The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewLinh Dinh Archive
Siurana, Charlottesville and Barcelona
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Becky Anderson in Barcelona, 2017
Becky Anderson in Barcelona, 2017

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

The Muslim conquest of Hispania began in 711 and ended in 1492. In Catalonia, they were expelled by 1154, with their last stronghold the mountainous village of Siurana, which today has but 39 residents, though with several restaurants for tourists.

Walking through it, I almost felt like I was in a theme park or movie set, for everything was overly determined, with few loose ends that are inevitable in a more natural, thus more chaotic, environment. Though with almost no child residents, there were a dozen kids’ drawings strung up along an ancient stone wall, as if to suggest there was still a school in this lonely outpost. Speaking half a dozen languages, two hundred or so tourists wandered about to stare at everything. Unlike in other Spanish villages, there were no old people conversing in the shade. A few Muslims have returned to toil in kitchens.

Going to Siurana in a rented Fiat, Jonathan Revusky and I stopped at a handful of other villages in various states of decline, with one, La Mussara, completely abandoned since 1959. It’s home to about 50 sheep, however, and we chatted briefly with their owner, a smiling, middle-aged fellow who lived two villages away. Reduced to a wrecked church and seven other ruins, La Mussara also lingers on through a Catalan phrase, “baixar de la Mussara,” which means being so ignorant of something the rest of the world is aware of.

On August 12th, news came that a man had plowed into a crowd in Charlottesville, and even the sheep of La Mussara must know about it by now, for what happens in the US reverberates around the world. Sitting beneath the awning of a beachside café in Tarragona, I opened El Diari to find a cartoon mocking Trump’s inadequate response. Next to it was an editorial, “Teaching Hate” [“Enseñar a odiar”] Though brief, it assumes many of the prescribed postures that deform our reality:

What is the difference between an Islamic terrorist who drives a vehicle against a crowd and a racist who attacks people with his car? None, although the President of the United States, with an attitude that denotes a certain complicity—to minimize such an act is to become an accomplice—treats them in a very different way. From where rises so much hate? Why does hate spread so much faster than any other sentiment? What kind of world will we leave our children? Thinking about all this, I came across an Obama tweet that quotes a reflection Nelson Mandela wrote while in the Roben Island Jail: “No one is born hating another person because of the color of his skin or his background or his religion. People must learn to hate, and if they can learn to hate, they can be taught to love. For love comes more naturally to the human heart than its opposite.” Yes, one learns how to hate. And I wonder, then, why so many people are interested in learning how to hate? What benefits do they gain? And, even more gravely, why do so many people follow them?

So hate is taught and inexplicable, and no one hates more than racists, with Trump egging them on, according to this editorialist and thousands of others just like him. The battle, then, is between love and hate, but this dichotomy is false because hate flows from love, for to love anything is to hate what may threaten it.

Differences breed conflicts. Spouses, neighbors, tribes and nations argue and sometimes kill each other. As some old Jew once opined, “To everything there is a season […] A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace.” More recently, Elie Wiesel wrote, “Every Jew, somewhere in his being, should set apart a zone of hate—healthy, virile hate—for what the German personifies and for what persists in the German. To do otherwise would be a betrayal of the dead.”

In 1988, the Palestinian poet Mahmoud Darwish penned:

It is time for you to be gone

Live wherever you like, but do not live among us

It is time for you to be gone

Die wherever you like, but do not die among us

For we have work to do in our land

We have the past here

We have the first cry of life

We have the present, the present and the future

We have this world here, and the hereafter

So leave our country

Our land, our sea

Our wheat, our salt, our wounds

Depending on your politics, ethnicity or religion, you might view Wiesel or Darwish as a hate monger, but what’s so unreasonable about asking invaders to leave?

Accepting his Nobel Prize in 1986, Wiesel declared, “I swore never to be silent whenever and wherever human beings endure suffering and humiliation. We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.”

Agreeing completely, I think Israel, that alpha terror state, should be dismantled tomorrow, but just for saying that, I will be tagged as a hater or anti-Semite, all for thinking that Arabs shouldn’t be evicted from their homes, shot at, bombed, wrongly imprisoned, economically crippled, daily humiliated and demonized.

As for Charlottesville, of course it’s way too simplistic to brand all those who object to the removal of the Robert E. Lee statue as “racists,” but the entire South has been stigmatized as such since the run-up to the Civil War. Further, all whites are now deemed guilty for just being born white, for whether a blue blood, recent Albanian immigrant or trailer park dwelling grandson of a coal miner, they all benefit from “white privilege,” whereas all “people of colors,” including a Saudi Prince or Silicon Valley Chinese tycoon, belong to the victim class.

ORDER IT NOW

Such idiotic and insulting bifurcation is meant to generate civil conflict, and we’re only at the beginning stages of that, with much worse to come, so it’s all going according to their script. Slitting each other’s throat, we can’t even see that our common enemy is the American Israel Empire, or what the Saker calls the AngloZionists.

This week, I met a British expat who’s been in Tarragona seven years. Michael had to leave England because it’s “an extension of America,” and though Spain is still within the American orbit, clearly, it’s not as suffocating. In 2004, Spain had the sense to withdraw all of its troops from Iraq, though not before it had lost, quite senselessly, 11 soldiers.

The best private school in Tarragona has English and Chinese as requirements, so they’re already thinking beyond the collapse of the American Israel Empire. As the Chinese and Russians work tirelessly to integrate Eurasia, our rulers can only stage wars and false flags.

Between the last paragraph and this came news that 13 people had been murdered and over 100 injured by a van on La Rambla, Barcelona. Since the street was cordoned off, Jonathan Revusky and I waited until the next morning to go there. Arriving, we found a media circus that ranged from the BBC to citizen journalists recording themselves on cellphones. A Japanese reporter sat cross-legged on the ground, typing, with a spread of Spanish newspapers and a cup of coffee in front of him. A Latvian TV crew interviewed a Restaurante Cuines barista, while Spanish station got a long statement from an employee of Café de l’Opera. Wearing a Rolling Stones North America Tour tank top, an unshaved dude recorded his impressions and insights into a cellphone. Just flown in from London, the CNN anchor, Becky Anderson, looked quite severe and dramatic as she read from her Autoscript teleprompter.

“She probably doesn’t even speak Spanish,” Jon said as we walked away, “so what is she reporting? They’re all just repeating the same story, man. It’s just story telling.”

There were more cops than usual, including some heavily armed ones, but they didn’t constitute an ominous presence. At the Joan Miro mosaic, an impromptu and quickly growing memorial of candles and flowers was spreading, but the overall mood on La Rambla was not solemn but relaxed and even festive, as usual. People talked and laughed.

Frederico Garcia Lorca, “The happiest street in the world, the street where the four seasons live together, the only street on earth that I wish would never end, rich in sounds, filled with breeze, beautiful with encounters, ancient with blood, Rambla of Barcelona.”

The term “rambla” is the Catalanized form of the Arabic “ramla,” which means a sandy patch or beach. Ancient with blood, indeed.

La Rambla has only two lanes of traffic, but with a very wide promenade down the middle. On both sides are five or six-story buildings, with many of these garlanded with balconies, so many eyes are likely to look down at all time, especially in the heart of summer. The homicidal van is reported to have bowled people over from Placa de Catalunya to the Maccabi kosher restaurant, roughly a third of a mile. Retracing its path, Jon observed halfway, “They did a pretty job cleaning it all up, huh?”

“It is amazing. Look at all these people here, man. If it was only half as crowded yesterday, it would have been one heck of a carnage, with bodies being pinned and dragged under the van, probably.”

Wanting coffee and conversation, overheard or direct, we entered the Café de l’Opera. Around since 1929, it’s an Art Nouveau gem. Bypassing all the tables, we seized two spots at the bar. Sure enough, people were talking about the van attack.

The 50-ish, balding cashier, Raul, was working when it happened. He saw people running in panic. “I walk up and down that street so many times. It could have been me being hit.”

About half of the staff appeared to be Arabs. One, a man in his 40’s, declared quite openly that he thought it was a false flag, “It’s like 9/11 or Pearl Harbor, you know. They stage these things so they can do what they want. There is no Muslim group in the Middle East that wants to stage terror attacks in Europe. They make up this scenario so they can continue to steal oil from Arabs.”

When asked what he had seen, the man answered, “I saw many people running, and a few bodies on the ground. I saw blood.”

Moving along, we asked several shopkeepers if they had witnessed the van barreling down La Rambla, but all said no, then we ducked into an ice cream parlor to find a middle-aged lady talking quite animatedly about the attack.

Jon, “We’ve been trying to find people who actually saw the attack, but so far, nothing.”

“That’s because they’re in shock. If you want to know what happened, you should watch the news!”

Seeing a Filipino woman opening her giftshop, we made small talk, then asked what she had seen. “I was inside the store, so I saw nothing. People came running in, and they hid here until midnight.”

“Midnight?!” I responded.

“The police wouldn’t let anyone leave.”

“So everyone just stayed in this little space.”

Forcing a tight smile, she said, “Everyone was very scared. One woman saw the van, and even the driver, but she didn’t get a good look. She was in shock.”

Back on La Rambla, Jon said, “Notice how nobody says they saw the van, much less saw it run over anybody. If I had to bet money, I would bet that you could cover this whole area and not find a single person who says that they saw a van smack into anybody.”

We checked the Maccabi kosher restaurant, but it was still closed, as was the Habibi Restaurant and Sisha Bar, two doors down, so we entered nearby Restaurante Cuines for a drink. There, we talked to its manager, a bearded 40-something in front of a laptop.

“Do you think this incident will hurt your business?” I asked him in English.

“No,” he laughed. “Look at all these people! There are so many people here than yesterday.”

“And what about relations between Spaniards and Muslims?”

“I don’t think so. We are very tolerant here in Barcelona. Our patron saint,” he chuckled, “is Santiago Matamoros. Do you know what that means?”

“Killer of Moors,” I grinned.

“Yes,” the man laughed, “but people here get along with Muslims and everybody else. Same with Madrid. There are people in the villages who may think in the old way, but it is not serious.”

Abutting La Rambla, there is a neighborhood, El Raval, that’s filled with Muslims, mostly Pakistanis. When I was there in 2003, there were no Pakistani-owned electronic stores, groceries, barbershops or butchershops. Most of Spain’s Muslims, though, come from Morocco.

ORDER IT NOW

Within hours of the van attack, a 28-year-old Moroccan was fingered as the driver, since he had, miracle of miracles, supposedly left his Spanish passport in the van. Seeing his face in the news, Driss Oukabir immediately turned himself in in Ripoll, 67 miles from La Rambla. Oukabir said his passport had been stolen, so he had nothing to do with the attack.

The prime suspect, then, became Moussa, Driss’ brother, but the 17-year-old, along with four other Muslims, was killed by police just 8 ½ hours after the Barcelona incident. It’s claimed they were attempting another van attack in Cambrils, an hour and a half by car from Barcelona, but why were five “terrorists” packed into one van? The clusterfuck doesn’t make sense.

Just think of all the recent terror incidents, from 9/11, Orlando, Charlie Hebdo to Nice, where all the accused are conveniently killed, leaving the official narrative unchallenged in a court of law.

The more alert among us are catching on that there’s a series of false flags designed to sow divisions within society, increase support for more surveillance and policing and, often, intensify hatred of Muslims. All these goals benefit the American Israel Empire, of course, so until this collapses, all of us will continue to be run over. Preaching love, they sow hate relentlessly.

Linh Dinh’s Postcards from the End of America has just been released by Seven Stories Press. He maintains an active photo blog.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: Conspiracy Theories, Terrorism 
Hide 274 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Real on the ground fact finding and poignant analysis. Thankyou Mr. Dinh!

    If the vans themselves aren’t real, what is causing all the commotion? There must be some physical origins.

    • Replies: @jacques sheete
    , @CalDre
  2. Wally says: • Website

    “Truth is hate to those that hate the truth.”

    The ’6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers’ are scientifically impossible frauds.
    see the ‘holocaust’ scam debunked here:

    http://codoh.com

    No name calling, level playing field debate here:

    http://forum.codoh.com

    “Some stories are true that never happened.”
    - Elie Wiesel

  3. Linh Dinh says: • Website

    Hi Anonymous,

    I’m not claiming there was no van in Barcelona, only that it is very likely a false flag.

    As for 9/11, I’m not asserting there were no planes, only no commercial jetliners crashing into the World Trade Center or Pentagon.

    Linh

  4. Linh: I love writing False Flag conspiracy theory articles because it shows I am smarter than everybody else. But you know what the best part is, get this, it is impossible to prove me wrong.
    Me: Fuck off Linh.

  5. Still readable but I’m worried about the contagiousness of Revusky’s brain attacking virus.

    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
  6. wayfarer says:

    I’ll admit it. I’m racist. I hate the entire human race.

    Today, I’d like to point a hateful middle finger at the demagogue Israel as it actively engineers zionist-nazism within and zionist-communism beyond, its borders.

    Their deceptive false flags abound, including 9/11 and Charlottesville Virginia.

    Couldn’t help but think of the evil little Israel and their “friendship” with the U.S., while watching this particular video.

  7. Erebus says:

    Mr. Dinh,
    Too much time has now passed, but it would have been damn interesting to have set up, as close to the “crime scene” as possible, a visible table, a couple of chairs and a large sign inviting any eye-witnesses to sit down and tell you what they saw.
    Would have been a good frontline look at how these things work. Maybe you’d get shut down, even arrested, but that would also tell you something.

    • Agree: Rurik
    • Replies: @Astuteobservor II
  8. ” What is the difference between an Islamic terrorist who drives a vehicle against a crowd and a racist who attacks people with his car? ”

    The difference is quite simple, the Islamic terrorist is attacked in his country from the outside, the west, the racist is attacked inside his country by immigrants.

  9. LauraMR says:

    Europe is being filled with millions of Muslims… yet, the objective is to “intensify hatred of Muslims.”

  10. jim jones says:

    I assume the terrorists were killed because the Police have decided it is better to kill them than to let the Judiciary set them free

    • LOL: Alden
    • Replies: @Carol Crumlish
  11. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    When asked what he had seen, the man answered, “I saw many people running, and a few bodies on the ground. I saw blood.”

    watched this video last night
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIrcB1sAN8I (h/t RobinG)
    the white guys are vile
    some of the locals are equally vile flavored w/ a soupçon of histrionics

    all concerned desecrate Charlottesville

    but I didn’t see any blood

    was the car crash bit theater?

  12. n230099 says:

    “As for Charlottesville, of course it’s way too simplistic to brand all those who object to the removal of the Robert E. Lee statue as “racists”…”

    Well, that’s ‘mighty white’ of you. Good grief!

  13. Preaching love, they sow hate relentlessly.

    Indeed, and “they” are here to “protect” us. All we have to do is trust ‘em and pay ‘em.

    Yet, the masses believe they need ‘em.

    So little pains do the vulgar take in the investigation of truth, accepting readily the first story that comes to hand.

    Thucydides, The Peloponnesian War, Book I, 1.21-[3], 431 BC

    Thank you for providing an antidote, but of course yer a hateful leftie “kunspiracy theerist.” ;) ;)

    • Replies: @Erebus
  14. @Anonymous

    If the vans themselves aren’t real, what is causing all the commotion?

    That’s easy. The commotion, as usual, is caused by the sensationalist BS artistes is my conspiracy minded guess. In other words, even if there were no commotion whatsoever, one or more would be spun out of thin air.

    Why?

    Cui bono.

    • Replies: @Anon
  15. @LauraMR

    Europe is being filled with millions of Muslims… yet, the objective is to “intensify hatred of Muslims.”

    Replace “yet” with “and” and you may begin to figure it out.

    • Replies: @LauraMR
  16. @Greg Bacon

    Just a coincidence, ya know… ;) ;)

  17. Erebus says:
    @jacques sheete

    Great quote! Thucydides is a gem.
    Thanks!

    • Replies: @jacques sheete
  18. @Erebus

    Glad you appreciated it. I need to go back and read the whole thing again. He’s full of good stuff that’s relevant today.

  19. Rurik says:

    Some very well phrased, poignant observations to be sure Mr. Dinh.

    Just think of all the recent terror incidents, from 9/11, Orlando, Charlie Hebdo to Nice, where all the accused are conveniently killed, leaving the official narrative unchallenged in a court of law.

    but are all Islamic terror attacks all false flags?

    I saw photos of some victims from Stockholm that sure looked real to me. Entrails and such. Who doubts that Theo van Gogh was killed in an Islamic terror attack?

    what about these guys?

    I saw some videos where some pedestrians were walking by them as they were filming their “justification” for killing the evil British white guy, but then they were both tried in a court of law and given life sentences. The authorities could have easily killed them and avoided all scrutiny if they were just false flag patsies.

    Your well written article here seems to come down on the side of Barcelona being a false flag. I’m assuming that is your impression, but are you convinced 100% that this was a synthetic event? Another blood libel on Muslims?

    We here at Unz (and indeed millions the world over) have been wrangling over the respective veracity of these attacks for many years now. So many of them are so wrought with anomalies to say the least. So I guess we were hoping for a little less-nuanced reporting on this particular ‘attack’, especially considering the importance of knowing if now the Spanish authorities and media are also in lockstep with the fake news zio-media of the ZUSA.

    If Barcelona is a false flag, then that would require the entire Spanish government and media from the top down to the local police and local media to all be informed and complicit. Including presumably hundreds of ‘witnesses’ and ‘crisis actors’, etc… Having gone to the actual site and spoken to folks and absorbed the milieu, do you suspect that’s the case Mr. Dinh?

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
    , @RudyM
  20. Durruti says:

    My friend and fine writer Linh Dinh:

    You, of all people should know this; I am not an anti-Semite. I like Arabs.

    I quote you below:

    “Agreeing completely, I think Israel, that alpha terror state, should be dismantled tomorrow, but just for saying that, I will be tagged as a hater or anti-Semite, all for thinking that Arabs shouldn’t be evicted from their homes, shot at, bombed, wrongly imprisoned, economically crippled, daily humiliated and demonized.”

    It is the Zionist Land Thieving Jews and their puppet imperialist Americans and Europeans who are <b>anti-Semites (anti-Arab, anti-Palestinian, anti-Syrian, etc.), racists. The correct use of the term anti-Semite has been distorted, as has the accuracy of history over the Mainstream media. Was not the misuse/abuse of language one of Orwell‘s major complaints in his Novel, 1984?

    It is time important writers, such as you, corrected the misuse of the term anti-Semite, which remains one of the key weapons of the Zionist imperialists in their ongoing ethnic cleansing -extermination of the Palestinian people and their simultaneous genocidal wars against the Syrian, Iraqi, Libyan, Somali, and Yemeni peoples. The Zionist Terrorists also have Egypt and Lebanon in their agenda for extermination.

    While we are at it:

    Let’s Restore our Republic: destroyed in a hail of gunfire on November 22, 1963.

    • Replies: @Durruti
  21. The root cause of these false flags here and in Europe is the Zionist NWO agenda and to get there these attacks are going to bring about martial law in the countries where the attacks are taking place. In Europe these attacks are ran by NATOs OPERATION GLADIO and their assassins and agent provocateurs and here in America they are ran by the same elites who run NATO and the U.S. government aka the Zionist dual citizen Neocons.

    Once these attacks bring about martial law the Zionist NWO will be complete and for a look at what America aka Oceania will look like under the Zionist NWO read Orwells 1984 where as Orwell said our future will be a boot smashing us in the face.

  22. Willem says:

    “Why does hate spread so much faster than any other sentiment?”

    Good question!

    In the essay of William Hazlitt ‘On the pleasure of hating’ the question is answered as follows:

    ‘Love turns, with little indulgence, to indifference or disgust: hatred alone is immortal.’

    By which Hazlitt meant that hating is the easiest thing to do. Just give up love, stop thinking, and the hate will come by itself.

    Hating is a form of decadence. You don’t have to do anything for it to experience it, that is the pleasure of hating. Hate is a better sentiment than no sentiment. And what does one have in a decadent society, filled with stuff that nobody needs, without any sentiment or any attachment to another?

    So there you go

  23. Joe Hide says:

    Linn,
    Another amazing article.
    I wish to restate a solution to many of the problems You have written about. Mandate MRI’s, proven psychological testing, and evidence based technology to screen all sitting and potential politicians for traits of extreme psychopathy, narcissism, sadism, and insanity. The chief opposition to this will come from those with these traits… and their ignorant puppets. Since the opposition would be very powerful, the next best step would be to develop aps for cell phones to give probability of these anti-human traits based on body language, voice non-verbal indicators, and facial expressions. At first it would have significant error, but over time the error would reduce toward zero.
    … Again… Lihn, whether You agree or not, please keep these articles coming!

  24. Durruti says:
    @Durruti

    Wish to clarify my above comment:

    The overwhelming majority of Jews are not Semites (peoples from the Middle East). Most Jews are from Europe, of German, Polish, or Russian, origin. One might check Koestler (the 13th Tribe), or other scholars here. Conversely, 99% of Arabs, Palestinians, etc., are Peoples from the Middle East, Semites. Arabs are the Semites, not, for the most part, Jews.

    Linh Dinh, of all people, you should know this.

    1. If one disagrees with a Jew, one is not necessarily an anti Jew. One just disagrees.

    2. If one disagrees and dislikes a Jew, one might be anti Jew, but not as likely an anti Semite.

    3. If one disagrees with a Palestinian, one disagrees.

    4. If one disagrees with a Palestinian and dislikes a Palestinian, one definitely IS an anti-Semite.

    5. I am not an anti-Semite. I like Arabs.

    6. *Zionists are the most virulent racist anti Semites on the Planet.

    7. Linh Dinh?

  25. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Linh Dinh

    That makes sense. I’d agree the whole thing stinks and the only thing missing is Richard Goodyear capturing it all on camera.

    What do you suppose happened on 9/11? Remote controlled military jets, or CGI?

    By the way, congratulations on having the balls to talk honestly about some really meaty topics, unlike some other contributors on this site *cough*fred reed*cough*

    • Replies: @DESERT FOX
  26. TheJester says:
    @Linh Dinh

    A “false flag” can mean many things. There is a tradition in covert operations where an organization such as the CIA identifies “useful idiots” conspiring to commit terrorism … and thereafter enables the terrorism by systematically removing the financial, physical, organizational, and operational obstacles confronting the conspirators. This tactic of enabling terrorism at a distance provides ready-made cover and deniability.

    This was a favorite approach used by NATO and Western governments in Operation Gladio to enable Leftist and Communist terrorism in post-WWII France and Italy. The goal was to discredit the Left to keep France and Italy from electing Communist governments. It worked.

    The events and timeline that map to 911 suggest a similar pattern. As one of many glancing points-of-contact with the FBI and the CIA, there is evidence that one of the Saudi hijackers was stopped by US Customs Agents as he tried to enter the United States from Canada. The hijacker made a hurried call to his handler who confirmed his relationship with the US Government. The hijacker was allowed to enter the country.

    Down the memory hole …

    After a controversy about an earlier remark, U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano stated in May 2009 that the 9/11 Commission found that none of the hijackers entered the United States through Canada.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijackers_in_the_September_11_attacks

  27. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Official narratives get challenged in a court of law? Wow, nice fable.

  28. @Anonymous

    No planes were used on 911 , holograms were used on the twin towers and the Pentagram, see John Lears youtube videos on why no planes were used, and there were 7 WTC buildings destroyed not just the twin towers and WTC 7, see Dr. Judy Wood.com.

    Particle beam weapons were used to destroyed the twin towers and the pentagram was an internally prewired explosion. John Lear is the son of William Lear of the Lear jet developer.

    • Replies: @yyrvjh
    , @Anonymous
  29. Oldeguy says:
    @Linh Dinh

    The rule of the Few ( the VERY few ) over the Many has always involved sowing discord and conflict among the exploited Many. The British were absolute artists in doing this during their Empire days and the divisions sown often persisted long after the Union Jack was lowered for the last time.
    When dealing with professional liars, extreme skepticism is definitely called for.

  30. Rurik says:

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4290145/barcelona-terror-suspect-younes-abouyaaqoub-shot-and-arrested-by-spanish-police-while-wearing-suicide-vest-in-outskirts-of-city/

    my biggest problem with this ‘terrorist’ attack is why do it?

    I can understand a black or brown or ‘yellow’ hate-crazed, anti-white psycho wanting to kill as many of the evil white people (whose women don’t want to go out on dates with him) as he can, in a kind of ‘going postal’ moment at whitey. That kind of thing happens all the time.

    what I can’t understand is an organization like ISIS, whose ranks are admittedly filled with stone age, sub-human orcs, but whose leadership must surely not be *that* f’n stupid, that they want to bring down the wrath of every last nation in Europe and N. America on their dying and dwindling heads. Nobody is that stupid, yes?

    but then I see them (ISIS) make videos of burning men alive, and drowning them in cages, which are not going to do them any PR favors in the West. And I have to accept that I guess they really are capable of being that hate-crazed and suicidally cretinous/stupid.

    So I confess I really have no idea about this one. (I wish I could have gone to Barcelona [been there once], and did some of those interviews like Erebus suggested)

    • Replies: @TheJester
  31. yyrvjh says:
    @DESERT FOX

    Good stuff. Whenever I feel doubtful of my own sanity I head over to Dim Lin. Seeing what the straitjacketed inmates type out (laboriously, with nose on keyboard) always refreshes my spirits.

  32. Old fogey says:

    Many thanks for your on-the-ground reporting.

    • Agree: Talha
  33. hyperbola says:
    @Linh Dinh

    Real Academia Español
    Diccionario de la lengua española

    rambla
    1. f. Lecho natural de las aguas pluviales cuando caen copiosamente.
    2. f. Suelo por donde las aguas pluviales corren cuando son muy copiosas.
    3. f. Artefacto compuesto de postes de madera fijos verticalmente en el suelo y unidos por dos series de travesaños, con puntas o ganchos de hierro, en que se colocan los paños para enramblarlos.
    4. f. En Cataluña y otras zonas de Levante, calle ancha y con árboles, generalmente con andén central.
    5. f. Arg. y Ur. Avenida que bordea la costa de un lago, un río o el mar.

  34. @Rurik

    If Barcelona is a false flag, then that would require the entire Spanish government and media from the top down to the local police and local media to all be informed and complicit.

    Oh really? So you think the entire U.S. government and media from top down to the local police and local media was informed and complicit in 9/11?

    • Replies: @Rurik
  35. @LauraMR

    LaursMR,

    I admire how you think.

    After having given Stalin eastern Europe, the victorious Allies knew about The Vodzh’s plan to export his revolution into western Europe nations.

    Soon communist political agitprop became a problem and the CIA launched Operation Gladio in order to liquiddate agents who gained an easy pathway of influence into west Europe capitals.

    In essence, the Anglo-Zionists facilitated the entry of communist revolutionaries into places like Rome and then Operation Gladio implemented the fiendish goal of killing the leadership.

    Presently, a different “cast” of Anglo-Zionists facilitated mass migration of Muslim refugees into Europe for humanitarian haven. (Be sure to recognize the fact that the Islamic refugees fled from the America-Israel Empire centered in the M.E. & North Africa)

    Now I focus upon your comment’s wise point.

    Europe is presently being filled with millions of Muslim refugees under a cynical guise of Christian charity & egalitarianism.

    For me, and given the very weird Barcelona “terror” attack covered insightfully by Linh and Jon R., I intuit that there is an Operation Gladio revival (!) going on in demographically modified west European cities. Such plays out as theater and the goal is, & as you wisely wrote, “intensify hatred of Muslims.”

    Bingo.

    The Neo Operation Gladio now has millions of refugee Muslims assembled in what geopolitical scientist referred to as “The Heartland.” How convenient? As the American-Israeli Empire proceeds to “pivot” Far East, the fiendish leadership prefer having “The Heartland” in tow and fillled with hatred for “Islamo-Fascism.”

    I fear for an increase & intensification/sophistication of Neo Oeration Gladio attacks and the “stage” being set for more immoral war for the fibbing sake of the salvation of “Western Civilization.”

    How ’bout that, Laura? The one’s who engineered the phased-degradation of western civilization now wear the mask of someone who wants to save it.

    Thank you!

    • Replies: @Rurik
    , @LauraMR
    , @Talha
  36. TheJester says:
    @Rurik

    Jews need the perception that Europe is being taken over by anti-Semitic Muslims to create the necessary level of fear so that the Jews living in Europe decide to immigrate to Israel. Same for the discord in the United States … that is, motivate Jews in the diaspora to relocate to Israel because it is perceived as too dangerous for them to live anywhere else.

    Would the Jewish leaders of their global community really stoop to such extreme measures to try to win the demographic war with the Palestinians in Israel? Yes … a slam dunk!

    • Replies: @Rurik
  37. This is your most infantile bit of drivel, yet, and you’re a master of infantile drivel. Your belief in your innocence is the fount of your infantilism.

    You’re just a fucking failure. I’ve met hundreds of fucking failures like you in San Francisco, NYC and Woodstock. And, like them you live like a pig in shit among drug addicts, alcoholics and other losers. The fucking failure school of literature that you belong to… hell, I’ve met the lot of them. They all like to think that they are just innocents who are too sainted for the big bad world.

    President Trump is the Lech Walesa of the U.S. He’s going to defeat the HR informers, racism hucksters and party apparatchiks in academia. He’s going to thoroughly defeat fucking failures like you in the U.S. Choke on it. The U.S. isn’t going down and white people aren’t finished.

    Here’s what’s actually going to happen chump. Europe will come pleading to the U.S., hat in hand, begging us to bail them out of the fucking mess Merkel and the other idiots have created, just like they did twice in the 20th century. This time we’ll have to rescue the idiots from the Jihadis.

    And little shits like you will keep pissing in the wind, living like pigs in shit and handing out that dimwit fucking lecture about what saints you are because that’s what asshole commies, drugs addicts and pigs living in shit do.

    We’re on to trash like you, Lihn. You don’t stand a chance against Trump and white America. And, since we’re Christians, we’ll bail your ass out and you’ll spit on us like the dumb ingrate child you are. Doesn’t matter. Even though you’re a spoiled idiot fucking child and an ingrate, we’ll save your worthless ass.

    Racism and bigotry hucksters are the lowest demagogues. We know that in the U.S. The era of racism and bigotry hucksters winning is over in the U.S. In Europe, the hucksters are winning and propelling the continent into yet another genocidal disaster.

    We’re the adults, asshole. You’re a fucking infant. We’ll be around to change your shitty diapers and save you from yourself. You aren’t competent to change them yourself.

  38. Rurik says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    So you think the entire U.S. government and media from top down to the local police and local media was informed and complicit in 9/11?

    to the degree that is was necessary to pull off the false flag ruse, and use it for their depraved designs, yes I do.

    have they not succeeded in destroying several nations Israel considered inconvenient? Does not the entire length and breath of our government and media all go along with the ruse everyday? Of course they do. If any media personality or government apparatchik openly questions what happened on 9/11, they’d be hounded out of their jobs in a New York minute.

    Obviously not all people in government and media here in the ZUSA agree with the ludicrous narrative, but they keep their heads bowed. They have families to feed, and pensions to collect.

    I just sort of had this feeling about countries like Spain that they were less under the thrall of the Fiend than the ZUSA or England for instance. I really don’t know. Just as I really don’t know what happened in Barcelona. If it was an ISIS attack as they say, it seems too stupid for words.

    Some feel they are staged attacks that may use zio-operatives and local CIA types to create havoc that can be used to malign Muslims, so the Spanish want to kill them in Muslim countries, (but of course keep the immigration coming ; ). As we also know the PTB want as many Muslims in Europe as they can get, so it’s complicated.

    I really don’t know. In a way that’s why I’m commenting on this article. Because I’m quite curious. And would like to know what you guys found out.

    Are you convinced it was a false flag? Was there a van at all? Were people actually killed?

    If there was a van, perhaps it’s possible it was being driven by a Mossad type with local CIA types running cover. Like I said, I really don’t know.

  39. Moi says:

    Allowing and having informed discussion on what’s called the Holocaust would help in setting things right. And let’s take it a step further by having an independent investigation of 9/11…

    I would not understand why anyone would or should object to the above.

  40. Rurik says:
    @TheJester

    motivate Jews in the diaspora to relocate to Israel because it is perceived as too dangerous for them to live anywhere else.

    well, that’s certainly what the Jewish Zionists who were collaborating with Hitler were all about.

    I remember the first thing I heard about the Barcelona attack was that it happened in front of a kosher restaurant.

    http://forward.com/fast-forward/380325/barcelona-van-terror-attack-kills-13-near-kosher-restaurant/

    • Replies: @CalDre
  41. RJJCDA says:

    “The battle, then, is between love and hate, but this dichotomy is false because hate flows from love, for to love anything is to hate what may threaten it.”

    In the fable TETHERS OF THE SAPIANTS, when a protagonist is accused as harboring hate, he replies “Yes I hate! I hate evil. Don’t you?”

  42. Rurik says:
    @ChuckOrloski

    The one’s who engineered the phased-degradation of western civilization now wear the mask of someone who wants to save it.

    and why we now need a police state and total surveillance and NDAA and drones and Gitmo …

    or this scene at 1:20

    amazing that movie was even made

    or maybe, they’re mocking us…

    • Replies: @ChuckOrloski
  43. Druid says:
    @Greg Bacon

    Classic reason for Ziofascist false flag!

  44. Druid says:
    @Shouting Thomas

    So idiot, how do you like Trumps’ start thus far?

  45. LauraMR says:
    @jacques sheete

    No need for replacements. Just read the article. There was no van… and if there was a van, there was no driver,… and if there was a driver, there were no victims,… and if there were victims, it was the deep state…

    You know, false flags and all.

    It’s ancient aliens all the way down.

  46. anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Rurik

    Oh no, not again!

    Rurik, many here value your comments. But Jonathan Revusky will never treat you as anything better than a strayed sycophant, and you’re likely to revive his wrath.

    Alternatively, please consider – both of you – taking this backseat quarrel over to the thread beneath that last article by Mr. Revusky where it left off. Linh Dinh is driving this car.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  47. LauraMR says:
    @ChuckOrloski

    It’s Linh Dinh who deserves the thanks.

  48. RudyM says:
    @Rurik

    Funny you should mention Woolwich which was obviously a false flag, and probably a hoax. Watch all the footage available. I especially like the Indian looking woman who practically walks into the “terrorist” who is waving a cleaver around, supposedly with a fresh corpse in the street nearby. Actually Woolwich is a good example of an attack that I initially assumed was probably genuine. It was small scale. I could easily see a couple Muslim men going off at random in a small-scale attack like that. But then it turned out to reek of hoax.

    I am not going to assume all these attacks are false flags, but virtually every time I look closely, they appear to be. Who the fuck has time to even keep up with them all at this point? I’m still against mass immigration and open borders, although I’m American, so deciding European policy isn’t ultimately my business.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  49. utu says:

    Dial a Terror Attack:

    1-800-FLS-FLAG

    I am sure there are outfits that for the right sum of money will organize any FF event of any scale and type in almost any place in the world. I would not be surprised finding that this business is dominated by outfits originated in Israel which developed the know-how of Islamic false flag terrorism the first. These outfits are still being supervised by hidden partners linked to the highest echelons of security apparatus of Israel who give the final green light to the operation. Not all operations will be permitted. But I am sure guys in CIA and MI5 are not far behind. Also FSB and GRU can do things as well though probably only in Russia’s sphere of influence. Furthermore it should be kept in mind if we are concerned with terrorist incidents in Western countries we are dealing with with only a tiny fraction of the terrorist phenomena. In countries like Iraq, Syria, Pakistan, Afghanistan the terrorist incidents are daily occurrences. It is possible that there the events have different etiology than the events in the West.

    The price depends on type of event and its difficulty. The latter is chiefly determined to what extent the security apparatus of the host country is infiltrated and compromised. The staging of the event is much simpler in Israel friendly countries than openly hostile ones. The biggest problem is always the local police that in its naive earnestness may compromise the operation and make the patsy placement in the second stage difficult. This is the honest cop problem. It seems that in Berlin Christmas 2016 operation something went wrong. Local police caught a wrong guy and committed cardinal mistake by not killing him. The next day an ID was found in the truck (that was presumably searched day before) and pointed to another guy who soon was killed in Italy. In Nice there were friction between the local police and central agency from Paris.

    Sometimes high ranking officers might not be cooperative. Is that what deputy director of regional police, Helric Fredou killed himself in the early stage of investigation of Charlie Hebdo? And what was the reason that the chief of security of Davos World Economic Forum Dr. Markus Reinhardt had to commit a suicide in 2010 just a day before the forum was to begin? Did his death stop some pending operation?

    In countries where police trade unions are closely linked with various para-masonic fraternal orders like in the Anglo-Saxon countries cooperation with police on all levels is certainly simpler. Everywhere local police departments have liaison officers and agents that are linked to secret security apparatus of the state who help to coordinate carrying out of the secret operations w/o unnecessary interference from some honest and clueless cops.

    Next it would be good to come up with FF operations taxonomy. Revusky’s division into synthetic and organic is way too coarse. And the most important it would be to do the cost benefit analysis. Who really benefits from this or that operation? What are they for? Can we identify the cui bono factor in particular operations?

    In the meantime all doubters and obstructionists like the Windbag of Antipodes should read The Little Drummer Girl by John Le Carre.

  50. I like reading Linh Dinh, but some of the Grassy Knoll Hologram stuff is a bit far-fetched.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  51. @Rurik

    Yes! MOCKING.

    Watch the movie “Brazil” which portrayed the ZUSA state of civilization & culture as it is
    and the bonus of terror attacks to come.

    Then came the Fox TV episode of “Lone Gunman” and such fiction became real 6-months later, 9/11.

    Of course, a director like Arnon Milchan can tell ZUSA present, past, and future!

    Ebeneezer Scrooge awakened in nick-of-time, but will we?

  52. @Linh Dinh

    As for 9/11, I’m not asserting there were no planes, only no commercial jetliners crashing into the World Trade Center or Pentagon.

    that is a very reasonable stance.

    • Agree: ChuckOrloski
  53. Vinteuil says:

    Uh-oh – Linh Dinh, Rurik & Jonathan Revusky all together, again.

    This should be good.

  54. Rurik says:
    @RudyM

    I especially like the Indian looking woman who practically walks into the “terrorist” who is waving a cleaver around, supposedly with a fresh corpse in the street nearby

    that’s what I said:

    I saw some videos where some pedestrians were walking by them as they were filming their “justification” for killing

    I am not going to assume all these attacks are false flags, but virtually every time I look closely, they appear to be.

    something’s rotten, that’s for sure

    but I do wonder if some of them are genuine, like as I mentioned, Theo Van Gogh, who I believe was murdered by a Muslim extremist/terrorist.

    what about Ft Hood? Others.

    I really don’t know.

    As I said, I have a rule; if they were running drills for just such an attack = it’s a false flag. If not, IDK.

    but I don’t automatically assume one way or the other, unless or until there’s evidence. Which is why I take an interest in such events, because they’re inevitably used (false flag or not) by the PTB to do harm. And the more we know about the specifics, the better informed we can all be to spread the word. And by doing so, ameliorate the harm that the PTB can do by using their false narratives; whether it was a synthetic event or not.

    That’s all.

    And also I just like to know the truth.

  55. Rurik says:
    @anonymous

    backseat quarrel

    who’s quarreling?

    Linh Dinh is driving this car.

    and I like the way he drives

    cheers

  56. @Shouting Thomas

    I feel like you have sold us short with this omment, Mr. Shouting Thomas. I would appreciate if you could elaborate quite a bit more on just how worthless Mr. Dinh is, and to also give a more thorough account of just what lengths we would go to save Mr. Dinh, despite his shortcomings.

    Thanks!

  57. c matt says:
    @Linh Dinh

    Having seen the videos of World Trade Center (WTC) and other videos of buildings falling/ demolition, etc., the WTC thing at a minimum raises some questions. Two things that raise the eyebrows: (1) How can a large heavy steel “missile” shaped object (the plane) travelling at high speed crash into a building and not have at least some significant portion of it exit the other side; and (2) how can something striking from one side with pretty incredible force (asymmetrical force) cause such symmetrical collapse? Why drop practically straight down rather than knock over – at least somewhat?

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    , @MarkinLA
  58. Z-man says:

    ‘Becky’ Anderson is a revolting individual.

  59. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @DESERT FOX

    Mixing in the truly absurd with the plausible is an effective technique to discredit the plausible.

    • Replies: @DESERT FOX
  60. @Anonymous

    Telling the truth in a world of deceit is a revolutionary act- George Owell

    • Replies: @utu
  61. @Wizard of Oz

    Given the choice, I’d rather be infected with Revusky’s brain virus than by the one that has destroyed your own brain.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  62. utu says:
    @DESERT FOX

    You are not telling the truth. You do not know the truth. Just like that Lear guy who also does not know the truth. There is no evidence that technology like holograms or particle beam weapons can exist to be used on the scales required in the imaginings of scientific dilettante Lear. There is ZERO evidence for it and there is plenty of good scientific arguments that it cannot exist. If your explanation requires invoking of something that might not exist and most liked does not exist your explanation is worthless. Ask Mr. Occam. Your “truth” is nowhere near revolutionary. It is delusional insanity infecting people who grow cauliflowers in their heads. It is a very sloppy thinking. I sometimes wondered whether the universal education was a good thing. People like you and that Lear guy make me think that humanity would be better off if some people were left alone and never taught to read or write. Do not hurt your cauliflower. Go fishing. Watch cartoons.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  63. notice says:

    Kessler and Spenser mistakenly believed a city with a liberal mayor, a black police chief, in a state where Terry McCauliffe is governor, were going to order the police force to hold antifa at bay for a handful of speakers in front of a statue to peacefully assemble and exercise their first amendment rights.

    Im sure they will learn from this. Any public space gatherings need to be in areas where there are friendly politicians firmly in control.

    • Replies: @anonymous
  64. Saxon says:

    There’s this weird narrative that somehow we’d be sitting around the campfire singing kumbaya with these people and be completely okay with being erased off the face of the earth if not for these attacks. It’s ridiculous. We won’t get along with these people and it’s not in our interest to have such massive numbers of them in our lands.

    Even if all of these attacks are false flags, they still commit enormous amounts of crime all of the time including and up to sexually enslaving our young girls. They still parasitize off of us in such a way that our birth rates are now far below replacement levels while they continue to flood in. Why in the world would we want these monsters in our territory?

  65. @Rurik

    So you think the entire U.S. government and media from top down to the local police and local media was informed and complicit in 9/11?

    to the degree that is was necessary to pull off the false flag ruse, and use it for their depraved designs, yes I do.

    “To the degree that…”???? But you were saying that, for something to be a false flag, the entire government and media “from top down” would have to be “informed and complicit”. So you’re now changing your position? Or is it that, up to now, you never really seriously thought about these things…

    Look, I’m going to be brutally honest with you here. What you are saying reveals a shocking lack of understanding of the most basic issues with these sorts of deep events.

    Probably every JFK assassination researcher believes that the conspirators had one or more moles within the Dallas Police Department, but probably not a single JFK researcher believes that the network responsible for killing JFK controlled the entire Dallas P.D. or that every last Dallas cop was “informed and complicit”. That would be a crazy proposition.

    Similarly, the faction behind killing Martin Luther King in Memphis had some assets within the Memphis P.D. and it seems likely that the actual shooter was, in fact, a Memphis cop. BUT again, nobody believes that the entire Memphis P.D. was “informed and complicit”.

    That simply is not how these things work. The network behind all these false flags must control key people in the various organs of the State and the media (both mainstream and “alternative”) but they do not have complete control over all the politicians, cops, journalists, etcetera. No, of course not!

    But anyway, there is a long history of these sorts of things, the JFK assassination research, Operation Gladio in Italy and many other cases, and it would make sense for you to look into these things and really educate yourself. It’s like there’s only one deep event (guess which one…) that you have any amount of understanding of. A wider approach would maybe cure you of talking this sort of nonsense about how, if this was a false flag, the ENTIRE Spanish State and media would have to be complicit, because, no, you can study these things and, even if one does not get complete knowledge, one gets a sense of how these things must work.

    Now, for a bit more brutal honesty here, I feel a bit miffed at having to explain something so basic to you. Well, I guess it’s useful as a sort of public service, but still, one has the feeling that conversations can’t simply revolve endlessly around the most basic concepts. Really, if you do want to insert yourself into all of these conversations, you really ought to understand the most very basic aspects of these things, because, otherwise, it really does just get kind of annoying. It really bogs the conversation down.

    Anyway, if you seriously, honestly think about it, you will realize that something being a “false flag” or “inside job” does NOT mean that the entire political/mediatic structure is in on it. Also, if you seriously and honestly think about it, you will also realize that hundreds of women cannot be sexually assaulted in a place like Grand Central Station and for there to be ZERO visual evidence. To just go around in circles with this kind of wilful obtuseness and then express befuddlement when people get exasperated at you — I really don’t think this is a good way to behave, and you should come to grips with that.

  66. anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @notice

    “Kessler and Spenser mistakenly believed …” Hmm.

    Having watched a few (not all, especially as some have been squelched) of the videos assembled under the parallel Cleburne article (where you’ve left a similar comment), my impression is that these so-called Uniters of The Right may have selected the forum because they, like the Establishment generally, desired a violent altercation.

    The Friday night torchlight parade as filmed by Vice seems almost scripted, provocative “reality TV” to stoke fear and loathing among the American manipullati. Men who look like Haven Monohan’s frat brothers chanting “Blood And Soil” (really?!), in perfect formation behind a drum major who looks like a Viking Hell’s Angel, all left undisturbed by observers. Are these even the same people sent packing on Saturday from the park and down the street to be abused by hundreds of counter-protestors, as seen in the Goldy video?

    Every sheep gets sheared.

  67. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @utu

    You assume he and others like him actually believe what they say. I think it’s much more likely to be deliberate sowing of disinformation.

    I think the goal is to create a ladder of potential truths stretching from those acceptable within polite conversation to those even complete loonies fail to swallow and then to populate each rung of the ladder with an equal number of active proponents so that a casual observer can no longer intuit the likely location of the real truth simply through meta analysis. This forces genuine investigators to analyse the truth present on each rung of the ladder entirely on its own merits, which obviously slows down the whole process and reduces the number of people working out what really happened. In other words, it’s a kind of DoS attack.

    Also along the same lines, seeing a ladder of potential truths stretching out into an infinite abyss causes people to fear for their sanity and hence dismiss the whole endeavour as far too dangerous.

    • Replies: @utu
    , @Liberty Mike
  68. @c matt

    You wouldn’t even be allowed into Truthers-for-Fantasy at the kindergarten level if you fail to read up their (often very different) grounds for certainty and their versions of the facts. I refer in particular to your describing the planes as steel! That is certainly wrong.

    As it happens one did I think breach two sides of the building. The central core of lift shafts would presumably have been a major barrier to a crumpling plane’s further progress.

  69. anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    I knew it! See #47, above. Next round will come the potty words.

    Please, boys, take it back over to Revusky’s Razor or one of the other threads where your strange relationship began.

    And yes, Mr. Revusky, I am the small “a” anonymous who attempted to discuss with you your last article. So no need to recycle all of that here, either.

  70. Rurik says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    “To the degree that…”???? But you were saying that, for something to be a false flag, the entire government and media “from top down” would have to be “informed and complicit”. So you’re now changing your position?

    no I’m not, you’re just being pedantic

    but probably not a single JFK researcher believes that the network responsible for killing JFK controlled the entire Dallas P.D. or that every last Dallas cop was “informed and complicit”. That would be a crazy proposition.

    how many of those Dallas cops have come out and publically said ‘hey, they told us to let Jack Ruby shoot Oswald!’. ‘I was the guy who let him in the room with a gun’.

    How many people in the government and media have become whistle blowers over the JFK assassination?

    This is the thing; they virtually control it all. The entire msm is in their grip. There wasn’t one media outlet on 9/11 or since that has said it’s all a hoax. They are controlled.

    what would happen to a congressman’s career if he said ‘I think 9/11 was an inside job’?

    complete control over all the politicians, cops, journalists, etcetera. No, of course not!

    again, semantics. Pedantics.

    the ENTIRE Spanish State and media would have to be complicit,

    I don’t know what happened in Barcelona, but I also don’t know why there wasn’t one local Spanish journalist who did what Erebus suggested, and showed up with a video crew within an hour of the attack, (one would certainly think this is doable) and started filming and interviewing witnesses.

    Where were they? Perhaps the authorities sealed off the crime scene, and didn’t allow any one near it, but certainly on the edges of the area people would be leaving, or heading to the local hospitals, and there would have been hundreds of people to interview. But the only things I’ve seen are predictable ‘people were running’ and there was hysteria’, which is why we here at Unz were actually counting on you guys! to go tell us what happened, because there’s always a deathly pall over reporting on such things. Or flat out lies. Especially here in the States, where everything is controlled.

    [now, when I say everything, I don't actually mean everything..]

    hundreds of women cannot be sexually assaulted

    >>sigh<<

    ok for that conversation, I think we should take the advise of the commenter here who suggested we discuss that elsewhere.

    Still, I appreciate your thoughts, but I was sort of hoping for more about Barcelona in particular.

    Like I said, we were counting on you and Linh to inform us, being as there don’t seem to be any local Spanish journalists doing the job. So far, I think I’ve glimmered a more nuanced understanding of Barcelona from this article, than I have from the ‘entire government and media from top down to the local police and local media’.

    cheers

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  71. Talha says:
    @ChuckOrloski

    Hey Chuck!

    the goal is, & as you wisely wrote, “intensify hatred of Muslims.”

    I think that is simply a stepping stone. It seems that allowing certain known hostile Muslims into the countries and then either facilitating, looking the other way, or even inciting through provacateurs certain events allows them to justify the expansion of; 1) a security state and 2) war on random third world countries – these are not those that can legitimately fight back or cause serious damage to the prevailing order like North Korea.

    There is so much money and power involved in this at so many levels, I cannot think there is interest to end this. I mean what would the weapons manufacturers do, take up making soda pop?

    And with people at the helm that know next to nothing about the region, it’s full steam ahead to fight “Islamo-facism”:
    “One of the ways McMaster tried to persuade Trump to recommit to the effort was by convincing him that Afghanistan was not a hopeless place. He presented Trump with a black-and-white snapshot from 1972 of Afghan women in miniskirts walking through Kabul, to show him that Western norms had existed there before and could return.”

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/its-a-hard-problem-inside-trumps-decision-to-send-more-troops-to-afghanistan/2017/08/21/14dcb126-868b-11e7-a94f-3139abce39f5_story.html?utm_term=.9ff939e9f12a

    Freedom and miniskirts for all!!! Isn’t that what trillion-dollar militaries are for?

    Peace.

    • Agree: jacques sheete
    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    , @republic
  72. utu says:
    @Anonymous

    You assume he and others like him actually believe what they say.

    Oh sure, some of them believe and some of them consider them as reasonable hypotheses. And yes, there are those who disseminate it on purpose to sow discord. In this particular case I do not know.

    When one tries to reconstruct the event form insufficient amount of data obviously there will be many solutions fitting the set of data. When you have two points on plane you can draw infinite numbers of different circles through the two points. The missing data mean that we are partially unconstrained. So obvious many theories are possible. Are there Cass Sustein’s cognitive infiltrators out there? I am pretty sure there might be but there will be enough spontaneously generated idiocies that in long run render the paid infiltrators unnecessary.

    • Replies: @Sparkon
  73. Talha says:
    @Linh Dinh

    Hey Mr. Dinh,

    where all the accused are conveniently killed, leaving the official narrative unchallenged in a court of law.

    And, of course, San Bernadino where a diminutive Pakistani housewife was mistaken by witnesses as a tall athletic male.

    Any chance of you guys heading to Morocco? I have read in multiple places (including travel/expatriate blogs) that it is a popular retirement destination for people; Marrakesh seems the most popular and Rabat and Casa Blanca also. Anyway, if you do go there, I’d love to hear how the thousands of expatriates like living there and their experiences*.

    Peace.

    *One complaint I’ve heard is that – apart from one or two grand ones, non-Muslims can’t enter or tour the various beautiful historic mosques of the region. The majority do follow the Maliki school there so that is to be expected. However, it is unfortunate because the Maghribi architecture is very unique and you simply cannot find a suitable analog for it anywhere else. But I bet if you put on a Moroccan thobe and go with a friend, nobody’s going to ask you – they’ll probably assume you are a Muslim from the East (Cham) or something.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  74. Dad Bones says:
    @Shouting Thomas

    So true, ST. He was incapable of learning anything from those who were there so he wrote a story that he and his diapered fans would like.

  75. Rurik says:
    @Talha

    Maghribi architecture is very unique and you simply cannot find a suitable analog for it anywhere else.

    you piqued my curiosity

    http://islamic-arts.org/2012/king-hassan-ii-mosque-in-casablanca-morocco/

    Peace

  76. @Linh Dinh

    Your comments are refreshing. Many thanks.

  77. @jim jones

    Perhaps, but the undeniable reality is that dead men don’t talk.

  78. Sparkon says:
    @utu

    When you have two points on plane you can draw infinite numbers of different circles through the two points. The missing data mean that we are partially unconstrained.

    No, because your premise is wrong.

    While any two points define a line, any THREE points on a plane define a circle, in the same way a circle can be drawn through all 3 points of any triangle.

    These arcane mysteries are encompassed in that branch of mathematics known as geometry.

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    , @utu
  79. MarkinLA says:
    @c matt

    and (2) how can something striking from one side with pretty incredible force (asymmetrical force) cause such symmetrical collapse? Why drop practically straight down rather than knock over – at least somewhat?

    What you see may be something of an optical illusion. In one of the collapses you see the top of the building slowly start to rotate. However, the area below that mass (where the plane has collided and weakened the main superstructure) has already started to collapse and reaches the point that it can no longer hold the mass of the top part of the building. Gravity pulls that mass straight down and the force of gravity on that top of the building is many times the rotational force of the top of the building. Because the force of gravity is so high the building falls much faster than it rotates so to the eye it looks like it stopped rotating and as it continues to collapse and smash into the floors below there are all kinds of smaller forces in all different directions that further hide the rotation of the top of the building.

  80. MarkinLA says:
    @Talha

    http://www.quotes-inspirational.com/quote/you-kill-our-men-yours-117/

    Ho Chi Minh is supposed to have said to the French: “You will kill 10 of our men and we will kill one of yours, but in the end it will be you who tire of it”. It seems stupid generals never learn. There is nothing we can do if the other side can simply out-wait us.

    The only guarantee of “victory” is to kill every Afghan and replace them with somebody else who would actually want to live in that hole, not that I am advocating that. Since no American would do it there could never be anything even close to victory. Since there can be no victory, we need to leave and make sure that Al Qaeda knows if they organize too much, we will MOAB them again.

    • Replies: @Talha
  81. woodNfish says:

    As for 9/11, I’m not asserting there were no planes, only no commercial jetliners crashing into the World Trade Center or Pentagon. – Linh

    Dumbest thing I’ve read all week. I watched it live on TV. On this one you’re an idiot Linh.

    • Replies: @Truth
    , @Liberty Mike
    , @Rurik
  82. Talha says:
    @MarkinLA

    Hey MarkinLA,

    That sounds about right. And once the ratio gets down to 1 to 5 or 6, then no Western nation really has the stomach for it – this is the kind of ratio that made the Lebanon a no-go area for Israel in 2006 (even though they had occupied it for around 15 years before).

    It seems stupid generals never learn.

    Generals only know how to do one thing – they are like someone with a hammer, everything looks like a nail. They don’t ask – should we be fighting this war in the first place? But honestly, that’s not their problem – that failure is in the politicians and the public that keeps tolerating this madness.

    The Taliban have already made it clear they will not tolerate another Al-Qaeda type presence there – it was a massive mistake. They are also fighting Daesh from making inroads.

    Afghanistan will recover eventually – it always has – but it will not be some mirror of Portugal or Belgium – different land, different people. They’ll go back to producing what they have for centuries; awliya and simple, tough people.

    “God created Arrakis to train the faithful.” – Dune

    Peace.

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
  83. @Jonathan Revusky

    Similarly, the faction behind killing Martin Luther King in Memphis had some assets within the Memphis P.D. and it seems likely that the actual shooter was, in fact, a Memphis cop. BUT again, nobody believes that the entire Memphis P.D. was “informed and complicit”.

    Before his death, King’s assassin, James Earl Ray, claimed to have had a handler named ‘Raoul’, whom he had come to believe was a government agent or asset. The MSM, naturally, treated his story as a conspiracy theory; but when Coretta Scott King, MLK’s widow, met with him, she said she thought his story was plausible.

  84. @woodNfish

    Yes, it must be true because you seen it on the Tee Vee.

    LOL!

  85. MarkinLA says:
    @Sparkon

    He said IF you had two points on a plane. You are talking about something completely different. He is trying to give an example about understanding something when you don’t have complete information. He isn’t saying anything about the minimal information necessary to define something.

    As for geometry, what he means is that with only two points on a plane you can generate any circle you want with any radius (as long as it is larger than 1/2 the distance between the two points). If you take the line on a plane that is equidistant from each of the two points, any point on that line can be the origin of a circle where the radius is equal to the distance from the origin to one of the points.

    Unfortunately, I don’t know how to use the picture drawing utilities.

    • Replies: @utu
    , @Sparkon
    , @Erebus
  86. Rurik says:
    @woodNfish

    no commercial jetliners crashing into the World Trade Center or Pentagon. – Linh

    I watched it live on TV.

    me too, but I don’t think those were commercial jetliners, but rather jets that were outfitted with remote flight control systems but made to look like commercial jets. Perfectly doable.

    They didn’t want to take the risk of sending in one of the commercial jets with all the passengers, because that would have risked the critical element of hitting the towers in just the right place.

    Something happened (likely blasted out of the sky over Pennsylvania) to the third jet that was probably intended for building seven, so they had to improvise. And just ‘pull it”.

    something hit the Pentagon, but obviously it wasn’t a commercial jet

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    , @Erebus
  87. @Anonymous

    What is the motivation for the goal of creating “a ladder of potential truths stretching from those acceptable within polite conversation to those even complete loonies fail to swallow and then to populate each rung of the ladder with an equal number of active proponents so that a casual observer can no longer intuit the likely location of the real truth simply through meta analysis” ?

    What, if any, evidence can you adduce to support this hypothesis?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  88. @Truth

    The Undercover Brother is a latter day Thucydides when it comes to assessing the WoodNfishes of the world.

    • Agree: Truth
  89. annamaria says:

    With the Empire’s master plan for the planet, there is no end of the suffering and mass slaughter in the Middle East: http://www.voltairenet.org/article197541.html

    “For the last 70 years, the obsession of US strategists has not been to defend their people, but to maintain their military superiority over the rest of the world. …
    These ideas and fantasies led President Bush and the Navy to organize the world’s most wide-ranging network for international kidnapping and torture, which created 80,000 victims. Then President Obama set up an assassination programme mainly using drones, but also commandos, which operates in 80 countries, and enjoys an annual budget of 14 billion dollars. …
    Destroying the state structures is to operate a plunge into chaos, a concept borrowed from Leo Strauss, but to which Barnett gives new meaning. For the Jewish philosopher, the Jewish people can no longer trust democracies after the failure of the Weimar Republic and the Shoah. The only way to protect itself from a new form of Nazism, is to establish its own world dictatorship – in the name of Good, of course. It would, therefore, be necessary to destroy certain resistant states, drag them into chaos and rebuild them according to different laws. …
    The US strategists like to compare their power to that of the Roman Empire. But that empire brought security and opulence to the peoples they conquered and integrated. It built monuments and rationalized their societies. On the contrary, US neo-imperialism does not intend to offer anything to the people of the stable states, nor to the people of the reservoirs of natural resources. It plans to racket the former and to destroy the social connections which bind the latter together. Above all, it does not want to exterminate the people of the reservoirs, but needs for them to suffer so that the chaos in which they live will prevent the stable states from going to them for natural resources without the protection of the US armies.”
    “War is a racket” — Smedley D. Butler, a retired United States Marine Corps Major General and two-time Medal of Honor recipient

    https://fas.org/man/smedley.htm

    • Replies: @Erebus
  90. utu says:
    @MarkinLA

    Thank you for trying to explain to Sparkon. His reading comprehension is probably a bit off.

  91. utu says:
    @Sparkon

    Read first before you speak. You won’t be making fool of yourself as often as you do. And you can reduce the chance of making a fool of yourself to zero by shutting up completely.

  92. Sparkon says:
    @MarkinLA

    He said IF you had two points on a plane.

    No he didn’t. He said when you have two points, exactly as I quoted him. You are either very sloppy, with poor attention to details, or you play fast and loose with the facts — brazenly — as we’ve already seen.

    There is allegorical and symbolic meaning here that is beyond you, I suppose, in additon to the geometry, but simply put, two points are strictly one-dimensional, or linear, while three points are required to make a two-dimensional figure, and four unique points – one not co-planar with the others — are required to define a sphere, and/or a tetrahedron in 3D space.

    Three unique points are the minimum required to define a circle — or triangle — in 2D space. You cannot make a 2-dimensional object with only two points, but go ahead on, and try to re-invent geometry, the way you do physics.

    Utu used his invalid two points argument to insinuate we don’t have that much data about the mechanics of 9/11, but that is highly misleading because — far beyond two mere points — there is in fact an abundance of data showing not only that 9/11 was a false flag attack on the WTC, but also that civil jetliners like the 767 and 757 could not, and did not perform as alleged.

    A mostly aluminum airplane like a 767 could not penetrate a steel barrier like the external box columns of the WTC, in the first place, and it certainly couldn’t decapitate WTC2 entirely, like the photos you’ve mentioned depict — with the top 30-some floors entirely disconnected from the rest of the structure, and rotated — because that would mean severing all 240-some of those box columns, in addition the the massive central core, which was the main support of the twin towers.

    There is no way on God’s green Earth that a 150-ton aluminum airplane could do that to a 500,000 ton building. On 9/11 Donald Trump said he thought bombs were used because the buildings were so strong, but within two days, he changed his lyrics to be in tune with the official song and dance.

    Irrespective of Trump’s flip flop, the phony videos tell the whole story.

    I see Unz has buried Revusky’s MRA article, so for the continuing edification of Unz.com readers, I’ll post this shot again of UA175 half-in, half-out of WTC2, which proves video fakery.


    CNN, Michael Hezarkhani

    In early 2000, CBS execs warned that new video technology that made fake images look too real was potentially subject to abuse:

    He said that he understood the argument against the use of the technology — which is widely employed in sports and some entertainment shows — on news programs. The danger is ”that it looks too real and therefore it’s wrong or potentially wrong,” he said. ”I certainly agree it’s potentially subject to abuse.”

    He noted that advances in computer-generated techniques had made things like missiles hitting Baghdad and airplanes crashing look so real that it was incumbent on networks to underscore that these were not real images.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2000/01/13/business/cbs-is-divided-over-the-use-of-false-images-in-broadcasts.html

    The simplest and most familiar form of this technology is Sportvision’s electronic first down line, and a similar system L VIS, or live video insertion from Princeton Video Image (PVI), which allowed program sponsors to paint their advertising messages on ballpark backstops, and other surfaces.

    Each football field has a unique crown and contour and is not perfectly flat in order to facilitate drainage, so a 3D model is made of the field prior to the game

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1st_%26_Ten_%28graphics_system%29

  93. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @jacques sheete

    Conspiracy theorists benefit.

    They enjoy every random tragedy the most. They are the “enlightened ones” – smarter and more perceptive.

    They are wrong though in their analysis and conclusion.

    Unfortunately in the age of the internet they have a platform and a wide audience.

    • Replies: @annamaria
  94. Erebus says:
    @annamaria

    Thank you for that Meyssan link. His take on geo-politics is always worth reading.
    The article is the 2nd of 2 parts. The 1st is here: http://www.voltairenet.org/article197477.html

    Incidentally, Meyssan was one of the 1st to argue that there was no airplane at the Pentagon.

  95. Interesting article, but I don’t see how mentioning and quoting Revusky boosts your credibility. Why didn’t he submit his own article?

    As far as hoaxes go, I think the denial of violence in Cologne is a hoax of sorts by the German government and world media. The same is probably true for official coverage of Charlottesville an other places.

  96. MarkinLA says:
    @Sparkon

    You have very poor reading comprehension so you go off in ridiculous tangents that have nothing to do with anything.

  97. MarkinLA says:
    @Talha

    You know I just had this thought that the supposed picture of Afghan chicks in miniskirts was probably the same picture the CIA was showing to Afghan tribal chiefs when the Afghan government was getting too cozy with the USSR. Assuming that, it was probably staged by the CIA to begin with.

    • LOL: utu
    • Replies: @Talha
  98. annamaria says:
    @Anon

    Well, here is an epic story of Awan affair, the greatest breach in the US national cybersecurity, tons of documentation, and yet the fraudsters and their patrons (Debbie Wasserman Schultz is the most important among the patrons) have been protected by MSM and now by the judicial system:

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-08-22/former-us-attorney-awan-indictment-there-something-very-strange-going-here

    Do you believe that the many curious facts about Awan affair are also “conspiracy theory?” “House Dems Office Approved $120k Write-off Linked To Awan Brothers:” http://www.912communique.com/forum/topics/house-dems-office-approved-120k-write-off-linked-to-awan-bros?xg_source=activity
    “…chief of staff for Democratic Rep. Yvette Clarke quietly agreed in early 2016 to sign away a $120,000 missing electronics problem on behalf of two former IT aides now suspected of stealing equipment from Congress… Clarke’s chief of staff at the time effectively dismissed the loss and prevented it from coming up in future audits by signing a form removing the missing equipment from a House-wide tracking system after one of the Awan brothers alerted the office the equipment was gone. The Pakistani-born brothers are now at the center of an FBI investigation over their IT work with dozens of Congressional offices.
    The $120,000 figure [the taxpayers' money, by the way] amounts to about a tenth of the office’s annual budget, or enough to hire four legislative assistants to handle the concerns of constituents in her New York district. … Abid Awan remained employed by the office for months after the loss of the equipment was flagged.”

    And how do you like this obvious question? – “Why hasn’t the DNC offered a reward for information related to his [Seth Rich] murder? Numerous groups, organizations, and individuals offered a reward for information related to Rich’s murder, including WikiLeaks, GOP lobbyist Jack Burkman, crowdfunding bounty site WeSearchr, and author Mike Cernovich. The DNC and other Democratic Party organizations, however, have not.”

    http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2017/05/16/4-unanswered-questions-surrounding-murdered-dnc-staffer-seth-rich/

  99. Talha says:
    @MarkinLA

    That’s actually a very good point. That picture may indeed have been staged for that purpose – totally something the CIA would do. But I believe there are others that were taken by Nat Geo and other magazines. Remember, they were also wearing pretty revealing stuff across the border in Iran in the same time frame.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  100. Erebus says:
    @Sparkon

    Actually, from what I can dig out, there is not a single piece of publicly verifiable hard evidence backing any single physical aspect of the official story. Every single piece that’s been brought to the attention of the public is either of dubious provenance, or uninformative, or defies physical law (your Hezarkhani pic is prototypical of the latter).
    That in itself should surely astonish even the most uninterested. The event produced more than enough hard evidence to fill the memory hole to overflowing. Surely they could have found something that corroborated their story if it had any points of contact at all with what really happened. Instead, we have dead air. Not even a real investigation.

    A mostly aluminum airplane like a 767 could not penetrate a steel barrier like the external box columns of the WTC, in the first place, and it certainly couldn’t decapitate WTC2 entirely…

    The exterior structure included plate steel spandrels between the columns. Combining the columns and the spandrels, the exterior face presented a barrier made up of, by area >60% structural steel, with glass being the remaining <40%. That Hezarkhani, or his superiors, released a photo with a plane ostensibly 40% of the way into the tower with nary a fragment flying anywhere (not even glass!) is a testimony to their chutzpah and/or ignorance, but it is also a testimony to the gullibility of a public who will latch onto anything in their desperate search for an explanatory narrative.

    One thing that has long struck me is the contrast between the professional planning and execution applied to the physical events, and the sloppiness of the script writers that were charged with coming up with a plausible cover story for the public. Yeah, something went physically wrong at Shanksville and WTC7 but no operation this big could be expected to go perfectly, and neither failure was mission critical. On the other hand, the story presented to the world was a joke. It's like they got a bunch of schoolkids to write a script made up of whatever entered their heads to scare their pre-school siblings, and then went with it. I guess Truthers can be thankful for all the freebies, but I wondered why they treated the narrative with so little apparent care. Surely, one would want a narrative that made sense, no?

    Then one day I re-read 1984 and the genius of “2+2=5″ finally dawned on me. Absurdity is crucial to getting the audience’s investment in the narrative. The intended audience is not the man in the street, the proles. Orwell’s Inner Party didn’t really care what they thought but made sure they were poor, ignorant, and sedated with alcohol and pornography. The Inner Party cared only what the Outer Party membership thought, and forcing the membership to proclaim absurdities is the mechanism they used to guarantee their full control of the Outer Party’s thinking. Read “Deep State” for “Inner Party” and “Think Tanks, USM, Congress, Academe & Professional Classes” for “Outer Party”, and the whole thing slips into a tidy little package. Hardly a one in those “Outer Party” organs dares to speak against the narrative, and so invests himself in the downstream narratives that are the real goals of the operation.
    Wikipedia has a pretty good write-up on the expression’s provenance. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2_%2B_2_%3D_5

    Voltaire famously said: “Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.”, America’s Outer Party believed the former, and dutifully marched off to commit the latter. Would they have marched as willingly for a well-constructed, plausible narrative that contained few histrionics and no absurdities? Frankly, I’m not so sure Voltaire and Orwell weren’t bang on the money.

    PS: You saved me the trouble of typing out some basic geometry lessons. Thanks.

    • Replies: @utu
    , @Rurik
  101. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Talha

    Out of curiosity, how do you feel about miniskirts in Muslim lands, Talha? Do you support it or abhor it?

    • Replies: @Talha
  102. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Liberty Mike

    I explained the motivation already. To confuse, distract, and diffuse earnest investigations.

    This theory arose simply after viewing the completeness of the continuum of ideas revolving around 9/11 and wondering how on earth things like mini nukes, lizard people, and hologram airplanes can get past anyone’s shit filter. This theory advances that these absurd ideas are deliberately nurtured so as to draw attention away from the reality of the situation. What’s the best way to hide a tree? Plant a forest!

    • Replies: @Liberty Mike
  103. CalDre says:
    @Rurik

    The Bolshevik Globalist Forward of course has as its corollary the supremacism of Jews over all else, with the subtext that “they hate us for our superiority and greatness”. So they always present Jews as victims.

    In this case it is said the van traveled through 1/3rd mile of downtown, only ending “near” a kosher restaurant. No doubt he also ended, and drove by, numerous other types of establishments, which The Forward wouldn’t mention as it does not advance their agenda.

  104. CalDre says:
    @Anonymous

    Who said the vans aren’t real? I think Linh claims nobody saw the van, or, more specifically, the driver of the van. The only thing linking anyone to the crime is … what, another convenient passport left behind? How many times have we heard this utter nonsense??????

  105. utu says:
    @Erebus

    You saved me the trouble of typing out some basic geometry lessons.

    Sorry for cutting in but did you intend to type the lesson for me? You also did not get my #75 comment?

    • Replies: @Erebus
  106. Corvinus says:
    @Linh Dinh

    “I’m not claiming there was no van in Barcelona, only that it is very likely a false flag.”

    You have little to base this assertion on, sans your gut instinct and pervasive belief that Zionists are behind everything. It is other than cogent analysis.

    “Further, all whites are now deemed guilty for just being born white…”

    Only by race baiters. Now, are all whites guilty of genocide for not standing up with their white brethren on every issue?

    “Slitting each other’s throat, we can’t even see that our common enemy is the American Israel Empire, or what the Saker calls the AngloZionists.”

    Perhaps this common enemy is overstated by zealots.

  107. Corvinus says:
    @Rurik

    “me too, but I don’t think those were commercial jetliners, but rather jets that were outfitted with remote flight control systems but made to look like commercial jets. Perfectly doable.”

    We have recorded flights.
    We have individuals on those recorded flights.
    We have video footage of those individuals going on those flights.
    We have those same people who never came back.
    We have family members have funerals for their loved ones from those flights.

    So how do you account for these facts in light of your insistence that “they didn’t want to take the risk of sending in one of the commercial jets with all the passengers”?

    Where did those passengers go?

    • Replies: @Rurik
    , @Anonymous
  108. @Anonymous

    The theory makes more sense if propounded by the TPTB and their stooges.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  109. Corvinus says:
    @TelfoedJohn

    There serves no purpose to have even a sanitized version on MSM. There is not going to be some “red pill” moment by watching these scenes, with those people suddenly becoming virulent anti-Islam jihadists. We have a general conception of what bombs to do people, thank you very little.

  110. Rurik says:
    @Erebus

    Then one day I re-read 1984 and the genius of “2+2=5″ finally dawned on me. Absurdity is crucial to getting the audience’s investment in the narrative. The intended audience is not the man in the street, the proles. Orwell’s Inner Party didn’t really care what they thought but made sure they were poor, ignorant, and sedated with alcohol and pornography. The Inner Party cared only what the Outer Party membership thought, and forcing the membership to proclaim absurdities is the mechanism they used to guarantee their full control of the Outer Party’s thinking.

    wow

    that makes a lot of sense!

    ‘they hate us for our freedom’

    “Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.”

    that is very insightful

    they actually want the narrative to be absurd, so that the HIQI will know instinctively not to look too closely at the bromides they’re reciting.

    ‘Bush (Obama) were trying to keep us safe’

    ‘we’re trying to help the people of Afghanistan (Iraq/Syria/Libya… et al)

    2+2=5

  111. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Liberty Mike

    I don’t understand. Why would they want to do that?

    • Replies: @Liberty Mike
  112. Rurik says:
    @Corvinus

    Where did those passengers go?

    they were liquidated

    do you imagine that the dancing and high-fiving Mossad or CIA would have any trouble with offing a few dozen civilians?

    at Waco they burned civilians alive in a church, I don’t think they’d have any problem killing a few at a CIA black site in their pursuit of an Eternal WarⓊ that is intended to mass-murder and maim and displace millions of innocents the world over.

    it was a federal agent, Lon Horiuchi – working for the ZUS government, that put Vicky Weaver’s temple in his sniper rifle sights, and even as she was standing in her cabin door, holding her newborn baby in her arms, he pulled the trigger and blew her brains out.

    Not for any crime mind you, but because the ZUS government considered her an inconvenience.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  113. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Corvinus

    Maybe they went to Diego Garcia?

    In fact, they must have done. Otherwise Manhattan would have been strewn with passports, which are of course well known to survive plane crashes, red hot fires, building collapsess, etc.

    Come to think of it, we should probably start coating aircraft black boxes in the same material used to cover passports. If only we had thought of this sooner, those 4 black boxes would certainly have been found intact!

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
  114. Erebus says:
    @Rurik

    … but I don’t think those were commercial jetliners, but rather jets that were outfitted with remote flight control systems but made to look like commercial jets. Perfectly doable

    It’s not at all clear that your idea is “perfectly doable” if you’re simply talking about Boeing 7X7 jetliners with an RC built into them. The same limitations apply to them as to a “normal” version, and there’s considerable doubt that they could have physically accomplished the task.
    What’s more, “remote fight control” suggests that a remote pilot, sitting at a console somewhere, presumably with a video feed from the cockpit/nose of the aircraft is somehow going to do a better job of it than one that’s onboard at the controls. Leaving aside that the one onboard would have to be rather single minded about his mission, he would seem to be in a much better position than anyone at a remote computer screen directing it.
    You’ve expressed this idea a few times, but I can’t for the life of me understand its attraction.

  115. @Anonymous

    If not the TPTB, who else would be so motivated? Cui Bono?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  116. Corvinus says:
    @Rurik

    “they were liquidated. do you imagine that the dancing and high-fiving Mossad or CIA would have any trouble with offing a few dozen civilians?”

    So are you saying that the CIA and Mossad commandeered the commercial planes, replaced these planes right under the noses of air traffic controllers who were monitoring those same planes with remote controlled planes made to look exactly like those planes, and then proceeded to blow up both planes?

    Now how could the passenger remains be found and identified in NYC and Pennsylvania…if they were liquidated in some other place?

    OR…

    do you have some sort of other scenario in mind? Please be specific as to how Mossad and the CIA was able to pull it off. See, in essence, you are saying that the United States is a miracle worker when it comes to False Flag Operations, but when it comes to other aspects of governing and the economy, it has a less than stellar reputation.

    So, go ahead, tell me how those commercial planes with the passengers on those planes were seized and where they actually went in light of the no fly ban on commercial jets in the wake of 911 and the monitoring of the skies by air traffic controllers and our military. You seem to be the expert here…

    • Replies: @CalDre
    , @Rurik
  117. Talha says:
    @Anonymous

    Hola Senor,

    To be honest, there are a few aspects to this question:
    1) As a man with a normal functioning psychology and parts, I would love to see all attractive women walking around in much less than that. This however is the desire of the lower animal-self; all it cares for is short term pleasure and fulfillment of whatever addiction it craves – irrespective of long term harm it brings to its master or society. It must be broken and ridden and never made the rider.
    2) Muslim lands (usually) enforce the ethos of modesty as outlined within the Shariah. Some of them go all the way, some go partial, but rarely do you find Muslim societies that encourage “letting it all hang out”. Those that do are setting themselves up for a disaster. I fully support reasonable legal codes to enforce modesty in Muslim lands – meaning, no mini-skirts. Here is an article on recommendations of how to dress when visiting Morocco which I consider to have set fairly reasonable public codes:

    http://thehostelgirl.com/how-to-dress-in-morocco-a-complete-guide-to-morocco-dress-code/

    3) I’m totally game for non-Muslim minorities negotiating to set their own public dress codes within their own enclaves/jurisdictions/millets. If they want to allow mini-skirts or thongs in public, most welcome – they can deal with the consequences to their own society. Though I have noticed that non-Muslim minorities in Muslim lands tend to be more modest and traditional in the first place*.

    Peace.

    *There was an interesting study conducted on this:
    “What’s more, the religious values of a Muslim majority in a country seem to exert a big influence on the wider population’s sexual norms. A 1 percent increase in the percentage of Muslims in a nation caused a 2 percent decrease in the likelihood of premarital sex for all citizens, regardless of their religious identity, the study found.”

    https://www.livescience.com/24093-muslims-have-least-sex-outside-marriage.html

  118. Erebus says:
    @utu

    I realized you were making the point that being asked to formulate theories based on a dearth of data is like being asked to draw a circle through 2 points. Any number of theories can be generated, just as any number of circles could be drawn, but in fact anyone who agrees to start drawing circles at that point is falling into a trap. The secret is to respond as Sparkon did. Namely: “Sorry, with 2 points, I can draw only a straight line”.
    You’ve complained that I lose Joe Q. Public when I (and I guess Sparkon) do that, but I don’t know another way.
    In any case, it’s a borderline irrelevant argument because we’re actually in possession of an over-abundance of data points. The Truther’s Dilemma is which circles to draw through the 100s of points available.

    • Replies: @utu
  119. CalDre says:
    @Erebus

    What’s more, “remote fight control” suggests that a remote pilot, sitting at a console somewhere, presumably with a video feed from the cockpit/nose of the aircraft is somehow going to do a better job of it than one that’s onboard at the controls.

    That’s not a necessary assumption. These (modern 767) planes can be programmed to make these maneuvers. Computers are far better at difficult maneuvers than humans (par. if there is a long period to program them).

  120. CalDre says:
    @Corvinus

    So are you saying that the CIA and Mossad commandeered the commercial planes, replaced these planes right under the noses of air traffic controllers who were monitoring those same planes with remote controlled planes made to look exactly like those planes, and then proceeded to blow up both planes?

    I’m not an advocate of the “replaced planes” theory, except with regard to the Pentagon (I think they were remotely computer-controlled, as no human pilot could be as accurate as these planes), but the theory I have read is as follows.

    Air traffic controllers do not have radar contact with the planes most of the time, but they are tracked by transponder. The theory is that planes with transponders turned off flew slightly over the hijacked planes, which switched off their transponders at the same time the intersecting plane switches theirs own (there is a limited number of transponder codes and each pilot can set it to whichever value they like).

    As to how the planes were destroyed, that is completely speculative, as nobody has even solid proof that any switch occurred. The closest is the Pentagon plane, where the 5 images released by the Pentagon seem not to be of a 767 (and many witnesses said they saw a Boeing approach the Pentagon, but then regain altitude and another object exploded against the Pentagon).

    • Replies: @Rurik
    , @Corvinus
  121. Rurik says:
    @Erebus

    I can’t for the life of me understand its attraction.

    you said it yourself

    the one onboard would have to be rather single minded about his mission

    they wanted to avoid human error

    I suspect the plane was guided by a laser, like they use with the ‘smart bombs’, but I’m not an expert on such things, only that from what I know, it was certainly doable.

    check this out

    http://rense.com/general75/latest.htm

    • Replies: @Erebus
  122. Rurik says:
    @Corvinus

    right under the noses of air traffic controllers who were monitoring…

    the whole N. America air defense was shut down for this event.

    SACS and NORAD and everybody else was told to stand down.

    remember Dick Cheney barking out ‘have you heard anything to the contrary’, when asked ‘do the orders still stand?’ as one of the jets was approaching a target.

    they were running a “drill” that day. Remember?

    Now how could the passenger remains be found and identified in NYC

    oh yea, ‘here’s some ashes, this was your husband’

    the only thing from inside a plane that survived intact after the explosion and fire ball was the ‘terrorists’ passport

    as for Shanksville, that whole story is absurd. The plane didn’t get swallowed into that gorge in the landscape. A gorge that was there even before they shot a missile into it as a last ditch improvised ploy. Something went wrong with Flight 93, it was likely shot out of the sky by a local commander who hadn’t gotten Dick Cheney’s memo. So they had to improvise.

    how those commercial planes with the passengers on those planes were seized and where they actually went in light of the no fly ban on commercial jets in the wake of 911

    don’t you remember, certain flights were allowed. Like the one with Bin Laden’s family who were some of the few people allowed to fly immediately after 9/11

    check it out

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  123. Rurik says:
    @CalDre

    I’m not an advocate of the “replaced planes” theory, except with regard to the Pentagon (I think they were remotely computer-controlled, as no human pilot could be as accurate as these planes),

    I think that’s possible too

    they could have just gassed the passengers and crew so they’d be inert and no threat to the mission

  124. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Liberty Mike

    I understand. Perhaps we’re looking at paid shills? I understand Israel routinely pays hasbara operatives to sow favorable opinions all over the internet, so why not something similar for 9/11 and friends?

  125. It is true that there seems to be a pattern of Islamic terrorists conveniently leaving their passports or ID at the scene of the crime, which does seem (to a Westerner) a very unlikely thing to do, but I don’t read jihadist sites. Perhaps soldiers of allah are instructed to proclaim their identity in order to discourage those random revenge attacks on innocent muslims which ‘are so common’ and which they’ll have read all about in the New York Times. Just a thought, though I’d think it more profitable to have police searching wrong or random addresses and creating more cheesed-off muslims.

    As for the five-in-a-car, that also seems unlikely on the face of it, but I’ve not read up on what their plan was. The last lot of London attackers were stabbing people to death in the street, and I guess numbers would be a help there, when otherwise two men with chairs could take a lone knifeman down.

    But it also seems a tad unlikely that some (state? intelligence?) actor is running over people in European cities while his colleagues gun down a few randomly selected muslims “wot did it”.

    • Replies: @CalDre
  126. republic says:
    @Talha

    I was in Kabul in the early 70s and I did not recall seeing any women dressed in miniskirts, they dressed like women I saw in Tehran and Damascus in the same time period.

    • Replies: @Talha
  127. utu says:
    @Erebus

    The secret is to respond as Sparkon did

    I see you have fallen for the secret allure of a simpleton. Good luck.

    In any case, it’s a borderline irrelevant argument because we’re actually in possession of an over-abundance of data points. The Truther’s Dilemma is which circles to draw through the 100s of points available.

    This only happened because we had just two points to start with. Then various people started postulating the position of the 3rd point to draw their circles and soon we had hundreds of 3rd points and many numbers of circles could drawn just like in the beginning. Why those 3rd points do not converge to one? Mostly because of the quality of human materiel. And some cognitive infiltrators. One must use Occam razor ruthlessly like a machete and cut through the thicket of nonsense and disinformation.

    • Replies: @Sparkon
    , @Erebus
  128. Talha says:
    @republic

    Hey republic,

    This makes sense. Of course in a large city, this depends on where you were; universities tend to be the hotbed of this kind of behavior.

    I would imagine pants and t-shirts (or skirts just below knee) were in vogue in Damascus and Tehran at the time, no?

    Peace.

    • Replies: @republic
  129. Sparkon says:
    @utu

    This only happened because we had just two points to start with. Then various people started postulating the position of the 3rd point to draw their circles and soon we had hundreds of 3rd points and many numbers of circles could drawn just like in the beginning.

    Nonsense. Arbitrary special pleading. Please specify which two points existed all by their little lonesomes “to start with.”

    Here’s a list of hints for possible candidates:

    1) No Air Force
    2) Bush sits
    3) WTC 1 & 2 disintegrate improbably but spectacularly, seemingly from the top down
    4) WTC 7 collapses for no apparent reason in what looks like a controlled demolition
    5) No airplane wreckage
    6) Cellphone calls from airliners
    7) Precision flying by novice pilots
    8) Rush to judgment blaming Osama bin Laden
    9) NYC work crews begin removing evidence
    10) Conflicting network reports

    All that in the first 24 hours. So as I’ve said, your premise is faulty, and so is the entire concept of applying mangled geometry to 9/11 in the first place, but at least you seem to have recognized your error with geometry.

    Now to save face, you try to pick up the pieces and go on with it like it was your idea all along, but there’s not a lick of hard evidence to be found in your arguments, just more bafflegab like chaff to weaken the signal, and distract the unwary with sophistry.

    And of course, name calling is always an expected tactic from those who are losing an argument.

    If you can’t beat ‘em, demonize ‘em.

  130. [Commenters are required to use a single Handle, or else Anonymous/Anon for their comments.]

    Well there’s another writer ruined for me. No commercial airliners into the WTC eh Dinh? And once again, no matter how many times Daesh or whoever proclaims their responsability for Muslim terror, it is never Muslim terror right Dinh? Just those dang Israelis tromping the world!
    Good lord what a useless c*nt but I blame Unz for publishing it. Makes this site look really bad.

    • Replies: @Talha
  131. utu says:

    Let me guess, you had many biblical literalists in your family? Clearly the ability to parse an analogy or metaphor is way above your head.

  132. Talha says:
    @Antonin Chigurh

    no matter how many times Daesh or whoever proclaims their responsability for Muslim terror

    Did they? I haven’t heard any group claim responsibility for this one – usually they can’t wait to, even if it was just some random guy.

    it is never Muslim terror right Dinh?

    Might be – we have some pretty stupid Muslims walking this earth with guns in hand:
    “Bulama Modu is said to be a Boko Haram commander from the Bulakuri area of Nigeria’s restive northeastern region, where, according to army spokesmen, dozens of militants were recently captured by the army, according to army spokesman Sani Usman. ‘I don’t know how to read the Quran,’ the captured militant chief admits in the footage in response to interrogators’ questions about his understanding of Islamic jurisprudence. He adds: ‘And I don’t know how to perform [Muslim] prayers either.’”

    https://www.dailysabah.com/africa/2015/09/25/boko-haram-leader-cant-read-quran-nor-perform-islamic-prayers

    Peace.

    • Replies: @utu
    , @ChuckOrloski
  133. utu says:
    @Talha

    it is never Muslim terror right Dinh?

    There was one case I remember when Daesh did not want to claim responsibility for a terrorist act. Turks were imploring them to take the claim but they did not budge. It was the airport bombing in Turkey some time before the coup attempt and right after Turkey started to cozy up to Russia and stopped being demanding and belligerent with respect to Assad.

    What could we learn form that? Only one thing. This attack was not approved as an Daesh attack by people who control the communication channels via which Daesh usually claims responsibility. (BTW, what are those channels and who monitors them and who makes announcements that later are repeated in all media all over the world?)

    While Erdogan who never minces his words was accusing Daesh the talking heads were trying to explain why Daesh is not claiming responsibility. Their take was that Daesh was shy in this case because they did not want to upset further their old partner Erdogan or people in his administration who were in cahoots with Daesh. Anyway it was not convincing.

    The point I am trying to make is that we have no first hand knowledge about Daesh and what are they really up to. Who ever controls various media channels and then makes announcements is the one who decides to whom a particular terrorist event is attributed. It can be Rita Katz outfit or other outfits of similar provenance. It all connects to media. That’s where the reality is created. Not on the ground but in the ether where narratives are created. Who owns the media? Do Palestinians or Syrians have world wide media?

    At the point of the game it is too late to ask the question whether the attacks are committed by true Muslims or not. I mean we can ask the questions but we will not change anything. There is a full spectrum between being an unlucky patsy and fully conscious participant with his own agency. The global media machine does not make these distinctions. It was decided that Muslims will take the rap and also politically conditioned that there are Muslims who are willing to take the rap and create the events. How many outfits are out there that make the terrorist events happens is another questions. I tried to touch this problem in my comment #51 above.

    The question is what is the ultimate source or the original cause. Is it the State of Israel? If the Jewish Sate was created in Madagascar as some were envisioning it before the WWII would Madagascarian and Mozambican terrorism became a world wide problem? Would we start bombing the Indian Ocean on allegation of anti-semitic fishes inhabiting it?

    Are Muslims and Arabs more susceptible to becoming terrorists? Perhaps to some extent because of their religious fervor. But I think that with a sufficient effort one can delegitimize any group of people attributing dastardly act they did not commit and by creating a subpopulation among them that will be willing to commit some dastardly acts and at some point the claims that we did not do this one will be irrelevant.

    • Replies: @Talha
  134. Talha says:
    @utu

    Hey utu,

    The point I am trying to make is that we have no first hand knowledge about Daesh and what are they really up to.

    Fully agree with you here. It’s not like it is a card carrying membership group. All we have of Baghdadi is one video where it looks like he is the only guy in the room. All we have is speculation at this point about what is “official narrative” when it comes to them. They are quite useful though to have around in order to scare people and justify military budgets.

    There is a full spectrum between being an unlucky patsy and fully conscious participant with his own agency.

    Yes and agencies have it in their interest to produce these people in order to justify budgets. Here is a good example:

    http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2011/03/inside-fbis-terrorism-factory.html

    Rest of the points are excellent and – honestly – I wish I had solid answers to this puzzle.

    Peace.

  135. @Talha

    Talha,

    It is a delusion to opine about mere “stupid” gun toting Muslims walking this earth with guns.

    As you know, however, such characters do often serve the American-Israeli Empire, unbeknownst to even themselves. *

    I know you read very much & I suggest you will appreciate Le Carre’s novel, “The Little Drummer Girl.” There one learns just how smart are both Muslim and Jew (thoroughbred) fighters. Please read the insightful book, & not simply reviews, Cliff Notes, Talha?

    Thank you.

    * Many patriotic American high school graduates, especially those with downsized
    career choices, enlist into The Empire service & some learn (too late) “what they’re
    really fightin’ for!” Thanks to Country Joe & The Fish, Woodstock, 1969.

    For an example, recall the sad example of poor Lyndie England who served in Abu
    Ghraib and took torture snapshots for Sgt. Chas. Garner.

    Uh… “Be all you can be!” Who said that?

    • Replies: @Talha
  136. Erebus says:
    @utu

    I see you have fallen for the secret allure of a simpleton. Good luck.

    I stand guilty as charged, with a clear conscience. The simplicities of Logic and Physical Law are the boundary conditions that I use to frame a problem when I try to understand the mechanics of an event. The allure of that method lies in the fact that it works. In my experience, conjecture and speculation don’t work nearly as well. What do you use?

    Look, utu, you make valid contributions from time to time. If I’m not mistaken, this 2 points/circle thing is just a failed metaphor for a point you were trying to make about how lack of data opens the door to absurdities. I understand and also wish it were otherwise. Hard, objective data is indeed in short supply, but any suitably simple observer was flooded by an over-abundance of empirical data from the moment the first floor blew out of the S. Tower.

    Continuing your metaphor, and restricting ourselves to the matter of demolitions, the empirical evidence may fall short of being “hard and objective”, but no-one had to “start postulating the position of the 3rd point”. For us simpletons, the 3 points were laid down empirically within seconds and the circle damn near drew itself by the time the S. Tower’s dust was hitting the ground. Every new 3rd point that showed up after the first few seconds landed on top of one of the originals, and only one circle could be drawn. The circle had a label, namely “Demolition”, for at least a few hours before the Great OBL Narrative drew a giant circle through 3 imaginary points and mesmerized the minds of the more imaginative. We simpletons, clinging to our cherished simplicities of Logic and Physical Law, were left behind. 16 years later, here we remain.

    As for Ockham, be careful. His is a double-edged sword that inflicts as many wounds on those who misunderstand its use as on any unnecessarily complex argument.

  137. Corvinus says:
    @CalDre

    Exactly, a theory–you have a set of beliefs or principles that might not be proven yet. So where is your evidence?

    What proof is there that the transponders were turned off?
    What proof is there that the CIA and Mossad took over the passenger planes?
    What proof is there that the CIA and Mossad had remote controlled planes?
    What proof is there that the CIA and Mossad “liquidated” the passengers themselves?

  138. Erebus says:
    @Rurik

    I suspect the plane was guided by a laser, like they use with the ‘smart bombs’

    OK, so you actually mean “remotely guided” as opposed to “remotely controlled”. A qualitative difference that changes almost everything, but not quite.

    Now, if the principle issue with civilian airliners is that Boeing 7x7s simply can’t maintain controlled flight at >500kn at sea level, why would a laser guided version be able to? Wouldn’t they also have to be some souped up hotrod version with much more powerful engines, reprogrammed aeronautics, and perhaps reinforced airframes and control surfaces?

    At that point, things start getting very complicated. You aren’t going to pull a couple (or 4) out of a Nevada boneyard, whip laser homing kits into them, and hope for the best on the mission critical portion of an operation of this import. The mods would take serious engineering, 100s of hours of highly skilled work, and presumably some flight tests. Lots of failure points along the way. Too many, in my mind.

    We have the further issue of the videos. Your theory suggests that there should be no need for faked photos and videos, yet that’s all we have. Why would the Hezarkhani photo be necessary? There should be any number of real videos/photos of real planes crashing into the Towers. Why are only those of dubious origin or outright fakes available?

    And then there’s the physical evidence. No souped up hotrod engines were found. Even if the fuselages got shredded to confetti, the engines would have survived. There were 4 of them, yet none were found? Odd, no?

    • Replies: @Rurik
    , @CalDre
  139. Corvinus says:
    @Rurik

    Stay on point, Rurik. Give me the scenario with evidence. Because all you have right now is a theory. A theory is NOT definitive truth.

    “Something went wrong with Flight 93, it was likely shot out of the sky by a local commander who hadn’t gotten Dick Cheney’s memo.”

    Again, where is your proof? You make an assertion and claim it is true. You need facts to back it up.

    “oh yea, ‘here’s some ashes, this was your husband’”

    DNA testing does not work in that fashion. Again, how could the passenger remains be found and identified in NYC and Pennsylvania…if they were liquidated in some other place?

    It would appear that you would believe that the Flight 93 heroism was therefore staged? If yes, what is your specific evidence other than your personal feelings on the matter?

    • Replies: @Rurik
    , @CalDre
  140. yyrvjh says:

    Paranoid schizophrenic Revusky vs. schizophrenic paranoid Rurik, who wins?

    Conspiracy “theorist” Erebus vs. conspiracy “researcher” utu, wooo hoooo

    FIGHT, BOYS!

  141. Rurik says:
    @Erebus

    At that point, things start getting very complicated. You aren’t going to pull a couple (or 4) out of a Nevada boneyard, whip laser homing kits into them, and hope for the best on the mission critical portion of an operation of this import. The mods would take serious engineering, 100s of hours of highly skilled work, and presumably some flight tests. Lots of failure points along the way. Too many, in my mind.

    did you follow my link?

    just check out the name Dov Zakheim

    a duel citizen and comptroller of the Pentagon when trillion$ (with a T) went missing

    Judicial Inc’s bio of Dov (linked below) tells us Zakheim was/is a dual Israeli/American citizen and an ordained rabbi and had been tracking the halls of US government for 25 years, casting defense policy and influence on Presidents Reagan, Clinton, Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. He is, as I described him earlier, the bionic Zionist. In fact, Judicial Inc points out that most of Israel’s armaments were gotten thanks to him. Squads of US F-16 and F-15 were classified military surplus and sold to Israel at a fraction of their value.

    in 2001 Zakheim was CEO of SPS International, part of System Planning Corporation, a defense contractor majoring in electronic warfare technologies, including remote-controlled aircraft systems, and the notorious Flight Termination System (FTS) technology that could hijack even a hijacked plane and land or crash it wherever.

    More from the resume: Wikipedia points out that Zakheim is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and in 2000 a co- author of the Project for the New American Century’s position paper, Rebuilding America’s Defenses, advocating the necessity for a Pearl-Harbor-like incident to mobilize the country into war with its enemies, mostly Middle Eastern Muslim nations.

    DOV ZAKHEIM ­ A brief resume’

    Former CEO of Systems Planning Corporation, a highly specialized defense technology company that manufactures a one-of-a-kind remote-piloting system for aircraft, including commercial airliners

    Senior Fellow for Asian Studies of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR)

    Former Under Secretary of Defense (appointed by George W. Bush)

    Comptroller of the Pentagon

    Pioneer and prime architect of Project for the New American Century (PNAC), the neo-con cabal that authored Rearming America’s Defenses (RAD), the bible for American global domination

    Long-time Bush associate, having served as a policy advisor to the governor during the 2000 campaign

    Columnist for The Jerusalem Post

    Editorial Board member of Israel Affairs

    Ordained Rabbi

    Citizen of the State of Israel – How a citizen of Israel can serve as Comptroller of America’s central defense establishment is a question I shall leave to others for comment. While they ponder this perturbing oddity, perhaps they could also shed light on why every one of the following kingpins of the Bush administration are also Israeli citizens: Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Michael Chertoff, Elliot Abrams, Donald Kagan, Richard Haas, Kenneth Adelman, Edward Luttwak, Robert Satloff, David Frum, David Wurmser, Steve Goldsmith, Phillip Zelikow, and Marc Grossman.

    looking into this guy you can get a glimpse of the kind of treason we are subjected to at the highest levels of our government. He’s one of the glairing reasons people refer to the USA as the zio-USA.

    More than any other, I suspect that Zakheim was the ultimate mastermind / financier for 9/11

    Your theory suggests that there should be no need for faked photos and videos, yet that’s all we have

    the need for faked photos and videos are to send truthers down rabbit holes of distraction

    they come up with elaborate computer generated visual effect that there were no planes, and the ones we all saw were fakes, and it sucks a few truthers in, and then they spout such silliness, and make themselves look silly to the ‘proles’. Who also saw the planes, but whose minds aren’t so convoluted by doubt, that they know what they saw. And thereby reject the truthers as whackos.

    And then there’s the physical evidence. No souped up hotrod engines were found. Even if the fuselages got shredded to confetti, the engines would have survived. There were 4 of them, yet none were found? Odd, no?

    these conversations can go on for ever

    for me it’s enough to know that they’re lying, and that their official version of what happened that day is an impossibility

    and that we need a new investigation

    what we know today is that building seven was brought down in a controlled demolition, which means that the whole thing is a fraud, and that they’re all lying, and culpable. It’s us against them, and I just don’t want to see what kind of world it’s going to be if they prevail

    cheers

    • Replies: @Sparkon
    , @Erebus
  142. Rurik says:
    @Corvinus

    was likely shot out of the sky by a local commander who hadn’t gotten Dick Cheney’s memo.”

    Again, where is your proof? You make an assertion and claim it is true. You need facts to back it up.

    look dumbass

    I said likely, because I wasn’t there on the phone with NORAD

    it’s what’s called speculation, OK?

    like what we do when we see building seven plop into its basement, we speculate on how it was actually brought down, because the first thing we all know is the official version is an idiotic crock of bullshit.

    and speaking of idiotic crocks of bullshit…

    DNA testing does not work in that fashion. Again, how could the passenger remains be found and identified in NYC and Pennsylvania…if they were liquidated in some other place?

    blah, blah, blah

    you tell me how building seven came down, and how they knew it was going to come down before it did, but yet it was still a surprise to them all, and I’ll give you the minutia on DNA testing for ashes

    K?

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  143. Talha says:
    @ChuckOrloski

    Hey Chuck,

    Thanks for the book reference. I’ll check for it when I next take a trip to the book store.

    Peace.

  144. MarkinLA says:
    @Anonymous

    You don’t need a passport to fly on a domestic route.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  145. Sparkon says:
    @Rurik

    they come up with elaborate computer generated visual effect that there were no planes, and the ones we all saw were fakes, and it sucks a few truthers in, and then they spout such silliness, and make themselves look silly to the ‘proles’. Who also saw the planes, but whose minds aren’t so convoluted by doubt, that they know what they saw. And thereby reject the truthers as whackos.

    Thanks for posting that image of an engine part found near the corner of Church & Murray Streets in NYC. Even more than the Pentagon lawn fragment junk I analyzed earlier, this photo reveals that the part was planted, and there are at least two visible indications of that sitting in plain sight.

    Planted evidence — when identified — blows the whole game wide open.

    Here we have a jet engine that has smashed its way through the south tower of the WTC, was apparently depicted flying in flames through the air in one of the videos, goes on to knock off a street sign as further demonstration of its power and presence, then comes to rest on a New York sidewalk gently, carefully, precisely, even landing erectly, but entirely unsinged — this stout fragment of debris — without so much as leaving a skid mark, crack, or any ding at all on that sidewalk of New York, bless its phony little heart.

    You, like virtually everyone else beyond those on the immediate scene watched the day’s events on the television, aka the boob tube, but you will not consider the fact that you’ve been fooled.

    That ol’ TV must be as infallible as the Pope.

    Anyway, to support your argument, please post a few of those eyewitness accounts from the “proles who also saw the planes.”

    Like Erebus, I’ve looked high and low for them myself, but the actual accounts from people who claim to have seen a commercial jetliner crash into the WTC are not only few and far between, but also not very convincing when you find them.

    Recall Shouting Thomas’s claim on this very forum to have seen both crashes, and how quickly he threw in the towel when pressed for details.

    But maybe you will find some convincing eyewitness accounts that will overturn the evidence of CGI — the videos are dripping with it — and set the “proles” straight.

    This should be good.

  146. Rurik says:

    Sparkon, I’ve already pointed out that the scars left by the plane impacts on the buildings are all the proof any doubter should need that planes did in fact crash into the buildings.

    the holes where there for long enough to be photographed from several different angles, and perspectives

    they show something forced its way into the buildings, because you see all the twisted and bent steel beams bent inwards. There are tones of these photos man. You can’t fake that shit.

    and not only that, but videos of the jets coming in from several different angles and perspectives that it would have been impossible to fake, not to mention the literally hundreds if not thousands of New Yorkers whose eyes and attention would have been trained on the towers by the time the second plane came.

    I’m on your side, but the ‘no planes’ theory is a ruse.

    • Replies: @Truth
    , @Sparkon
  147. CalDre says:
    @YetAnotherAnon

    Perhaps soldiers of allah are instructed to proclaim their identity in order to discourage those random revenge attacks on innocent muslims which ‘are so common’

    That makes no sense. Once they have your passport you will be caught, so you might as well stay instead of running. The only logic to leaving a passport is to frame an innocent person in a primitive way, which wouldn’t work unless the “controllers” were in on it. That’s why the “left passport” is a strong signal of false flag.

  148. CalDre says:
    @Corvinus

    “Something went wrong with Flight 93, it was likely shot out of the sky by a local commander who hadn’t gotten Dick Cheney’s memo.”

    Again, where is your proof? You make an assertion and claim it is true. You need facts to back it up.

    There’s no proof bin Laden was involved, there’s no proof fire alone collapsed three steel skyscrapers (which never happened before or since), or proof that hijackers flew the planes into the buildings – this is all speculation based on a selectively released set of alleged facts.

    Search your favorite search engine for “flight-93 shot national-guard”, there are a lot of claims there, including a claim by retired Army Col. Donn de Grand-Pre on the Alex Jones Show that the North Dakota air national guard shot down Flight 93.

    The real issues are twofold: The official story is utter nonsense, and no proper investigation has ever been conducted (though a lot of evidence has been intentionally destroyed).

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  149. CalDre says:
    @Erebus

    Should have addressed this the first time: the e Hezarkhani video is explained for example at https://skeptools.wordpress.com/2014/06/09/two-truthers-photo-video-maps-geotags-mpeg-interpolation/ . Of course the author of that blog uses an incorrect hypothesis of one person to try to discredit all counter-theories (but does not apply those critical skills to the “official version”) and it’s a bit tough to wade through his snarky approach, but that’s not my point, my point is there is a lot of disinfo as well as a lot of well-meaning but incorrect analysis out there.

    That’s why only a full and honest investigation can uncover what really happened.

  150. Truth says:
    @Rurik

    I swore of “was 9/11 real” discussions a few years ago, as at this point, it seems to be arguing with someone who has the viewpoint that “water flows uphill”, however, I had never seen that picture before. One question though, how come there’s no airplane hanging halfway out of that hole? Same thing with the pentagon, coincidentally.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  151. MarkinLA says:

    One question though, how come there’s no airplane hanging halfway out of that hole?

    Because the aircraft is mostly hollow and the parts in the back collapse into the mass inside the building. Have you ever thrown florescent tubes at a block wall like spears for fun when you were a kid?
    The rear of the tubes continue to move forward as the front of tube hitting the wall breaks the glass into dust.

    Once the skin of the buildong has been penetrated by the front portion of the plane, the back part continues to smash into the mass inside the building pushing it forward (very little given the difference in mass) and collapsing into the mass like those florescent tubes.

    • Replies: @Truth
  152. MarkinLA says:

    no proof fire alone collapsed three steel skyscrapers (which never happened before or since),

    Of course not, because nobody ever said it was fire alone. A 100 ton aircraft traveling at 500 mph is a lot of kinetic energy to add to the mix.

    • Replies: @CalDre
  153. CalDre says:
    @MarkinLA

    because nobody ever said it was fire alone. A 100 ton aircraft traveling at 500 mph is a lot of kinetic energy to add to the mix.

    You obviously are grievously uninformed. It is in fact claimed that WTC 7, which collapsed perfectly at free-fall speed into its own footprint, collapsed by fire alone (the plane that was meant to hit it, Flight 93, crashed in Pennsylvania).

    As to the twin towers, the towers withstood the plane crash. As it was designed to (a B-something bomber had crashed into the Empire State Building in the 1940s and surviving a large plane crash was a specific design criteria for the twin towers). The claim is that the fire “heated” the steel core to the point where it collapsed. So fire is blamed for the twin tower collapses as well.

    The most compelling single picture that proves a demolition is the one at the end of this post. You can see that the top of one tower was at a 30 degree angle when the collapse started. The angular momentum, combined with the fact that the great part of the weight of the “above” tower was on one side of the tower, should have caused that large chunk to fall over the edge into the street below. The reason it didn’t is because all of the floors below it were collapsing themselves at free-fall speed given the lack of any resistance to their fall.

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    , @Erebus
  154. Sparkon says:

    because you see all the twisted and bent steel beams bent inwards. There are tones of these photos man. You can’t fake that

    Actually, when it comes to photos or video, you can fake whatever you want.

    Various fakes have been done from the earliest days of photography — e.g. painting out unwanted things, or people, and pasting the head of one person onto the body of another — cut ‘n’ paste.

    As it turns out, faking photographs, and move scenes, is a highly desired craft — big bucks in Hollywood for special effects — with mumerous significant advances in tools, techniques, and technology steadily along the way, including such innovations as air brushes, painted backdrops, false facades, miniature models, animatronics, blue screens, and double exposures with Traveling Willburys, I mean traveling mattes, which isolate, or mask, part of one film so that it can be superimposed, or layered, over another.

    But it is especially easy to fake anything today because of the wide availability of powerful digital photo, video, and 3D graphics editing tools, along with the enforced implementation of digital broadcasting in 2009, which incidentally, has made most of the nation’s TV weather girls look much better against their green screen weather maps, compared to their earlier, analog broadcast counterparts, where the electronic fringing around the presenter was more noticeable, and on some occasions, bizarre and garish.

    Hollywood creates fake imagery all the time, from King Kong to Yoda. Think of Spiderman flying around NYC. Sony introduced a landmark digital video camera in the late 90s so that Starwars II was one of the first movies to be filmed entirely with a digital camera. Wiki:

    In addition to introducing the digital camera, Attack of the Clones emphasized “digital doubles” as computer-generated models that doubled for actors, in the same way that traditional stunt doubles did. It also furthered the authenticity of computer-generated characters by introducing a new, completely CGI-created version of the character Yoda.

    For the last 20 years, MSM TV networks have had the ability to fake whatever they want in real time with the technology I’ve mentioned above, which allows one image to be painted over another, or replace it entirely.

    Again, the electronic 1st down line gives a basic demonstration of the technology, which requires that a 3D model of the target object be made in advance. Making a 3D model of the WTC is pretty easy, and the big, flat surfaces made it a perfect target for the various CGI strategies to be employed.

    Why do you think the CBS executives in early 2000 were warning of the potential for abuse by TV technology that lets fake imagery be pasted on or over a real structure — even replace it entirely, as with the Katrine Witt video — or has any of that registered on you, at all?

    and not only that, but videos of the jets coming in from several different angles and perspectives that it would have been impossible to fake, not to mention the literally hundreds if not thousands of New Yorkers whose eyes and attention would have been trained on the towers by the time the second plane came.


    Here’s that same play from a different angle:

    We see an impossible feat broadcast live from at least two vantage points, or camera positions. Or do you maintain that the fragile nose cone of a 767 could survive intact after penetrating the entire building?

    Maybe some of those 1000s of eyewitness of a commercial jetliner crashing into the WTC saw UA175′s nose cone come popping out too, in that memorable peek-a-boo boo!

    But I doubt it.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  155. republic says:
    @Talha

    I had just flown in from India and I notice that Kabul had a slight European feel. Could tell at once that the local population had a certain percentage of European blood. Excellent pastries.

    • Replies: @Talha
  156. Sparkon says:
    @Rurik

    That second image of the “nose-out” video wouldn’t display due to hot linking restrictions, which I wasn’t able to test, and which image was a hurried replacement during edit for another image that wasn’t displaying either. Sorry ’bout that. Now, let’s try this:

    • Replies: @CalDre
    , @Rurik
  157. MarkinLA says:
    @CalDre

    As to the twin towers, the towers withstood the plane crash.

    So that means that no physical damage occurred to the building by the plane slamming into it? That means that no weakening of the main superstructure occurred by a plane slamming into them?

    I hope you see how dumb that is.

    • Replies: @CalDre
  158. Talha says:
    @republic

    Hey republic,

    Well, the Greeks had rolled through there a long time ago and some had decided to stay. If I recall correctly, Kandahar is a local derivative of Alexander the Great’s name.

    Peace.

  159. Rurik says:
    @Truth

    One question though, how come there’s no airplane hanging halfway out of that hole?

    because it was traveling fast and once it breached the fabric of the exterior, the weight of the engines and sturdy aluminum skeleton dragged the rest of the plane into the conflagration though inertia.

    the scenes of the planes hitting the buildings and the consequent fireballs look to me exactly as they should to my eyes.

    The Pentagon is something else altogether, as I suspect it was a missile that hit it. With a jet as a distraction flying nearby.

    but we don’t need to belabor all of this to death to know that the official version is a lie

    and that it was a false flag attack intended as a pretext to catalize the American people into wars in the Middle East to benefit Israel

    And even if this becomes obvious, there are some 70 million Christian Zionists and assorted Jews and others, like congressmen and defense contractors and liberals who all would say ‘so what?’

    ‘we Christian Zionists don’t care about those Muslims, because we want our rapture’

    or ‘we Jewish supremacists don’t care about those Muslims or American soldiers because we’re the chosen people and everyone should be willing to die for us’.

    or ‘we defense contractors love all this money

    or we congress critters love all this power

    and on and on, there are millions upon millions of Americans and others that wouldn’t even care if it was an inside job, so long as it serves their respective agendas.

    I’ve come to realize that most liberals feel that way. That if 9/11 was an inside job perpetrated by the Jews, then so what. The Jews are on their side in putting it to the deplorable white men they hate so much.

    and even Muslims! Who feel the same way. ‘So what if the Jews are using the Americans to slaughter other Muslims, we get to come to whitey land and fuck the women (Mohammed Atta loved strippers) and realize our ancient and eternal desire to finally, at long last conquer whitey!! Mazel Tov!

    so even if your arguments are cogent and undeniable, (as the truthers arguments certainly are), it doesn’t even matter to perhaps most of the population. All they care about are their respective agendas. Slaughtered Americans and Iraqis and Libyans and Syrians and everybody else as far as they’re concerned are irrelevant when it comes to what serves their narrow interests.

    sad

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  160. MarkinLA says:
    @Truth

    Was the car going 500 mph? In your pictures, it didn’t even hit something solid so my guess is it was going about 15 mph. Not even enough to dent the car body. Why does a bullet become a flat piece of metal when it hits a large steel target? Because the hind part of the bullet is still traveling forward when the front part is halted by the target. The same principle applies here.

    Why doesn’t the bullet stop dead in it’s track and just stick out of the target exactly like the bullet was formed at the factory?

    • Replies: @Truth
  161. CalDre says:
    @Sparkon

    So you are claiming they CGI’d the whole thing and then intentionally drew the nose of the plane coming out, but never to be seen again?

    Also you have only one frame (not one I could find after looking). I have seen other pictures that show an earlier frame and it looks like black smoke coming out. But could be an engine, debris, or anything else with a smoke tail.

    • Replies: @Sparkon
  162. Rurik says:
    @Sparkon

    dude, there has to be thousands of these pictures from every angle imaginable

    • Replies: @Erebus
  163. @Sparkon

    He said when you have two points, exactly as I quoted him.

    No matter. You are still wrong. MarkinLA explained it perfectly.

    • Replies: @Sparkon
  164. CalDre says:
    @MarkinLA

    So that means that no physical damage occurred to the building by the plane slamming into it? That means that no weakening of the main superstructure occurred by a plane slamming into them?

    Obviously I didn’t claim that, but did you read the part about the buildings being specifically designed to withstand impact by a very large plane?

    Also if you look at the “official explanation”, it is that fire heated the steel so that it buckled and this caused WTCs 1 and 2 to collapse. So in the end the alleged cause was the fires (yes it was weakened also by the plane but not enough to bring it down, nobody is even claiming that.) But there are so many holes in that theory, I don’t have the inclination to type them all here, but do some research into heat conductivity, the small size of the fires (after the first few minutes – allegedly the steel buckled while the fires were small), the construction of the towers (the center column alone was enough to support the entire building, and at least one of the planes, the second one, clearly didn’t hit the center column at all), etc., etc.

    And most fantastically you have not explained the collapse of WTC 7 which was not struck by a plane but fell like the most perfect demolition one can imagine – really, a perfect demolition (also look up the Zionist Jew owner’s “pull it” interview). Which has led me to joke in years since that I can spare companies their $100 million demolition costs, I can just bring in a few thousand gallons of fuel and have a perfect demolition of a skyscraper into it’s own footprint.

    It’s interesting, that a few months after a Zionist Jew with ties to Mossad takes control over the WTC, which had been controlled since construction by the New York Port Authority, they go crashing down in an event Israelis rejoiced over and which clearly benefited Israel? Can’t begin to list all the connections to Israel, there are literally thousands, from the dancing Israelis, the white vans with Mossad agents arrested with bomb residue in the vans, the “construction” in the “elevators” (which is where the center columns are) in the months leading up to 9/11 (once the Zionist got control), the Israeli “art students”, the Israeli “monitoring” of the alleged hijackers, the dual-citizen taking control of the WTC a few months before, the warning about the event sent to certain people before it happened, the control of the White House by zionist neo-cons (related to the stand-down and cover-up), the Israeli security companies at the airports which let the “hijackers” on board, etc., etc. There are also interesting questions about the lack of follow-up on the airline puts placed before, etc.

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
  165. Truth says:
    @MarkinLA

    Was the car going 500 mph?

    No, but then a Chuck-E-Cheese is not specifically constructed to withstand a flying bumper either.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1340225/Twin-towers-built-to-withstand-plane-crash.html

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
  166. Sparkon says:
    @CalDre

    The fragile nose cone can’t penetrate the building, so those videos showing that sequence must be fake. There may have been some screw up with the CGI used, or these guys were just too ignorant of physics to understand that the largely aluminum airplane couldn’t crash through the building like that, and have its delicate nose cone appear to emerge unscathed on the other side.

    But it was very dramatic, and breathtaking when I first saw it at the time, and I’ve spent any number of years trying to conceptualize an airplane capable of doing that, you know, like the one with the cutting edge, razor sharp, virtually indestructible wings capable of slicing cleanly through not only the aluminum cladding, but also even the steel box columns themselves, as we see in some of the images that Rurik is posting.

    I’d lean to the idea that the nose-out video is the result of Hollywood-type hack artists with no understanding of physics. You can see that the nose of the airplane is casting a shadow on the building.

    But the image I posted in my #160 shows that, despite the apparent nose punching through the south tower’s north face as depicted in two or three videos, subsequent images show no corresponding hole in that spot on the north face.

    However, the punch-out, airplane outline images Rurik is posting most likely show the results, not of CGI necessarily, but rather the handiwork of the Gelatin and/or E-team “artists” who were active in both buildings where the airplanes subsequently were reputed to have crashed, and were photographed with some of the tools of their trade:

    • Replies: @CalDre
    , @Corvinus
  167. Sparkon says:
    @jacques sheete

    The two points conjecture is an artificial construct of utu’s imagination. It has never played any role in solving a crime, and has no bearing on 9/11, or anything else that I can fathom.

    But if it makes sense to you, then go with it, and report back here with your results.

    At any rate, as I’ve already explained, there were many more than just two points — metaphorically speaking, or not — right from the outset of 9/11, so the entire argument is based on the false premise that there wasn’t much evidence. As I see it, that’s the key point, because there is an abundance of evidence for those with the eyes to see it, and plenty of specious sophistry to distract those who don’t.

    Indeed, I’ve commented quite a bit here on that evidence that is directly related to 9/11 – where this two points nonsense is not — but all you can manage with your comment is try to get some more mileage out of a distraction, and play the nag?

    Why not comment on the Church St. image Rurik posted, and I analyzed?

    Do you think that engine part could fly through air — in flames, no less — and come to rest on end without disturbing its surroundings, or smashing the sidewalk where it landed?

    What would happen if you dropped, say a V8 engine block from the 70th floor of a skyscraper onto the sidewalk below?

  168. CalDre says:
    @Sparkon

    The point is your picture doesn’t look like a nosecone ejecting from WTC 2 at all. It looks like a cylindrical shape – which is a shape (to some extent) of a nosecone but it’s also the shape of many other things. But of course we don’t know the shape because you have vastly magnified a low-resolution image so for all we know it was square before the major distortions. Why don’t you like a higher resolution image or a video showing all the frames? I’ve seen hearts in clouds but that doesn’t mean there was blood, lol.

    And why would they use a fake plane when a real plane would do? Doesn’t make any sense. On top of the fact that countless people saw the second plane hit (and there’s video of both of them).

    My guess is it’s a jet of smoke being forced out a hole by an explosion. Assuming the hole was roughly round it would appear to be a cylindrical shape. With the lack of frames you cannot tell the shape a moment before or a moment after.

    Not really evidence of anything.

  169. Erebus says:
    @Sparkon

    I don’t think the entry holes need any CGI, much less airplanes. In fact, I seriously doubt airplanes would have made those Wiley E. Coyote cutouts.
    Remember, the fascia was only about 35% glass. The rest was box columns and plate steel spandrels. A 7x7s’ skin varies between 1 & 2mm thick, with some parts getting much thicker where needed. The wing root is the “backbone” of the aircraft and extends between the 2 engines, to which the passenger compartment and wings are attached. If there were planes, the relatively heavy wing root may have made it through with the engines, but that the fuselage and wing skins made it through as well stretches credulity. I would expect that the wings would have been folded back from the engines and landed on the street below, while the very light passenger tube skin would have crumpled like a beer can and joined the fallen wings on the street below.
    As for believing that a plastic (FRP) nosecone can make it through 2 sets of steel columns and spandrels unscathed, with several meters of 1-2mm aluminium tube in tow, and apparently without even slowing down… well, that can be nothing other than a real-time CGI error.
    The thing that troubles me is that there’s 2. Is the 2nd one live, or made later? If live, how is it that both made the same mistake? Something doesn’t add up for me here. Any thoughts?

    • Replies: @utu
    , @Sparkon
  170. Erebus says:
    @Rurik

    did you follow my link?

    No, it timesout on my mobile data connection.

    just check out the name Dov Zakheim

    I have. Know all about him. In my mind, a 2nd echelon player in the 9/11 drama. One of the beneficiaries.

    for me it’s enough to know that they’re lying, and that their official version of what happened that day is an impossibility

    Fair enough, and I’m with ya as far as that goes, but I’m not usually satisfied until I can reconstruct events to the point where I can answer “How would I do it?”, taking into account at least the physical facts. The socio-political necessarily get shorter shrift, as I’m neither a psychologist or a politician.

  171. MarkinLA says:
    @Truth

    Yeah, just because somebody said they built it to withstand something doesn’t mean it will in the real world. Structures fail all the time and sometimes for the simplest of reasons.

    They also may have only assumed a plane would hit the very top of the building at take off or landing velocity (less than 200 mph) without any significant fire damage. In that case the building likely would have survived. However, a fully gassed up plane traveling at 500 mph hitting 30 stories from the top where the impact and fire damaged superstructure has to hold up the weight of 30 floors is probably something they didn’t think about or even attempt to try and model.

    I bet they didn’t try and model a 50 foot tall gorilla swatting small planes with a woman in one hand and the effect that would have on the building either.

    • Replies: @Erebus
    , @Truth
  172. MarkinLA says:
    @CalDre

    And most fantastically you have not explained the collapse of WTC 7 which was not struck by a plane but fell like the most perfect demolition one can imagine – really, a perfect demolition (also look up the Zionist Jew owner’s “pull it” interview).

    The debris ejecting out sideways from WTC1 and WTC2 weakened the lower floors of WTC7 such that the weight of the floors above it could no longer be supported.

    The reason why they look like controlled demolitions is because controlled demolitions are also instances where the building is taken down by the force of gravity. The explosives in a controlled demolition do not bring the building down, they weaken the building to the point that gravity finishes the job.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @CalDre
  173. Corvinus says:
    @Rurik

    “it’s what’s called speculation, OK?”

    Exactly. But you insist that this theory is fact. What evidence makes you believe that it is likely Cheney made the order?

    “you tell me how building seven came down, and how they knew it was going to come down before it did, but yet it was still a surprise to them all, and I’ll give you the minutia on DNA testing for ashes”

    You’re being a weasel. If you acknowledge the discrepancy I provided here, your narrative starts to fall about. Besides, it appears that you are already convinced about how Building 7 down, and little will do to sway you to say that you are other than accurate on this matter.

    Answer the question–DNA testing does not work in that fashion. Again, how could the passenger remains be found and identified in NYC and Pennsylvania…if they were liquidated in some other place?

    “for me it’s enough to know that they’re lying, and that their official version of what happened that day is an impossibility…”

    You think, not know, they’re lying.

  174. Corvinus says:
    @CalDre

    “There’s no proof bin Laden was involved, there’s no proof fire alone collapsed three steel skyscrapers (which never happened before or since), or proof that hijackers flew the planes into the buildings – this is all speculation based on a selectively released set of alleged facts.”

    You have yourself in a tailspin. There is other than conclusive proof in your mind. You are speculating based on the facts you believe to be true. There is evidence…that you dismiss and replace it with a narrative you personally find to be accurate.

    • Replies: @CalDre
  175. Corvinus says:
    @Sparkon

    “However, the punch-out, airplane outline images Rurik is posting most likely show the results, not of CGI necessarily, but rather the handiwork of the Gelatin and/or E-team “artists” who were active in both buildings where the airplanes subsequently were reputed to have crashed, and were photographed with some of the tools of their trade”

    This source addresses your assertion.

    https://kendoc911.wordpress.com/israeli-connections-to-911/israeli-art-students/

    • Replies: @Sparkon
  176. utu says:
    @Erebus

    Is the 2nd one live, or made later?

    The first one, I read somewhere, was to be shown by FOX on 911 but supposedly they did not show it. Still the video was shown next day and was used as the crown argument for the CGI theory. Here there are several videos that surfaced later

    http://debunkingnoplanes.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-nose-out-fallacy.html

    showing the event form several different angles. I can’t draw from these images a definitive conclusion. In my option this is inconclusive evidence like almost everything else dug up and publicized by skeptics of the official version. To evaluate it one would need an objective video expert. But you won’t find a neutral video expert as everybody is somewhat invested in one of the narratives about what has happened on 9/11.

    Wiley E. Coyote cutouts

    Arguments like yours will be quite persuasive to most people’s intuitions (I am not using the word knowledge because people do not have knowledge in this field). However the arguments are still just hand waving arguments. We are dealing here with intuitions not actual knowledge. The intuitions that are formed by lack of experience of high velocity phenomena. One would have to do calculations based on solid finite element model to exclude the possibility of plane doing the cutout. This has not been done as far as I know. People keep talking about soda cans. It is not good enough. This is not only about the tensile strength of aluminum and steel. It is about mass and speed. A tomato at high velocity may break a hole in a steel plate. Water jet cuts steel.

    Why is hitting water from a great height like hitting concrete?

    http://www.askamathematician.com/2012/07/q-why-is-hitting-water-from-a-great-height-like-hitting-concrete/

    NB: In 2010 there was Polish plane crash in Russia. The official version was that it was an accident resulting from plane’s wing breaking after hitting a birch tree. The doubters of this version found some finite elements specialist at U. of Toledo, Ohio who performed calculations proving that the wing could not be broken by this tree. So you see the skeptics in Poland wanted to show that the plane is stronger while skeptic in the US would like to show that the plane is weaker. Perhaps this guy form Toledo could be hired to show that Wiley E. Coyote cutouts are impossible.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  177. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @MarkinLA

    I understand that not presenting a passport causes a whole lot of trouble most people would rather avoid, and hence >90% of the passengers would have been carrying theirs. Is this wrong?

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
  178. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Rurik

    Rurik, that is indeed a sad comment and I am scared you are actually right. Perhaps they’ll deny it right up until the point of complete impossibility, and then switch instantly to a ‘yeah they probably did… and so what?’.

    Fuck these cretins :/

    • Replies: @Rurik
  179. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @MarkinLA

    Debis coming from one angle.
    Uniform weakening and symmetrical collapse.
    How?

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
  180. Erebus says:
    @CalDre

    The most compelling single picture that proves a demolition is the one at the end of this post.

    That tilting, ~20 storey block, some 20-30 degrees off vertical in the photo, vaporizes midair, and never “hits the ground” except to add to the blanket of dust covering S. Manhattan. Amazing photo, but watching a video of it as it happens is even more amazing. The entire block just turns into a cloud of dust as it starts its fall. Quite unusual behaviour from a steel structure.

    MarkinLA, of course, ignores the photo, puts a few words in CalDre’s mouth, and then attacks them, adding a little insult as an attempt at a coup de gras.

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
  181. Erebus says:
    @MarkinLA

    However, a fully gassed up plane traveling at 500 mph hitting 30 stories from the top where the impact and fire damaged superstructure has to hold up the weight of 30 floors is probably something they didn’t think about or even attempt to try and model.

    Of course they didn’t, because a “fully gassed up” (which it actually wasn’t) airliner most likely can’t fly at >500kn (not mph!) at that altitude because its engines just wouldn’t have the thrust to overcome the parasitic drag at low altitude.
    Be that as it may, only about 10CBM of fuel would have gone into the building, about enough to cover the office floor about 3mm (1/8″). NIST’s calculation was that the steel reached mid 200sC. I doubt it got as hot as that except locally, but even if it did, how much would the steel weaken at that temp?
    If you answered “Not materially”, you’d be right.

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
  182. CalDre says:
    @MarkinLA

    The debris ejecting out sideways from WTC1 and WTC2 weakened the lower floors of WTC7 such that the weight of the floors above it could no longer be supported.

    So do you have any photos of this catastrophic damage to WTC 7, damage so severe it didn’t just break a few windows but smashed the support columns? Because NISTA didn’t find any such damage and ruled that out as a cause of collapse. Unfortunately for truthseekers, they also ruled out explosives as the cause of the collapse and expressly, beyond any comprehension unless it was a cover-up, REFUSED TO EVEN TEST for explosive residue or to consider a demolition. I.e., it was a political decision.

    By the way they made the same assumptions for WTC 1 and WTC 2 re: explosives/demolition. It took them years to finally come up with a model under which WTC 1 and WTC 2 would actually collapse due to fire (and the plane damage); however they have never made this model public so nobody can validate or challenge it.

    The explosives in a controlled demolition do not bring the building down, they weaken the building to the point that gravity finishes the job.

    A controlled demolition is an extremely precise science, both in terms of where charges are placed, the order in which they detonate, and the time lapse between detonations. This is why in a controlled demolition the building falls into its own footprint. If you just pour a few thousand of gallons of gas into a building, and light a match, first, it isn’t going to fall at all, and second, even if it did, it would not collapse perfectly into its own footprint. As you can see from the countless fires which were vastly more intense than the WTC ones in other skyscrapers which did not cause even a partial collapse.

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
  183. CalDre says:
    @Corvinus

    There is evidence…that you dismiss and replace it with a narrative you personally find to be accurate.

    OK, I’ll play, what evidence of bin Laden’ involvement did I miss (spare me the videos released after he died, even if those actually were him claiming responsibility, which he repeatedly denied in his first comments after the event (and before he died), that is not convincing evidence that he was involved).

    What evidence is there fire collapsed the building? There’s no evidence of that at all, unless you jump from the observation “there were small dispersed fires” to “the fires collapsed the building” which is counter to all prior and subsequent human experience, so no, that’s not evidence! To prove that you would have to eliminate other causes. The most obvious “other cause” is controlled demolition. Nobody (except Professor Jones) tested for explosives in the debris – NISTA was expressly ordered by the neo-cons not to test for it. Professor Jones (and multiple collaborators) found nano-thermite, there are several videos available online about his findings.

    What evidence is there the hijackers flew the planes into the buildings? Sure there is weak evidence, namely, some Arabs allegedly (claimed by someone – who? someone reliable?) got on a plane and the plane later crashed into a building. Oh, on some of the flights there are some maybe credible “calls” from “cellphones” that someone had hijacked some of the planes. That is some circumstantial evidence but since there was also a pilot on the plane there is also circumstantial evidence the pilots did it. And given the superb flying maneuvers there is also circumstantial evidence that they were remote controlled.

    I assert that the only reason you believe the official lies is that you lack critical thinking. If based on the very same events the government had claimed that the buildings were demolished with explosives, you would believe that too. So you have not formed an independent judgment, you have just aped what your masters told you to think.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  184. Erebus says:
    @Rurik

    If I wanted to make those inwardly bent broken columns in an evocative Wiley E. Coyote cartoon shape, I wouldn’t use an airplane or CGI. Shaped charge explosives placed under the aluminium fascia would make a cleaner and much more reliable job of it. It would also attract the attention of live witnesses, to whom any CGI would be invisible unless we’re talking holograms or something equally far “out there”.
    As I said to Sparkon above, hypothetical engines and perhaps the wing root may have made it through the >60% plate steel spandrels and box columns facade, but that 1-2mm Aluminium sliced through it simply beggars belief. 1mm aluminium is easily cut with ordinary scissors, FFS.

    How would one place charges like that? Well, that’s where we get into speculation, but if I wanted to do that, I couldn’t think of a better way than to get the Lower Manhattan Cultural Council (LMCC) to cajole the NY Port Authority into “donating” unoccupied space to some “event art” groups as part of one of their art promotion programs.
    In the event, the Israeli “artists” who came to live and work in their donated space for ~4 years prior to 9/11, were issued WTC “Construction Passes”, which allowed them to bring in materials, and gave them access to structural elements of the towers on a 24/7 basis. As luck would have it, at least one of the groups were ensconced right at the impact zone in the North Tower. Odd coincidence, no? Odd or not, they had plenty of time and opportunity to place appropriate charges anywhere they needed to be to make the Wiley E. Coyote cutout, and probably enough to do the rest of the building as well.

    There were quite a few photos of them a decade ago, including ones where they removed some windows and built a “balcony” protruding from the side of the N. Tower as one of their “event art” displays. It was located dead on at the point of impact of the first plane, and they had a helicopter fly by filming them on the balcony in a stunning violation of building security. That they weren’t summarily evicted surprises, but the NYT wrote a gushing article about the “audacity” of their art and so, perhaps the Port Authority thought better of it.

    They published a rather bizarre “art book” afterwards containing bad hand sketches of the buildings and various scribblings that apparently passes for art nowadays. It sells, or doesn’t, for a lot of money in some circles, but frankly what pages were on the net at the time looked like the work of demented 9 yr olds to me. It was on Amazon, titled “The B-Thing” and new copies were in the $1000s. Might still be there.

    Anyhow, I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that these Israeli “event artists” were friends of, or even amongst the dancing Israelis “documenting the event” from the rooftop of their Urban Moving Co. van and high-fiving on their big day. Parenthetically, in a much less known incident, one of the UMC’s other vans was also stopped that morning, and the 2 Israeli occupants arrested. Interestingly, it had a mural painted on its side of a plane flying into the N. Tower, also in a childish style. They too were released and promptly fled home.
    Back when I dug into their activities, though there was nothing conclusive about anything I found, I felt I got as close as I’m ever gonna get to a smoking gun. If those kids were the Trojan horse for the pros that did the job, or if they were the actual pros, there’s simply no need for AQ, OBL, real planes, hijackings, “raging fires”, or anything else to explain how the N. Tower fell. All that’s needed is an explication of the materials and techniques used. Given the similarities between the two collapses, explicating one would explicate both.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    , @Rurik
  185. Corvinus says:
    @Erebus

    “In the event, the Israeli “artists” who came to live and work in their donated space for ~4 years prior to 9/11, were issued WTC “Construction Passes”, which allowed them to bring in materials, and gave them access to structural elements of the towers on a 24/7 basis.”

    This source addresses your assertion.

    https://kendoc911.wordpress.com/israeli-connections-to-911/israeli-art-students/

    • Replies: @Erebus
  186. Corvinus says:
    @CalDre

    “I assert that the only reason you believe the official lies is that you lack critical thinking.”

    Having conducted my own investigation, I conclude that there is a possibility that our government was involved. Again, a possibility. You, on the other hand, believe it is without a doubt that our government was responsible.

    Notice the difference?

    “What evidence is there fire collapsed the building?”

    http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/design/a3524/4278874/

    Now, you can sit here and outright dismiss their findings, which is your liberty.
    Now, you can sit here and demand that the government is covering everything up, which is your liberty.

    But here the conclusions based on the findings of the evidence by a group of investigators. It is possible they could be telling other than the truth. But I surmise that you will insist they are definitively are telling other than the truth.

    Notice the difference?

    • Replies: @CalDre
  187. Rurik says:
    @Anonymous

    Fuck these cretins :/

    one thing we all know for sure is that the Mossad was filming on 9/11 to “document the event”. And that the Mossad agents were arrested because they were so obviously celebrating what for all Americans was an horrific event. But they were “dancing and high-fiving’ and ecstatic.

    And if the Mossad was there to “document the event”, then we also know that Bibi also knew what was about to happen, if the Mossad knew. He even had the rotten nads to call the attack “very good”.

    something to be happy about

    and yet look how they gush over a man who stood by and watched thousands of Americans horrifically slaughtered. From a nation that hands over to Israel billions of dollars in tribute every year.

    http://www.trbimg.com/img-54f61667/turbine/la-pn-netanyahu-congress-reaction-20150303

    so when you say “fuck these cretins”, I think of congress

    the men and women who’re trusted and empowered to keep Americans protected from harm…

    and yet they worship a man who casually remarks that the slaughter of Americans is ‘very good’, and knew the attack was going to happen but didn’t warn us, because allowing it to happen would be ‘good for Israel’.

    at the risk of being vulgar, what wouldn’t these cretins do to appease that loathsome pig of a man?

    would they eat the feces straight out of his backside? So they could get re-elected?

    I say yes, yes they would.

  188. Erebus says:
    @utu

    Arguments like yours will be quite persuasive to most people’s intuitions

    Well, I wasn’t making an argument, I was simply saying what I thought as in idle conversation. When I make arguments, I’m quite precise in my language and procedure (you’ve complained that I’m being too pedantic when I do).

    Water jet cuts steel

    No, it doesn’t. In hard materials, water is just a carrier for a cutting agent such as tungsten, diamond, or Al2O3, which does the actual cutting. Water only cutting is typically used in the food industry, and I’ve never seen water alone being used on anything harder than wood. It’s slow going in the harder woods, so an abrasive like garnet is often used.

    Why is hitting water from a great height like hitting concrete?

    It isn’t, if you hit it right. If you ask any of these guys to dive off a building into a sidewalk they’d be clever enough to refuse whatever your mathematician says. https://www.redbull.com/int-en/red-bull-cliff-diving-ireland-2014-video-and-report

    Yes, FEA analysis could answer a lot of 9/11 questions if done with great care. Even better would be to simulate some of it in real life. As you’ve said, none of that will ever get done, unless some rich Truther decides to fund the work.

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    , @utu
  189. Erebus says:
    @Corvinus

    This source addresses your assertion.

    Umm, what assertion was that, and how does kendoc address it? You’ve lost me.

  190. CalDre says:
    @Corvinus

    You, on the other hand, believe it is without a doubt that our government was responsible.

    Actually, you have no evidence to make that claim. My claim to you was: The real issues are twofold: The official story is utter nonsense, and no proper investigation has ever been conducted (though a lot of evidence has been intentionally destroyed). Where do you read “no doubt out government was responsible” in there? I do think it’s highly likely given all the “mistakes” and “anomalies” and “cover-ups” but I am not without doubt, hence, my call for an investigation.

    Now, you can sit here and outright dismiss their findings, which is your liberty.

    Of course I will dismiss their “findings”, because they did not use the scientific method and speculated fire caused the collapse since they had no other explanation to provide (as far as I’m concerned they could have claimed the wind knocked them down). I.e., they had no evidence the fires brought down any of the three buildings, it was a “process of elimination”, if you read the report.

    But wait! NIST makes a stunning admission in their FAQ #22 of their “FAQs – NIST WTC Towers Investigation” that “NIST did not test for the residue of [explosives or thermite] in the steel” (or anywhere else). Then they give some lame explanation for why thermite wouldn’t work (which is correct) but entirely ignore the use of nano-thermite, which does not have those limitations.

    To find out why they did not even test for explosives, which would have been a quite simple test really! extremely simple, we have to run through their gamut of clear lies and misinformation, such as in FAQ #8 on that page, where they claim that “NIST’s findings also do not support the “controlled demolition” theory since there is conclusive evidence that:”

    1. “the collapse was initiated in the impact and fire floors of the WTC towers and nowhere else” – so what, someone who wanted to do a controlled demolition could easily set it up that way, it in no way disproves controlled demolition.

    2. “the time it took for the collapse to initiate (56 minutes for WTC 2 and 102 minutes for WTC 1) was dictated by (1) the extent of damage caused by the aircraft impact, and (2) the time it took for the fires to reach critical locations and weaken the structure to the point that the towers could not resist the tremendous energy released by the downward movement of the massive top section of the building at and above the fire and impact floors” – erhh, OK, yeah, that’s your contrived explanation, but how does that disprove controlled demolition or prove that fire did it (it’s an assumption)?

    Then they claim further that “there was no evidence (collected by NIST or by the New York City Police Department, the Port Authority Police Department, or the Fire Department of New York) of any blast or explosions in the region below the impact and fire floors as the top building sections (including and above the 98th floor in WTC 1 and the 82nd floor in WTC 2) began their downward movement upon collapse initiation” – but yet I have seen videos (one collating a bunch but also separately) a large number of interviews with firefighters and witnesses, and a number of live reports, all claiming a number of large explosions, as well as video showing damage from those explosions and video in which one can hear the explosions. So possibly they could have claimed there was a mass malfunction of recorders that day and lots of firefighters and police lied, but it plainly a flagrant lie to state “there was no evidence collected … of any blasts or explosions.”

    And that’s it! Based on those utterly bogus reasons, they forewent the $200 explosives test! Even though anybody intelligent who saw the collapses immediately thought “controlled demolition” (esp. WTC 7). That’s not an investigation by experts, that’s propaganda by shills, and no, propaganda is not “evidence”, even if it’s Gospel to you.

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    , @Corvinus
  191. Truth says:
    @MarkinLA

    I said that I wasn’t going to argue for water flowing downhill again, but here I am…

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
  192. MarkinLA says:
    @Anonymous

    If you don’t need one why carry it or even bother getting one? Americans are not used to having their passports with them, unlike Europeans who are probably still used to what it was like before the EU. You driver’s license is enough.

  193. MarkinLA says:
    @Anonymous

    Have you ever dropped a handful of dirt on the ground such that it stays in one bunch? If you did you would notice some of the dirt ejecting sideways after it hit the ground.

  194. MarkinLA says:
    @CalDre

    and the time lapse between detonations.

    Nonsense the typical controlled demolition shows the all the charges going off well before the building collapses. When there is a concern that the building won’t fall the way they want that usually put in ties that pull the outer walls into the center as the middle collapses first.

    • Replies: @CalDre
  195. MarkinLA says:
    @Erebus

    Planes hit the building, YES or NO? After that I get tired of people who know absolutely nothing about physics telling me stupid things and expecting me to believe them.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  196. MarkinLA says:
    @Truth

    Truth, it is obvious that you know nothing of physics yet continue to believe you are saying something.
    Try watching a videos of a racing cars crashing at 200 mph (especially pre-carbon fiber days) to get some idea of how much energy even that small mass has at that speed and then realize how much more it has with an airliner traveling at 2.5 times the speed.

    • Replies: @Truth
  197. MarkinLA says:

    Of course they didn’t, because a “fully gassed up” (which it actually wasn’t) airliner most likely can’t fly at >500kn (not mph!) at that altitude because its engines just wouldn’t have the thrust to overcome the parasitic drag at low altitude.

    Yeah except that is the estimate based on the frame rate of the videos and the size of the airliner – something quite easy to do. I should know I worked in defence for a group that made guided missiles. They routinely had to calculate the distance to the target by the size of the target in the field (compared to the known intrelligence) of view and estimate it’s speed by the apparent angle it was traveling and the number of pixels it traversed per frame given the frame rate of the video or IR camera.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  198. MarkinLA says:
    @Erebus

    No, it doesn’t. In hard materials, water is just a carrier for a cutting agent such as tungsten, diamond, or Al2O3,

    Only because if you used water alone it would require pressures beyond would be safe or even likely to be maintained with current technology. You could cut steel with compressed air if the pressure was high enough.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  199. MarkinLA says:
    @CalDre

    2. “the time it took for the collapse to initiate (56 minutes for WTC 2 and 102 minutes for WTC 1) was dictated by (1) the extent of damage caused by the aircraft impact, and (2) the time it took for the fires to reach critical locations and weaken the structure to the point that the towers could not resist the tremendous energy released by the downward movement of the massive top section of the building at and above the fire and impact floors” – erhh, OK, yeah, that’s your contrived explanation, but how does that disprove controlled demolition or prove that fire did it (it’s an assumption)?

    Maybe you can explain why the building that was hit such that there was significantly more mass above the impact point collapsed significantly faster than the one with less mass above the impact point. Why did people going through all that trouble to set up a controlled demolition set it up this way?

    • Replies: @Erebus
    , @CalDre
  200. Erebus says:
    @MarkinLA

    Yeah except that is the estimate based on the frame rate of the videos

    No, that figure was from the 5 radar tracks made public shortly after 9/11. 4 had the aircraft approaching the towers at 500-550kn, with the 5th outlier at >600kn. Included on at least some of those tracks were the points at which the aircraft deviated from their flight plan, turned off their transponders, etc.

  201. Erebus says:
    @MarkinLA

    True, I shouldn’t have assumed utu was talking about the present state of the art.

  202. Sparkon says:
    @Corvinus

    Why don’t you at least offer your summary of the material on that long link, your argument why anyone should go there, and why you think it is persuasive enough to recommend it twice without any substantive comment from you about the material there, and why you want us to go look at it.

    Otherwise, it’s just a snipe hunt. If it’s worthwhile to invest the time, please tell me why.

  203. Erebus says:
    @MarkinLA

    The obvious answer is that the fires in the S. Tower were visibly dying. Ergo, better bring it down or somebody’d have some ‘splainin’ to do if it stayed standing after the fires died.

  204. utu says:
    @Erebus

    Well, I wasn’t making an argument, I was simply saying what I thought as in idle conversation. When I make arguments, I’m quite precise in my language and procedure (you’ve complained that I’m being too pedantic when I do).

    I do not think you could add more specificity or substance to what you wrote in the comment I responded to about the plane being able or not to penetrate the building. You would not be able express your arguments it numerical results regardless of how precise your language would be. And I do not think you got any procedure to speak of. There is not secret Wunderwaffe in your arsenal. Short of comprehensive finite elements model or some experiments all is really hand waving. Better be honest with yourself and admit that you do not know and are not in position to make definitive statements of consequence in this matter. Just like you could not make a definite statement about the top speed of planes and instead reduced your argument to the appeal to plane manufacturer’s ability of making such a statement.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  205. Erebus says:
    @MarkinLA

    Planes hit the building, YES or NO?

    How the f&ck would I know? I know where the preponderance of evidence lies, and no more. When unimpeachable evidence is unavailable, I reserve final judgement. What do you do?

    Do you know? Or, do you merely believe, unaware that there is an epistemological chasm between knowledge of matters of physical fact and belief?

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  206. Rurik says:
    @Erebus

    opportunity to place appropriate charges anywhere they needed to be to make the Wiley E. Coyote cutout,

    or.. just have a plane crash into the building so that it can be filmed doing so (and cause the ‘cutout’)

    if your whole issue is that those particular jets could not have flown at that speed, then I’d just happened to disagree, that’s all. If you feel I’m wrong, and can prove it with all kinds of formulas and equations, then that’s fine, and perhaps there’s merit to that argument. But I’d simply rather not engage.

    It’s enough that we both agree that 9/11 didn’t happen like they say it did, and that we need to have a real investigation.

    cheers

    • Replies: @joefour
    , @Erebus
  207. Truth says:
    @MarkinLA

    Somehow a 240′ airplane all condensed into a small hole in a building like an accordion, and left no trace.

    I’m sorry Markin, I just can’t do this anymore.

  208. Sparkon says:
    @Erebus

    First of all, I think it is conceivable that the nose-out could have been an actual physical effect generated by the Gelatin crew from within the building, just as I think was likely done with the direct airplane outline punch outs on the facades, where the airplanes were said to have “slammed” into the WTC.

    But why would you want the ‘nose out?” Probably because — for many — Hollywood special effects trump physics. The spectacular image of the plane appearing to smash through the building had enormous shock value when first broadcast, and people in shock do not always think clearly or rationally, especially if they are angry too.

    Of course, it’s probably a CGI timing or masking flub, as you suggest, but because there are other rather audacious special effects in this operation — like the cutting wingtips — I won’t abandon entirely my idea that this 9/11 TV animation/production crew was made up of hack Hollywood-wannabe hot dogs for whom presenting spectacular visual effects was much more important than adhering to physical reality.

    Indeed, even now, there are many who think the two building penetrations are real — because they saw it on TV — and the two 150-ton airliners destroyed two 500,000 ton buildings, with WTC7 thrown in for good measure. Or something. You can read some of these quite incredible arguments right here this morning on Unz.com.

    It is also conceivable that some of the images are hybrids: mostly real, but with CGI detailing and noodling for extra effect, which approach would definitely fall within the capabilities of the two video insertion systems I’ve mentioned. Again, please recall the comments of the CBS executives, who were warning of the potential for abuse of this new broadcast technology.

    Of course, with this technology, wholesale replacement of one physical object with an image of something else entirely is also possible.

    You asked:

    how is it that both made the same mistake? Something doesn’t add up for me here. Any thoughts?

    Again, with 3D graphics, unlimited virtual cameras are available for rendering from within the 3D workspace. They can record (and/or simulate) the same scene from different positions. Indeed, this is the great attraction of 3D graphics, which may require a great deal of set-up work to build and texture the models, but which when finished can be run over and over as many times as you like, from the same viewpoint, or from different ones.

    With 2D graphics you must redraw any moving parts for each frame, although that can be animated, but you cannot change views (cameras) with 2D graphics without redrawing everything from scratch, where the 3D model once set in motion can be rendered and recorded from as many different viewpoints, view ports, or virtual cameras as you like.

    With Sportvision’s 1st & Ten tech, three “instrumented” cameras are the norm, and they are fitted with motion sensors that transmit positioning data to the broadcaster’s production van where the computers are located, one for each camera, and where some fiddling is required by the engineers if there are changing weather conditions, clouds, muddy field, snow, dust, green uniforms, and other such challenging situations for the chroma key recognition circuits.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1st_%26_Ten_%28graphics_system%29

    This technology relies on chroma keying, where computers connected to the vidcams can detect and isolate the green playing field, so that the green is always on the bottom, the electronic yellow line is on top of that, and everything but the green field is on top of, or blocks (masks) the yellow line.

    PVI’s L-VIS video insertion system would appear to be more capable, although the two technologies share common roots.

    The company pioneered the vision-based, match moving technology that allows the virtual insertion of images and video into broadcast video signals in real time, i.e., while the program is being broadcast. In addition to the virtual yellow down line, the technology has been used to place virtual advertising in broadcasts of soccer, baseball, ice hockey games and, more controversially, on some TV news shows, including the CBS 2000 New Year’s Eve show when an NBC logo behind Dan Rather in Times Square, NY, was covered over with a virtual CBS logo.

    Originally marketed as L-VIS (Live Video Insertion System), their systems are now called inVU systems to emphasize their use of pattern recognition of images, and that motion sensors are not required on the broadcast cameras that the system is working with.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PVI_Virtual_Media_Services

    On another issue, the Hezarkhani still image probably was not released by CNN, but rather is a frame grab from a video. Some are arguing that the image is the result of video interpolation, but again, isolation of the moving plane against the changing background (sky, then building) is only possible with electronic or digital masking of some kind, and not from interpolation.

    Thanks again for your excellent work here, and many great comments Erebus!

  209. Erebus says:
    @utu

    I do not think you could add more specificity or substance to what you wrote in the comment

    Really? I can assure you that a qualitative leap in specificity and substance would be evident if I knew, rather than merely believedwhat I said. As it is, that’s idle conversation where I drink. How do your conversations go?
    Look utu, here’s what I said:

    I don’t think the entry holes need any CGI, much less airplanes. In fact, I seriously doubt airplanes would have made those Wiley E. Coyote cutouts.

    Nota bene, I announced doubt, and went on to give reasons for my doubts. I didn’t have an FEA, much less the results of a scaled or life-size physical simulation in front of me. If I had, then I would make a formal claim (aka “argument”) that would add a qualitative difference to the “specificity and substance” of my discourse. What do you think humans are doing when they’re chatting? In my experience, they express some doubts or beliefs on some topic, and express the reasons behind them. Were my reasons for doubt too strong for your liking, or what?

    You would not be able express your arguments it numerical results regardless of how precise your language would be.

    Jeezus utu, no, we don’t have the numbers, and so we can’t make formal claims, and so I didn’t and don’t. Anything short of an unimpeachable proof is idle conversation (regardless of anyone’s command of English) and not argument. “Argument” normally means something quite specific, the presentation of a proof, unless you actually mean “persuasion” when you use the word “argument”, in which case we’re separated by a common language and discourse indeed becomes problematic.

  210. joefour says:
    @Rurik

    Rurik, you are one the best commenters here at the Unz Review IMHO. Like you, I know only that the official story of 9/11 is pure baloney. As to whether the planes were real or CGI here’s a link to an interesting YouTube video that makes the case for CGI…

    • Replies: @Rurik
    , @daniel le mouche
  211. CalDre says:
    @MarkinLA

    There could be lots of reasons – one mentioned by Erebus, or because they thought it made more “sense” given the impact zones (in which case, it worked for you), or because one of the planes did not hit where intended and they had to update the detonation sequence. It’s really speculation but I don’t think this factor is indicative either way. The way NIST explained the “perfect demolition by simple fire”, the collapse was initiated on a single floor, not from the weights above that floor (which is supported by the central column and the steel beams framing the outside of the towers), but from the weight of the floor immediately above.

    And just to show the utter absurdity and dishonesty with which NIST presented its results, in the FAQ I linked earlier, NIST tries to explain why the towers fell exactly at free-fall speed by claiming:

    “the momentum (which equals mass times velocity) of the 12 to 28 stories (WTC 1 and WTC 2, respectively) falling on the supporting structure below (which was designed to support only the static weight of the floors above and not any dynamic effects due to the downward momentum) so greatly exceeded the strength capacity of the structure below that it (the structure below) was unable to stop or even to slow the falling mass. “

    So most physicists understand the conservation of energy principle. First, huge amounts of energy were lost pulverizing the roughly 300,000 tons of concrete in each tower, and bending/breaking the roughly 100,000 tons of steel in the towers. This effect would slow the fall (just like, say, friction slows the speed of an object sliding down an incline).

    Second, I wrote a program that analyzed the collapse speed of the towers, making very favorable assumptions to a quick collapse, based solely on the principle of conservation of momentum. Among with other favorable assumptions, I assume that no floor beyond the floor where the collapse initiated had any support beyond the minimum required to hold it in place (i.e., even one extra gram of weight would cause the floor to collapse without any resistance). Conservation of momentum is a principle that a moving object that combines with another object at a different velocity will have its velocity affected. A clear example of this is when a train hits a car in its way. The car is accelerated and the train is slowed down. The exact same principle applies in the domino falling scenario. Well guess what? Only with that principle (and ignoring the 300,000 tons of concrete which were pulverized and the immense force required to shear 100,000 tons of reinforced steel of the highest quality), the collapse would still have been slower than what actually happened! by about one second (which is significant given it took only, say, 9 and 11 seconds to collapse).

    The only way to reconcile this difference is that the floors below actually started collapsing before they were struck by the floors from above. And the only way this happens, is by controlled demolition.

    • Replies: @CalDre
    , @MarkinLA
  212. CalDre says:
    @MarkinLA

    the typical controlled demolition shows the all the charges going off well before the building collapses.

    Emphasis on typical but even in those cases, the sequence of detonations and their separation in timing is an integral part of the task.

    From an article completely unrelated to 9/11: “[controlled demolition experts] decide what explosives to use, where to position them in the building and how to time their detonations.”

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
  213. CalDre says:
    @CalDre

    The only way to reconcile this difference is that the floors below actually started collapsing before they were struck by the floors from above. And the only way this happens, is by controlled demolition.

    Just to expand on that: it has to happen that way if you are collapsing a building from the top down because if a floor below offers resistance, there can be no assurance the building won’t topple over the side of the footprint. So the support structure has to be eliminated before the weight from above hits it.

    One other thing I did not mention in my computer simulation – I assumed the weight of the above floors remained constant and was the same, per floor, as the floors below. This is obviously a HUGELY conservative assumption, as most of the weight was the concrete, which, obviously, was pulverized and did not land on the floors below as part of the impact.

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
  214. Rurik says:
    @joefour

    thank you Joe!

    I checked out (some of) the video, and I guess my problem with the CGI thing is why go to all the trouble? Why not just send in some jets and have these terrific and horrific crashes and explosions?

    It’s not like they lacked funds. And it’s not like they had any moral qualms. So why risk glitches or some people with cameras recording the explosions with no jets and all the other logistical complications. Just look how they reported building seven falling before it did. That was a huge embarrassment, and even a type of smoking gun.

    When all you have to do is outfit a couple of jets with remote flight capability, (or whatever you call it), and voila! A pretext for Eternal WarsⓊ!

    cheers

  215. Corvinus says:
    @CalDre

    You do not notice the difference.

    • Replies: @CalDre
  216. Corvinus says:
    @Erebus

    Yes, actual planes hit the buildings.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  217. Erebus says:
    @Rurik

    It’s enough that we both agree that 9/11 didn’t happen like they say it did, and that we need to have a real investigation.

    I hear ya. Now, if only you’d be reasonable and come round to my view…. [/sarc] :-)

  218. CalDre says:
    @Corvinus

    Of course I see a “difference”, just like any two snowflakes are different, but it’s an inconsequential difference. The inquiry was whether there is “evidence” that fires brought down the building. The fact that some political hacks, who were not witnesses to the event, came up with some spun story without any evidence but based on not looking for the most likely cause of the event, is NOT evidence. It simply is NOT evidence anymore than me claiming what the inside of your house looks like, or prognosticating on the reason for some bad event happening in your life, is evidence.

    As a matter of law, experts are allowed to give “evidence” at trial without being eyewitnesses based on some sound scientific theory. There is no sound scientific theory for rejecting testing for explosives. There is no sound scientific basis for a large number of their claims upon which they base their pre-determined conclusion. For example, ignoring the law of the conservation of momentum (which, you may note, is one of the few areas of physics that is actually a law, not just a theory). Hence if the judge ruled property their so-called “evidence” would be inadmissible in court.

    So, yes there is a difference between liars saying something which is clearly a lie, and nobody saying something, but it’s not a difference of moment. But one you seem to latch on to.

  219. Erebus says:
    @Corvinus

    Yes, actual planes hit the buildings.

    Well, that settles the matter, at least in some circles. One still wonders why they went to all the extra trouble. Chutzpah, ya think? Or just not very bright?

  220. Erebus says:
    @MarkinLA

    what he means is that with only two points on a plane you can generate any circle you want with any radius

    Actually, the 3rd point must be drawn, or no circle can be drawn. In utu’s case, where there are 2 existing points, for every circle he may wish to draw he must posit a centre equidistant from those two points. No centre, no circle. The centre is your 3rd point.

    • Replies: @yyrvjh
  221. yyrvjh says:
    @Erebus

    Actually, the 3rd point must be drawn, or no circle can be drawn. In utu’s case, where there are 2 existing points, for every circle he may wish to draw he must posit a centre equidistant from those two points.

    Idiot, a third-grader sees through your laughably false assertion. Here’s how the third-grader does it:

    1. Smallest circle that can be drawn through any given two points is the one where distance between points = circle diameter.

    2. Progressively bigger circles can be drawn where the two points mark off the circumference segment bounding a circle sector. The skinnier the wedge (circle sector, “piece of pie”), the farther the center of the circle will be and the bigger the circle. Imagine the circumference of our sun to be the smallest circle that can be drawn between two points in space, while the same two points mark off sectors on the limb of progressively larger red supergiants. In every case, the third point (center) does not need to be supplied, it’s implied once you’ve chosen the curvature of the line connecting the two points (from perfect semicircle to infinitesimally little curvature).

    3. Obviously adult 9/11 Truthers are the stupidest species of human since even I, a third-grader, can out-think them easily.

    • Replies: @Sparkon
    , @daniel le mouche
  222. @Rurik

    no I’m not, you’re just being pedantic

    Well, no, it’s not “pedantic”. Being pedantic involves a kind of obsessiveness about trivial, nth order questions. The matter at hand, whether the people behind a false flag need to have complete control over a country’s institutions is a very key issue.

    The basic argument that “conspiracy debunkers” make repeatedly centers around this point. They argue that the various “conspiracies’ are impossible because they require the U.S. government as a whole to be in on it.

    In comment #20 above, you wrote:

    If Barcelona is a false flag, then that would require the entire Spanish government and media from the top down to the local police and local media to all be informed and complicit.

    THAT IS COMPLETELY WRONG!!!

    And, for me, to point that out is hardly pedantic, because it’s really such a key issue.

    Anyway, look, there is a problem here that goes beyond this specific point. The problem is YOU. I mean to say, you have a problem, you really do. And we (I mean, people who want to discuss issues in a serious, honest way here) consequently have a problem…

    Here is what I think the solution is. In two parts… Here is a proposition to consider, Rurik.

    When replying to somebody else in a discussion thread, you need to do two things:

    A. Before composing any response to a comment, make sure you’ve read it carefully and that you are sure you understand the main point(s) or argument(s) the person is making.

    B. After you have written your response, before positing it, ask yourself whether what you have written is a response to the principal points or arguments the person is making — i.e. from step A.

    Or conversely, if the response you have written does not address anything the commenter to whom you replying actually said, you should not post the response.

    Now, self-observation is difficult, and nobody is perfect, but I think that, in my own participation, I basically adhere to A+B above. I do not typically respond to somebody with a lot of verbiage that has nothing to do with what the person was actually saying. However, unfortunately, this is something that you do CONSTANTLY.

    What I would ask is whether you think you could commit to adhering to A+B above. That means, making sure that you undertsand what the person you are replying to actually said. And also, being quite careful that your reply relates to that.

    Recently, I reread carefully some of our previous dialogues on this site and it really just did dawn on me that you do not feel that there is a strong onus on you to understand what the person is saying or even to write a response that has very much to do with what they are saying. This got utterly ridiculous under my second-last article, where I simply asked you whether you believed it possible for hundreds of women to be sexually assulated in a space similar to Grand Central Station with Zero photographic evidence emerging. In response, you would start ranting about completely separate incidents, such as what happened to white settlers in Zimbabwe(!) This, on the grounds that you believe there is some connection.

    In any case, if you adhered to A+B above, you would basically have two possibilities.

    1. You respond to the points I was making in an honest manner.

    2. You simply don’t respond, which is okay, because you don’t have to respond to everything.

    However, we have a situation in these threads where you insert yourself into these discussions really rather egotistically, I find frankly, and you simply do not adhere to A+B above. You do not feel that there is an onus on you to understand the points the other person is making AND to write a response that addresses what the other person is saying.

    In any case, I am convinced that adherence to A+B above is the ONLY way that a serious, intellectual discussion can proceed. So, would you be willing to commit to that, and if not, I guess you should explain why.

    hundreds of women cannot be sexually assaulted

    >>sigh<<

    ok for that conversation, I think we should take the advise of the commenter here who suggested we discuss that elsewhere.

    Well, that’s dishonest really, because discussing it “elsewhere” effectively means not discussing it. But again, the question is key. Is it possible, in a current-day context, for events of a certain scale to happen in a wide-open place full of people and for there to be no visual evidence?

    So, go to youtube and look for any video of even a single person being sexually assaulted in Cologne railway station and what you do you find? NOTHING.

    Now, go to youtube and look for a video of any van smacking into anybody on the busiest tourist street in Barcelona at 5 p.m. in the afternoon. What do you find? NOTHING.

    There really is a common thread running through all of this, which is that these synthetic events do not seem to leave a visual record that you would expect them to. When there are photos/videos, they frequently seem to be faked somehow — for example, you have visuals that are from a drill being passed off as the real event, things like that…

    But, in any case, under Linh’s last article, you wrote something that flabbergasted me. In comment #159 there (here: http://www.unz.com/ldinh/george-orwell-and-mohammed-atta-were-here/#comment-1975392) you refer to your “refusal to comprehend” the so-called “Revusky’s Razor”. You see, it’s really a damning thing. You don’t really understand that you are not supposed to be engaging in wilful obtuseness refusing to comprehend what the other person is saying!

    NO!!!!

    You really seem to think that you can just insert yourself into a conversation and then steer it the way you want, just wilfully ignoring and REFUSING TO COMPREHEND the arguments the other person is making!

    Anyway, there’s a real problem here and my view is that if you want to help solve it, then the best way would be for you to commit to A+B above. It’s win-win, because I think that if you do commit to that, you will get a lot more out of these discussions than if you don’t. Everybody will… So how about it?

    • Replies: @utu
  223. Rurik says:

    Being pedantic involves a kind of obsessiveness about trivial, nth order questions. The matter at hand, whether the people behind a false flag need to have complete control over a country’s institutions is a very key issue

    read that over about seven times

    your whole issue is over the word or meaning of ‘complete’. You’re being pedantic. When people use the word ‘complete’, it is almost never in the literal sense, and yet you seem to be implying that I’m suggesting that somehow the Deepstate has ‘complete’ control in the literal sense, and now I suppose I’m going to be subjected to a dissertation on how I was soo foolish for suggesting that they have ‘complete’ control..

    The basic argument that “conspiracy debunkers” make repeatedly centers around this point. They argue that the various “conspiracies’ are impossible because they require the U.S. government as a whole to be in on it.

    In comment #20 above, you wrote:

    If Barcelona is a false flag, then that would require the entire Spanish government and media from the top down to the local police and local media to all be informed and complicit.

    THAT IS COMPLETELY WRONG!!!

    you don’t see the irony in this?

    we both believe 9/11 was a false flag. We both believe that the government and media were complicit to a degree. But when we say so, right away someone will accuse us of suggesting that the “ENTIRE” government and media, from White House janitor to CNN mail room boy are all in on it!!!!’

    So we’re forced to endlessly make caveats that ‘no. we don’t actually mean the ENTIRE government and media, but enough of them, and so on. Which is the same thing you’re doing now. I say the “entire Spanish government and media from the top down”, (which is more or less how I see it here in the States) and you attack the semantics and shout me down for being too all-encompassing with my characterization. You are doing what the 9/11 apologists are doing. Suggesting that to imply a conspiracy, would require the ENTIRE media and government be complicit, when we both know that isn’t how it works, even if we say, the ‘entire government and media were in on it’, which is perfectly honest and true, if you’re not being pedantic about it and demanding that it isn’t specifically true in the literal sense !

    whew

    The problem is YOU.

    >>sigh<<

    pure JR ;)

    Isn't it enough that we both suspect that Barcelona was a false flag ruse? And that.. OK, how do I phrase this; certain elements, at least as many and/or as much as were necessary to control the narrative up to and including the fringes of that narrative, had to be at least to one degree or another, complicit with that narrative, to the point that it could be disseminated out into the public awareness as 'reality'.

    is that careful enough? I'm still pretty certain that if you dissect it enough, you could find words that specifically are not entirely always true under all circumstances always…

    But isn't that what we both agree on nevertheless, (personalities notwithstanding…)

    that Barcelona might have been a false flag? Isn't that the point of this thread?

    Are you and Linh still convinced that is was a false flag? Have you guys done any more delving into it?

    am I discussing this properly according to the rules you've set down?

    Help me out here JR, because we all aren't as intelligent as others.

    What, at the end of the day, happened in Barcelona?

    and if it was a false flag, how would you characterize the degree of government and media complicity?

    complete? or somewhat? or barely?

    does it matter?

    now I'm being pedantic. I'll stop and simply ask what is the consensus between you and Linh as to what actually transpired there?

    (I’m going to respond to the ‘Revusky Razor’ in a separate reply, as to not conflate and confuse it with my sincere questions ending this reply)

  224. Sparkon says:
    @yyrvjh

    You wrote

    1. Smallest circle that can be drawn through any given two points is the one where distance between points = circle diameter.

    This is true, but to draw that circle, you still must first find the center point c between the two initial points a and b — to establish the radius ac — in order to be able to draw any circle at all, just as Erebus said.

    I can tell you how to bisect the line between the two initial points, but that requires two additional points. A line drawn through these two construction points will bisect line ab, and it will also define a line cx on/along which are all the center points for all the circles that can be drawn through points a and b

    In every case, the third point (center) does not need to be supplied, it’s implied once you’ve chosen the curvature of the line connecting the two points

    Your argument is more nonsense. Please describe the process for choosing — defining — the curvature of the line without the benefit of additional calculations, formulae, or constants such as pi.

    And while you’re at it, please draw for us a circle with an implied center. No circle templates allowed.

    Obviously, 9/11 shills feel the need to impersonate a 3rd grader to get their “point” across.

    Good job; carry on.

    • Replies: @yyrvjh
  225. yyrvjh says:
    @Sparkon

    Any number of circles can be drawn that will include two given points. Draw a straight line connecting the points, add a perpendicular line bisecting the first. Place spike end of a compass at arbitrary points along second line while making sure pencil end intersects the two points to get circles of varying size.

    • Replies: @Sparkon
  226. Sparkon says:

    The confusion on the two points stems from the use of the action verb draw where the action verb fit is being implied.

    These are two different actions: drawing circles as opposed to fitting circles.

    So yes, any circle — once it has been drawn — can be made to fit, or rest against, any two points closer together than the diameter of the circle, if you have some way of magically moving the newly drawn circle over the two points. If not, you have to find the center point to draw the circle in place over the two points, as I’ve described.

    Of course, virtually any other open or closed, regular or irregular linear figure, shape, or scribble you could draw can also be made to pass through any two points.

    You can draw curly-Qs, loop de loops, and beautiful doodles all over the paper, and still easily cross over the two points.

    So what?

    The entire exercise is meaningless.

    “If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about answers.”

    –Thomas Pynchon

    • Replies: @Erebus
  227. Mo Muslims, mo problems. 1400 years of history, from many different parts of the world, attest to this.

    When you have Muslims, you don’t need false fags.

    • Troll: Jonathan Revusky
  228. anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Rurik

    Oh, come on. Have you still not realized that he likes kicking you, puppy? Or are you getting revenge by trolling JR into scolding you?

    There must be something gratifying in this for each of you, but please don’t be selfish to the detriment of this website. As you’ve a private means of correspondence, please take this endless love/hate thing back there.

  229. @Shouting Thomas

    You, sir, sound like a charmer. I long to sit on the porch of a cottage by a lake on long, warm summer evenings, and play Parcheesi with you, sipping lemonade.

  230. utu says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    Hey JR, did you look into Charlottesville? You can’t use your razor there because there are many videos. But is it possible there are too many videos? Perhaps Revusky’s Shaving Cream rule could be formulated: too many videos imply a hoax? There are at least four videos of the crash from different angles including one from a drone above and photographs from the building across the street. There is a video of the red minivan standing on the cross section w/o a driver few minutes before the crash there with no crowds around. The same video has the Dodge several minutes before the crash on a different street. There is a video of the Dodge approaching the crash and leaving the crash and then there is a video of damaged Dodge passing by the police station in full view of walking policemen. Anyway, there are plenty of anomalies. Then there are post crash videos with victims looking quite OK and no sign of the the dead woman.

    By some here at unz.com you are perceived as the towel heads and goat molesters sympathizer. Perhaps by debunking Charlottesville you could redeem yourself in their eyes. You could help to acquit the white nazi. Wouldn’t it look great in media: Jonathan Revusky’s brilliant analysis helps to acquit the innocent white nazi. I am sure your mother would not be happy but, well, it is all about the truth, right? So put on your shiny armor of the Knight for the Truth and go for it. Here are some clips I saw recently:

  231. Erebus says:
    @Sparkon

    The entire exercise is meaningless.

    Actually, therein lies the point of it.
    I understand what utu was trying to get at in his circle analogy. It doesn’t quite work geometrically, but his larger point (ahem!) is valid. The fewer data points there are, the less constraints there are to the imagination.
    Interestingly, just as geometry requires a minimum of 3 points to draw/define a circle, mystery writers (EG Conan Doyle) use “The 3 Clue Rule” to develop the solution to a mystery.
    Utu’s analogy doesn’t really work with 9/11 data points either. There are legions of them. If anything, it’s as Sherlock Holmes says in one the stories, “There are altogether too many clues in this room”. It’s important to note that that fact becomes one of the 3 clues.

    The most flagrant violator of the many, too many data points is the theory that 19 Arabs, directed by an invalid in a cave in Bora Bora, hoodwinked America’s gigantic security apparatus and wrought destruction from Manhattan to the Pentagon itself because he hated America’s freedoms. The perpetrators knew they had nothing to worry about. They controlled the media that flooded the public with the theory, and dropped “too many clues” for the average private person to corral into a cohesive counter-theory, while keeping the critical data points hidden. The perfect crime.

    Anyhow, Sparkon, thanks for straightening the 3rd grader out. Saved me the trouble again. :-) And thanks for your lessons on the state of the art in video processing at the time. Well done.

    • Replies: @yyrvjh
  232. yyrvjh says:
    @Erebus

    Interestingly, just as geometry requires a minimum of 3 points to draw/define a circle

    You’re still not getting it. Any number of circles can be DRAWN starting from two points placed anywhere on the plane. Principle explained by Mark in LA, how-to given by me later. End of that discussion.

    bin Laden wasn’t an invalid in a cave prior to 9/11, he was a rich and powerful man moving between comfortable safe houses evading U.S. surveillance, but the U.S. nonetheless likely could have whacked him on at least one occasion if they had been less afraid of hitting the wrong guy. He also had access to medical care if he needed it.

    All the conspiracy theorizing about 9/11 is laughably wrong, except that I’ll grant a small non-zero possibility to the claim that “intelligence services knew a big terror attack was coming but did not act forcefully enough to prevent it because some officials were hoping the fallout would benefit them”.

    The myriad conspiracy theories (no planes, or no commercial planes with airline passengers being especially insane examples) are examples of motivated reasoning. The most prevalent motivation appears to be, “9/11 made it impossible to avoid acknowledging that ‘Islam hates us’ as candidate Trump said; I don’t want that to be true”.

    Odd how no energy is being expended to prove that the previous attempt to topple the World Trade Center was a false flag. The reason is that it was unsuccessful. Had it succeeded (and set the inevitable reactions in motion), the same subculture of Truthers would have sprung up.

    Also noteworthy is the considerable overlap between Holocaust deniers and Truthers.

    • Replies: @utu
    , @Anonymous
    , @utu
  233. utu says:
    @yyrvjh

    that the previous attempt to topple the World Trade Center was a false flag

    But we know that FBI was instrumental in pulling it off. So it was not just let it happen on purpose (LIHOP) as you are willing to admit the non-zero possibility in the case of 9/11

    “intelligence services knew a big terror attack was coming but did not act forcefully enough to prevent it because some officials were hoping the fallout would benefit them”

    but there was active involvement of FBI. W/o FBI nothing would have happened and we may speculate that the blind Sheik perhaps would not even thought of it until the idea was planted by friendly FBI provocateur.

    forcefully should be replaced with on purpose

  234. Sparkon says:
    @yyrvjh

    Your comment is a paraphrase of what I’ve already explained in my comment #229, but you are being shackled by your apparent inability to add, or read, maybe both:

    You wrote:

    Place spike end of a compass at arbitrary points along second line while making sure pencil end intersects the two points to get circles of varying size.

    Any of those “arbitrary points” is the 3rd point necessary to draw the circle, and that is the point you’re missing.

    Try to read again what I wrote, and understand it this time:

    I can tell you how to bisect the line between the two initial points, but that requires two additional points. A line drawn through these two construction points will bisect line ab, and it will also define a line cx on/along which are all the center points for all the circles that can be drawn through points a and b

    Maybe in your school they don’t get to addition until the 4th grade?

    • Replies: @Erebus
  235. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @yyrvjh

    All the conspiracy theorizing about 9/11 is laughably wrong

    Did you miss the entire discussion about 3 symmetrical freefall collapses from 2 planes, no wing holes in the pentagon, dancing israelis, thermite residues, etc, etc, etc? I think so.

    Also noteworthy is the considerable overlap between Holocaust deniers and Truthers.

    Perhaps the dogs are on to another rat? Maybe it smells fishy… instead of like almonds…?

  236. @joefour

    Good video, thanks. Holograms, real drones or CGI? Very scary shit going on either way.

  237. @yyrvjh

    ‘Yahweh’ from the United States of Mossad, thanks for all the enlightening comments.

  238. Erebus says:
    @Sparkon

    Maybe in your school they don’t get to addition until the 4th grade?

    I get the impression our little grasshopper’s been in the 3rd grade for a while. I’m thinking his academic career will probably end there.

  239. utu says:
    @yyrvjh

    Also noteworthy is the considerable overlap between Holocaust deniers and Truthers.

    It should not surprise or offend anybody there are overlaps and connections. Both stories in their canonical versions serve as the foundations for the post WWII and post Cod War new world orders which are part of the same world order with the same powers and actors.

  240. MarkinLA says:
    @Erebus

    Of course they didn’t, because a “fully gassed up” (which it actually wasn’t) airliner most likely can’t fly at >500kn (not mph!) at that altitude because its engines just wouldn’t have the thrust to overcome the parasitic drag at low altitude.

    First of all this is complete nonsense in that the plane was hijacked after the passengers were allowed out of their seats so was at a high altitude already. Therefore the plane was not climbing when it was flying toward the building it was descending before the final run to the building. As for the idea that an airliner could not fly that fast, I believe the Lockheed P-38, a twin engine prop WWII fighter experienced the effects of approaching the sound barrier on strafing dives at the end of WWII or the Russian ground effect plane capable of 300-400 kph riding just above the waves.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_effect_vehicle

    Some manned and unmanned prototypes were built, ranging up to eight tons in displacement. This led to the development of a 550-ton military ekranoplan of 92 m (301 feet) length. The craft was dubbed the “Caspian Sea Monster” by U.S. intelligence experts, after a huge, unknown craft was spotted on satellite reconnaissance photos of the Caspian Sea area in the 1960s. With its short wings, it looked airplane-like in planform, but would obviously be incapable of flight.[5] Although it was designed to travel a maximum of 3 m (9.8 ft) above the sea, it was found to be most efficient at 20 m (66 ft), reaching a top speed of 300 kn (560 km/h; 350 mph) to 400 kn (740 km/h; 460 mph) in research flights.

    • Replies: @Sparkon
  241. MarkinLA says:
    @CalDre

    You are trying to say that YOU can calculate perfectly what the normal rate of collapse of the building should be and that somebody else should be able to do it such that it fools everybody into thinking it was a natural collapse by having ALL the detonations time so perfectly that we don’t actually see any explosions in the lower floors.

    We can’t believe the idea of the weight of 30 floors collapsing a building because that is too crazy but we can believe that people who have never done such a controlled demolition can do it so precisely that they can fool everybody by hiding all the small explosions necessary for taking the building down. Not only that, they did it without the normal tools of the trade so must have had incredibly sophisticated electronic detonators to pull it all off.

    Now since one plane likely didn’t hit where it was supposed to these incredibly sophisticated detonators must have had the ability to think for themselves. They must have had accelerometers and other sensors to know when the floor above them was about to hit or had done so and then explode. The question is, who built them and where were they tested prior to this first use?

    I can see why you would think that it is so much simpler.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  242. MarkinLA says:
    @CalDre

    was pulverized and did not land on the floors below as part of the impact.

    Where did it go? 100 tons of dust still weighs 100 tons. The concrete is in various sizes from big chunks to dust. One thing you do not seem to get is that the force necessary to shear a floor off the main superstructure is not significant. There is no sense in making those floor supports hold more than the weight of the floor and a reasonable safety margin.

  243. MarkinLA says:
    @CalDre

    So most physicists understand the conservation of energy principle. First, huge amounts of energy were lost pulverizing the roughly 300,000 tons of concrete in each tower, and bending/breaking the roughly 100,000 tons of steel in the towers. This effect would slow the fall (just like, say, friction slows the speed of an object sliding down an incline).

    Yes and most physicists understand kinetic energy which is the mass times the velocity SQUARED divided by 2. They also understand how force and acceleration are related. So as the floors collapse they gain mass and velocity so the kinetic energy of the falling mass is increasing but the force needed to shear a floor off the main superstructure is, in all likelihood, the same.

    Lets try a little thought experiment about the construction of the building. Instead of the main steel superstructure we will have 4X4s 20 feet long standing perpendicular to the ground at each corner. For a floor we will have 4 8 foot 2x4s nailed into a square with 2 3/4 inch plywood sheets on top so the floor weighs about 100 pounds. We will have a floor every two feet. Given that the weight of the floor isn’t much, we will attach it to the 4×4 superstructure with one 20D nail in each corner. Those 4 nails are more than enough to hold the weight of the floor and some amount of excess weight. The floors give the building some stability and resistance to twisting and swaying.

    The reality is that each floor is only held in place by 4 nails. If the top (10th) floor is overloaded such that the 4 nails can no longer hold it and the floor comes slamming down on the 9th floor, the only force that is needed to continue the collapse is the force needed to shear the nails holding the 9th floor. However, there was already enough force (due to gravity alone) at the 10th floor to bring it down and we have added the force due to the 10th floor accelerating downward. Of course, every nail doesn’t have the exact same resistance to shearing but it is highly unlikely that the difference is enough to stop the collapse.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  244. Sparkon says:
    @MarkinLA

    As for the idea that an airliner could not fly that fast, I believe the Lockheed P-38, a twin engine prop WWII fighter…

    Why would you cite a fighter to prove something about an airliner? ‘Apples and oranges, and anyway, the Lightning wasn’t that fast:

    We had found out that the Bf 109 and the FW 190 could fight up to a Mach of 0.75, three-quarters the speed of sound. We checked the Lightning and it couldn’t fly in combat faster than 0.68. So it was useless. We told Doolittle that all it was good for was photo-reconnaissance and had to be withdrawn from escort duties.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_P-38_Lightning

    And…

    Propeller aircraft can never reach the sound barrier, since the tips of propeller blades hit the sound barrier before the rest of the plane does. The propeller blades go into shock stall, and the plane can no longer accelerate.

    There are many claims of propeller driven dive bombers breaking the sound barrier during WWII, but these have to all be considered implausible. Approaching the sound barrier, an airplane is already well above its terminal velocity, the speed at which drag matches the acceleration imparted by gravity. Propellers are shock stalled, and there is neither thrust nor gravity available to accelerate a diving airplane past a certain point.

    As any aircraft approaches the speed of sound, airflow over some parts of the plane will exceed Mach 1 and create shockwaves. These shockwaves cause intense buffeting. Many propeller driven WWII fighter planes, including the Supermarine Spitfire, the Lockheed P-38 Lightning, and the North American P-51 Mustang, experienced these effects at Mach 0.85. Similarly, jet engines of the day were not designed to work with supersonic airflow entering through the compressor vanes; such engines would flame out.

    https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4154

    The Caspian Monster relied on ground effects, and flew at around 15-30 feet, so it’s an entirely different kettle of fish from a Boeing 7×7 which flies most efficiently at around 30,000 ft.

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
  245. @Erebus

    You’ve expressed this idea a few times, but I can’t for the life of me understand its attraction.

    The attraction is that the alternative would involve admitting that he was wrong.

    Generally speaking, I think that all the scenarios involving actual planes hitting the buildings run up against such big problems that, to all intents and purposes, it proves NPT via reductio ad absurdum.

    • Replies: @utu
  246. utu says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    If NPT then why unrealistic velocities were synthesized for the virtual planes? What if those who procured the velocity numbers issue a correction and admit they made a mistake? What those who obsess about the velocities as their killer argument will be able to do about it? Nothing!

    On other thread I formulated the imperative which is solely based on the maximization of the chance of success by the planner of the operation:

    Demolition implies virtual planes and its equivalent Real planes imply no demolition.

    The above implication obviously does not need to hold in “real world” but in the world were the Planners of 9/11 operation behaved rationally according to the principe of minimum risk it does.

    Hey JR, I asked you about Charlottesville above. Did you look into it?

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  247. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @MarkinLA

    Who says they’d never done a controlled demolition before? You think they were really art students?

    No need for sensor on the building either, just connect the explosive array in a resilient mesh network and issue ignite commands from a desktop PC. Maybe they had a nice GUI and some prewritten macros to calculate for anticipated variations, like exact impact point. Maybe not even necessary since they had enough time after impact to adapt the ignition sequences to the events on the ground.

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
  248. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @MarkinLA

    What about the 4×4′s? If i run your model through my mental calculator, i end up with four vertical 4×4′s, and a bunch of plywood sheets on the floor. WTC 1,2,7 didn’t leave anything vertical. The whole thing came down together.

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
  249. @utu

    Hey JR, I asked you about Charlottesville above. Did you look into it?

    Well, it’s obviously NOT an organic event.

    There are surely plenty of youtubers and bloggers who have dissected it. But all of the writers on this site will, of course, analyze the thing as if this is something that occurred organically.

    But, it’s like the Cologne incident (that OBVIOUSLY never happened) and, if people think the narrative is ideologically useful to them, they glom onto it.

    Isn’t that really a rather hopeless oppositional stance? To take your enemies’ staged agitprop and be analyzing it as if it was real events? At some point, a serious analyst of events has to call out all the synthetic events as synthetic, regardless of whether they seem ideologically useful. Pretending that synthetic events are real is just bound to be a trap to fall into. Maybe you (and some others here) could think about that and finally realize this.

    • Replies: @utu
  250. @Rurik

    you don’t see the irony in this?

    Irony? No. Again, what you wrote that I took issue with was the following:

    If Barcelona is a false flag, then that would require the entire Spanish government and media from the top down to the local police and local media to all be informed and complicit.

    You’re trying to pretend that the above statement is “more or less correct”, and that I am simply being “pedantic”, i.e. nitpicking. But NO! The above is COMPLETELY WRONG. It is completely wrong in a way that reveals, unfortunately, you have never really seriously thought about these issues.

    The other aspect to this is that if the people behind a false flag completely controlled the government and media top to bottom, there would probably be no need for them to even execute a false flag in the first place!

    Help me out here JR, because we all aren’t as intelligent as others.

    What, at the end of the day, happened in Barcelona?

    Well, OBVIOUSLY it’s a staged event of some sort. The kids that they claim did this were just patsies. If you had been following similar events with any attention over the past couple of years, you would not need me to tell you this. The whole thing fits so many of the patterns, like, just for starters, them finding the ID in the vehicle and all this, so…

    But anyway, in the last comment, I posed a simple question. I said that your participation would be much more useful if you followed two basic principles:

    A. Before writing a response to a comment, be absolutely sure that you understand the main argument (or arguments) the person was making.

    B. After writing your response (but before posting it) satisfy yourself that what you have written actually is a response to what the person was saying.

    I believe that I really do follow A+B myself — as best I can anyway, maybe there is the occasional lapse…. However, you, by and large, DO NOT. So would you be willing to commit to A+B? Yes or no?

    I sense that you have a desire to be respected as an intellectual or thinker or whatever and a lot of the tension in the situation is that it is becoming fairly clear that I no longer take you seriously. AT ALL. This, unfortunately, is the result of interactions in which your behavior is really pretty UNSERIOUS. So, if you do want to be taken seriously (by me and other serious people) I think the first step would be to commit to A+B.

    I’m going to respond to the ‘Revusky Razor’ in a separate reply, as to not conflate and confuse it with my sincere questions ending this reply

    Well, okay, suppose I responded to your “sincere questions” about what happened in Barcelona by simply ranting about something that had happened in Zimbabwe or Timbuktu, how would you react to that? And then suppose that you then said that you had asked me about Barcelona, not some completely different events, and I responded that what happened in Timbuktu and what happened in Barcelona were basically the same thing, so I had answered your question. How would you react to that?

    But, look, anyway, you’re demanding answers to very general questions, like “Was this a false flag?” that you ought to be able to figure out the answer to on your own. If you really can’t figure out the answer on your own, then you are missing some basic conceptual tools.

    The “Revusky’s Razor” concept is a very simple analytical tool that, really, should not be terribly controversial. Events of a certain scale cannot occur in wide open public places full of people without there being a visual record — not at a point in time when everybody has a video camera in his/her pocket.

    So, I have given you (though not just you specifically, anybody) some very basic analytical tools to suss things out and, at a later point, you then refer to your “refusal to comprehend Revusky’s Razor”. So, at specific points, you wilfully decide NOT to understand what I’m telling you.

    If you were in my shoes, how much time would you waste talking to somebody like this? What it means is that I can work up a systematic argument and you can just wilfully refuse to even think about it and say “I refuse to comprehend it”. I explained to you that hundreds of women cannot be sexually assaulted in the equivalent of Grand Central Station and for there to be ZERO visual record, and you (AND OTHERS) simply REFUSE TO UNDERSTAND THIS!

    WTF?

    And then when I get pissed off somewhat, it’s proof of how unreasonable I am. On Cologne specifically, I only realized after I wrote my last article, that the main guy who was an alleged witness to the events, one Ivan Jurcevic, was another damned crisis actor! The guy has an IMDB page and has a reel still up on youtube of his acting highlights! That, and I pointed out that the main case that shocked everybody, the girl who was gang-raped and got pregnant and had an abortion and blah blah, was not even in Cologne at the time, by her own admission….

    But it’s obviously a mediatic hoax at this point. So I point out that there is a simple analytical tool that would have allowed anybody to see through this pretty quickly, that I chose to call “Revusky’s Razor”. And then you say that you “refuse to comprehend” that!

    Anyway, unfortunately, I do not take you very seriously and it’s a time-sink to get too involved in conversations with you, but the situation is remediable. If you want to take a positive step, just commit to points A+B above. If not, explain why you won’t. I think these should be the basic ground rules of a serious participant. If you will not commit to A+B, then you are announcing your lack of seriousness, and I can really finally wash my hands of this. I am a serious person and I cannot be expected to just endlessly waste my time with unserious people. (Granted, nobody has ever really forced me to, but I have to be much more disciplined about this in the future.)

    • Replies: @Rurik
  251. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    “I am a serious person and I cannot be expected to just endlessly waste my time with unserious people. (Granted, nobody has ever really forced me to, but I have to be much more disciplined about this in the future.)”

    Find a cave with a lot of wallspace. We don’t deserve you.

  252. utu says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    But, it’s like the Cologne incident (that OBVIOUSLY never happened)

    You have been seriously traumatized by the Cologne incident. It never leaves you. Not a second of respite from it. I hope you will overcome this one day. In the meantime you are not fit for normal interactions.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  253. MarkinLA says:
    @Anonymous

    connect the explosive array in a resilient mesh network and issue ignite commands from a desktop PC.

    Except nobody saw all the det cord that is normally visible throughout the building in a controlled demolition. So how were all those explosions set off if there wasn’t sophisticated electronic detonators?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  254. MarkinLA says:
    @Anonymous

    There is tremendous outward pressure from the debris being thrown out of the world trade towers that would not be as present in my example. The 2x4s making up the floors would tend to bulge out and push and twist the 4X4s. My example was to show how unlikely it was that a single floor of a modern steel superstructure building could withstand the force of 30 floors above it crashing down on it.

    Also if you look at the ground level pictures there are large sections of the superstructure sticking out of the debris.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  255. MarkinLA says:
    @Sparkon

    Once again you post some totally irrelevent nonsense. The claim was that somehow a jet airliner could not go 500 knots so close to the ground when many other lesser planes have done so when diving. The airliners was not climbing but hijacked at high altitude (when passengers could leave their seats) and assumed descending so one can conclude that the airliner could go that fast.

    • Replies: @Sparkon
    , @yyrvjh
  256. Sparkon says:
    @MarkinLA

    some totally irrelevent nonsense.

    You mean like the Lightning and ekranoplan?

  257. yyrvjh says:
    @MarkinLA

    The claim was that somehow a jet airliner could not go 500 knots so close to the ground

    Yes, truther insaniac “Erebus” claimed that an “airliner most likely can’t fly at >500kn (not mph!) at that altitude because its engines just wouldn’t have the thrust to overcome the parasitic drag at low altitude”, never mind what experts recognized by their peers say. Erebus has declared that a Boeing 767 could not fly that fast, and that settles the matter, you greasy conspiracyphobe.

    However, this is a temporary diversion. I expect that soon Dim Lin’s minions will return to their usual hobby horses, namely claiming “false flag!” for every new terror attack and denying the Holocaust.

    • Replies: @Sparkon
  258. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @MarkinLA

    So how were all those explosions set off if there wasn’t sophisticated electronic detonators?

    What’s wrong with electronic detonators and hidden wiring and/or radio/wifi?

    I didn’t say not sophisticated, i just said self sensing wasn’t necessary

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
  259. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @MarkinLA

    Also if you look at the ground level pictures there are large sections of the superstructure sticking out of the debris.

    Yes and why are the beams neatly cut at the angle required to let them slide past each other, instead of a minimum effort perpendicular cut that would be used by a clean up crew?

  260. Rurik says: • Website
    @Jonathan Revusky

    I am a serious person and I cannot be expected to just endlessly waste my time with unserious people.

    OK, I’ll try to keep this short..

    first off, I never claimed any women were raped in Cologne, so why should I be expected to provide proof that they were?

    What I said is that I suspect that lots of women were assaulted, or even finger raped’. That may not be a big deal to many people, but I suspect the women and girls involved with such instances wouldn’t agree.

    second, I don’t consider lack of proof, as lack of guilt. There are thousands of rapes and murders that happen every day, and many of them in public places, like the one in Panama City, FL, where they drugged the teen and gang raped her in broad daylight, even filming it, and no one complained or intervened because it would have been racist to do so. But just as with all videos showing diversity committing crimes against Westerners, the evidence is always suppressed. As has already been pointed out, as with for instance the BART robberies.

    http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2017/07/09/bart-withholding-surveillance-videos-of-crime-to-avoid-stereotypes/

    indeed, in this case

    the police officer in charge of suppressing the evidence leaked it, and that’s the only reason people are even aware of that crime.

    which brings us to the final question of JR’s curious obtuseness when it comes to seeing that the crimes in Rotherham and Zimbabwe and Cologne are all OBVIOUSY related. Because the soul-rot that has metastasized in the West is civilizational. The reaon all those white college boys in Florida allowed that girl to be gang raped in front of their emasculated eyes is because they didn’t want to be called ‘racist’ if they intervened. Which is why all the authorities and community leaders in Rotherham weren’t willing to do anything about hundreds of British school girls being systematically raped and gang raped by Pakistani Muslims- was because they didn’t want to be called ‘racists’, for noticing that is was brown Muslim men who were raping white British girls.

    Which is why the German people are allowing themselves to be invaded by armies of young Muslim and African men, because they’re scared of being labeled ‘Nazis’ if they object.

    And anyone with a brain the size of a peanut, can see this from a ten thousand miles away.

    So it seems rather curious that the otherwise intelligent JR is strangely daft in this regard.

    which I suspect is ideological. I suspect that JR would have no problem with Germany being inundated with Muslims and blended into a brown race of non-Germans. Indeed, that seems to be an imperative of non-Westerners these days and their brain-dead liberal allies.

    whereas I would unapologetically round up and deport every single potential non-Swedish rapist in Sweden (and Germany and everywhere else in the West) and ship them all home- post haste.

    but that’s just me, and I confess to having more sympathy for that murdered Swedish girl than I do for all the millions upon millions of Muslim and African men who would like very much to make their homes in the West.

    I guess I’m just more callous than you JR (and “racist” ; ), and it’s something I’ll have to live with, I suppose.

    I hope this puts this tiresome charade to rest once and for all. We simply should agree to disagree.

    cheers.

    • Replies: @Truth
    , @Jonathan Revusky
  261. MarkinLA says:
    @Anonymous

    I didn’t say not sophisticated, i just said self sensing wasn’t necessary

    You gotta have redundancy for such an important mission. Even GPS guided missiles probably still have gyroscopes (ring laser gyros). Imagine if the charges didn’t all go off and blew up like unexploded bombs in WWII? That would give the whole thing away, wouldn’t it?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  262. Truth says:
    @Rurik

    Because the soul-rot that has metastasized in the West is civilizational. The reaon all those white college boys in Florida allowed that girl to be gang raped in front of their emasculated eyes is because they didn’t want to be called ‘racist’ if they intervened.

    Naah… If they’re like the young, white boys I know, they were just enjoying the free porn.

  263. Sparkon says:
    @yyrvjh

    To prove the 767 can be flown at 510 knots — 586.9 mph — below 1000 feet, all the plane-huggers have to do is produce some documented evidence, news article, FAA bulletin, Boeing press release, or what have you — anything — that describes, or records the flight of a standard 767 in excess of 575 mph below 1000 feet prior to 9/11, or since.

    If such a significant event had occurred, the aviation community would have taken note, and there would be some record of it.

    Meanwhile, like Erebus, I defer to the pilots and aerospace experts, who say a 767 can’t be flown like that.

    (edited)

    NASA Flight Director Confirms 9/11 Aircraft Speed As The “Elephant In The Room”

    06/22/2010 – (PilotsFor911Truth.org) Recently Pilots For 9/11 Truth have analyzed the speeds reported for the aircraft utilized on 9/11. Numerous aviation experts have voiced their concerns…

    These experts state the speeds are impossible to achieve near sea level in thick air if the aircraft were a standard 757/767 as reported. Combined with the fact the airplane which was reported to strike the south tower of the World Trade Center was also producing high G Loading while turning and pulling out from a dive, the whole issue becomes incomprehensible to fathom a standard 767 can perform such maneuvers at such intense speeds exceeding Maximum Operating limits of the aircraft. Especially for those who research the topic thoroughly and have expertise in aviation.

    Co-Founder of Pilots For 9/11 Truth Rob Balsamo recently interviewed a former NASA Flight Director in charge of flight control systems at the NASA Dryden Flight Research facility who is also speaking out…

    Retired NASA Senior Executive Dwain Deets published his concerns on the matter at the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) as follows:

    A Responsibility to Explain an Aeronautical Improbability

    The airplane was UA175, a Boeing 767-200, shortly before crashing into World Trade Center Tower 2. Based on analysis of radar data, the National Transportation and Safety Board reported the groundspeed just before impact as 510 knots. This is well beyond the maximum operating velocity of 360 knots, and maximum dive velocity of 410 knots.
    [...]
    Have engineers just looked the other way?

    The above entry remained at the moderated AIAA Aerospace America Forum for approximately two weeks before being removed without explanation…

    http://pilotsfor911truth.org/911_Aircraft_Speed_Deets.html

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons

    Note that the maximum speed in a dive for the 767 is just 472 mph, well short of 500.

    Speed aside, you still have to be able to fly the 767, and navigate to your destination…

    • Replies: @yyrvjh
  264. yyrvjh says:
    @Sparkon

    Truly, this is the Funny Farm of Unz.com — and Unz hosts some real nutcases. Truther insaniac “Sparkon” writes:

    To prove the 767 can be flown at 510 knots — 586.9 mph — below 1000 feet, all the plane-huggers have to do is produce some documented evidence, news article, FAA bulletin, Boeing press release, or what have you — anything — that describes, or records the flight of a standard 767 in excess of 575 mph below 1000 feet prior to 9/11, or since.

    What this genius doesn’t realize is that no sane pilot — not even the bravest “Right Stuff” test pilot — would push a plane so very far beyond its specs when the probability of rapid disassembly in mid-flight is so high. That’s why he apparently hasn’t found a record of such an event.

    However, there are recorded instances of such extreme overspeeds in commercial jets, but they usually end fatally. Example:

    16 seconds later the distress call was made, after another 17 seconds the aircraft reached the highest recorded speed of 950kph (512 knots), the engines reduced to idle thrust, and the aircraft impacted ground at about that speed (508 knots last recorded speed) 80 seconds after the aircraft departed controlled flight.

    https://avherald.com/h?article=4920a18a/0000&opt=7680

    That was a CRJ 200 jet, with less powerful engines and lower rated top speed than the Boeing 767.

    Note, also, that one of “Sparkon”‘s references only speaks of “improbability”.

    Tell you what, “Sparkon”. Since you obviously live here, I’ll let you continue your monologue undisturbed while I return to more fruitful pursuits. My tarbaby index is past 11 already!

    • Replies: @Sparkon
  265. Sparkon says:
    @yyrvjh

    Now our fabled 3rd grader “yyrvjh” trots out a patently false analogy. He wants us to think that an out-of-control CRJ 200 — about to auger in at 589 mph — somehow is comparable to, or has some bearing on a 767 allegedly flying at 587 mph, and about to make a precision strike on the WTC, while in a turn.

    Apples and oranges.

  266. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @MarkinLA

    Imagine if the charges didn’t all go off and blew up like unexploded bombs in WWII? That would give the whole thing away, wouldn’t it?

    No more so than symmetrical collapses at freefall, 3 buildings from 2 planes, no plane at the pentagon, dancing israelis, the israeli van with twin towers motif, BBC announcing WTC collapse before it actually happened, the Israelis ready on TV to blame Muslims, the debris being shipped off to China before it could be analysed, nanothermite residues being found in Manhattan dust, etc etc etc

    There’s more than enough evidence to give the game away, it’s just that most people can’t stomach the implications and hence deny the evidence. Emotions trump logic.

  267. @utu

    You have been seriously traumatized by the Cologne incident.

    Well, the “Cologne incident” is just another mediatic hoax. It never happened, so it is hard to see how that, in itself, could “traumatize” me.

    That said, there is some bit of truth to what you say, but it was really the subsequent discussion that deeply affected me. It was in the subsequent discussion that I realized the nature of some of the people that I was interacting with, just the sheer level of dishonesty and immorality.

    For example, I came to the conclusion that you, utu, know perfectly well that hundreds of women cannot be sexually assaulted in the equivalent of Grand Central Station and for there to be ZERO visual evidence. You know it perfectly well, yet decide, for whatever reason to pretend to believe this story. And to insult and attack me for telling the truth. I find that level of wilful dishonesty to be really quite offensive.

    In any case, any man who wants to support false rape accusations is both a fool and a total moral degenerate. When I realized that I had invested so many hours talking to such rats, yeah, that was somewhat “traumatizing”. It marked a sort of “before and after” watershed in my experience on this website.

  268. @Rurik

    first off, I never claimed any women were raped in Cologne, so why should I be expected to provide proof that they were?

    Well, you’ve certainly written enough stuff on this site which shows clearly that you buy into this MRA (Muslim Rape Army) narrative. You really seem to believe that white women in Europe are being raped right, left, and center, by Muslim savages. I’m pretty sure that this is not happening and is just another Zionist psy-op.

    What I said is that I suspect that lots of women were assaulted, or even finger raped’.

    Well, I’ve explained to you (and others) ad nauseam that there is no real possibility that hundreds (and that is the claim, hundreds) of women can be assaulted in the equivalent of Grand Central Station and for there to be ZERO visual evidence. and for there to be ZERO visual evidence.

    You can disagree, fine, but you have to say why you disagree. You have to explain why my argument is wrong.

    Explain what is incorrect about the argument I have made. This relates back to the A+B proposition above and you did not answer my question, regarding whether you would commit to A+B. Your response to what somebody writes has to be a response to the points that the person actually raises. The main point I keep raising is the sheer impossibility of hundreds of women being assaulted in a wide open public space full of people and there being ZERO photographic evidence. There really is an onus on you to address this basic point.

    which brings us to the final question of JR’s curious obtuseness when it comes to seeing that the crimes in Rotherham and Zimbabwe and Cologne are all OBVIOUSY related.

    Hold on a second. Just for starters, for all the above-mentioned 3 things to be related, at a minimum, they would all have to have really occurred, no? Surely you can see that… or can you???

    So, if I am arguing that the the third of the above-mentioned events, Cologne, is a hoax, i.e. DID NOT HAPPEN, that means it cannot really be very related to the first two, can it?

    As for the first two, well… a bunch of white farmers having their land expropriated in southern Africa does not have much to do with an underage prostitution ring in Rotherham, England. But, okay, they are related in the absolutely minimal sense that they both happened. The third case, the alleged events, in Cologne, is pretty clearly a mediatic hoax, so it is not related to the other two even in the minimal sense of actually having occurred!

    Actually, it occurs to me what the relationship between all three events might be. They are all things that you like to rant about. Or, put another way, they all produce a certain emotional reaction in you. But other than that, they’re pretty unrelated.

    You know, on Cologne, I came across other things even later, that are a dead giveaway that this is a mediatic hoax. One of the main (false) witnesses who claims he saw all kinds of shit on NYE in Cologne and even defended some poor women and blah blah and he’s just another damned crisis actor! That’s this Croat guy, Ivan Jurcevic. He has an IMDB page.

    http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2406659/?ref_=nv_sr_1 and he has acting highlights reels that are still up on Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=ivan+jurcevic+show+reel

    What are the odds of that? And this guy was being pumped up as “the Hero of Cologne”. I mean, these people are just having a joke at your expense, Rurik.

    or http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3395967/The-Hero-Cologne-7ft-tall-hotel-doorman-ex-kickboxing-champ-saved-two-women-New-Year-s-sex-mob.html

    So, you think that this “Hero of Cologne” just happens to be an actor!!?? What’s up with all this, eh?

    Part of the problem here is your willingness to be played here. And it’s continual. Do you really think that these Zionist shills here who are encouraging you to think that you have some grievance against me actually believe that you do have a grievance? Or is it that they have just identified you as a useful idiot that they can manipulate in order to attack me?

    As for the rest of it, it’s just symptomatic of the problem you have. On some level, you do not comprehend that there is such a thing as a purely factual question. You don’t understand the difference between a factual question and an ideological question.

    It’s as if you were presented the “Emperor’s New Clothes” story and concluded that it was an anti-Monarchist and thus, pro-Republican tract.

    Well, of course, it’s not. The point of the Emperor’s New Clothes story could be equally well conveyed with the President’s New Clothes or the General’s New Clothes or any other authority figure. The people pretend, for whatever reasons they likely have, that a naked man is wearing clothes. But the man IS NAKED! It’s a purely factual question. It’s not really ideological in nature!

    That you and others want to pretend that hundreds of women can be sexually assaulted in Grand Central Station (or its equivalent) and for there to be no photographic evidence — for me, this is a very similar case. It has nothing to do with advocating mass immigration or any other specific policy. It’s just about identifying what is true and what is not true.

    The story is a hoax just like the king is not wearing clothes in the story. That’s all. There are people putting out these strange narratives for whatever reasons they have. We have to identify these synthetic narratives (of which MRA is an egregious example) and figure out what these people are up to.

    Now, I guess the idea for you is that you think that you are somehow obliged to believe every single vicious lie told about Muslims in order to oppose mass immigration. Except that does not logically follow.

    And then you argue that if I point out that these things are lies, I must be an advocate of mass immigration, except that doesn’t logically follow either.

    I do not believe I have ever written anything in an article or a comment that can be construed as pro-immigration particularly. In general, I have not written about the topic one way or the other.

    My writing has not been pro (or anti) immigration. My writing is pretty much just totally anti-BULLSHIT.

    As for “agree to disagree”, well, you can agree to disagree about an ideological question, but a purely factual question that can be resolved must be resolved. We can’t agree to disagree about whether Paris is the capital of France. It either is or it isn’t. It so happens that it is, but people can’t “agree to disagree” about it.

    The Cologne thing either happened or it didn’t. It’s a factual question and you don’t resolve a factual question regarding what really happened in Cologne by ranting about things that happened in Zimbabwe or England or anywhere else. Frankly, I find this constant recourse to the hyperemotional ranting about unrelated things to be rather nauseating finally. Especially in a man. There’s something very… I guess the german word would be “weiblich”, I guess “womanly”, about it. Anyway, to have somebody who behaves the way you do inserting himself aggressively into every conversation, conversations that should revolve around actual factual issues — I find this really an imposition. I would like you to stop. It’s really not a good thing.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Linh Dinh Comments via RSS