The Paranoid Style at Pacifica

In his Wall Street Journal column yesterday, Tom Frank paid homage to Richard Hofstadter's famous essay, "The Paranoid Style in American Politics." As Frank noted, Birthers convinced that Barack Obama's birth certificate was forged in a plot to turn the United States into a fascist state are heirs to a long tradition of conspiracy thinking that has periodically flourished on the fringes of the American right.

But the paranoid style has seeped into some institutions on the left as well. For proof, look no further than a recent meeting of the Pacifica radio network's National Board, where a resolution was introduced that requires all programmers to disclose funding sources above $5,000. "The reason I created this motion," Chris Condon, a member of Pacifica's National Governance Committee, explained, "is because there has been a lot of debate about whether or not Amy Goodman has received CIA conduit foundation funding from the Ford Foundation and other places."

Amy Goodman is, of course, the co-host of Democracy Now!, an unabashedly progressive news program that airs on over 800 stations across the country. As anyone who has listened to even five minutes of the program knows, Goodman is about as likely to be on the payroll of the CIA as Howard Zinn or Noam Chomsky. She has probably devoted more airtime to dissecting the CIA's transgressions in the past decade than any other member of her profession.

No matter, the Governance Committee at Pacifica passed the resolution, a step taken to discover whether you-know-who has been funneling money to Goodman to cover up "the truth" about 9/11. "We'd like to know what kind of 9/11 coverage the Ford Foundation paid for," said Condon. "The whole issue of 9/11 and Amy Goodman has been ongoing for years and years and years."

The disquieting coverage was apparently just journalism, as when Goodman had the gumption to ask David Ray Griffin, a 9/11 Truther who appeared on her program several years ago, to name some engineers who supported the theory that passenger planes could not have brought down the Twin Towers. (The real cause was explosives set off by the attack's covert plotters, 9/11 Truthers allege.) When Griffin referred vaguely to the notes in his book, Goodman persisted: "Name just one. Name just one structural engineering expert who said it is not feasible that the planes caused the towers to go down." "I'm sorry, I don't have that information at my fingertips," Griffin replied.

The suspicions about Goodman would be laughable were they not coming from board members at an independent radio network with a proud history of promoting progressive dialogue and dissent. Pacifica was founded by conscientious objectors a half-century ago and has stations in some of the largest markets (New York, Los Angeles, Washington) in the country. In the late 1990s, some of the network's supporters fought off what they believed was an attempt by the National Board to standardize programming and soften its edge.

The struggle was successful, but the unintended consequence was to democratize Pacifica in a way that has ended up empowering many cranks. Instead of serving as a vibrant home for incisive programming that challenges the assumptions of mainstream debate, the network has fallen into the hands of sectarians and crackpots whose control over the Governance Committee may be strong but whose hold on reality appears tenuous.

Comments (167)

1. Nice post, Eyal.

   I'm not familiar with the internal bickering at Pacifica or their programing for the most part since I'm not in their listening area. But I've always made the asumption that they are a useful and valuable voice in the progressive sphere.

   Interestly, though, I've just been reading Edvard Radzinsky's bio of Stalin and it paints a fascinating portrait of the patriot versus provocateur dilemma. It's hypothesized in the book, in fact, that Stalin himself may very well have been an informant --with Lenin's knowledge-- to the NKVD for many years before the final rise to power of the Bolsheviks.

   Kind of like the truce that often exists in large cities between the crime syndicates and gangs, and the police --only in the case of Stalin he would have given up a few rivals and lesser players in the party.

   Riveting, if also distasteful, food for thought in any case.

   Posted by b_kool_66 at 10/22/2009 @ 4:36pm

2. Not that it should have needed clarification, but before the rightwing nutjobs jump to conclusions, I'm not a communist or a Stalin sympathizer.

   Maybe.

   :D

   Posted by b_kool_66 at 10/22/2009 @ 4:39pm

3. An off topic, but in honor of Dreyfuss article in the latest issue of The Nation I'll post my accolades for him here:

   My congrats to Robert Dreyfuss on his latest piece for the mag, "How to Get Out".

   I've been quite critical of his coverage of the Iranian post-election miasma, in particular, his --and the magazine's-- lack of acknowledgment of well documented indications of US intelligence involvement in fomenting the so-called Green Revolution. Lately, we've seen renewed evidence of US involvement in fomenting amongst Sunni malcontents in extreme SE Iran (Baluchistan) with the --US "mainstream media" noted-- attack on high ranking Revolutionary Guards there.

   We can, and should, all hope for worldwide developments that bode well for a more peaceful and cooperative future --including a Green Revolution if it eventually helps positively contribute.

   But please excuse me for being deeply skeptical of the honesty and integrity of official (and unofficial) US efforts to bring these changes about. The body politic, unfortunately, is very unlike a human body in that entire organ systems so often are determined to wrest away the control and useful function of other organs and organ systems --to the grave detriment of the body as a whole.

   The core principle of the defenders of democracy is that we must have an educated critical mass of citizenry to regulate our homeostasis and keep major organs from going, essentially, cancerous against the whole.

   The Nation magazine, I believe, is a very important component in this effort. I sincerely hope we can all keep up enough intellectual and political pressure on the severely bleeding wounds of the current US body politic to enable the survival of our dangerously traumatized democracy.

   Thanks again,

   Peace,~B

   Posted by b_kool_66 at 10/22/2009 @ 4:45pm

4. Once upon a time......

   In the blissful days of pre-HAPPY.....

   Pacifica can be heard in my Capri and Audi....

   Until "reality" intruded.

   Posted by Happy at 10/22/2009 @ 5:01pm

5. Transparency, disclosure is good for everyone.

   The issue between Pacifica and Amy Goodman was well presented and Pacifica does have egg on it face - as it should from Eyal Press's account.

   The issue of accounting for donations larger than $5000. is another issue, it seems to me. No matter what Pacifica's motivation regarding Ms Goodman may be, the accounting does seem to go to transparency. I see nothing wrong with requiring such disclosures.

   Posted by goedel at 10/22/2009 @ 5:24pm

6. I agree with Goedel and am surprised Eyal Press apparently doesn't see this distinction. Of course the suggestion that Amy Goodman is a tool of the CIA (or anyone else) is beyond ridiculous. But the proposed disclosure rule is a sound idea, and one that really should be adopted by all media entities that claim to be independent of financial influences.

   Posted by MarciaFS at 10/22/2009 @ 6:22pm

7. I agree with both "goedel" and "MarciaFS."

   Posted by JakobFabian at 10/22/2009 @ 6:26pm

8. As a regular listener to Democracy Now and as conservative libertarian, I find the notion of Ms Goodman being a tool of the CIA absurd. I have never doubter the sincerity of her beliefs even if I disagree with most of them.

   Posted by antisocialist at 10/22/2009 @ 6:34pm

9. Would Amy Goodman like to have David Ray Griffin back on her show?

   If she asked him today how many engineers support the theory that planes could not have brought down the Twin Towers, he would tell her about 900. Google "Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth" to see their names and how they are calling for a new investigation.

   And if she asked him for information presented by 9 scientists in a peer-reviewed science journal proving the existence of explosives in the WTC dust, he could ask her to google "Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe," which will lead to 48,000 hits pointing to this definitive study in the Open Chemical Physics Journal, Vol. 2 (April 3, 2009): 7-31.

   Anyone who is not reporting this scientific evidence is guilty of covering up "the truth" about 9/11.

   The big question is, do we really want to know what is true and what isn't?

   Posted by abettervision at 10/22/2009 @ 6:58pm

10. Who says Barack Obama's birth certificate was forged? He refuses to show his birth certificate. His certificate of live birth is the forgery, as you well know. I don't care if Obama was born in Kenya. I still prefer him to McCain, the senile warmonger and Richard Cheney, the Zionist mad dog. Better Sarah Palin should be President.

    Posted by MarkOller at 10/22/2009 @ 7:29pm

11. The World Trade Center demolition and Pentagon bombing is an infintely more serious matter, and blaming al Qaeda is more absurd than blaming Arab terrorists for the bombing of Pearl Harbor. It was physically possible for Arab terrorists to bomb Pearl Harbor, but the al Qaeda kamikaze terrorist plot is as impossible as a Road Runner cartoon, perhaps more so. When Wile E. Coyote crashed into a mountain side, he made a coyote shaped tunnel in the mountain. The 767 which supposedly struck WTC 2 never made a hole in the wall.

    Download http://killtown.blogspot.com/2007/05/why-they-

    didnt-use-planes-to-hit-wtc.html and http://www.propeller.com/story/2009/10/21/killto

    wn39snbspwtc-crash-videos/

    All of the slow motion cgi jet crash videos were removed from YouTube on December 24, 2008. Normally, that would illegal, but there are no laws anymore. There is no United States anymore.

    Posted by MarkOller at 10/22/2009 @ 7:31pm

12. Posted by MarkOller at 10/22/2009 @ 7:31pm

    Hey conspiracy nut; you do realize that for your 9/11 theory to be true, the Democrats have to be in on it?

    And how then do so many keep so many more quiet among both parties staffs?

    Your conspiracy theories are suited to your racist and antip-semitic hate

    Posted by antisocialist at 10/22/2009 @ 7:46pm

13. Hey anonymous shill,

    Of course the Democrats are in on it. The Democrats have been in on every Jewish conspiracy since Franklin Delano Roosevelt's time. President Kennedy was the only exception, and he was murdered on orders from David Ben-Gurion, because opposed Israel's nuclear weapons program. Read, The Mossad Role in the JFK Assassination Conspiracy, by Michael Collins Piper.

    http://www.afrocubaweb.com/news/mossadjfk.htm

    Woodrow Wilson was a Jewish dupe. Read "A Jewish Defector Warns America," by Benjamin H. Freedman.

    http://www.themodernreligion.com/jihad/freedman

    .html

    Posted by MarkOller at 10/22/2009 @ 8:15pm

14. For an outstanding example of Jewish hatred, download http://www.propeller.com/story/2007/08/11/radio

    -host-tears-into-offended-muslim/

    Posted by MarkOller at 10/22/2009 @ 8:20pm

15. Whenever a PC hate monger uses the words hatred, racism and anti-Semitism, I can almost see the hangman's nooses in his eyes. The homophobia accusation is not worth dignifying with a response.

    There are Jews who are the opposite of liberal communists and neoconservative fascists. Google Israel Shahak, Rabbi Michael Dov Weissmandl, Naeim Giladi and Norman Finkelstein for starters.

    Posted by MarkOller at 10/22/2009 @ 8:36pm

16. Not much happening here, so, something delightful: Patterson is a RACIST, I tell ya, but Obama was a RACIST first!

    Paterson to Obama: You just cost NY a billion dollars, champ

    posted at 2:55 pm on October 22, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

    Barack Obama's war on Wall Street has claimed one significant casualty so far: the state of New York. While the Pay Czar claws back bonuses and salaries from bailed-out investment firms, which was a condition of taking the TARP money (not exactly a voluntary act anyway), the big reduction means a big hit in New York state income revenues. Governor David Paterson took the opportunity to slam Obama over the missing money, observes the New York, er, Observer:

    David Paterson....just attacked the Obama administration's decision to restrict bonus pay with John Gambling on WOR.

    "That probably cost New York $1 billion,....the reality is, in the end, we've lost $1 billion dollars because of that act...."

    This comes as no shock, since the Obama White House publicly pushed Paterson not to run for re-election. Paterson suggested that Obama was just cranky because the President hadn't accomplished much in his term, and Paterson's wife suggested that Obama might have something against black governors.....

    Posted by Happy at 10/22/2009 @ 10:02pm

17. Here is even more "Happy-Changey results" for the Obamanation that makes desolation!!

    President Obama's approval rating dropped to 53 percent in the third quarter from 62 percent in the second, according to Gallup.

    The 9 percentage point decline is the largest for an elected president during that period of his first year in office that Gallup has ever recorded, going back to 1953.

    President Truman suffered a 13 point slide in the third quarter of 1945, but of course he wasn't elected to his first term in office.

    Obama's 9 point slump was one of the steepest for a president during any portion of his first year in office. Bill Clinton topped the list for elected presidents with an 11 point dip between the first and second quarters of 1993.

    Obama was hurt by Americans' growing disenchantment with healthcare reform and an unemployment rate that rose to 9.8 percent in September.

    Obama's 53 percent rating puts him near the bottom of the list for presidents at the same time of their tenures. Only Clinton had a lower third-quarter average among elected presidents – 48 percent. Gerald Ford averaged 39 percent during his third quarter in office (1975).

    Obama's third quarter rating also places him below average for any president in any quarter, going back to 1945. Out of 255 presidential quarters measured by Gallup since then, Obama's 53 percent rating earns him 144th place.

    Posted by BigPasture at 10/22/2009 @ 11:22pm

18. If anyone at Pacifica is taking CIA$, Condon invites examination for his provocateur role in paralyzing the organization with suspicion & dissension, an old old ploy.

    But yes, Goodman could easily invite critics of the official 9/11 report on her program & ask probing Qs now. She could, for example, invite John Farmer, sr. counsel of the 9/11 Commission, whose recently published book "The Ground Truth" asserts that most high-level witnesses intentionally lied to the Commission; while he says he doesn't know the truth, he proves they lied. He calls for a new official investigation. Goodman might, inter al, ask him why specifically?

    Goodman could also invite 6 of the Commission's 10 commissioners who are also now calling for a new official investigation, asserting that their original investigation & report were seriously flawed, deficient, not remotely the truth.

    Posted by sloper at 10/22/2009 @ 11:49pm

19. Controlled demolition explains the destruction of the exterior beams of the Twin Towers, but it does not begin to explain the destruction of the 47 core columns, which were surrounded by steel 100mm thick.

    35 Reasons for Many Small Fission Nukes at the WTC

    http://wtcdemolition.blogspot.com/2009/07/35-

    reasons-for-many-small-fission-nukes.html

    911 University -- College of Disinformation Recognition

    http://911u.org/CoDR/

    Posted by MarkOller at 10/22/2009 @ 11:51pm

20. Happy;

    After seeing this poll, it will be hard to see the Obamanation re-elected much less any Demoncrat since they will purposely leave the door open to illegals in thier healthcare bill!

    A new national poll by CNN/Opinion Research Corporation indicates that nearly three-quarters of all Americans would like to see a decrease in the number of illegal immigrants crossing the nation's borders.

    According to CNN, 73 percent of the survey responders wanted a drop in the number of illegal immigrants -- with 22 percent saying the number should remain the same.

    In other poll findings:

    3 percent stated that there should be an increase in the number of illegal immigrants.

    37 percent wanted to see all illegal immigrants deported.

    23 percent said that the number of illegal immigrants in the country should be decreased significantly.

    "Support for deporting all illegal immigrants is highest among older Americans and people who live in rural areas. It's highest in the South and Midwest and nearly as high in the Northeast, but only one in four Westerners think that all illegal immigrants should be deported," said CNN Polling Director Keating Holland.

    CNN also advised that the 73 percent figure was the highest recorded since the question was first asked four years ago.

    Posted by BigPasture at 10/22/2009 @ 11:53pm

21. Goodman might also ask Farmer & the 6 Commissioners what they think is the likelihood of a new investigation actually being commissioned by the Obama govt &/or Congress.

    Posted by sloper at 10/23/2009 @ 12:07am

22. antisocialist,

    I discovered this gem by Henry Makow:

    "When Victims Rule" By Henry Makow, Ph.D. War Could Create Resentment Against Jews

    Did you know the term "Final Solution" apparently was first used by American Jews to apply to Germans? In a 1941 book entitled Germany Must Perish, Theodore Kaufman advocated the sterilization of all Germans (pp.82-89). The American Jewish Committee endorsed this call for genocide. Needless to say, it enraged the Nazis.

    http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?

    ID=512

    Posted by MarkOller at 10/23/2009 @ 01:34am

23. All of the slow motion cgi jet crash videos were removed from YouTube on December 24, 2008. Normally, that would illegal, but there are no laws anymore. There is no United States anymore.

    Posted by MarkOller at 10/22/2009 @ 7:31pm

    Yeah, because it'd be easier to coordinate the hijacking of three jets by a team of patsies and have them fly two of those jets into the WTC as COVER for the explosives you already secretly planted without anyone else in the building noticing.

    Because adding layer upon layer of complication is better than just detonating the explosives you already planted and simply blaming those explosions on Islamic terrorists, a team of which had already managed to bomb the WTC back in the 1990s.

    Yep, easier to do it with the jets instead, don't you think? The more moving parts, the more people involved, the easier it is to maintain the cover-up, right?

    You sir, are an idiot.

    Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/23/2009 @ 07:34am

24. Citizen Carrier,

    Look at the slow motion jet crash videos deleted from YouTube, and then pretend that it is real. Pay particular attention to amputee planes and butter planes. http://www.propeller.com/story/2009/10/21/killto wn39snbspwtc-crash-videos/

    And investigate Pilots for Truth 911 to learn about the impossible maneuvers made by the amateur pilots.

    Posted by MarkOller at 10/23/2009 @ 08:16am

25. Who would be crazy enough to order the September 11 false flag terrorist conspiracy? Zionist, of course. No one thinks Zionist leaders are stupid, but they are crazier than Ayatollah Khomeini on PCP.

    Posted by MarkOller at 10/23/2009 @ 08:22am

26. Let's summarize. You are claiming that there is some sort of cover-up going on because in December of 2008--about 7 YEARS after the 9/11 attacks--some videos were removed from Youtube?

    Who's running this cover-up? Ray Charles?

    And please, debunk my theory. You are claiming that the planes didn't bring those buildings down. That it was done with explosives, traces of which can be found in the masonry wreckage.

    Again, why not just use your planted explosives? The ones you were somehow able to secret away at vital stress points in the building EXACTLY where you knew the planes were going to hit?

    Why have a team of patsies hijack 4 planes and then crash two of them into the WTC? Why not just plant explosives, detonate them, and have some group plant evidence or fabricate intercepts, emails, phone calls, etc. implicating IRAQ intelligence directly?

    If YOU were planning a conspiracy attack like this, would you add more layers of complication to it, or make it as simple as possible?

    Bombs blow up buildings. Blame terrorists. Plant evidence. Frame the Iraqis. Go to war.

    Do you have any explanation, using Occam's Razor, as to why they did it this way instead of my way?

    Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/23/2009 @ 08:27am

27. Let's summarize. You are claiming that there is some sort of cover-up going on because in December of 2008--about 7 YEARS after the 9/11 attacks--some videos were removed from Youtube?

    Who's running this cover-up? Ray Charles?

    And please, debunk my theory. You are claiming that the planes didn't bring those buildings down. That it was done with explosives, traces of which can be found in the masonry wreckage.

    Again, why not just use your planted explosives? The ones you were somehow able to secret away at vital stress points in the building EXACTLY where you knew the planes were going to hit?

    Why have a team of patsies hijack 4 planes and then crash two of them into the WTC? Why not just plant explosives, detonate them, and have some group plant evidence or fabricate intercepts, emails, phone calls, etc. implicating IRAQ intelligence directly?

    If YOU were planning a conspiracy attack like this, would you add more layers of complication to it, or make it as simple as possible?

    Bombs blow up buildings. Blame terrorists. Plant evidence. Frame the Iraqis. Go to war.

    Do you have any explanation, using Occam's Razor, as to why they did it this way instead of my way?

    Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/23/2009 @ 08:27am

28. Happy;

    After seeing this poll, it will be hard to see the Obamanation re-elected......

    Posted by BigPasture at 10/22/2009 @ 11:53pm

    Peggy Noonan has an excellent, and in a classy way (the total antithesis of our Mopper-in-Chief), commentary on ownership!

    Posted by Happy at 10/23/2009 @ 09:59am

29. Peggy Noonan has an excellent, and in a classy way (the total antithesis of our Mopper-in-Chief), commentary on ownership.....at the Wall St. Journal.....access via RealClearPolitics.com.

    Posted by Happy at 10/23/2009 @ 10:01am

30. @ Big Pasture. lol at your wishful thinking. You been reading The Secret? Obama's approval ratings have slipped largest amongst his *liberal* base. That doesn't translate into ANY votes for the GOP, who is so fractured at the moment it doesn't know how right-wing batsh*t crazy it really wants to be. Latest polls show less people identifying themselves as Republicans, as the party is increasingly reduced to a shrinking base of tea-baggers and wackjobs--who completely alienate those all-important "independents" (like me). Obama's poll numbers (which are still rather good) will increase among his base and independents, when they see him meeting what they demanded. The next 3 years will be telling. But even as dissatisifed as those supporters/voters may become from time to time, chances of them casting a ballot for the GOP presidential candidate (who is that again? Palin? Vitter? Limbaugh?) are slim to none. Keep dreaming....

    Posted by sincere1906 at 10/23/2009 @ 10:43am

31. Thursday, July 02, 2009 35 Reasons for Many Small Fission Nukes at the WTC

    1) heat generation at ground zero for six months (china syndrome) 2) inability to quench ground zero heat with water 3) red hot/molten steel at ground zero 4) missing core columns from ground zero (vaporized during destruction) 5) spreading of sand at ground zero consistent with attempts to limit radiation 6) washing of steel recovered from pile consistent with radiation decontamination 7) extreme security for ground zero steel shipments consistent with limiting access to radioactive steel 8) extreme security at ground zero, limiting exposure, view of devastation 9) extreme pulverization of WTC concrete into very fine particles 10) disappearance of over one thousand human bodies from WTC debris 11) disappearance of furniture, phones, filing cabinets and computers from WTC debris 12) disappearance of elevator doors, office doors, office cubicle walls, toilets and sinks from WTC debris 13) several floor fragments fused together in "meteorite" object 14) bone fragments sprayed into Bankers Trust upper floor during destruction 15) multiple blast waves during destruction of tower 16) large fireballs during initiation of WTC1 destruction 17) small backpack-sized fission nukes exist 18) fission-nuke technology well-established 19) low efficiency of fission nukes ensures leftover radioactive fragments and China syndrome 20) EMP formation during tower destruction (exploding cars, partial burning) 21) Description of heat in WTC blast cloud 22) Extensive cover-up of ground zero air by EPA

    http://wtcdemolition.blogspot.com/2009/07

    /35-reasons-for-many-small-fission-

    nukes.html#

    Posted by MarkOller at 10/23/2009 @ 10:44am

32. 23) High rate of cancers, including thyroid cancer typically associated with radiation exposure, in ground zero responders 24) Melted, hanging skin in WTC survivor Felipe David in absence of fire 25) Vaporized press and crumpled steel door in WTC basement reported by Pecoraro 26) Steel beam bent in U, without cracking, evidence of extreme high temps 27) Steel beam bent in U has layer of molten metal on surface 28) Extreme overall devastation of two massive towers and blasted out Ground Zero aftermath 29) Appearance of fantastical, nonsensical DEW theory by likely govt agents-- uses evidence of nukes (EMP, extreme pulverization of tower into dust) but denies nukes at all costs 30) Appearance of fantastical, nonsensical thermite (super nano-thermite) theory by likely govt agents-- uses evidence of nukes (molten steel, china syndrome) but denies nukes at all costs 31) Small iron microspheres found by Jones et al in WTC dust-- evidence of steel vaporization by high temps of nukes 32) Pyroclastic debris cloud during WTC destruction 33) Upwards jutting debris trails reminiscent of debris trails formed during underground nuke test 34) Small bright flashes during destruction of both towers 35) Extremely compacted ground zero debris

    Posted by MarkOller at 10/23/2009 @ 10:48am

33. Explain why the Bureau of Transportation Statistics never recorded the departure of flights AA 11 and AA 77 on 9/11/2001. Explain why the original BTS records said flights UA 93 and UA 175 were diverted. Download:

    http://www.serendipity.li/wot/aa_flts/aa_

    flts.htm

    http://www.bts.gov/xml/ontimesummarystati

    stics/src/dstat/OntimeSummaryDepaturesDat

    a.xml

    http://www.911forum.org.uk/board/viewtopi

    c.php?p=127629

    UA 93 actually landed at Cleveland Hopkins airport.

    http://911review.org/inn.globalfreepress/

    Cleveland_Airport_Mystery.html

    In this video a witness says "it was a bomb." Next, it reveals the absence of plane wreckage at the Pentagon and in the crater in Pennsylvania.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?

    v=_0eC3uns3pA&NR=1

    Posted by MarkOller at 10/23/2009 @ 11:28am

34. There seem to be a lot of hit pieces on Pacifica appearing lately. Ever wonder why? One reason is that it's election season at Pacifica and the 5 Pacifica stations are currently electing their local boards which, in turn, elect the Pacifica national board of directors.

    Ergo this mosh of inaccuracies and innuendoes. Actually, it was a committee of the board -- the governance committee -- that passed a motion recommending that Pacifica adopt a policy requiring all independently produced programs disclose funding sources in excess of $5k. A very good idea, no matter what the motivation of the original moving party might have been. So, I do hope the Pacifica Board of Directors adopts the recommended policy.

    That the left gate-keepers express horror that there might be some "paranoids" lurking on committees of the Pacifica board is pretty laughable. A huge percentage of Americans know the official 9/11 conspiracy theory doesn't stand up to rational scrutiny. And lord only knows what the CIA does with its money -- perhaps it does funnel money to the Ford Foundation and perhaps Democracy Now does receive Ford Foundation grants. (We don't know because they don't disclose their funding.) Paranoia can best be addressed by transparency. I love Democracy Now. It's a great program. It has its limitations, so it's good there are other programs out there, even some on Pacifica, that range a little further into "paranoid" territory. I hope Pacifica will continue to challenge both the left and right orthodoxies. That's where its greatest value lies.

    Posted by MsPang at 10/23/2009 @ 11:48am

35. Posted by MarkOller at 10/22/2009 @ 7:29pm

    "Better Sarah Palin should be President."

    9/11 Truthers for Palin. Fantastic. Other nut job for the ignore bin.

    Posted by srjenkins at 10/23/2009 @ 11:49am

36. Read what happened to the 'hijacked' planes and the pilots.

    FLIGHT 11 John Alexander Ogonowski, pilot, apparently STILL ALIVE. Thomas Francis McGuinness Jr, copilot, apparently STILL ALIVE. N 334AA Serial 22332 Registration: Cancelled/ plane destroyed on 1/14/2002

    FLIGHT 77 Charles Frank Burlingame, pilot, DECEASED as of September 11, 2001. David Michael Charlebois, copilot, apparently STILL ALIVE. N 644AA Serial 24602 Registration: Cancelled/ plane destroyed on 1/14/2002

    FLIGHT 93 Jason Matthew Dahl, pilot, apparently STILL ALIVE. Leroy Wilton Homer Jr, copilot, apparently STILL ALIVE. N 591UA Serial 28142 Registration: Valid/ PLANE STILL ABLE TO FLY.

    FLIGHT 175 Victor Saracini, pilot, DECEASED as of September 11, 2001 Michael Horrocks, copilot, DECEASED as of September 11, 2001 N 612UA Serial 21873 Registration: Valid/ PLANE STILL ABLE TO FLY.

    http://www.democraticunderground.com/disc

    uss/duboard.php?

    az=printer_friendly&forum=125&topic_id=12

    490

    Victor Saracini and Michael Horrocks must have been murdered after the jet landed to prevent them from talking.

    According to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics, flight AA 77 never departed from Dulles airport on 9/11/2001, and it certainly never struck the Pentagon. But Charles Frank Burlingame still died on 9/11/2001. No doubt, he was also murdered to prevent him from talking.

    Posted by MarkOller at 10/23/2009 @ 12:07pm

37. Posted by MarkOller at 10/23/2009 @ 12:07pm

    It's time to render you to the ignore list. Your ant-semitic hatred does not merit an audience here.

    I encourage others not to give this creep any attention.

    Posted by antisocialist at 10/23/2009 @ 12:18pm

38. The Widening Crusade Bush's War Plan Is Scarier Than He's Saying Sydney H. Schanberg Tuesday, October 14th 2003

    In his new book, Winning Modern Wars, retired general Wesley Clark, a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, offered a window into the Bush serial-war planning. He writes that serious planning for the Iraq war had already begun only two months after the 9-11 attack, and adds:

    "As I went back through the Pentagon in November 2001, one of the senior military staff officers had time for a chat. Yes, we were still on track for going against Iraq, he said. But there was more. This was being discussed as part of a five-year campaign plan, he said, and there were a total of seven countries, beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia and Sudan. . . . I left the Pentagon that afternoon deeply concerned."

    A five-year military campaign. Seven countries. How far has the White House taken this plan? And how long can the president keep the nation in the dark, emerging from his White House cocoon only to speak to us in slogans and the sterile language of pep rallies? http://www.villagevoice.com/2003-10-14/news/the-widening-crusade

    Posted by MarkOller at 10/23/2009 @ 12:19pm

39. Sharon to Peres: "Don't worry about American pressure; we control America"

    Occupied Jerusalem: 3 October, 2001 (IAP News)

    An acrimonious argument erupted during the Israeli cabinet weekly session last week between Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and his foreign Minister Shimon Peres during which Sharon reportedly yelled at Peres, saying "don't worry about American pressure, we control America."

    According to Israel radio (in hebrew) Kol Yisrael, Peres warned Sharon Wednesday that refusing to heed incessant American requests for a cease-fire with the Palestinians would endanger Israeli interests and "turn the US against us."

    At this point, a furious Sharon reportedly turned toward Peres, saying "every time we do something you tell me Americans will do this and will do that. I want to tell you something very clear, don't worry about American pressure on Israel, we, the Jewish people control America, and the Americans know it."

    The radio said Peres and other cabinet ministers warned Sharon against saying what he said in public because "it would cause us a public relations disaster."

    Sharon to Peres: "Don't worry about American pressure; we control America"

    (c) IAP News E-mails: iapinfo@iap.org

    InfoPal - The Independent Palestinian Information Network A subsidiary of PalVision Ltd., P.O.Box 25658, Nicosia, Cyprus Telefax +44-870-131-2672, Email: info@palvision.net In Palestine:info@infopal.org

    http://www.wrmea.com/html/newsitem_s.htm

    Posted by MarkOller at 10/23/2009 @ 12:24pm

40. FLIGHT 93 Jason Matthew Dahl AGE 43 Since there were eighteen (18) entries, here are the males and below that, the one and only (DAHL) death that actually occurred on September 11, 2001. Name : Birth : Death : SSN card issued in: GEORGE G DAHL : 22 Jun 1919 : 15 Sep 2001 : Verified : Massachusetts CRETE M DAHL : 03 Aug 1896 : 15 Sep 2001 : Verified : New York OLIVER B DAHL : 22 Oct 1918 : 07 Sep 2001 : Verified : Minnesota DAVID J DAHL : 31 Oct 1941 : 26 Sep 2001 : Proof : Minnesota SIGFRED T DAHL: 24 Feb 1939 : 09 Sep 2001 : Verified : Washington NORMAN K DAHL : 17 Jun 1928 : 19 Sep 2001 : Verified : North Dakota JEFFREY P DAHL: 19 Dec 1951 : 26 Sep 2001 : Proof : Oregon CHARLES M DAHL: 17 Jan 1929 : 16 Sep 2001 : Verified : California PEARL W DAHL : 14 Sep 1925 : 11 Sep 2001 : Verified : Indiana

    Leroy Wilton Homer Jr AGE 36 Name : Birth : Death : Issued in: HERBERT W HOMER: 05 Feb 1953 : 11 Sep 2001 : Proof : Massachusetts EDITH D HOMER : 27 Feb 1918 : 01 Sep 2001 : Verified : New York GLENN B HOMER : 13 Feb 1926 : 24 Sep 2001 : Proof : Pennsylvania

    ******** ********

    FLIGHT 175 Victor John Saracini AGE 51 Name : Birth : Death: : SSN card issued in: VICTOR J SARACINI : 29 Aug 1950: 11 Sep 2001 : New Jersey

    Michael Robert Horrocks AGE 38 Name : Birth : Death : SSN card issued in: MICHAEL R HORROCKS : 24 Mar 1963 : 11 Sep 2001 : Proof : Pennsylvania http://www.democraticunderground.com/disc

    uss/duboard.php?

    az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=10112&mes

    g_id=10112

    Posted by MarkOller at 10/23/2009 @ 12:31pm

41. srjenkins wrote: Posted by MarkOller at 10/22/2009 @ 7:29pm

    "Better Sarah Palin should be President."

    9/11 Truthers for Palin. Fantastic. Other nut job for the ignore bin. _______________

    Let's not take quotes out context. I wrote: I don't care if Obama was born in Kenya. I still prefer him to McCain, the senile warmonger and Richard Cheney, the Zionist mad dog. Better Sarah Palin should be President.

    Posted by MarkOller at 10/23/2009 @ 12:37pm

42. Unfortunately, stunningly it is NOT that far off to suggest Amy's compromise.

    She has steadfastly refused to acknowledge even the most OBVIOUS holes in the 911 story.

    She backs the abuse of undocumented workers, by having "no problem" with uncontrolled immigration, which is the Chamber of Commerce position and the corporate position.

    She is paranoid herself about having anyone else play a major part in her show.

    And what about Jeremy Skahill split?

    I have had a lot of questions myself, as a liberal.

    Posted by acupuncturegirl at 10/23/2009 @ 12:39pm

43. This may be off topic, but entire war on terror revolves around Israel, and I just discovered that politicians kowtowing to Israel and powerful Jews are not necessarily sincere. See

    Senator Hillary Clinton's Remarks to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) February 1, 2007

    The speech was so fawning, it was removed from the AIPAC website, but it can still be found at the Radio Islam website.

    http://www.radioislam.org/islam/english/j

    ewishp/usa/hillaryclinton_aipac.htm *****

    BOOK CHARGES: HILLARY CALLED AIDE 'JEW BASTARD'

    http://www.rense.com/general2/hillh.htm

    Posted by MarkOller at 10/23/2009 @ 12:44pm

44. small scale nuclear weapons at the WTC?

    And all this other hokum? Dude, people on those hijacked planes telephoned authorities and their families and told them what was going on.

    And do you have any source citations that don't involve going to conspiracy forums and blogs?

    You know, like links to CNN stories? The BBC? Fox News? NPR?

    Anything like that?

    Ever consider that what you saw unfolding with your own eyes, as did thousands of other Americans, was pretty much exactly what happened?

    Barbara Olson, conservative commentator, was on one of those planes. Is it your contention she's somehow alive now? Or was killed in some other manner? She telephoned her husband and told him she was on a hijacked plane. She asked him what she should do.

    Exactly what is it you are trying to say happened?

    Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/23/2009 @ 12:45pm

45. small scale nuclear weapons at the WTC?

    And all this other hokum? Dude, people on those hijacked planes telephoned authorities and their families and told them what was going on.

    And do you have any source citations that don't involve going to conspiracy forums and blogs?

    You know, like links to CNN stories? The BBC? Fox News? NPR?

    Anything like that?

    Ever consider that what you saw unfolding with your own eyes, as did thousands of other Americans, was pretty much exactly what happened?

    Barbara Olson, conservative commentator, was on one of those planes. Is it your contention she's somehow alive now? Or was killed in some other manner? She telephoned her husband and told him she was on a hijacked plane. She asked him what she should do.

    Exactly what is it you are trying to say happened?

    Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/23/2009 @ 12:45pm

46. This article appeared in a Washington Post publication, and we know how pro-Israel The Washington Post is.

    USS Liberty: Did Israel commit one war crime to hide another? By James M. Ennes, Jr., The Washington Post Report on Middle East Affairs, May/June 1996

    http://www.hartford-

    hwp.com/archives/51a/023.html

    Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, March 2004, page 10

    Special Report

    Declaration of Ward Boston, Jr., Captain, JAGC, USN (Ret.)

    http://www.wrmea.com/archives/March_2004/0403010.html

    Posted by MarkOller at 10/23/2009 @ 12:51pm

47. This is going nowhere. Twice, I've asked the equivalent of:

    "Yeah, but how does the jolly old fat man get down those narrow chimneys with all those presents and has anybody considered the load-bearing capabilities of your average American roof?"

    And your response to that question has been to cite fringe forums and blogs that talke about "mysterious" radar signatures on Christmas Eve.

    Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/23/2009 @ 1:01pm

48. This is going nowhere. Twice, I've asked the equivalent of:

    "Yeah, but how does the jolly old fat man get down those narrow chimneys with all those presents and has anybody considered the load-bearing capabilities of your average American roof?"

    And your response to that question has been to cite fringe forums and blogs that talke about "mysterious" radar signatures on Christmas Eve.

    Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/23/2009 @ 1:01pm

49. Theads like this sure bring them out of the woodwork and dark cellars, scary!

    Posted by BigPasture at 10/23/2009 @ 1:09pm

50. Citizen Carrier wrote: "And do you have any source citations that don't involve going to conspiracy forums and blogs?

    You know, like links to CNN stories? The BBC? Fox News? NPR?"

    As if I am supposed to trust the official propaganda organs. I admit that the conspiracy forums are also monopolized by disinformation agents and gatekeepers, but I have learned to separate the truth, that half-truth, the unspoken truth and the untruth.

    Fox, incidentally, was once the most honest network. It broadcast a four part series on Israeli espionage. Then it disappeared.

    I do happen to have a BBC source however. This is from the "Who is the Taliban?" blog:

    The BBC broadcast the collapse of WTC 7 26 minutes before it happened, and they repeated the absurd cover story that the steel beams were weakened by fire. This is no secret in Britain, but Americans have been kept in the dark for eight years.

    The BBC's 'WTC 7 Collapsed At 4:54 p.m.' Videos http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES

    /b

    bc_wtc7_videos.html?

    q=bbc_wtc7_videos.html

    Check out "Part of the conspiracy?"

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/200

    7/02/part_of_the_conspiracy.html

    Posted by MarkOller at 10/20/2009 @ 5:27pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    http://www.thenation.com/blogs/dreyfuss/4

    86019/who_is_the_taliban

    Posted by MarkOller at 10/23/2009 @ 1:09pm

51. "As if I am supposed to trust the official propaganda organs. I admit that the conspiracy forums are also monopolized by disinformation agents and gatekeepers, but I have learned to separate the truth, that half-truth, the unspoken truth and the untruth."

    That's how I was expecting you to respond. If we cannot agree upon some mutually accepted agency of proof, what does that leave us with?

    Intuition? Buying into the things that only confirm our opinions rather than challenge them?

    Again, I'll ask one more time...before I go find Rowdy Roddy Piper to get my alien-detecting sunglasses.

    Why was it necessary to hijack four planes and crash them into the buildings if the real demolition work was done by explosive charges, or even nukes, as you seem to have posited?

    Why add that unnecessary layer to the plan? Seeing as how bombers already hit the WTC in the past, wouldn't a second, more successful attack that way be believeable? Rather than this Jerry Bruckheimer extravaganza?

    Bombs in the buildings would do it all by themselves. And if you can sneek them in and implant them without anyone noticing (as you are suggesting "they" did), then you can certainly blame whoever you want. It would be just as easy as blaming more than 14 hijackers.

    So why the planes, Mark, why the planes? It's gilding the lilly.

    The logistics and planning behind successfully hijacking AT LEAST two planes leaves too much to chance. Things go wrong. People get flat tires. Lose their car keys. Get stuck in traffic. Why hinge your bets on planes that will strike exactly where you need them to in order to cover your bomb blasts when your bomb blasts alone will be good enough to enrage a nation?

    Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/23/2009 @ 1:45pm

52. "As if I am supposed to trust the official propaganda organs. I admit that the conspiracy forums are also monopolized by disinformation agents and gatekeepers, but I have learned to separate the truth, that half-truth, the unspoken truth and the untruth."

    That's how I was expecting you to respond. If we cannot agree upon some mutually accepted agency of proof, what does that leave us with?

    Intuition? Buying into the things that only confirm our opinions rather than challenge them?

    Again, I'll ask one more time...before I go find Rowdy Roddy Piper to get my alien-detecting sunglasses.

    Why was it necessary to hijack four planes and crash them into the buildings if the real demolition work was done by explosive charges, or even nukes, as you seem to have posited?

    Why add that unnecessary layer to the plan? Seeing as how bombers already hit the WTC in the past, wouldn't a second, more successful attack that way be believeable? Rather than this Jerry Bruckheimer extravaganza?

    Bombs in the buildings would do it all by themselves. And if you can sneek them in and implant them without anyone noticing (as you are suggesting "they" did), then you can certainly blame whoever you want. It would be just as easy as blaming more than 14 hijackers.

    So why the planes, Mark, why the planes? It's gilding the lilly.

    The logistics and planning behind successfully hijacking AT LEAST two planes leaves too much to chance. Things go wrong. People get flat tires. Lose their car keys. Get stuck in traffic. Why hinge your bets on planes that will strike exactly where you need them to in order to cover your bomb blasts when your bomb blasts alone will be good enough to enrage a nation?

    Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/23/2009 @ 1:45pm

53. and they repeated the absurd cover story that the steel beams were weakened by fire.

    Posted by MarkOller at 10/23/2009 @ 1:09pm

    Absurd? What's absurd about that? Your kitchen oven gets hot enough to temper steel. Heat steel much, much hotter than that, say with jet fuel, office furniture, and a lot of filing cabinets full of paper and structural steel loses it's load-bearing capability.

    Heck, I read something similar along those lines when I was just a kid. But that was about Sherman tanks in WWII.

    Those suckers would light up an burn when hit because they used gasoline engines. A picture of one of those burned tanks made it look like the tank could merely be reclaimed, reconditioned, and used again. The author pointed out that once that armor steel is burned in that manner, it loses it's ability to resist penetration. In other words, the fire ruined the armor's ability to take a beating.

    You don't suppose the same thing could be said of steel beams holding up thousands of tons of masonry/concrete and other steel beams could suffer a similar fate, do you?

    Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/23/2009 @ 2:00pm

54. and they repeated the absurd cover story that the steel beams were weakened by fire.

    Posted by MarkOller at 10/23/2009 @ 1:09pm

    Absurd? What's absurd about that? Your kitchen oven gets hot enough to temper steel. Heat steel much, much hotter than that, say with jet fuel, office furniture, and a lot of filing cabinets full of paper and structural steel loses it's load-bearing capability.

    Heck, I read something similar along those lines when I was just a kid. But that was about Sherman tanks in WWII.

    Those suckers would light up an burn when hit because they used gasoline engines. A picture of one of those burned tanks made it look like the tank could merely be reclaimed, reconditioned, and used again. The author pointed out that once that armor steel is burned in that manner, it loses it's ability to resist penetration. In other words, the fire ruined the armor's ability to take a beating.

    You don't suppose the same thing could be said of steel beams holding up thousands of tons of masonry/concrete and other steel beams could suffer a similar fate, do you?

    Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/23/2009 @ 2:00pm

55. Ms. Goodman forgets to mention:

    Towers' Design Parameters

    Twin Towers' Designers Anticipated Jet Impacts Like September 11th's Structural engineers who designed the Twin Towers carried out studies in the mid-1960s to determine how the buildings would fare if hit by large jetliners. In all cases the studies concluded that the Towers would survive the impacts and fires caused by the jetliners.

    Evidence of these studies includes interviews with and papers and press releases issued by engineers who designed and oversaw construction of the World Trade Center.

    And, due note:

    1960s-era Jetliners Compared to Boeing 767s

    Contrary to widely promoted misconceptions, the Boeing 767-200s used on 9/11/01 were only slightly larger than 707s and DC 8s, the types of jetliners whose impacts the World Trade Center's designers anticipated

    http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/design.html

    same cite:

    John Skilling

    John Skilling was the head structural engineer for the World Trade Center. In a 1993 interview, Skilling stated that the Towers were designed to withstand the impact and fires resulting from the collision of a large jetliner such as Boeing 707 or Douglas DC-8.

    Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the fuel (from the airplane) would dump into the building. There would be a horrendous fire. A lot of people would be killed, ... The building structure would still be there. 3

    A white paper released on February 3, 1964 states that the Towers could have withstood impacts of jetliners travelling 600 mph -- a speed greater than the impact speed of either jetliner used on 9/11/01..................

    Very strange how some of our Jewish liberals are anti-truthers..........

    Posted by OneVote at 10/23/2009 @ 2:28pm

56. CBS Poll in 2006 indicates that 81% of Americans do not believe the government's account of 9/11. Nearly 1/3 of American's believe Bush's account was a total and complete fabrication.

    Posted by OneVote at 10/23/2009 @ 2:33pm

57. 'The struggle was successful, but the unintended consequence was to democratize Pacifica in a way that has ended up empowering many cranks. Instead of serving as a vibrant home for incisive programming that challenges the assumptions of mainstream debate, the network has fallen into the hands of sectarians and crackpots whose control over the Governance Committee may be strong but whose hold on reality appears tenuous'

    WTF is wrong about asking where the funding is coming from?

    Your statement:

    'Goodman is about as likely to be on the payroll of the CIA as Howard Zinn or Noam Chomsky'

    As to Noam Chomsky - lots of folks thinks he insulates Jews and Israel from the extraordinary influence they have over our foreign policy - an outright fabrication and denial. He wants us to believe that Israel's interest is "our Interest" - good or bad. This is the bullshit from the 2% tail that wags the dog.

    I want to know who is funding these folks.

    If you don't think Amy Goodman and Noam Chomsky have issues, then you are part of the problem, not the solution.

    Posted by OneVote at 10/23/2009 @ 2:43pm

58. I encourage others not to give this creep any attention.

    Posted by antisocialist at 10/23/2009 @ 12:18pm

    I encourage others not to give THIS creep any attention.

    (sorry, couldn't resist)

    Posted by BlackFrancis at 10/23/2009 @ 2:45pm

59. I encourage others not to give this creep any attention.

    Posted by antisocialist at 10/23/2009 @ 12:18pm

    I encourage others not to give THIS creep any attention.

    (sorry, couldn't resist)

    Posted by BlackFrancis at 10/23/2009 @ 2:45pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    The Preacher thinks 9/11 was G-d's plan for The Rapture.....it's all in the Bible.

    Posted by OneVote at 10/23/2009 @ 2:57pm

60. The Preacher thinks 9/11 was G-d's plan for The Rapture.....it's all in the Bible.

    Posted by OneVote at 10/23/2009 @ 2:57pm

    Yes, very scary thought...having people in our government that think even remotely like him. Nice preacher - he must always resort to name calling.

    Re: 9/11, I think the odds of 3 buildings on the same site collapsing due to fire are kinda unlikely...

    Posted by BlackFrancis at 10/23/2009 @ 3:04pm

61. You don't suppose the same thing could be said of steel beams holding up thousands of tons of masonry/concrete and other steel beams could suffer a similar fate, do you?

    Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/23/2009 @ 2:00pm

    And what about the center support cores coming down in free fall along with the floor plates?

    Not a chance in hell.

    'Each tower was supported by a structural core extending from its bedrock foundation to its roof. The cores were rectangular pillars with numerous large columns and girders, measuring 87 feet by 133 feet. The core structures housed the elevators, stairs, and other services. The cores had their own flooring systems, which were structurally independent of the floor diaphragms that spanned the space between the cores and the perimeter walls. The core structures, like the perimeter wall structures, were 100 percent steel-framed.'

    Posted by OneVote at 10/23/2009 @ 3:10pm

62. Re: 9/11, I think the odds of 3 buildings on the same site collapsing due to fire are kinda unlikely...

    Posted by BlackFrancis at 10/23/2009 @ 3:04pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    Combine that probability with all the other strange circumstances, and you would have to a stupendous idiot to believe what the government has told you, or, part of Neoconservative Wetdream that hatched the false flag to begin with.

    Posted by OneVote at 10/23/2009 @ 3:14pm

63. Not that it should have needed clarification, but before the rightwing nutjobs jump to conclusions, I'm not a communist or a Stalin sympathizer.

    Maybe.

    :D

    Posted by b_kool_66 at 10/22/2009 @ 4:39pm

    Come on b. They already think you are a commie sympathizer. To question the ways of the W administration is nothing short of complete hatred of the U.S. in their eyes (note: t they are blind and can't see out of their eyes).

    You see, this is where we differ. A good portion of us on the left side of the equation question the Obama administration and even get mad at them. The right wingnuts posting here, on the other hand, would never ever, ever question their appointed messiahs whether it be Karl Rove, Dickless Cheney or W. All of the Bush administration was and is infallible to them. They truly believe that God, Country and baseball, hotdogs and apple pie are what those men care about. Nothing could be further from the truth, but the truth has little to no value to these folks.

    Posted by Wolfgang1 at 10/23/2009 @ 3:16pm

64. Better Sarah Palin should be President.

    Posted by MarkOller at 10/22/2009 @ 7:29pm

    You should go sleep it off because you've obviously had a few too many pal. Sarah Palin as President? Good God man, the woman couldn't even cut it as gov. of Alaska for 4 years.

    Posted by Wolfgang1 at 10/23/2009 @ 3:20pm

65. I encourage others not to give THIS creep any attention.

    (sorry, couldn't resist)

    Posted by BlackFrancis at 10/23/2009 @ 2:45pm

    Don't let Liverlips get to you. Most of us have had enough of his crap and don't pay any attention to him. Put him on ignore. Occasionally you'll see his ranting on a reply by someone else, but overall it's better than having to read the infinite B.S. he pulls out of his ass on a daily basis.

    Posted by Wolfgang1 at 10/23/2009 @ 3:43pm

66. Personally, I haven't spent much time cogitating on the 9/11 attacks and the 9/11 truth movement's arguments.

    In some respects, it's an afterthought since the reality of our shadow government with its multilayers of secret agencies makes terrifying scenarios that undermine democracy, and invite vicious blowbacks in the form of "terrorist" attacks and many other kinds of unintended consequences exceedingly likely. That being said, I suspect that the vast majority of American citizens would like to see a well conceived and thorough investigation of the 9/11 events --specifically in regards to any potential conspiracy(s), and the actual causes of the building collapses.

    But at this precise moment, unless someone highly regarded as an objective observer comes out with a bold statement of accusations or new and crucial evidence emerges, I'd say we aren't likely to see movement on the 9/11 truth front.

    In the meantime, we're at a critical juncture for this country and its hanging-by-a-thread "democracy". It seems very likely that nothing short of a mass citizen's revolt will recover our lost government.

    Unfortunately, if the economy does a further nose dive, or (dog forbid) there is another major terrorist attack, things could easily spiral downward into martial law territory. Not a pleasant thought, but the seriousness of the possibility should have progressives and wise conservatives working overtime to regain some sanity.

    We could start by getting out of Afghanistan.

    Posted by b_kool_66 at 10/23/2009 @ 3:44pm

67. How's it goin' Volf Gaang?

    Peace, ~B

    Posted by b_kool_66 at 10/23/2009 @ 3:46pm

68. How's it goin' Volf Gaang?

    Peace, ~B

    Posted by b_kool_66 at 10/23/2009 @ 3:46pm

    It's Friday!! Life is better than it was on Monday....and at least W isn't the president.

    Unfortunately I have to agree 100% with your previous post. We may indeed be in big trouble. 9/11 is the least of our problems during our present predicament. Getting out of Afghanistan would be a step in the right direction if for any other reason than to pull the rug out from underneath the neocon warhawks that have been running this country for too long. Our country is going broke and making war in multiple countries would be the advice only a village idiot would come up with. Evidently, our country has a lot of village idiots! LOL

    Posted by Wolfgang1 at 10/23/2009 @ 3:54pm

69. And what about the center support cores coming down in free fall along with the floor plates?

    Not a chance in hell.

    posted by OneVote.

    Yeah, no chance in hell that a jetliner loaded with fuel traveling at a few hundred miles an hour could penetrate deep enough into the building to set that central core on fire hot enough t o degrade that steel's load-bearing ability. Especially when the only things between the plane and that core would be some windows, office furniture, and cubicle partitions.

    But there's just one problem with this. The majority of the WTC's load bearing strength was on the outer walls, not an inner core. This was by design. You could maximize office space by having the building supported on it's exterior rather than using up interior space for support columns. It's called the "tube-frame" concept, using high strength perimeter steel called Vierendeel Trusses.

    Bottom line, once the perimeter strength was compromised, it was going to happen.

    Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/23/2009 @ 4:08pm

70. ....those all-important "independents" (like me). Obama's poll numbers (which are still rather good)...

    Posted by sincere1906 at 10/23/2009 @ 10:43am

    I sincerely hope you stay, ahemmm..... "independent"......the Right will be "rather good", without your, ahemmmm...., `intelligence'......yipee!

    Posted by Happy at 10/23/2009 @ 4:11pm

71. More statement by another WTC engineer:

    Leslie Robertson was a participant or observer in the following events:

    (Between Early 1984 and October 1985): Office of Special Planning Studies Vulnerability of WTC to Terrorist Attack The Office of Special Planning (OSP), a unit set up by the New York Port Authority to assess the security of its facilities against terrorist attacks (see Early 1984), spends four to six months studying the World Trade Center. It examines the center's design through looking at photographs, blueprints, and plans. It brings in experts such as the builders of the center, plus experts in sabotage and explosives, and has them walk through the WTC to identify any areas of vulnerability. According to New York Times reporters James Glanz and Eric Lipton, when Edward O'Sullivan, head of the OSP, looks at WTC security, he finds "one vulnerability after another. Explosive charges could be placed at key locations in the power system. Chemical or biological agents could be dropped into the coolant system. The Hudson River water intake could be blown up. Someone might even try to infiltrate the large and vulnerable subterranean realms of the World Trade Center site." In particular, "There was no control at all over access to the underground, two-thousand-car parking garage." However, O'Sullivan consults "one of the trade center's original structural engineers, Les Robertson, on whether the towers would collapse because of a bomb or a collision with a slow-moving airplane." He is told there is "little likelihood of a collapse no matter how the building was attacked."

    Posted by OneVote at 10/23/2009 @ 4:53pm

72. Bottom line, once the perimeter strength was compromised, it was going to happen.

    Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/23/2009 @ 4:08pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    So sayeth government paid contractors....thanks CC....just like Saddam has WMD...

    I am going to go with what the certifying engineers who have liability for their work and representations have to say historically.

    Posted by OneVote at 10/23/2009 @ 4:59pm

73. Actually, I didn't get that from government paid contractors. I got it from a show on The History Channel a few years back that specifically said the WTC's structural strength came from it's outer wall, not central support columns as was prevalent in older building designs.

    Remembering that, I referenced it on a few different websites before I made my earlier post here.

    Like I said, the outer wall strength allowed more floor space to be used for office space, rather than support columns on the inside.

    But don't take my word for it. The information is out there for anybody to see.

    Oswald shot Kennedy. Al Qaeda brought down the World Trade Center. There was no "October Suprise" in which the Iranians held on to the hostages until after Reagan was elected.

    Accept it.

    Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/23/2009 @ 5:27pm

74. The Preacher thinks 9/11 was G-d's plan for The Rapture.....it's all in the Bible.

    Posted by OneVote at 10/23/2009 @ 2:57pm

    I guess Friday is a good enough day for you to lie.

    I've never said any such thing, nor do I believe that.

    Posted by antisocialist at 10/23/2009 @ 7:46pm

75. I had to post this because it is representative of the fantasy world these 9/11 conspiracists live in.

    <As regards the passengers on the planes which actually departed on 9/11 (perhaps just the two UA flights), when one looks into this matter there are also anomalies. See Media Published Fake Passenger Lists and 9/11 and the Neo-Cons. Attempts to locate social security numbers for numerous alleged passengers have produced no result. The published passenger lists put the occupancy at an average of about 27%, unusually low for early morning flights from the East Coast to L.A. and San Francisco. While some passengers may have been totally fictitious and some may have been government operatives travelling under fake names, those passengers who were listed under their real names may have been either (a) in on the plot and now either terminated or hidden away, (b) government agents (or relatives of government agents, e.g., Barbara Olson) who for some reason (e.g., knowing too much and deemed a security risk) were marked for elimination or (c) totally innocent people who were there to provide body parts for grieving relatives or in the case that DNA tests were to be performed. The body parts might well have been obtained when UA 93 or UA 175 landed somewhere, with all innocent passengers on those flights being killed by some quick method (such as a nerve gas introduced into the cabin).>

    http://tinyurl.com/8tlzs

    What I'd love for these nuts to answer is that since both political parties were in on this conspiracy, WHY DO THEY LET ANY OF YOU LIVE?

    If they could get rid of so many other people, why not you "true believers"?

    Posted by antisocialist at 10/23/2009 @ 7:54pm

76. There is an easy way to alleviate doubts about the official lunacy. The television networks could broadcast the crashes into the Twin Towers in slow motion. Why don't they? The government could also let us see the video tapes of the 757 hitting the Pentagon. Why classify video tapes of a jet hitting a wall? Why is it a matter of vital national security?

    I happen to live in Alexandria, Virginia, no more than ten miles from the Pentagon, and I looked at the Pentagon late in the afternoon on September 11, 2001. There was no wreckage.

    We should also be allowed to see live, unedited television broadcasts from the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and the empty crater in Pennsylvania. Why can't we? And was there an epidemic of amnesia at the networks and local affiliates by the evening of September 11, 2001?

    In this video a witness says "it was a bomb." Next, we see the original 16 foot, circular hole in the Pentagon, but we do not see any wreckage. Finally, we the empty crater near Shanksville, Pennsylvania.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0eC3uns3pA&NR=1

    The live television broadcasts from the World Trade Center made no secret of the bombs and controlled demolition. See

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8n-nT-luFIw

    Posted by MarkOller at 10/23/2009 @ 7:57pm

77. Between $750 million and $950 million in gold and silver bullion and coins disappeared from the Comex vaults under WTC 4. That includes 102 million ounces of silver or 3497 tons. Al Qaeda must have been busy indeed.

    Missing Gold A King's Ransom in Precious Metals Seems to Have Disappeared http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/gold.html

    Posted by MarkOller at 10/23/2009 @ 8:07pm

78. Lucky Larry wants $12.3 billion more for 9/11 By Jerry Mazza Online Journal Associate Editor

    http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_3

    135.shtml

    Posted by MarkOller at 10/23/2009 @ 8:48pm

79. I wonder why the stinking Jews didn't include even one Palestinian among the patsies. Must be that Palestinians are 100% uncorruptable by Jewiness!

    They're like kryptonite to the shmattas' evil tricknowledgy!

    Posted by gangpapist at 10/24/2009 @ 12:12am

80. We could start by getting out of Afghanistan. Posted by b_kool_66

    Absolutely.

    But we won't.

    And consequently Obama will probably lose in '12, as the Failed Leader meets the Great Manager, and Mike Multibillionaire Bloomberg buys himself the White House, having spent a mere $2B of his $16B fortune, and wasted not a minute of his own time fundraising.

    Think it's bad now? Just wait.

    Posted by sloper at 10/24/2009 @ 01:02am

81. BTW: Chomsky has been an eloquent & outspoken supporter of the Palestinian cause for nearly 40 years.

    Posted by sloper at 10/24/2009 @ 01:03am

82. Which doesn't mean Chomsky has called for, or should call for, the destruction of Israel. Not calling for Israel's destruction hardly makes one crypto-Likud.

    Posted by sloper at 10/24/2009 @ 01:05am

83. Accept it.

    Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/23/2009 @ 5:27pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    Dude, you are in serious denial.

    Take a look at the center core. Now you want me to believe that the center core is a curtain wall and the curtain wall is the support structure.

    http://stj911.org/evidence/wtc.html

    And, this is really surreal - given the sound of explosions recorded on video and in testimony.

    And, you have failed to provide any explanation for WTC 7.

    No way am I going to accept this. Not going to drink the Kool-Aid.

    Posted by OneVote at 10/24/2009 @ 11:16am

84. Actually, yes, I have provided an explanation.

    Two planes loaded with jet fuel crashed into the WTC after they were hijacked by members of the terrorist group al Qaeda. We know this because passengers on the planes telephoned authorities and family members and described the hijackers. The hijackers' ethnicity did not resemble that of Ed Bagley Jr.

    The WTC towers were supported by their exterior "cage" construction. They were built this way so that the interior spaces could be maximized and not taken up by interior columns used in older building designs. A plane crashing into the side would compromise the structural integrity at the point of impact.

    The buildings subsequently caught on fire, fueled by high octane jet fuel, office furnishings, paper, anything that would burn.

    Heat does things to steel, especially steel that is under the stress of holding up several thousands of tons of concrete and other pieces of steel. As I mentioned before, your kitchen stove gets hot enough to temper steel. A simple blacksmith's forge, like you see in movies or at renaissance festivals, produces enough heat to soften iron so that it becomes maleable. It is reasonable to assume the fires at the WTC equaled or surpassed that level of heat.

    It is reasonable to assume this because the buildings did not collapse immediately when they were hit. Or by "secret" charges hidden in the building. Were there explosives present, the fire would've eventually ignited them and the presence of secondary explosions so long after the impacts would've been suspicious. There were no secondaries. Clearly, it took time for the fires to heat the steel to the point where it was no longer able to support thousands of tons. That explains the time difference from impact to collapse.

    Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/24/2009 @ 5:55pm

85. There. That's an explanation. One that requires the fewest number of assumptions or deviations in order to be credible. Again, Occam's Razor. Learn it. Love it. Live it. It will rarely, if ever lead you astray.

    You can do one of two things here. Present your own version of events, as I have done....or you can try to answer the question I have probably asked about 3 times now in this blog.

    That question, in light of what you and Mark have posited, is what brought the buildings down if NOT the planes and the subsequent fires? Planted bombs seem to be the suggestion, with Mark even alluding to small yield nuclear weapons (uh huh).

    My point is this. If you can plant explosives in a building housing hundreds and hundreds of people without them detecting the explosives, then you do not need airplanes. You do not need a cover story of 14 hijackers (many of them, embarassingly, from "ally" countries). You don't need patsies. You can blame the blasts on whoever you want. You can even hire "arab" looking guys to get caught on tape delvering "packages" to the building. Footage you can reproduce after the "attack" as the smoking gun you need.

    So why the planes? Do you have an explanation for this plan, unnecessarily complex and convoluted, involving many players, many people who could "talk"? Something this complex would require dozens of people to be "in on it". That's too many people to maintain the ruse. It would never work.

    Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/24/2009 @ 6:20pm

86. What I'd love for these nuts to answer is that since both political parties were in on this conspiracy, WHY DO THEY LET ANY OF YOU LIVE?

    If they could get rid of so many other people, why not you "true believers"?

    Posted by antisocialist at 10/23/2009 @ 7:54pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    If the Zionist occupation government had absolute power, it would kill every dissenter on the Internet. It would get rid of the Internet, itself, or limit it to official business and essential commercial transactions. Instead, a fake truth movement was created to suppress the truth as much as possible, and to control the opposition and prevent it from becoming a real threat.

    Posted by MarkOller at 10/24/2009 @ 6:24pm

87. So why the planes? Do you have an explanation for this plan, unnecessarily complex and convoluted, involving many players, many people who could "talk"? Something this complex would require dozens of people to be "in on it". That's too many people to maintain the ruse. It would never work.

    Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/24/2009 @ 6:20pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    As laughable as the 19 Arabs with box cutters is, it is not nearly as absurd as Arab terrorists demolishing the Twin Towers with explosives and nuclear weapons, however small. A low yield atomic bomb nearly demolished WTC 6: the eight story Customs building. Even the 9/11 truthers rarely mention WTC 6. Do not forget the Pentagon or the anthrax letters.

    Anthrax laced letters were sent to every tv network, Tom Brokaw, The New York Post, the National Enquirer and Sun tabloids and USA Patriot Act opponents: Senators Daschle and Leahy. The Senators were sent America's most advanced weaponized anthrax. Even the official propaganda no longer maintains that this was done by Arab terrorists or Islamofascists. Speaking of Occam's razor, which is more likely: that Bruce Ivins did it because he had a grudge against the Kappa Kappa Gamma sorority, and then committed suicide with Tylenol, or that it was an official message to keep your mouths shut?

    Posted by MarkOller at 10/24/2009 @ 7:22pm

88. I long wondered how it was possible to plant tons of demolition charges in the Twin Towers without anyone noticing. People did notice the hammering and drilling and dust for six weeks, but they were not allowed in the floors where it was taking place. Watch "Conspiracy : 9/11 Mysteries Part I: Demolitions," and fast forward 80 minutes.

    http://www.guba.com/watch/3000021442?

    category_id=525&duration_step=0&filter_tiny=0&

    pp=40&sb=5&set=-

    1&sf=0&size_step=0&o=16&sample=1214881050:1

    defb2128ff5bcf747668c4b9d8425ac7cdd3d4d

    Posted by MarkOller at 10/24/2009 @ 7:48pm

89. This is an accurate quote from "Conspiracy : 9/11 Mysteries Part I: Demolitions," even though it appeared in a despicable 'debunking' website.

    1:21:11 What could have been happening on the 34th floor? For weeks, Scott Forbes had heard similar noises on the 98th floor above him.

    Scott Forbes: "It must have been at least four to six weeks before 9/11. It was like rebuilding work going on upstairs. The tenants, the people from Aon who had been there, were moved somewhere else. The offices were just vacant, and there was a lot of heavy machinery building work going on. It was almost like pneumatic drills and lots of hammering. So much so that the floors were shaking, that's how noticeable it was. It was almost as if something heavy was being moved, and then it was being taken off wheels, and it was like, BOOM! Our floor underneath literally shook. You could feel the weight above you. That was how large it was.

    On one occasion I opened a door to see what was going on, being nosey. When I opened the door the whole office space was empty. There was nothing there at all. It was quite bizarre because it was just empty, completely empty, barren, nothing, zero -- not even cables hanging from the ceiling. But there'd been these heavy noises and vibrations up above. It was really strange. http://www.911mysteriesguide.com/22.php

    Posted by MarkOller at 10/24/2009 @ 8:47pm

90. What a pathetic article. Want me to name some structural engineers who believe that a steel structure high-rise building cannot completely collapse at near freefall acceleration due to burning jet fuel?

    Visit Architects and Engineers For 9/11 Truth at www.AE911Truth.org.

    Or here's some basic physics for you to consider...

    Simple science proves the inside job aspect of 9/11. Both WTC towers fell at near 'freefall acceleration'. Freefall acceleration is described as the time it would take to drop an object a given distance until it reaches the ground with only gravity as the downward force. Ex: the time it would take to drop a baseball off the top of one of the 110 storey World Trade Center buildings until it hit the street below with only air as the resistant force. (About 9.2 seconds.) Therefore, as each tower collapsed, how is it physically possible for them to collapse at this speed with all of the massive steel and concrete support structure below giving NO RESISTANCE? Also, what was the energy force that caused massive multi-ton steel support columns to be ejected laterally outward up to 600 feet embedding them into nearby buildings? What was the energy force that caused all of the concrete to be pulverized into a fine powder covering all of lower Manhattan? The Physics Law of Conservation of Momentum does not allow for this. You can't have it both ways. If the Official Government Conspiracy Theory claims that the weight of the part of the building above the plane impact area crushed the lower structure how can it also have the energy to eject the steel outward and pulverize the concrete too? Simple answer. It can't.

    Posted by Cincy911Truth at 10/24/2009 @ 8:52pm

91. The evidence is in... 'Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe', a peer-reviewed scientific paper has recently been published in the Open Chemical Physics Journal detailing the use of nanothermite to bring down the three buildings in NYC on 9/11 by controlled demolition. We must demand a new, thorough and "independent" 9/11 investigation now for the 9/11 victims, their families and all those lives lost from this prefabricated war on terrorism.

    Posted by Cincy911Truth at 10/24/2009 @ 8:54pm

92. Citizen Carrier, you keep saying that most of the Twin Towers load bearing capacity was provided by the exterior columns. This is incorrect. The exterior columns took care of all the lateral loads (wind, etc.) and shared the gravity load with the core columns, which bore most of it. See http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCSTAR%201-1A.pdf#pg=130

    Also, I should point out that "MarkOller" seems to be a disinformationist of the "no planes hit the towers" and/or "the jooz did it!" variety and should not be regarded as sincere or as representative of the citizens' movement for 9/11 truth. Those seeking to find out what real 9/11 skeptics believe should consider the works of Prof. David Ray Griffin first and foremost, as well as the organization Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth at ae911truth.org.

    Posted by Gretavo at 10/24/2009 @ 9:32pm

93. "Were there explosives present, the fire would've eventually ignited them "

    An intuitively plausible belief but incorrect:

    Sensitivity Regarding an explosive, this refers to the ease with which it can be ignited or detonated--i.e., the amount and intensity of shock, friction, or heat that is required. When the term sensitivity is used, care must be taken to clarify what kind of sensitivity is under discussion. The relative sensitivity of a given explosive to impact may vary greatly from its sensitivity to friction or heat. Some of the test methods used to determine sensitivity are as follows:

    Impact Sensitivity is expressed in terms of the distance through which a standard weight must be dropped to cause the material to explode. Friction Sensitivity is expressed in terms of what occurs when a weighted pendulum scrapes across the material (snaps, crackles, ignites, and/or explodes).

    Heat Sensitivity is expressed in terms of the temperature at which flashing or explosion of the material occurs.

    Sensitivity is an important consideration in selecting an explosive for a particular purpose. The explosive in an armor-piercing projectile must be relatively insensitive, or the shock of impact would cause it to detonate before it penetrated to the point desired. The explosive lenses around nuclear charges are also designed to be highly insensitive, to minimize the risk of accidental detonation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosive_material#Stability

    Posted by Gretavo at 10/24/2009 @ 9:39pm

94. " There were no secondaries. "

    Wrong again.

    In June of 2002, NBC television played segments from tapes recorded on 9/11. One segment contained the following exchange, which involved firefighters in the south tower:

    Official: Battalion 3 to dispatch, we've just had another explosion. Official: Battalion 3 to dispatch, we've had additional explosion. Dispatcher: Received battalion command. Additional explosion.11 http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20060118104223192

    The two decided to ascend the stairs to the C level, to a small machine shop... When the two arrived at the C level, they found the machine shop gone.

    "There was nothing there but rubble, "... "We're talking about a 50 ton hydraulic press ? gone!" The two began yelling for their co-workers, but there was no answer. They saw a perfect line of smoke streaming through the air. "You could stand here," he said, "and two inches over you couldn't breathe. We couldn't see through the smoke so we started screaming." But there was still no answer.

    The two made their way to the parking garage, but found that it, too, was gone. "There were no walls, there was rubble on the floor, and you can't see anything" he said.

    They decided to ascend two more levels to the building's lobby. As they ascended to the B Level, one floor above, they were astonished to see a steel and concrete fire door that weighed about 300 pounds, wrinkled up "like a piece of aluminum foil" and lying on the floor. "They got us again," Mike told his co-worker, referring to the terrorist attack at the center in 1993. , Mike recalled seeing similar things happen to the building's structure. He was convinced a bomb had gone off in the building. http://www.chiefengineer.org/article.cfm?seqnum1=1029

    Posted by Gretavo at 10/24/2009 @ 9:54pm

95. So why the planes? Do you have an explanation for this plan, unnecessarily complex and convoluted, involving many players, many people who could "talk"? Something this complex would require dozens of people to be "in on it". That's too many people to maintain the ruse. It would never work.

    Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/24/2009 @ 6:20pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    To cover the ass of those who did the demo work for the government. And do Google Norad Exercises and WTC, a nice primer to found at:

    http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a99wtccrashsimulation

    'Turner Construction, who supervised the 2000 demolition of the Seattle Kingdome, participated in the post-9/11 Ground Zero clean-up and performed extensive renovations within the World Trade Center towers just prior to 9/11, was in fact performing unspecified renovation work throughout the WTC complex until the very morning of September 11, 2001. The Port Authority of NY/NJ now claims that records describing such work or other projects were destroyed on September 11, 2001. A December 2000 WTC property assessment described required renovation work to be completed within one year, upon steel columns within elevator shafts of both WTC towers that was immediately pending or already underway'

    Now check out this picture. Note the angle cut - this is characteristic of demolition.

    http://www.debunking911.com/angcut.jpg

    Also see: The following is a Freedom of Information (FOI) reply from the Port Authority of NY/NJ reporting that contracts pertaining to abatement of World Trade Center tower asbestos containing fireproofing material have been located and are available for release. World Trade Center tower asbestos abatement was noted by the December 6, 2000 Merritt Harris Inc.

    Posted by OneVote at 10/24/2009 @ 10:20pm

96. 'At the end of two trials in 2004, a federal court decided that the insurers owed a maximum of $4.6 billion, more than the $3.5 billion term of the insurance policy. Silverstein had originally claimed $7 billion, attempting to prove that the crashing of the two planes into two towers constituted two separate events. The two sides have been locked in a grueling appraisal process to determine exactly how much of the $4.6 billion must be paid out.............

    Silverstein is determined to rake in every last penny possible from 9/11 and has already secured billions from other insurers without a blink of an eye over the fact that he leased the property just six weeks before the attacks and has since been caught in an admission that he ordered at least one of the buildings, WTC 7, "pulled" on 9/11.

    Building 7 occupied a city block immediately north of the World Trade Center complex. Photos taken minutes before its collapse show small fires on two or three floors. Building 7 became only the third steel building in history before or since 9/11 to collapse from fire damage. The other two were the North and South towers of the World Trade Center.

    We have thoroughly documented the mystery surrounding the collapse of building 7, an issue which recently exploded back into the limelight with the revelations that the BBC reported that the building had collapsed up to an hour before it actually fell.

    Any building that was not owned by Silverstein Properties that day strangely remained upright, despite being a lot closer to the two towers that collapsed onto them.'

    Is There A Secret To The 9/11 Insurance Battle? Why is Allianz really holding out on paying Larry Silverstein?

    Steve Watson Infowars.net Wednesday, March 14, 2007

    Posted by OneVote at 10/24/2009 @ 11:44pm

97. Whatever ... There are questions and what 911 Truthers want more than anything else is another, more thorough and more independent investigation. Goddamn it, is that too much to ask?

    Posted by Spoopy at 10/25/2009 @ 12:07am

98. Was This Network Worth Saving? Pacifica Caves In To Smear Campaign by ROBERT BUZZANCO

    October 4, 2002 - Counterpunch

    http://www.counterpunch.org/buzzanco1003.html

    Definitely worth a read for some perspective and history.

    Crazies indeed - but maybe from without rather than from within.

    And maybe - a little "paranoia" is justified.

    Posted by OneVote at 10/25/2009 @ 12:52am

99. "Goodman is about as likely to be on the payroll of the CIA as Howard Zinn or Noam Chomsky."

    I agree, but don't consider it particularly unlikely in regard to any of the three. I respect what they have done and continue to do, but would surprised if they weren't pressured into keeping shut on various issues, and possibly paid to seal the deal. In particular, Amy Goodman is visibly afraid of discussing the facts of 9/11:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXTlxT7gFGk

    It seems like calling for a new investigation is all she is allowed to say.

    Posted by kylebisme at 10/25/2009 @ 01:12am

100. Also, I should point out that "MarkOller" seems to be a disinformationist of the "no planes hit the towers" and/or "the jooz did it!" variety and should not be regarded as sincere or as representative of the citizens' movement for 9/11 truth. Those seeking to find out what real 9/11 skeptics believe should consider the works of Prof. David Ray Griffin first and foremost, as well as the organization Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth at ae911truth.org.

     Posted by Gretavo at 10/24/2009 @ 9:32pm | ignore this person | warn this person

     The evidence is in... 'Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe', a peer-reviewed scientific paper has recently been published in the Open Chemical Physics Journal detailing the use of nanothermite to bring down the three buildings in NYC on 9/11 by controlled demolition. We must demand a new, thorough and "independent" 9/11 investigation now for the 9/11 victims, their families and all those lives lost from this prefabricated war on terrorism.

     Posted by Cincy911Truth at 10/24/2009 @ 8:54pm | ignore this person | warn this person

     The Zionist propaganda ministry must be desperate, if it is resorting to truthers and limited hangouts on a magazine blog.

     I am still waiting for someone to explain the cartoon jet crashes or to provide links to slow motion videos of the real jet crashes. I still want to know why the Bureau of Transportation Statistics never recorded the departures of flights AA 11 and AA 77 on 9/11/2001. Why was there no wreckage in the crater in Pennsylvania? Why was there no wreckage at the Pentagon except a few planted scraps? How can one explain what happened without micro nuclear weapons, i.e. .002 to .1 kilotons?

     Posted by MarkOller at 10/25/2009 @ 03:58am

101. Also, I should point out that "MarkOller" seems to be a disinformationist of the "no planes hit the towers" and/or "the jooz did it!" variety and should not be regarded as sincere or as representative of the citizens' movement for 9/11 truth. Those seeking to find out what real 9/11 skeptics believe should consider the works of Prof. David Ray Griffin first and foremost, as well as the organization Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth at ae911truth.org.

     Posted by Gretavo at 10/24/2009 @ 9:32pm | ignore this person | warn this person

     The evidence is in... 'Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe', a peer-reviewed scientific paper has recently been published in the Open Chemical Physics Journal detailing the use of nanothermite to bring down the three buildings in NYC on 9/11 by controlled demolition. We must demand a new, thorough and "independent" 9/11 investigation now for the 9/11 victims, their families and all those lives lost from this prefabricated war on terrorism.

     Posted by Cincy911Truth at 10/24/2009 @ 8:54pm | ignore this person | warn this person

     The Zionist propaganda ministry must be desperate, if it is resorting to truthers and limited hangouts on a magazine blog.

     I am still waiting for someone to explain the cartoon jet crashes or to provide links to slow motion videos of the real jet crashes. I still want to know why the Bureau of Transportation Statistics never recorded the departures of flights AA 11 and AA 77 on 9/11/2001. Why was there no wreckage in the crater in Pennsylvania? Why was there no wreckage at the Pentagon except a few planted scraps? How can one explain what happened without micro nuclear weapons, i.e. .002 to .1 kilotons?

     Posted by MarkOller at 10/25/2009 @ 03:59am

102. Rabid Zionists were to blame, including some Christian Zionists. These are the founding members of the PNAC of "new Pearl Harbor" fame.

     Elliott Abrams Gary Bauer William J. Bennett Jeb Bush Dick Cheney Eliot A. Cohen Midge Decter Paula Dobriansky Steve Forbes Aaron Friedberg Francis Fukuyama Frank Gaffney Fred C. Ikle Donald Kagan Zalmay Khalilzad I. Lewis Libby Norman Podhoretz Dan Quayle Peter W. Rodman Stephen P. Rosen Henry S. Rowen Donald Rumsfeld Vin Weber George Weigel Paul Wolfowitz

     http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm

     Posted by MarkOller at 10/25/2009 @ 04:10am

103. Pardon me for posting the same message twice.

     Why should we trust a government which tried and hanged one of Saddam Hussein's doubles in Baghdad? Why should we trust the propaganda organs which allowed this farce? Take a look at the real and fake Saddam Husseins. Despite the resemblance, only a blind man could confuse the two.

     Our "Saddam" prisoner in Iraq - is NOT Saddam!

     http://www.apfn.net/messageboard/05-16-

     05/discussion.cgi.50.html

     The Capture, Trial and Conviction of Saddam Hussein - Another US Intelligence Farce

     http://www.sott.net/signs/editorials/signs20061106

     _TheCaptureTrialandConvictionofSaddamHusseinA

     notherUSIntelligenceFarce.php

     No amount of name calling will persuade anyone who actually downloads these web pages.

     Discover the truth about Osama bin Laden, and see the real Osama and the fakes.

     http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/o

     sama_dead.html

     http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-

     1212851/Has-Osama-Bin-Laden-dead-seven-years--

     U-S-Britain-covering-continue-war-terror.html

     http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?

     context=va&aid=6722

     http://www.911lies.org/fake_bin_laden.html

     http://emperors-clothes.com/news/probestop-i.htm

     http://911review.com/articles/usamah/khilafah.ht

     ml

     Posted by MarkOller at 10/25/2009 @ 04:24am

104. These links demonstrate American servitude to Israel.

     HUNDREDS OF MOSSAD AGENTS CAUGHT RUNNING WILD IN AMERICA! Warren Royal http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/h

     undreds.html?q=hundreds.html

     Fox News: Israeli Spyring http://100777.com/usa/israeli_spyring

     The neocon power grab at NSA and an attempt to stifle the press By Wayne Madsen http://www.onlinejournal.org/Special_Reports/052

     405Madsen/052405madsen.html

     How Israeli Backdoor Technology Penetrated the U.S. Government's Telecom System and Compromised National Security An Israeli Trojan Horse By CHRISTOPHER KETCHAM http://www.counterpunch.org/ketcham09272008.h

     l

     NSA Security running amok to plug leaks about 9/11 By Wayne Madsen Online Journal Contributing Writer July 7, 2009, 00:17 http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_4

     878.shtml

     masters of puppet http://cleveland.indymedia.org/news/2007/07/263

     04.php

     If you believe the "war for oil" diversion, read "The Deadly Embrace - Zion-power and war: from Iraq to Iran," by James Petras. http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2007/11/06/

     the-deadly-embrace-zion-power-and-war-from-iraq-

     to-iran-by-james-petras/

     Whose War? by Patrick Buchanan http://www.amconmag.com/article/2003/mar/24/00007/

     THE NEW THOUGHT POLICE: The campaign to criminalize criticism of Israel By Justin Raimondo http://www.monabaker.com/pMachine/more.php?

     id=A957_0_1_0_m

     9-11 Gatekeepers, Israel, Thought Police & Word Nazis By Lisa Guliani. http://www.wingtv.net/thorn2006/911truthorg2.ht

     ml

     cont.

     Posted by MarkOller at 10/25/2009 @ 04:55am

105. The Bollyn Trial: The Criminalization of an Outspoken Journalist *PIC* Posted By: Christopher Bollyn Date: Friday, 6 July 2007, 6:08 a.m. http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-

     bin/archive.cgi?read=106333

     Let us not forget the Christian Zionists.

     The Widening Crusade: Bush's War Plan Is Scarier Than He's Saying Sydney H. Schanberg http://www.villagevoice.com/2003-10-

     14/news/the-widening-crusade/

     George Bush: 'God told me to end the tyranny in Iraq' Ewen MacAskill http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/oct/07/ira

     q.usa

     Radical Christians in Iraq http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m61elAh5F1c

     Posted by MarkOller at 10/25/2009 @ 04:57am

106. Do these reviews of Prof. Griffin's latest book look like they're from kooks?

     http://www.amazon.com /Mysterious-Collapse-World-Trade-Center /dp/1566567866/

     "During my 33 years as a research physicist at the Naval Research Laboratory, it was my great joy to be able to contribute to the advancement of science without the slightest interference by NRL officials. So I was sickened to read in David Ray Griffin's assiduously researched book of unequivocal evidence for massive scientific fraud committed by a politicized NIST. I implore President Obama to end the subversion of science at NIST and open a new, unfettered, investigation of the 9/11 attacks."

     --David L. Griscom, Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science and of the American Physical Society

     "Based on my engineering knowledge and experience, I fully agree with Dr. Griffin's conclusion that NIST's report on the collapse of WTC 7 is pseudo-science, containing claims that are misleading and even outright false. Numerous contradictions exposed by outside experts during the public review process were completely ignored, because they did not fit NIST's contrived explanation."

     --Jack Keller, Fellow of the American Society of Civil Engineers; member of the National Academy of Engineering

     "Once again, David Ray Griffin has taken on a complicated piece of the 9/11 story and made it understandable. Whether you are a novice about 9/11 or have been following the inconsistencies of the government's story closely, you will find Griffin's new book enlightening."

     --Lorie Van Auken,widow of Kenneth Van Auken, who was killed at WTC 1 on 9/11, and member of the Family Steering Committee for the 9/11 Commission

     Posted by Gretavo at 10/25/2009 @ 06:35am

107. Do these reviews of Prof. Griffin's latest book look like they're from kooks?

     http://www.amazon.com /Mysterious-Collapse-World-Trade-Center /dp/1566567866/

     "During my 33 years as a research physicist at the Naval Research Laboratory, it was my great joy to be able to contribute to the advancement of science without the slightest interference by NRL officials. So I was sickened to read in David Ray Griffin's assiduously researched book of unequivocal evidence for massive scientific fraud committed by a politicized NIST. I implore President Obama to end the subversion of science at NIST and open a new, unfettered, investigation of the 9/11 attacks."

     --David L. Griscom, Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science and of the American Physical Society

     "Based on my engineering knowledge and experience, I fully agree with Dr. Griffin's conclusion that NIST's report on the collapse of WTC 7 is pseudo-science, containing claims that are misleading and even outright false. Numerous contradictions exposed by outside experts during the public review process were completely ignored, because they did not fit NIST's contrived explanation."

     --Jack Keller, Fellow of the American Society of Civil Engineers; member of the National Academy of Engineering

     "Once again, David Ray Griffin has taken on a complicated piece of the 9/11 story and made it understandable. Whether you are a novice about 9/11 or have been following the inconsistencies of the government's story closely, you will find Griffin's new book enlightening."

     --Lorie Van Auken,widow of Kenneth Van Auken, who was killed at WTC 1 on 9/11, and member of the Family Steering Committee for the 9/11 Commission

     Posted by Gretavo at 10/25/2009 @ 06:35am

108. From Publishers Weekly (who made Griffin's "The New Pearl Harbor Revisited" their "Pick of the Week")

     Starred Review. Author and professor Griffith (9/11 Contradictions: An Open Letter to Congress and the Press) knows his work is referred to by officials and the media as conspiracy theory, and he has a rebuttal: "the official theory is itself a conspiracy theory." In this companion volume to 2004's The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9/11, Griffith provides corrections, raises new issues and discusses "the two most important official reports about 9/11," the 9/11 Commission Report and the National Institute of Standards and Technology report on the Twin Towers, both "prepared by people highly responsive to the wishes of the White House" and riddled with "omission and distortion from beginning to end." Griffith addresses many points in exhaustive detail, from the physical impossibility of the official explanation of the towers' collapse to the Commission's failure to scrutinize the administration to the NIST's contradiction of its own scientists to the scads of eyewitness and scientific testimony in direct opposition to official claims. Citing hundreds, if not thousands, of sources, Griffith's detailed analysis is far from reactionary or delusional, building a case that, though not conclusive, raises enough valid and disturbing questions to make his call for a new investigation more convincing than ever.

     Posted by Gretavo at 10/25/2009 @ 06:39am

109. "The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." --William Colby, former CIA Director, quoted by Dave Mcgowan, Derailing Democracy

     "You could get a journalist cheaper than a good call girl, for a couple hundred dollars a month." --CIA operative, discussing the availability and prices of journalists willing to peddle CIA propaganda and cover stories. Katherine the Great, by Deborah Davis

     Posted by mtracy9 at 10/25/2009 @ 07:30am

110. The Nation magazine has a sorry reputation regarding exposing shadow government. Back in the early 1990s, with the airing of Oliver Stone's movie JFK, The Nation magazine spent a lot of ink trying to convince its readers that the Warren Commission had it right all along, with its double lone-nut theory -- that JFK was killed by a lone nut (Oswald) who, in turn, was kill killed by another lone nut (Ruby).

     Posted by mtracy9 at 10/25/2009 @ 07:38am

111. Back in the early 1990s, with the airing of Oliver Stone's movie JFK, The Nation magazine spent a lot of ink trying to convince its readers that the Warren Commission had it right all along, with its double lone-nut theory -- that JFK was killed by a lone nut (Oswald) who, in turn, was kill killed by another lone nut (Ruby).

     Posted by mtracy9 at 10/25/2009 @ 07:38am | ignore this person | warn this person

     Perhaps, The Nation magazine was trying to lend Oliver Stone credibility. See

     Final Judgment: The Missing Link in the JFK Assassination Conspiracy by Michael Collins Piper

     Permindex was clearly the Israeli link to the JFK assassination, so much so that Jim Garrison himself later circulated the manuscript for a never-published novel in which he fingered the Mossad as prime mover behind the conspiracy although Garrison never otherwise mentioned a Mossad connection publicly.

     You may ask why Hollywood's so-called "radical film-maker" Oliver Stone, whose film JFK was a virtual tribute to Garrison never mentioned any of this.

     I would contend that Stone failed to mention these details in JFK because the film was financed by Arnon Milchan, an Israeli arms dealer linked to smuggling of materiel to Israel's nuclear program--the very point of contention between JFK and Israel.

     Milchan's role in the production of JFK is no secret, by the way. He is listed in the credits as "executive producer," which, in Hollywood parlance, means that he was the "money man," so to speak, behind the film.

     http://afrocubaweb.com/news/mossadjfk.htm

     Posted by MarkOller at 10/25/2009 @ 09:54am

112. Posted by MarkOller at 10/25/2009 @ 09:54am |

     Mark, that dog won't hunt...take off your semite-colored glasses, follow the money, and try sniffing around the mobbed up General Dynamics and the curious procurement of the TFX / F-111 Aardvark, if you really want to know why JFK caught one in the head.

     http://tinyurl.com/ylrv3u7

     http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080218/cockburn

     Posted by snowball777 at 10/25/2009 @ 10:19am

113. Whatever ... There are questions and what 911 Truthers want more than anything else is another, more thorough and more independent investigation. Goddamn it, is that too much to ask? Posted by Spoopy at 10/25/2009 @ 12:07am | ignore this person | warn this person

     yes it is.

     the american people were promised a congressional investigation of the run up to the Iraq war. promised but not delivered. that investigation is far more important than placating a bunch of conspiracy nuts.

     Posted by emile duBois at 10/25/2009 @ 10:19am

114. As laughable as the 19 Arabs with box cutters is, it is not nearly as absurd as Arab terrorists demolishing the Twin Towers with explosives and nuclear weapons, however small.

     Posted by MarkOller at 10/25/2009 @ 09:54am

     You're apparently unaware of how laughable this explanation is.

     Arabs already attempted to demolish one of the towers with explosives. In what way would anybody consider it absurd for them to reconsider the problem and make a more effective attempt at it? You mean you wouldn't believe that?

     You're honestly saying this incohesive amalgamation of "facts" involving planes that didn't take off, people who didn't die, planes that didn't crash into buildings despite eyewitnesses not connected to the government in any way is actually more believeable to you than terrorists--some of them probably with engineering degrees--placing explosives in the WTC?

     And I have not claimed they used nukes. That is absolutely absurd.

     You see, I'm supposed to believe, simultaneously, that people were able to secretly emplace explosives in the WTC, but that the same planners thought that nobody would believe terrorists could sneak explosives into the WTC.

     See the contradiction?

     Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/25/2009 @ 10:20am

115. Posted by snowball777 at 10/25/2009 @ 10:19am | ignore this person | warn this person

     conspiracy nut.

     ignored conspiracy nut.

     Posted by emile duBois at 10/25/2009 @ 10:21am

116. For anybody who has never attempted to argue any point, political, scientific, economic, whatever, with the most rabidly Christian fanatic who counters your points only with scripture quotatons and considers that to be the final word on any subject...read this blog and get an idea what that feels like.

     Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/25/2009 @ 10:24am

117. how did we get from Pacifica to conspiracy nutterdom?

     conspiracy nuts are a pathetic bunch. they are just trying to get attention. don't give it to them.

     Posted by emile duBois at 10/25/2009 @ 10:27am

118. Posted by OneVote at 10/24/2009 @ 10:20pm |

     But why the planes?

     Why not just 'pull' the buildings with some ordnance suitable for arab jihadists and plant evidence leading back to their scapegoat of choice?

     Occam's razor...

     Posted by snowball777 at 10/25/2009 @ 10:28am

119. Also, I should point out that "MarkOller" seems to be a disinformationist of the "no planes hit the towers" and/or "the jooz did it!" variety and should not be regarded as sincere or as representative of the citizens' movement for 9/11 truth. Those seeking to find out what real 9/11 skeptics believe should consider the works of Prof. David Ray Griffin first and foremost, as well as the organization Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth at ae911truth.org.

     Posted by Gretavo at 10/24/2009 @ 9:32pm | ignore this person | warn this person

     From Publishers Weekly (who made Griffin's "The New Pearl Harbor Revisited" their "Pick of the Week")

     Posted by Gretavo at 10/25/2009 @ 06:39am | ignore this person | warn this person

     The phrase, "new Pearl Harbor," appeared in the PNAC document, "Rebuilding America's Defenses." So, even Prof. Griffin must be aware that Jewish fanatics had something to do with the September 11, terror, or he has now idea who belongs to the PNAC.

     And what does "the citizens' movment for 9/11 truth" have to do with citizens? It's a creation of the CIA masquerading as a grass roots movement. In modern America, even dissent is a totalitarian charade. Welcome to 1984.

     Posted by MarkOller at 10/25/2009 @ 10:36am

120. Reviews Israeli State Terrorism Exposed - An Amazing Book, September 5, 2000 Reviewer: David L. Rubinstein from Tel Aviv , Israel A landmark book for modern American history that should be on the bookshelf of every serious historian as well as every single concerned American. Let me give my reasons.

     This book is an extraordinary feat of investigative journalism. The information and facts that Piper uncovers are used in an extremely powerful way to reveal a whole sequence of Israeli/Jewish actions culminating in the assassination of JFK (who was an implacable opponent of the Israeli nuclear weapons program of the early 1960's and 1950's )....

     As an Israeli/American peace activist I welcome this book . This book is especially topical today as the search for peace in the Middle East continues. As Israelis as well international Jews who care about our country I believe it right and proper to engage in an informed and vigorous debate about the undoubted wrong-doings of our government in an open and informed way. This is the only way in which the worst excesses of Zionism can be curbed. This book provides us all with just such an opportunity.

     http://afrocubaweb.com/news/mossadjfk.htm#Reviews

     Posted by MarkOller at 10/25/2009 @ 11:10am

121. Posted by MarkOller at 10/25/2009 @ 10:36am |

     "The phrase, 'new Pearl Harbor', appeared in the PNAC document, 'Rebuilding America's Defenses'."

     <Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor. Domestic politics and industrial policy will shape the pace and content of transformation as much as the requirements of current missions.>

     Ooooh...ominous.

     The PNAC toadies are a disturbing lot...too many toy guns in their youth or something, but you're stretching if you believe their plans outlined 9/11 as the aforementioned catalyst.

     Posted by snowball777 at 10/25/2009 @ 11:13am

122. MarkOller wrote "If the Zionist occupation government had absolute power, it would kill every dissenter on the Internet. It would get rid of the Internet, itself, or limit it to official business and essential commercial transactions. Instead, a fake truth movement was created to suppress the truth as much as possible, and to control the opposition and prevent it from becoming a real threat."

     MarkOller, you never answered the previous commenter's question. If the evil ZOG can bump of 3K Americans and 8 years later still run free, how does a dangerous "truth teller" such as yourself remain alive? The stupidity of your response reveals your lunacy. If this was the 1950s, you'd be in the nuthouse. I guess to got tired of having your spamm the WAPO message boards ignored, so you've come to stink up this thread with your stupid and dishonest conspiracy theories. Seriously, buddy, seek counseling.

     Posted by RealChoices at 10/25/2009 @ 12:48pm

123. MarkOller, you never answered the previous commenter's question. If the evil ZOG can bump of 3K Americans and 8 years later still run free, how does a dangerous "truth teller" such as yourself remain alive?

     Posted by RealChoices at 10/25/2009 @ 12:48pm

     I am low on the hit list, and if everyone above me were killed it would attract too much attention, thus requiring more killings. My lack of anonymity may also afford me some protection.

     Besides, there has to be enormous bitterness within the government, press and mass media. It may be fear of anarchy which prevents them from talking. If the truth leaked out, civilization would be blown sky high. Glasnost was possible because the Soviet government was strong enough to maintain order. Our government is totalitarian and weak.

     I have no desire to be a new Gavrilo Princip. Immediately after exposing the truth, there has to be a coup d'etat and martial law. It would be unavoidable. Then, we could scrap our worthless, 18th century constitution and reconstruct the government from top to bottom. It would be a far freer society. We could even free the drug prisoners.

     It is time to discuss what to do after the truth explodes, and not just the truth about the WTC and Pentagon massacre. This country has as many skeletons in the closet as any communist country. One might start by reading The Frozen Republic, by Daniel Lazare and the even more radical Twilight of Democracy, by Patrick E. Kennon.

     Posted by MarkOller at 10/25/2009 @ 2:59pm

124. "You see, I'm supposed to believe, simultaneously, that people were able to secretly emplace explosives in the WTC, but that the same planners thought that nobody would believe terrorists could sneak explosives into the WTC. "

     A single bomb laden truck was parked in one of the parking lots in 1993. That would seem doable to most people. In 2001, so many explosives had to be placed in the buildings that the perps knew it would be obvious that it required cooperation by someone with control over the buildings. I see no contradiction here. What I do find implausible, as should everyone, is that the official investigators admit freely that no tests were conducted for traces of explosives. As if planes flying into two of the buildings meant that terrorists couldn't also have planted a few bombs as well? Riiiiight.

     Posted by Gretavo at 10/25/2009 @ 3:09pm

125. This all remembers of an exchange with a certain Thomas Mountain who lives in Africa and who wrote a piece a few days ago in Counterpunch saying that there was never a real genocide in Darfur, in any case it's over, and that the Save Darfur crowd is raking in money for their own greedy purposes using the "genocide " as a pretext. He also beleives "Western intelligence sources " are at the source of Darfur genocide info. Here is his last exchange with me:

     "if you believe the western press i some how doubt i will ever influence you, no matter how well i document my work, and as for the save dafur bunch, where is their "documentation"? i have checked out everything they have provided and it is all bunkum, completely unsubstantiated garbage with origins in western intel agencies, read my work again and critique it if you are serious."

     What a jerk! The Left is full of paranoids. Marco Ermacora Canada

     Posted by Marco22 at 10/25/2009 @ 4:35pm

126. what nonsense. in '93 they drove the truck into the building's garage, and walked away. in 2001 19 men staged a suicide attack with four planes. big difference.

     incidentally there was no connection between the two attacks. there is no such thing as "the terrorists".

     Posted by emile duBois at 10/25/2009 @ 4:37pm

127. "My lack of anonymity may also afford me some protection."

     I've got a better suggestion. There is no ZOG, since ALL 9/11 twoofer morons remain alive and free to slander this country left and right without any consequence whatsoever.

     However, just in case, be sure to sleep with one eye open and check your closet for hobgoblins, you never know when the ZOG may come to get you!

     Posted by RealChoices at 10/25/2009 @ 5:12pm

128. The PNAC toadies are a disturbing lot...too many toy guns in their youth or something, but you're stretching if you believe their plans outlined 9/11 as the aforementioned catalyst.

     Posted by snowball777 at 10/25/2009 @ 11:13am | ignore this person | warn this person

     I might agree if the PNAC's membership did not include, Richard Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz Richard Perle, John Bolton, Richard Armitage, Eliot Abrams, Zalmay Kahlilzad, Lewis Libby, Douglas Feith and James Woolsey. Download

     http://www.tvnewslies.org/html/pnac_neo-

     con_artists.html

     Richard Cheney was the real President, and he was probably a psychopath. Who else but a psychopath would approve a scheme as wreckless and crazy as the false flag terrorism of 9/11?

     Incidentally, I refuse to call him Dick Cheney, as if he were just plain folks. I hate it when VIP politicians pretend to be regular guys.

     Posted by MarkOller at 10/25/2009 @ 5:47pm

129. Richard Cheney was the real President, and he was probably a psychopath. Who else but a psychopath would approve a scheme as wreckless and crazy as the false flag terrorism of 9/11?

     Incidentally, I refuse to call him Dick Cheney, as if he were just plain folks. I hate it when VIP politicians pretend to be regular guys.

     Posted by MarkOller at 10/25/2009 @ 5:47pm

     Dick Cheney has donated millions of dollars to charity. Compared to Al Gore, Biden, and other "caring" liberals, I suppose you could make the case that Cheney isn't a regular guy.

     Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/25/2009 @ 7:09pm

130. STOP AVOIDING THE CGI PLANE ISSUE

     The great unmentionable, even among 'truthers', is computer animation. No wonder. In slow motion, the WTC jet crash videos would be laughable to a five year-old. Either say that these videos look real or provide links to the real crash videos. While you are at it, explain why the television networks refuse to broadcast these videos in slow motion.

     http://killtown.blogspot.com/2007/05/why-they-

     didnt-use-planes-to-hit-wtc.html

     http://killtown.911review.org/2nd-hit.html

     The youtube videos have been removed from the ghostplane webpage, but the still frames are equally useful.

     http://ghostplane.blogspot.com/

     This video proves that the computer animation was created in advance and even the buildings were computer generated. The Twin Towers magically grew, so foreground buildings would not obstruct the view.

     http://www.livevideo.com/video/embedLink/2E931

     C9D7704481DA658233F0463A620/328280/shock

     -and-awe-cnn-fake-is-no.aspx

     In this video, a witness says "it was a bomb." Next, it reveals the absence of plane wreckage at the Pentagon and in the crater in Pennsylvania.

     http://www.youtube.com/watch?

     v=_0eC3uns3pA&NR=1

     The live television broadcasts from the World Trade Center made no secret of the bombs and controlled demolition. See

     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8n-nT-luFIw

     Read the accounts of the fire and rescue workers themselves.

     "Explosive Testimony: Revelations about the Twin Towers in the 9/11 Oral Histories," by David Ray Griffin

     http://www.911truth.org/article.php?

     Posted by MarkOller at 10/25/2009 @ 7:31pm

131. "My lack of anonymity may also afford me some protection."

     I've got a better suggestion. There is no ZOG, since ALL 9/11 twoofer morons remain alive and free to slander this country left and right without any consequence whatsoever.

     However, just in case, be sure to sleep with one eye open and check your closet for hobgoblins, you never know when the ZOG may come to get you!

     Posted by RealChoices at 10/25/2009 @ 5:12pm | ignore this person | warn this person

     RealChoices,

     You have even less to fear, so why don't you use your real name? Perhaps, because you are working for the men who conquered this country?

     Posted by MarkOller at 10/25/2009 @ 8:01pm

132. For a list of 29 officials with the Bush admistration and the Bush era Defense Department, download "Bush administration: Project for the New American Century."

     http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?

     title=Bush_administration:_Project_for_the_New_

     American_Century

     Eight were members of the unofficial but influential Defense Policy Board. I quote from "The New American Century," by Arundhati Roy, The Nation January 22, 2004:

     The Center for Public Integrity in Washington found that at least nine out of the thirty members of the Bush Administration's Defense Policy Board were connected to companies that were awarded military contracts for $76 billion between 2001 and 2002. http://www.thenation.com/doc/20040209/roy

     Posted by MarkOller at 10/25/2009 @ 8:52pm

133. Occam's razor...

     Posted by snowball777 at 10/25/2009 @ 10:28am

     GWOT - NEVER ENDING.

     Posted by OneVote at 10/25/2009 @ 10:54pm

134. Occam's razor...

     Posted by snowball777 at 10/25/2009 @ 10:28am

     Journalist James Bamford summarized Operation Northwoods in his April 24, 2001 book Body of Secrets:

     Operation Northwoods, which had the written approval of the Chairman and every member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, called for innocent people to be shot on American streets; for boats carrying refugees fleeing Cuba to be sunk on the high seas; for a wave of violent terrorism to be launched in Washington, D.C., Miami, and elsewhere. People would be framed for bombings they did not commit; planes would be hijacked. Using phony evidence, all of it would be blamed on Castro, thus giving Lemnitzer and his cabal the excuse, as well as the public and international backing, they needed to launch their war.[18]

     Posted by OneVote at 10/25/2009 @ 11:02pm

135. And do you have any source citations that don't involve going to conspiracy forums and blogs?

     You know, like links to CNN stories? The BBC? Fox News? NPR?

     Anything like that?

     Posted by Citizen_Carrier at 10/23/2009 @ 12:45pm

     That reminds me of Gene Weingarten's column in Sunday's Washington Post magazine.

     Are we having pundit yet? A cheat sheet on The Post's columnist contest

     By Gene Weingarten Sunday, October 25, 2009

     You may have heard that The Washington Post is running a contest to find "America's next great pundit." The idea is to identify the best blogger-type opinioneer and reward him or her with a weekly column that, if it's deemed worthy, might actually be published in ink on the pages of the newspaper. A case could be made that this is like running a contest to find America's best race-car driver, with first prize being a mule. But let's not quibble....

     http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-

     dyn/content/article/2009/10/16/AR20091016017

     11.html

     Posted by MarkOller at 10/26/2009 @ 02:42am

136. Conspiracy Theorism is a secular religion. Almost identically.

     No amount of contradictory evidence will suffice to shake their faith. Most of their "evidence' has to be taken on faith. And there is even an eschatology...the "day the sheeple wake up"...much as the Rapture and Armeggedon work for the fundy/evangey Christians.

     And it will never end. Henry Ford has been dead and buried for 60 years....yet the "World-wide Jewish Conspiracy" outlives him. Just as it will likely outlive MarkOller.

     Posted by Mask at 10/26/2009 @ 08:10am

137. Obamas ratings in no way reflect support for a return to the past debacle. Just mention a republican to most sane people and outside of nitwits you a receive a recoil of disgust. Obamas errors in non- regulation of wall street, healthcare wishy washing and failure to redirect or end the bush wars have eroded confidence in people who voted for him. His sane detractors are not from the right. Unfortunately, the choice in three years will be him or a republican. This is still a mismatch.

     Posted by jobbo at 10/26/2009 @ 09:41am

138. Mask,

     If I am so stupid, it should be easy to refute my arguments, so why don't you try? Why are you unwilling to even use your real name? I am the one accusing the entire government and press of murder and treason, but I use my real name, and my last name is quite unusual.

     My full name is Mark Scott Oller, and I live at 422 N. Armistead St., Apt. 304, Alexandria, Virginia 22312-3493. My email address is markscottoller@yahoo.com Feel free to write.

     Posted by MarkOller at 10/26/2009 @ 09:49am

139. To all those engaging the obvious troll "MarkOller":

     Why are you arguing with him ad nauseum? Why not have a rational discussion with the people on this board who don't agree with you who AREN'T obvious provocateurs. I mean, CGI planes at the WTC? NO 9/11 skeptic seriously believes that. Those who claim to are putting into practice Nietzsche's dictum that "the most perfidious way of harming a cause is to defend it deliberately with faulty arguments."

     And those who eschew a legitimate debate in favor of responding to a troll's ramblings would seem to be avoiding real issues and we must ask ourselves why. End the dog and pony show--put "MarkOller" and anyone responding to him on "ignore" and let's have a serious debate.

     Posted by Gretavo at 10/26/2009 @ 10:07am

140. Mask wrote: "No amount of contradictory evidence will suffice to shake their faith. Most of their "evidence' has to be taken on faith."

     So what is this contradictory evidence, and why must my evidence be taken on faith? Do you claim that the live, unedited tv broadcasts on 9/11/2001 have to be taken on faith? In slow motion, the jet crashes look like ghosts walking through a wall on a tv show. Must it be taken on faith that the jets are computer generated. I happen to think that all the pseudoscientific gibberish used to justify the burning jet fuel theory has to be taken on faith. By faith, I mean believing contrary to irrefutable proof.

     Do you claim that the oral histories of fire fighters, rescue workers and police are fake despite the video evidence?

     Read "Explosive Testimony: Revelations about the Twin Towers in the 9/11 Oral Histories," by David Ray Griffin

     http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20060118104223192

     And watch Watch "YouTube - 9/11: Total Proof That Bombs Were Planted In The Buildings."

     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8n-nT-

     luFIw

     Posted by MarkOller at 10/26/2009 @ 10:43am

141. Posted by Mask at 10/26/2009 @ 08:10am | ignore this person | warn this person

     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUXglJU2w6U&feature=related

     9/11 was good for Israel wasn't it Mask?

     Posted by OneVote at 10/26/2009 @ 11:34am

142. Gretavo wrote: "I mean, CGI planes at the WTC? NO 9/11 skeptic seriously believes that." Anyone who has seen the jet crashes in slow motion and still claims it was not computer generated is a paid liar. If anyone believes Gretavo, see for yourself.

     http://killtown.blogspot.com/2007/05/why-they-

     didnt-use-planes-to-hit-wtc.html

     http://killtown.911review.org/2nd-hit.html

     The youtube videos have been removed from the ghostplane webpage, but the still frames are equally useful.

     http://ghostplane.blogspot.com/

     This video proves that the computer animation was created in advance and even the buildings were computer generated. The Twin Towers magically grew, so foreground buildings would not obstruct the view.

     http://www.livevideo.com/video/embedLink/2E931

     C9D7704481DA658233F0463A620/328280/shock

     -and-awe-cnn-fake-is-no.aspx

     Posted by MarkOller at 10/26/2009 @ 12:01pm

143. WTC Central Core Intact PBS Nova -

     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4u9i62bMXQWTC

     Posted by OneVote at 10/26/2009 @ 12:18pm

144. To all those engaging the obvious troll "MarkOller":

     I mean, CGI planes at the WTC? NO 9/11 skeptic seriously believes that. Those who claim to are putting into practice Nietzsche's dictum that "the most perfidious way of harming a cause is to defend it deliberately with faulty arguments."

     The only "9/11 skeptic" I ever trusted was Gerard Holmgren. Now, I find that Morgan Reynolds and Ronald Beier are also trustworthy. Download

     Holmgren and Reynolds on No Planes on 911- Exposing the Illusion By Ronald Bleier

     http://desip.igc.org/NoPlanesOn911.html

     Also read "A DIALOGUE WITH GERARD HOLMGREN," by Nick Kollerstrom.

     http://www.911forum.org.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=16184

     Holmgren says: "Most journalism is just plagiarism of hearsay." Every newspaper should come with that warning in block letters on top of page 1.

     Posted by MarkOller at 10/26/2009 @ 1:01pm

145. NO 9/11 skeptic seriously believes that.

     those skeptics are called conspiracy nuts. nearly the entire attack on 9/11 was televised.

     it is also important to remember that the Towers were not built in accordance with usual skyscraper construction methods and standards. they were exempted from NYC building codes. they were horrible buildings. I felt sorry for the people working there before they were knocked down.

     Posted by emile duBois at 10/26/2009 @ 6:38pm

146. I was pleased to find that there still are slow motion crash videos on youtube. This video shows a sequence of ridiculous still shots, but that allows one to see things which would be difficult to notice even in slow motion.

     911 Fake Plane http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1bHkTt_NPBA&NR=1

     Notice the equally cartoon like Pentagon fireball.

     Voila!! http://thewebfairy.com/911/pentagon/voila.htm

     This is a 9:57 minute video detailing the construction of the Twin Towers. The towers were built like gigantic tanks.

     PLANES PENETRATED THESE????? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fG31l8WaNbA&NR=1&feature=fvwp

     Posted by MarkOller at 10/26/2009 @ 7:26pm

147. "My lack of anonymity may also afford me some protection."

     I've got a better suggestion. There is no ZOG, since ALL 9/11 twoofer morons remain alive and free to slander this country left and right without any consequence whatsoever.

     However, just in case, be sure to sleep with one eye open and check your closet for hobgoblins, you never know when the ZOG may come to get you!

     Posted by RealChoices at 10/25/2009 @ 5:12pm | ignore this person | warn this person

     Some people have been murdered, probably including Barry Jennings and Bruce Ivins. Download

     9/11 Key Witness Murdered?

     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLpbW64bMrI&NR=1

     Posted by MarkOller at 10/26/2009 @ 9:25pm

148. "it is also important to remember that the Towers were not built in accordance with usual skyscraper construction methods and standards. "

     Utter bunkum, of course they were up to code, nor were they the first or last built with a tube structure. Gee, I guess the Sears Tower had better be pre-emptively demolished--just fly a plane into it, should come straight down! As to what the attack being televised has anything to do with it, I watched the towers get hit by planes then being blown up on TV--it's you who claims you saw them succumb to gravity after the plane strikes despite the obvious visual evidence of explosive energy. I also saw numerous eyewitnesses on TV talk about the explosions going off all over the towers, including in the basement. Presumably you had already switched off your TV by then.

     Posted by Gretavo at 10/27/2009 @ 10:35am

149. As an interstate agency, the Port Authority was not subject to local laws and regulations of the City of New York including building codes.

     Posted by Gretavo at 10/27/2009 @ 10:35am | ignore this person | warn this person

     conspiracy nut. ignored conspiracy nut.

     unlike you, I was in the building before completion, documenting the extensive use of asbestos.

     Posted by emile duBois at 10/27/2009 @ 11:19am

150. I also saw numerous eyewitnesses on TV talk about the explosions going off all over the towers, including in the basement.

     hahahahaha.whattajoke.

     Posted by emile duBois at 10/27/2009 @ 11:20am

151. I have seen numerous people on TV denying that the holocaust in Germany and Poland did not happen.

     I have been to an extermination camp and saw the crematoria with my own eyes.

     Posted by emile duBois at 10/27/2009 @ 11:29am

152. I also saw numerous eyewitnesses on TV talk about the explosions going off all over the towers, including in the basement.

     hahahahaha.whattajoke.

     Posted by emile duBois

     Matt Lauer interviews victims of explosions in the WTC basement:

     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQ5qVkJ0-hs&feature=related

     Posted by Gretavo at 10/27/2009 @ 2:01pm

153. Here's another mainstream news account of the explosions in the basement: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=roJJGEKcwro

     And another: http://www.chiefengineer.org/article.cfm?seqnum1=1029

     Posted by Gretavo at 10/27/2009 @ 2:04pm

154. "As an interstate agency, the Port Authority was not subject to local laws and regulations of the City of New York including building codes.

     conspiracy nut. ignored conspiracy nut.

     unlike you, I was in the building before completion, documenting the extensive use of asbestos.

     Posted by emile duBois "

     This page in the NIST report clearly states the codes that were used. Now, do *you* have a source for your claim that these codes did not apply to the Port Authority? Let me answer that for you--no you don't.

     http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCSTAR%201-1B.pdf#page=31

     And I'm well aware that asbestos was used in the towers, up to the 40th floor or so of the North Tower when they decided to stop using it--though it was not actually outlawed until after the towers' completion. The reason they stopped using it (in 1970) was that the EPA had passed stringent safety measures to be used in its application and contractors who didn't follow them were being forced to stop by the city (See "City Bars Builder's Use Of Asbestos at 7th Ave." NYTimes April 28, 1970)

     Not sure what your point was with that anyway--the presence of asbestos in the towers is not a point of contention. Interesting that you seem to know much less than you claim to, though!

     Posted by Gretavo at 10/27/2009 @ 2:30pm

155. while asbestos was not banned until after the towers completion, it was considered dangerous far earlier.

     the thing with the PA not being subject to the building codes is well known and well documented.

     anyway you're a conspiracy nut, which is evident from your post. good grief.

     Posted by emile duBois at 10/27/2009 @ 3:03pm

156. I find it awfully cuter how you can both believe the gov't's investigation, AND believe this nonsense about explosives planted. very compartmentalized. hahahahaha

     Posted by emile duBois at 10/27/2009 @ 3:28pm

157. cute not cuter

     Posted by emile duBois at 10/27/2009 @ 3:47pm

158. The bulk of the NIST report on the twin towers consists of factual descriptions of the buildings--with which no one I know has any quarrel. The problems with the NIST report are many, but I will sum up the most important here.

     First, they conducted no tests for traces of explosives or incendiaries. This is contrary to accepted fire investigation standards used to rule out arson.

     Second, they ignore numerous reports of explosions for which their report cannot account. Both this and the first point are remarkable considering that having placed explosives in the towers in 1993, terrorists could have done it again in 2001--why not consider the possibility?

     Third, they started with their conclusion (a combination of impact damage and fire caused the collapses) and worked backwards, inputting values for variables like number of columns severed until their computer model returned the desired outcome (collapse initiation.)

     Finally, they end their analysis at the point of "collapse initiation" meaning they did not even try to explain the destruction of the part of the buildings beneath the impact zones. They simply asserted that once the tops (the lightest part of the structure) began to fall, they tore through the stronger, undamaged, and cold structures below with virtually no resistance (judged by the rate at which the tops would have had to accelrate towards the ground given the time it took for each tower to disintegrate totally.)

     Posted by Gretavo at 10/27/2009 @ 4:49pm

159. Also see: The following is a Freedom of Information (FOI) reply from the Port Authority of NY/NJ reporting that contracts pertaining to abatement of World Trade Center tower asbestos containing fireproofing material have been located and are available for release. World Trade Center tower asbestos abatement was noted by the December 6, 2000 Merritt Harris Inc.

     Posted by OneVote at 10/24/2009 @ 10:20pm | ignore this person | warn this person

     Would the asbestos have to be removed even if the buildings had not been scheduled for demolition in 2008? Laws requiring that asbestos be removed after it has been installed are insane. It is not hazardous until it becomes airborne.

     The asbestos was orginally installed in the form of a cement slurry. Then it was stopped during construction. How can a slurry of any kind produce dust?

     Starting wars on behalf of Israel was not the only reason for the World Trade Center demolition. It was also the biggest, bloodiest insurance scam in hisotry, and WTC 7 and WTC 6 contained evidence of financial scandals of such proportion, the evidence had to be destroyed at any cost. See

     http://www.london77truth.com/Lucky%20Larry%20-%20WTC%20bonanza.doc

     One of the more minor motives was looting the Comex vaults beneath WTC 4. Download http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/gold.html And search for Comex on this page.

     Posted by MarkOller at 10/27/2009 @ 9:01pm

160. I meant, scheduled for demolition in 2007.

     Posted by MarkOller at 10/27/2009 @ 9:08pm

161. Oh, I forgot one other glaring problem--NIST dismissed evidence of molten iron and/or steel both in the rubble piles AND seen pouring out of the South Tower before its collapse. They claim, absurdly, that this uniformly yellow/orange glowing substance could have been aluminum, though molten aluminum is silver colored (like mercury) in daylight due to its jigh reflectivity. They do this because to admit that it was in all probability molten iron and/or steel would require them to admit that something other than jet fuel and office furniture was providing the immense amount of heat required to melt iron or steel--2800 degrees fahrenheit compared to 1800 degrees fahrenheit maximum for an open air hydrocarbon (jet fuel) based fire.

     See the molten iron pouring out of the south tower here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmuzyWC60eE

     And see firefighters describing molten steel "flowing like lava" (as in bright orange), "like in a foundry", here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBNkw2Vvi28

     When so much evidence suggests the use of something other than jet fuel and planes to destroy the twin towers (and WTC7) and no tests are conducted by the official investigation for explosives/incendiaries, and on top of that so many people have bizzarely cavalier negative reactions to suggestions that might be a problem, it should give pause to any serious and honest people concerned about real security for Americans.

     Posted by Gretavo at 10/28/2009 @ 08:35am

162. When so much evidence suggests the use of something other than jet fuel and planes to destroy the twin towers (and WTC7) and no tests are conducted by the official investigation for explosives/incendiaries, and on top of that so many people have bizzarely cavalier negative reactions to suggestions that might be a problem, it should give pause to any serious and honest people concerned about real security for Americans. Posted by Gretavo at 10/28/2009 @ 08:35am | ignore this person | warn this person

     blah, blah blah, yawn.

     the biggest problem with this tripe is called MOTIVE

     another is opportunity. after the truck bombing security in the towers was super tight. the command center for the police was in the building. it's just preposterous to think that an extensive explosion was set.

     Posted by emile duBois at 10/28/2009 @ 08:41am

163. any serious and honest people concerned about real security for Americans.

     suggesting that you are serious and honest, and I'm not?

     Posted by emile duBois at 10/28/2009 @ 08:42am

164. the biggest problem with this tripe is called MOTIVE

     another is opportunity. after the truck bombing security in the towers was super tight. the command center for the police was in the building. it's just preposterous to think that an extensive explosion was set. Posted by emile duBois at 10/28/2009 @ 08:41am

     Motive... let's see. After building WTC7 in 1987, Lawrence Silverstein signs a 99 year lease for the rest of the WTC including the twin towers just six weeks before 9/11. Having made only the tiniest fraction of the payments on the lease he is able to claim billions of dollars in insurance money when they are totally destroyed (not just damaged by jetliner impacts) on 9/11. Leasing the twin towers was a bizarre move since the North Tower contained asbestos which would cost an exorbitant amount to remove and since the towers were perenially under-occupied. I am not saying that there is any evidence that Silverstein was responsible, but any legitimate investigation would have taken the possibility seriously, and none has to date so neither can his complicity be ruled out.

     As for opportunity, a few key insiders could easily have arranged for the necessary preparations to be done under cover of any number of types of maintenance work, mostly taking place out of sight of most building occupants (inside the core structures) and during non-regular work hours when the buildings would be mostly empty.

     These are distinct possibilities, and absent a credible investigation one cannot rule them out by appealing to personal incredulity. Moreover there is enough evidence of fraud committed in the report on WTC7, and of the woeful inadequacy of the report on the twin towers to explain every aspect of the towers' destruction, to suspect foul play.

     Posted by Gretavo at 10/28/2009 @ 09:05am

165. any serious and honest people concerned about real security for Americans.

     suggesting that you are serious and honest, and I'm not?

     Posted by emile duBois at 10/28/2009 @ 08:42am

     Read my comment however you like. Others reading may judge for themselves who in this discussion is serious and/or honest.

     Posted by Gretavo at 10/28/2009 @ 09:07am

166. People who follow the blackout of MSM non-discussion regarding the global awareness of 9/11's twin towers complete pulverization in 12 second, and clear "classic controlled" demolition of building 7 in 6 seconds--- here's a curious statement to ponder for BOTH sides on this issue, whether you agree or disagree with the above statement.

     "9/11 truthers" (there really isn't a collective group, ask anyone with 'alternate' views, there is no 'collective' here) -- always task FEMA/NIST/FBI with their failure of not testing for explosives in the WTC dust.

     Many samples were collected from the crime scene by residents and others who held onto it because the gravity of the event, not for any foresight to engage in forensics. However, Dr. Steven Jones and others associated with "9/11 truth" have some samples sent to them and have had them in their possession for over 3 years.

     Here's the question: Don't you think it odd that so-labeled "truthers" themselves HAVE NOT tested for explosives in their WTC dust sample. In 3 years, they haven't tested for any explosives, yet they appeal in all their position papers that "they didn't" and ending with "someone should". Why not them? Indeed....

     Like Pacifica radio's oh-so far left leanings that ends at a steel gate --- so too does the efforts of the investigative "leaders" of 9/11 truth.

     Again, why wouldn't scientists who believe "911 is an inside job, and they blew up the buildings" - why wouldn't they test for different explosives being that they continue to hold the WTC dust samples for OVER 3 YEARS!!?

     I just came up on this information, don't you find it interesting ?

     Posted by ahey at 10/28/2009 @ 11:22am

167. "When so much evidence suggests the use of something other than jet fuel and planes to destroy the twin towers (and WTC7) and no tests are conducted by the official investigation for explosives/incendiaries, and on top of that so many people have bizzarely cavalier negative reactions to suggestions that might be a problem, it should give pause to any serious and honest people concerned about real security for Americans.

     Posted by Gretavo at 10/28/2009 @ 08:35am

     What is so unbelievable about micro nuclear weapons? Unlike the collapse of WTC 7, the collapse of the Twin Towers was a highly uncontrolled demolition. The buildings were blown to pieces and ground into dust. What caused the pyroclastic flow? What made steel boil? What "wrinkled up" a 300 pound steel and concrete fire door "like a piece of aluminum foil"? What made a 50 ton hydraulic press vanish? http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20060118104223192

     Why deny that the jets were computer generated? Why not mention the Bureau of Transportation Statistics records? Isn't it a bit suspicious that the Pentagon bombing killed 34 accountants and budget analysts in a nearly vacant wing of the Pentagon? Did they know too much?

     Are you trying to divert attention from our own government, Mr. Gretavo?

     "9/11 Truthling Community Guide" (part of 9/11 Sukipedia, Project "NICOLAND" Cartoon community, see http://www.911closeup.com/nico/Nicoland_community_updates.html

     (* see also 911tvfakery.blogspot and please LIVEClick Bookmark us) Updated entries (06/10):

     http://www.911closeup.com/nico/911truthlings.html

     "WTC Planehugger Therapy -Top 30 FAQ

     By Nico Haupt April 7, 2006

     http://www.911closeup.com/nico/FAQ_planehuggers.html

     Posted by MarkOller at 10/28/2009 @ 11:03pm