to Montreal, San Francisco to Miami, undercover New York police officers attended meetings of political groups, posing as sympathizers or fellow activists, the records show.
They made friends, shared meals, swapped e-mail messages and then filed daily reports with the department’s Intelligence Division. Other investigators mined Internet sites and chat rooms.
From these operations, run by the department’s “R.N.C. Intelligence Squad,” the police identified a handful of groups and individuals who expressed interest in creating havoc during the convention, as well as some who used Web sites to urge or predict violence.
But potential troublemakers were hardly the only ones to end up in the files. In hundreds of reports stamped “N.Y.P.D. Secret,” the Intelligence Division chronicled the views and plans of people who had no apparent intention of breaking the law, the records show.
These included members of street theater companies, church groups and antiwar organizations, as well as environmentalists and people opposed to the death penalty, globalization and other government policies. Three New York City elected officials were cited in the reports.
Long version here: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/25/nyregion/25infiltrate.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
Hey, Spooks! THE PILOTS WANT ANSWERS TOO (about the New Pearl Harbour event that sparked the so-far miserably failing neo-con Project for a New American Century otherwise known as invade the middle east):
See their Press Release of March 26, 2007 part way down this page:
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/index.html
March 26th, 2007 at 2:40 pm
It isn’t just the Iraq War that w and his band of neoclowns have screwed up gentlefolk… a few weeks ago I gave credit where credit was due (at the time anyway). North Korea had agreed to scrap their nuke weapon plans and return to the Clinton deal of fuel oil carrots for good behavior. Diplomacy from the White House! At last! Thanks be to God/Allah/FSM!
Only problem? We didn’t give the NKs their $30 million in siezed assets on the agreed upon schedule and now they walked out of the talks, no deal, gfy.
ps – $30 million is about 4 HOURS of Iraq War spending (not counting graft, black ops spending and other slight of hand)
March 27th, 2007 at 4:46 am
Hi Matt,
I have a couple guys in from Europe to buy off a machine this week, so I may be out of touch for a few days. Just wanted to let you know I’m not ducking you’re your questions.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:15 pm
Things are sure getting desperate over there if this is the kind of strategy being employed.
I just wish some people would stop trying to compensate for their smaller than normal penis size and admit that this mission has failed, miserably.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:24 am
NorthernLite, I don’t usually laugh at penis compensation jokes, but that was funny.
So, shcb says he’s selling a “machine” to “Europeans”. That sounds like a euphemism for trying to sell a new torture device he’s invented (on behalf of the Agency) to the Serbs.
Yea, shuuure he has to take a break now from Lies.com well if that is so the reason is more likely to be that his propoganda unit is swamped with the double whammy of trying to sell the Iranian War post-haste before the Bush junta completely implodes and to undermine the unravelling of the 9/11 cover-up. Cases in point: Gonzales testimony put off until April 17 and this blog comment (about the article pasted below.)
” It must be embarrassing. When I think of all the articles that have been written. All the news shows been taped. All the pundits willing to pretend they don’t know better. It must be embarrassing that it can all so easily be shown to be a lie in a few paragraphs by a former Deputy Treasury Secretary writing about the recent book by the great David Ray Griffin. ” Submitted by Blueglow on Tue, 03/27/2007 – 7:57pm.
http://vdare.com/roberts/070326_evidence.htm
March 26, 2007
9/11 and the Evidence
By Paul Craig Roberts
Professor David Ray Griffin is the nemesis of the official 9/11 conspiracy theory. In his latest book, Debunking 9/11 Debunking, Griffin destroys the credibility of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and Popular Mechanics reports, annihilates his critics, and proves himself to be a better scientist and engineer than the defenders of the official story.
Griffin’s book is 385 pages divided into four chapters and containing 1,209 footnotes. Without question, the book is the most thorough presentation and examination of all known facts about the 9/11 attacks. Griffin is a person who is sensitive to evidence, logic, and scientific reasoning. There is no counterpart on the official side of the story who is as fully informed on all aspects of the attacks as Griffin.
At the outset, Griffin points out that the reader’s choice is between two conspiracy theories: One is that Muslim fanatics, who were not qualified to fly airplanes, defeated the security apparatus of the US and succeeded in three out of four attacks using passenger jets as weapons. The other is that security failed across the board, not merely partially but totally, because of complicity of some part of the US government.
Griffin points out that there has been no independent investigation of 9/11. What we have are a report by a political commission headed by Bush administration factotum Philip Zelikow, a NIST report produced by the Bush administration’s Department of Commerce, and a journalistic account produced by Popular Mechanics. Various scientists who work for the federal government or are dependent on government grants have issued speculative statements in behalf of the official conspiracy theory, but have not produced meaningful evidence in its behalf.
The relevant skeptics of the official story are approximately 100 independent researchers consisting of experts and professors whose careers have required them to deal with evidence and its analysis. Their individual contributions to 9/11 analysis can be found online.
Griffin has undertaken to absorb the arguments and evidence for the official account and the arguments and evidence against it. In his latest book, which has just been released, he presents the case for the official account and its evidential failure.
Polls show that 36% of Americans do not believe the official story. Setting aside the 25% of the public that is so uninformed or uninvolved as to believe that Saddam Hussein was responsible for the 9/11 attack, leaves 39% of the public who believe the official story. However, this 39% is essentially relying on the mainstream media’s endorsement of the official story. Griffin believes, perhaps naively, that truth can prevail, and it is his commitment to truth that has motivated him to shoulder the enormous task.
Everyone who believes in the integrity of the US government or the Bush administration will find Griffin’s book to be disturbing. Readers will have to confront such issues as why US authorities seized the forensic evidence resulting from the destruction of the three World Trade Center buildings, the attack on the Pentagon and the crashed airliner in Pennsylvania and prevented any forensic examination of any part of the 9/11 attacks.
Despite widespread belief that Osama bin Laden was responsible for the attack, the evidence we have is a suspect video declared to be “bogus” by Bruce Lawrence, perhaps the leading American expert on bin Laden. The US government has never produced the promised report on bin Laden’s responsibility. When the Taliban offered to hand over bin Laden on presentation of evidence, the US government had no evidence to deliver; thus the invasion of Afghanistan.
The fragility of the NIST report is astonishing. The report succeeded because people accepted its assurances without examination.
Griffin shows that the Popular Mechanics report consists of special pleading, circular reasoning, appeals to the authority of the NIST report, straw men, and internal contradictions in the report itself.
There is not space in a review to present the evidence Griffin has mustered. A few highlights should suffice to alert readers to the possibility that the Bush administration has lied about more than Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction.
The two WTC towers did not collapse. They blew up and disintegrated, as did WTC 7. There is an enormous energy deficit in every account that rules out the use of explosives. Gravitational energy is insufficient to explain the pulverization of the buildings and contents and the severing of the 47 massive center core steel columns in each of the towers into convenient lengths to be picked up and loaded onto trucks; much less can gravitational energy account for the pulverization of the top floors of the towers and ejection of steel beams hundreds of feet horizontally just prior to the disintegration of the floors below.
Damage caused by airliners and short-lived limited fires cannot explain the disintegration of the buildings. The massive steel skeletons of the towers comprised a gigantic heat sink that wicked away whatever heat the limited fires produced.
NIST’s final report stated that of the steel available to it for examination, “only three columns had evidence that the steel reached temperatures above 250 degrees Celsius” (482 degrees Fahrenheit). The self-cleaning ovens in our home kitchens reach temperatures higher than this, and the ovens do not melt or deform.
Steel begins to melt at 1,500 degrees C or 2,800 degrees F. Temperatures of 250 degrees C would have no effect on the strength of steel. The explanation that the buildings collapsed because fire weakened the steel is speculative. Open air fires do not produce temperatures sufficient to deprive steel of its structural integrity. Steel framed buildings have burned 22 hours in raging infernos, and the steel skeletons remained standing. The WTC fires in the towers lasted about one hour and were limited to a few floors. Moreover, it is impossible for fire to account for the sudden, total and symmetrical disintegration of powerfully constructed buildings, much less at free fall speeds that are obtainable only with controlled demolition.
Griffin provides quotes from firefighters, police, and tenants, who heard and experienced a series of explosions prior to the disintegration of the towers. Such witness testimony is generally ignored by defenders of the official conspiracy theory.
Molten steel was found in underground levels of the WTC buildings weeks after the buildings’ destruction. As everyone agrees that the fires did not approach the melting point of steel, a possible explanation is high explosives used in demolitions that produce 5,000 degree temperatures. The possibility that explosives were used remains unexamined except by independent researchers.
Contradictions in the official conspiracy theory leap off the pages and hit the reader in the face. For example, the evidence that Flight 77, a Boeing 757, crashed into the Pentagon is the government’s claim to have obtained from the wreckage enough bodies and body parts to match the DNA for each person on the passenger list and flight crew. Simultaneously, the absence of passenger luggage, fuselage, wing and tail sections–indeed the absence of a 100,000 pound airliner–is attributed to the vaporization of the airplane due to the high speed crash and intense fire. The incompatibility of vaporized metal but recovered flesh and blood stood unnoticed until Griffin pointed it out.
Another striking inconsistency in the official conspiracy theory is the difference in the impact of airliners on the Pentagon and the WTC towers. In the case of the Pentagon, the emphasis is on why the airliner caused so little damage to the building. In the case of the WTC towers, the emphasis is why the airliners caused so much damage.
Perhaps it is merely a coincidence that just prior to 9/11 Cathleen P. Black, who has family connections to the CIA and Pentagon and is president of Hearst Magazines, the owner of Popular Mechanics, fired the magazine’s editor-in-chief and several senior veteran staff members and installed James B. Meigs and Benjamin Chertoff, a cousin of Bush administration factotum Michael Chertoff. It was Meigs and Benjamin Chertoff who produced the Popular Mechanics report that Griffin has eviscerated.
In his conclusion Griffin reminds us that the 9/11 attack has been used to start wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, to plan an attack on Iran, to curtail constitutional protections and civil liberties in the US, to radically expand US military budgets and the power of the executive, and to enrich entrenched vested interests. Griffin is definitely correct about this regardless of whether a believable case can ever be made for the government’s version of the 9/11 conspiracy.
COPYRIGHT CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.
Paul Craig Roberts [email him] was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan Administration. He is the author of Supply-Side Revolution : An Insider’s Account of Policymaking in Washington; Alienation and the Soviet Economy and Meltdown: Inside the Soviet Economy, and is the co-author with Lawrence M. Stratton of The Tyranny of Good Intentions : How Prosecutors and Bureaucrats Are Trampling the Constitution in the Name of Justice. Click here for Peter Brimelow’s Forbes Magazine interview with Roberts about the recent epidemic of prosecutorial misconduct.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:29 am
Just in case you missed the significance of the 9/11 item in my previous post, let me repeat this:
” Griffin’s book is 385 pages divided into four chapters and containing 1,209 footnotes. Without question, the book is the most thorough presentation and examination of all known facts about the 9/11 attacks. Griffin is a person who is sensitive to evidence, logic, and scientific reasoning. There is no counterpart on the official side of the story who is as fully informed on all aspects of the attacks as Griffin. ” – PCR
March 28th, 2007 at 7:27 am
Dude, David Ray Griffin is a professor of philosophy of religion and theology (taken from Wikipedia — show me a credible source is this is incorrect). This is your “better scientist and engineer”?
Your theories are a gross violation of Occam’s Razor — this doesn’t make them impossible, but it does mean you need extraordinary evidence, and I’m not seeing it. Ff nothing else, this administration is frankly too ineffectual to have pulled off the kinds of conspiracy theory stuff you’re talking about (they can hide the demolition of 2 towers in downtown New York, but they couldn’t hide any of the other frightening semi-legal programs that have been leaked?). You’re going to need a lot better evidence than some “expert” who isn’t actually an expert at all. Unless you can produce that, stop wasting comment space with the same arguments.
March 28th, 2007 at 8:19 am
I’m going to have to side with matt on this one. Bush and his pals are just way too stupid to cover something like the 9/11 attacks up. I mean, we’re talking about a bunch of stupid white men that have pretty much screwed up everything they attempted. Surely people would have come forward by now as well if those attacks were orchestrated.
Besides, there are a host of other, more obvious reasons to despise Bush and his pals.
March 28th, 2007 at 9:22 am
The biggest conspiracy has always been the fact that there is no conspiracy. Nobody’s out to get you. Nobody gives a shit whether you live or die. There, you feel better now?
Dennis Miller
One of the reasons for conspiracy theories is an assumption that people in high places always know what they are doing. When they do something that makes no sense, devious reasons are imagined by conspiracy theorists, when in fact it may be due to plain old ignorance and incompetence.
Thomas Sowell
I think this holds true for most politicians, and would probably hold true if you or I were in their place.
shcb
March 28th, 2007 at 9:28 am
wow, shcb I actually agree with you
“ignorance and incompetence”
now try out the other “I” word: Impeachment
March 28th, 2007 at 10:58 am
I have to throw you guys a bone every now and then. (that little smiley face with keystrokes I can never remember and feel stupid using :-)
March 28th, 2007 at 11:21 am
While we’re at it, I’ll throw out one of my favorite lines:
“Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.”
March 28th, 2007 at 11:59 am
Hold on a second boys, before you congratulate yourselves on being a good flock of sheep why don’t you wait for my reply? My reply is held up in the queue, because I have provided links to support my statements. In the meantime, here is a pre-view:
ymatt and NorthernLite: Thank you for your intelligent questions and cautious cynicism. Please consider my answers:
re: Prof. David Griffin ‘This is your “better scientist and engineer”?’
Yes, but you have completely missed the sarcasm. The point is that if, in spite of all the obstructions and withheld evidence* a philosopher and theology professor can compile and present credible scientific evidence that destroys the credibility of the scientists who are the gatekeepers of the official conspiracy theory, then what does that say about the quality of those scientists and engineers?
(* e.g. In March of 2007, an extensive set of detailed architectural drawings of the World Trade Center became public through the actions of a whistleblower. Source: http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/blueprints.html )
March 28th, 2007 at 12:08 pm
Hm. Actually, at the moment the moderation queue is empty.
John
March 28th, 2007 at 2:10 pm
So the fact that he is not especially qualified to talk about science or engineering somehow makes him *more* credible? There are lots and lots of real scientists and engineers out there. If this evidence is so clearly credible and contrary to the reported story, why hasn’t a whole group of these qualified individuals taken it up and started making noise?
I as an (admittedly fairly junior) Mechanical Engineer have not found any of the evidence the conspiracy theorists have come up with that I’ve looked at to be anything close to conclusive. In fact much of it reminds me of something akin to Intelligent Design: That is, because certain details are confusing on the surface (the human eye / steel failing at a temperature lower than jet fuel should burn), then the jump is made to a conclusion that the proponent wants to be true (God did it / Bush did it).
The fact is that this is the first time that giant airliners have smashed into a skyscraper. Who the hell knows what unpredictable forces combined to cause the towers to fall? But until I see real evidence to the contrary, I’m putting my money on the simplest explanation available.
So again, show me people who know what they’re talking about. The very fact that we’re debating this in an entirely unrelated thread — in fact I don’t believe there ever has been a relevant thread on lies.com — irritates me.
March 28th, 2007 at 2:11 pm
And side comment to jbc: There does seem to be a quirk with posts with a lot of external links getting stuck or lost. You click to post, nothing shows up, but if you try to post again, WP claims you’ve already submitted. But the post in question doesn’t show up in the admin queue. Weird.
March 28th, 2007 at 4:32 pm
Sorry JDC, but my post is not getting through, maybe if I break it into six short parts instead. That is, after I address the latest that ymatt has just thrown at me.
Ymatt, “fact ”? Sorry, but the fact is that a large bomber crashed into the Empire State building during or around the time of WWII, but unlike the ESB the WTC towers were designed to take an large airline hit like a pencil through a screen door according to the architect (and moreover WTC #1 and #2 were hit in different spots but fell in an identical manner and at a free fall speed that indicates no resistance at all from the lower floors) It is clear you have not done even basic research on this topic , so who’s wasting who’s time here? As for relevance of this thread, nothing could be more relevant to the “War on Terrorism” than 9/11, it is the excuse for the quagmire that the USA is engulfed in now.
You would be doing yourself a favour if you took a good long look at David Griffin’s prior book, “The New Pearl Harbour…” then at least you will know of what you speak. It is an easy read, although disturbing in its implications.
It was very hard for me when I started to realize that what I was hearing from TV about 9/11 did not make sense. I realized that I still wanted to believe what the News was telling me. However, that became impossible the more I learned about the unanswered questions from the families of those killed that day, the administration’s stonewalling in establishing an impartial investigation, the contradictions in the official story, and oddities that were not reported, etc. So I sympathize with your difficulty in accepting what is before you.
Now, the original response:
March 28th, 2007 at 4:33 pm
Part #1
Hold on a second boys, before you congratulate yourselves on being a good flock of sheep why don’t you see my reply?
ymatt and NorthernLite: Thank you for your intelligent questions and cautious cynicism. Please consider my answers:
re: Prof. David Griffin ‘This is your “better scientist and engineer”?’
Yes, but you have completely missed the sarcasm. The point is that if, in spite of all the obstructions and withheld evidence* a philosopher and theology professor can compile and present credible scientific evidence that destroys the credibility of the scientists who are the gatekeepers of the official conspiracy theory, then what does that say about the quality of those scientists and engineers?
(* e.g. In March of 2007, an extensive set of detailed architectural drawings of the World Trade Center became public through the actions of a whistleblower. Source: http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/blueprints.html )
By the way, Griffin’s strength is in his clear logic and drawing from the experts. He goes to the sources and when there are two non-compatible scientific explanations he sets out the reasons for accepting one over the other.
March 28th, 2007 at 4:35 pm
Part #3:
Re: “it does mean you need extraordinary evidence, and I’m not seeing it.”
There is a plethora of evidence for anyone with open eyes. Here is the cover page of an exhaustive catalogue of the evidence (refer to the sidebar for details and full links going back to the original source): http://911research.com/sept11/evidence.html
Re: “this administration is frankly too ineffectual to have pulled off the kinds of conspiracy theory stuff you’re talking about”
Well, maybe it wasn’t “this administration” or it wasn’t the whole administration, or whatever. We won’t have a completely clear idea of who is responsible until the criminal investigations are well underway. We do know that the senior people who the administration have found most derelict in their duties to protect America on 911 (and leading up to that date) were not disciplined, rather they were promoted.
Re: “stop wasting comment space with the same arguments.”
I have a zillion important things that need attending to instead of wasting time and space here. My comments are given out of duty to truth.
If you think I am repeating the same arguments, then that proves you are not even giving them the cursory review that would show how each is distinctly different! Therefore your criticisms have little basis.
March 28th, 2007 at 4:36 pm
(Seems like Part #3 got stuck in the queue) Here’s…
Part #4:
“Bush and his pals are just way too stupid to cover something like the 9/11 attacks up.”
Yes, absolutely, and that’s partly why the cover-up is unraveling. His stupidity might also explain why Bush was not heard from for an extended period of time on the day of the attacks.
Let me explain, but first a bit of background: CNN reported the WTC North Tower crash two minutes after it occurred, and the secret service knew of this event almost immediately, and also had information that at least 3 and possibly up to 11 airliners were currently hijacked over US airspace. After Bush loitered around the classroom for about 25 minutes
(so as not to alarm the children he says, but that lame excuse also is inconsistent with the fact that by loitering in this widely publicized location he was jeopardizing the lives of those very same children because he is a prime terrorist target; also the secret service have not explained their gross violation of standard operating procedures in not immediately removing the president to an undisclosed location.) That’s the background.
So what did Bush say to reporters while lingering around and joking at the school photo op? He said that he saw the first plane crash on TV just before going into the classroom, and that he thought to himself “that’s one heck of a poor pilot”. That is an incredibly stupid statement because it is either a blatant LIE, or damning evidence that what he saw was a live feed from secret service video equipment set up in advance to monitor the attack. Why? Because the first airplane crash video was not discovered until much later (13 hours later if memory serves me.)
So if there is this huge operation going on and right off the bat Bush is screwing up with his ad-libbing then they have got to get that loose cannon under control. And they did. He was put on Air Force One and held incommunicado for most of the rest of that day.
(As an aside, getting Bush on to Air Force One in itself was a controversial decision at the time because the Secret Service had a credible report that AF One would be a target, yet it took off anyway without fighter escort. And by any account I’ve heard, while Bush was flying around Cheney was calling the shots from a bunker.)
March 28th, 2007 at 4:37 pm
(errata – I meant Part #2 got stuck in the queue not #3) at least #4 got through, here is #5:
Part #5:
Re “Surely people would have come forward by now as well if those attacks were orchestrated.”
I’ve addressed that old specious argument several times before in other threads.
But I haven’t mentioned this: many people have come forward, it’s just that they are attacked, slandered, and then ignored by the media. Look at Sibel Edwards. Here’s a big list of people who have come forward and been destroyed in the process (if you don’t like the source then Google your own “911 whistleblowers” trust me you will get lots): http://www.prisonplanet.com/Pages/230904_whistleblowers.html
Part #6
Re: “Besides, there are a host of other, more obvious reasons to despise Bush and his pals.”
Yes, and also to like about them. I would have loved to have been playing catch with a football on the back lawn of the White House with GWB and Ari Fletcher. By the way, if I was told that we have to invade the middle east to secure the oil or our standard of living will fall into the toilet, well I’d still disagree but I would have some respect for that approach.
Well, actually they did tell us all that in the Project for a New American Century, signed off by many in the current administration.
I hope that now, after seeing my answers to your hesitancies about this issue, you might go back and actually read some of my posts and links provided and examine the research and evidence. That might be hard work, but the answers that you will find from that research are a lot simpler than, for example, the convoluted mess you get when you try to align the Government’s Conspiracy Theory with the evidence.
March 28th, 2007 at 5:44 pm
I’m glad circumstances have allowed me to not be able to join in this conversation much.
“Never try and murder a man that is intent on committing suicide.”
Woodrow Wilson
March 28th, 2007 at 8:47 pm
I may have not read this book, but I have actually been reading the webpages that you keep linking to, particularly 911research.com. Every argument that I read there comes off like the arguments I see on the “Apollo moon landings were faked” webpages. I see nothing obvious or conclusive, only wild speculation based on any shred of possible inconsistency or vaguery. Anything that could possibly be used to support the conspiracy theory is latched onto as conclusive.
My eyes are wide open and what this engineer sees is that this is not science or logic, it’s faith.
Sadly I think much of this seems to arise from people looking at WTC footage and matching the images with something they have seen before (building demolition footage) in the absense of having enough engineering background to understand the kinds of forces that could arise from an occurrence so far from our experience. Once that mental link has been made, the faith in that alternate conclusion starts seeping into all the gaps in the information surrounding the events, strangling out rational deduction.
March 29th, 2007 at 7:19 am
Hi Knarely,
I have a tremendous amount of respect for your opinions as well your very thoughtful and detailed posts.
I still think that this tragic day was used as a launching pad to implement the details of the Project For a New American Century.
I probably agree with 99% of your beliefs, just not this one. Which is fine, we can disagree on some things and agree on others.
I do take offence to being labelled a sheep though. Trust me, I am not a sheep. Very, very far from it. Take care.
March 29th, 2007 at 11:15 am
NorthernLite:
I really do not believe anyone that has posted on this thread can be categorized as part of a “flock of sheep.” So I apologize for that, especially to NorthernLite whom I think is more like a polar bear.
NL, Thank you for offering your contrary opinion about 911. The manner and tone that you project in your posts is something to which I aspire. As a result of your posts, I have reconsidered my belief that the huge number of questions about 911 that the government refuses to answer (or to which they refuse to look for answers) does not necessary prove anything. I hope you will agree that when more of the answers are discovered (answers such as obtained a few days ago that the thickness and configuration of the WTC1 tower core columns specified by the (still withheld) blueprints to the towers that were leaked only a few days ago by a person (now in danger as a whistleblower) who was upset at how FEMA, NIST and the government’s 9/11 Commission Report, had misrepresented the tower’s construction) …the answers when discovered … will lead us to the truth.
If you are interested, here are some of the questions that were posed to the 9/11 commission by the victim’s family members who were part of the 9/11 Commission’s steering committee: http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/911questions.html Most remain unanswered.
March 29th, 2007 at 11:17 am
ymatt:
If person A says that X is true, and person B says that person A believes crazy things, that does not prove or disprove whether X is true.
I realize now that we aren’t going to agree anytime soon and just because you are with the minority of people who still believe the government isn’t lying about 911 or believe government’s version(s) of events, I will respect your steadfastness and loyalty to the establishment and try to avoid personal attacks or words such as “crazy”.
I wonder if I can assume that you still have faith in the government’s 9/11 Commission Report despite the thousands of people who are actively complaining about more than a hundred documented shortcomings that it contains, including:
The Report’s Notes state: “the interior core of the [Twin Towers] was a hollow steel shaft, in which the elevators and stairwells were grouped.” In fact, the core structures were composed of bundles of steel columns numbering 47 and having outside dimensions, in most cases, of 36 by 16 inches and 54 by 22 inches.
The Report fails to mention the total collapse of 47-story steel-framed skyscraper Building 7 at 5:20 on the day of the attack.
The Report contains no mentions of eyewitness accounts of explosions preceding the collapse of South Towers.
The Report fails to mention that the published passenger lists contained no Arab names
The Report fails to ask why the plane that crashed into the Pentagon was not stopped by anti-aircraft missile batteries that presumably ring the building.
The Report does not mention that letters with weaponized anthrax were sent to the two most powerful senators attempting to slow the passage of the 9/11/01 attack-predicated USA PATRIOT Act.
The Report states: “The threat of terrorists hijacking commercial airliners within the United States — and using them as guided missiles — was not recognized by NORAD before 9/11.” (The Report repeats the assertion three times.) Yet media reports, such as the USA Today article entitled “NORAD had drills of jets as weapons” describe pre-9/11 NORAD drills involving hijacked jetliners crashing into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. 3
?
March 29th, 2007 at 11:45 am
Just one more thing then I promise to shut up for a while. This relates to the claim that no-one is coming forward and the claim that people who question the government’s version of 911 are not qualified:
” The leaking of the until now withheld WTC blueprints this week represents a growing trend of truth seeking individuals putting aside politics and coming forth in an attempt to set the record straight on the defining event of the 21st century.
Below is a by no means extensive list with links that represents how this 9/11 truth domino effect is gathering pace in all walks of life.
100 Senior Military, Intelligence, Law Enforcement, and Government Officials Question the 9/11 Commission Report – http://patriotsquestion911.com/
Around 130 Professors Question the 9/11 Commission Report – http://patriotsquestion911.com/professors.html
Over 100 9/11 Survivors and Family Members Question the 9/11 Commission Report – http://patriotsquestion911.com/survivors.html
Over 70 Entertainment and Media Professionals who Question the 9/11 Commission Report –
http://patriotsquestion911.com/media.html
Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth are constructing their site now – http://ae911truth.org/
”
cheers.
March 29th, 2007 at 11:47 am
Just one more thing then I promise to shut up for a while. This relates to the claim that no-one is coming forward and the claim that people who question the government’s version of 911 are not qualified:
” The leaking of the until now withheld WTC blueprints this week represents a growing trend of truth seeking individuals putting aside politics and coming forth in an attempt to set the record straight on the defining event of the 21st century.
Below is a by no means extensive list with links that represents how this 9/11 truth domino effect is gathering pace in all walks of life.
100 Senior Military, Intelligence, Law Enforcement, and Government Officials Question the 9/11 Commission Report – http://patriotsquestion911.com/
Around 130 Professors Question the 9/11 Commission Report – http://patriotsquestion911.com/professors.html
”
cheers.
March 29th, 2007 at 11:48 am
continued…
Over 100 9/11 Survivors and Family Members Question the 9/11 Commission Report – http://patriotsquestion911.com/survivors.html
Over 70 Entertainment and Media Professionals who Question the 9/11 Commission Report –
http://patriotsquestion911.com/media.html
Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth are constructing their site now – http://ae911truth.org/
March 29th, 2007 at 11:48 am
Over 100 9/11 Survivors and Family Members Question the 9/11 Commission Report – http://patriotsquestion911.com/survivors.html
March 29th, 2007 at 11:48 am
Over 70 Entertainment and Media Professionals who Question the 9/11 Commission Report –
http://patriotsquestion911.com/media.html
AND PERHAPS THE BEST FOR LAST:
Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth are constructing their site now – http://ae911truth.org/
March 29th, 2007 at 11:49 am
bye for a while. cheers.
March 29th, 2007 at 2:29 pm
Haha, I love it (not really). “120+ Professors Question 9/11”! Why is it that virtually all of them are professors of philosphy or theology?
Why is that that the “Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth” webpage is empty?
All of the government official’s questions are related to the 9/11 Commission report being incomplete or inaccurate. Of course it was, there were a lot of incompetent asses to cover!
Wow, lots of people on the ground on 9/11 experienced explosions… I imagine that’s very much how planes hitting the buildings would feel.
Somehow all of this makes it more likely that somebody within the government blew up the WTC (*and* arranged to have a pair of planes hit it) and fired a missile at the Pentagon and got away with it?
I find it really strange to be accused of blindly “believing the government’s version of events”. I think this is perhaps the most damaging and maliciously untruthful administration in the history of our nation, but again… is that any reason to make the enormous leap to saying that they attacked us and not al Qaeda?
March 29th, 2007 at 2:41 pm
Oh and lets look at the latest bit of evidence that you keep mentioning: the steel support columns that were misrepresented or left out of the report. Lets consider two possibilities for why that misrepresentation may have occurred:
1) The 9/11 commission desperately wanted to cover up that the WTC was strategically demolished by neocon agents, and so they de-emphasized the support columns, hoping that nobody would find drawings of a skyscraper in New York City showing them. Nobody with knowledge of this massive and horrific coverup has come forward.
2) The 9/11 Commission was intended to give the appearance of finding fault, but had an interest in protecting a large number of people who would probably be found negligent or incompetent if they studied too much in detail. Thus, the resulting report was superficial and lacked much detail that a rigorous study would have included.
I’d say option 2 is about 1000 times more likely.
March 29th, 2007 at 4:37 pm
So much for getting a break from this, you deserve a response to your questions.
Ymatt:
“Why …(mostly) profs. Philosophy and theology?” I’d guess it is because excelling in those disciplines requires a mastery of Logic. If you have ever opened a textbook on that subject (I suspect not) you would find that it is not easy to master but is extremely useful in sorting through the types of problems that 911 anomalies present.
“Why …Architects/ Engiineers webpatge (mostly) empty? I’d guess they are just getting started now. Check back later, it’ll probably be very interesting.
“All of the government official’s questions… relate to … incomplete or inaccurate. Incompetent …cover” Yes, and perhaps criminal, but we do not know that because the point is that there has not been a competent nor thorough investigation.
“Wow, …people on the ground experienced explosions … how planes hitting buildings would feel…” The testimonials were withheld for 5 years. The most credible are from firefighters who know what kinds of explosions to expect from burning buildings and were highly suspicious of what they heard just before the towers (all three) fell. Then there is the Rodriguez experience about explosions before the planes hit, that is just weird.
“Somehow all this makes it more likely … government blew up … missile at the pentagon …” Absolutely not. That’s a statement worthy of O’Reilly or Hannity. All it shows is that the government theory is so full of holes that it demands further investigation. (Actually theory is the wrong word because that implies it was arrived at after the event, when it seemed more like the story was unfolded over the day and the next tow like a script.)
“I find … enormous leap to saying they attacked us and not al Qaeda?” I agree. The reason for suggesting a link (not making the leap) is because of the people and organizations who benefited the most from the events that day (see pages 127 -134 of The New Pearl Harbor, by D.R. Griffin) “It is reasonable to ask whether those who have profited to such an extent from this tragedy contributed to bringing it about.”
“steel support columns” The truth is probably neither option #1 nor option #2. Option #2 (the incompetence theory) is just too convenient an explanation and does not cover enough of the inconsistencies and lies for me to place all my faith in at this point.
March 29th, 2007 at 4:39 pm
one more thing guys. I may be wrong, and I haven’t the time to look into it, but wasn’t the the 911 commision charged with finding out the inteligence shortcomings? I think any referal to the buildings would be by way of background only. There are probably more indepth studies as to the structural issues of the WTC. The Purdue study may have delved there. Sadly I will be gone for a few days, my sister’s home was destroyed by tornado last night, so we will be helping them clean up whatever is left this weekend. Yes Knarley, even us government agents have families. just kidding knarley, ya know we love ya. So you guys play nice.
SHCB
March 29th, 2007 at 5:29 pm
Well, I do hope we get a new independent 9/11 study. But I’m pretty confident that we would discover that al Qaeda got some guys onto three planes, those planes caused the catastrophe on 9/11, and there are an enormous variety of people that fucked up in one way or another before and on that day who could conceivably stopped it from happening, but were too complacent or misguided to do so. That’s bad enough.
And I can tell you that yelling about evidence that doesn’t exist that a missile struck the Pentagon or that there were explosives planted in the WTC won’t help get a new study.
And don’t tell me I haven’t cracked a philosophy book. All I’m saying is that when your group of experts don’t at least contain a large number of actual experts on the topic at hand, that should tell you something.
March 29th, 2007 at 5:30 pm
Sorry to hear about the tornado and your sister’s home, shcb. I’ve been lucky living in the plains of North Texas so far, although tonight’s going to be interesting it looks like.
March 30th, 2007 at 11:39 am
shcb: This from the 9-11 Commission FAQ page:
What is the Commission’s mandate?
• The Commission’s mandate is to provide a “full and complete accounting” of the attacks of September 11, 2001 and recommendations as to how to prevent such attacks in the future.
Specifically, Section 604 of Public Law 107-306 requires the Commission to investigate “facts and circumstances relating to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001,” including those relating to intelligence agencies; law enforcement agencies; diplomacy; immigration, nonimmigrant visas, and border control; the flow of assets to terrorist organizations; commercial aviation; the role of congressional oversight and resource allocation; and other areas determined relevant by the Commission for its inquiry.
Thar ya go. It may be subjective and open to debate (I won’t debate it) as to whether the commission’s mandate pre-supposed that Arab terrorists were actually involved or whether they had the mandate to investigate things like whether there were explosives pre-planted during the unusual building power-downs that occurred on weekends preceding September 11, 2001.
Since you’re doing quotes, I’ll indulge for a bit.
“The wicked leader is he who the people despise. The good leader is he who the people revere. The great leader is he who the people say, ‘We did it ourselves.’ ” – Lau Tzu
March 30th, 2007 at 11:40 am
As usual, I’m coming in late in the game…and I’m responding to an old post — but I just wanted to make a note on the conspiracy theory:
This is a minor point, but did you mean majority, not minority? Majority beliefs have little to do with the truth of the matter, but I seriously doubt that the majority of Americans believe that the government is lying about the events of September, 2001.
March 30th, 2007 at 11:57 am
ymatt, ymatt, ymatt…
Re: “yelling about evidence …missile struck the Pentagon… “ Yes, there are a lot of people out there trying to fit theories like that into the available evidence.
What is strange is that there can be so many different theories so long after 9-11-2001. That indicates an enormous dissatisfaction with the official conspiracy theory of which you seem confident.
It also indicates that the evidence has not been properly evaluated from an impartial scientific basis. That means in keeping with basic criminal investigations and forensic crime scene investigative techniques.
Thankfully there is a ton of evidence even if you only count what the government wants you to count as evidence. However, there is a vacuum created by the Bush administration’s outright stonewalling.
Stonewalling that included 2 years to get a 911 Commission which then didn’t even meet its mandate. Interference with activities that would be mandatory for a simple homicide or mass murder and absolutely treasonous not to conduct for an event of this magnitude. That refers especially to destruction of evidence: the expedited removal and destruction of the steel before its full examination. There are a myriad of other items too: the destruction of tape recordings of key Air Traffic Controller witnesses.
In any unnecessary information vacuum created by stonewalling and an unsatisfactory examination and accounting of the evidence for an event of this magnitude, there will be a large number of people who will want to find theories that better fit the available evidence.
Of course many of these theories will be “crazy.” That is partly because many (most) of the people trying to fill this vacuum are amateurs, partly because they make mistakes and do not consider all the evidence, because some of those people really are “crazy”, and possibly because some of those people are there as plants to make up “crazy” theories and tarnish the more respectable independent investigators with their “crazy” image so that people like you can ridicule them and forget about the gross inadequacies of the official conspiracy theory.
Gross inadequacies that motivated all of them to try and find other possible answers in the first place. Gross inadequacies that should keep a conscientious person awake all night.
Postulating a missile at the Pentagon is a great example of all this! Possibly the best of the evidence (the tapes confiscated by the FBI) are not being released. So that leaves people to thrash around:
(1) measuring the initial hole in the building and comparing it to the size of the plane;
(2) comparing what is known about the incompetent terrorist pilot and comparing that to dramatic and sophisticated flight manuevers upon his approach to the Pentagon;
(3) trying to reconcile the pressure corrected altitude flight data from the recovered black box verified and released by the FAA that seems to clearly indicate the plane was about 400 feet too high for the collision and that it had a very different flight path than what was required to knock out the light poles upon its approach;
(4) trying to make sense of the official argument that the high speed collision into the reinforced section of the Pentagon was so forceful that the entire plane (including the 15 foot titanium engines) was virtually vaporized yet fragile DNA samples survived for every person on that flight; and,
(5) wondering about all the other pieces of the puzzle; and then you ridicule them for wanting to suggest something that fits better?
Does a missile fit better? Well, it provides a good fit for some of the pieces of the puzzle but it also does not answer bigger questions like what happened to the airplane and what about the eyewitnesses who saw the plane fly toward the Pentagon?
Just because a theory like the Pentagon missile has gross inadequacies and it is being presented by independent people it does not mean that you are right to fixate on the “craziness” of that theory and forget about the gross inadequacies of the official theory.
Yes, I realize it is much more politically correct to rally around the official sources. However, since both theories are bad, what’s important now is not which theory is better, but whether the Truth can be found with a more thorough examination of the evidence.
Perhaps the release of the rest of the WebCam footages might actually show an airliner; but alas, there are people who will not believe the tapes if they are ever released by your government, even if they clearly show the plane, because, they would argue, those tapes have been withheld for so long that there has been ample time to insert their own special effects. Does that mean there will never be a resolution to this? No, not while people are free enough to question.
The story unfolds and that is what fascinates me.
–
re: “… All I’m saying is …when your group of experts don’t… contain …experts on the topic…that should tell you something.” Yes, it tells me to be cautious of their conclusions. So I look at their conclusions and ask what are they based upon and discover that they are based on opinions of some, not a lot, but some qualified experts in “the topic at hand” who are willing to come forward and other experts who are not yet willing to come forward. I see that they are based on basic facts (distance = one half time 9.8m/s/s * time squared) and that they actually consider anomalies such as that pools of molten steel could not have existed at the WTC complex for days from fuel and office building fires alone (& wonder why things like that are left out of the official dumb-down explanations.)
It also tells me that the risk of coming forward and stating such things publicly has been extremely dangerous to their livelihood (Dr. Jones was fired before the academic community revolted and under that pressure the administration had to re-hire him) and during the extreme nationalism that followed 911 and especially in leading up the Iraq invasion it was dangerous physically to speak out in such a manner. Most people, myself included, would not speak out under these conditions if they had other people or family who depended upon them. That is why I am not so quick to ridicule and damn these people, they are more likely to be the real heroes than …well, I’ll let you fill in those blanks.
–
re: “cracked a philosophy book… ” You’re kidding me, you cracked open a philosophy book? Really? I’m just teasing like a good shcb student, don’t get all freaked out about it man. We all love you here.
March 30th, 2007 at 3:26 pm
ethan-p:
I agree with you. Good catch… I stand successfully challenged on that point.
When I wrote that most Americans do not believe the government’s Con. theory I was thinking of the following recent quote by someone who was playing fast and loose with results of polls taken last fall:
“ Polls show that 36% of Americans do not believe the official story. Setting aside the 25% of the public that is so uninformed or uninvolved as to believe that Saddam Hussein was responsible for the 9/11 attack, leaves 39% of the public who believe the official story. However, this 39% is essentially relying on the mainstream media’s endorsement of the official story.”
That is not reasoning that can be defended, other than (doubtfully) as a loosy-goosy estimate.
However, there seems to be a turning of the tide, judging by the explosion of YouTube videos, Rosie O’Donnells strong stance for answers to the questions that have reached a TV audience of 30 million on the show “The View”, and the right wing attack media being so concerned as to dramatically increase the number and viciousnessof their attack hit pieces on members of the Truth movement, especially Charlie Sheen and Rosie, such as this:
“Actor and radio host Danny Bonaduce, appearing as a guest last night on MSNBC’s Scarborough Country, hosted by former Republican Congressman Joe Scarborough, advocated the death penalty in response to Rosie O’Donnell’s statements about the Iran hostage crisis and her questioning the official story behind 9/11.” Videos can be viewed at (Prison Planet).
So when I said to ymatt that it is frightening for experts like physics professors, who obviously aren’t usually the most media savvy types or attention seeking personalities, to publicly challenge the official Con. theory, I can add that example of a death threat (?) on national TV to further illustrate my point.
By the way I haven’t had time to watch the segment yet, so DON’T BEAT ME UP if it isn’t actually a real death threat, okay ymatt and shcb?
March 31st, 2007 at 11:16 pm
don’t worry, I won’t beat you up for anything Danny or Rosie says, they are both kooks.
Hey guys, I just got back from helping my sister and her town clean up the tornado mess, it is 1 oclock in the morning, it’s a 4 or 5 hour drive and I am beat. This was one of the most amazing two days of my life. I would like to write about it, but don’t want to tack it on here, can I start a new thread, or can one of you cut and paste it for me in a new thread? It may take a day or two for me to get my thoughts together so no hurry.
thanks
March 31st, 2007 at 11:30 pm
ethan-p,
If you hear that a majority of Americans disagree with government on 911, there are some polls such as this from CNN:
http://edition.cnn.com/POLLSERVER/results/23968.exclude.html
I hate media polls they are so anti-scientific.
It’s interesting to get the “wackos” on a soapbox, I think they’ve handled themselves pretty well, like AJ from last year:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qyzSSnNUWnE&mode=related&search=
What was this thread about anyways?
gnite.
April 1st, 2007 at 7:34 am
about the goodness of neighbor helping neighbor, of the spirit of smalltown America. An anti Katrena story. Mushy patriotic crap.
April 1st, 2007 at 3:13 pm
shcb – how the hell am I gonna argue with you about that? Well, maybe I could say that it worked out best because there weren’t any Blackwater cops nor superdome and the people were allowed more or less fere flow into and out of the area, rather than after Katrina when the blacks were prevented at gunpoint from walking away out of the city. You know what I don’t want to talk about Katrina any more, that is just too depressing.
I am very very glad their was a rainbow for you and yours after the tornado. Sometimes those realizations about neighbors and enhanced feelings of community that arise from a crisis almost make it seem worthwhile. But what the hell do I know, the closest I’ve ever come to a disaster is to run out of beer.
April 1st, 2007 at 3:14 pm
*free (not fere.)
April 1st, 2007 at 5:28 pm
we told fema to take a hike, does that help?
April 1st, 2007 at 8:05 pm
shcb:
(smile) Now that sounds like the real America. Maybe there is still some hope for you people. It would be nice to think so.
How far did FEMA back off? And if they did take a hike why do you suppose they did that instead of taking control?
How big was that impacted area (can you provide a link to a news item about it?)
April 2nd, 2007 at 5:35 am
Google Holly Colorado tornado. I’ve seen coverage as far as Australia. thank god we weren’t depending on you for help last week.
April 2nd, 2007 at 10:14 am
Ah hem – if you are referring to “you” as in Canada, we offered to send our DART (Disaster Assistance Rapid Response Team) right after Katrina and were told you didn’t need our help, or Cuba’s and many other nations that offered. Although it was pretty obvious you did need help and we did end up sending our coast guard witch saved many an American from a roof top.
Are you saying you told your own government relief people (FEMA) to go away, but were expecting help from other countries?
So you know, tornadoes occur quite frequently and they don’t necessarily make the evening news in other nations. Not when there are dozens of people needlessly dying everyday in an immoral war.
April 2nd, 2007 at 4:56 pm
Good lord guys, don’t get your knickers in a bunch.
I’m not disparaging your precious little socialist country, I’m disparaging you. All I want to know is how to start a new thread, or if I can. If only the administrator can start a thread, just tell me, I can understand the need to control the subject matter to a degree. I have a neat little story of an area coming together to help each other out without a lot of government help, an event I was witness to with a interesting comparison to lazy worthless slugs in New Orleans. I ask politely and all I get is the third degree; what is the thread about, what are your sources, how large an area, is your mother fat, are you ugly, etc. All I’m saying is that if we would have had to wait for self centered pricks like you to help we would still be trying to figure out who was going to pay for the fuel.
April 3rd, 2007 at 1:36 am
shcb:
I am glad things worked out well for the people of Holly, Colorado. I am sure they are great people, and a loss like that is devastating. Can you imagine if it was your home… I can and I would not be a happy camper.
Sounds like help got to Holly quick. It must be very comforting to you to realize that such strong socialist ideals, such as helping less fortunate people than yourself, are still alive in America.
Didn’t America’s founding fathers warn, 200 years ago, against the current kind of unbridled capitalism and concentration of wealth that mostly benefits the few who now define America? They certainly lived in more charitable and neighbor helping neighbor times. They might take some comfort with you as they look down from heaven and realize that Holly’s devastation did not look like New Orleans.
We all had Katrina fatigue ags ago, but LOOK: the earliest first hand account I saw was astounding. It made clear why Katrina unfolded as it did. All past and future news accounts paled in comparison. As a bonus it is fairly short.
http://www.emsnetwork.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi?archive=56&num=18427
–
shcb, now that you have read that, lets create a scenario from the mainstream news account of Katrina. Imagine that you were fortunate and are sitting on the porch of your moderately damaged New Orleans home.
You have a surreal view to the devasatation stretching as far as you can see. It`s been 48 hours since the flood, it is hot and your food is rotting, you got some fresh water in your hot water tank, and a shotgun in your lap to keep the neighborhood gang bangers at bay so your fat mother`s twinkies don`t get looted, say no more.
The Blackwater security guys show up in their flack jackets, short hair, and they seem nice enough (probably from Texas) but then the guy doing all the talking gives you the choice of surrendering your weapon or going with them to a makeshift detention facility. They tell you that help and emergency supplies are on the way, but you see no sign of either. They tell you not to even attempt to leave the City as the roads are blocked (that makes you feel a bit uneasy now doesn’t it?) but if you need to abandon your house you are told to go to the Superdome. That is a long way away so you tell them you will take your chances here.
However, as you think about the gangs that are HUNTING for anything that will help them survive or satisfy their needs – like a craving for your mothers twinkies – you decide to make one last appeal for your shotgun back. You could surrender it in the morning, if only they would let you keep it through the night. Except, as they walk toward their air-conditioned vehicle and you are about to call to them, you hear one of them curse to the other: jesus, that `lazy worthless slug` sure was ugly.
–
shcb- forget about Katrina, who cares, even Google Earth has tried to forget by putting up the pre-Katrina images agin so all is well.
Here is a good idea for your Holly thread: lets take this little one mile by 200 or 600 yard swath through a bunch of average lower-medium-income farmer-trucker owned 1970s style american homes and trailers in one of a million easily rebuilt hick towns, Holly Colorado
– known to neighboring towns by a radio station jingle: Let`s Eat Chickin Tonight
– death toll ONE
(an atrocity committed by god.)
Let`s compare that to the FLATTENING of most of the 1500 year old City of Fallujah
– known to the world as The City of Mosques for the incredible beauty of their 1000 year old inately detailed architecturally stunning mosques,
– death toll HUNDREDS OR THOUSANDS
(an atrocity committed by repeated attacks of the American occupiers in Iraq.)
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article10907.htm
Let me start with the comparison.
The people of Holly had to deal with wind that was over in hours and help arrived quickly.
The people of Fallujah endured weeks of seige during which military aged males were sent to prison if they tried to leave, then suffered a crippling bombardment which included the hospitals as they were known to treat injured enemy combatants, then the tanks and armoury blasted away anyone tryingto resist the onslaught, then house to house invasion during which any military aged males remaining were considered enemy combatants and either shot or taken to prison, then weeks turning to months during which supplies into the city arrived at a trickle and relatives – of the aged or sick or others that remained in the City of 350,000 to protect their belonings – were kept out and mostly were not able to get any news of their loved ones or even whether their houses remained standing. Thirty to Sixty thousand homes destroyed, Sixty five mosques destroyed.
Most of the people of Holly support their troops including the attack and destruction of Fallujah. The people of Fallujah, if told about Holly Colorado, would certainly support Allah.
shcb, also since you live in the USA and seem to get your news from USA talking heads you probably have not heard about this OLD news:
–> ” Two weeks ago the UK Independent ran an article which confirmed that the US had “lied to Britain over the use of napalm in Iraq”. (06-17-05) Since then, not one American newspaper or TV station has picked up the story even though the Pentagon has verified the claims.” You can find that lower down on the information clearing house link I provided above.
For more on this horror in a(n) (illegal) war, see the links at the bottom of the Wikipedia item on Fallujah, but what you find there is only the half of the story so you will need to do some research beyong what the Army press Corps tells you.
So again, imagine that happened to you and your home…(my imagination starts to get a little fuzzy at this point.)
–
About getting our knickers i a bunch… Hold on shcb, I think we all agree that it is not your fault if your mother is fat. The important question is whether in fact you are, or are not, truly ugly. (joke) Maybe not a joke considering that Karma is as it is, considering that hate-mongering thoughts like your `Islamo-pukes` tirade will usually destroy any soft or lovable qualities that a person might have had, and abusive language (`self-centered pricks like you`) reveals an ugliness that runs to a dark, empty core: all these things fester over time and usually manifest themselves in actual physical ugliness, disease, obesity or all of the above.
–
shcb: “trying to figure out who would pay for fuel”: that is brilliant, you are truly the MASTER OF IRONY at this site. West Texas Intermediate at Cushing before the invasion of Iraq was approx. $30 per bbl; the same WTI price is now $65 per barrel. Shall those of us smart enough to hold Oil Company Stocks (I do!) join in with Bush and his oil buddies for a big laugh at that? Here we go… 1…2…3…. MUHAHAHAHHAAAAAAAAA!
—
ethan – p If you are still here, you might be interested in this:
Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research
Americans Question Bush on 9/11 Intelligence
October 14, 2006
– Many adults in the United States believe the current federal government has not been completely forthcoming on the issue of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, according to a poll by the New York Times and CBS News. 53 per cent of respondents think the Bush administration is hiding something, and 28 per cent believe it is lying.
Only 16 per cent of respondents say the government headed by U.S. president George W. Bush is telling the truth on what it knew prior to the terrorist attacks, down five points since May 2002…
Polling Data
When it comes to what they knew prior to September 11th, 2001, about possible terrorist attacks against the United States, do you think members of the Bush Administration are telling the truth, are mostly telling the truth but hiding something, or are they mostly lying?
Oct. 2006
Telling the truth 16%
Hiding something 53%
Mostly lying 28%
Not sure 3%
Source: The New York Times / CBS News
Methodology: Telephone interviews with 983 American adults, conducted from Oct. 5 to Oct. 8, 2006. Margin of error is 4 per cent.
April 3rd, 2007 at 7:00 am
Wow – I think your true colours are starting to show here:
“lazy worthless slugs in New Orleans”? Is that how you think of your fellow countrymen? Wow.
You were hit by a lil itty bitty tornado and you try to compare that to what happend in New Orleans and what those people went through?
Self centered pricks?
Get out of the trailer park much SHCB?
April 3rd, 2007 at 8:12 am
shcb:
I am glad things worked out well for the people of Holly. I am sure they are great people, and a loss like that is devastating. Can you imagine if it was your home…I can.
Sounds like help got there quickly. It must be very comforting to you to realize that such socialist ideas as helping those less fortunate than yourself are still alive in America. Your country`s founding fathers, most of whom warned against the current kind of unbridled capitalism and concentration of wealth for the benefit of the few that now define America, might take some comfort with you as they look down from heaven and realize that the devastation in Holly Colorado did not turn out like Katrina.
We all had Katrina fatigue ages ago, but hold on: the earliest first hand account I saw was astounding. It made clear why Katrina unfolded as it did. All past and future news accounts paled in comparison. As a bonus it is fairly short.
http://www.emsnetwork.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi?archive=56&num=18427
shcb, now that you have read that, lets take the mainstream news account of Katrina. Imagine that you were fortunate and are sitting on the porch of your moderately damaged New Orleans home. You have a surreal view to the devasatation stretching as far as you can see. It`s been 48 hours since the flood, it is hot and your food is rotting, you got some fresh water in your hot water tank, and a shotgun in your lap to keep the neighborhood gang bangers at bay so your fat mother`s twinkies don`t get looted, say no more. The Blackwater security guys show up in their flack jackets, short hair, and they seem nice enough (probably from Texas or Colorado) but then the guy doing all the talking gives you the choice of surrendering your weapon or going with them to a makeshift detention facility. They tell you that help and emergency supplies are on the way, but you see no sign of either. They tell you not to even attempt to leave the City as the roads are blockaded but if you need supplies go to the Superdome, that`s a long way away so you tell them you will take your chances here. However, as you think about the gangs that are HUNTING for anything that will help them survive or satisfy their needs like your mothers twinkies, you decide to make one last appeal for your shotgun back. You could surrender it in the morning, if only they would let you keep it through the night. Except, just before you call to them as they walk toward their air-conditioned vehicle, you hear one of them saying to the other: jesus, that `lazy worthless slug` sure was ugly.
–
shcb- forget about Katrina, who cares Googles Earth has the pre-Katrina images up and running again so all is well.
Instead, here is a good idea for your thread: lets take this little one mile by 200 or 600 yard swath through a bunch of average lower-medium-income farmer-trucker owned 1970s style american homes and trailers in one of a million easily rebuilt hick towns, Holly Colorado
– known to neighboring towns by a radio station jingle: Let`s Eat Chickin Tonight
– death toll ONE
(an atrocity committed by god.)
Let`s compare that to the FLATTENING of most of the 1500 year old City of Fallujah
– known to the world as The City of Mosques for the incredible beauty of their 1000 year old inately detailed architecturally stunning mosques,
– death toll HUNDREDS OR THOUSANDS
(an atrocity committed by repeated attacks of the American occupiers in Iraq.)
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article10907.htm
Let me start with the comparison.
The people of Holly had to deal with wind that was over in hours and help arrived quickly.
The people of Fallujah endured weeks of seige during which military aged males were sent to prison if they tried to leave, then suffered a crippling bombardment which included the hospitals as they were known to treat injured enemy combatants, then the tanks and armoury blasted away anyone tryingto resist the onslaught, then house to house invasion during which any military aged males remaining were considered enemy combatants and either shot or taken to prison, then weeks turning to months during which supplies into the city arrived at a trickle and relatives – of the aged or sick or others that remained in the City of 350,000 to protect their belonings – were kept out and mostly were not able to get any news of their loved ones or even whether their houses remained standing.
Most of the people of Holly support their troops including the attack and destruction of Fallujah. The people of Fallujah, if told about Holly Colorado, would certainly support Allah.
shcb, since you live in the USA and seem to get your news from USA talking heads you probably have not heard about this OLD news:
Two weeks ago the UK Independent ran an article which confirmed that the US had “lied to Britain over the use of napalm in Iraq”. (06-17-05) Since then, not one American newspaper or TV station has picked up the story even though the Pentagon has verified the claims. You can find that lower down on the information clearing house link I provided above.
For more on this horror of (illegal) war, see the links at the bottom of the Wikipedia item on Fallujah, but what you find there is only the half of it so you will need to research beyong what the Army press Corps tells you.
So again, imagine that happened to you and your home…
–
About getting our knickers i a bunch… Hold on shcb, I think we all agree that it is not your fault if your mother is fat. The important question is whether in fact you are, or are not, truly ugly. (joke) Maybe not a joke considering that Karma is as it is, considering that hate-mongering thoughts like your `Islamo-pukes` tirade will usually destroy any soft or lovable qualities that a person might have had, and abusive language (`self-centered pricks like you`) reveals an ugliness that runs to a dark, empty core: all these things fester over time and usually manifest themselves in actual physical ugliness, disease, obesity or all of the above.
–
shcb: about arguing who would pay for fuel: that is brilliant, you are truly the Master of Irony. West Texas Intermediate at Cushing before the invasion of Iraq was approx. $30 per bbl; the same WTI price is now $65 per barrel. All those like me who hold oil company stocks lets all join in with Bush and his oil buddies for a big laugh at that. Ready… 1….2….3….MUHAHAHAHHAHAAAAAA!!!
April 3rd, 2007 at 9:26 am
JTB – if you can, please delete my last 14 comments (all posted after NorthernLite) from this mornong because they just repeat my one longer comment before NL’s.
(The 14 were posted to replace the one long one that did not appear to make it through the queue when I checked this morning, but then after I posted the 14 it popped up.)
NL – I like your response to shcb better than mine. Succinct and full of meanings.
Anyone noticing how much Doublethink is contained in shcb’s thoughts? He derides socialist leaning people, and then extolls the virtue of American actions that resemble socilaist acts. It must be driving his soul crazy, the poor prole.
By the way shcb, despite what Faux News tells you, Canada is about as socialist a country as Microsoft is a socialist company. It is only in comparison to a fascist leaning country that Canada would appear socialist. By world standards, we live in a refreshingly laizze fair culture and generally, overall, we have very, very good governance. Very low crime, few police, few prisons, and few guns. That may not last though, as our current PM with about 36% of the popular vote wants to undo many defining Canadian institutions that make our society so healthy so that he can join the club of good old boys who generally control the USA.
April 3rd, 2007 at 9:40 am
Just noticed this recent report (unsanitized, unembedded) from one of the few independent American reporters who have managed to get into Iraq*. He talks about current events in Fallujah. Does it remind you of Holly, Colorado shcb?
“They hate us because we are Muslims, and no one can argue with that any more,” 65- year-old Abu Fayssal who witnessed the event told IPS.”
http://www.rense.com/general76/fallu.htm
Also worth a look for some deeper news on Iraq:
http://www.dahrjamailiraq.com/
So here it is 4 years later and the people of Fallujah are still in a hell created by America’s sadistic henchmen, otherwise known as “the troops”.
snip—>
*Dahr Jamail provides Independent News From the MidEast
In late 2003, Weary of the overall failure of the US media to accurately report on the realities of the war in Iraq for the Iraqi people and US soldiers, Dahr Jamail went to Iraq to report on the war himself.
His dispatches were quickly recognized as an important media resource. He is now writing for the Inter Press Service, The Asia Times and many other outlets. His reports have also been published with The Nation, The Sunday Herald, Islam Online, the Guardian, Foreign Policy in Focus, and the Independent to name just a few. Dahr’s dispatches and hard news stories have been translated into French, Polish, German, Dutch, Spanish, Japanese, Portuguese, Chinese, Arabic and Turkish. On radio as well as television, Dahr reports for Democracy Now!, the BBC, and numerous other stations around the globe. Dahr is also special correspondent for Flashpoints.
Dahr has spent a total of 8 months in occupied Iraq as one of only a few independent US journalists in the country. In the MidEast, Dahr has also has reported from Syria, Lebanon and Jordan. Dahr uses the DahrJamailIraq.com website and his popular mailing list to disseminate his dispatches.
April 3rd, 2007 at 9:48 am
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2006/04/cant-have-your-cake-and-eat-it-too.html
You might assume that the Twin Towers collapsed on 9/11 because of their design or because the fires were so hot or because of the damage from the hijacked planes. You probably assume that someone who knows alot more than you — a structural engineer, or a fire expert, or a tall building designer — has an explanation of why the towers collapsed, and that it all makes perfect sense. At the very least, you assume that you don’t have the expertise to even think about why the Twin Towers collapsed, right?
Well, a contradiction in the way the towers collapsed shows that this is not so.
Specifically, there are two possibilities regarding the collapse of Twin Towers on September 11th:
EITHER the towers experienced virtually no resistance from their steel-reinforced concrete floors as they collapsed, in which case, how could the buildings have been pulverized in mid-air into massive dust clouds (see also this photo), and why how could heavy steel beams have shot out sideways up to 500 feet as the buildings collapsed?
OR — if there was sufficient resistance from the floors of the buildings to have caused the dust clouds and sideways ejection of material — how could the buildings have collapsed at virtually free-fall speeds?
Did I lose you? Okay, let’s back up and start over.
The mid-air pulverization of tons of concrete indicates massive and competing forces — incredibly violent collisions between objects. Concrete usually cracks when dropped or hit, it is not pulverized. Either the pulverization was caused by some type of explosion, or by the heavy tops of the buildings hitting massive inertial resistance in the form of the lower floors, which were steel-reinforced concrete floors solidly bolted into the steel core.
Likewise, the sideways ejection of heavy steel beams indicates either explosive forces or, at the very least, tremendous resistance by the floors to the downward collapses, thus forcing heavy objects to shoot out sideways.
If the buildings collapsed from any cause other than controlled demolition — which violently blows out all supports of the buildings being demolished — then there would have been a crumpling of the buildings. In that case, there might have generated dust clouds near the end of the collapse, but not towards the very beginning. And, clearly, the collapse would not have approached free-fall speeds, since the intact floors would have put up alot of resistance against the momentum of the falling floors.
Bottom line: There could not have been both beginning-of-collapse dust clouds (indicating huge, violently-competing forces) AND collapses at virtually free-fall speeds (indicating only small, minor competition of forces and little resistance).
The towers collapsed as fast as a house of cards, and yet produced enormous dust clouds from early on in the collapses.
The defenders of the official story of 9/11 can’t have it both ways.
Instead, the towers had to have been brought down with explosives:
• The near free-fall speed is easily explained by the demolition of the towers’ support structures, which took away the resistance which should have slowed the collapse time
And
• The tremendous dust clouds seen early in the collapses can be explained by the massive explosions caused by pre-set demolition charges which pulverized concrete and shot it out of the towers.
April 3rd, 2007 at 9:50 am
Beleiving in both the free fall and the pulverization of concrete and everthing else into tiny dust particals on a massive scale is possible through the black magic of Doublethink.
April 3rd, 2007 at 10:06 am
George Orwell, Big Brother is watching your house
31.03.07
The Big Brother nightmare of George Orwell’s 1984 has become a reality – in the shadow of the author’s former London home.
It may have taken a little longer than he predicted, but Orwell’s vision of a society where cameras and computers spy on every person’s movements is now here.
See original for map showing cameras:
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23391081-details/George+Orwell%2C+Big+Brother+is+watching+your+house/article.do
Foresight: The cameras crowd George Orwell’s former London home
According to the latest studies, Britain has a staggering 4.2million CCTV cameras – one for every 14 people in the country – and 20 per cent of cameras globally. It has been calculated that each person is caught on camera an average of 300 times daily.
Use of spy cameras in modern-day Britain is now a chilling mirror image of Orwell’s fictional world, created in the post-war Forties in a fourth-floor flat overlooking Canonbury Square in Islington, North London.
On the wall outside his former residence – flat number 27B – where Orwell lived until his death in 1950, an historical plaque commemorates the anti-authoritarian author. And within 200 yards of the flat, there are 32 CCTV cameras, scanning every move.
Orwell’s view of the tree-filled gardens outside the flat is under 24-hour surveillance from two cameras perched on traffic lights.
The flat’s rear windows are constantly viewed from two more security cameras outside a conference centre in Canonbury Place.
In a lane, just off the square, close to Orwell’s favourite pub, the Compton Arms, a camera at the rear of a car dealership records every person entering or leaving the pub.
Within a 200-yard radius of the flat, there are another 28 CCTV cameras, together with hundreds of private, remote-controlled security cameras used to scrutinise visitors to homes, shops and offices.
The message is reminiscent of a 1949 poster to mark the launch of Orwell’s 1984: ‘Big Brother is Watching You’.
In the Shriji grocery store in Canonbury Place, three cameras focus on every person in the shop. Owner Minesh Amin explained: ‘They are for our security and safety. Without them, people would steal from the shop. Although this is a nice area, there are always bad people who cause trouble by stealing.’
Three doors away, in the dry-cleaning shop run by Malik Zafar, are another two CCTV cameras.
‘I need to know who is coming into my shop,’ explained Mr Zafar, who spent £400 on his security system.
This week, the Royal Academy of Engineering (RAE) produced a report highlighting the astonishing numbers of CCTV cameras in the country and warned how such ‘Big Brother tactics’ could eventually put lives at risk.
The RAE report warned any security system was ‘vulnerable to abuse, including bribery of staff and computer hackers gaining access to it’. One of the report’s authors, Professor Nigel Gilbert, claimed the numbers of CCTV cameras now being used is so vast that further installations should be stopped until the need for them is proven.
One fear is a nationwide standard for CCTV cameras which would make it possible for all information gathered by individual cameras to be shared – and accessed by anyone with the means to do so.
The RAE report follows a warning by the Government’s Information Commissioner Richard Thomas that excessive use of CCTV and other information-gathering was ‘creating a climate of suspicion’.
Share this articleWhat is this?
DiggRedditDel.icio.usNewsvineNowPublic
Reader views (11)
Add your view | Show all
Here’s a sample of the latest views published. You can click view all to read all views that readers have sent in.
Patrick in Norfolk:
Our fine Republican-run guvmint has already put thousands of security cameras within a few miles of your home. With Marines and the FBI in Quantico, and CIA in Langley, and the Pentagon, and Navy Bases in the Chesapeake, if you drive to DC from Norfolk, I’ll bet you’re on camera 100% percent of the time. It’s been that way since Reagan was prez.
– D. L. Hall, Spokane, WA
I’m glad I don’t live in London but I am close to Minneapolis and they are getting to be like London. They just approved a measure to add more cameras on the north side to cut crime. The crime will just move elsewhere and I’m sure the cameras will follow. I wonder what would happen if people in London started to where a mask, perhaps a V mask. Would they pass a anti-mask law then?
– Vince, USA
In the context from Ed from London’s response, this is EXACTLY the reason why these things don’t work. If law enforcement is unwilling to follow up on property crime (which I think would be the main benefit of such a system). It seems as if USING the camera’s were an afterthought, seeing as how the perception of “Big Brother” weren’t enough it would be a tough pill to swallow for a sciety accept the use when they hear stories of blatent neglect of follow-up crime prevention. Why don’t we just call this what it is, another way for authority to datamine activites of their citizens under the great guise of protecting them. What’s next?, calling them TerroristCams or perhaps if it is widespread in US; FreedomCams? Here’s a thought, what if they used the camera’s to catch “suspicious” movements and respond to ambient biometrics then alert police to the scene, the technology for this is not science fiction.
– Jose, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
April 3rd, 2007 at 10:31 am
According to my word processor, 4467 words have been posted since I asked a simple favor; how do I start a new thread so as to not dilute this one with an off topic subject. No one has even tried to help. All you have done is point by point deconstruct a post I haven’t even begun to write.
I rest my case. It appears my choice of words was correct.
By the way, you always give me a hard time for writing off topic. See the first paragraph.
April 3rd, 2007 at 10:39 am
Hey, sorry to have failed to answer your question. It’s not from any desire to make you feel bad; I’m simply really busy these days, and after a while I tend to tune out what’s being said in the comments to posted items, at least when it seems to be just the same people arguing ideological points back and forth.
Currently I’m the only one actively posting new items (which I guess is what you mean when you talk about “starting a new thread”). ymatt and craig have the ability to do so, and occasionally do. I guess I’d be the one to give you that ability if it was going to happen, but at this time I’m not inclined to do that.
I appreciate your willingness to add your views to the comments, and encourage you to continue to do that. You’re also welcome to forward items to me that you think should be posted as new items on the site, and if I think they meet my own admittedly loose criteria for post-worthiness, I’ll be happy to post them on your behalf.
April 3rd, 2007 at 11:07 am
You can’t start threads.
This is jbc’s blog, he posts stuff that interests him, we read it, we comment.
Sorry to have to point out the obvious.
Your racist comments are pretty obvious as well. I am a converted Buddhist, does that mean I am suddenly Asian? If someone starts observing Jewish faith rituals or say Muslim rituals does that suddenly change their race? please explain. Your thinly veiled anger at dirty hippies, librlz and commie pinko socialists (basically anyone who doesn’t Believe w is Gawd’s Gift to the World or is born anywhere outside of your rural enclave) makes for entertaining reading, but you aren’t convincing this puke.
Then again I am not convinced that there is some super secret, super capable cabal of hardline neocon nutjobs who perpped 9/11 (sorry knarly and northern, I just don’t think these jokers are competent enough to pull this off without completely farking it up six ways from Sunday). The Pentagon hit was the most questionable: jet engines just don’t vaporize.
As to a community pulling together to help one another out in times of disaster, this isn’t some exclusive to white hick hoods my brother. There were many unsung heroes who helped one another out during Katrina, the media focuses on the sensational bad stuff. I could tell stories about how my family has helped others, but you just won’t Believe. Whateva. Have a nice day.
April 3rd, 2007 at 12:25 pm
Thanks John, I figured I probably couldn’t start a new thread myself, and I certainly understand. It will be very rare that I will want to start a new thread (what word should I be using?), these guys keep me busy enough as is, and I understand I am a visitor, sometimes a wanted and sometimes an unwanted visitor, but a guest nonetheless.
I think a discussion of how different the two disasters were handled would be fun, if nothing else it would get us off the war for a day or two. How would you like me to proceed? Should I e-mail my piece to you or just tack it somewhere.
Again, thanks for having me, I find this a lot of fun, and I find this site to be well run and professional.
Rick
April 4th, 2007 at 1:25 am
These are not proofs as claimed in the video, but it is an excellent collection of items indicating probable cause.
Nevertheless, interesting:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-649993991751648213&q=9%2F11+justice
April 4th, 2007 at 5:11 am
Enkidu,
I know there were many stories of neighbors helping neighbors just as in Holly during the Katrina aftermath all over the south and I applauded them all. And I know the scale of the disasters is not on anywhere near the same. People drove all night through the devastation of Katrina to get to friends homes to start helping with only the supplies they could haul in their truck. We walked six blocks to have lunch in an area of town that was untouched. I am referring specifically to the few thousand bad apples in New Orleans, I should have made that more clear, but I wasn’t writing about it yet so how could I have made it more clear.
I do think I need to address the racist thing. I don’t hate, disapprove, or dislike (or approve) of people because of something arbitrary like race or religion. I do hate, approve, disapprove, like or dislike individuals or groups of individuals or movements when there is a rational reason. At this time I hate the Muslims that are killing us, I dislike and distrust the Muslims who support the terrorists and I like the ones that don’t. all for rational, self serving reasons.
Blacks are the most upwardly mobile section of our society, I say “bully!” to their efforts and cheer when I hear Bill Cosby, Thomas Sowell, and Walter Williams berate the “poor me” blacks, the blacks I was referring to above. And I do loath the liberal ideals and programs started by Lyndon Johnson that have driven this proud race of Americans to the level they find themselves heroically climbing out of. Before the socialistic Great Society out of wedlock childbirth and divorce rates among blacks was on par or below whites, and a higher percentage of black kids graduated from high school than white kids.
More later.
April 4th, 2007 at 10:53 am
When a person is under stress, aspects of their true self shows through. After the stress, a person starts to rationalize past actions and remembers to repress outward expressions of socially unacceptible beliefs.
shcb – I understand why you would, on a primitive, visceral level hate “Muslims” who kill Americans, but could you explain to me:
– Do you hate Jews who kill Americans? (e.g. USS Liberty)
– What is the difference between Shia and Sunni Muslims in their attitude towards Americans?
– Why a majority of Iraqi’s (not just the Muslims) support suicide attacks on coalition forces in Iraq?
(I can’t find the more recent data which shows higher support for attacks on troops, but from this 2005 article
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/10/23/wirq23.xml
we see that:
• Forty-five per cent of Iraqis believe attacks against British and American troops are justified – rising to 65 per cent in the British-controlled Maysan province;
• 82 per cent are “strongly opposed” to the presence of coalition troops;
• less than one per cent of the population believes coalition forces are responsible for any improvement in security;
• 67 per cent of Iraqis feel less secure because of the occupation;
• 43 per cent of Iraqis believe conditions for peace and stability have worsened;
• 72 per cent do not have confidence in the multi-national forces. )
On Racism, here’s a song that shows what most Black/Hispanic/etc. countrymen think about SHCB and his comrades (by the way, my favourite verse is this:
They say that Terrorism Revolves around the Koran
But that’s stupid
I show you why thats Totally Wrong
cuz If this country was invaded and plundered, I’d turn Harlem into a Columbian jungle. And I wouldn’t be fighting for Christian Nation, I’d be fighting for survival from extermination. I wouldn’t fight for Fox News the Racist Biggots; I’d be fighting for the ‘hood for the faceless Victims; For the immigrants America loves and despise, …) .
Even if you hate the music and oppose the politics of the hip-hop sub-culture (language warning), the video starts slow but after a minute or two it’s into the guts of the matter:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmNkupmePvA&mode=related&search=
Peace, brothers!
April 5th, 2007 at 10:56 am
shcb
hmmmm
Once upon a time, I googled the communist manifesto – having never read it after a half century of existence – when your sockpuppet master called me a commie for the umpteenth time. So now I googled “great society” and read what that was about. I don’t see how you can point to Johnson’s Great Society and say these initiatives were bad for America.
Here is an edited list of GS programs:
Civil rights
War on Poverty
Education
Health
——————————
Medicare
Medicaid
Arts and cultural institutions
——————————
National endowments for arts and humanities
Public broadcasting
Cultural centers
Transportation
Consumer protection
Environment
As another web site put it: “President Johnson wanted to create the “Great Society” — to end poverty, promote equality, improve education, rejuvenate cities, and protect the environment.”
May I ask what is so wrong about these initiatives? You hate funding for schools? Inner city revitalization? Transportation? I googled “problems with the great society” as well and it seemed like there aren’t very many problems with these initiatives. When you have a surplus in tax revenue, you spend some and pay down your debt with the rest. Build infrastructure, schools, science labs and mass transit.
Your beef must be with the civil rights.
Or perhaps the welfare and food stamps. Chump change to feed the children of single mothers must really burn you up.
Or both?
April 5th, 2007 at 5:51 pm
Knarley,
First I want to go up the page a bit, you made the comment that socialist ideals like helping each other are still alive and well in America. Rubbish, a willingness to help each other has nothing to do with economic systems. The ability to help does. Would all those people have all that equipment at their disposal on a moment’s notice in a socialist system? Probably not. One of the reasons America is one of the most generous nations in history is because we can afford it because of our capitalistic system. You are right to a small degree though, the aspect of socialism that makes all men’s labor relatively equal works only in survival situations. Natural disaster cleanup is a close cousin to survival, about the only other place socialism works is in professional sports, but only within that particular sport. Think about that one for a while and then call me stupid or moronic when you can’t figure it out.
Now to your points:
Hating someone who wants to kill you or your family may be on a primitive level, but I don’t think it is socially unacceptable, unless you make it so to cover your own cowardice.
-I don’t hate Jews for what appears to be an accident 40 years ago since nothing like it has happened since. And please don’t fill up three pages with accounts by USS Liberty survivors.com links and quotes, I’ve read them already.
-The Sunnis hate us more than the Shiite faction because they lost their leadership status with the overthrow of Sadam’s government even though they only have a 20% minority, they pine for the old days. This is evident with your correct statistic that 67 percent of Iraqis feel less secure because of our occupation. Looking deeper into that stat you will fine that 67% of Iraqi citizens (87 percent of Kurds and 72% of Shiites) want us to stay until certain conditions are met, not a date positive withdrawal. While 55% of Sunnis want an immediate withdrawal.
I think it was Mark Twain who said “there are lies, damned lies and statistics”. I would have to see the source of the other statistics, so many times stats like the 82 percent number are added together from the three or four options given to make emphasize a point. “Do you want the US to leave your country?” 10% no, 65% yes when the job is done, 15% really yes, 10% right now! The headline then reads “90% want the US to leave” that type of thing.
Sorry, I don’t listen to rap. Period.
The reason so many don’t have confidence in the multi national force is because we left them high and dry after the first gulf war and many were brutally killed, they correctly see dissent in this country and around the world as a precursor to our abandoning them again. And that blame for that will fall on your shoulders. Sleep well.
April 5th, 2007 at 7:17 pm
Hi Enkidu,
I’m not sure why you think all conservatives or Republicans are racists, sure we have our David Dukes, and liberals have Louis Farikan (I probably misspelled his name, but he isn’t worth looking it up). My dad asked me what I thought of Obama earlier this week, I said I thought he was an articulate decent guy who probably would make an ok president. And he said “but do you think we are ready for a black man as our president?” I didn’t bother to tell him Obama is as white as he is black. Oops, forgot to mention my dad is a lifelong Democrat and is opposed to the war. In our conversation, I asked him if he thought we should just surrender and he said yes without hesitation.
Remember, the Republican party was formed largely on an anti slavery platform, and our first president signed the Emancipation Proclamation. The civil rights act of 1964 would not have passed without something like 75% of Republicans voting in favor to offset a less than majority of Democrats voting in the affirmative.
I’m not opposed to the other aspects of Great Society initiatives with the exception of Public broadcasting. I just don’t approve of the delivery method. I want state and local control of social spending, that way the capitalistic concept of competition can work to at least some degree.
When the US government went into the welfare business in the early 1900’s (I think), the entire budget was a couple hundred dollars, enough to pay for the postage to send a poll to people who would qualify if the programs existed to see if they would use those programs. To a man, they all responded that they wouldn’t because that was what family and churches were for. I know our world has changed to the point that isn’t practical, but regional administration would be more efficient in many ways.
Since you brought up schools, I am for public funding of schools, just not the delivery of the education. Vouchers.
One final comment, the phrase “promote equality” I believe in equality of opportunity not equality of outcome. What say you?
April 5th, 2007 at 10:00 pm
shcb:
Okay you win. You know everything and what you in your infinite wisdom refuse to look at or listen to doesn’t matter at all.
Yes, USS Liberty was an accident as the clear weather and clear markings and radio communications were obviously confusing to the Israelis as American warshipos are so easy to mistake for the Arab ones and after what 2 or 3 hours of attacks it was clear they were only playing with that mouse anyway, right?
I watched “The Shooter” tonight. Interesting to see the 911 Commission report on the hero’s desk as he logs on to his computer to figure out what kind of LIES the gov’t is dishing out today.
Would be nice to hear JBC’s comments on that movie.
Got to go, busy weekend ahead with loved ones.
April 5th, 2007 at 11:19 pm
To clarify, practicing Jews are unlikely to be involved in `Waging war by deception`(Mossad); that`s more the realm of secular Israelis and zionists.
Few talk about dual Israeli-US citizens in influential positions in the current US administration. Knowing many Jews during my childhood, the common thread was their loyalty to Israel first and foremost. I`m not saying that is bad, I`m just saying that it is strange the USA would allow foreign policy to be greatly influenced by other than people who put US interests or the general interests of humanity first. (Oh, I am so naive and I`m sure shcb will explain why this is a great thing and he will tell us all how America is doing a wonderful job defending Israel against the suicidal Arab ragheads who all wear bombs under their burkas and have no other purpose in life other than to blow themselves up for Allah.) Well, I`d rather hear it from someone who actually know what he`s talking about:
February 16, 2007
The High-Fivers
More proof the Israelis were shadowing the 9/11 hijackers
by Justin Raimondo
It was the tail-end of a bleak November 2001: a pall of shocked numbness hung over the country, and a rising war hysteria had nearly everyone cowed. Americans were just beginning to pick themselves up, dust themselves off, and focus on what had happened, and how to react. It was very early on the morning of the 23rd when, scanning the headlines, I came across a Washington Post story by John Mintz: “60 Israelis Detained on Tourist Visas Since Sept. 11.” Odd, I thought, why go after the Israelis, probably the least likely suspects?
The subhead was even more intriguing: “Government Calls Several Cases ‘of Special Interest,’ Meaning Related to Post-Attacks Investigation.” Apparently organized groups of Israelis had been arrested, and “dozens” held without bond. Inquiries to the Justice Department had yielded this response:
“In several cases, such as those in Cleveland and St. Louis, INS officials testified in court hearings that they were ‘of special interest to the government,’ a term that federal agents have used in many of the hundreds of cases involving mostly Muslim Arab men who have been detained around the country since the terrorist attacks.
“An INS official who requested anonymity said the agency will not comment on the Israelis. But he said the use of the term ‘special interest’ means the case in question is ‘related to the investigation of September 11th.’”
It wasn’t some anti-Semitic conspiracy crank sitting in his parents’ basement, or Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who first linked Israeli nationals to the events of 9/11: it was the U.S. government, specifically its law enforcement arm.
This I found utterly astonishing, because it was clear to me, at that point, that there was a link, albeit one largely unknown in its specifics. Why else were the feds casting their nets around for Israelis rather than Arabs, Persians, and, yes, Muslims?
There was more. The original Post piece was updated: the number of detained Israelis had risen to 120. I had been following the story in this space, and noting its significance, in the weeks before Carl Cameron broadcast his famous four-part report on Fox News, which exposed the extensive Israeli spy network in this country and opened with this electric charge:
“There is no indication that the Israelis were involved in the 9-11 attacks, but investigators suspect that the Israelis may have gathered intelligence about the attacks in advance, and not shared it. A highly placed investigator said there are – quote – ‘tie-ins.’ But when asked for details, he flatly refused to describe them, saying, – quote – ‘evidence linking these Israelis to 9-11 is classified. I cannot tell you about evidence that has been gathered. It’s classified information.'”
The story, as it developed in the months – and years – to come, sent me down an investigative path that has yet to reach its endpoint. What we know is this:
http://antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=10528
April 6th, 2007 at 12:25 am
shcb – get your facts straight – the people that you Americans left high and dry in the first Gulf War were the Kurds who you encouraged to rebel against Saddam with promise of further American support if they did. Well they did, YOU Americans did not keep to your word, and the Kurds were brutally repressed. (How how many sleepless nights did YOU have about that- I am betting zero.)
Today is a very different scenario. IF the US Generals had only listened to good ol shcb Ìraq would now be a nation of fun lovin gun totin Wal Mart shoppers, NOT.
I don`t have the answers, but on balance the approach of historical leaders and people I know who SUPPORT PEACE are far more noble and intelligent than the historical leaders and people I know who promote war, as those people tend to be zenophobic, self-centred, and lack huge measures of humanitys greatest qualities.
I do know that the USA HAS NOT and IS NOT doing much of anything good in Iraq and HAS DONE HELLISH BAD and is planning on staying there for a very long time, judging by the permanence of their new military bases and their enormous “consulate“. Staying prolongs the HELL and drags America down on so many levels. But it will make shcb proud.
Debating war strategy, diplomacy, or anything else with shcb is like debating with your TV set, and worse it is usually tuned to Faux News.
Gary Becher writes a superb monthly WAR article for a trashy magazine, and I think SHCB will like it because (a) it does not involve RAP music, and (b) it is pro-killing.
Just like shcb, Gary has an atrocious attitude about war, but unlike SHCB, at least Gary has analysis that is historically accurate (shcb seems to get all his cultural knowledge from the CIA fact book and all his war history from Stars and Stripes or Pentagon News Releases.) From a tactical perspective Gary is LIGHT YEARS ahead of anything that shcb has said about military tactics:
http://www.exile.ru/2006-November-17/how_to_win_in_iraq.html
April 6th, 2007 at 12:33 am
Oh, and for all you naive believers in the Official Conspiracy Theory, look who jsut signed on to ParPatriots’ for 911 Truth:
Lt. Col. Jeff Latas, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Former combat fighter pilot (F-15E and F-111). Former PRESIDENT, U.S. AIR FORCE ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION BOARD. Also served as PENTAGON WEAPONS Requirement Officer and as a member of the Pentagon’s Quadrennial DEFENSE REVIEW. Awarded Distinguish Flying Cross for Heroism, four Air Medals, four Meritorious Service Medals, and nine Aerial Achievement Medals. 20-year Air Force career. Currently commercial airline pilot.
yea, but what does he know. shcb is the real expert.
April 6th, 2007 at 10:33 am
Knarley,
I’m not an expert on these matters, I’m a amateur history buff, I’m fairly knowledgeable in the workings of our country’s government and economic system and I have a lot of common sense. The difficulty you have looking at these issues rationally is you almost always start from the perspective that America is wrong, government is wrong, corporations are wrong, and capitalism is wrong. Then you work backwards from that. If facts and rational thought won’t get you to the conclusion you desire, you find someone to lead you down a path that will get you there. Then you declare that this or that expert led you there so it must be true.
I love it when you and NL, mostly NL but sometimes you, call me racist and then trash Jews.
By the way, I’m not xenophobic, I don’t hate other countries or their peoples for no reason, I may not approve and I may criticize their lifestyles, or form of government, or lack of courage, but I don’t hate them, they can live however they want as long as they leave me alone.
April 6th, 2007 at 2:38 pm
shcb – you are now hallucinating.
April 6th, 2007 at 3:35 pm
I wish, my doctor only gives me the good drugs when I fall down really hard.
Wishing you and your family a happy Easter