Refuting the Hollow Arguments of the So-called 9/11 Debunkers & Truthers
Friday, December 31, 2010
A threat much greater than terrorism ...
"I know you have seen countless horrors in your lifetime, Mr Bin Laden, and that you have witnessed the very worst of mankind, well now I ask you to watch this..."
Hahahaaa!!
The UK government recently announced plans to pressure ISPs into censoring 'pornography' to 'combat the early sexualization of children'. Isn't pornography legally defined as anything that is explicit, intended to sexually arouse, and lacking in literary, artistic, scientific or political merit? - Sounds like half the crap you see on MTV!
If the government truly cared about children's mental health, they'd be regulating Hollywood, MTV, tabloid newspapers and Disney - not the internet!
Thursday, December 30, 2010
'Terror' in My Home Town
The Shires re-opens after bomb squad blow suspect package up
Shoppers and staff have been allowed back into The Shires shopping centre in Trowbridge after bomb disposal experts blew up an abandoned suitcase shortly before 3.30pm today.More: http://www.wiltshiretimes.co.uk/news/8763670.The_Shires_re_opens_after_bomb_squad_blow_suspect_package_up/
The controlled explosion was initiated by the Royal Logistics Corps bomb disposal squad based in Tidworth.
They used a bomb disposal robot which entered The Shires and blew the black suitcase up causing slight damage to Halifax store window, near where the bag was left.
The centre was evacuated at 1.50pm not long after Wiltshire Police were told of the suspicious package.
I was there. Pathetic really. A 'suspicious package' was found near where my sister works and naturally everyone's first thought is "ZOMG! A bomb!". So the entire shopping centre was evacuated and the area was cordoned off. An hour later, a bomb disposal team arrived and sent in a robot. After a few 'suspenseful' minutes, we heard this pop, and then a policeman went in and came out with a suitcase full of random luggage.
I wish I had my video camera on me at the time, all I had was my crappy phone camera. In a way it was kind of fun, since nothing interesting ever happens in my home town, but those two wasted hours could easily have been saved if someone just unzipped the bag and looked inside. Talk about paranoia!
At one point someone told me they were examining the CCTV to see if they could discern whether it looked like the bag was placed there intentionally, or if it appeared as though it was just accidently left there. Not surprsingly they couldn't tell and that's why they needed to call in the bomb squad. Yet another case of CCTV failing to show anything useful.
I'd imagine it's even more over the top in places like London. What's sad is how a country that once withstood months of ceaseless bombing from the Nazis during WWII is now so paranoid of 'terrorism' we feel the need to call in bomb disposal robots every time we see an unattended suitcase.
Wednesday, December 29, 2010
NFL's Mark Stepnoski & Tony Szamboti: Buildingwhat? Round 2
Visit: BuildingWhat.org
Related Info:
Building What? is up...
Thank You Mr Curley: "Debunker" PROMOTES the "Building What?" Campaign & Pushes Discredited Material (again) to Discredit Himself
Breaking News: Hell Freezes Over!
Geraldo Should Be Impressed by 1300 Architects and Engineers
Shirley they can't be serious!
Attacks against Geraldo and Napolitano expose establishment desperation and demolish left-right nonsense
Tuesday, December 28, 2010
The Year in Duh-Bunking: March
Pat Curley of the Screw Loose Change blog has published the March installment of his "Year In Troof" series. Faith summed up the major point he is raising quite well on this blog back on March 6th, stating:
Scootle had this to say on March 5th:
After Pat called the Pentagon shooter a "nutbar", Scootle came up with this artist rendering of the assailant on March 6th, with a reminder of what I told Pat he should do with such a sweet nutty treat:
"Pat Curley needs to put a nutbar in his pie hole!"
Pat also states in his new blog post that, "The Washington Post slammed Japanese Troofer Fujita. Fujita tried to weasel out of it."
Fujita is a member of the Democratic Party of Japan. At the time I pointed out that the Washington Post was right about a few things. That being said, Fujita didn't weasel out of anything. His strongest opinion voiced during his speech to the Japanese Parliament concerned the damage to the Pentagon, which he later stated was an issue the Bush administration could put to rest "simply by showing videos that show the plane that hit the Pentagon." On the other matters he was more agnostic, citing the doubts and information of "very influential people" about 9/11 and stating that the information has "not been properly investigated." So while Fujita was angry at the Washington Post for their characterization of his 9/11 views and for publishing comments made during an informal chat about 9/11 as opposed to the hour long interview he gave them on immigration, he did not withdrawal his request for a new 9/11 investigation.
As was also demonstrated in Pat's February "Year in Troof" post, 9/11 truth remained "a mainstream political reality" in 2010.
Pat notes that, "The Troofers managed to get propositions on the ballot in six tiny New Hampshire towns, and went 1-5."
On March 13th Pat stated that, "And you won't hear about it anywhere else other than here and at JREF." However, on March 12th 911blogger.com posted the an article entitled "Richmond, New Hampshire Passes Resolution For New 9/11 Investigation," which stated:
Here is an important year in review item from March that Pat missed.
Super-Duper Thermite: A Year in Review
Related Info:
9/11 Truth Movement: Year in Review (2009-2010)
The Year in Duh-Bunking: January
The Year in Duh-Bunking: February
Out of the thousands of people who believe that we were fed a load of bull from the government in the official conspiracy theory of 9/11...There are three or four out of those thousands that have bi-polar disorders or anger issues from being screwed by the government. (What are the odds)Faith should have said millions of people!
For "them" to insinuate that we "Truthers" in whole, as a movement, are a danger to anyone, makes as much sense as me saying that since both of those who recently went over the edge in a violent manner were software techs, then all software techs are unstable and prone to violence.
It is clear that there are many sane software techs and a couple of over the edge software techs do not represent the majority of software techs. So if we follow this thought procession logically,... then a couple of people reacting in a over the edge manner (who believe that we have been lied to by our government in regards to 9/11 Truth,) do not represent the majority of Truthers.
Scootle had this to say on March 5th:
...The idea of demonizing an entire movement just because one apple goes rotten is completely illogical. Charles Manson was a Beatles fan, does that mean all Beatles fans are mass murderers? And Michael Jackson was a suspected paedophile, does that mean he was a bad musician? Does that mean all popstars are paedophiles? You see what I'm saying here? 9/11 truth is generally a peaceful movement and they know it. But of course, that's not going to stop the pathetic debunkers and media whores from having a field day over this.Pat also employs this type of argument by pointing out Holocaust deniers in the movement.
After Pat called the Pentagon shooter a "nutbar", Scootle came up with this artist rendering of the assailant on March 6th, with a reminder of what I told Pat he should do with such a sweet nutty treat:
"Pat Curley needs to put a nutbar in his pie hole!"
Pat also states in his new blog post that, "The Washington Post slammed Japanese Troofer Fujita. Fujita tried to weasel out of it."
Fujita is a member of the Democratic Party of Japan. At the time I pointed out that the Washington Post was right about a few things. That being said, Fujita didn't weasel out of anything. His strongest opinion voiced during his speech to the Japanese Parliament concerned the damage to the Pentagon, which he later stated was an issue the Bush administration could put to rest "simply by showing videos that show the plane that hit the Pentagon." On the other matters he was more agnostic, citing the doubts and information of "very influential people" about 9/11 and stating that the information has "not been properly investigated." So while Fujita was angry at the Washington Post for their characterization of his 9/11 views and for publishing comments made during an informal chat about 9/11 as opposed to the hour long interview he gave them on immigration, he did not withdrawal his request for a new 9/11 investigation.
As was also demonstrated in Pat's February "Year in Troof" post, 9/11 truth remained "a mainstream political reality" in 2010.
Pat notes that, "The Troofers managed to get propositions on the ballot in six tiny New Hampshire towns, and went 1-5."
On March 13th Pat stated that, "And you won't hear about it anywhere else other than here and at JREF." However, on March 12th 911blogger.com posted the an article entitled "Richmond, New Hampshire Passes Resolution For New 9/11 Investigation," which stated:
To our disappointment seven other towns voted down the resolutions, though the overall percentage of votes in favor (in towns where exact results were recorded) was 23%. In referendums on social issues that depend more on values than awareness of the facts, 77% to 23% might be a landslide. However, because of the painful implications of 9/11 not being what we were told, and the media blackout on critical examination of the official 9/11 account, about 1 in 4 voters calling for a new 9/11 investigation is an accomplishment we can be proud of – it shows beyond a shadow of a doubt that questioning 9/11 is anything but fringe.I think these are all great points, but Pat probably disagrees because the bottom line is that the numbers prove most people don't agree with us and therefore we are wrong. But as FOX News has pointed out, "A majority of the public believes the assassination of President John F. Kennedy was part of a larger conspiracy." Does Pat agree? Will Pat change his mind if and when the numbers shift to our favor? Not a chance, because he's a goalpost moving duh-bunker.
Here is an important year in review item from March that Pat missed.
Super-Duper Thermite: A Year in Review
Related Info:
9/11 Truth Movement: Year in Review (2009-2010)
The Year in Duh-Bunking: January
The Year in Duh-Bunking: February
Charles Lewis
So, Pat Curley of the Screw Loose Change blog seems to have taken Scootle's advice and did some further reading on Charles Lewis, who says that he overheard radio chatter at Los Angeles International Airport on 9/11 saying that "NORAD had not responded, because it had been 'ordered to stand down'"
In a previous post Pat stated, "But what time was the Pentagon hit? Around 9:38 in the morning, right? What time is that in LA? So now we're supposed to believe that an LA building inspector was at work at LAX before 6:30 in the morning?"
To which Scootle replied, "Now I know Pat read my post on the program, he mentions it in his article, but he obviously did not read the 911truth.org article I linked to. According to his testimony, he was at work around 6:30AM."
Now Pat has this to say:
To say that Lewis was there to "fix certain parts of a guard shack" is a misrepresentation of what he says in the aritcle. As he points out, "'LAX Security' involves the Los Angeles World Airport Police Department, the Los Angeles Police Department, and sometimes the FBI and/or the California Highway Patrol." Lewis states that he was "one of only a few persons who would know how to fix certain parts of the new security systems if problems developed," and that he "managed the design changes and construction" for the systems at Guard Post II. Thanks for reading though, Pat.
Blog contributor AdamT. had this to say:
He could possibly get in contact with the individuals mentioned and I will try to do just that. Nevermind the fact that if Lewis were lying it doesn't make sense for him to suggest ways his story could not just be proved, but disproved as well.
In a previous post Pat stated, "But what time was the Pentagon hit? Around 9:38 in the morning, right? What time is that in LA? So now we're supposed to believe that an LA building inspector was at work at LAX before 6:30 in the morning?"
To which Scootle replied, "Now I know Pat read my post on the program, he mentions it in his article, but he obviously did not read the 911truth.org article I linked to. According to his testimony, he was at work around 6:30AM."
Now Pat has this to say:
He went out there to be available to fix certain parts of a guard shack? And I'm sorry, I don't find his claims of being at the Hilton at 6:30 AM very credible. At the end he provides several ways in which his story could be corroborated, but you can guess the next part. David Ray Griffin (who made the post at 911 truth dot org) made no attempt to confirm the guy's story.How about giving Scootle a tip of the hat? Don't want to admit that you didn't look into the issue at all before making a comment?
To say that Lewis was there to "fix certain parts of a guard shack" is a misrepresentation of what he says in the aritcle. As he points out, "'LAX Security' involves the Los Angeles World Airport Police Department, the Los Angeles Police Department, and sometimes the FBI and/or the California Highway Patrol." Lewis states that he was "one of only a few persons who would know how to fix certain parts of the new security systems if problems developed," and that he "managed the design changes and construction" for the systems at Guard Post II. Thanks for reading though, Pat.
Blog contributor AdamT. had this to say:
"And I'm sorry, I don't find his claims of being at the Hilton at 6:30 AM very credible." -PatPat states that David Ray Griffin should have followed up on the recommendations Lewis made to corroborate his story. How is he supposed to obtain video from LAX security cameras and audio of the phone conversations, radio transmissions, and radio broadcast at LAX? I think a new 9/11 investigation would be better suited to do that.
Wow. You know, I hope for Pat's sake that if a crime is ever committed against him, the police don't use his method of investigation.
He could possibly get in contact with the individuals mentioned and I will try to do just that. Nevermind the fact that if Lewis were lying it doesn't make sense for him to suggest ways his story could not just be proved, but disproved as well.
Sunday, December 26, 2010
Visibility 9-11: Debunking the Debunkers (5/5/2009)
Decided to upload this after realizing I could upload videos longer than 15 minutes on Youtube.
Related links:
Visibility 9-11 Welcomes John-Michael Talboo and Stewart Bradley of Debunking the Debunkers
Debunking the Rebunking
Related links:
Visibility 9-11 Welcomes John-Michael Talboo and Stewart Bradley of Debunking the Debunkers
Debunking the Rebunking
I am a concerned citizen who wants the real truth about 9/11 exposed. I find science fascinating. I also enjoy researching the history of the origins of religion.
Bio: http://www.scientificmethod911.org/authors/taylor_author.html
Facebook page: http://tinyurl.com/3zynhh3
Friday, December 24, 2010
The Year in Duh-Bunking: February
Pat Curley of the Screw Loose Change blog writes:
As to his second point, FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds didn't become a truther then, but Pat did just learn about it from me. Pat used anonymous FBI officials instead of the preponderance of evidence concerning her credibility and a mistranslation of her words to make it seem as if she had inadvertently exposed herself as a liar.
When it comes to Debra Medina, Pat is only giving half the story. Yes, a local Texas ABC affiliate did report that Tuesday February 23rd poll numbers showed Debra Medina jumping from nine percent of Texas Republicans having an unfavorable opinion of her to 30 percent. However, after Medina's initial statements Texans still seemed to be backing her and Glenn Beck lost 500,000 viewers. However, after she flip-flopped on the 9/11 issue on February 18th she lost many of her largest supporters. As one commenter stated upon hearing audio where Medina agrees that "the belief that America would do this to its own people" is "despicable":
As to Meserlian, I don't agree with the seismic and basement bombs evidence he presents. And I don't condone his actions towards the police. But as was pointed out in the link Pat provided, "Meserlian admitted he can be annoying, but that’s only because he’s trying to get the truth out." Pat has pointed out, "Meserlian was forced to surrender his engineering license by the State of New Jersey because he wasn't using a licensed surveyor in his work." However, Meserlian did write up a defense of his New Jersey professional engineer's license, which he held "for more than 30 years." To achieve a P.E. licence Imagineering E-zine notes that one must pass several exams:
So what we have here is, misunderstanding, mistranslation, and misrepresentation, otherwise known as duh-bunking!
Related Info:
9/11 Truth Movement: Year in Review (2009-2010)
The Year in Duh-Bunking: January
The Year in Duh-Bunking: March
His first point led to a debate between he and Scootle where Pat demonstrated his complete misunderstanding of the nano-thermite paper.The Year in Troof: February Follies
Gage's Gaggle held their 1000th signer press conference and celebration. Steven Jones chose this opportunity to speculate that perhaps the New World Order had caused the Haiti earthquake.
Sibel Edmonds became a 9-11 Truther.
Debra Medina, a Republican candidate for Texas Governor who was registering real support in the polls, crashed and burned when she claimed that there were lots of legitimate questions about controlled demolition at the WTC on the Glenn Beck show.Don Meserlian, the swimming pool engineer, got slapped down in local court for threatening to beat up the local cops because they weren't interested in his rants about misprision of treason.
As to his second point, FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds didn't become a truther then, but Pat did just learn about it from me. Pat used anonymous FBI officials instead of the preponderance of evidence concerning her credibility and a mistranslation of her words to make it seem as if she had inadvertently exposed herself as a liar.
When it comes to Debra Medina, Pat is only giving half the story. Yes, a local Texas ABC affiliate did report that Tuesday February 23rd poll numbers showed Debra Medina jumping from nine percent of Texas Republicans having an unfavorable opinion of her to 30 percent. However, after Medina's initial statements Texans still seemed to be backing her and Glenn Beck lost 500,000 viewers. However, after she flip-flopped on the 9/11 issue on February 18th she lost many of her largest supporters. As one commenter stated upon hearing audio where Medina agrees that "the belief that America would do this to its own people" is "despicable":
I wanted to vomit when I heard her say this.And people close to Medina's campaign were concerned about it, writing in emails that:
Apparently, to want the truth has become "despicable". All the 911 victims family members that want the truth and have questions, are now "despicable".
The legendary Texas film maker/radio show host/activist Alex Jones, has just pulled his support for Medina based on her "despicable" interview with the neo filth operative. This was a death blow for her. His Infowars.com "infowarriors" were the core of her base support. Now, we're gone.
No where does Debra say "truthers are despicable people"... We are THIS close to beating the establishment. We have to keep up the pressure, dig in, work hard and we can win this election... Are we going to let this stop us? I have placed my faith in the ability of Debra Medina to lead us in this fight, and I will stand by her and fight for our rights with her. I will not cave because the opposition is trying to divide and conquer.Regardless of which of Medina's 9/11 comments had more of an effect on her campaign, the fact remains that 9/11 truth remained "a mainstream political reality" in 2010.
As to Meserlian, I don't agree with the seismic and basement bombs evidence he presents. And I don't condone his actions towards the police. But as was pointed out in the link Pat provided, "Meserlian admitted he can be annoying, but that’s only because he’s trying to get the truth out." Pat has pointed out, "Meserlian was forced to surrender his engineering license by the State of New Jersey because he wasn't using a licensed surveyor in his work." However, Meserlian did write up a defense of his New Jersey professional engineer's license, which he held "for more than 30 years." To achieve a P.E. licence Imagineering E-zine notes that one must pass several exams:
The first exam, Fundamentals of Engineering, covers mathematics, chemistry, physics, and engineering sciences. The second exam, Principles and Practice of Engineering, requires the applicant to solve engineering problems in his discipline plus problems in four other disciplines. The difficulty of these tests have been equated to passing ten final exams on the same day. The data covered on the tests requires the applicant to draw upon knowledge that has been accumulated over an entire college and professional career.So when Pat calls Meserlian simply a "swimming pool engineer" he is misrepresenting his credentials, just as he does when he calls Kevin Ryan, who has a B.S. in chemistry from Indiana University, a waterboy because he worked as a chemistry lab manager at a premier water-testing laboratory.
So what we have here is, misunderstanding, mistranslation, and misrepresentation, otherwise known as duh-bunking!
Related Info:
9/11 Truth Movement: Year in Review (2009-2010)
The Year in Duh-Bunking: January
The Year in Duh-Bunking: March
Thursday, December 23, 2010
The Year in Duh-Bunking: January
Pat Curley of the Screw Loose Change writes:
And yes, a woman who has "dedicated her life to ending war and injustice" after losing her son in Iraq stated that she is "a 9/11 truther" in September of 2009. And your point is?
As Scootle pointed out on January 17th:
Pat says that there is, "Lots more Troofer fail 2010 to come." Some more fine duh-bunking I'm sure. In the meantime, here is our year in review.
http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2010/08/911-truth-movement-year-in-review-2009.html
Related Info:
The Year in Duh-Bunking: February
The Year in Troof: JanuaryYes, in January 1,000 crazy, but nevertheless credentialed, goalpost chasing, architects and engineers kicked off the year with a bang. Thanks again Pat, for making us feel like not reaching overly ambitious goals is somehow a let down. You keep us inspired brother! The fact of the matter is AE911Truth is looking back at an amazing 2010, and Pat has proven himself to be the best ringmaster there is.
The 1000th Clown joined Richard Gage's circus, only about 2-1/3rd years after Gage's predicted date. Not having learned his lesson, Box Boy promptly set a goal of having 2,000 members by summertime.
Cindy Sheehan joined the Troof Brigade.
The State Department blew a big hole in the "Osama Ain't Wanted for 9-11" meme.
The Obama Administration gave up on trying KSM in New York City.
And yes, a woman who has "dedicated her life to ending war and injustice" after losing her son in Iraq stated that she is "a 9/11 truther" in September of 2009. And your point is?
As Scootle pointed out on January 17th:
The debunkers are now saying Bin Laden is now wanted for 9/11. Indeed his Rewards for Justice wanted page does mention September 11th...And as Faith said, "Just because they have found a "Mastermind" (possible Patsy) to blame 9/11 on does not answer any of the questions I have regarding 9/11 and our governments involvement in some form or another. "
"Usama bin Ladin is wanted in connection with the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon and for the August 7, 1998 bombings of the United States Embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania and Nairobi, Kenya."
However the key thing here is the indictments. As it goes on to say...
"The individual listed above has been indicted on the following charges:Murder of U.S. nationals outside the United States; conspiracy to murder U.S. nationals outside the United States; and attack on a federal facility resulting in death."
I don't see "Conspiracy to murder U.S. citizens INSIDE the United States" or anything like that. So it would appear he has still not been formally indicted for 9/11. Which was our argument all along. He hasn't been indicted because there isn't any hard evidence that he was involved. Now that doesn't mean he wasn't involved (I've always been hesitant about defending Bin Laden and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed etc because the world isn't black or white. Just because the US and other international intelligence agencies were involved doesn't mean Bin Laden, KSM, the Hijackers and Al-Qaeda weren't involved), we're just telling you what they are saying.
Pat says that there is, "Lots more Troofer fail 2010 to come." Some more fine duh-bunking I'm sure. In the meantime, here is our year in review.
http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2010/08/911-truth-movement-year-in-review-2009.html
Related Info:
The Year in Duh-Bunking: February
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
Pat Curley will Always be the Better Ringmaster
Comment from Scootle:
Over at the Screw Loose Change blog, Pat Curley has commented on 'Jesse's Pentagon Circus', I agree with many of his comments, but there are a few points that need addressing.
Pat writes:
Over at the Screw Loose Change blog, Pat Curley has commented on 'Jesse's Pentagon Circus', I agree with many of his comments, but there are a few points that need addressing.
Pat writes:
The standdown witness is an LA building inspector? Of course, it makes complete sense to me! And it's no surprise that he tunes in to "the high-level police radio frequency" and learns that a missile hit the Pentagon. Let's put some timeframes on this. Jesse clearly states that Lewis learned this after he learned about the standdown. But what time was the Pentagon hit? Around 9:38 in the morning, right? What time is that in LA? So now we're supposed to believe that an LA building inspector was at work at LAX before 6:30 in the morning?Now I know Pat read my post on the program, he mentions it in his article, but he obviously did not read the 911truth.org article I linked to.
In that article, Charles Lewis writes:
On the morning of 9/11, I was working as Deputy Inspector representing the City of LA Building and Safety Department for the seismic retrofit of the LA Hilton Towers Hotel, only a few minutes by car from where I had worked at LAX. When I realized, after the second strike on the WTC, that the country was under attack, I decided that I should go to the APO, because I was one of only a few persons who would know how to fix certain parts of the new security systems if problems developed. Especially crucial were the systems at Guard Post II, for which I had managed the design changes and construction. So, after telling the workers to leave (because of my fear that the hotel might be struck) and informing Hilton Security of my order, I rushed to LAX Guard Post II. Arriving at about 6:35 AM (PT), I explained my purpose for being there to the Security Guards. I then heard some very interesting things.
According to his testimony, he was at work around 6:30AM. I think Pat is suggesting that we are too stupid to consider time zones and could be duped by false accounts. No, we're not the BBC!
In the original post I stated that it was good that CIT was not on the show, to which Pat responded that CITs flyover theory was mentioned. What I meant was, I was happy they didn't feature Craig or Aldo claiming the flight path was wrong or on to accusing ordinary citizens of complicity in mass murder. That really wouldn't have done the movement any good.
____________________________________________________________________
Comment from John-Michael:
First off, Pat ignores that I stated I disagreed with most of what Jesse Ventura's program presented and that Scootle was just highlighting the good points while also Pat criticising many aspects of the show.
It is also important to note that in the link Scootle provided, Charles Lewis suggested a multitude of ways in which his story could be corroborated. And never mind the common "debunker" argument that if 9/11 was a conspiracy people would have talked. As I've pointed out, there are no 9/11 whistle-blowers if you claim they are all confused or lying.
It could be argued that since we believe a plane did hit the Pentagon and that I don't believe Flight 93 was shot down that it is inconsistent to not dismiss what Lewis says he heard about a stand-down, but as Aidan Monaghan noted on 911blogger.com, "After all, some TV reports also wrongly described "missiles" attacking the WTC." So confusion that day about physical aspects of the attacks is one thing, but overhearing that "NORAD had not responded, because it had been 'ordered to stand down'" is quite another.
Pat states:
Note that they interview Rob Balsamo at Freeway Airport. Why not interview Marcel Bernard, as Dylan did, or one of the pilots who actually flew with Hani Hanjour the day he was refused rental of a Cessna? Could it be that Bernard's assessment of Hanjour as an average to below average pilot wouldn't support the conspiracy theory?Hundreds of hours? If Pat would have looked at the link that Scootle provided when he stated, "I was going to give a detailed response to the Hani Hanjour stuff and the thermite stuff, but JM already covered that," he would have found the following, which was also located right under Scootle's post:
Jesse's gofer proves unable to hit the Pentagon in the flight simulator (with a Troofer as his co-pilot). But why not have a real professional pilot who's not a nutbar try it? The gofer says he's flown "a few times" in small planes; Hanjour had a professional air pilot's license and hundreds of hours in a simulator. It's pretty clear that Jesse's bending over backwards to support the conspiracy theory.
HistoryCommons.com contains the following entry on Hanjour's perseverance:
Hani Hanjour practices on a Boeing 737-200 simulator for a total of 21 hours at the JetTech International flight school in Phoenix, Arizona. Hanjour also attends ground school and pays just under $7,500 for the training. Despite only completing 21 of his originally scheduled 34 hours of simulator training, according to the FBI this is the best-trained of the four hijacker pilots (see Spring-Summer 2001). However, an instructor comments: “Student made numerous errors during performance… including a lack of understanding of some basic concepts… Some of the concepts involved in large jet systems cannot be fully comprehended by someone with only small prop plane experience.” [US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia; Alexandria Division, 7/31/2006] The school contacts the FAA to warn it of Hanjour’s poor English and flying skills (see January-February 2001).The article "How the FBI and 9/11 Commission Suppressed Key Evidence about Hani Hanjour" notes:
...And yes Freeway Airport's chief instructor Marcel Bernard did say that, "There's no doubt in my mind that once that [hijacked jet] got going, he could have pointed that plane at a building and hit it." But as the article on suppressed evidence points out, upon accompanying Hanjour on three test flights, instructors Sheri Baxter and Ben Conner at Freeway observed that Hanjour had trouble controlling and landing a single-engine Cessna 172 and based upon their assessments Bernard refused to rent him a plane.The 9/11 Commission Report fails to discuss or even mention this negative written evaluation, even while presenting Hanjour’s substandard performance in a Boeing 737 simulator as sufficient evidence that Hanjour could fly a Boeing 757, an even larger plane! The wording of the final report succeeds in giving this impression, however dubious, even while obscuring the facts: an amazing achievement of propaganda.
This isn't just a "a battle of the scare quotes"..., because the preponderance of qualified opinions and other evidence is clearly on our side of the argument.
Now to what I didn't cover in my original post. Note that the time "Jesse's gofer" spent in a 757 simulator is is more time than Hanjor spent, which amounts to zero minutes! The co-pilot that Pat speaks of was Captain Ross Aimer, who has 40 years and 30,000 hours worth of flying experience, including flying time in two of the actual United Airlines aircraft that were used on 9/11. Even he says he couldn't have done it, but in Pat's world he is not "a real professional pilot." Having Aimer as a co-pilot certainly helped, on the other hand, Hani Hanjour's likely co-pilot could not fly either.
But yes, Hanjour did get his pilot’s license despite his dubious skills.
And we are "the guys at the misnamed 9-11 Debunkers site"? I expect nothing less from the king of scientific peer-review!
YouTube Restores 'Liarpoliticians' Account [UPDATE]
*Update 12/21/10: After a battle with the laywers, YouTube has now reinstated the original account.*
liarpoliticians2 (1 week ago)
"There is a prospect to get my original channel back after an impasse has been reached and sort of worked around between myself and the solicitors of the copyright holder who claims I used their material - which I did not, and they can't actually prove I did. They are now trying to save face from their screw-up."
liarpoliticians (3 days ago)
"Finally after three weeks, I've got this channel back up after a BS copyright claim took the channel down. After a lot of writing between the lawyers and myself over the BS copyright claim that they COULD NOT actually prove. I hope it was worth putting my neck on the block for all you visitors to save these clips."
The YouTube channel liarpoliticians - a channel by a British guy who uploaded lots of high quality news clips recorded from British TV - has been terminated.
The channel was the home of the original uploads of the Herman Van Rompuy "Global Governance" clip and the Gordon Brown "World Constitution" clip. My two videos about the 2010 UK election would not have been possible without it.
The account was deleted after a BS copyright claim by Wixen Music UK Limited. They claim an unspecified song was used in one of his videos.
Future videos will be uploaded to his second account, liarpoliticians2.
From his new channel ...
Previous Youtube channel:
Hits: just under 3 million
Videos: 3200
Uploaded approx 150GB of video
Time online: over 2 years
All deleted thanks to a bullshit claim by "Wixen Music UK Limited".
"Wixen Music UK Limited got my previous successful youtube account deleted, because they claim there was music in a 46 minute George Osborne party conference speech (did he break into some song himself?).
Thank you to all who made the previous channel successful and the just under three million viewings. Congratulations to Wixen Music UK Limited for deleting the 3200 clips of politicians and their lies. Wixen Music UK Limited must be very proud of themselves that their lies to youtube have hidden so much evidence of the crookedness of our politicians. Add Wixen Music UK Limited to that list of bastards."
"I have contested to youtube the deletion of the account AND of the bullsh1t copyright claim, but having past experiences of what piece of garbage yt are and their reluctance to do something called FACT checking, I hold out no hope of getting the channel back. You can also certainly bet that the company that came up with this bullshit claim will have no reprimands what so ever.
The only certain thing is, money talks, and we little people don't matter."
"After tracking down the video in my archives that "Wixen Music UK Limited" claims has their music in, I can confirm there was not even one second of music in the George Osborne speech. Shysters!"
The reality is of course, this has nothing to do with copyright, it's simply about censoring the truth to protect the liar politicians.
liarpoliticians2 (1 week ago)
"There is a prospect to get my original channel back after an impasse has been reached and sort of worked around between myself and the solicitors of the copyright holder who claims I used their material - which I did not, and they can't actually prove I did. They are now trying to save face from their screw-up."
liarpoliticians (3 days ago)
"Finally after three weeks, I've got this channel back up after a BS copyright claim took the channel down. After a lot of writing between the lawyers and myself over the BS copyright claim that they COULD NOT actually prove. I hope it was worth putting my neck on the block for all you visitors to save these clips."
The YouTube channel liarpoliticians - a channel by a British guy who uploaded lots of high quality news clips recorded from British TV - has been terminated.
The channel was the home of the original uploads of the Herman Van Rompuy "Global Governance" clip and the Gordon Brown "World Constitution" clip. My two videos about the 2010 UK election would not have been possible without it.
The account was deleted after a BS copyright claim by Wixen Music UK Limited. They claim an unspecified song was used in one of his videos.
Future videos will be uploaded to his second account, liarpoliticians2.
From his new channel ...
Previous Youtube channel:
Hits: just under 3 million
Videos: 3200
Uploaded approx 150GB of video
Time online: over 2 years
All deleted thanks to a bullshit claim by "Wixen Music UK Limited".
"Wixen Music UK Limited got my previous successful youtube account deleted, because they claim there was music in a 46 minute George Osborne party conference speech (did he break into some song himself?).
Thank you to all who made the previous channel successful and the just under three million viewings. Congratulations to Wixen Music UK Limited for deleting the 3200 clips of politicians and their lies. Wixen Music UK Limited must be very proud of themselves that their lies to youtube have hidden so much evidence of the crookedness of our politicians. Add Wixen Music UK Limited to that list of bastards."
"I have contested to youtube the deletion of the account AND of the bullsh1t copyright claim, but having past experiences of what piece of garbage yt are and their reluctance to do something called FACT checking, I hold out no hope of getting the channel back. You can also certainly bet that the company that came up with this bullshit claim will have no reprimands what so ever.
The only certain thing is, money talks, and we little people don't matter."
"After tracking down the video in my archives that "Wixen Music UK Limited" claims has their music in, I can confirm there was not even one second of music in the George Osborne speech. Shysters!"
The reality is of course, this has nothing to do with copyright, it's simply about censoring the truth to protect the liar politicians.
Monday, December 20, 2010
Of Course, WTC7 Never Existed!
"Every now and then I meet somebody [..] asking me about this
Building 7, but I have no evidence that this really occured!"
~ Joe Lieberman
Building 7, but I have no evidence that this really occured!"
~ Joe Lieberman
Now this is what you call denialism! As if denying WTC7's demolition isn't bad enough, Joe Lieberman seems to be denying it even existed! So what about all those photos and videos of its existence and its collapse? They must all be fake! Lieberman's crazy 'WTC7 fakery' conspiracy theory puts the September Clues people to shame!
There's enough WTC7 denialism from the mainstream media as it is. If Lieberman gets his wish, and the free internet is killed, future generations may be taught that WTC7 never existed, and you'll be called a conspiracy theorist if you say it did! How 1984 is that?!
Sunday, December 19, 2010
I still don't follow the logic...
Ever since I posted a video on this blog of Bill Gates at TED 2010 talking about using vaccines to reduce overpopulation, a number of people have messaged me trying to rationalize it. This is a Youtube debate I've been having with minmotstand ...
minmotstand said:
The last message doesn't make sense. 60% of kids die so families have more children, but actually only 20% of them die so the population goes up ... huh? I thought 60% die! If 20% die then 20% die! How can it be 60% and 20%?!
Am I just being stupid? Or is he? I genuinely do not see the logic behind the idea that the third world is overpopulated because lots of kids die!
Please, someone explain it to me!
Minmotstand employed a classic debunker tactic of putting words in my mouth. He accused me of being an Alex Jones sheep and spouted a load of stuff from nowhere about Lady Gaga and Freemasonry. I like AJ, yes, but I am not a sheep. I routinely notice errors when listening to his show, especially on the subject of 9/11, and have on this very blog called him out on misinformation, such as that fake naked body scanner image.
minmotstand said:
you should think before you speak...ScootleRoyale said:
How Bill Gates wants to reduce world population through vaccines and health-care access:
- Vaccines and health-care access decrease the rate of infant mortality
- Low infant mortality rates = people decide to have less kids since they don't have a good chance of dying
- People having less kids = lower population rates
You should question your faith with regards to the Gospel of Alex Jones and actually critically think about an issue yourself.
Yeh I've heard that response a million times before... the logic makes no sense. So the population is high at the moment coz lots of kids die?minmotstand said:
The real reason the third world is overpopulated is they are undeveloped. Now. If you take his statement at face value, he's basically saying, "We'll help the third world develop to lower population". The problem is, he - and all these other top globalists - do not want the third world to develop - by their own admissions! Allowing them to devlop and providing access to contraception etc. would lower their population, but Gates isn't interested in that. He just wants to screw them over some more.
So your argument is that they are underdeveloped.ScootleRoyale said:
You do realize Bill Gates is talking about DEVELOPING the health care system, right?
You do realize you are agreeing with both of us, right?
Also, if you weren't an imbecile, then maybe my argument would make sense.
Most of your children die before age 5 so you have more children to balance this out. If people in Africa just had 2 or 3 kids, they would end up having zero to 1 kids.
Also, where is this admission that Bill Gates doesn't want the third world to develop?
You can live in your fantasy conspiracy theory enveloped world where everyone is a secret globalist (from Lady Gaga to the creator of the Simpsons), or you can just accept that the super rich elite just want to consolidate power and wealth (aka power).
I guess that's just too simple to make sense.
Obviously Lady Gaga is in the illuminati because she seems to be as fascinated by freemasonry as much as you morons.
He's not talking about devloping the third world... he wants you to think he is but he doesn't want that.minmotstand said:
Watch a documentary called "The Great Global Warming Swindle"... even if you don't agree with the science in the documentary, the second half of it goes into the politics of it and exposes how the UN and all these top globalists do not want the third world to develop. Bill Gates is intimately involved with that crowd, and he's invoking global warming just like they are.
"Most of your children die before age 5 so you have more children to balance this out. If people in Africa just had 2 or 3 kids, they would end up having zero to 1 kids."
Yeh I get that but I don't understand how that leads to overpopulation ... as you said: "to balance this out" ... If there's a balance between the number of deaths and the number of births it wouldn't lead to overpopulation.
I would keep talking but you don't even understand math...ScootleRoyale said:
and climate change is real
you just obey Alex Jones -- cult of personality if I've ever seen one
and you guys think Obama's followers are sheep
lmfao
How does lots of births balanced by lots of deaths lead to overpopulation?minmotstand said:
If you have a population of say half a billion... each death takes one off, each birth adds one... if there's a high infant death rate, then the population is gonna go down over time ... but if people have more kids, at best that's gonna keep the population the same, it's not gonna turn it into a positive trend. So how does a high infant mortality lead to overpopulation? It doesn't make any sense. Please explain exactly how it happens. Noone ever has to me, they have just asserted that that's what happens.
Of course climate change is real... you'd have to be an idiot to deny it...stop throwing around the vague term "climate change" and accusing people who question catastrophic anthropogenic global warming of 'denying climate change'.
And stop generalizing, I like Alex Jones, yes. But I am not an AJ sheep... I've debunked him on certain issues many times.
MY GOD how is this difficult to comprehend?
Say ~60% of your children die before age 5 years
You want to have 2 kids.
To try to get 2 kids, you have 6 or 7.
Say only 20% of your children die
You now have 5 children
FFS
The last message doesn't make sense. 60% of kids die so families have more children, but actually only 20% of them die so the population goes up ... huh? I thought 60% die! If 20% die then 20% die! How can it be 60% and 20%?!
Am I just being stupid? Or is he? I genuinely do not see the logic behind the idea that the third world is overpopulated because lots of kids die!
Please, someone explain it to me!
Minmotstand employed a classic debunker tactic of putting words in my mouth. He accused me of being an Alex Jones sheep and spouted a load of stuff from nowhere about Lady Gaga and Freemasonry. I like AJ, yes, but I am not a sheep. I routinely notice errors when listening to his show, especially on the subject of 9/11, and have on this very blog called him out on misinformation, such as that fake naked body scanner image.
Jesse Ventura's Pentagon Episode & a response to Neighborhood Rationalist
Now I personally believe a plane did hit the Pentagon, and alot of leading people in the truth movement such as Richard Gage, Kevin Ryan and Jim Hoffman have warned about disinformation relating to the Pentagon attack and the divisive and damaging effect such speculation has on the movement. So I was skeptical about this episode, and almost didn't bother watching it. But I'm glad I did, it was so much better than I thought it would be.
They exposed how Norman Mineta's testimony that suggests a standdown was covered up. They interviewed Charles Lewis about what he heard at LAX. They demonstrated the ludicrous difficulty of the official flight path using a flight simulator. They demonstrated the power of voice morphing technology, which was mindblowing even for me. And the exposing of the 9/11 commission at the end was excellent.
And best of all, no CIT!
Jesse's programs really put the mainstream media to shame. If Jesse could accomplish what he has on a relatively low budget, imagine what Popular Mechanics or the BBC could have done if they actually did their jobs.
But it would have been nice if they interviewed someone in the truth movement or a witness or firefighter or someone who disagrees with no-plane theories to give both sides, and emphasized that the question of what hit the Pentagon is less important than why/how it was hit, like what Dylan did in Loose Change Final Cut.
We know a plane approached the Pentagon - noone denies that. There's no evidence that the plane flew over the Pentagon. No witnesses have come forward saying they clearly saw a plane flying away from the explosion or anything like that. In order for the 'north-side flyover' theory to be true, the damage to Lloyd England's taxi would have to have been staged. Some proponents of no-plane theories have accused Lloyd England of being an accomplice with no evidence whatsoever. Not only is there no evidence that the scene was staged, but it is also implausible that they would be able to stage such a scene in broad daylight within just a few minutes of the explosion. Even if they could stage the scene, and indeed the entire Pentagon attack, what would be the point? Considering the amount of stuff that would need to be faked, it seems ridiculous that they would go through all the extra unnecessary trouble of staging a fake plane crash, and risk jeopardising a highly compartmentalized operation, when they could just crash a plane into the building!
One much simpler theory that isn't discussed much, which seems to fit the evidence and eyewitness accounts better than any other theory and could potentially explain the observed damage and debris anomalies, is the theory that there were explosives of some kind on board Flight 77 that were detonated a split second before impact to weaken the plane and reduce damage to the Pentagon.
Futher Reading...
Is The Missing $2.3 Trillion Really Missing?
"Fake" Phone Calls? What The Evidence Shows
9-11 Review: Pentagon Attack Errors
A dozen questions about Flight 77 and the Pentagon that might lead to justice, and one that won’t
Jimd3100's response
Related Info:
TruTV's 'Conspiracy Theory with Jesse Ventura' - 9/11
The fact that Hani Hanjour -- the alleged pilot of the Boeing airplane which crashed into the Pentagon -- could not fly at all is now being challenged by apparent CIA informant Louai al-Sakka, who says that it was actually Nawaf al-Hazmi who piloted the plane. No, HE Couldn't Fly Either
On another note, Neighborhood Rationalist has responded to my earlier debunking effort. I was going to give a detailed reponse to the Hani Hanjour stuff and the thermite stuff, but JM already covered that. So I'll respond to the improbability stuff.
Incidently, I noticed Neighborhood Rationalist, in defence of the 9/11 Commission Report, quoted the 9/11 Commission Report - the very thing we are challenging. This reminds me of the Countering Criticism of the Warren Report document, which at one point says "Where possible, counter speculation by encouraging reference to the Commission's Report itself".
Anyway, when I wrote my earlier post, I was at work lol. So I wasn't able to watch that video I posted about improbabilities before I posted it, if I had I probably wouldn't have done so. I confused it with another video I've seen but can't find in which someone mentions I think about 20 'coincidences' surrounding 9/11 and assigns each one a modest one in ten probability. The conclusion is that the probability of all 20 of those coincidences being 'just coincidences' would be one in ten to the power of twenty.
Edit: I found the video I was on about, turns out it has absolutely nothing to do with 9/11, I was thinking of this clip from the documentary The Priviledged Planet, which argues that Earth-like planets are rare in the universe. This is what happens when you research so many different topics! How embarrassing!
Nonetheless, the same method can be applied to 9/11. There are hundreds of coincidences surrounding not just the events themselves but stuff relating to the truth movement (Barry Jennings' death for example), and that number is ever increasing. Even if you were to give each one a modest one in five probability, the probability of there being no conspiracy would still be ludicrously low. So it takes an enormous amount of faith to believe in the official story. Ironic since Conspiracies R Not Us seem to like to claim that we are the ones with faith.
Saturday, December 18, 2010
A Critical Review of the "9/11 Mysteries Viewer's Guide"
We've all seen the film 9/11 Mysteries Part 1: Demolitions. Likewise, I'm sure we have also all seen the 9/11 Mysteries Viewer's Guide, which claims to refute the entire film. Many have obviously read this Guide and believed it to debunk the entire film. Well, I've read the Guide also, and I wasn't so thoroughly impressed. That's why I am happy to announce that I have written an extensive refutation of the 9/11 Mysteries Viewer's Guide. While not tackling everything in it (as 9/11 Mysteries does have some genuine errors), my critique shows that, for as many false claims that are in the film, the Viewer's Guide dwarfs the film by comparison. My critique of the Guide can be downloaded as a PDF document here. As I make clear in the introduction, please let me know if you find anything wrong in it. Also, feel free to use this critique in any way you want.
I am a concerned citizen who wants the real truth about 9/11 exposed. I find science fascinating. I also enjoy researching the history of the origins of religion.
Bio: http://www.scientificmethod911.org/authors/taylor_author.html
Facebook page: http://tinyurl.com/3zynhh3
Knee Deep in Crap
Thanks for walking us through that Conspiracies R Not Us.
I just had a look at their reply to Scootle's reply yesterday and here is mine, and I'm not "in a fuss" I assure everyone.
"Neighborhood Rationalist" at CRNU states that Scootle's "generally speculative characterization of the plane’s maneuvers was pathetic." Well, while I disagreed with most of what Jesse Ventura's program presented on the Pentagon last night, it did do a good job of debunking the counter-claim presented to Scootle that Hani Hanjour simply "tipped the nose twice."
Our Neighbourhood Irrationalist continues, "And, as usual, I think it goes without saying that the claim that Hanjour is naught but a flight-school dropout who was 'incompetent in a single engine Cessna' is a lie by omission - he was, until he wasn’t."
It is then pointed out that the 9/11 Commission stated, "Hanjour persevered; he completed the initial training by the end of March 2001." But as it turns out the only "lie of omission" here is from the Omission Commission.
As is pointed out in an article "Al Qaeda’s Top Gun Willful Deception by the 9/11 Commission":
HistoryCommons.com contains the following entry on Hanjour's perseverance:
This isn't just a "a battle of the scare quotes" as stated by CNRU, because the perponderance of qualified opinions and other evidence is clearly on our side of the argument.
But Neighbohood Rationolist states that even if the points about Hanjour being an incompetent pilot were conceded that it doesn't matter because "100% of the remaining evidence singles him out as a hijacking pilot."
While this is true, it does not rule out a scenario in which the hijackers were hijacked by remote control. The paper "Plausibility Of 9/11 Aircraft Attacks Generated By GPS-Guided Aircraft Autopilot Systems" demonstrates that the maneuvers attributed to Hanjour are consistent with the use of such technology.
The bottom line is that we do not doubt terrorists were involved in 9/11. When the alleged 9/11 plotters offered to confess at Guantánamo in December of 2008 many probably asked themselves: "What does it mean for the 9/11 truth movement?” The answer is nothing; many people make the mistake of only seeing the issues concerning 9/11 in black and white, as opposed to shades of grey. Even if we accept that bin Laden and gang were the masterminds of 9/11 it does not negate a slew of evidence indicating that they were allowed to succeed and had their results amplified. 9/11 very well could have been an inside and an outside job.
Addressing my blog entry "Super-Duper Thermite: A Year in Review,"
Neighborhood Rationalist states:
I'll let Steven Jones walk you through it.
We are also informed that thermite's use in incendiary devices "is the exact same as its use in fireworks – as a pyrotechnic initiator."
I'm guessing our friendly neighbor missed this.
http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2010/11/slicing-through-every-single-debunker.html
Back to the nano-thermite, we are told that "it is scientific dishonesty to reject the fact that these are the normal components of the collapse site of a skyscraper." As will be demonstrated here in a second, Steven Jones did his due diligence on this, but commen sense is all that is needed for this one, as Gordon Ross put it, "...If I leave margarine, flour, sugar and fruit in a cupboard, when I next open the cupboard I will not find a fruit crumble. Some mechanism is required to convert the ingredients. Similarly, if I take these same ingredients, set them alight and throw them out the window, I still will not get my fruit crumble."
Next the chain of custody of the samples is questioned, they state, "People mailed him things, and he took them at their word." As Scootle has pointed out this is "effectively accusing the scientists and the citizens of conspiring to fake evidence by manufacturing high-tech energetic nanocomposites." I guess Neighborhood Rationalist is a Conspiracies R Us kid afterall!
Steven Jones addreses both of these points in detail in the following videos.
In this next video chemical engineer Mark Basile reveals that he has unequivocally confirmed the peer-reviewed work of Jones and his colleagues and obtained a completely independent sample of dust from a NYC museum, which leads me to related point. Pat Curley of the Screw Loose Change blog recently posted a critique of the nano-thermite paper by Denis Rancourt.
Rancourt states that, "Many members of the 911 Truth movement use an 'appeal to authority' argument in advancing Harrit's paper as 'peer reviewed' and Harrit himself as a scientific authority with relevant expertise. Anyone using 'appeal to authority' arguments must expect that the authority in question can be questioned."
Rancourt, however, is appealing to his apparent authority as the new king of peer-review, who can trump a forensic evidence based paper that was thoroughly peer-reviewed by individuals more qualified and just as qualified as him, and the replication of the paper's results by a chemical engineer, with a blog post that he purports to be a peer-review.
Great comments by "Sitting-Bull" and "The Masked Writer" here.
Related Info:
The fact that Hani Hanjour -- the alleged pilot of the Boeing airplane which crashed into the Pentagon -- could not fly at all is now being challenged by apparent CIA informant Louai al-Sakka, who says that it was actually Nawaf al-Hazmi who piloted the plane. No, HE Couldn't Fly Either
I just had a look at their reply to Scootle's reply yesterday and here is mine, and I'm not "in a fuss" I assure everyone.
"Neighborhood Rationalist" at CRNU states that Scootle's "generally speculative characterization of the plane’s maneuvers was pathetic." Well, while I disagreed with most of what Jesse Ventura's program presented on the Pentagon last night, it did do a good job of debunking the counter-claim presented to Scootle that Hani Hanjour simply "tipped the nose twice."
Our Neighbourhood Irrationalist continues, "And, as usual, I think it goes without saying that the claim that Hanjour is naught but a flight-school dropout who was 'incompetent in a single engine Cessna' is a lie by omission - he was, until he wasn’t."
It is then pointed out that the 9/11 Commission stated, "Hanjour persevered; he completed the initial training by the end of March 2001." But as it turns out the only "lie of omission" here is from the Omission Commission.
As is pointed out in an article "Al Qaeda’s Top Gun Willful Deception by the 9/11 Commission":
Turning to the footnote for the claim that Hanjour “completed” training at Jet Tech, one can read (emphasis added): “For his training at Pan Am International Flight Academy and completion by March 2001, see FBI report ‘Hijackers Timeline,’ Dec. 5, 2003 (Feb. 8, 2001, entries…)”. But turning to that source, the FBI timeline does not state that Hanjour “completed” the training, only that he “ended” the course on March 16. The truth is that, as the Washington Post reported, “Hanjour flunked out after a month” at Jet Tech. Offering corroboration for that account, the Associated Press similarly reported that “Hanjour did not finish his studies at JetTech and left the school.”Beyond exposing the blatant lies of the 9/11 Commission that were obviously intended to exaggerate Hanjour's training, the article also refutes media outlets like New American and Salon who have tried "to 'debunk' the assertion that Hanjour wasn’t a capable enough pilot to have pulled it off."
HistoryCommons.com contains the following entry on Hanjour's perseverance:
Hani Hanjour practices on a Boeing 737-200 simulator for a total of 21 hours at the JetTech International flight school in Phoenix, Arizona. Hanjour also attends ground school and pays just under $7,500 for the training. Despite only completing 21 of his originally scheduled 34 hours of simulator training, according to the FBI this is the best-trained of the four hijacker pilots (see Spring-Summer 2001). However, an instructor comments: “Student made numerous errors during performance… including a lack of understanding of some basic concepts… Some of the concepts involved in large jet systems cannot be fully comprehended by someone with only small prop plane experience.” [US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia; Alexandria Division, 7/31/2006] The school contacts the FAA to warn it of Hanjour’s poor English and flying skills (see January-February 2001).The article "How the FBI and 9/11 Commission Suppressed Key Evidence about Hani Hanjour" notes:
The 9/11 Commission Report fails to discuss or even mention this negative written evaluation, even while presenting Hanjour’s substandard performance in a Boeing 737 simulator as sufficient evidence that Hanjour could fly a Boeing 757, an even larger plane! The wording of the final report succeeds in giving this impression, however dubious, even while obscuring the facts: an amazing achievement of propaganda.Then CRNU treats us to this tidbit from 911myths.com:
One 9/11 Commission footnote (to Chapter 7) is relatively positive. 170. FBI report, "Summary of Penttbom Investigation," Feb. 29, 2004, pp. 52¬57. Hanjour successfully conducted a challenging certification flight supervised by an instructor at Congressional Air Charters of Gaithersburg, Maryland, landing at a small airport with a difficult approach.The instructor thought Hanjour may have had training from a military pilot because he used a terrain recognition system for navigation. Eddie Shalev interview (Apr.9, 2004).First off, there is no evidence that he obtained a certification, as noted on HistoryCommons:
Alleged Flight 77 pilot Hani Hanjour successfully conducts “a challenging certification flight supervised by an instructor at Congressional Air Charters of Gaithersburg, Maryland, landing at a small airport with a difficult approach,” according to the 9/11 Commission Report. The instructor, Eddie Shalev, thinks that “Hanjour may have had training from a military pilot because he used a terrain recognition system for navigation.” However, it is unclear what certification the 9/11 Commission thinks Hanjour receives. [9/11 Commission, 7/24/2004, pp. 248, 531] Shalev is an Israeli national and has a military background. He began working at Congressional Air Charters in April 2001. [9/11 Commission, 4/9/2004] A stipulation used as evidence at the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui will mention the flight, but fail to mention any certification Hanjour allegedly receives based on it, merely saying it is a “check ride with a flight instructor.” Hanjour will subsequently rent aircraft from the company on August 26 and 28. [US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Alexandria Division, 7/31/2006, pp. 68]Furthermore, there are other important questions regarding this issue. The aforementioned article on suppressed evidence states:
The note gives a name, Eddie Shalev, but no other information about him. Indeed, his identity remained a mystery until January 2009, when NARA released the 9/11 files. Nonetheless, David Ray Griffin had already identified the key questions in his 2008 book The New Pearl Harbor Revisited. Wrote Griffin: “How could an instructor in Gaithersburg [i.e., Shalev] have had such a radically different view of Hanjour’s abilities from that of all of the other flight instructors who worked with him? Who was this instructor? How could this report be verified?”And yes Freeway Airport's chief instructor Marcel Bernard did say that, "There's no doubt in my mind that once that [hijacked jet] got going, he could have pointed that plane at a building and hit it." But as the article on suppressed evidence points out, upon accompanying Hanjour on three test flights, instructors Sheri Baxter and Ben Conner at Freeway observed that Hanjour had trouble controlling and landing a single-engine Cessna 172 and based upon their assessments Bernard refused to rent him a plane.
These are important questions because the two assessments of Hani Hanjour’s flight skills are so radically different that both cannot be correct. The evaluations, made just days apart, are contradictory, hence, mutually exclusive; which raises the disturbing possibility that someone could be lying.
This isn't just a "a battle of the scare quotes" as stated by CNRU, because the perponderance of qualified opinions and other evidence is clearly on our side of the argument.
But Neighbohood Rationolist states that even if the points about Hanjour being an incompetent pilot were conceded that it doesn't matter because "100% of the remaining evidence singles him out as a hijacking pilot."
While this is true, it does not rule out a scenario in which the hijackers were hijacked by remote control. The paper "Plausibility Of 9/11 Aircraft Attacks Generated By GPS-Guided Aircraft Autopilot Systems" demonstrates that the maneuvers attributed to Hanjour are consistent with the use of such technology.
The bottom line is that we do not doubt terrorists were involved in 9/11. When the alleged 9/11 plotters offered to confess at Guantánamo in December of 2008 many probably asked themselves: "What does it mean for the 9/11 truth movement?” The answer is nothing; many people make the mistake of only seeing the issues concerning 9/11 in black and white, as opposed to shades of grey. Even if we accept that bin Laden and gang were the masterminds of 9/11 it does not negate a slew of evidence indicating that they were allowed to succeed and had their results amplified. 9/11 very well could have been an inside and an outside job.
Addressing my blog entry "Super-Duper Thermite: A Year in Review,"
Neighborhood Rationalist states:
I’m confused as to why we got the first link he provides, which doesn’t have a lot to say about our case for why the big thermite article is a fraud. It provides one particularly egregious overstep early on: It quotes an article saying that “Nanosized thermitic materials are being researched by the U.S. military with the aim of developing new types of bombs that are several times more powerful than conventional explosives” to argue that nanothermite “IS an incendiary and an explosive,” even though it is literally chemically impossible for that to be true unless you add something else to the thermite...Just the use of nano-metals, which makes it nano-thermite, was reported by Las Alamos to "increase the (chemical) reaction time by a thousand times." But something else is added to make it truly explosive. The scientists report that the material found in the WTC dust is mixed in a sol-gel matrix with organic components and as an April 2000 report by Gash et. al. about the sol-gel process states, "Once dry the (hybrid inorganic/organic energetic composite) material burns very vigorously and rapidly with the evolution of significant amounts of gaseous species."
I'll let Steven Jones walk you through it.
We are also informed that thermite's use in incendiary devices "is the exact same as its use in fireworks – as a pyrotechnic initiator."
I'm guessing our friendly neighbor missed this.
http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2010/11/slicing-through-every-single-debunker.html
Back to the nano-thermite, we are told that "it is scientific dishonesty to reject the fact that these are the normal components of the collapse site of a skyscraper." As will be demonstrated here in a second, Steven Jones did his due diligence on this, but commen sense is all that is needed for this one, as Gordon Ross put it, "...If I leave margarine, flour, sugar and fruit in a cupboard, when I next open the cupboard I will not find a fruit crumble. Some mechanism is required to convert the ingredients. Similarly, if I take these same ingredients, set them alight and throw them out the window, I still will not get my fruit crumble."
Next the chain of custody of the samples is questioned, they state, "People mailed him things, and he took them at their word." As Scootle has pointed out this is "effectively accusing the scientists and the citizens of conspiring to fake evidence by manufacturing high-tech energetic nanocomposites." I guess Neighborhood Rationalist is a Conspiracies R Us kid afterall!
Steven Jones addreses both of these points in detail in the following videos.
In this next video chemical engineer Mark Basile reveals that he has unequivocally confirmed the peer-reviewed work of Jones and his colleagues and obtained a completely independent sample of dust from a NYC museum, which leads me to related point. Pat Curley of the Screw Loose Change blog recently posted a critique of the nano-thermite paper by Denis Rancourt.
Rancourt states that, "Many members of the 911 Truth movement use an 'appeal to authority' argument in advancing Harrit's paper as 'peer reviewed' and Harrit himself as a scientific authority with relevant expertise. Anyone using 'appeal to authority' arguments must expect that the authority in question can be questioned."
Rancourt, however, is appealing to his apparent authority as the new king of peer-review, who can trump a forensic evidence based paper that was thoroughly peer-reviewed by individuals more qualified and just as qualified as him, and the replication of the paper's results by a chemical engineer, with a blog post that he purports to be a peer-review.
Great comments by "Sitting-Bull" and "The Masked Writer" here.
Related Info:
The fact that Hani Hanjour -- the alleged pilot of the Boeing airplane which crashed into the Pentagon -- could not fly at all is now being challenged by apparent CIA informant Louai al-Sakka, who says that it was actually Nawaf al-Hazmi who piloted the plane. No, HE Couldn't Fly Either
Friday, December 17, 2010
Anonymous really are frickin' stupid!
I've never cared much for 4chan. The place is so full of hate and immaturity it puts JREF to shame. It's like some pathetic cult of sick, perverted, shallow, dehumanized geeks. The first time I visited the site I stumbled upon a disgusting, graphic photo of some old man having sex with a dead body! Sure it's brought us some funny stuff, but it's classic mind control.
And I had a feeling that the long planned cyber false-flag would involve them in some way. I just never thought it would be an all out cyber war - as if several staged real-life wars aren't enough.
So 'Anonymous' is annoyed that top services like Amazon, Visa, Mastercard and Paypal are censoring Cass Sunstein's Wikileaks. I am too. I support a free and open internet as much as anyone, but hacking websites won't achieve anything. You're just giving the people who want to censor it the moral high ground. If a website pisses you off, boycott it - simple as that!
Anonymous are the internet equivalent of those anarchist agent provocateurs who give the police a convenient excuse to break up otherwise peaceful protests. Their hearts are in the right place, shame about their brains! The free internet is one of the last hopes of free humanity. If we lose it, we're screwed. Anonymous better wake up and see they're just playing right into the hands of those with an agenda.
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
Action Alert: Send This Letter to Any Architects and Engineers You Can Find!
As AE911Truth has stated before, "Its easy! Just look them up in the phone book or on the Internet and send them an email (like the one below)." Just type "architectural firms" or "engineering firms" followed by any state or country and you will find plenty of results. Make sure to check their site for the latest number as it is perpetually growing much to the chagrin of the so-called debunkers.
Subject:
1,450 architectural and engineering professionals calling for a new 9/11 investigation
Letter:
Hello,
As a credentialed building professional you can assist in putting an end to the War on Terror by signing a petition that calls for a new investigation into the attacks of September 11. Already the war has killed many thousands of innocent civilians and US military personnel. With no end in sight it is imperative that people with expertise stand up and question the physics defying official explanation into the collapse of the 3 World Trade Centre Buildings on 9/11. Please visit http//ae911truth.org, but first take a look at some of the individuals you will find amongst their ranks.
Dwain Deets appointed as NASA Dryden Aerospace Projects Director
February 28, 1996
Release: 96-10
...In 1986 Deets received the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) Wright Brothers Lectureship in Aeronautics Award. Among his other awards are the NASA Exceptional Service Award, presented in 1988. He was included in "Who's Who in America" for 1990-91 and "Who's Who in Science and Engineering" from 1993 to the present.
He was the 1988-90 chairman of the Aerospace Control and Guidance Systems Committee of the Society of Automotive Engineers. He has also been a member of the AIAA technical committee on Society and Aerospace Technology from 1990 to 1995. He is a 1961 graduate of Occidental College, Los Angeles. He earned a master of science degree in physics from San Diego State College in 1962 and then a master of science degree in engineering, as part of the Engineering Executive Program, at UCLA in 1978.
Source:
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/news/NewsReleases/1996/96-10.html
Excellent radio interview with former NASA Engineering Executive and AE911Truth active member Dwain Deets
Here is an article from AE911Truth showcasing 60 of their aerospace engineers.
You will also find people like Alfred Lee Lopez, who is "a structural engineer with 48 years of experience in all types of buildings."
Source:
http://www2.ae911truth.org/profile.php?uid=991403
Robert F. Marceau, who:
Worked for 30 years as a structural engineer in New Jersey, Colorado, and Nevada. Designed as project engineer a variety of structures including Bridges, High-rise office commercial buildings, parking structures, Project Manager Mirage hotel (Las Vegas) , Part of team on Bank One Ballpark Pheonix, Arizona, and many other structural related projects
Source:
http://www2.ae911truth.org/profile.php?uid=989952
And Ron Brookman, who:
Received his M.S. in Structural Engineering (1986) from the University of California at Davis, following a B.S. in Civil Engineering from the same school in 1984. He has over 23 years experience in structural analysis, design, evaluation and rehabilitation of buildings in northern California.
Here is an article by Brookman which "Dismantles the NIST Analysis of WTC 7."
And although they are not signatories at AE911Truth "two professors of structural engineering at a prestigious Swiss university (Dr. Joerg Schneider and Dr. Hugo Bachmann) said that, on 9/11, World Trade Center 7 was brought down by controlled demolition."
Source:
Prominent Structural Engineers Say Official Version of 9/11 "Impossible" "Defies Common Logic" "Violates the Law of Physics"
Here is an article from AE911Truth showcasing 29 of their structural/civil engineers.
Here is an article from an Englewood Florida paper about the experiments of AE911Truth civil engineer Jonathan Cole, he states, "I am looking for someone to prove me wrong. I would love for someone to prove me wrong."
Here is AE911Truth mechanical engineer Tony Szamboti on the show "Geraldo At Large" on FOX News.
Then of course there are the architects where you will find people like 40-year Architect Stephen Barasch:
High-Rise Architect with Transamerica Building Design Experience Signs AE911Truth Petition
Here is a video interview with Mr. Barasch.
And Robert E. McCoy:
Project Architect-Director for many high and low rise steel structures including the 34 story 1.7 Million SF Headquarters Building for Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San Francisco, 44 story Citicorp Building San Francisco, 44 story 575 Market street Building, San Francisco (A Standard Oil Company Headquarters Building), St. Mary's Hospital and Medical Center, San Francisco, and the 1 Million SF Tom Bradley International Terminal at LAX.
Source:
http://www2.ae911truth.org/profile.php?uid=986416
Here is a video interview with Mr. McCoy.
It must also be pointed out that among the other signatories of the AE911Truth petition are many highly credentialed people in other fields equally as relevant to the issue. Petition signers include physicists, firefighters, metallurgists, explosives experts, and controlled demolition technicians.
One of the controlled demolition technicians is Tom Sullivan. He is a former photographer and explosive-charge placement technician for Controlled Demolition, Inc.; a company that was a major player in the removal and recycling of the steel at Ground Zero. While working with CDI Sullivan personally placed hundreds of explosive charges at the Kingdome demolition site in Seattle Washington, which set a world record for the largest structural implosion by volume. He also held a FDNY issued Powder Carrier licence; a position that is just one step down from being "the most highly qualified person at the blasting site."
Please give the information presented by these individuals careful consideration before making a decision and make sure not to miss this video interview with AE911Truth chemical engineer Mark Basile regarding the forensic evidence.
Here is their entire membership list.
For refutations of so-called debunkers visit this site.
Sincerely,
YOUR NAME
Subject:
1,450 architectural and engineering professionals calling for a new 9/11 investigation
Letter:
Hello,
As a credentialed building professional you can assist in putting an end to the War on Terror by signing a petition that calls for a new investigation into the attacks of September 11. Already the war has killed many thousands of innocent civilians and US military personnel. With no end in sight it is imperative that people with expertise stand up and question the physics defying official explanation into the collapse of the 3 World Trade Centre Buildings on 9/11. Please visit http//ae911truth.org, but first take a look at some of the individuals you will find amongst their ranks.
Dwain Deets appointed as NASA Dryden Aerospace Projects Director
February 28, 1996
Release: 96-10
...In 1986 Deets received the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) Wright Brothers Lectureship in Aeronautics Award. Among his other awards are the NASA Exceptional Service Award, presented in 1988. He was included in "Who's Who in America" for 1990-91 and "Who's Who in Science and Engineering" from 1993 to the present.
He was the 1988-90 chairman of the Aerospace Control and Guidance Systems Committee of the Society of Automotive Engineers. He has also been a member of the AIAA technical committee on Society and Aerospace Technology from 1990 to 1995. He is a 1961 graduate of Occidental College, Los Angeles. He earned a master of science degree in physics from San Diego State College in 1962 and then a master of science degree in engineering, as part of the Engineering Executive Program, at UCLA in 1978.
Source:
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/news/NewsReleases/1996/96-10.html
Excellent radio interview with former NASA Engineering Executive and AE911Truth active member Dwain Deets
Here is an article from AE911Truth showcasing 60 of their aerospace engineers.
You will also find people like Alfred Lee Lopez, who is "a structural engineer with 48 years of experience in all types of buildings."
Source:
http://www2.ae911truth.org/profile.php?uid=991403
Robert F. Marceau, who:
Worked for 30 years as a structural engineer in New Jersey, Colorado, and Nevada. Designed as project engineer a variety of structures including Bridges, High-rise office commercial buildings, parking structures, Project Manager Mirage hotel (Las Vegas) , Part of team on Bank One Ballpark Pheonix, Arizona, and many other structural related projects
Source:
http://www2.ae911truth.org/profile.php?uid=989952
And Ron Brookman, who:
Received his M.S. in Structural Engineering (1986) from the University of California at Davis, following a B.S. in Civil Engineering from the same school in 1984. He has over 23 years experience in structural analysis, design, evaluation and rehabilitation of buildings in northern California.
Here is an article by Brookman which "Dismantles the NIST Analysis of WTC 7."
And although they are not signatories at AE911Truth "two professors of structural engineering at a prestigious Swiss university (Dr. Joerg Schneider and Dr. Hugo Bachmann) said that, on 9/11, World Trade Center 7 was brought down by controlled demolition."
Source:
Prominent Structural Engineers Say Official Version of 9/11 "Impossible" "Defies Common Logic" "Violates the Law of Physics"
Here is an article from AE911Truth showcasing 29 of their structural/civil engineers.
Here is an article from an Englewood Florida paper about the experiments of AE911Truth civil engineer Jonathan Cole, he states, "I am looking for someone to prove me wrong. I would love for someone to prove me wrong."
Here is AE911Truth mechanical engineer Tony Szamboti on the show "Geraldo At Large" on FOX News.
Then of course there are the architects where you will find people like 40-year Architect Stephen Barasch:
High-Rise Architect with Transamerica Building Design Experience Signs AE911Truth Petition
Here is a video interview with Mr. Barasch.
And Robert E. McCoy:
Project Architect-Director for many high and low rise steel structures including the 34 story 1.7 Million SF Headquarters Building for Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San Francisco, 44 story Citicorp Building San Francisco, 44 story 575 Market street Building, San Francisco (A Standard Oil Company Headquarters Building), St. Mary's Hospital and Medical Center, San Francisco, and the 1 Million SF Tom Bradley International Terminal at LAX.
Source:
http://www2.ae911truth.org/profile.php?uid=986416
Here is a video interview with Mr. McCoy.
It must also be pointed out that among the other signatories of the AE911Truth petition are many highly credentialed people in other fields equally as relevant to the issue. Petition signers include physicists, firefighters, metallurgists, explosives experts, and controlled demolition technicians.
One of the controlled demolition technicians is Tom Sullivan. He is a former photographer and explosive-charge placement technician for Controlled Demolition, Inc.; a company that was a major player in the removal and recycling of the steel at Ground Zero. While working with CDI Sullivan personally placed hundreds of explosive charges at the Kingdome demolition site in Seattle Washington, which set a world record for the largest structural implosion by volume. He also held a FDNY issued Powder Carrier licence; a position that is just one step down from being "the most highly qualified person at the blasting site."
Please give the information presented by these individuals careful consideration before making a decision and make sure not to miss this video interview with AE911Truth chemical engineer Mark Basile regarding the forensic evidence.
Here is their entire membership list.
For refutations of so-called debunkers visit this site.
Sincerely,
YOUR NAME
This should be a laugh...
It seems Michael Shermer is making a documentary about 'conspiracies'.
My Day in Dealey Plaza: Why JFK was Killed by a Lone Assassin
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-shermer/my-day-in-dealey-plaza-wh_b_796812.html
Obvious that one could have done the job? I think the most widely accepted official timeline is, first shot missed, 6.3 seconds later, magic bullet shot that has never been replicated and the only demonstration we've been given of its plausibility is a questionable computer animation, 4.9 seconds later, 'back and to the left'. Even if you assume it is all physically possible, there's a glaring contradiction here. We're expected to believe the same man who missed so wildly from only 140 feet could score a headshot from 265 feet! Even the Warren Commission found that hard to believe ...
Related Info:
Michael Shermer making documentary about "conspiracy theories" for CBC
Alex Jones interviews Jim Marrs about JFK, the parallels to 911, JFK the Directors cut, and what went into the making of the movie
The Kennedy Assassination - Jim Marrs Interviews Doug Horne
Debunk This! Part 6: J.F.K Conspiracy - Second Shooter
Conspiracy Theory With Jesse Ventura, Season 2 Episode 5 (JFK) 4 PARTS
The History Channel: JFK and 9/11
Bill Hicks on JFK: Two Critical lessons for the Citizens of the USA
Jim Garrison's (Kevin Costner's) Closing Argument / Final Speech - JFK
The JFK Assassination Autopsy Cover-up; Only One Picture is telling the Real story here:
My Day in Dealey Plaza: Why JFK was Killed by a Lone Assassin
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-shermer/my-day-in-dealey-plaza-wh_b_796812.html
There is no more to the Pearl Harbor conspiracy theory than there is that President Bush helped orchestrate 9/11 or knew about the pending attack and allowed it to happen in order to unite the American public into supporting his wars of aggression in the Middle East.He's right, with Pearl Harbor there's enough room for debate. The hard facts of 9/11 can't be debated, only denied.
Is it really necessary to invent additional assassins when it is obvious that one could have done the job? No. LHO acted alone in killing JFK. QED.Ermmm ... Maybe because one conspirator confessed?![1] [2]
Obvious that one could have done the job? I think the most widely accepted official timeline is, first shot missed, 6.3 seconds later, magic bullet shot that has never been replicated and the only demonstration we've been given of its plausibility is a questionable computer animation, 4.9 seconds later, 'back and to the left'. Even if you assume it is all physically possible, there's a glaring contradiction here. We're expected to believe the same man who missed so wildly from only 140 feet could score a headshot from 265 feet! Even the Warren Commission found that hard to believe ...
"On the other hand, the greatest cause for doubt that the first shot missed is the improbability that the same marksman who twice hit a moving target would be so inaccurate on the first and closest of his shots as to miss completely, not only the target, but the large automobile."Possible? Perhaps. Probable? No. Like everything else. Go do your little hitpiece Shermer, we'll tear your faith-based arguments to shreds and expose you for the delusional shill you are.
Related Info:
Michael Shermer making documentary about "conspiracy theories" for CBC
Alex Jones interviews Jim Marrs about JFK, the parallels to 911, JFK the Directors cut, and what went into the making of the movie
The Kennedy Assassination - Jim Marrs Interviews Doug Horne
Debunk This! Part 6: J.F.K Conspiracy - Second Shooter
Conspiracy Theory With Jesse Ventura, Season 2 Episode 5 (JFK) 4 PARTS
The History Channel: JFK and 9/11
Bill Hicks on JFK: Two Critical lessons for the Citizens of the USA
Jim Garrison's (Kevin Costner's) Closing Argument / Final Speech - JFK
The JFK Assassination Autopsy Cover-up; Only One Picture is telling the Real story here:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)