Has Lynn Margulis (and many others) been vindicated about 9/11?
CIA Agent Confesses On Deathbed: ‘We Blew Up WTC7 On 9/11’This is a problem I have studied along with others far more knowledgeable all of them being shrugged off as conspiracy theorists. Maybe sometimes conspiracy theorists are right?
A lot of time has passed since articles by engineers and demolition experts have claimed a false flag operation here and what seemed outlandish is less so as Trump's presidency exposes more and more how low our government can get. Bush was no better, just less transparent.
The government of Trump is a continuation of that of Obama which in turn is a continuation of that Of Bush. Trump has shed the the cover and the evil empire stands naked. History will vindicate a lot more careful, honest doubters who did their research and spoke out.
Comments
Well, that's what I mean.
One would think that at some point of the building drop, 45%, 35%, 25% or even 15%, the building still standing would be stronger and able to withstand the practically vaporized building collapsing from above. I don't know if it happens at 75% or 65%, but at some floor the building should be able to stop the collapse, what's beneath stronger than what's on top. Either that... or the heat from the fuel trickled down some 50, 60 floors or more, heating the steel on those lower floors, rendering them as weak as the upper floors. What are the physics chances of that?
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
"What are the physics chances of that?"
Indeed!
but that isn't how the math of gravitational acceleration
actually works. as each successive floor collapses, the falling top of the tower is going to accelerate further, because it's still being pulled down by gravity. it's going to continue hitting with more and more momentum. the scenario you envision is conceivable, but only if the integrated sum of the (force x distance) offered up by each collapsing floor exceeds the integrated sum of (force x distance) exerted by gravity on the falling segment of the tower as it moves through the space of the collapsed floor.
note, also, that the shock of each impact is going to be transmitted down through the structural steel below, doing some amount of lesser damage prior to the moment when each particular floor takes the brunt of the impact. i could imagine (though i do not know whether it could really happen) that eventually sets of 2, and then 3, and then 4 etc floors would pop their rivets simultaneously, creating longer and longer periods of relatively unimpeded fall.
The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.
also note that dust is not vapor.
the pulverized concrete was not vaporizing (despite popular usage), it was crumbling to dust under the accumulating shocks. non-dispersed dust (e.g., a sack full of cement mix) falls just as fast and accumulates just as much momentum as solid concrete. at each subsequent floor, the total falling mass increases, though of course some of the mass does get ejected horizontally.
The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.
And, as far as the
planes... if the planes didn't hit the buildings where are they? Or better yet, where are the passengers? Nobody saw a plane hit the pentagon - there wasn't even mention of passengers - but the second plane to hit the towers was live on TV. People with their own videocams caught the second plane hitting the building.
The "conspiracy" comes in to play with the question, where were the USAF jets? And, as Howard Stern pointed out, during real time on his radio show that day, how did the plane that hit the Pentagon even enter Washington, D.C. airspace? How does that happen? Well, prolly becuz there was no plane, but the Pentagon said there was one and it hit their building. So... There's plenty of room for conspiracy speculation, and then there's the BBC broadcast reporting that WTC Building 7 had dropped 20 minutes brfore it actually had - and a picture of the building still standing behind the news people broadcasting the story. My money is on inside job. There just are Way too many "things that make you go hmmm... " for some of them not to lead to conspiracy.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
There are
a lot of witness descriptions of an airliner hitting the Pentagon. There were a lot of people commuting on the freeway nearby who saw it.
What's odd, and I mean still after all these years, truly puzzling to me is that there is no photography of it. It was before everyone had a cell phone with a camera close at hand, and it's possible the route taken was such that few if any people were in a position to see it coming from whichever direction it came from. But guys, the country was on emergency alert, the plane was being tracked by military as well as civilian agencies, they knew it was coming in. They tracked it. But no one photographed it? No one in Washington DC video tracked it? I find that puzzling to this day.
The fact that the first plane to hit the WTC was also not photographed, except by a nearby film crew that captured only a glimpse of it hitting the building, is understandable because no one was looking for it, whereas the second hit was video-captured by many people because the WTC itself was being videoed. But I don't understand why no camera stills or footage have ever emerged of AA77 approaching Washington DC.
It's part of why I have a belief in the possibility that a warhead was used by our defensive aircraft and that it caught up with the plane at the same time that it hit the Pentagon. Reasons for not wanting photographic evidence of such a defensive attack to become public could include the fact that it was too late to prevent the crash into the Pentagon and also that the missile may have caused much more loss of life inside the building because of exploding once inside.
you are close to an epistemological breakthrough
on the whole Pentagon business (& perhaps the rest as well). why? because you've identified something that is both:
A. Inexplicably weird
and
B. Undoubtedly true
An airliner hit the Pentagon. Period. Anyone who will not admit this is someone I will not even have a discussion with. Yet, there's no footage of it. No news footage. Nobody with a camcorder out in the park, looking up from their kids on the swing and going, "huh", and swinging the camcorder up. Nada. Nobody with an early cell-phone camera. And apparently, no "unofficial" "official" footage either.
There is not one shred of evidence that anything else happened, yet your natural suspicions lead you to wonder ... maybe something nefarious did happen in our government ... and they don't want us to know ... so they have footage but they aren't releasing it ... or something. but what? maybe a missile? because the hole looks like another hole that was made by a missile 1/1000th the size of a jetliner, but carrying high explosives? What? Really?
At this point, you're starting to spin ... because you've come up with a "conspiracy" that isn't a very big deal even if it's true. Oh, it was one of our anti-aircraft missiles, fired to stop the aircraft? Uh. Okay. I guess that's kinda sucky. Sure wouldn't want to be the guy who would have had to make that call ... but half the country would probably agree that it was the right thing to try to do.
The problem is that this is not what they Pentagon truth brigade want us to believe. They want us to believe that no airplane ever did hit the Pentagon ... or maybe one did, but the real damage was done by a missile that was fired, not to stop the Pentagon, but as part of a plot to damage the Pentagon ... in which case, the unanswerable question becomes, to what fucking purpose? Was there anywhere in the world a single American citizen whose emotional response to the overall event would be in any degree sharpened by how much damage was actually done to the Pentagon? Hell's bells, how many people even have a good idea of how much damage was done to the Pentagon?
Once you accept the most important fact -- that a 757 flew into the Pentagon -- all the speculation becomes
A. unnecessary to explain any other facts that we have about the impact
B. inexplicable in terms of any supposed motivations of the supposed nefarious actors.
Nonetheless, it is remarkably easy to let oneself get spun into the vortex of such speculation, forgetting that the most basic foundation for the speculation is absent. Is it really that improbable that nobody at the Pentagon (or anywhere else in the vicinity who knew what was going on) thought to themselves, "Hey, let's get a bunch of folks out there with camcorders, so we can get lots of footage of whatever is about to happen ... wherever it's about to happen!"? Not at all. To the contrary, I suggest that it would have been a bit surprising if, in the heat of that moment, anybody gave that a single moment's consideration. Seriously, imagine yourself in the room. Imagine the vague sense of disbelief, and doubt, and fear. Imagine the apprehension. Imagine the imagining, as everyone in the room is wondering out loud what is going on, where is this plane heading, what's happening, why?
The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.
Yet the "official" narative
is mighty lame. But, give 'em that, there's still plenty of conspiracy speculation surrounding the Towers. I never gave it any serious consideration way back when becuz, as I said, too many moving parts. But, given the "Deep State" hanky panky of the 2016 election the 9/11 conspiracy might deserve a second look.
A couple things for me... where was the USAF that day? Mostly invisible. So much for our Homeland readiness. And, two, the BBC broadcast of a building down (WTC-7) that was still standing. hmmmmm... I personally watched a crew drop a building the size of WTC 7 in downtown Rottenchester, NY many moons ago (mid '70s). Just happened to be downtown that day and hung around to watch. It took the crew a good 8-10 hours (the day before) to set the charges for that demolition. Maybe more. Can't remember. Dropped it right in its footprint. Impressive. I don't know if they had that much time at "Ground Zero" that day.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
yeah, but as i wrote elsewhere ... well ... what exactly is the
CD/FF narrative supposed to be about the BBC broadcast? the problem is, the only narrative you can build that actually makes any sense is one in which information that came into the Beeb about WTC7 was misinterpreted -- presumably, information along the lines of "we've lost the building", meaning the firefighters had given up hope of saving it. the alternative explanation is beyond bizarre, requiring some sort of pointless collusion between whoever was planning to dynamite WTC7 and somebody at the BBC. the whole thing rests on the peculiar premise that anybody "on the inside" would bother to plant the story of WTC7 collapsing before it actually had. but ... why? what is the supposed motivation? it's not a story that was going to go unnoticed.
Hell, i haven't even seen a rational explanation of why WTC7 would have been targeted in the first place, or for that matter, how: Something that they could not have planned for was that falling debris from one of the towers would start a series of fires in WTC7 that could not be controlled.
The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.
CIA Agent Confesses
On Deathbed: "We Blew Up WTC7 On 9/11"
Only two reasons. They couldn't put the fire out. Or, literally covering up evidence.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
for starters, you're assuming that this guy is who he says he is
I don't know him from Adam. Maybe we'll get evidence that supports his claims, and maybe we won't. For now, he's just some guy talking.
But yeah, I'm willing to entertain the possibility that certain buildings in certain places have been pre-configured for controlled demolition in the event that an uncontrolled collapse seems imminent, and that this might have been the fate of WTC7. So far, though, I just don't have any good reason to believe it.
The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.
Two points
can be brought in response to your vastly strong argument, which I truly respect. The first is that AA77 didn't just hit the Pentagon. It hit the particular wedge of the Pentagon that had been reinforced over a period of 2 years, the completion of which construction had been announced in the days just before the attack. For that reason, relatively few people were killed in the Pentagon, compared to the number who would have been killed if the new space had been moved into. That is the basis for the speculation that the exit hole was an escape mechanism, set to blow in the event of an explosion. The purpose of the reinforcement was to prevent damage from a terrorist attack.
The second point I would respond with is that it is commonly stated that the Pentagon is the most camera-covered structure in the world. I don't know if that's true. But wouldn't you think there is some footage somewhere of the attack on the Pentagon? I take your point about sending people out on the lawn with cameras in the intensity of that day of emergency. But no coverage in any routine way of the surroundings of the Pentagon? It just puzzles me, and yes, I believe that the deep state are the Merchants of Death. So I see incongruities with that in mind, with that perspective.
Just a couple of
many things or moments of that day that make you go "hmmmm... "
There are just too many of those for it to be coincidence.
My money on Deep State manipulation.
Deep State knew the date and time of the hijackings and
made sure it wasn't a 1993 moment this time, made sure
those buildings dropped.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
Given time and inclination, I could produce an endless
series of "hmm" moments about almost anything.
The Illuminati Trilogy demonstrates this brilliantly.
The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.
no mention of the passengers?
huh?.
one of the passengers was a CNN pundit , Barbara Olson, who was married to the Solicitor General, Ted Olson. this was reported very early on.
there are eyewitness accounts of the plane hitting the pentagon. i don't know why you think otherwise.
The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.
Mostly becuz there is
no evidence of a plane, no wreckage, barely a pin prick. I'm sure there was one, but if you asked an impartial observer, given the evidence, if a plane hit the building, I'm guessing over half would say "no way."
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
There are very few truly impartial observers
when it comes to explaining the events and causes of 9/11. UntimelyRippd is certainly not being impartial, but then neither am I -- though perhaps we each might think we're being impartial. There are many intelligent and well-informed people who have reached contradictory conclusions about exactly what happened on that day, and why.
native
there's small bits of wreckage all over the lawn,
trivially identifiable as airplane parts; but indeed, most of the plane ended up in inside the pentagon, where whatever could burn (which is almost everything in an airplane) did burn.
barely a pinprick? we don't even have decent photos of the impact, because of the flames, smoke, and firefighters' water, so how do you justify this characterization?
The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.
Passengers
on AA77 included not only Barbara Olson, but:
When I told my husband about this, he said it reminded him of the film, Day of the Jackal, in which the assassin examines the gun specially made for him by the gunsmith and then shoots and kills the gunsmith. In the spirit of our discussion about whistleblowers on their deathbeds, just saying...
Not *directly* relevant, but I adhere to the WPNK theory
of reality where government(s) is/are involved. We'll probably never know. There are all the things brought up n this story and the subsequent discussion thread, but I'd like to point out some disjunctions, little globs of irremediable uncertainty.
The planes were hijacked and piloted by Saudi Expats.
The Saudis? Da Ahl Bidness? Tejas?
Class clown Prexy Bush had oil connects and Saudi connects aplenty
His dad, CIA bush had both aplenty too.
His dad was involved in and knowledgeable of who knows what, both as agent and agency head, but almost certainly al qaeda and the Taleban, and especially the self-confessed (bragging?) financier, Osama Bin Ladin, another Saudi expat from an influential and well placed Saudi family.
Osama and crew, were at least partially the creation of Jimmy Carter. JC, kindly well meaning devout xtian had not a minutes hesitation nor any qualms about creating an unholy shitstorm in Afghanistan for the simple sole purpose of fucking with the Russkies. Certain to cause great numbers of deaths, of innocents and not so innocent alike, untold suffering and all that, just to fuck with Russia. (How is it that allegedly decent people go that batshit once in office? - but I digress)
Some Saudis were spirited out of the country and never have been and never will be deposed or anything.
As everybody knows and the surce states, the CIA is capable of anything. "Oh, they'd never stoop to that" is not a phrase that comes to mind where they are involved, and they are involved up to their eyeballs, hell, they wee even on site at WTC7.
Thus, there is enough murk and uncertainty that the absence of any meaningful investigation, the excessively prompt destruction of all of the physical evidence and the fact that the government immediately used this as justification to permanently and/or indeterminately curtail and/or abrogate rights, ignore the laws and constitution, set up a massively intrusive sekurity state and so on and so forth (Reichstag fire anyone?) pretty much guarantees that the myriad of nagging little questions will never be laid to rest because there is not one, not any remotely credible party involved in the event, its aftermath, and its explanation.
That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --
AMEN!
Top comment there, IMO.
native
@native Agreed.
Agreed.
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." ---- William Casey, CIA Director, 1981
bing! Granted, it's impossible
to prove a negative, even for "the government," but 9/11 left Way more questions unanswered than not. And, even many of the ones answered make many of us go "hmmmm... really?"
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
I do not believe much of anything
the government tells me.
I am very open to other explanations.
One commenter asked why we should accept the dying man's statements about who and what he is.
I pose the question, why not?
Why would an elderly person in final stage of cancer tell such a story? To distract himself from his imminent demise? Has he been a delusional conspiracy theorist in his 70's and 80's?
My late husband spent his last 6 months getting all his stories told. He told me everything he ever did. He spent 6 months telling his friends and relatives he forgave them for all slights and fights, asked to be forgiven for his, and every night, he revealed yet another life event to me that he just wanted to get off his chest. Before I die, I hope to commit them to writing, make sure his daughter understands who he really was.
So, without evidence that the man is delusional, and calling yourself a cia agent/murderer is quite the little delusion, I think I will just believe him.
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." ---- William Casey, CIA Director, 1981
well, that's your choice.
and i will not believe him, sans supporting evidence.
remember, the next time you meet some guy in a bar who starts telling you about his days as a Navy Seal, there's about a 98% chance he's lying.
The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.
@UntimelyRippd I did.
I did.
He was. Boat 6.
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." ---- William Casey, CIA Director, 1981
@on the cusp Believe what you
Believe what you believe. You support your beliefs with evidence, with science, anecdotes, and you feel secure with it.
I have no interest in changing your opinion. Have it. Great.
By the same token, I believe 911 was a false flag. I haven't been convinced to the contrary, merely enforced of my belief.
As far as I am concerned, none of us have mentioned that man's impending death.
I wish that man all the best, hope his final days are pain free, guilt free, filled with love.
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." ---- William Casey, CIA Director, 1981
Pages