US News and World Report 911 hit piece backfires against the Propagandists
May 29, 2009 – 10:53 am
U.S. News and World Report ran an article on May 26th entitled “The Inner Worlds of Conspiracy Believers”. The intention was to demonize the truth/freedom movement by implying that anyone who doesn’t believe the official story of 911 or anyone who mistrusts the government all-together is mentally ill. But the real story isn’t the obvious moronic drivel concocted by this yellow-journalistic rag of disinformation, it is the collection of well-informed comments left on their site…. 147 so far, the overwhelming majority of which are critical of the official conspiracy theory and also of this collection of nonsense that tries to pass itself off as news. Here are the comments…
Anyone who believes in the scientific
method owes it to themselves to see, once and for all, that the 9/11 collapse
of the WTC buildings 1, 2 & 7 were all done by explosives. Watch "9/11
Blueprint" found at http://www.ae911truth.org or on YouTube searching for
the video title. From there, it’s not hard to figure out who stood to gain, and
what they had to lose by doing it. I take GREAT offense to this report. Just
because people question an "official" story doesn’t make them
mentally ill. Everyone around the entire world should be demanding the TRUTH be
told about 9/11.
C.
C. of AZ
May 29, 2009 03:00:59 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
But
Popular Mechanics would never lie!?!?
I thought Popular Mechanics were the
final authority! set the record straight by pretending to debunk all of our
questions!
They are obviously paid off to lie and
divert us re: 9/11.
It’s amazing to hear social climber
types like Randi Rhodes use that pack of laughable lies as a legit debunking.
Have you heard about how some of the
NIST scientists who didn’t happen to check for nanothermite happen to be
pioneering experts in such high-tech paint-on explosives?
And how a Bush brother was in charge of
WTC security? Shhhh. don’t mention the Bushes are Nazis! That’s a conspiracy
theory, right?
Brian
of ME
May 29, 2009 01:16:05 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
But
Popular Mechanics would never lie!?!?
I thought Popular Mechanics were the
final authority! set the record straight by pretending to debunk all of our
questions!
They are obviously paid off to lie and
divert us re: 9/11.
It’s amazing to hear social climber
types like Randi Rhodes use that pack of laughable lies as a legit debunking.
Have you heard about how some of the
NIST scientists who didn’t happen to check for nanothermite happen to be
pioneering experts in such high-tech paint-on explosives?
And how a Bush brother was in charge of
WTC security? Shhhh. don’t mention the Bushes are Nazis! That’s a conspiracy
theory, right?
Brian
of ME
May 29, 2009 01:06:49 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
The
Facts are rather interesting.. try Them.
If US News would please stop pretending
we don’t know that the 9/11 commission was a sham, that the evidence doesn’t
point to some kind of inside job, etc. we’d all be better off.
It’s rather suspicious when people and
corporations are sooo sure there was no inside job. How are they so sure that
there wasn’t some mole that scheduled the wargames that day?
Stop kidding yourselves: 9/11 was
clearly covered up and Kean and Hamilton admit it in a New York Times op-ed.
Ignore the facts if you must, but you’re
not going to convince us that building 7 didn’t collapse that evening, that the
molten metal flowing from the towers wasn’t possible without high-tech
explosives.
We’ve got eyewitness testimony. See
Jason Bermas’ Fabled Enemies for a detailed look into the spy networks that
were involved. If only you had 1/10th the integrity of Jason Bermas.
Brian
of ME
May 29, 2009 00:54:44 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
I first am inclined to applaud all of my
awakened like-minds for their intellect, competence, logic and articulation.
You, Americans, have proven to be a passionate group of free-thinkers and
truth-seekers. Now, before I gerund myself into a hole, I’ll make my point.
I would like to bring to all of your
attention the conspiracy the researchers supposedly concocted to prove that all
9/11 Truth believers subscribe to most any other conspiracy they hear. Here’s
the passage:
…"both psychologists, asked
volunteers about eight common conspiracy theories and one that researchers made
up: “The government is using mobile phone technology to track everyone all the
time.”
The only way to argue that this
conspiracy is "made up" by psychologists is the usage of vague,
general terms. "The government" is only applicable to the audience
who hears it. Also, not all people revere their nation’s government as the only
government anymore. Since the rising of the UN and EU, many people are apt to
refer to "the government" meaning any one or combination of various
groups with authority over that certain nation. The use of "mobile phone
technology" could potentially be an argument based on the technicality
that the technology used in mobile phones is not mobile phone technology
exclusively. Lastly, the ridiculous phrasing, "to track everyone all the
time" is far too general to expect a comprehensive response from a
layperson. Obviously, "the government" is NOT tracking
"everyone" nor are they doing it "all the time," largely
because not everyone even has a mobile phone. Even if they did not only would
it be pointless, but it would be far beyond the funding available at this
current state for a nation’s government — or even more absurd, an
international authority — to fund the tracking of everyone with a cell phone
24 hours a day. The intentional vagueness was a not-so-clever trick on the
author’s part.
Now, for my opinion:
I do believe that technology used in
mobile phones – namely, the widely-spreading and recently popular feature, the
GPS – may potentially be used to track individuals personal trends, habits, and
whereabouts. Cell phones without actual comprehensive GPS features have
previously been used to track callers in aid to bringing criminals to justice.
To suppose that "the government" will never use these devices to
track citizens’ actions is foolish. To do so would place far too much trust in
powerful people who express authority over large masses of people.
So, had these conspiring researchers
called MY home and spoke to ME, I would have been another statistic, as I would
have most likely heard the general terms used and immediately attached connotation,
resulting in my answer, "yes."
Take that.
Tiffany
Trouble of TX
May 29, 2009 00:21:05 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Are there still people that believe the
outrageous "Official Story"?
Mike
Baldwin of CA
May 28, 2009 23:45:19 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Notice that the writer — and the
university researchers he cites — don’t include the government among those
alleging conspiracies. (Even though thousands of people in the U.S. alone are
charged with by prosecutors and indicted by grand juries for conspiracy every
year.) Only those alleging conspiratorial actions by governmental institutions
and the political establishment are rated "conspiracy believers."
Notice that the writer makes not even a
token attempt to evaluate the evidence of a single "conspiracy
theory." The reader is expected to assume that such theories are
self-evidently preposterous and unworthy of any consideration.
Notice further that the reader is
expected to assume that the only proper response to "conspiracy
believers" is to psychologize as to what motivates such perversity.
Notice that the author doesn’t provide
any specific quantification about the trick question that’s supposed to
demonstrate "conspiracy believers’" prejudiced thinking. For all we
know, "conspiracy believers" are only 2% likelier to buy the faked
conspiracy asked by the pollster, but, whatever the actual figure, we’re told
"that conspiracy believers displayed a greater propensity than
nonbelievers to jump to conclusions based on limited evidence."
Notice further that such "jump[ing]
to conclusions" is limited to those who disbelieve the government. No
evidence is provided as to whether non-"conspiracy believers"
"jump to conclusions based on limited evidence" when that limited
evidence is proclaimed by official sources.
Very, very interesting. Thanks, U.S.
News & World Report, for including this important article by a reporter for
Science News.
Randy
McCosker of CA
May 28, 2009 23:38:03 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Well Bruce, have you read all these
comments? It appears there is an abundance of examples into the "Inner
Worlds of Conspiracy Believers". Hundreds of them in fact.
I have to agree with Goertzel’s
assertion that the, "arguments advanced by them tell you more about the
believer than about the event”.
These so-called "conspiracy
theorists" seem to be completely rational, intelligent, thoughtful
Americans that share the common trait of using their own intelligence and
cognitive skill as opposed to blindly believing an anemic, commissioned report.
If you are attempting to develop the
argument that "displaying an inquisitive outlook" and questioning the
official government account of the crime of 9/11 is "psychologically"
equivalent to superstitious, paranormal-seeking skeptics, these hundreds of
response comments alone have most clearly destroyed any argument that your
pathetic article endeavored to make.
Rod
Tataryn of WA
May 28, 2009 22:32:07 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
PatrickSMcNally: "Well, cows don’t
contain large amounts of aluminum and iron rust, whereas the World Trade Center
did. The presence of thermite is automatic on those grounds alone. The issue of
nanothermite is simply about the actual size of the aluminum and iron rust
particles, which is a question of how far would things be expected to break
down amidst such a titanic collapse."
So these red/gray bi-layered chips come
from which parts of the World Trade Towers?
"The red material contains grains approximately
100 nm across which are largely iron oxide, while aluminum is contained in tiny
plate-like structures…The iron oxide and aluminum
are intimately mixed in the red
material."
"It is also shown that within the
red layer there is an intimate mixing of the Fe-rich grains and Al/Si
plate-like particles and that these particles are embedded in a carbon-rich
matrix."
Active Thermitic Material Discovered in
Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe
So how did the aluminum and iron become
bound in a carbon-rich matrix during the destruction of the towers?
Should we expect to find red/gray chips
after any building containing iron oxide and aluminum is destroyed?
The paper also notes, "No red/gray
chips having the characteristics delineated here were found in dust generated
by controlled demolition using conventional explosives and methods, for the
Stardust Resort & Casino in Las Vegas (demolished 13 March 2007) and the
Key Bank in Salt Lake City (demolished 18 August 2007)."
Active Thermitic Material Discovered in
Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe
tanabear
of NC
May 28, 2009 21:36:03 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Richard Gage of Architects &
Engineers for 9/11 Truth was on KMPH Fox 26’s "Great Day" morning
show. They show the collapse of Building 7 multiple times, from different
angles, including side by side with a controlled demolition. The hosts were
pretty rattled.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oO2yT0uBQbM
Editors at US News & World Report
are now (further) exposed as traitors. They are accessories to the cover-up of
the crimes of 9/11
We will never forget
Arthur
Fischl of NY
May 28, 2009 20:39:13 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
"Top
military brass met to discuss what really happened on 9/11"
"those who met did not believe, in
whole or in part, the official line that 19 Arabs nationals armed with box
cutters hijacked four U.S. passenger planes and flew three of them into the
World Trade Center and Pentagon.
The officers included veterans of Marine
Corps Special Operations."
http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_4741.shtml
Fank
of AL
May 28, 2009 19:47:40 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
The twin towers and Building 7 were
brought down by controlled demolition. You can see and hear the bombs going
off. You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to figure it out. All you need is
eyes and ears. The "official" 9/11 story is a farce and not even
worthy of a comic book.
maddog
of CA
May 28, 2009 19:05:16 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Nanothermite is an engineered material,
it would not create itself just because aluminum and rust were in the building.
It would be just as intellectually dishonest to find a ream of paper at the
base of a fallen tree and chalk it up to the force of collapse acting on the
pulp.
BenF
of CA
May 28, 2009 18:22:21 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Patrick
Take your own advice and look at the
pictures and videos of the debris pile. The vast majority of concrete floors
were pulverized. Govenor Pataki talks about it in this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDuBi8KyOhw
Chris
Sarns of CA
May 28, 2009 18:08:17 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Patrick, I have teken the time to
examine the remains of the buildings & looked at your link in your latest
post. I am unable to find any photos of reinforced concrete floor slabs or the
steel structures they were attached to. Do you have a link?
Shawn
of AZ
May 28, 2009 18:05:30 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
> the process to change the form of
the concrete floors to a particulate solid (powder and ash)
Going from making a general comment
about the emergence of dust from the collapse to claiming that concrete floors
turned into powder and ash is a big leap. A significant proportion of the dust
would have been generated from plaster, which has a much lower strength than
concrete. But there were concrete slabs among the wreckage after the collapse,
which even played a role in saving some lives:
http://www.papba.org/media-archive/usa/usa-020609-debris.html
"20 people survived the collapse,
amid steel beams, concrete slabs and other wreckage. They escaped death in the
most unlikely of ways and in the most surprising of places. Fourteen people
survived inside the remnants of a stairwell at the center of the north tower.
One man remembers falling from a 22nd floor stairwell in the north tower and
regaining consciousness atop the 12-story-deep pile of rubble at Ground Zero.
Two police officers, trapped in debris between the towers, barely survived both
collapses."
Take some time to investigate the
remains of the collapse and you should find that the majority of concrete in
the buildings was not by any means pulverized. That’s an illusion which is
created by the dust from gypsum boards and related materials disintegrating
very swiftly.
PatrickSMcNally
of FL
May 28, 2009 17:32:36 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
That’s all I need to insure mental
health? Okay, I believe.
No wait. I don’t.
Okay, I do.
Don’t.
Do.
Unuh….
Frank
of AL
May 28, 2009 17:10:45 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
> 2 white elephants that were costing
billions in asbestos abatement
The cost of asbestos clean-up for the
World Trade Center was estimated at around 200 million:
“The suit sought recovery of the Port
Authority’s huge expenses of removing asbestos from hundreds of properties ranging
from the enormous World Trade Center complex-which represented more than $200
million of the abatement costs-to bridge and tunnel toll booths.”
That comes from Port Authority of New
York & New Jersey et al. vs. Affiliated FM Insurance Co. et al., U.S.
District Court for the District of New Jersey, No. 91-cv-2907, and is cited
here:
http://www.newswithviews.com/Spingola/deanna39.htm
The outlook for property at the WTC had
actually been very good in the years before 911:
http://www.nytimes.com/1998/05/31/realestate/commercial-property-downtown-at-the-world-trade-center-things-are-looking-up.html?pagewanted=print
"As the market for office space in
midtown has tightened and rental rates increased, tenants have been looking to
downtown as a cheaper alternative. Over the last year, those seeking large
blocks of space have been finding them at the trade center, which had many
vacancies as a result of the 1993 terrorist bombing and the shrinkage of the
financial industry in the early part of the decade… But as a result of the
last year’s work, Ms. Nanninga, said the complex is over 90 percent occupied
and expects to it reach the 95 percent mark by the end of the year. That, she
said, would be about as full as the center is likely to get, since there is almost
always someone moving in or out."
No signs of any white elephant there.
PatrickSMcNally
of FL
May 28, 2009 16:55:27 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
All
falling object take the path of least resistance
In the spirit of Richard Feyman’s (PhD
Cal Tech) demonstration to the world on how the “O-Ring” failure caused the
Shuttle to disintegrate before our eyes.
I simply take a 40 pound chunk of
concrete. We can see that it is concrete. I can drop it from a height of 3 feet
and it will make a noise when it hit’s the floor but it will not break apart.
It does not disintegrate to gravel much less powder or ash. We know that if it
drops from 100+ feet it will break into more pieces but still not powder or
ash. Now we also know that it will break apart ONLY upon impact with the ground
depending on the hardness of the ground. It may also break apart if it hits
another object which is stationary or moving slower than it is moving or is hit
by a object moving faster than it is moving but again it will not become powder
or ash.
Below are two simple physic’s
observations:
First; All falling objects take the path
of LEAST resistance, (therefore not the path of greatest resistance)
and
Second; To change a material, from its
solid state to a particulate solid state,
1) takes time
2) takes a process where the solid is
changed (crushed or ground)
3) takes energy.
Now let us apply the second of these
simple physics observation to the collapse/disintegration of either of the Twin
Towers in NYC on 9-11-01.
First: time – We know the collapse is
completed in less than 15 seconds and that almost immediately the powder,
“dust”, appeared and within a few seconds the powder and ash had engulfed the
building. So we know the time is less than 15 seconds for the production of the
powder and ash. We also know that some of the powder and ash was produced
within a second of the start of the collapse.
Second: the process to change the form
of the concrete floors to a particulate solid (powder and ash) – There seem to
be 3 categories of processes that could be used for this purpose 1) natural 2)
mechanical and 3) explosive. By a simple process of deduction we can rule out
natural processes because we know they can take hundreds of years just to
produce a very small change, except for volcanic action, earthquakes, and
massive movements of air or water none of which occurred in NYC on 9-11-01. We
will address the “massive” movement of the “top” if you are sure that such an
occurrence happened.
This leaves us with either a mechanical
process or an explosive one to produce the powder and ash. Again by using the
simple process of deduction we can eliminate the mechanical process because of
the time it take to crush and or grind big chunks of concrete just to gravel.
(Think stone crushers) The random movement of the collapse elements will
produce chunks but never powder and ash. With the simple elimination of the
mechanical process we are left with only the explosive process and we know that
the explosive process could do what we saw happen as each of the towers
collapsed in less than 15 seconds on the morning of 9-11-01 in NYC.
Just as the “O-Ring” material did not
expand when the clamp was removed because the elastic property of the “O-Ring”
material was affected by the cold there is no natural or mechanical processes,
that in less than 15 second can produce the particulate solids (powder and ash)
that we witnessed as each tower collapsed
You say that my conclusion is impossible
because no scientist from any of the major universities have made this simple
observation. I suggest to you that yes, they have all remained SILENT but there
SILENCE does not supported the “official” government story it just demonstrates
to the world how bankrupt our Universities are.
Now some are wondering why I included
the first observation. I did that because two noted engineers Bazant of
Northwestern University and Stephen of the Cambridge University UK have peer
reviewed papers published in the Journal of Engineering Mechanics. Therefore
this is TRUTH! The essence of these two papers is that the “top” of the
building crushed the building below and then the “top” proceeds to collapse
into it own pile of rubble . While there is considerable debate about what
happens at the “top” it seems that these learned men must have skipped 6th
grade science where we (USA) all learned that “All falling objects take the
path of least resistance” not the path of greatest resistance. Yes we must
APPLY what we know as we watch each tower collapse to come to an accurate
understanding of what happened in NYC on 9-11-01. The “tops” if they existed
and that is debatable MUST fall to the side. There are NO restraining
horizontal forces to “keep” the “top” on the top of the lower tower structure
as it falls supposedly crushing the strongest part of the building on its way
to the ground.
Explosives had to be used to cause each
of the Towers to collapse in the manner that we all have seen them collapse.
A simple image is a bus and a pickup
truck. The pickup truck runs into the front of the bus, but it does not destroy
the bus.
The relentless rant "Conspiracy
Theory" means "Nut job" is propaganda. Your article is
propaganda. You are entrusted and protected by the first amendment to inform
us. You have not only failed to do your fiduciary duty, you have effectively
committed treason by aiding and abetting the real terrorists.
We will not forget.
The FBI has NOT charged OBL with 9/11
because there is NO hard evidence that he was involved.
Any crime planned and committed by two
or more people is a conspiracy.
"OBL and 19 hijackers did it."
is a "Conspiracy Theory"!
Therefore: We are a nation of "Nut
Jobs" because we all believe in conspiracies.
Chris
Sarns of CA
May 28, 2009 16:31:59 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
> All it takes to KNOW something is
wrong with what the government told the citizens is five minutes of studying
any commercial aircraft accident that resulted in fatalities besides the four
airliners claimed to have "vaporized" on 9-11-01
Actually the planes are not claimed to
have vaporized. Photos of what is claimed to be wreckage of Flight 77, for
example, can be found here:
http://911myths.com/html/757_wreckage.html
Even if one wishes to argue that the
above wreckage was somehow planted, it would still be wrong to say that the
planes are claimed to have vaporized. What is claimed is that we have photos of
the wreckage, as above.
Apart from that, one should be careful
of making too many comparisons with normal accidents. Most accidents occur when
the pilot is lost and flying at a slowed speed trying to determine their
location. The flights on 911 were deliberately rammed at high speed by whoever
was in control of them. That much is just a fact, even if you wish to postulate
that the planes were taken over by remote control or some other hypothesis.
Since the flights were deliberately rammed at high speed, it’s only logical to
expect that they will be much more fully shredded than occurs in a usual
accident.
PatrickSMcNally
of FL
May 28, 2009 16:23:26 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
> A Boeing 757 is said to crash into
the Pentagon yet leaves a round hole only 16 feet wide
You may be confusing the entry hole on
the exterior with the exit hole in the interior. Here are the actual dimensions
of impact damage:
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/analysis/conclusions/damage.html
"Regions in which the Pentagon’s
west facade were punctured were restricted to the first and second floors. The
puncture on the second floor was about 18 feet wide and extended to the top of
the second floor, about 26 feet above the ground. The region with punctures on
the first floor was about 96 feet wide."
That’s a bit wider than you’re
suggesting.
PatrickSMcNally
of FL
May 28, 2009 16:05:27 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
So people who question governments are
now officially crazy because: "they display an inquisitive, imaginative outlook"
?
i wonder what people like Socrates and
Aristotle would of thought of this?
but what makes me laugh even more is
that people were actually paid to come up with this ‘research’ and article,
lol.
oh well, i guess it seems now that all
governments are infallable theres not much we lowly people can do anymore but
blindly accept the harsh realities of our eternal servitude.
Keltik
of XX
May 28, 2009 15:54:41 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
9/11
WAS CARRIED OUT BY THE MOSSAD AND US GOVT
I know the truth. they cannot suppress
it. 9/11 was an INSIDE JOB by the MOSSAD and elements of the U.S. Govt and
Military (NORAD).
screw these bastard liars who know we
are right!
Dale
A. Sender of OR
May 28, 2009 15:49:07 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
> The odds that an entire plane cold
vaporize in a Pennsylvanian field without one piece of aluminum for evidence?
They did find two turbines. This is the
statement by the mayor of the town of Shanksville, Ernie Stull:
http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,265160-5,00.html
"They just found the two turbines
because, of course, they’re heavier and more massive than everything else. But
there was almost nothing left of the actual airplane. You can still find
plate-sized parts out there. And Neville from the farm over there found an
aluminum part from the airplane’s outside shell behind his barn that must’ve
been about 8 by 10 or even 8 by 12 feet."
There are more debris photos from Flight
93 here:
http://911myths.com/html/flight_93_photos.html
PatrickSMcNally
of FL
May 28, 2009 15:42:58 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
A
Follow-up Challenge for Psychologists
So we now have psychologists studying
the traits of "conspiracy theorists". I would like to encourage
psychologists to do a follow-up study on the derogatory connotations associated
with the "conspiracy theorist" label and how it is being used today
(much the same as "f*ggot" and "n*gger" were used in the
past) to intimidate and marginalize a segment of the population. That anyone
who openly questions the official account of 9/11 is stamped with a demeaning
label is a significant injustice. The reasons for this bigoted behavior need to
be studied and understood fully if we are to move forward.
Concerned
Citizen of MA
May 28, 2009 15:33:31 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
> If you drop a cow from a building
you will not find cheeseburgers at the bottom.
Well, cows don’t contain large amounts
of aluminum and iron rust, whereas the World Trade Center did. The presence of
thermite is automatic on those grounds alone. The issue of nanothermite is
simply about the actual size of the aluminum and iron rust particles, which is
a question of how far would things be expected to break down amidst such a
titanic collapse. There’s room for some valid scientific questions there, but
it doesn’t sound promising as case for controlled demolition.
PatrickSMcNally
of FL
May 28, 2009 15:20:41 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
More
attempts at head-faking gobbledy gook.
"Dana of MI ( where the Muslims
hang out in numbers) thinks 9/11 was cooked up by Israel.Hmmmm Must either be
that Jew Bin Laden again taking credit for the work of others or Dana of Mi has
skipped her meds. Wonder which it is." (Jimmy of NV)
Your reading comprehension is poor. I
didn’t say Israel cooked up anything and the Bin Laden "taking
credit" tape is obviously a fake (please, watch it people and judge for
yourselves).
The sad but beautiful thing about 911 is
that the clear picture is there for anyone who has the courage to look and the
will to research. Then, comments designed to put the masses back to sleep can
be seen for what they are.
dana
of MI
May 28, 2009 15:10:00 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
What are the odds that three buildings
within blocks of each other could fall straight down without damaging any other
building in NYC? The odds that an entire plane cold vaporize in a Pennsylvanian
field without one piece of aluminum for evidence?
The government funded both sides of the
Iran-Iraq war in the ’80s, and funded both the Taliban and the warlords in
Afghanistan. 10,500 people per day die in America per day;
isn’t it possible a one day bump in the
death pool on 9/11 was considered a small price for a $3 trillion dollar payday
for the military industrial complex?
If you drop a cow from a building you
will not find cheeseburgers at the bottom.
BenF
of CA
May 28, 2009 14:45:27 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
> You also don’t understand (or
pretend to not understand) the difference between thermite and nano-thermite.
The difference arises from the degree to
which the composition materials have been broken down. Thermite appears to be
typically composed of iron, especially iron rust, and aluminum. There was
plenty of each at the World Trade Center. What has distinguished nanothermite
from plain thermite is that the particles are much smaller, having been broken
down much further. A nanoparticle has a diameter of between one billionth to
ten millionths of a meter. So because things are more fully broken down the
mixture between aluminum and iron rust can occur at a more intense level. That
seems to reduce this to a debate over whether or not the crushing impacts of
the collapses coud be expected to cause a sufficient breakdown in composition
to give us some nanoparticles. While I’m not enough of an expert in physics to
make any detailed argument on this point, it does seem plausible that this is
how the matter will be slowly resolved. Devastating collapse impacts cause
major decompositions of structural materials into nanoparticles; significant
presence of aluminum and iron rust in the builings leads to the formation of
nanothermite. While it’s worth keeping an eye on any further scientific debates
which may occur around this issue, it doesn’t sound promising for proving the
controlled demolition thesis about the World Trade Center.
PatrickSMcNally
of FL
May 28, 2009 14:10:37 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
You people know where you can go, and
what you can do to yourselves when you get there. You cannot present one shred
of evidence to prove that the "official" conspiracy theory about 9/11
is true. It’s not up to people who can see what’s right in front of their face
to prove that the story is a lie, it’s up to jerkoffs and disinfo artists like
you to prove that it’s true, instead of engaging in the time-honored, 5th-grade
practice of printing ad hominem attacks.
If the U.S. federal government had to
take this idiotic fairy tale into a courtroom and deal with due process, they’d
be laughed into the street for trying to convince a jury that Arabs hijacked
planes, when they don’t have any video of them boarding any planes on that
date, or that a plane crash and a kerosene fire could muster up enough kinetic
energy to take down a 110-story steel-framed building and reduce it to rubble,
while vaporizing the over-engineered central cores, and pulverizing millions of
square feet of concrete into fine powder in mid-air.
Those twin towers didn’t collapse –
they were demolished, floor by floor, in mid-air, with high-grade explosives.
There are plenty of photos on the Internet that show beyond any doubt that
those columns were cut at 45-degree angles, a hallmark of controlled
demolition.
Anybody who could still believe this
crap after seven and a half years doesn’t have enough brains to bait a fish
hook, or to get a job as a spellchecker in an M&M factory.
Have a nice day.
Big
M of AZ
May 28, 2009 14:08:47 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Pay
No Attention To The Man Behind The Mirror!
The Zapruder film clearly shows JFK
taking a shot to the right front portion of his forehead which knocks his head
back violently.
A Boeing 757 is said to crash into the
Pentagon yet leaves a round hole only 16 feet wide, devoid of any evidence of a
757.
Watch the clip of Building 7 fall and
then tell me that’s footage of a building burning down!
I could go on and on for hours.
Why don’t you write an article about
people who will believe whatever they are told by those in positions of
authority?
That would make for an interesting read!
Robert
Calton of MO
May 28, 2009 13:45:11 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Interesting that this author tries to
lump people who don’t believe the governments version of things as somehow
different than normal people.
In this case there is a right group and
a wrong group..
The people who don’t believe the
government version have obviously done their homework and have very credible
questions. Why would our government of the people not be willing to satisfy
these people with further inquiries?
Why would people write articles like
this instead of spending their time carefully refuting claims with clear data
and research?
I personally am not into this fray to a
great degree, however I am sure that Bldg 7 did not fall like it did because of
fire.. Why would it fall? I don’t know… But that alone gives me, a thinking
man, pause to start to question why the government would lie about that. As I
pause and look at both groups I see the government in a cover up mode and i see
them being secretive and dismissive..
If there is something that was covered
up or if there wasn’t we should open up the investigation, put on rational,
distinguished people who are on both sides of the debate. It would not be hard
to conclude if Bldg 7 were taken down or not. It would not be hard to know if
thermite was present at the site and if so why? and if not it should be clearly
refuted and the public should feel comfortable about the results.. Right now
I’m not..
The 9/11 truth group on the other hand
has some very compelling evidence, studies and backing of a broad and
accomplished group of people all asking the same questions… Why would the
government not want to answer them? I don’t know..
david
Joshua of IN
May 28, 2009 13:39:40 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
I tried refuting your evidence, but I
couldn’t. That damn building seven and the paper on nano-thermite! :( So, I
resorted to ad hominem attacks, but that has failed me. So, as of late I’ve
been posing like I agree with you, but adding in there that I’m basing it all
on bogus theories like no planes and space beams. As you know, I have been
doing this to discredit you, but I have been failing at this as well. People
have become more discerning. I’ve also been posting that I am conflating all of
this with the Jews. This is to sicken you and your friends into thinking
anti-semitism is at the root of your questions about 911. This is failing too.
So, I hope you don’t mind that I am trying to make you look crazy. It worked in
the Soviet Union and to shut down abuse victims of the church so my hope is
that it’ll be a smash hit here as well. I’m keeping my fingers crossed. In the
meantime, whereever you cry out for truth, I’ll be there beside you also demanding
the truth, but adding a little something about the Chupa Cabra to try to make
you look like a fool. See, I’m a shill, paid to discredit you.
Sincerely,
Shilly Shillerson von Shill
ShillyShillersonvonShill
of KY
May 28, 2009 13:11:45 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Followibg
evudebce is not "conspiracy thinking"
I believe that elements of the
government were responsible or complicit in the 9/11 crimes not because of any
theory, but because the EVIDENCE clearly indicates that the official story in
incredible and completely bogus. Why don’t YOU examine the evidence and see
where it leads, instead of resorting to name-calling?
James
Hufferd of IA
May 28, 2009 13:05:53 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Dana of MI ( where the Muslims hang out
in numbers) thinks 9/11 was cooked up by Israel.Hmmmm Must either be that Jew
Bin Laden again taking credit for the work of others or Dana of Mi has skipped
her meds. Wonder which it is.
Jimmy
of NV
May 28, 2009 12:48:31 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Suspicious and inquisitive you say? Very
very funny.Try ignorant and stupid.They fit much better
JND
of NY
May 28, 2009 12:43:09 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Those who’s agenda it is to discredit
the 9/11 truth movement know they dont stand a chance in hell if they try to
debate the science or encourage readers to do their own investigation and think
for themselves.
Therefore … they do the (next ?) best
thing … they call us crazy.
“How fortunate it is for leaders that
men do not think.” – Adolf Hitler
Psychology
of "conspiracy theorists" is bad psychology
While the author of the review, Bruce Bower,
may claim that he does not espouse the unscientific allegations made by the
team, whose study he reviews, he does not distance himself from such
allegations. On the contrary, it appears that he relishes in presenting these
as munitions in his „war“ against the 9/11 truth movement.
In the second paragraph the author
claims that a team led by psychologist Viren Swami had identified several
„traits“ associated with what he pejoratively designates as „9/11
conspiracies“. However, what he lists as „traits“ are perfectly rational
political stances that have nothing in common with what psychologists call
„traits“. Since when does the endorsement of democratic practices, questioning
alleged government lies on 9/11 and a general attitude of cynicism towards politics,
defined as „psychological traits“?
The author cites Ted Goertzel, a
sociologist, who claims that each of a person’s convictions about secret plots
serves as evidence for other conspiracy beliefs, bypassing any need for
confirming evidence. I doubt that a true scientist would make such a
preposterous statement. Apparently Goertzel also claimed that „A belief that
the government is covering up its involvement in the 9/11 attacks thus feeds
the idea that the government is also hiding evidence of extraterrestrial
contacts or that John F. Kennedy was not killed by a lone gunman.“ Does
Goertzel really believe that the thousands of scientists, engineers,
architects, physicists, physicians, pilots, war veterans, former CIA employees,
scholars, artists, who doubt the official conspiracy theory on 9/11 now believe
in „extraterrestrials“? What kind of sociology is that?
The author attributes to Goertzel the
concept of „conspiracy thinking“, apparently unaware that this term would far
better apply to those who establish a conspiracy, not those who try to solve
it.
Another arbitrary term used by the
author is that of „conspiracy believers“, as if there were a particular
category of people who „believe in conspiracies“ vs. others who believe that
conspiracies do not take place. Are police investigators, for example,
„conspiracy believers“, because it is their job is to solve criminal
conspiracies? Is there anyone who really believes that conspiracies do not take
place? Why do all these scientists elude the basic question, namely whether a
particular conspiracy theory fits the facts? If it does not, it is a bad
theory, if it does, it is a good theory. According to my view, for example, the
official conspiracy theory of 9/11, according to which Osama bin Laden and his
assistants conspired to attack the United States on 9/11, is a bad theory,
because it has never been proved and because it is scientifically untenable.
Others may be of another opinion, although I never met anyone who can prove
this official theory.
Elias
Davidsson of XX
May 28, 2009 11:17:24 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Oh yeah, we believe you Goldberg, honest
we do. You people wouldn’t lie to us now would you? Like Madoff and the rest of
the "swindlers list", you people are NOT trusted. Your media is NOT
trusted, not ONE SINGLE WORD is believed.
House
Goy of GA
May 28, 2009 10:41:17 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
>"The heavily flawed paper was
published in an obscure journal that does NOT follow
>standard peer review procedures and
charges authors to publish their papers. Google
>“vanity press”. While there are a
small number of legitimate journals that charge
>authors Bentham Open in NOT one of
them."
You doubt the validity of the paper, the
legitimacy of the journal and the peer review procedure. Yet I don’t see your
peer reviewed publication refuting the paper. That’s because the paper is
valid, the journal legitimate, and the peer review solid.
Futhermore, samples have been sent
directly to other scientists who confirm the findings. Furthermore, RJ Lee
confirms molten iron, and finds iron-rich microspheres. USGS finds molten
molybdenum. Furthermore, a thermite/thermate reaction can be observed happening
in the South Tower shortly before its demise.
The reason you pay to publish a paper in
an OPEN JOURNAL is so that YOU AND I CAN READ IT FOR FREE. Is that clear?
You proceed with a straw man argument:
(I don’t care who you quoted)
>“For those who don’t know, thermitic
material (thermite) is what demolition experts use
>to bring down buildings.”
Professor Steven Jones, professor Niels
Harrit, Kevin Ryan et al. never put forth this argument. It is well known that
demolition experts use conventional high explosives such as RDX to bring down
buildings. The 9/11 truth movement never made this statement, you have set up a
straw man you subsequently take down and then pretend you have defeated the
actual argument. This is tell-tale ‘debunker’ deception, as professed by Hearst
publications and their ilk.
You also don’t understand (or pretend to
not understand) the difference between thermite and nano-thermite. Thermite is
an incendiary, nano-thermite is a high explosive. However, devices exist to use
thermite/thermate as a cutter charge, and the military does have applications
for nano-thermite in shaped charges.
Here is a demonstration:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wn-MCCZ3O1M
Of course, this is light years behind of
what the military is capable of:
http://www.p2pays.org/ref/34/33115.pdf
This was 2001/2002. Note the shaped
charge example.
So many Len’s, so little hope.
Oh, and David, since you brought up a
retired CIA employee, seven of his colleagues disagree with him:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_alan_mil_070922_seven_cia_veterans_c.htm
Time to have them meet up and discuss
their differences, wouldn’t you think?
SnowCrash
of XX
May 28, 2009 09:36:20 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
US News and World Report is owned by
Mort Zuckerman, who’s part of the Israel lobby. It’s very important for Israel
to keep the world believing that Muslims committed the 911 murders, even if the
official story is by far the most ridiculous.
dana
of MI
May 28, 2009 09:28:04 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Proof
9/11 was an inside job is rock solid.
This is Joseph Goebbels style
"psychology" (better known as propaganda) these clowns are promoting
in this article.
The proof the towers were demolished has
been released in the following paper: Active Thermitic Material Discovered in
Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe
The paper has been extensively peer
reviewed and has been published in a scientific journal. Google it and you will
find it right away.
These quacks either don’t know what they
are talking about concerning 9/11 (idiots) or they know exactly what they are
doing and are engaging in an intentional propaganda effort for unsavory reasons
(liars). Take your pick.
The jig is up. Too many of us know the
truth about 9/11 to buy into the lies and junk science these bozos are trying
to sell us.
Centrino105
of CA
May 28, 2009 09:23:30 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Wow… The quality of U.S. university
level education IS in a sad state of affairs. All it takes to KNOW something is
wrong with what the government told the citizens is five minutes of studying
any commercial aircraft accident that resulted in fatalities besides the four
airliners claimed to have "vaporized" on 9-11-01 and look at the
evidence manifests as well. THERE IS LITERALLY THOUSANDS OF ITEMS IDENTIFYING
THE AIRCRAFT. NOT ONE SINGLE PIECE OF EVIDENCE EXISTS THAT SHOWS ABSOLUTELY THE
IDENTITY OF ALL FOUR JETLINERS. A fricken first grader could figure this one
out.
Anyone who accepts the governments
version on 9-11 is not only maniacally delusional they are also a detriment to
U.S. freedom!
Mike
of WA
May 28, 2009 09:21:05 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Fear
of Discussion or Fear of the Truth
The ability to question any activity is
crucial to civil discourse and discovery. When doors are shut only more
questions arise. Whether beliefs are rational or irrational is not the point.
What is crucial is the freedom to investigate, evaluate and, if necessary,
reinterpret. At a time long ago, a few souls questioned an earth-centric
universe, some like Galileo payed a professional price for their heresy.
Rutherford rocked established physics by replacing plum pudding with a solar
system. At the time his analysis was likened to firing a 15-inch shell at a
sheet of tissue paper and having it bounce back. Considered insane by some, he
was eventually proven correct. Today many scientist, physical, social, economic
etc., challenge conventional wisdom. Orthodoxy by its nature always has room
for review. Yet some would rather shout down voices rather than hear them.
Particularly in the political arena, where few dare to wade. Many in the 911
truth movement ask difficult and uncomfortable questions. There premises seem
outlandish. Yet only transparency can resolve these matters. Answers must be
sought in the deepest secrets of government. No truth should be beyond the
reach of citizens. If we are to participate in a healthy democracy, then we as
citizens must be given access to all facts, no matter how incompetent, ugly or
absurd. Demagoguery is a common fault. The courage to fight for truth is rare.
In the old Soviet Union, fear of discussion dictated national policy. Yet fear
of the truth was an even bigger concern. Is that where we want our America to
go?
rashid
of CA
May 28, 2009 09:15:48 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Christianity, Judaism and Islam are the
biggest conspiracy theories and the world is crazy! so maybe there’s some
validity to this story.
PaulZ
of IL
May 28, 2009 09:12:58 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Unfortunately, conspiracies abound in
fact. Just two or more people getting together to conspire to commit crime …
happens all the time – from the local community level right up to the
corporatist government of the Empire… But of course, labelling the U.S. as
such would be regarded by Viren Swami as the work of ‘conspiracy theorists’ as
well. Regardless of the evidence.
Since ‘Dr. Swami’, apparently according
to the article, brought up the issue of 9/11 – a truly amazing
government-involved psyop against the American people – he should be courageous
and willing to debate that subject. But my ’suspicious’ predilection leads me
to doubt that he would stand behind his words. However, I will write him to
offer the challenge. One psychologist to another.
dr..
forensic neuropsychologist
douglasterrance
of NC
May 28, 2009 09:11:21 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
See how easy it is to make mistakes?
thank heavens for all those Jewish scientists letting us know that its all safe
to ignore and go back to sleep.
BArton
of MI
May 28, 2009 09:01:06 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
So, people who demonstrate "an
inquisitive, imaginative outlook" are mentally ill. Interesting, comrade,
interesting.
Niktor
of NV
May 28, 2009 08:57:32 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
The Martha Mitchell effect is a process
by which a belief is mistakenly diagnosed as a delusion by a psychiatrist. This
is named after Martha Beall Mitchell (the wife of John Mitchell, the
Attorney-General in the Nixon administration) who alleged that illegal activity
was taking place in the White House. At the time her claims were thought to be
signs of mental illness, and only after the Watergate scandal broke was she
proved right (and hence sane).
Origin
Psychologist Brendan Maher named the
effect after Martha Beall
Mitchell.[2] Mrs. Mitchell was the wife
of John Mitchell, Attorney-
General in the Nixon administration.
When she alleged that White House
officials were engaged in illegal
activities, her claims were
attributed to mental illness.
Ultimately, however, the relevant facts
of the Watergate scandal vindicated her
and hence attracted to her the
title of ‘Cassandra of Watergate’.
Read a book.
Buy a clue.
Think for yourself.
Dead
Broke Daddio of NY
May 28, 2009 08:32:59 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
So
many fallacies so little time!
“Not too long ago, a group of
international scientists published a paper (see link below) titled "Active
Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trace Center
Catastrophe."”
The heavily flawed paper was published
in an obscure journal that does NOT follow standard peer review procedures and
charges authors to publish their papers. Google “vanity press”. While there are
a small number of legitimate journals that charge authors Bentham Open in NOT
one of them.
“For those who don’t know, thermitic
material (thermite) is what demolition experts use to bring down buildings.”
Actually there are no known instances of
thermite, which reacts slowly, being used to demolish buildings. It apparently
has been use by commandos to cut bridges but symmetry would not have been
important in such cases. There would be no way to precisely time cutting with
thermite charges.
Also the authors of the paper seem to have
back tracked and now only claim the thermite was used in detonator fuses.
Len
of XX
May 28, 2009 08:28:57 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
The
need for civility on this issue
While I want everyone everywhere to live
in freedom, the only people who deserve that freedom are those who can civilly
discuss evidence that the "war on terror" is a lie. It is almost
impossible to find a civil exchange on this issue, which includes evidence of
what happened on 9/11 and 7/7. It is particularly rare to find defenders of the
official theories who discuss such evidence civilly. Anyone who can defend the
official theories without the use of personal attacks is a hero of mine.
I’ve actually met one. He’s a retired
CIA employee I met through the MIT club of Washington DC.
David
Slesinger of MD
May 28, 2009 08:18:54 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Not too long ago, a group of
international scientists published a paper (see link below) titled "Active
Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trace Center
Catastrophe." For those who don’t know, thermitic material (thermite) is
what demolition experts use to bring down buildings. U.S.News (and any other
MSM news source) would be doing a great service to report on and investigate
this finding.
http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/content.php?TOCPJ/2009/00000002/00000001/7TOCPJ.SGM
Thermite – a mixture of finely powdered
aluminum and iron oxide that produces a very high temperature on combustion,
used in welding and for incendiary bombs.
Concerned
Citizen of MA
May 28, 2009 06:47:02 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
USNEWS!
ssri
of HI
May 28, 2009 06:12:51 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
How wonderful to see that this article -
The topic of which seems to be regurgitated in various forms every few months
by glorifed data enterers (a real journalist investigates, that ain’t you), has
been thoroughly called by via the readers comments as purile propaganda. 5 to 1
that the person who wrote this article didn’t even know tower 7 had fallen
until months later, after a ‘nutty conspira -psycho’ sent them a link.
Please,.. get real.
Phil
of CT
May 28, 2009 06:05:57 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
The real conspiracy states that CIA
Agent Osama Bin Laden organized the worlds biggest terrorist act from inside a
cave. No proof was ever given that he did this. Nor is the FBI charging him
with that crime. How often does the government need to lie to the sheeple
before they wake up.
Tom
Janice of KS
May 28, 2009 05:33:07 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Paper
implies "conspiracy theorists" as crazy
Even though they are not openly saying,
the authors of this paper are indirectly implying that "conspiracy
theorists" are crazy. If it were not so, then why are psychologists
examining "conpspricary theorists" as as group. There are no similar
papers on what the profile of "official story believers" is like.
Therefore by having this type of examination at all, there are implying that
"conspiracy theorists" are some weird, abnormal group.
Maybe a pschological profile of
"official story believers" would be like this:
- trust authority blindly
- are gullible about information that
comes from official sources
- are neither curious or nor inquisitive
- have a negative, unimaginative outlook
- believe politics work
- are very unflexible and dogmatic in
their beliefs
If such a paper cam out, how would that
make the "official story believers" feel? Not very good I suspect
Channing
Jones of XX
May 28, 2009 04:30:25 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Thankfully
we have the Internet now
The propaganda level of the U.S.
mainstream media has become undeniable. Anyone who bothers to take a hard look
at the facts of 9/11 will quickly discover numerous and serious anomalies in
the government’s story. Combined with the repeated unwillingness of government
officials to clarify these anomalies, one is left with, at the very least, the
eerie suspicion that Eisenhower was right: the American military-industrial
complex is capable of some absolutely horrific acts in order to expand its
bottom line. Among these acts is mass murder, which is what we had on 9/11.
As more and more Americans become
suspicious of 9/11 and take a closer look at it, articles like this one should
make them more suspicious still. An earlier American generation learned that
their government was lying to them; now we learn that our government lies to
us, and the MSM says we’re crazy to question it. I don’t think so.
Brad
B. of VA
May 28, 2009 02:47:56 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
"A belief that the government is
covering up its involvement in the 9/11 attacks thus feeds the idea that the
government is also hiding evidence of extraterrestrial contacts or that John F.
Kennedy was not killed by a lone gunman"
comparing questioning 9/11 and JFK with
questioning extraterrestrial contacts?
this next part taken from George
Washingtons blog….
Indeed, even the 9/11 Commissioners
themselves now say that they don’t believe the government’s version of 9/11.
For example:
* The Commission’s co-chairs said that
the CIA (and likely the White House) “obstructed our investigation”
* Indeed, they said that the 9/11
Commissioners knew that military officials misrepresented the facts to the
Commission, and the Commission considered recommending criminal charges for
such false statements (free subscription required)
* 9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey said that
“There are ample reasons to suspect that there may be some alternative to what
we outlined in our version . . . We didn’t have access . . . .”
* 9/11 Commissioner Timothy Roemer said
“We were extremely frustrated with the false statements we were getting”
* 9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned
from the Commission, stating: “It is a national scandal”; “This investigation
is now compromised”; and “One of these days we will have to get the full story
because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants
to cover it up”
* The Senior Counsel to the 9/11
Commission (John Farmer) – who led the 9/11 staff’s inquiry – said “At some
level of the government, at some point in time…there was an agreement not to
tell the truth about what happened“. He also said “I was shocked at how
different the truth was from the way it was described …. The tapes told a
radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two
years…. This is not spin. This is not true.”
Given that even the 9/11 Commissioners
themselves no longer believe the government’s version of 9/11, is a mental
health professional who believes the official version really saying that the
entire 9/11 Commission is delusional?
Fred
C. of IL
May 28, 2009 02:39:02 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Stop,
Relax, and Read the article again
It’s ironic to see that the comments
actually seem to.. validate the article!
What the article does NOT say:
- all conspiracy theories are wrong
- “believers” are wrong
What the article DOES say:
- “believers” talk about 9/11 conspiracy
beliefs with likeminded friends and others
- They take a cynical stance toward
politics
- They mistrust authority
- They feel generally suspicious toward
others
- Conspiracy believers are highly
doubtful about information from the government or other sources they consider
suspect
- optimistic conviction that they can
find “the truth,” spread it to the masses and foster social change
- they display an inquisitive,
imaginative outlook
- believers jump to conclusions
But it seems that no one actually read
the article properly.
The topic is not about conspiracy, it’s
about the psychological profile of “believers” in conspiracy theories.
Moshi
Moshi of XX
May 28, 2009 02:25:46 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
My comment is almost unnecessary, due to
the articulate arguments like-minds have already presented with clarity,
brevity, and conviction.
This article assumes that the audience
has no intention of researching the truth of 9/11 (videos, articles, etc), and
that is the only reason the author so arrogantly posted information that is
easily researched. Video footage of the twin towers collapsing played
consecutively with footage of any other building collapsing under controlled
demolition should alone prove that planes at the tops of the towers in no way
whatsoever brought the towers down. It’s a hoax. The media and the government
have lied to the American people.
The "terrorist attacks of
9/11" have been a very valuable step towards establishing a New World
Order. Obama was the perfect figurehead to bring in after Bush. Bush was
beloved at first, but then his "hill-billy" ways exposed his failure
to keep his lies secret. People’s hatred for the middle-aged, white, redneck
GOP Bush set the stage for a young, attractive, half-black icon of a man to
waltz in with a voice like velvet and a smile that has without a doubt warmed
millions. He is the perfect FACE for the real leaders to hide behind. Obama
preaches "change" and "hope" for America, but all the
"philanthropists" and bankers and otherwise filthy-rich
socialism-favoring officials and stock-holders are continuing to work steadily
against the United States’ constitution, sovereignty, and liberty.
Funny how the villain Bush still gets
blamed for the problems the Obama administration is continuing without
restraint.
Yeah, I believe in some conspiracies,
because I’d be a fool to think the global elite were in no way conspiring
against mine and others’ civil and human liberties.
This isn’t the land we thought it was.
TiffanyTrouble
of TX
May 28, 2009 02:13:44 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Stop
believing. Start investigating.
I have not seen any investigation of
9/11 in USnews, or any commentary on the suspicious nature of the closed-door
inquiry and secret testimony. As a professional manager, I do not trust anybody
who cannot show the hard facts that lead them to their conclusions.
Please, more investigation? But not in
America, because America has become a country of Believers. Any Investigators
are long dead.
America has lost its place in the world
as a result of its incredibility. We see television programs like CSI, which
show investigators using simple, reliable, modern technology to draw
conclusions, but the investigation of the WTC destruction was handled with such
unseemly haste and sloppy investigation, the Official Conspiracy Theory becomes
simply yet another improperly investigated wild conjecture.
With the recent European scientific
publication of a study which analyzed three samples of dirt taken from the WTC
site immediately after the destruction of the twin towers and claims the
presence of nano-thermite in the dirt, I started looking for the equivalent
analysis done by the US investigators. I have not found any yet. Considering
the demolition theories, it is amazing to me that the US investigation team did
not do this kind of investigation at the time.
All I want to see is proper
investigation across the board. I want to see this applied to the Iraq war, our
reasons for being there, and our conduct. Also, investigate the current
economic collapse that looks like it is just beginning, with the bankruptcy of
GM presaging much more to come.
Stop believing. Start investigating.
Richardhg
of CA
May 28, 2009 02:05:13 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
To:
Bruce Bower and Viren Swami
Hope you read the comments boys …
because today you got schooled by the respondence. Wake up guys the circle jerk
is over and intelligent people are calling you out.
Joann
of AZ
May 28, 2009 01:48:37 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Joke journalism.Obey,Conform,distribute
propaganda. Surely you can do better than that! Investigate attitudes, how
about investigating sound science. Go back to reporting on the Indy 500, maybe
then you would get some credibility.
Bob
Shutty of CA
May 28, 2009 01:42:14 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
"taking a cynical stance toward
politics, mistrusting authority, endorsing democratic practices, feeling
generally suspicious toward others and displaying an inquisitive, imaginative
outlook."
These are all positive traits, other
than "feeling generally suspicious toward others", which I don’t- and
I don’t buy the official explanations, as even the Commissioners have
criticized the process, which was frustrated by false statements by NORAD
officials and failure to by the White House, CIA, FBI, DOD, etc. to produce
documents. Like the US govt is trustworthy??? These shrinks need their heads
checked, and to research A People’s History of the United States. A
supermajority does NOT trust the US govt, which under Dems and Reps
consistently serves the interests of a corrupt corporate elite class at the
expense of the public interest. And a supermajority knows that the official BS
about JFK’s death is BS, too.
Complete 9/11 Timeline
http://www.historycommons.org/project.jsp?project=911_project
Active Thermitic Material Discovered in
Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe
http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/content.php?TOCPJ/2009/00000002/00000001/7TOCPJ.SGM
Erik
Larson of CA
May 28, 2009 01:27:34 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Let’s
put the kooks in their place with a real investigation!
The best way to prove to a child that
there’s no monster under the bed, is not to wave your hands and raise all kind
of abstract arguments, but to simply look under the bed together with the
child.
Likewise, let’s just drive a stake
through the heart of the "911 Truth Movement" by looking under the
bed.
Just think, when the
"official" version of events is finally fully confirmed, by way of a
real, thorough, independent, transparent investigation, the conspiracy theorist
nut cases will be so embarrassed, so utterly humiliated, they’ll never question
their government again!
J.P.
Smith of NJ
May 28, 2009 00:34:32 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Ha Ha Ha…amazing…I’ll tell you why I
don’t believe the GOVERNMENT, and that’s the UK and the US governments…Nano
thermite…that’s why….there’s TON more reasons (no pun intended)….of
course, if you had even RESEARCHED any of the 911 so called conspiracy
theorists proof…you wouldn’t have published this article in your newspaper…This
is what is called a hatchet job…against….intelligent, think for themselves
patriots…oh yeah, the same kind of mentality that created the United States
Of America via the constitution and bill of rights…Your paper gets a
"D" for lack of imagination and intelligence.
Zito
Barn of CO
May 28, 2009 00:32:16 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Inner
world of conspiracy deniers
Another wanabe aparatchik of the Soviet
school of disident psychiatry.
Sandra
Tilingham of XX
May 28, 2009 00:14:16 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Guilty,
by reason of mental defect
So, when you start questioning the
government’s official line, no matter how flawed the plot line, it’s time to
bring the psychologies in and pronounce you schizo-nuts.
KMD
of IL
May 28, 2009 00:00:45 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
To the few editors who may be reading
these comments, I ask you to reflect on one quote from Swami’s team:
"beliefs in 9/11 conspiracy
theories were stronger among individuals … with intellectual curiosity and an
active imagination."
I ask you, when selecting good writers
for investigative journalism, do you look for people with imagination and
intellectual curiosity or for those with little imagination and intellectual
passivity?
The fact that this quote was included in
the litany of concocted reasons why those who challenge the official story
about 9/11 should be suspect, makes the entire approach of this article
suspect.
No wonder some of us are generally
suspicious.
9/11
Peacenik of MA
May 28, 2009 00:00:27 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
I agree this is a propaganda piece, but
I guess the conspiracy theorists WOULD say that, huh?
Conspiracy theories regarding the secret
US government agencies cover-ups of alien activities are shared by Dr Edgar
Mitchell, a highly respected former astronaut, and just about anyone with
cognitive function.
Only the brain dead believe the US
government’s explanation for 9/11.
Kev
of XX
May 27, 2009 23:44:24 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Short
on Truth in this Country
Yes… everything in this country is so
normal I just can’t understand why those nutter 9/11 truth seekers would want
to make things up about our really great government.
Are you kidding me?!!!
3,000 people are murdered in what were
obvious controlled demolitions of 3 buildings – 2 white elephants that were
costing billions in asbestos abatement and one government building destroying
evidence of stock market manipulation all of which took $7 trillion out of the
economy according to Treasury Secretary John Snow at a National Press Club
event. Just go shopping folks… nothing to see here.
If we had an honest media and an honest
government, there would be no need for people to try and investigate and expose
the obvious and quite public discrepancies in the official version of the
story. Personally, I don’t like being lied to and I do want to know the truth,
the whole truth and nothing but the truth. It’s a dangerous situation when the
government lies and the media swears to it.
As for not having credentials to
investigate, you’re joking right? Outside of the analysis of the debris and the
calculations involved, I can’t think of degree that one would need. All one
needs is a basic understanding of science, a logical mind, attention to detail
and intellectual integrity.
Vicky
Davis of ID
May 27, 2009 23:43:45 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Looks like an intern’s article that was
thrown together the night before a deadline. There is absolutely no substance
to this story. Utter drivel! With all that is going on in the world these days
I find it hard to understand how this subject matter was able to grace the
editor’s desk!! US News, huh?
Chris
of MI
May 27, 2009 23:39:15 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Wow, it sounds like the article has hit
a nerve (by reading the comments).
So much emotions in the comments.
One of my friend is a
"believer", he corresponds exactly to the psychological profile
mentioned.
But of course that’s just one person,
can’t draw conclusions from that.
John
Lebuilder of XX
May 27, 2009 23:32:06 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
When I read this article I laughed right
out loud.
The complete transparency of this
idiotic propaganda piece is comedy at it’s best.
Somebody’s (or Somebodies) running
scared. and that’s as it should be.
The truth is catching up with them.
Guess who’s going to have the last laugh.
Riis
Oland of IL
May 27, 2009 23:23:59 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
I
am Oz the Great and Powerful
Two plus two equals four.
Buildings do not implode unless they
have been primed to.
There’s no place like home.
Are we there yet ?
trout
of XX
May 27, 2009 23:22:25 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
.
MG
of PA
May 27, 2009 23:20:33 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Great
Collection of Reader Responses
While the article is eerily reminiscent
of Soviet style psychological persecution, it has in fact served a great
purpose. Never have I read a better collection of reader responses supporting
the quest for 911 truth. And not only that, the absence of obnoxious and
insulting debunkers is a surprising and welcome first. Where ever did they go?
Concerned
Citizen of MA
May 27, 2009 23:12:17 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
They may have gotten away with it had
they not decided to pull WTC 7 after 93 was shot down. Just think, they could
have cooked up an anthrax scare, closed the building, and removed the charges.
Poor planning.
RJ
of DC
May 27, 2009 22:37:27 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
But in the field of science, the
explosive nature of the demise of towers 1, 2 and 7 is no longer in dispute.
Collisions (such as buildings falling in on themselves) require deceleration.
Unless of course, you feel compelled as a scientist to denounce the laws of
nature in your effort to reconcile the official narrative with your belief
system. Furthermore, the enormous temperature gap observed at Ground Zero
requires exothermic reactions. (E.g. molten iron, molten molybdenum — RJ Lee,
USGS)
Furthermore, molten iron and active
thermitic materials have been discovered in World Trade Center dust by various
scientists, who were sent samples independently.
NIST’s embarrassing attempts to cover up
what happened in lower Manhattan at the very least amount to scientific
misconduct and fraud. Most likely, however, they indicate criminal complicity.
Furthermore, I disagree with this
statement:
"unlike the 9/11 Commission they do
not have the credentials to do so"
I agree that no plane theories are
unscientific and have no basis in science nor logic. However, the 9/11
commission couldn’t be less credentialed in unearthing ‘facts’. They say so
themselves: (I quote from: http://911blogger.com/node/20218, links to
mainstream media sources are presented there)
* The Commission’s co-chairs said that
the CIA (and likely the White House) "obstructed our investigation"
* Indeed, they said that the 9/11
Commissioners knew that military officials misrepresented the facts to the
Commission, and the Commission considered recommending criminal charges for
such false statements (free subscription required)
* 9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey said that
"There are ample reasons to suspect that there may be some alternative to
what we outlined in our version . . . We didn’t have access . . . ."
* 9/11 Commissioner Timothy Roemer said
"We were extremely frustrated with the false statements we were
getting"
* 9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned
from the Commission, stating: "It is a national scandal"; "This
investigation is now compromised"; and "One of these days we will
have to get the full story because the 9-11 issue is so important to America.
But this White House wants to cover it up"
* The Senior Counsel to the 9/11
Commission (John Farmer) – who led the 9/11 staff’s inquiry – said "At
some level of the government, at some point in time…there was an agreement
not to tell the truth about what happened". He also said "I was shocked
at how different the truth was from the way it was described …. The tapes
told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public
for two years…. This is not spin. This is not true."
SnowCrash
of XX
May 27, 2009 22:37:22 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Putting aside whether you believe on
conspiracies or not.
They do a "study" on a certain
group (they don’t mention on who so for all we know it could be uneducated
people) and from that study they say that most people whow question the
government´s version of 9/11 also believe on a number of other conspiracy
theories and have an active imagination.
Do people actually think this article is
academic?
It’s funny how some articles show
"studies" but never describe the background of the people studied, at
least completely. MANIPULATION OF INFORMATION is annoying
GC
of XX
May 27, 2009 22:31:32 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
My
opinion as a Psychology Graduate
I have a Bachelors degree in Psychology
(not yet a Psychologist), and I’ve put a lot of thought into 9/11 conspiracies
theories and others. I first would like to preface my personal opinion to make
the point that this is issue that could be argued Psychologically from two
sides. From one perspective, one arrives at the conclusion that those who
believe conspiracy theories have issues with suspicion, paranoia, or perception
of reality. From the other perspective, one concludes that those who reject
conspiracy theories are suffering from cognitive dissonance (evidence is
ignored because that would contradict one’s world view) or defense mechanisms,
such as denial.
From simply talking to friends and
family, I have seen both cases. For example, in conversations I would ask
someone who does not believe in 9/11 conspiracies why the government does not
release substantial evidence of the 757 hitting the Pentagon, thus settling the
issue for the sake of the public knowledge. Typically they would answer,
"National security prevents it", "The Pentagon doesn’t need
to.", or "I don’t know." The fact is that there is a definite
lack of evidence available to the public to support either side. To assume that
there is nothing wrong or to create your own explanation is illogical. Mentally
healthy people would want to know the truth, and in the case of 9/11 (event of
global significance), they should demand it!
There is a significant difference
between demanding the truth, and formulating theories. So when the 9/11
Commission claims that a 757 hit the Pentagon without providing evidence to the
public, they too are formulating a theory from our perspective. When you hear
of the 9/11 Truth Movement, you should understand that the crux of the movement
is to seek the truth and that it is a perfectly healthy behavior. Finally,
there will no doubt be people that fall into the "nut" category, that
believe that no planes hit the world trade center towers (however in the case
of WTC7 this is true) or that aliens were involved. They are also creating
theories of their own, but unlike the 9/11 Commission they do not have the
credentials to do so. These people deserve to be proven wrong through debate
and the use of the Scientific Method, and their failure should not reflect upon
other socially beneficial movements.
Please do your part as a citizen of this
country and take your time to research this. For example, watch a documentary
and then try and debunk it. Have a debate with someone you know. Come to the
decision on your own, and don’t let your peers or the media decide for you.
Aaron
J of VA
May 27, 2009 22:09:49 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Tell me, Bruce and Viren, who was
responsible for the Anthrax attacks, targeting Democratic senators opposing the
‘Patriot’ Act and blamed on Al Qaeda by the White House? (While Bush and Cheney
were already put on the antidote ‘Cipro’ since 9/11 by Jerome Hauer, head of
Kroll Security who had a security contract at the WTC on 9/11)
Please, do answer.
SnowCrash
of XX
May 27, 2009 21:02:24 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
So it comes down to this, question the
"official" story…I mean, asking questions instead of taking the
government’s version at face value and be at a risk of being considered a nut.
So do as they say, think as they say, obey blindly and be considered
"normal".
Ted
D of CO
May 27, 2009 20:54:59 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
60 positive comments and only 1 shill
with a half-assed attempt to support the gov’t BS. That even impresses a
cynical old fart like me. Are the paid shills sleeping in or is it possible
that even THEY are growing a bit of a conscience and refusing to prostitute
themselves? Nahhh, couldn’t be. Oh and about this comment
"Looks like the "Story"
hasn’t come off the way USNews had thought
Seems USNews has a brighter bunch of
readers than they had supposed."
Don’t be so sure … they now have our
IPs.
"Your failure to be informed does
not make me a wacko." — John Loeffler
The biggest government conspiracy is the
claim that there are no government conspiracies! — Michael Rivero
"A paranoid is a man with all the
facts at his disposal." — William S. Burroughs
Outraged
Old Man of CA
May 27, 2009 20:46:17 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
"The study, still unpublished,
shows that conspiracy believers displayed a greater propensity than
nonbelievers to jump to conclusions based on limited evidence."
How does this article get away with
making such a ridiculous statement? The idea that there is no evidence to
support the claims made by the 9/11 Truth Movement can only come from a place
of profound ignorance.
What evidence did the government ever
provide to show that Osama bin Laden was guilty? Why hasn’t he been indicted
for the crimes of 9/11?
It would be nice if journalists today
could do a little bit of research.
tanabear
of NC
May 27, 2009 20:39:44 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Johnson
or Castro or Soviets "could have"
"But "they" blew up the
WTC and Pentagon on purpose, AND crashed a 4th jet into the ground, and nobody
sqwawks? Even in eight years since? Nope. Too big a stretch."
Think of it as the three F’s
Fanaticism: Your devotion to the cause
behind the event or the agency that employed you is so strong that you would
never think of squawking. Include here the inevitable sociopath who would only
come forward if there was something in it for him in this group. For those who
don’t fit this group but might be inclined to come forward you have two
additional constraints.
Fear: Would you squawk, knowing that you
are going against the wishes of people capable of carrying out such a deed?
Futility: Even if you wanted to squawk,
who would listen to you? All your evidence has long since disappeared. Nobody
will corroborate your story. The mainstream media would not report your story
no matter how convincing. So why put your and possibly others life on the line
for nothing, not to mention your livelihood?
mark
of XX
May 27, 2009 20:27:36 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
For a great response to this article,
see:
www.washingtonsblog.com/2009/05/psychologists-weigh-in-on-911.html
Note that the 911 Commissioners
themselves said the Gov’t decided to lie rather than be truthful to the
commission (on the page above).
It also lists 16 eminent
Psychiatrists/Psychologists who question the gov’t story, and call for a real
investigation. One, Dr. Barry R. Komisaruk, Rutgers University Board of
Governors Distinguished Service Professor of Psychology and Associate Dean of
the Graduate School, says:
"Essay Rutgers Observer 9/11/07:
Regarding 9/11 "Based upon my reading, published evidence leads me to a
terribly disturbing conclusion as to the veracity of the official government
accounts. …
The observations are readily available
and clearly evident from existing news reports, books, and photos and videos on
the Internet. They have not been accounted for convincingly, or even at all, by
the official U.S. government reports, and they have not even been challenged by
the mass media. They raise serious doubts and questions as to what really
happened on that day.
If the assumptions about the true nature
of the events are erroneous, then the policies that have been justified by
those assumptions must be questioned – ongoing policies that include the
invasion and occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan, and suspension of the
guarantees provided by the Bill of Rights and the Constitution – against
torture and against warrantless spying on U.S. citizens.
If we turn a blind eye to the truth
about the events that occurred on September 11, 2001, we do so at our peril,
for revealing the truth may well change profoundly the course of future
events." media.www.rutgersobserver.com".
See
patriotsquestion911.com/professors.html#Komisaruk for more of his and other
professors of psychiatry have to say (as well as many other professionals).
What this really is, is an attempt to
stifle free speech for any criticism of the gov’t. This will likely be used to
label those that call for a REAL 911 investigation, mentally ill, which will be
used to restrict speech and other rights. Mark my words, you will see
legislation or regulations using mental illness, with this as a measure, to
further restrict free speech rights.
So, to believe the 911 commission
report, when the commissioners themselves say it was a farce, is to me,
delusional.
Better wake up before we have no first
amendment!
Tom
Sullivan of MA
May 27, 2009 20:14:33 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
from:
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/9-11BasicQuestions.html
9/11 – The Basic Questions
1. Why didn’t jets intercept the
airliners since they had numerous warnings of terrorist attacks?
2. Why did Ashcroft stop flying
commercial airlines, citing an unidentified "threat" in July 2001?
3. Why did FEMA lie about their presence
in New York on 9/11?
4. Why didn’t the Secret Service hustle
Dubya out of the classroom?
5. Why did George H.W. Bush meet bin
Laden’s brother on 9/11?
6. Why did passengers or crewmembers on
three of the flights all use the term boxcutters?
7. Where are the flight recorders?
8. Why were the FISA warrants
discontinued?
9. How did Bush see the first plane
crash on live camera?
10 Why was security meeting scheduled
for 9/11 cancelled by WTC management on 9/10?
11. How did they come up with the
"culprits" so quickly?
12. How did they find the terrorist’s
cars at the airports so quickly?
13. Why did Shrub dissolve the Bin Laden
Task Force?
14. Why the strange pattern of debris
from Flight 93?
15. How extensive was the relationship
between the Taliban, the ISI and the CIA?
16. What exactly was the role of Henry
Kissinger at UNOCAL?
17. When was it decided to cancel
building a pipeline from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan to Pakistan?
18. Why did the FBI in 1996 close the files
to investigate Osama bin Laden’s relatives in Washington?
19. Why did .Bush stop inquiries into
terrorist connections of the Bin Laden family in early 2001?
20. Who made the decision to have John
O’Neill stop investigating Al-qeada accounts?
21. Who gave the decision to give him a
security job at the World Trade Center?
22. Did John O’Neill meet anyone of the
FEMA in the night of September 10th?
23. What about media reports that
hijackers bought tickets for flights scheduled after Sept. 11?
24. Why did none of the 19 hijackers
appear on the passenger lists?
25. Why would devout Muslims frequent
bars, drink alcoholic beverages and leave their bibles?
26. Why would the hijackers use credit
cards and allow drivers licenses with photos to be zeroxed?
27. Why did the hijackers force
passengers to call relatives?
28. How did the hijackers change the
flight plan without law enforcement or the military try to stop them?
29. How did a hijackers passport
miraculously appear near the WTC? Who found it and what time?
30. How could the FBI distinguish
between "regular" Muslims and hijacker Muslims on those flights?
31. Why was there not one
"innocent" Muslim on board any of these flights?
32. Did someone go through the passenger
lists looking for Muslim names and label them as hijackers?
MOHAMMED ATTA
33. Did the Florida police provide
information that Atta was searched because of 1) an expired Visa, 2) driving a
car without a license, 3) because of an incident at Miami Airport?
34. Why did Atta leave his bag at the
airport and the employees didn’t put it on board?
35. Who found his bag? How can we be
sure it it was his bag?
36. Why did Atta place a video
The
End of IN
May 27, 2009 20:08:24 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
DOD
Psychologists design torture – HEAL THYSELF
Neocon sociopaths!
Honesty compassion intelligence guts?
Means motive opportunity…
(whistleblowers multiply)
Bush Rove Cheney Rummy
Federal Reserve
AIPAC
gravel
kucinich paul nader of XX
May 27, 2009 20:05:33 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Suspicious
of your government? Try our new gulag!
I notice that this author leaves out any
mention of the fact that there are people with degrees in engineering who don’t
believe the official story either. I notice that this author creates a straw
man argument by conflating JFK murder with 9/11. Indeed, what I detect most of
all in this article is that the author is engaging in a form of ad hominem, not
unlike that found in the former Soviet Union — where questioning official
government stories was enough to land you a rent-free stay in a gulag.
Shane
of IN
May 27, 2009 20:04:48 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Geee, whaddaya know, another mainstream
news source slamming conspiracy theorists.
Do they ridicule things like belief in
God, Angels, or Heaven? I think those are ludicrous beliefs, but the mainstream
is quite comfortable with them.
The same mainstream media that helped
lie America into the Iraq debacle. So pardon me if I don’t take THEIR word for
ANYTHING.
9/11 was an inside job, case closed. The
only people who laugh at this are the ones who haven’t taken the time to
OBJECTIVELY look at the EVIDENCE. There’s so much of it, it’s hard to find
where to start–
http://www.WhatReallyHappened.com/WRHARTICLES/9-11BasicQuestions.html
The
End of IN
May 27, 2009 19:57:51 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
There are not even doctors right?
Its a science in the same way economics
is.
What a laugh!
Michael
of XX
May 27, 2009 19:45:03 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
So, the desperate and pathetic
mainstream has resorted to trying to discredit the engineers and physicists who
understand that the ONLY explanation of the three towers destruction that
addresses ALL scientific evidence is a controlled demolition……with a
sociologist and a psychologist.
Well until such time that the
psychologists can explain how the WTC 1 Antenna accelerated through the 47 core
columns, the nano-thermite, the lack of "pancake" floors at ground
zero, the energy to generate the pyroclastic flow, the near free fall
symmetrical acceleration of WTC 7 into its own footprint, the inner core
"spire" that stood a few moments after the bulk of the towers fell,
why the puffs of concrete dust came out every other floor,the molten metal, the
complete severance of the core columns well below the plane impact,the fact
that the top floors did not drop as a block but exploded on the way down, the
shower of yellow sparks on the corners,the squibs, and a few other little
details…I will stick with newtonian physics rather then this mainstream
nonsense.
Plus I have a difficult time believing
that all 650 plus professional engineers and architects on AE911truth,org are
all crazy.
Jonathan
Cole of FL
May 27, 2009 19:40:24 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
David
Ray Griffin speaks at Boston University
April 11, 2009 – David Ray Griffin
Please watch David Ray Griffin’s lecture
at Boston University on April 11, 2009 (9/11, Time For a Second Look) . Dr.
Griffin meticulously presents the case for a new investigation of the 9/11
attacks–the 9/11 Commission Report on the “official” conspiracy theory is full
of contradictions and apparent lies.
http://davidraygriffin.com/calendar/april-11-2009-boston/
Edward
Rynearson of IL
May 27, 2009 19:38:46 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
The
U.S. media’s role in propaganda offensives
Every student of propaganda knows that
the corporate media have always made themselves available to the military
during wartime. This was true prior to, and during, World War I, when President
Wilson hired progressive journalists to overcome widespread opposition to
American participation in that senseless conflict. The same took place during
World War II, when journalists and media executives went to work for the
government to censor news and create pro-war propaganda. This shameful trend
continued on into the Cold War when the CIA forged lasting alliances with major
media companies and those who work for them.
The transparently bogus "news"
item above is just more of the same — and all quite predictable. As Mark Twain
said, "History doesn’t repeat itself but it sure does rhyme!"
The best response to this journalistic
farce is to cancel your subscription to ‘U.S. News’! Use the internet and books
to get reliable news and information. Your life and the welfare of our nation
depends on knowing what is really happening.
Terry
Hansen of WA
May 27, 2009 19:26:41 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
HA!
This is just proof that universities are CORPORATE FUNDED…
…and follow orders from the
foundations(aka, oligarchies). What nice corporate slaves you are.
You’ve resorted to lies and false
studies. Anything to support the ongoing dismantling of our Constitution.
What you professors don’t get is…this
New World Order isn’t pretty. It isn’t something you’ll want your children
living under. Yet, you continue to leave this legacy which is so harmful.
9/11 DENIERS are choosing a comfortable
position. While the rest of country’s economy and Rights are being destroyed.
THANKS ALOT!
Tessa
Campbell of MA
May 27, 2009 19:18:40 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
There was a time when doctors recommended
smoking.
Articles such as this are pure garbage.
B
of XX
May 27, 2009 19:07:27 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
It’s amazing how this article gets
published in a scientific journal by denigrating the group of people who don’t
believe the buildings fell because the planes hit them. This group now has
mountains of scientific evidence supporting their hypothesis. A rigorously
peer-reviewed, published study confirms with evidence the existence of thermate
explosives.
If there is enough scientific evidence
to support the demolition hypothesis, how then can "Swami" justify a
psychological profile? What is the purpose? Should the rest of the world be
concerned about scientists that think they can improve the efficiency of
lithium ion batteries? Perhaps they need to be discredited with a psychological
profile provided by the petrol industry.
Sorry, but I’m not going to buy the idea
that 700 licensed, practicing engineers and architects need a psychological
profile because they recognize that demolitions took place in New York on
September 11th, 2001.
J.T.
Waldron of AZ
May 27, 2009 19:04:23 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
What an insulting piece of junk this
article is. You gotta love the list of "traits" that supposedly 9/11
Truth supporters believe. Like "mistrust of government"….really?
you think? And please explain how someone could believe the gov’t was involved
in 9/11 and yet somehow still HAVE trust in their gov’t? It’s an absurd list of
"traits", and this whole article is meant to further smear anyone who
actively seeks out the truth and refuses to let it die. Apparently such people
have an "inquisitive, imaginative outlook" AKA, "are
intelligent". What trash.
Clint
of OR
May 27, 2009 18:52:58 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
The government fairytale defies logic.
Three steel frame buildings collapse at near freefall, WTC7 never being hit by
a plane, right into their own footprint. Virtually no remnant of a plane
wreckage at the Pentagon or Shanksville. The part of the Pentagon that was
taken out just happened to be the section that was investigating the $2.3
trillion that went missing under Dov Zakheim’s watch, who just happened to be
involved with a company that manufactured remote airplane technology. Notto
mention all the investigative research into Worldcom, Global Crossing, etc.,
that was destroyed when WTC7 just happened to collapse. Larry Silverstein just
happens to insure his meager investment in the WTC only months before against
two planes hitting the buidings. Condi Rice before the 9/11 comission admitting
the August 6th daily briefing was about Planes being used as missles into
buildings in New York City claiming that should not have risen any suspicions.
Hello, is anybody home? We shouldn’t be labeled Conspiracy Theorists, but
rather Conspiracy Realists!
bassman
of NV
May 27, 2009 18:48:28 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Looks
like the "Story" hasn’t come off the way USNews had thought
Seems USNews has a brighter bunch of
readers than they had supposed.
Thomas
Jackson of CO
May 27, 2009 18:46:41 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
The first thing that jumps out at me
here is the incredibly low number of participants and limited geographical
range of most of the surveys mentioned. The second thing is, unless one
believes bin Laden hijacked all four airplanes all by himself, flew three of
them into buildings and crashed one in Pennsylvania, and somehow escaped back
to the caves of Bora Bora unharmed, one has to concede that the Official Story
is also a "conspiracy." And because bin Laden never took credit for
the attacks and the Bush Administration never actually provided the evidence it
promised that bin Laden was involved, the Official Story is also a
"theory." A "conspiracy theory." Can we all stop misusing
this phrase to describe only paranoid schizophrenics? Thirdly–never mind the
scientific evidence that the Twin Tower collapses couldn’t possibly have
resulted from a mere fire– anyone who watched video of the collapses on
broadcast news that day and still believes it was anything but a controlled
demolition gets three 10s for mental gymnastics.
Regan
Straley of PA
May 27, 2009 18:43:10 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
The church made victims of abuse feel
like mentally disturbed attention seeking liars for trying to come forward with
their accusations. They were made to feel like fantasists with wild
imaginations used destructively to escape their boring realities by making
hideous baseless allegations against pillars of society. Ridiculed and shunned,
the victims shut up, while none of the countless thousands of people on the
inside ever stepped forward to unburden their conscience and clean up the
disgusting wretched mess of perverts being sent to investigate perverts, the
constant cover ups and shuffling of predatory priests from parish to parish.
For 1,600 years no sickened insider came through, no reporter stepped up, no
prosecutor took it on, and yet the flaw in the truth movement’s psychology is
that if the official story is false some insider would step forward and some
reporter would be happy to write their story and some prosecutor would be all
for a real investigation. Those who shunned the victims of church abuse would
say, "Gee, who knew?" in the aftermath of the scandal breaking, but
of course they knew. They should do a psychological study on how ridicule and
shunning relate to denial and moral cowardice. That would be compelling.
BenF
of CA
May 27, 2009 18:33:40 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Imagine a situation where a team of
thieves plots several simultaneous bank robberies in the downtown financial
district of a major city.
None of the bank tellers are able to
send out an alarm to the police even though banks have numerous hidden silent
alarms for foiling robbery. The guards at the bank take much longer to call the
police for assistance than they have done on previous occasions.
When eventually notified, the police
take an extraordinarily long amount of time to show up on the scene, despite an
unblemished record of immediate response to prior robberies.
The city leadership does not act
surprised when notified the robbery is underway. The commander of the nearest
police station continues working at his desk despite the robbery across the
street. The Mayor is holding a photo opportunity at a nearby elementary school,
and continues reading to second graders even after his assistant whispers in
his ear that bank robbers had just committed the largest mass murder in the
city’s history.
Evidence from the scene, which could
explain some abnormal circumstances, is immediately shipped overseas and
destroyed. The Mayor announces that no criminal investigation will occur since
this was an act of belligerence and proceeds to interfere with any attempts to
investigate the incident.
So Sherlock, who committed the crime?
Joe
Pepe of NY
May 27, 2009 18:30:22 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
conspircay
believers for the government
Can someone advise me on how to counsel
those "conspircay theorists’ that believe the ‘official Bush believers
conspircay theory that 19 Arabs did 9/11"?
Pariculary, in the light of all the
physics and science now known aboout the colapses of the three buildings.
Years ago, I tried to counsel his
Holiness on the realities of my observations of the planetary system and until
rcently, I think they thought I was suffering a psychological problem. It was
nice for them to recently apologise though.
"Star bright star bright Oh what a
starry night, eh, eh, don’t we all love Bush Believers?
gallileo
of XX
May 27, 2009 18:29:25 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Curious, too, that the author of this
article includes among the "nuts" those who think that Oswald didn’t
act alone. I guess that means the members of the U.S. Congress’s Committee that
re-opened the JFK case in te 1970s and found evidence that at least one other
person was involved. It’s on the record, folks. Funny how the mainstream media
tries to make us forget even those rare occasions when our government tried to
get at the truth.
Clovis
of XX
May 27, 2009 18:21:15 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
The
Growing Desperation of 9/11 Gangsters
The appearance now of an article such as
this goes only to show how desperate the 9/11 gangsters are getting. I have to
wonder how many sleeping pills Larry Silverstein needs simply to take a nap
nowadays.
Theon
Lyreal of NJ
May 27, 2009 18:11:36 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Science has proven the existence of
high-tech explosives only being produced by the federal government, within the
dust created by the World Trade Center collapses.
Google "Active Thermitic Material
World Trade Center"
The aircraft attacks?
Strong evidence suggesting the use of
GPS-guided aircraft autopilot control systems to perform the attacks. Most do
not realize that the 9/11 Boeing 757s and 767s could fly entirely by themselves
using coordinates programmed into their Flight Management Computers (including
those transmitted remotely) and precisely guided by extremely accurate GPS
service (WAAS) activated 13 months before 9/11.
The official 9/11 story is mostly
unverfied mythology.
Aidan
Monaghan of NV
May 27, 2009 17:55:44 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
How can anyone tout this bs to the
public? This is an obvious attempt to discredit anyone who doesn’t buy into the
official story of 9/11, the only problem – the official story WAS A CONSPIRACY!
At least 20 men (the 19 + Osama) planned, plotted and attacked, means
conspiracy.
RRMoore
of FL
May 27, 2009 17:53:01 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Let the mainstream media die.
Die Now, Die, die, die.
Much rather watch WeAreChange
confronting the most evil of "our" dear leaders and watch all of them
slither away behind their secret service goons.
Note that none of the abnormally chipper
airheads on TV news ever mention the current ammunition shortage.
Lasthorseman
of MA
May 27, 2009 17:52:38 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
From the article
Conspiracy Believers =
Taking a cynical stance toward politics,
mistrusting authority,
endorsing democratic practices,
feeling generally suspicious toward
others
and displaying an inquisitive,
imaginative outlook.”
What you have described sounds to be a
wise man in this day and age.
Lets reverse your logic Dr Freud.
Official Story Believers=
Trusting Politics
Trusting Authority( the bankers)
Endorsing Un democratic practices.
Trusting Everyone
Are not Inquisitive
Have no imagination
911 Was an inside job!!!!!!!!!!
Smoking
Man of XX
May 27, 2009 17:43:58 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
These whackjobs at USnews are so
gullible that they believe the governments official conspiracy theory:
"9/11, So easy a caveman can do it."
Bill
Jones of PA
May 27, 2009 17:26:50 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Hmmmm, let’s see. "Subscibes to one
or more other CTs". "Cynical stance towards authority".
"Misstrusting authortiy". "Endorsing democracy".
"Inquisative and imaginative". Yup, that’s me!
ehswan
of KY
May 27, 2009 17:16:23 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Conspiracy
= "to breathe together"
This article’s author suggests that
(usually, rich, white men) don’t conspire to defraud, and that anyone who
believes otherwise tends toward flights of fantasy.
Well, I can tell you, I don’t think I
fit into what he assumes to be the conspiracy believer demographic. I am a
practical person with an advanced business degree, a 500k/year S-corporation, a
home on a lake, a well adjusted family and a Mensa membership. And I do my
research.
After reading through NIST’s work, and
trying every possible mental gymnastic required to agree with the U.S.
government’s own conspiracy theory, I find that 9/11 is a no brainer as far as
conspiracies go: it was surely an inside job.
That’s the problem with trying to
pigeonhole "believers." Unless you assume you already know what ISN’T
a conspiracy, you can never disprove a conspiracy theorist’s claims. The author
has picked a few cases where well informed researchers all agree that cover ups
are involved (JFK, 9/11, UFOs), meaning his case is doomed from the beginning.
I can’t wait for the author’s follow up
study examining his own beliefs and why they are so contrary to the actual
evidence.
Doug
Woczniewski of WA
May 27, 2009 17:13:29 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
I
believe anything you tell me
Sure , go ahead and tell me I am crazy
because I don’t beleieve anything you say..if 9/11 wasn’t done by the insiders.
Why are they getting guys like this to write such a b.s. article
one
gun of NE
May 27, 2009 17:12:36 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
politicians are interested only in our
well-being over theirs. The news publishers and channels are set up to tell us
the truth and not to feed us lies and distortions to maintain the current power
structure. Stop asking questions. Go to the mall. Watch Fox news. Believe the
news.
Billy-Bob
Garcia of TN
May 27, 2009 16:57:24 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
I may be able to believe the governments
official conspiracy theory if they show me a photo of an airliner crashing into
the pentagon and after I have 3 or 4 upper lobotomies, otherwise there are too
many glaring problems with their lies.
As Michael Rivero points out in his “Dog
that did not Bark“ essay, if the US was under a surprise attack, why would the
secret service let the president (a prime target) remain in an elementary
school? That also would have put innocent children and the president at risk in
a genuine attack.
Willie
of PA
May 27, 2009 16:49:26 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Columbia Space Shuttle Investigation
Cost $175 Million. Challenger Investigation Cost $100 Million. 9/11
Investigation Only Got $15 Million
Many people have written on the 9/11
Commission’s budgetary constraints. See this.
Want to Know has a great new summary of
the Commission’s scandalously inadequate budget:
The 9/11 commission was originally
allotted only $3 million. Eventually, after much begging and haggling, the
commission was given $15 million. Yet a CNN article lists the cost of the
Lewinsky investigation at $30 million. A Los Angeles Times article states the
cost of the Columbia space shuttle disaster investigation was $175 million.
How could 9/11 – the greatest disaster
in American history – be given such a small budget for investigation?
Remember, the Commissioners stated that
government did everything it could to cover up and obstruct their
investigation:
The Commission’s co-chairs said that the
CIA (and likely the White House) "obstructed our investigation"
Indeed, they said that the 9/11
Commissioners knew that military officials misrepresented the facts to the
Commission, and the Commission considered recommending criminal charges for
such false statements (free subscription required)
9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey said that
"There are ample reasons to suspect that there may be some alternative to
what we outlined in our version . . . We didn’t have access . . . ."
9/11 Commissioner Timothy Roemer said
"We were extremely frustrated with the false statements we were
getting"
9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned
from the Commission, stating: "It is a national scandal"; "This
investigation is now compromised"; and "One of these days we will
have to get the full story because the 9-11 issue is so important to America.
But this White House wants to cover it up"
The Senior Counsel to the 9/11
Commission (John Farmer) – who led the 9/11 staff’s inquiry – said "At
some level of the government, at some point in time…there was an agreement
not to tell the truth about what happened". He also said "I was
shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described …. The
tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the
public for two years…. This is not spin. This is not true."
Given such a lack of cooperation, $15
million wasn’t enough to even start getting to the bottom of what happened. $15
million didn’t pay for much other than some press releases and the costs of
printing reports. It certainly wasn’t enough to pay for real investigation or
legal struggles to discover information which the government was stonewalling.
Indeed, well after the Commission issued
its final report, Commissioner Bob Kerrey said it might take "a permanent
9/11 Commission" to end the remaining mysteries of September 11.
Afterword: In response to a commenter
who wrote "But everybody already knew it was the terrorists", I
responded:
Even assuming, for the sake of argument,
that the government knew before starting the investigation that terrorists did
it by flying planes into buildings, how come they weren’t stopped before hand,
and why didn’t the military stop them in the air, pursuant to standard
operating procedures? Wouldn’t that have been gross negligence?
That’s what top intelligence and
military experts say [they actually say much more dramatic things as well].
Even investigating who screwed up would
cost a lot more than $15 million.
Cindy
Jones of IL
May 27, 2009 16:39:48 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
So if you don’t buy the authorised
version of the 9/11 attacks (aka the fiction) you are mentally disturbed.
Stalin would be proud.
Andrew
Milner of XX
May 27, 2009 16:21:54 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Does anyone believe the
"official" tale anymore? How people recite the 19 cavemen story with
a straight face, I will never know.
trudy
of XX
May 27, 2009 16:10:48 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
The fact that this article purports to
describe "conspiracy believers" without even mentioning that the
official explanation — the 19 highjackers and subsequent crashes — is a
conspiracy theory, shows how language is perverted. Somehow belief in a theory
involving conspiracy is only worthy of psychological analysis if the conspiracy
in question is one that goes against the official government approved version.
Put simply, "Official conspiracy theory good, unofficial conspiracy theory
bad." This shows that the article is not in fact a valid analysis of
conpiracy believers, but rather a thinly veiled and unprofessional hit piece
against those who do not automatically accept the government promulgated
stories.
As someone with a deep background in
history and science, and as an ongoing news junky, I can affirm that anyone who
gives more than passing credence to official explanations is either not paying
attention or not doing their homework.
Jason
Calley of FL
May 27, 2009 16:01:47 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Article
grossly missrepresenting the 9/11 truth movement
"..taking a cynical stance toward
politics, mistrusting authority, endorsing democratic practices, feeling
generally suspicious toward others and displaying an inquisitive, imaginative
outlook"
So those who are not conspiracy
theorists are gulllible towards politics, obedient to authority, rejecting
democratic practices, unsuspicious towards others and displaying an
uninterested and uninspired outlook. Whom would you rather trust when it comes
to an important issue.
Before writing so much meaningless text
about a topic already settled, rather go to existing literature and just
instruct yourself:
Architects & Engineers for 9/11
Truth
Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice
Firefighters for 9/11 Truth
Pilots for 9/11 truth
Lawyers for 9/11 truth
And many other sites. What you find
there is all solid research. Something the US government has failed to provide
so far. Your allegation that those thinking we are not told the truth about
9/11 by the USA and maybe the British government are lunatics, people who
cannot think scientifically because they are subject to "selective
skepticism" is just disregarding the large number of higly scientific work
done by people as rigorous as could be wished, while the reports produced by
the government don’t stand the simplest scrutiny. Your further allegation that
these people are into all sorts of conspiracy theories plainly misses the fact
that those really working at uncovering the truth of what happened at the WTC
are concentrated on scientific work related to this particular case and do not
guess at all or publish opinions about what may have happened in other
instances, except if these are related to the WTC and they have solid data to
support their case.
Martin
Regelsberger of XX
May 27, 2009 15:59:50 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
how is that in the psychology world they
are coming up with newer and newer psychosis for the most normal of behaviors
yet they still can’t find that those people who horde animals have anything
wrong with them?
those folks just get sent right off to
jail for animal cruelty.
count
blah of KS
May 27, 2009 15:50:15 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Mainstream
Media has a credibility problem
This why the newsmedia is rapidly going
out of business, They have a credibility problem regarding the bogus official
9/11 story and the bogus WMD’s in Iraq they lied to us about. Good Riddance,
Mortimer Zuckerman propaganda!
Rory
Snyder of PA
May 27, 2009 15:49:46 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Did the CIA pay for this
"resarch" ?
Maulder
of NV
May 27, 2009 15:41:48 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
This same exact article pretty much cut
and pasted points that has been circulating all this week. If you question the
version of reality the government spoon feeds us, you may need a perscription
drug to calm that wild imagination.
I wonder why it is so important to make
sure we are all in line and relegate anyone who does not believe the
governments version of the facts to be a wacked out conspiracy nut ball.
You want real talk radio, news and
poliitics check out
OracleBroadcasting.com
The Home Of Cutting Edge Talk Radio!
Disapointed
Doug of TX
May 27, 2009 15:34:34 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
The closer you get to the truth, the
more likely you are to be called a conspiracy nut.
brooke
of MA
May 27, 2009 15:31:45 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Decrying
dissidents as mentally ill
Wow, how very Soviet of them! It used to
be "better dead than red", now the Red Staters and the Blue Staters
are using the KGB’s former tactics.
Anyone with a modicum of common sense
who researches the full set of facts regarding 9/11 for themselves can not help
but question the official government story. Even many of the committee
authoring that story have the gravest of concerns that the story was being
manipulated and handled and might not represent the full truth. Both men in
charge of the investigation met with the man the FBI called "the 9/11
money man" as the crime was going down… even if this was somehow NOT a
conflict of interest it certainly had the appearance of such. Think, please,
for a moment- if two cops met the bagman for some kidnapping ransom… might
people not wonder if those cops were a part of the crime? Porter Goss was one
of these men and later went to head the CIA.
But no… people who don’t trust their
murderous and lying ("Iraq is preparing to attack with WMD’s!!!")
government to tell the truth MUST BE MENTALLY ILL.
Thebes
of NM
May 27, 2009 15:26:32 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
There is indeed something vaguely
Stalinist about this article. That is, suggesting there is a set of beliefs
that is normal and identifying deviant behavior as a measure of the rejection
of these beliefs. But look at some of those deviant characteristics -
"taking a cynical stance toward politics, mistrusting authority, endorsing
democratic practices… and displaying an inquisitive, imaginative outlook."
Yikes! Lock them up!
I also enjoyed the suggested link
between JFK sceptics and UFO buffs.
jeff
of XX
May 27, 2009 15:19:10 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
I cancelled my subscription to Science
News when they published the article "Why Burning Buildings Fail",
about the WTC collapse. Real scientists, and architects, and engineers, know
that steel-framed buildings DO NOT collapse when they burn. But they most
certainly do collapse when they are packed with explosives.
Tom
Ness of OR
May 27, 2009 15:14:57 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
lol…that’s
rich…i’m the crazy one…lol
must feel good to turn that hate you’re
feeling onto them rag heads way over there.
start looking for domestic enemies, my
fellow countryman, and see how mad you can really get.
by the way, I’ve been a structural
engineer for over 15 years…i have photographic eveidence that controlled
demolition was used to bring those three buildings down, it hangs right next to
my B.S. in Civil Engineering that I earned….i’ve read and i understand the
NIST Forensic Analysis Report of the collapse…I’ve seen where they fudged
their model, and where they even ommitted the steps that would make it a
complete investigation….I’ve read their response to a formal request made by
a Respected doctor of Physics and several engineers, etc. regarding these
errors and ommisions…it even suprised me a little that NIST offered no
Rational Explaination at all…i thought to myself…ahhhh, they are caught
now!, how are they gonna get out of this one?…. i guess all NIST needed to do
then was just not answer the questions.. that’s well and good enough for the
U.S. …Right?
I’ve also talked PERSONALLY with a main
stream "news" editor who told me that they are NOT ALLOWED to investigate
this story and i’ve seen with my own eyes HOW they intimidate any reporter that
even comes close to this story.
Yep, im gettin a lil crazy havin to keep
pointing out facts like this…that’s for sure… but that’s only natural
folks.
StructuralEngineer
of NY
May 27, 2009 15:12:05 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Psychologists
Weigh In On 9/11
I have written a comprehensive comment
on this important issue:
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2009/05/psychologists-weigh-in-on-911.html
George
Washington of CA
May 27, 2009 15:09:40 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
What
a tired piece of propaganda
The bogus idea that somehow
"conspiracy theorists" take comfort in their theories – that they add
order to a disorderly world – is completely against reason. It is more apt to
describe those who accept the official accounts of lone gunmen, or 19 arabs
with boxcutters. It is very disturbing to admit that our governments are
machiavellian in their methods and are dominated by war profiteers.
Rick
of CA
May 27, 2009 14:57:21 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Just because I’m paranoid, it doesn’t
mean they aren’t watching me
Shagbargh
Hickory of CT
May 27, 2009 14:51:50 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Stalin
did the same kind of demonizing of his opposition
Anyone who didn’t believe communism
wasn’t the salvation of mankind was branded mentally defective by the Stalinist
media in the old Soviet Union. Apparently nobody is supposed to notice that the
‘mainstream’ media is resorting to Stalinist tactics in order to defend the
evil orthodoxy which stood to benefit and did benefit from the 9/11 attacks.
Homeland Security was called the KGB in the old Soviet Union, but not a single
‘mainstream’ outlet had the cojones to point this out. Why? Because the mainstream
outlets are traitors to the American people just like Pravda and TASS betrayed
the Soviet people.
As for those who believe the official
fairy tale that 19 illiterate hijackers single handedly got the air defenses of
the U.S. to not do their jobs on 9/11 by sheer cunning and voodoo, they’re no
better than Lenin’s ‘useful idiots’ who promoted policies that went against
their own self interests on a basis of political ideology. Look at who got
bigger budgets and carte blanche to waste taxpayer money while erecting a
neo-communist system of total surveillance that would make Brezhnev blush with
envy. THEY are the ones who perpetrated 9/11. Don’t fool yourself.
A.
Magnus of UT
May 27, 2009 14:51:25 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
One either has to believe in the laws of
physics relative to conservation of momentum or trust that the official
narrative of the 911 atrocity is true. They are mutually exclusive.
Objects or buildings that fall at a
free-fall rate fall with no resistance. Discounting air resistance, this is the
case with WTC1, 2 and especially building 7. The widely trumpeted "pancake
collapse theory" would introduce significant resistance as upper floors
would have to crash through many tens of stories of undamaged structure. The
actual rate of the collapse of these three structures as corroborated by
unspinnable video evidence, exposes the fallacious nature of the official
explanation. A free-fall rate of collapse is only possible if all structural
integrity is eliminated just ahead of the collapse wave. This set of parameters
can only be accounted for by the controlled demolition of these buildings.
Every American has to decide whether to
trust this government and corporate controlled news media or whether to apply
some critical thinking skills in the evaluation of widely disseminated
information concerning the 911 atrocity. Since my government has a long history
of protecting me from the truth “for my own good”, I’ll stick with Newton and
Galileo.
A thorough treatment of this topic,
including a peer reviewed academic treatise, can be considered at
www.stj911.org/.
brisa
of
May 27, 2009 14:48:49 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Call
it what YOU want; truth is truth
The mounting evidence against the
government’s ‘conspiracy theory’ continues to reveal what is actually taking
place in America, as well as the rest of the world. It is a shame that the
truth is made to seem like a lie and "the lie" is portrayed as the
truth.
I am an enemy of lies, deception, and
propaganda. I stand against the injustice being perpatrated against the
innocent human beings of this world. While people are locked up for styealing a
loaf of bread murderers in suits and ties walk the halls of our federal
buildings. While we seek out the ‘terrorists’ supposedly hiding in caves we
have REAL terrorists setting policy concerning America’s economy and foreign
policy.
The proponents of the REAL 9/11
government conspiracy have had an opportunity to present their case without a
shread of evidence to support ttheir claims. THE FACTS, however, are supported
by the evidenciary body of material that people have painstakingly gathered
from their errors. WE will eventually succeed in presenting the information in
a way that the people will open their eyes, recieve, and respond to…..much to
the establishments chagrin.
James
B of KS
May 27, 2009 14:47:44 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
One either has to believe in the laws of
physics relative to conservation of momentum or trust that the official
narrative of the 911 atrocity is true. They are mutually exclusive.
Objects or buildings that fall at a
free-fall rate fall with no resistance. Discounting air resistance, this is the
case with WTC1, 2 and especially building 7. The widely trumpeted "pancake
collapse theory" would introduce significant resistance as upper floors
would have to crash through many tens of stories of undamaged structure. The
actual rate of the collapse of these three structures as corroborated by
unspinnable video evidence, exposes the fallacious nature of the official
explanation. A free-fall rate of collapse is only possible if all structural
integrity is eliminated just ahead of the collapse wave. This set of parameters
can only be accounted for by the controlled demolition of these buildings.
Every American has to decide whether to
trust this government and corporate controlled news media or whether to apply
some critical thinking skills in the evaluation of widely disseminated
information concerning the 911 atrocity. Since my government has a long history
of protecting me from the truth “for my own good”, I’ll stick with Newton and
Galileo.
A thorough treatment of this topic,
including a peer reviewed academic treatise, can be considered at
www.stj911.org/.
brisa
of
May 27, 2009 14:46:21 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Please note that many psychiatrists and
psychologists think that those who BELIEVE the official conspiracy theory are
afraid of facing the truth:
http://www.911summary.com/psych.php
George
Washington of CA
May 27, 2009 14:30:21 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
I think that the towers and WTC7 were
demolished, but that doesn’t come from any psychological quirk, it is a matter
of elementary physics.
I also wonder why there is no CCTV of a
757 hitting the Pentagon, released to the public. I would argue that believing
that such footage must exist, if it happened, is not a psycholgical quirk, but
a realistic evaluation.
The psychology of those who would
abandon logic and facts,in the face of propaganda is my main interest regarding
9/11.
This article exemplifies propaganda that
encourages us to believe that one sort of conspiracy theorist, the sort that
believes the official conspiracy theory, is in some way more psychologically
stable than someone who doesn’t believe it.
That may be true, but they are not very
bright, ignorance is bliss.
William
Webber of XX
May 27, 2009 08:04:12 AM [permalink]
[report
comment]
The very Nut Cases that the article
outlines.
Now I know what is wrong with them so
maybe I can stop calling them Idiots now.
That feels better!
Nut Cases are my Nemesis. How I hate
them for not thinking in a rational manner.
DaveH.
of NC
May 26, 2009 20:09:51 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Johnson
or Castro or Soviets "could have"
had Kennedy murdered. But space
distances are too great for credible "visitors" to Roswell from other
places in the cosmos. A yet unknown "bigfoot" somewhere? Maybe.
But "they" blew up the WTC and
Pentagon on purpose, AND crashed a 4th jet into the ground, and nobody sqwawks?
Even in eight years since? Nope. Too big a stretch.
Muser
of NM
May 26, 2009 19:43:14 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Many
U.S. Counter–Terrorism Veterans Don’t Believe 9/11
Perhaps the researchers should also
interview these 41 Counterterrorism and Intelligence Agency veterans.
May 18, 2009: 41 U.S. Counter-Terrorism
and Intelligence Agency Veterans Challenge the Official Account of 9/11 –
Official Account of 9/11: “Terribly Flawed,” “Laced with Contradictions,” “a
Joke,” “a Cover-up”
Summary: More than 40 U.S.
Counter-Terrorism and Intelligence Agency veterans have severely criticized the
official account of 9/11 and most have called for a new investigation. Veterans
from the U.S. State Department, the National Security Agency, the Central
Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Federal Aviation
Administration, U.S. Customs and Border Protection and the branches of the U.S.
Military are quoted.
http://patriotsquestion911.com/#Articles
Alan
Miller of NY
May 26, 2009 17:45:40 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
explosive
residue found in world trade center dust
How does being a conspiracy nut explain
the proven scientific fact that explosive residue was found in the World Trade
Center demolition dust, name thermite residue. This should cause the
authorities to start a criminal investigation, but sadly that is not being
done.
The readers here should demand that the
FBI investigate this evidence of controlled demolition as they would any other
criminal act where the evidence demands it. Why are they not acting?
You can find that evidence here and hopefully
the FBI will do their jobs and not ignore it because they are afraid of
political consequences to their jobs.
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Scientists_find_active_superthermite_in_WTC_0404.html
Allan
Rees of CA
May 26, 2009 17:34:02 PM [permalink]
[report
comment]
Recent Posts:
- Pregnant Woman Beaten And Humiliated by muslim policemen
- Time to Go Global
- Overdose: The Next Financial Crisis
- Uncle Scam
- Speech Control is Thought Control
No related posts.
Tags: 9/11 truth, awakening, freedom, hearst publishing, main stream media, propaganda, truth, tyrrany, us news and world report, yellow journalism
3,249 views
8 Responses to “US News and World Report 911 hit piece backfires against the Propagandists”
Over the past few nights I helped my daughter with a school project on the "Mysteries of 9/11".
I had never spoken to her in any detail about it before but she did know I was not a believer in the official story. She hadn’t looked into it at all. I showed her the collapse of the WTC1 when the top bit started to tip over then straightened up. She immediately said "that's weird" without me even prompting her. Her commonsense told her that the top bit should have fallen off. She saw the ‘flower’ of ejected debris as the tower collapsed and said “where did that come from?” (Presumably meaning “how did the apparent explosion of energy appear to shoot upwards and outwards when the building was falling?”)
Later I asked her what the gray smoke meant. Being an avid camping family, she immediately stated "the fire's gone out". Her commonsense told her this.
The difference between my 14 year old daughter and the official deniers is that she didn’t experience 9/11 like we did, in fact she hadn't really ever looked into it. When she did, without the "benefit" of all the hype and misinformation generated during the cover up, and with just the simple videos and viewing newscasts from the day and using her commonsense, she was able to see that the official story was simply wrong.
For me this has been such a confirmation of the power of the media and the official story and the debunkers efforts. We spend so much energy battling with these arguments when really our commonsense tells us immediately what the likely truth is.
By Griz
on Jun 2, 2009
Please stop with the clean-up asbests bullsh!t. If there was none on the steel griders,towers would have fallen 2 times faster and the engineers would have an excuse. .Buildings fall due to fire and lack of fire retardent material on steel columes.Notice Bush and Clinton are visting Canada–the two pieces of shit were envolved in allowing Israel to attack merica on 911.
:^(
By Geo1671
on May 29, 2009
Patrick, can you eplain why it is that the so called crater in the Penn field was visible on satellite photos years before Sept. 11 2001? Are we now to believe that there was a grand conincidence that the plane hit at this exact location? Maybe we are to believe that Usama Bin Laden had advanced time traveling techonolgy???
By Shane
on May 29, 2009
Americans are initiating the takeback of America.
By hANOVER fIST
on May 29, 2009
US News and World Report.
Mort Zuckerman.
Case closed.
By Probably Pete
on May 29, 2009
The 9/11 truth is finally washing over the the dam of lies, and the overwhelming majority now know that the U.S. government and the Israeli MOSSAD were both involved in what took place that day, and we're not talking as mere passer's by, either. They planned and executed it.
speaking of 'execution', it's time we had trials and started to build a gallows.
By Sparky
on May 29, 2009