mynameis: Theories on 911

[mynameis]

http://www.ryze.com/posttopic.php?topicid=893863&confid=2950
http://www.ryze.com/posttopic.php?topicid=893884&confid=2950

[mynameis]

NIST Whistleblower
A former NIST employee made the following statements regarding NIST's politicization, corruption and lack of interest in sticking to science (these emails were forwarded to me by a prominent 9/11 truth activist; I simply edited them to remove names so as to protect the anonymity of the whistleblower):

Communication dated October 1, 2007:

"NBS/NIST had become fully hijacked from the scientific into the political realm well before he became involved. That hijacking happened in the mid-90's, and has only grown stronger to the present. Prior to that time, the Director of NBS/NIST was appointed via the political process (Presidential nomination, Congressional confirmation), but with the firm understanding in the scientific community that the job was essentially a non-political one, as the leader of the government's premiere scientific research institution. Directors were carefully selected from a field of well-known senior scientists with management skills, typically from within the NBS staff, after gaining much credibility in their fields. Once appointed, Directors tended to stay on for several years, through different administrations in an essentially career mode, usually until they retired. That all changed under the Clinton administration.

I saw it happen. After retirement from the Army, in 1983 I joined then-NBS as a scientist on the staff. After 3 years, I decided to move on (engineering on the Star Wars project). Becoming sick of that charade in 1989, I succumbed to my former boss' entreaties and returned to now-NIST in a supervisory scientist position at the top civil service grade. I retired from there in 2001, and worked as a part-time contractor for them until last year. So I've had a chance to observe some of the higher-level NIST goings-on up close and personal for some time, and was personally involved in some of its politicization.

I don't know whether the NBS Director, Dr. John Lyons, was forced into retirement by the Clinton administration; I just remember the abruptness of the change after only 3 years on his job. He was replaced by a relatively unknown and also quite young scientist from DARPA. What I remember about her is her lack of credibility in representing NIST in scientific circles, her choice of senior staff with little regard for their scientific standing, and her keen emphasis on political sensitivities. She departed after a long four years, and the Director's office (and hence the whole Institute) has been in turmoil ever since. Four of her six successors to the present time have been "Acting", meaning in a practical sense that they may well not have had the personal credibility and scientific standing to survive the scrutiny of the confirmation process.

About the time of this major reduction in stature of the Director's office, some other major shifts took place at NIST, the echoes of which may have direct relevance to [9/11 truth]. Prior to that time, we were focused on scientific research and standards development that tended to be independent of what other government agencies were doing. All of a sudden, the senior levels of NIST were flooded with what I perhaps over-harshly termed "political commisars", whose job was principally to deal with what may be called "the political sensitivities" of our work and also making sure it supported big industry.

That support became an overtly-stated major mission for us. We lost a major share of our direct research funding, and from then on have been largely dependent upon receiving funds from other government agencies (the majority from Depts of Defense and Energy) for research and standards-making to support their own work. This "other agency" work amounted to about 40% of our total budget in my last several years there. In essence, we lost our scientific independence, and became little more than "hired guns".

When I first heard of [9/11 truth] and how the NIST "scientists" involved in 911 seemed to act in very un-scientific ways, it was not at all surprising to me. By 2001, everyone in NIST leadership had been trained to pay close heed to political pressures. There was no chance that NIST people "investigating" the 911 situation could have been acting in the true spirit of scientific independence, nor could they have operated at all without careful consideration of political impact. Everything that came from the hired guns was by then routinely filtered through the front office, and assessed for political implications before release.

Sorry this blurb became overly long, but I did want to make sure that an "insider's view" got onto the record."

Email dated October 2, 2007:

"A little more general insight into what I referred to as the NIST politicization, some of which may be of interest to you. In addition to the NIST "front office" looking closely over our shoulders, we had three major external oversight groups keeping close track of our little part of NIST, which admittedly dealt at times with some sensitive issues regarding technological security.

One was NSA (no surprises there!), another was the HQ staff of the Department of Commerce, which scrutinized our work very closely and frequently wouldn't permit us to release papers or give talks without changes to conform to their way of looking at things. A third was a bit of a surprise to some -- the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) had a policy person specifically delegated to provide oversight on our work. Just as a reminder, the OMB is an arm of the Executive Office of the President.

One more tidbit - a gentleman named William A Jeffrey served as NIST Director from July 2005 until last month. Interestingly, Dr. Jeffrey's previous assignment was in the EOP's Office of Science and Technology Policy! Talk about high-level oversight!! So one can be certain that on so hot a topic as yours, Dr. Jeffrey (and his previous political handlers in the WH - if they still were "previous") would be very personally involved at every step.

I don't know what more I can add that might be relevant, as I have been once-removed from NIST for the past 6 years as a contractor via [a defense company]. However, I do have some good NIST friends who are rather highly placed, so if you have any other questions re NIST, I might be able to ferret out an answer. Would be worth a shot anyway."

http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2007/10/former-nist-employee-blows-whistle.html

[mynameis]

http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vid=182631

[ryanc]

Excellent and thought-provoking video link, thanks for posting it.

[mynameis]

http://digg.com/politics/Loose_Change_Final_Cut_Release_Date_Announced

[mynameis]

http://digg.com/politics/Martin_Sheen_Questions_Official_9_11_Story_2

[veritas2007]

What do you make of this spate of 'celebrity awareness'?

Is the truth movement gaining momentum or is this more cunning misdirection?

[helloperator]

I don't know about the whole term truth movement...it sounds like it's a pie drive or something.

[veritas2007]

I don't know about the whole term truth movement...it sounds like it's a pie drive or something.

For want of a better expression

[mynameis]

If this is your opinion than it is so, if it is not your opinion, then it isn't. It sounds like you are newspeaking. What difference does my opinion make for you? This is misdirecting whom?

What do you make of this spate of 'celebrity awareness'?

Is the truth movement gaining momentum or is this more cunning misdirection?

[veritas2007]

It wasn't a loaded question mynameis. I got into the search for truth through 9/11. The official story didn't sit well with me. One thing that is apparent to me though through my nights of trawling through the internet, is that the people behind this are very influential and are capable of a great deal.

By misdirection, I mearley meant just that - are we being apeased in some way to avert our attention from some other misdeed or evidence about to emerge. You started the topic so I asked you, but its open to anyone. I'm trying to learn as much about this as I can so I ask people who have knowledge on the subject.

[mynameis]

The normal pattern to look for is scandal and distraction, or Icke's Problem, Reaction, Solution.

I this couldn't be a distraction since digg is trying to buy the story, and Charlie Sheen has also confirmed the same attitude of his father's from this story. I hope this helps out with looking for things. Usually, if there's a plan in action, there will be no coverage of it. If there is a staged event, there will be subtle pre-warnings.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/05/11/TERROR.TMP

Here are just three real triggers that could be major recent scandals:

http://www.pensitoreview.com/2007/10/27/rumsfeld-flees-france-to-avoid-arrest/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/25/AR2007102502488.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21530470/

[howie]

I expect there will be a load of hit pieces about Martin Sheen this week in the news, they accused Charlie of abusing his own kids after he spoke about 9/11.

[graflok]

I expect there will be a load of hit pieces about Martin Sheen this week in the news, they accused Charlie of abusing his own kids after he spoke about 9/11.

Yes. Martin played the President on a very successful TV show so his saying
these things will have impact on the American public.

The neocons must be having fits over this.

[mynameis]

New Digg link

http://digg.com/celebrity/Martin_Sheen_Questions_Official_September_11th_Sto ry

Screen shot this to show the cheating on Digg

Enter the url below
http://www.duggtrends.com/digggraph.aspx

1st Digg story here.
http://digg.com/politics/Martin_Sheen_Questions_Official_9_11_Story_2

[veritas2007]

Thanks mynameis, I'll take a look at those links tonight.

[mynameis]

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

;)

http://digg.com/world_news/Bill_O_Reilly_Makes_Rosie_O_Donnell_His_Scapegoat_ After_Ambush_At_Book_Sign

[helloperator]

O'Reilly astounds me with his ignorance. I don't know how he sleeps

[majicdragon]

and Alex Jones explains it best. The Cointellpro are on all the sites talking "no planes" and "planet x" and thus when we suffer this we suffer looking like morons and can be discounted.

only relevant posts from me from now on.

try to notice who posts what and when... Does the no-planes post come up first when there is other more relevant news?...

It's an info war... we gotta find out who's who.

[mercuryrapids]

This was a big story on Prisonplanet.com, but has now vanished from there for some reason... :confused:

[gordonfreeman]

Now that is bullshit, calling us like we are going to be new threat. Blah, blah!
I hate Fox News and all the other News Media!

[i_am]

I sincerely hope they do see us as a threat.


Now that is bullshit, calling us like we are going to be new threat. Blah, blah!
I hate Fox News and all the other News Media!

[mynameis]

Nz Protest: 11th Nov 12pm Aotea Sq.


With The New Terror Law Coming Into Place In Nz, We Think It Is Important That People Understand The Massive Deception That Took Place On Sept. 11th 2001, Which Has Led To The Destruction Of Our Rights And Those Of Countless Others Worldwide.

Please Come To The 9/11 Truth Rally, Aotea Square Midday, On The 11th Of November

[mynameis]

Italy/European Truth Conference
YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

Good video highlighting the important work as well as good shots of Amsterdam.
European 911 Truth Conference - YouTube

Fujita-san's interview at the Conference
911 Truth at European Parliament - YouTube

Marching World Wide 15th. Forming Voltron on their asses!
YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

[andrewandrew]

Only 8 out of 600 parliamentarians showed up? :(

[mynameis]

Note how they don't name the group of critics as an organization to make them seem disparate and alone in their bizzare not so bizzare assertion of their own field of study.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Engineer Society Accused of Cover-Ups

By CAIN BURDEAU – 20 hours ago

NEW ORLEANS (AP) — The professional organization for engineers who build the nation's roads, dams and bridges has been accused by fellow engineers of covering up catastrophic design flaws while investigating national disasters.

After the 2001 attack on the World Trade Center and the levee failures caused by Hurricane Katrina in 2005, the federal government paid the American Society of Civil Engineers to investigate what went wrong.

Critics now accuse the group of covering up engineering mistakes, downplaying the need to alter building standards, and using the investigations to protect engineers and government agencies from lawsuits.

Similar accusations arose after both disasters, but the most recent allegations have pressured the organization to convene an independent panel to investigate.

"They want to make sure that they do things the right way and that they learn lessons from the studies they do," said Sherwood Boelhert, a retired Republican congressman from New York who heads the panel. He led the House Science Committee for six years.

The panel is expected to issue a report by the end of April and may recommend that the society stop taking money from government agencies for disaster investigations.

The engineering group says it takes the allegations seriously, but it has declined to comment until completion of the panel's report and an internal ethics review.

In the World Trade Center case, critics contend the engineering society wrongly concluded skyscrapers cannot withstand getting hit by airplanes. In the hurricane investigation, it was accused of suggesting that the power of the storm was as big a problem as the poorly designed levees.

The group has about 140,000 members and is based in Reston, Va. It sets engineering standards and codes and publishes technical books and a glossy magazine. Members testify regularly before Congress and issue an annual report on the state of the nation's public-works projects.

The society got a $1.1 million grant from the Army Corps of Engineers to study the levee failures. Similarly, the Federal Emergency Management Agency paid the group about $257,000 to investigate the World Trade Center collapse.

The engineers were not involved in investigating last year's bridge collapse in Minneapolis.

The society issued a report last year that blamed the levee failures on poor design and the Corps' use of incorrect engineering data.

Raymond Seed, a levee expert at the University of California, Berkeley, was among the first to question the society's involvement. He was on a team funded by the National Science Foundation to study the New Orleans flood.

Seed accused the engineering society and the Army Corps of collusion, writing an Oct. 20 letter alleging that the two organizations worked together "to promulgate misleading studies and statements, to subvert appropriate independent investigations ... to literally attempt to change some of the critical apparent answers regarding lessons to be learned."

Maj. Gen. Don Riley, the corps' director of civil works, disputed Seed's allegations at a December meeting in New Orleans.

"He talks about the supposed cover-up," Riley said. "Well, our people live here in New Orleans ... We don't stand behind our work. We live behind our work."

In 2002, the society's report on the World Trade Center praised the buildings for remaining standing long enough to allow tens thousands of people to flee.

But, the report said, skyscrapers are not typically designed to withstand airplane impacts. Instead of hardening buildings against such impacts, it recommended improving aviation security and fire protection.

Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl, a structural engineer and forensics expert, contends his computer simulations disprove the society's findings that skyscrapers could not be designed to withstand the impact of a jetliner.

Astaneh-Asl, who received money from the National Science Foundation to investigate the collapse, insisted most New York skyscrapers built with traditional designs would survive such an impact and prevent the kind of fires that brought down the twin towers.

He also questioned the makeup of the society's investigation team. On the team were the wife of the trade center's structural engineer and a representative of the buildings' original design team.

"I call this moral corruption," said Astaneh-Asl, who is on the faculty at the University of California, Berkeley.

Gene Corley, a forensics expert and team leader on the society's report, said employing people with ties to the original builders was necessary because they had access to information that was difficult to get any other way.

Corley said the society's study was peer-reviewed and its credibility was upheld by follow-up studies, including one by the National Institute of Standards and Technology.

"I hope someone looks into the people making the accusations," Corley said. "That's a sordid tale."

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hzg4otojhA781hp18wMHpy2WUPqQD8VKKNMO0

[mynameis]

World Trade Center Attack Confirmation in 1996 - YouTube

[dangermouse]

interesting

pretty close to the mark too :D

[mynameis]

"The US Air Force Shot Down Flight 93"

George Washington's Blog
Saturday, April 12, 2008
The following comment was posted to my blog today (I do not know who the author is -- he posted semi-anonymously; so decide for yourself whether or not you believe him):

"I am an Air Force veteran. I was serving at Langley AFB, Virginia on Sept. 11. (not to be confused with CIA headquarters at Langley, VA). The "Alert Squadron" of 4 F-16 Falcons also stationed at Langley AFB was scrambled AFTER the "plane" crashed into the Pentagon. Because of my position as a ground equipment mechanic, I had access to the flightline operations that day. My friends were Crew Cheifs and Weapons Loaders, among other professions on the flightline that day. One of my [unusual] duties that day was to drive a Loader (personal friend) along with a rack of live missiles (AIM-9's and AIM-120's) across the active runway to the Alert Squadron and drop them off. I was towing equipment to the flightline, so when it was time to go back and pick up the Loader (and our missile trailer) I was unable to do so, but another member of my Flight (a good friend, and later roommate) did go. According to my roommate (and I later confirmed with the Loader) the Loader was completely silent most of the trip back to our side of the base, after they crossed the active, he spoke. "They shot one down." JJ replied "WHAT?" Loader:"One of those 16's came back with one less missile than it left with" That was all. As they pulled back in to the squadron area, The loader was whisked away by his commanders for debriefing. I didn't see him for a few days, but when I did, he said he couldn't talk about it, but he confirmed that what my roommate had told me was true.

The US Air Force shot down Flight 93. I haven't told this to many people. I told my parents and other family members shortly after I left the military. They didn't believe it. I figured no one else would either. I kept my mouth shut. Everyone was dedicated to the president and the country (not really) And anything that went against the Official, media delivered story was viewed as unpatriotic. I knew that I loved this country, so I kept my mouth shut. I just can't do that anymore. I know that I don't have any documents to prove it, and I have no way of knowing where the others involved are now days, so I can't prove anything. All I have is my word. and with God as my witness that is the truth."

http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/

[mynameis]

Speaking about 9/11 - YouTube

[dave52]

Love him or hate him - he does strike a chord doesnt he...?

[mynameis]

9/11 Debunking for Dummies
YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

[cruise4]

Good stuff Stoobradley.

[bam fest]

class:rolleyes:

[lost_in_translation]

laughed my ass off, great video

[empyblessing]

that was wonderful made my day :):):):):):D:D:D:D

[mynameis]

Dr. Reynolds exposes 9/11 TV fakery on FoxNews - YouTube
Dr. Reynolds exposes 9/11 TV fakery on FoxNews - YouTube


Morgan O. Reynolds was a professor emeritus at Texas A&M University and former director of the Criminal Justice Center at the National Center for Policy Analysis headquartered in Dallas, TX.

He served as chief economist for the United States Department of Labor during 2001–2002, George W. Bush's first term. In 2005, he gained public attention as the first prominent government official to publicly claim that 9/11 was an inside job, and is a member of Scholars for 9/11 Truth. Some 9/11 conspiracy theorists have expressed concern over Reynolds' theory that commercial jets were not involved in the WTC attacks.

Morgan Reynolds - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[phaid]

I think you'll find Nico Haupt (the infamous ewing2001), who started the New York 911 Truth group was one of the first researchers to get into the area of NPT, and is now one of its champions.

http://www.bloglines.com/blog/ewing2001

[dave52]

In 2005, he gained public attention as the first prominent government official to publicly claim that 9/11 was an inside job, and is a member of Scholars for 9/11 Truth. Some 9/11 conspiracy theorists have expressed concern over Reynolds' theory that commercial jets were not involved in the WTC attacks.

NPT was around long before 2005. As already pointed out, Nico and the Web Fairy were probably the first.

[stealth_0073]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reQZT9Hzvt8





http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgan_Reynolds




Morgan Renaults seen the light just because he was a bush associate
doesn't make him a bad guy hes a true patriot

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

[mynameis]

NPT was around long before 2005. As already pointed out, Nico and the Web Fairy were probably the first.

Your evidence please?

[mynameis]

No Planers on Howard Stern - Total Penetration [4 of 5] - YouTube

NicoHitler 911 Transgression Blitzkrieg On A New York Subway - YouTube

Nico Haupt Ground Zero Affrontivism Performance vs Trifler - YouTube

Don't F*king Touch Me Nico!!! I'm With Eva Now - YouTube

[sidlittle]

Your evidence please?


http://www.911closeup.com/index.shtml?ID=67

Here is the website of gerard holmgren. The debates with Eric Salter are from April 2004.

That should be the end of the thread.

[dave52]

Thanks for backing me up Sid...

Also:

http://web.archive.org/web/20030911165402/http://www.911hoax.com/

2003....

[dave52]

Webfairy talking about "watzits" and wondering just what it was that we saw, back in 2002...

http://thewebfairy.com/911/cia-drugs/Msg00726.html

Ready to take it back yet...?

[mynameis]

Webfairy talking about "watzits" and wondering just what it was that we saw, back in 2002...

http://thewebfairy.com/911/cia-drugs/Msg00726.html

Ready to take it back yet...?

I can't be sure you are accurate about NICO and Webfairy. I already know Hufschmidt is a goon. Did you read the bottom of the page:

http://web.archive.org/web/20030911165402/http://www.911hoax.com/

[dave52]

I can't be sure you are accurate about NICO and Webfairy. I already know Hufschmidt is a goon. Did you read the bottom of the page:

http://web.archive.org/web/20030911165402/http://www.911hoax.com/

Well, firstly - the thread was about Morgan Reynolds starting NPT, I think we can all agree that this has been proven false without a doubt.

As for Hufschmidt, what is your evidence to prove that he is a "goon". He was the first person to get me interested in this topic with his "Painful Questions" stuff.

[mynameis]

Well, firstly - the thread was about Morgan Reynolds starting NPT, I think we can all agree that this has been proven false without a doubt.

As for Hufschmidt, what is your evidence to prove that he is a "goon". He was the first person to get me interested in this topic with his "Painful Questions" stuff.

No the thread isn't about Morgan Reynolds per say. It is about Bush Goons starting NPT. TYVM...as for Hufscmidt I don't need evidence of proof for my personal opinion that I have already proven to myself. You can dig deeper if you want to about Eric...sorted history.

[whatistruth]

Morgan Renaults seen the light just because he was a bush associate
doesn't make him a bad guy hes a true patriot

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Adp_XpEcA74

What complete bullshit that video is, the fact alot of people cant see through this 'no planes' garbage seriously puts my faith in the movement in doubt.


"Why did the plane turn black?!??!"

Well, because it clearly moved into the shadow of the building.


And you all understand the 'tv fakery' videos could EASILY be faked themselfs?
Its the PERFECT cointelpro garbage, fake a video and have wild conspiracy nuts who'll believe in anything (reptoids, no planes, planet X) waving their arms like morons discrediting all the reasonable people who talk about norad stand down, demolition charges etc.

[john white]

You do realise that you're on the David Icke Forum right...?

Well Dave, you clearly associate that with having no sense of responsibility and hoovering up any shite laid in front of you because it looks funky

I mean NPT is just so cool, isnt it? Holograms and Space Beams! How exciting!

And, of course, you also have no sense of shame at allowing yourself to be used

But I DON'T associate Icke with believing any old shite: its supposed to be about thinking and challenging yourself n'est pas?

This section remains a tragedy of disinformation becuase of a few tools and vicitims are stuck in the rut of repeating fantasy becuase they turned their backs on actual truthseeking in order to have a fun hobby

[dave52]

Hi John,

Firstly this thread was origionally about NPT being started by Morgan Reynolds, the implication being that it was started by "Bush Goons" because he once worked in the Bush Administration.

Secondly this thread was started by someone who is against NPT in order to discredit the NPT, not promote it.

Thirdly, once it had been established that NPT wasn't started by Morgan Reynolds, Mynameis started contradicting himself.

Fourthly, Whatistruth was equating NPT with the belief in "Reptoids and Planet X", that is the only reason I mentioned David Icke.

Fifthly - Holograms and Space Beams...? Nice one, why don't you accuse me of disrespecting the dead, not being a Patriot and denying the Holocaust...?

Sixthly, there isn't a sixthly, I just never typed the word sixthly before. I kinda like it... :D

[mynameis]

Hi John,

Firstly this thread was origionally about NPT being started by Morgan Reynolds, the implication being that it was started by "Bush Goons" because he once worked in the Bush Administration.

Secondly this thread was started by someone who is against NPT in order to discredit the NPT, not promote it.

Thirdly, once it had been established that NPT wasn't started by Morgan Reynolds, Mynameis started contradicting himself.

Fourthly, Whatistruth was equating NPT with the belief in "Reptoids and Planet X", that is the only reason I mentioned David Icke.

Fifthly - Holograms and Space Beams...? Nice one, why don't you accuse me of disrespecting the dead, not being a Patriot and denying the Holocaust...?

Sixthly, there isn't a sixthly, I just never typed the word sixthly before. I kinda like it... :D

I am against a no nonsense theory. If what was observed fit the facts of NPT then I would be all for that theory, however I only see smoke when there should be mirrors mixed with both.

[dave52]

I am against a no nonsense theory.

So, you want a theory that IS nonesense...?


I only see smoke when there should be mirrors mixed with both.

?

[mynameis]

So, you want a theory that IS nonesense...?




?

I want a theory that is no nonsense. NTP = nonsense.

[dave52]

I want a theory that is no nonsense. NTP = nonsense.

Then go and find a theory that you like rather than wasting your time creating threads in an attempt to discredit a theory you don't like. I really can't see the point. Also, once your thread's agenda has been dismantled (ie. Morgan Reynolds did not start NPT), be man enough to admit that you were wrong.

[mynameis]

Then go and find a theory that you like rather than wasting your time creating threads in an attempt to discredit a theory you don't like. I really can't see the point. Also, once your thread's agenda has been dismantled (ie. Morgan Reynolds did not start NPT), be man enough to admit that you were wrong.

If I had the time, I would follow the money from Nico, Webfairy, Woods etc....back to the FED and the GOP. Since I am not located near them, I will conduct my research as I see fit. TVM. Shove off if you don't like reading the threads. So far I have one. Later I will post more information about Eric Hufschmidt and so on until I am finished with the thread. Don't like the pace and style of my research then go elsewhere, clearly I already think your intellect has. You can't see the point of putting up facts against a theory that is already demolished to further demolish the theory only lunatics would encourage? Yet, I am supposed to kowtow to dave52 for thinking and forwarding evidence and I'm not following any leader; interesting.

[dave52]

Eric Hufschmidt has nothing to do with NPT. Are you prepared to admit that you were wrong about Reynolds...? And what's with this GOP business? Do you seriously think that 9/11 is in anyway bipartisan...? You think it wouldn't have happened if the Democrats were in power...?

[mynameis]

Eric Hufschmidt has nothing to do with NPT. Are you prepared to admit that you were wrong about Reynolds...? And what's with this GOP business? Do you seriously think that 9/11 is in anyway bipartisan...? You think it wouldn't have happened if the Democrats were in power...?

Are there attending Democrats listed on the PNAC agenda? 9/11 was totally partisan within the wetworks home offices, Guiliani, Carlyle, and other companies like KBR. I may be wrong that I thought he was first, but I am not wrong that he's a Bush goon if that's what you're thinking; and there are more to come. Eric Hufschidt has a lot to do with attending research backed by NPT.

[dave52]

Democratic PNAC Signatorys...

Madeleine Albright, former Clinton Secretary of State
Ivo Daalder, Clinton National Security Council member
Martin Indyk, Clinton Ambassador to Israel
Anthony Lake, Clinton National Security Advisor
Will Marshall, founder Democratic Leadership Council
Dennis Ross, Clinton Middle East coordinator
Charles Schumer, U.S. Senator
Stephen Solarz, former Democratic Congressman
James Steinberg, Clinton Deputy National Security Advisor
James Webb (ex-Republican), Virginia senator (D)

Source: http://www.king-george.biz/wst_page6.html

[john white]

Morgan O. Reynolds was a professor emeritus at Texas A&M University and former director of the Criminal Justice Center at the National Center for Policy Analysis headquartered in Dallas, TX.

He served as chief economist for the United States Department of Labor during 2001–2002, George W. Bush's first term. In 2005, he gained public attention as the first prominent government official to publicly claim that 9/11 was an inside job, and is a member of Scholars for 9/11 Truth. Some 9/11 conspiracy theorists have expressed concern over Reynolds' theory that commercial jets were not involved in the WTC attacks.

Morgan Reynolds = David Davis: there to misdirect and mislead!

He says what they want to hear and the NPT junkies lap it up

He sets them like attack dogs onto Stephen Jones, alledging that because Jones has a background in his feild he's compromised! But lets never ask those questions of Reynolds, hey lads?

Him and his bogus waste of space lawsuit PAID FOR BY WHOM?

Its conspiracy noobville and you'll deserve what you get if what you have been programmed to desire comes about and NPT is seen as the key 9/11 Truth theory

Fortunately REAL 9/11 truthers know the difference: however its the poor bloody public who will have the disinfo thrown at them to stop them taking the subject seriously

Nice one Reynolds! Job well done!

[mynameis]

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

The No Planers - YouTube

[mynameis]

It was first floated in early October 2001 by French author Thierry Meyssan and US War Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. Monsieur Meyssan started a webpage that suggested a plane did not hit the Pentagon on October 7, and Rumsfeld gave an interview to Parade magazine on October 12 where he said a "missile" hit the Pentagon. That "missile" quote was then used by many no plane advocates as part of the campaign to draw attention to this claim. Meyssan went on to create the "Hunt the Boeing" website and then published two books "The Horrifying Fraud" (published in English as "9/11 The Big Lie") and Pentagate. These books have been translated into a total of 28 languages, which ensures that they are the dominant version of the claim suggesting complicity or conspiracy that is seen around the world.

On September 4, 2004, two months before the pseudo Presidential election, Parade magazine claimed that this quote was a mis-statement and the sole source for the no plane hoaxes, thus dismissing 9/11 "truth" to an audience of millions of voters.

The biggest claim for the no plane hoax is that the "hole" in the facade of the Pentagon was supposedly too small to have been created by a 757. Many of these claims state that photos taken during the half hour between the crash and the collapse of that part of the building show a hole merely 16 to 18 feet across. However, those photos have most of the damage obscured by firefighting foam and smoke -- the full hole was about 90 feet wide, and additional damage (from the wingtips) is visible for tens of feet beyond the hole. The impact on the outside of the building was the size and shape of the cross-section of a 757.

http://www.oilempire.us/bogus.html
http://www.oilempire.us/parade.html

[gribz]

Case closed then :rolleyes:

[dave52]

So, we've moved on from Morgn Reynolds (because we have proven that he didn't start NPT), through "it was all Bush" (again thrown out because PNAC wasn't just a Republican job), ignoring the spurious mention of Hufschmidt, we end up with the Peak Oil crowd talking about Pentagate.

It's been a strange journey of discovery to be sure. Thanks Mynameis...

[john white]

So, we've moved on from Morgn Reynolds (because we have proven that he didn't start NPT), through "it was all Bush" (again thrown out because PNAC wasn't just a Republican job), ignoring the spurious mention of Hufschmidt, we end up with the Peak Oil crowd talking about Pentagate.

It's been a strange journey of discovery to be sure. Thanks Mynameis...

You just LOVE "moving on" dont you Dave?

Anything to avoid actually taking in the implications of whats being said

"move along move along nothing to see here my belief system to protect nothing to see oh what elephant I see no ships"

In fact you cant WAIT to "move things along"

You NEED to move things along

ANYTHING to avoid confronting the fact that

YOU HAVE BEEN CONNED

[edelweiss pirate]

Why don't you believe it John?

There is just too much evidence out there to suggest that there must be some truth to the fact that missiles were used then later edited to look like planes.

From video evidence to media and eyewitness testimonies. The scale is vast. It isn't just about a forum personality clash, it's bigger than that!

[john white]

Why don't you believe it John?

There is just too much evidence out there to suggest that there must be some truth to the fact that missiles were used then later edited to look like planes.

From video evidence to media and eyewitness testimonies. The scale is vast. It isn't just about a forum personality clash, it's bigger than that!

Why dont I "believe" it?

Because what evidence is out there is fraudulent and the persons behind it highly dubious at best

Why SHOULD I "believe it" under those circumstances?

Its the moral compromise of those who do accept it I question

And I'm right to do so

[beldazar]

truth always comes out in the end


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8045542387672451515

Has anyone seen this video posted on the headlines page several days ago?

[stealth_0073]

TVFAKERY PT.3 - YouTube
YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

[edelweiss pirate]

truth always comes out in the end


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8045542387672451515

Has anyone seen this video posted on the headlines page several days ago?

Just one of those most amazing vids I have ever seen......

This was the video that made me change my mind and made me think again.....

A great afternoon's viewing.

[beldazar]

yep, lets hope others think the same. Im not gettig involved here tho, its far too controversial and too much abuse thrown around :eek:

[mynameis]

http://www.oilempire.us/bogus.html
http://www.oilempire.us/parade.html

post# 31
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=423210&postcount=31

What about Thiery Meyssan is incorrect?

[nessa felagund]

This thread is closed for cleanup. When all insults have been removed, it will be reopened for discussion.

Do not go to other threads and derail them with pointless insults and name calling.

[nessa felagund]

I have attempted to clean up this thread as much as possible. It is now reopened for real discussion. However, it seems to me, this argument is going around in circles and not really benefitting anyone.

If you have anything constructive to add, please do so. :) Otherwise, stay off this thread.

By the way, this eight page thread went down to five after removing all of the insulting posts. Just thought you ought to know that.

[mynameis]

NTSB: No Records Pertaining To Process Of Positive Identification Of 9/11 Aircraft Wreckage
( Home » blogs » Aidan Monaghan's blog » NTSB: No Records... )

Within a July 18, 2008 Freedom of Information Act response from the National Transportation Safety Board, the NTSB indicates that it possesses no records indicating how wreckage recovered from the 4 aircraft used during the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 was positively identified as belonging to the 4 planes reportedly hijacked that day or even if such wreckage was positively identified at all.

http://www.911blogger.com/node/16762

[thematrix]

In the interests of looking at both sides of an argument you might also want to watch this ...

kind of a companion vid for September Clues (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=823734902101057550&q=september+clues+busted&ei=LmWLSJakKZPyjgKyy7S-CA)

This page here (http://www.questionsquestions.net/WTC/review.html) is a good read as well.


Within a July 18, 2008 Freedom of Information Act response from the National Transportation Safety Board, the NTSB indicates that it possesses no records indicating how wreckage recovered from the 4 aircraft used during the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 was positively identified as belonging to the 4 planes reportedly hijacked that day or even if such wreckage was positively identified at all.

Typical.

The Government has in it's posession CCTV footage of flight 77's crash. Do we get to see any of that??? - no course not.

It **must** have ID'ed the planes as part of the investigation. The planes transponders were turned off and there was no way to tell what planes crashed where as I understand it. They DNA tested for survivors - but didn't check the DNA of the plane????????????

It beggars belief that they are so incompetent that they failed to positively ID the aircraft.

[mynameis]

In the interests of looking at both sides of an argument you might also want to watch this ...

kind of a companion vid for September Clues (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=823734902101057550&q=september+clues+busted&ei=LmWLSJakKZPyjgKyy7S-CA)

This page here (http://www.questionsquestions.net/WTC/review.html) is a good read as well.



Typical.

The Government has in it's posession CCTV footage of flight 77's crash. Do we get to see any of that??? - no course not.

It **must** have ID'ed the planes as part of the investigation. The planes transponders were turned off and there was no way to tell what planes crashed where as I understand it. They DNA tested for survivors - but didn't check the DNA of the plane????????????

It beggars belief that they are so incompetent that they failed to positively ID the aircraft.

I doubt those who already are faith based in the Fakery will allow themselves to watch it and think for themselves what arguments the critic makes.

[mynameis]

Pentagon witness evaluations

http://www.thepentacon.com/LloydEngland_AccompliceVideo.htm

[banoyes]

767 Debris

Wheels, engine parts, a piece of a fuselage and other 767 debris were found in and around the WTC. The argument that there is not enough wreckage to account for a 767 crash is purely speculative: We don't know how much plane debris was recovered from the rubble of the WTC. The government refuses to allow independent access to all the debris collected, and they may even be deliberately withholding evidence to create suspicions and encourage no-plane claims. -Eric Salter

What isn't mentioned is the engine found on Church Street
it was NOT from a 767
also not mentioned is the analyst of the tire on the landing gear.
It was shown to be so worn that no pilot would have accepted it.
No doubt these were planted
as was the piece of unchard fusalage found on top of building 5

The possibility that anomalies that defy easy explanation might exist in the visual record must be considered when analyzing the no-plane hypothesis.
It may very well be that the explanation of some alleged anomalies might require a level of technical capacity far beyond any researchers in the 9/11 movement now dealing with this issue.
( Cop out )

For example, a professional 3D modeling of the plane's
approach to the WTC with photo-realistic lighting combined with simulation of physics
properties such as momentum or aerodynamics and using research into the exact location
and lens type of the camera in question might be needed.
(A journey into fantasy)
But even if a confirmed anomaly in the visual record were someday found,
it would not constitute proof that no 767s hit the towers:
It would prove only that that particular video was faked,
and the perpetrators of 9/11 could have distributed faked videos to encourage the no-plane hypothesis.
( ahh perhaps they distributed fake videos to fool the public, a totaly bogus arguement )

Given that the perps couldn't have controlled all the cameras in New York on 9/11,"and that absolutely no images showing something other than 767 impacts have surfaced, it is arguable that anomalous videos shouldn't even be considered compelling evidence, let alone proof, of no-767 claims.

If you bother to read this it is no more than a CYA cop out
he even in a backhanded way supports the NPT
with the"perpetrators of 9/11 could have distributed faked videos


http://www.questionsquestions.net/WTC/review.html
A lot of words that don't say very much

The very idea that someone would be filming a building for no particuliar reason defies logic
"and that absolutely no images showing something other than 767 impacts have surfaced,"

I watch "Septerber Clues-Busted... man I guess it is all just coincidence... geeezzzee

[mynameis]

767 Debris

Wheels, engine parts, a piece of a fuselage and other 767 debris were found in and around the WTC. The argument that there is not enough wreckage to account for a 767 crash is purely speculative: We don't know how much plane debris was recovered from the rubble of the WTC. The government refuses to allow independent access to all the debris collected, and they may even be deliberately withholding evidence to create suspicions and encourage no-plane claims. -Eric Salter


767 Debris

Wheels, engine parts, a piece of a fuselage and other 767 debris were found in and around the WTC. The argument that there is not enough wreckage to account for a 767 crash is purely speculative: We don't know how much plane debris was recovered from the rubble of the WTC. The government refuses to allow independent access to all the debris collected, and they may even be deliberately withholding evidence to create suspicions and encourage no-plane claims. -Eric Salter

Completely consistent after an airplane crash that was observed and the building collapsing.

What isn't mentioned is the engine found on Church Street
it was NOT from a 767
also not mentioned is the analyst of the tire on the landing gear.
It was shown to be so worn that no pilot would have accepted it.
No doubt these were planted
as was the piece of unchard fusalage found on top of building 5

Says who and are they an expert at aircraft engines? Link please to a credible source?


The possibility that anomalies that defy easy explanation might exist in the visual record must be considered when analyzing the no-plane hypothesis.
It may very well be that the explanation of some alleged anomalies might require a level of technical capacity far beyond any researchers in the 9/11 movement now dealing with this issue.
( Cop out )

Apparently, it is out of the no planer's capacity to vet their own visual information, thus there are no experts on their side from the visual analysis standpoint; that has written any research papers to back such claims; if so where's the research journal articles please?

It would prove only that that particular video was faked,
and the perpetrators of 9/11 could have distributed faked videos to encourage the no-plane hypothesis.
( ahh perhaps they distributed fake videos to fool the public, a totaly bogus arguement )

No.

(A journey into fantasy)

You are quite right about no planes in this aspect.

Given that the perps couldn't have controlled all the cameras in New York on 9/11,"and that absolutely no images showing something other than 767 impacts have surfaced, it is arguable that anomalous videos shouldn't even be considered compelling evidence, let alone proof, of no-767 claims.

Wow! What a rush to judgment. "Perps?" There are no perps and nobody had total control of all images and cameras in New York on 9/11. I suggest you have proof to suggest otherwise; if not then I am inclined to believe this is your opinion and have nothing worth substance yet again to contribute, and are merely pissing in the wind figuratively speaking on the David Icke forums.

http://www.questionsquestions.net/WTC/review.html
A lot of words that don't say very much

The very idea that someone would be filming a building for no particuliar reason defies logic
"and that absolutely no images showing something other than 767 impacts have surfaced,"

I watch "Septerber Clues-Busted... man I guess it is all just coincidence... geeezzzee

Nobody filmed the buildings for no particular or a particular reason. You are making assumptions that this was the case when it is not. Again the banoyes's post and it's words above are of no substance. Please get some information that is factual and not other people's non-expert opinions about scant camera evidence with mechanical limitations that are obvious, or some other non-expert twerp's opinion.

September Clues Busted, Debunked and Skunked! Where'd the intelligence of the maker of September Clues documentary go?

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=823734902101057550