To know what happened on 9/11 you just have to visit on www.sauron2k.de
Although it's all in german, but you'll understand everything.

9/11 was obviously an inside job. Lets stop the madness before they start putting us in FEMA camps! nickspinner@gmail.com

Yes and yes again, whyz.ache.err, I'll own up to it. There is a ton of personal animus in my campaign to get the "smirking chimp", also known as "dum'ya botch" impeached. It's not at all like I don't have cause. For one thing, what he's peddling as, get this, "terrorist surveillance" ain't Shinola.


I'm hoping you'll grant me the small favor of patience. I would like you, at first, to read straight through to the end of this text, without clicking on any of the enclosed hyperlinks.


In case, you'd like to know, the hyperlink to your blog, specifically, "Polygon, the Dancing Bear", is found at the third hyperlink on the list below ... ah, please remember, no clicking until AFTER reading the entire text.


Perusing your blog, I believe I arrived at what is a reasonable inference. That is, both you and your readers concur with my interpretation of "terrorist surveillance". Wood'ja (?) buh-leave! A civilian like me, and up to his ears in credit card debt, could come up with a game plan to snag Osama bin Ladin.


As for my plan for capturing Osama, again I should like to ask to refrain from clicking on any enclosed hyperlink, until AFTER you've read the entirety of the text.


http://hewhoisknownassefton.blogspot.com/2...umass-botch_20.html


The hyperlink just above this sentence leads to my game plan. If you've gotten this far on the first read, without clicking on any of the enclosed hyperlinks, congrats!


Whatever the case, remind or prepare, please keep in mind that it's a good bet that everything else to snag bin Ladin has already been tried. I think it's time we tried drawing on one of the few activities Americans do better than any other national group, music and pizza delivery being among those few activities.


http://hewhoisknownassefton.blogspot.com/2...specter-danger.html


oh, yeah, and here's the third hyperlink:


http://www.reachm.com/amstreet/states-writes.htm#MI


toodles
...... .he who is known as sefton


oh, yes, surely, you've heard about the government "requesting" certain records about internet activity. oh, br'dah! ... cynical and skeptical lil'ole me, I'm smelling a rat in all that. Quite candidly, I have cause to suspect that more than compiling statistics on access to pornographic websites is involved.

oh, yeah, right after Hitler came to power, the German people were assured that, if they were innocent of untoward activity, they would have nothing to worry about ... yeah, right.

Incidentally, the second hyperlink leads to a piece that relates to governmental eavesdropping WITHOUT a warrant.

     Larry, if you're going to spend time blogging about "alternative news stories" or unreported news, your expertise and knowledge would be of far greater interest to your fans in another area than crackpot 9/11 theories, most of which have roots in anti-Semitism or Israeli bashing, and aren't going to be given up by their adherents, no matter wht proof is brought to bear.
     How about discussing one of the Utne Reader's most important underreported/sqaushed stories of 2005? On p.14, they write: " "In These Times" uncovered the disquieting fact that the discredited exit polls which projected a 5 million vote victory for John Kerry in 2004 proved accurate in Kerry strongholds and in precincts that used hand-counted ballots..." Or how about the liberal 'zine American Prospect's articles on how smooth and hyper efficient the Republican's GOTV operation ran in Ohio, while the Democrats looked lile incompetent amateurish jackasses, and how this, along with all of the other irregularrities even if it didn't mean that Ohio 2004 was stolen, it was foolishly lost. We all look up to you, and you've finally got the credentials and the office to go with your background and skills so as to become a statewide or nationally quoted authority. The long-sufferring Democratic masses, fed up with the spinelessness, corruption, and gross incompetence of their leaders, need your wisdom more than they need you stuck in debates with lunatics.

Edited by author 01-07-2006 12:19 PM
i examined the expert refutation to my wildly claim that uncontrolled fires could have weakened the steel structure of WTC7.

in jones (the first link on the page you cited), i found (1) the maximum flame temperature increase for burning hydrocarbons (jet fuel) in air is 1000 °C, and (2) structural steel begins to soften around 425 °C and loses about half of its strength at 650 °C.

what was that about goblins?

Edited by author 01-07-2006 11:47 AM
silverstein was not reading from a script and did not have the opportunity to edit his remarks for clarity or precision. there are many ways he could have said what he meant, many interpretations of what he said.

"pull it" means nothing in isolation. it is subject to interpretation.

you are right, he might have meant "destroy the building."

i am right, he might have meant "remove the firefighters."

anyone who has some other interpretation, from "will work for food" to "happy mother's day" is right, he might have meant that, too.

however, i reject your claim that (1) he said "pull it" when he meant "destroy it" and (2) in an interview that he knew would be broadcast nationally, he admitted that he is a central figure in a secret conspiracy that destroyed thousands of lives and billions of dollars in property.

ridiculous? some nerve? so be it.

In case it was not clear, my comment (number 5) was directed toward Honeyman's comment. I did not address Larry Kastenbaum's post in that comment.

As far as the original post, it is based on the assumption that if there was a big cover-up, there would be more leaks, whistleblowers, etc.

The problem with that is that there have been many leaks, and the reason why they are not more popularly known is that the mainstream media won't report them. Primarily because the mainstream media is liable for so many other distortions (eg all the other big stories it marginalizes) if it concedes that the "conspiracy theorists" have some valid arguments.

Calling conspiracy theories "far fetched" (though Kastenbaum doesn't use that particular phrase) isn't saying much, because the 9/11 attacks themselves are highly improbable (the U.S. failed to prevent them?) and because many "facts" of 9/11 are totally impossible (fuel fires bending steel?)

The motive, the physical evidence, and the cover-up evidence all point straight at the Bush regime and the skeptics' strongest argument is that if our allegations were true, there would be more evidence.

Let me remind everyone that the federal government can be very persuasive. A country does not become the world's most powerful empire through stupidity. To think that 19 terrorists armed only with small boxcutting knives could subdue four planes of people (or smuggle firearms on board?), and foil every American defense apparatus in the process is a conspiracy theory. To believe that all of the highly improbable events (the WTC collapses, the minute damage to the Pentagon, the fighter plane sighted in Shanksville, etc) were coincidences, and that DNA records of the crash victims was recovered but identifiable parts of the aircraft were not makes it even more absurd.

It is time to stop spreading absurd conspiracies about September 11th.

http://www.a2planet.com/loony.html
http://www.a2planet.com/blog/skeptics.html

Some nerve to call it "semantic wrangling" that Silverstein saying "pull it" means "pull it down."

To think that "pull it" could have meant "pull any firefighters from the building" is semantic wrangling it its worst. Wouldn't he at least have said "pull them?"

More ridiculous is your claim that no experts or witnesses have spoken out. See http://www.a2planet.com/blog/skeptics.html

Contained in that page is also expert refutation to your wildly claim that uncontrolled fires could have weakened the steel structure of WTC7.

Kerosene fires do not burn nearly hot enough to weaken steel, by a margin of hundreds of degrees. No modern steel building has collapsed due to fire before or since. Only Silverstein-owned buildings can collapse due to fire, apparently.

If you believe kerosene fires can weaken steel, you might as well believe that goblins can weaken steel.

Think about all the kerosene burning in all those kerosene heaters (and lanterns), constructed primarily of thin, low-grade, steel sheet metal. Think about all those kerosene heaters burning merrily away, with temperatures perhaps approaching 875 degrees at the hottest. Think about how parts of all those kerosene heaters would then turn into bubbling pools of melted steel before the horrified eyes of countless poor souls who had no idea the fuel used in their heaters would actually "MELT" the heaters themselves.

http://www.a2planet.com/blog/skeptics.html

"The fact that the owner of the WTC complex, Larry Silverstein, is implicated in the WTC7 demolition shows that the arrangements could have been made."

i was curious about this implication.

following some links, the smoking gun -- the only evidence, in fact -- is this quote from a PBS documentary in which larry silverstein says

"I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."

the implication rests on what silverstein meant by "pull it." "pull any firefighters from the building" means one thing. "pull it down" another.

as i understand it, the fd commander told silverstein that the water main break caused by the collapse of the towers had made it impossible to fight the fires in wtc7. this being mere hours after the mind-bending collapse of the towers and the terrible loss of life, silverstein suggested no more human sacrifice, i.e., to pull the fire fighters from wtc. the fires in wtc subsequently caused its collapse.

the way i DO NOT read it is that silverstein and the fdny secretly prepared the building in advance for controlled demolition, then silverstein ordered the fd commander, to "pull the building down," then silverstein slipped up in an interview for national broadcast by admitting this deepest possible secret to the world.

i scoured the wtc7 demolition web pages but could not find any testimonial evidence to support the demolition theory. in particular,

• no one from the nyfd -- whose fd commander and others would have knowledge of the demolition plans and actions -- has spoken out,

• no demolition experts have admitted knowledge of the placement of demolitions, and

• no building occupants -- who might have seen suspicious activities as the demolitions were put in place -- have spoken out.

furthermore, no physical evidence from the remnants of wtc7 have been produced to support the demolition theory.

the ONLY evidence in favor of the "pull it down" theory is the semantic wrangling of the conspiracy crowd based on the silverstein interview.

on the other hand, the FEMA report on wtc7 has quite a bit to say about the conditions that led to the building's collapse. although the report leaves some questions unanswered, it concludes that uncontrollable fires fed by the massive diesel fuel reservoir in wtc7 weakened the buildings steel structure over a period of hours, leading to its collapse.

in leaping to embrace an alternate view, the conspiracy crowd resembles nothing more than advocates for intelligent design, who grasp at a supernatural explanation to confirm what they have already concluded.

Larry:

My rebuttal is posted at

http://www.a2planet.com/blog/kast-911.html

Also, I forgot to include a short great called "911 - All the Proof You Need," at

http://tvnewslies.org/html/9_11_-_all_the_proof_you_need.html

Larry, your article certainly warrants a thorough response, and it will have one. I'll need a little bit of time to write it.

In the meantime, let me just point out that, for obvious reasons, there are plenty of loony conspiracies about the attacks (some people saying there were no planes involved, etc.)

But if you cast aside of all them, you are still left with no easy explanation as to how the terrorists could have taken control of the planes and guided them to their targets, a process which took a good while, without any response from the various Air Force, Army, and FAA rapid-response teams.

No explanation, either, for why the FBI and CIA were ordered off of Bin Laden's trail as they discovered evidence of the impending plot.

No explanation for why the Secret Service didn't evacuate Bush from Booker Elementary school, when they could not have safely assumed Bush would not have been a target (his appearance was announced in the Sarasota Herald-Tribune three days prior).

No explanation for why Larry Silverstein, owner of the WTC complex, gave the order to "pull" Building 7, or how the demolition could have been prepared in less than one day's time.

No explanation for why the insider trading on the airlines and WTC businesses affected was not investigated.

Instead, you've cited the most dubious suggestions people have put forth.

Until my response is complete, I suggest people that want to investigate matters for themselves have a peek through

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wrh_9-11_index.html

Larry, that was really interesting. Along with the other points you raise, one more that occurs to me is that the conspirators would have been in an embarrassing spot if one of their hypothetical drone-planes had malfunctioned or otherwise somehow failed to accomplish its mission to hit a tower, leaving all the tell-tale explosives and other tell-tale equipment in place to be examined.