I heard Dr Karl Kruszelnicki on Sunday morning on ABC’s Weekend Breakfast show being interviewed by Andrew Geoghegan – and in typical ABC style denigrating those who challenge the official 9/11 theory.
They were covering various topics with a neuroscientist and skeptic and were talking about analytical thinking, when they moved to a discussion of 9/11 conspiracy theorists. To paraphrase: They as scientists have critical and skeptical thinking on their side, but the 9/11 conspiracy theorists are wrong – finding a theory to fit their belief system (that government was somehow involved). Celebrity scientist Karl agreed. What a joke! They are themselves guilty of fitting the facts and science into their belief system – and have thrown critical thinking out the window.
And Dr Karl, it’s wrong to claim that so-called ‘conspiracy theorists’ start from a belief system and then find the facts to fit. In the early 2000’s I was against the war on Iraq, but firm in the belief that 19 Arabs were responsible – UNTIL I happened across the anomaly of Building 7. It took three months of intensive soul searching (and research) as I reluctantly forced a change to my belief system to match the science and the facts before me. Thus, I do not consider myself to be believing in a ‘conspiracy’, but rather a theory (the most plausible) that fits the laws of science and the facts. I have come to understand that the official theory is fraudulent fanciful nonsense. (And by the way, I have no idea who orchestrated it – but an honest investigation would root out some of the players).
So Dr Karl, this is a challenge to you (and if you are not prepared to take it up – stop talking down to people who challenge the official version):
‘Please Explain’ Building 7
Oh, do you know about WTC 7? Well here is the video below. This skyscraper was not hit by a plane and had only a few office fires. It was the THIRD skyscraper to ‘collapse’ – and did so at 5.20 that afternoon of the 11th. And if it was ‘brought down’ then this creates a terrible dilemma.
The official (FEMA and NIST) theory says:
The official report claimed the fires expanded floor beams, which pushed a girder off its seat, precipitating multiple floor failures, which left column 79 unsupported and it buckled, which then dragged floors 14 to the roof downward. Then a north to south floor failure commenced, which propagated to the west. When most of the floors had fallen, the exterior was essentially an empty shell and it collapsed straight down, at free-fall acceleration.
The principal ‘conspiracy’ – or other theory:
Over 2300 engineers, architects and scientists (like yourself) believe the only possible explanation for this steel frame building to free fall in this perfect collapse is by demolition, and the use of some form of explosives. (Remember, no other skyscraper has ever just collapsed as a result of fire, even though some fires raged for 24 hours.) Evidence here from Architects and Engineers.
So – I want you to ‘Please Explain’ how did the 47 floor skyscraper (note: the Rialto in Melbourne is 52) just ‘come down’ in a mostly free fall collapse into its own foot print (so to speak)? And you can just comment below if you want or contact me.
But these are the simple rules:
1. You must only take into account the ‘science’ relating to the collapse.
2. You MUST ignore your personal belief system when you investigate the evidence.
3. You must ignore all media reports, witness statements, hearsay evidence, all reportage from conspiracy theorists and from government that are not strictly factual.
4. You must ignore ‘possible’ theories – and make you conclusions ONLY based on ‘hard’ science.
5. You must be honest about your findings – and provide the most logical scientific option to the collapse of WTC 7.
For you interest – this is NIST’s computer model to try explain the collapse, but unfortunately it does not match reality. There is ample evidence on the construction of the building and there is photographic and video EVIDENCE (both before and during collapse) etc. We can provide links to relevant science on request.
And I would suggest you inform the ABC of your findings (and radio personalities like Jon Faine). As you hold great sway at the ‘people’s organisation’, it might stop the ABC from propagating the fraudulent story of how those Australians were murdered on September 11, 2001.
PS:
And this is lease holder, Larry Silverstein, saying that “we” “pulled” the building. But as this is just a ‘statement’, you will NOT be allowed to use it to sway your scientific investigation either way.
Who is Dr Karl?
Dr Karl Kruszelnicki’s media career began in 1981 presenting ‘Great Moments In Science’ and since then his celebrity status has exploded, and is even been called the ‘President of Science’ in Australia. Author of 26 plus books, with his ‘Please Explain’ released in November 2007. According to “New Scientist” Magazine Karl’s last five books have all hit the position of best-selling Popular Science book in Australia. Dr Karl Kruszelnicki received the Member of the Order of Australia Award in the 2006 Australia Day Honours list. In 2007 the Australia Skeptics Society awarded Dr Karl the Australia Skeptic Of The Year Prize. Karl has degrees in Physics and Maths, Biomedical Engineering, Medicine and Surgery and has worked as a physicist, tutor, film-maker, car mechanic, labourer, and as a medical doctor at the Kids’ Hospital in Sydney.
I followed much the same path to 9 11 enlightenment as you. I learned my lesson the hard way when they offered to give me a gun to kill people in Vietnam. This sharpened my senses and went from a believer to a total anti war advocate, all based on the facts of the war. Same re 9 11, believer till the physics took over. A whole lot of facts had me scratching my head, box cutters, phone calls from planes, terrorists still alive, passport on the 9 11 site, bin lades flown out, no interceptors, no video of pentagon plane, Impossible flight of pentagon plane, pilot and ground effect in pentagon, pilot with no training flying like an ace fighter pilot in a bloody great plane. No fire from hitting light poles, no marks on law, no debris. Single puncture hole in….and out the other side of a hardened building. Conflicting eye witnesses. the place the plane hit, the fact they just did not crash straight down. The lack of aviation fuel explosion, lack of engine impact holes. Knocked a hole out five walls in but nothing there to knock out the hole. Shanksville??? are you kidding, what plane, no debris, no smoke , no flame, no engines, Bodies?????
Bodies at the pentagon??? Pentagon lawn buried under tons of gravel instantly>>>>>?????????Why?????
There are lots of other anomalies, but the only ones yu need to know, DR Karl, as a physicist, is that all buildings fell at free fall, 9.8m/s/s, IMPOSSIBLE, IMPOSSIBLE , IMPOSSIBLE. Laws of momentum at LEAST prevent this. and also the explosive ejecta from the initial “explosion” and the thermodynamics of converting most of the building to pure dust and a pyroclastic cloud.
cOME ON.
Tired of Dr Karl and the like slamming conspiracies – enough is enough. Scientists wake up
Dr Karl is rapidly becoming one of the celebrity Scientists you can’t believe-
It stands to reason that believing the official lie of 911, he would also go along with the other big lie that is Climate Change!
Oh! Now let us bring on stage ‘The Sardine’; climate change and debate that for a distraction. You missed out on moon matters, Elvis, Harold Holt sailing off in a China yellow submarine and the rest.
Bad try, Fail! ! Sounds like Faine, 2UE and the rest with their irrelevancies.
Dr. karl,
Please explain Terry Wallace’s assertion that United 93 struck the ground at 10:06:05, plus or minus 2 seconds. You two seem to be good buddies:
http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2003/05/08/841976.htm
From this archived news article we can read Wallace’s statement regarding his opinion of the officially recognised crash time of 10:03:
http://newsmine.org/content.php?ol=9-11/flight93-ua/seismologist-discrepancy.txt
“The seismic signals are consistent with impact at 10:06:05,” plus or minus two seconds, said Terry Wallace, who heads the Southern Arizona Seismic Observatory and is considered the leading expert on the seismology of man-made events. “I don’t know where the 10:03 time comes from.”
Given that his expert opinion contradicts the official narrative does that make him a conspiracy theorist?
Thank you in anticipation of your timely response.
El-Kammo, Johnyboy et al. Maybe wait until Dr Karl gives an opinion before you clog this thread with your disinfo
I have not commented in this topic, therefore I plead not guilty.
Rofl 😀
So much wrong here its ridiculous… You want him to look at it with a open mind, but all you post is conspiracy stuff. If you really want him to look at it with a open mind, you drop all that stuff and give him the 5 rules.
And this one is the best….
“And this is lease holder, Larry Silverstein, saying that “we” “pulled” the building. But as this is just a ‘statement’, you will NOT be allowed to use it to sway your scientific investigation either way.”
Why post it at all, if you don’t want him to be influenced by it???
And he never said that We pulled the building. he said that the firedepartment made that decision.
The building didnt collapse in its own footprint, but it crashed in other buildings. It also wasn’t an almost free fall collapse. NIST also explains why the video and reality don’t match in their report. They also explain it in their FAQ, which I guess was even to much for you to read.
Larry – an example… Poor Ol Dr Karl has already been swayed by 13 years of mainstream propaganda. he will have to have a clear mind.
Quote:
For you interest – this is NIST’s computer model to try explain the collapse, but unfortunately it does not match reality.”
You truthers really don’t get it,, do you ?
Does anyone of you even has a clue of the number of unknown parameters ?
Really, you’re way too much focussing on the details… but I know : details are as important for truthers as oxygen is important to normal people 🙂
Let me make it clear to you.
There is absolutely no need to make a perfect match of the collapse of WTC 7 as seen on video. NIST had to explain WHY a building could collapse due to fire. They did that and if you would have read (understood) their report, you’d know that it’s IMPOSSIBLE to make a perfect model.
If they would have been able to make a perfect match with reality, it would also imply that NIST would have known all the unknown parameters.
Now, in my humble opinion, THAT would have been a reason for a conspiracy theory.
No matter how you deal with the facts : a truther will ALWAYS find something suspicious
So please move on with your life…It’s really not so bad after all.
By the way Dalia, people actually landed on the moon too, chemtrails don’t exist and there’s no such thing as a depopulation going on.
Geez… Please go outside once in a while… I assure you that the air is safe to breathe 🙂
(drum roll)
I’ll give you an unknown parameter. Bombs.
Even crazier. Silent bombs!
At this point in time no constituted investigation applying satisfactory legal process and accountability as been conducted.
According to the official record most members of the 911 commission did not even view the key interrogation transcripts that the official “Muslim conspiracy theory” was framed about.
Anyone who is satisfied with this reality has surrendered their responsibility to preserve the essential integrity of our governing and legal institutions and processes.
This highly flawed and secretive activity gives me every right to declare the “Muslim conspiracy theory” unproven by any acceptable standard of legal process and it would only be logical to take a highly suspicious, skeptical and critical view of those who participate, protect or tolerate this corrupting legal climate.
How could any person be satisfied with this pattern of legal and political conduct that has been fraudulently disguised as an authentic, open and honest investigation process?
We can state with 100% certainty that the political climate over the last 100 years has been a series of lies and deceptions that have in time been totally exposed revealing the incredible breadth and capacity of a criminal political class to contain their crimes from public exposure over many decades even after solid evidence has been uncovered by a tiny minority.
This reality is beyond any question or dispute.
Quote:
“We can state with 100% certainty that the political climate over the last 100 years has been a series of lies and deceptions that have in time been totally exposed revealing the incredible breadth and capacity of a criminal political class to contain their crimes from public exposure over many decades even after solid evidence has been uncovered by a tiny minority.
This reality is beyond any question or dispute.”
Sure Christopher… You’re absolutely RIGHT.
So, hence, every major crime has/had to be planned by the “oh so evil” government.
Basically, all you’re saying is that ALL the bad guys work for the government and people who don’t work for the government aren’t able of acting crimes… Right ?
Life CAN be simple when you’re a truther (as long as you stay inside your (mental) home of course)
Xingfu, the portion you quoted accurately you declare..
“Sure Christopher… You’re absolutely RIGHT.”
I appreciate your support. (I can be sarcastic also)
The rest you just invented.
I’m a fair man so I will not fail you on your first attempt.
Go back and read the comment again before you make another attempt but if it is as poorly referenced and pointless as your first effort I will not pay it any attention at all and a fail will be recorded.
I notice that you’re coming back to your senses…
By the way, you’re the one that’s claiming that government can’t be trusted at all because there have been some thing about which they lied in the past.
So, in your opinion, if the government has lied before, they surely will lie about almost anything. Right ?
But you can’t proof that 9/11 was an inside job ?
Look who’s inventing now…
Xingfu, it’s a fail.
Once again you invented my opinion and then claimed I invented your invention.
In any legal standard that I consider acceptable, the crime of 911 has not been investigated so it is all those people who adopt the “Muslim conspiracy theory” that we might well charge with speculative invention.
As I posted I believe we can 100% prove the political class have a pattern of lies and deception that they manage to often hide from exposure for decades but eventually the truth comes to the light of day.
Your morality and logic is a matter for yourself but considering the lies often lead to mass human deaths and other wartime miseries that I find highly disgusting, as a responsible individual
I have no choice but to respond based on both my knowledge of the realities of the political climate and the correct constituted legal process that is essential for authentic justice.
Xingfu, if you have adopted the “Muslim conspiracy theory” as proven your legal standards are much lower than mine and your trust in the agencies of Governance are much higher.
The logic behind questioning every aspect of the 911 event, for that matter every aspect of any claim made to justify war, is 100% sound when everything is considered.
Under the circumstances, those who trust what they are told without questioning and abandon the expectation of legal standard accountability are doomed to ignorance.
Our historical records tell all the tales of ignorant masses slaughtered and sacrificed on the battlefields for the benefit, and by the deceptive schemes of hidden power.
Xingfu, I could only speculate about your intelligence, logical capacity, morality and motivation.
But is was investigated… By a few 1000 FBI agents…, Local law enforement agencies….
You can read the rest of the agencies who were involved in the investigation here.
https://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/someoftheagencies%2Corganizationsandindivi
But hey. I am glad you know that there wasn’t an investigation….
johnnyboy222, the truth is only resolved when the evidence is brought into a legitimate legal process that cross examines every relevant aspect of the conspiracy charge.
This has not yet happened.
Clearly your standard of justice is low and your naive trust in the Government is childish considering the corrupt political climate.
In a cult based community the public are instructed in the official beliefs by those with power and the “heretic” is burnt at the stake.
The trick of power is to delude their disciples into believing they are the “enlightened ones” when in fact they are just foolish jesters.
Yes it has.
http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/prosecution.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zacarias_Moussaoui
You guys don’t follow the news much do you?
Johnyboy – you are an absolute JOKE… putting Moussaoui forward as the “9/11 investigation” that proves what went down. You have truly exposed your stupidity or complicity. Best not bother with this site anymore.
johnnyboy2222,
A simple question that can be answered with a straight forward YES or NO.
Is the legal process of the Moussaoui trial judged by you as consistent with your standards of acceptable justice?
Yes
Secret evidence and secrecy constraints over legal representatives are not a legitimate legal process.
Evidence obtained by torture is not evidence of anything.
This type of corrupt political show trial was more likely found in a Stalinist era, East Germany or under Nazism but as a result of new “terrorism” justified legislation many Western countries now conduct trials I don’t accept as proper legal process.
A trial conducted in this fashion will never resolve the truth about anything and that is not the purpose of this type of procedure.
At least it is clear now where the johnnyboy2222 argument sits in the political spectrum.
Once transparent and accountable legal process is compromised intelligent honest people know that that truth of things becomes impossible to judge.
It is fair to judge all supporters of this standard as rogues.
There are no certainties about exactly what Moussaoui really new and how he fitted into the “Muslim conspiracy theory” but any logical reading of all the information clearly reveals contradictions and absurdities typical of all the “hijacker evidence”.
KSM, who is just a figment of propaganda mostly, announced according to the “record”, that Moussaoui was part of a separate “terror” plot. Who to believe?
Moussaoui also had the typical pilot training background where he was almost completely without any skills despite paying for all sorts of convenient lessons and materials.
This is evidence of a patsy trail not evidence of a genuine terrorist.
Unless a proper legal process is conducted then the truth can
be hidden for decades until public information unravels the full picture.
Precedents of this corrupt political climate can be found in the John Kennedy assassination “investigations” or the Liberty attack “investigations” where, in retrospect we now know, incredible numbers of law enforcement, political, legal and media were to varying degrees participants in obstructing the truth and still to this day proper legal process has not been conducted to bring justice.
XingFu – it is already proven. It is just the evidence is not being ‘released’
Who is withholding the evidence? AE911? If they have proof, why don’t they release the evidence then?
XingFu – you guys are as predictable as flies around cow dung. Just waiting for the other disinfo specialists to buzz in. Ned and Christopher have explained their points with clarity
I have my doubts about that.
I think you’re more predictable than I am.
Let me give you an example : I’m sure I’ll only have to wait for a couple of days or your blog will have a new conspiracy post.
Gotcha 🙂
I went through the same training field as most genuine skeptics and the poor doctor has his cart before the horse, as does the ABC misinformation propaganda machinery.
I reacall the ABC doing something similar with the program, “the Drum’ and runninfgwith Prof Clive Williams with his address to the Canberra Sketics, one January years ago.
When I saw the buildings 1 and 2 that night I thought they were ‘imploded’.
Soon after, I read an article in the SMH that had diagrams etc. and explained how both buildings fell………that was the pancake theory. Yea right! All l worked out in a few days like the ‘witness in the street’ (actor!) who said the same on the day of ……structural weakness. Yearh right, a set up a mile high being planted in the public psyche. with ‘Bin Laden did it’.
Then I left it, thinking Muslims were s#@t.
The I heard some comments from Muslims in Asia saying that 911 was a CIA job.
I thought. F… Muslims they would blame anybody….blow the crap out of Iraq and save those poor bastards being put into the giant shredder by the Saddam boys and find those weapons of mass destruction…bomb the s@#t out of them.
Then in late 2003 sonething strange happned, a neighbour passed me a paper from some Muslim obviously, raising some questions. I showed it to my wife and we chucked it in the bin.
Then by chance I came across the article from France……”find the Boeing’, from memory.
Well by mid 2004 I concluded with two weeks of ;”I can’t believe this”‘, that the offiiclal story was nonsense but if I mentioned it, I was howled down, vilified and called ‘conspiracy theorist’, even a ‘fool’.
Well there I was, all alone with my concerns until I found a ‘friend.’ I found David Ray Griffin’s book” “911 Commssion report lies and omissions”.
Well, if the good Dr. Karl ever finds himself sitting with 11 other jurors in a criminal trial he may learn that his fellow jurors might find him a bit strange if he were to ignore a key witness for the one side exposing that the official witnesses. i.e. the Congressional Commission; as LYING, OBFUSCATING, OMITTING FACTS and so on. Now of course confirmed by some of the Commissioners.
Even the most ‘bogan’ example on the jury panel might just ‘sqeak’ from the end of the jury table; “But, why are they telling so many lies and giving us Bullshit?”
Oh dear ! Why so? I thought and here we are ten years later having confirmed that the official government 911 conspriacy theory and their conspiracy believers are BS and protecting evil mass murderers after using the lies to go invade and kill in half a dozen countries.
By the way, I still do not like Muslim fundamentalists but they have been shafted on this one……..serves em right for living above so much oil !!!!.
So for the ‘gullible skeptics’ and their conditioned social and emotional naivity.
The good doctor should avoid all jury duty, some find it difficult.
Now watch all those shills come in here and comment …………. they don’t want a proper investigation…………NOW WHY NOT ?
It’s not that I don’t appreciate the Replies that discuss the details of 9-11. They’re valuable. But isn’t Dalia’s article mainly about the ABC Spokesperson’s dedication to untruth? And if she’s right about the ABC in regard to one major event, wouldn’t this hold, most likely, for any other event? From whom do these spokespersons take their marching orders (or, as radio talk-shows in America call it, their ”talking points.”)? I consider it blasphemous (to “science”) that a science show refuses to talk reason.
Jaaaaayzuz, that is horrible.
Perhaps; The Rt. Hon. Mr Malcolm Turnbull MP. will deign to reply to your comment/inquiry. After all, he is the Australian Minister for Communications responsible for our annual billion contributed to the ABC , et al. and he has a duty of due diligence in the conduct of his Ministerial portfolio. Besides, he would like to be PM, I suspect, if Julie cannot grasp the title. Maybe his policy will be for principles and truth and forgo warmongering policies for foreign agendas.
Oh well. Let us at least dream! He has children and nice dogs and may care for their futures.
I am posting this email (with permission)
Attention: Dr. Karl Kruszelnicki.
Dear Doctor,
I draw your attention to a discussion of your interview with Mr Andrew Geoghegan on first November 2014, posted on http://gumshoenews.com/
Ms. Lachlan’s article poses some questions for you, which many would wish to be answered.
Prior to your appearance it may be useful if you did some scientific examination and research into who really did the mass murders on 9/11 and how it was carried out. Note in that regard the debate over the 28 ‘secret’ redacted pages from the official 911 Congressional report into 9/11.
I hope you and your interviewer are up to date on the 28 ‘secret’ pages. It has been suggested that the Saudis were in on the planning of 911 and financed the ‘hijackers’. I think it is another firewall originally set up to have the Saudis involved to some extent but the firewall is part of the pre-planned design to cause another distraction to protect the real culprits. As you would be aware: A US consul in SA was coerced by the CIA to provide visas to more than half the alleged ‘hijackers’. A search of ‘US consul provides visas for 911 hijackers’ will bring up the consul’s video statement.
With respect, I appreciate that you are into science and perhaps the scope of the conspiracy as to other matters is one for someone who thinks with the criminal mind and looks into those nooks and crannies. Of course there is much more in that regard to cause serious questions to be posed in regard to 9/11. Perhaps that field is one for a specialised terrorist expert to examine. For the Criminal lawyers, it is handy to examine what should be there if certain circumstances are taken to exist. If it is not there, for example, in a proper investigation, then alarm bells are ringing for the commonsense bogan juror.
In any case it is clear that a number of Congressmen/senators in the US who have read the 28 pages are of the view that the official 911 government conspiracy theory is tainted with fantasy.
If the US politicians are correct then it would appear that the Howard government spurred on by “our” ABC and mass media invaded the wrong blinking country and we lost about 40 soldiers for nought. Really funny, I suppose, that so many are vilified because they ask questions. Yep really funny; when you hear General Wesley Clark (ret) explain to Amy Goodman in March 2007 that he went to the Pentagon and spoke to a few of the chaps in the weeks after 9/11 and was told; “ …….going to war sir! Why? Don’t know, we are going to take down 7 countries in 5 years ……. Iraq. Sudan. Somalia, Libya, Lebanon. Syria and Iran. (we were bombing the crap out of Afghanistan at the time)
With the utmost respect Dr. Karl and ABC………………….there is much more than science that is relevant to examining the mass murders on 9/11 and some courtesy may be expected to those of us who just do not believe the official nonsense and that should at least be recognised. When a scientist and broadcaster/commentator delves into such areas with a narrow view of the reality and broadcasts a fraction of the material relevant to the subject……………after all, listeners to the ABC might be misinformed as to the reality and truth is not on the ABC agenda?
One day even, the ABC might broadcast the General Clark – Goodman March 2007 interview?
Fat chance! The ABC will not inform the public that we have been deceived into losing soldiers spending heaps going into debt for 13 years of killing for an agenda of invasions planned by the US NEOCONS prior to 9/11.
As for your world of science; some material may be found at http://www.ae911truth.org/ and at the 911 index at http://www.whatreallyhappened..com/ (see the top of the site).
Also, you may wish to comment on those of your 400 or so peers at; http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/ and the past military and government officials who also are ‘weirdo conspiracy theorists’. (i.e. by not accepting the government’s complete 911 official conspiracy theory fantasy) (not updated since 2011)
For inspiration on how the ABC spends part of its Billion dollar budget and deals with those who question the official government conspiracy theory, note the Jonathon Faine interview with Kevin Bracken on about 20th October 2010 via the critique by Anthony Lawson at:
http://www.youtube..com/watch?v=tE3pMPObcGU/
As per the mass media campaign to vilify many who ask 9/11 questions, another disgraceful vilification of Mr Bracken was done by radio 2UE in Sydney on or about 21st October. A Mr Steve Liebmann referred to the Faine –ABC diatribe on Mr Bracken and then proceeded to call Mr. Bracken a ‘’Goose’, scandalised him and raised irrelevant matters as per the style of the ABC and the commentators and interviewees. The “scandal cast’ my Mr. Liebman may be found by a search ‘Radio 2UE Steve Liebmann Bracken 911 conspiracy claptrap’.
For several very good views on 9/11 I recommend several of David Ray Griffin’s books on the subject. He may be contacted for a chin wag at his address in the cc box above.
A copy is being sent to Professor Clive Williams, Australia’s foremost ‘terrorist’ expert so that, if you wish and he agrees, you may compare style when having a go at those who question the mass murders on 9/11. Professor Williams was given a hearing on the ABC program ‘The Drum’ in the past when his address to some skeptics given by him to a Canberra group, was broadcast.
As we pay a billion or so each year for the ABC, some of us at least should be recognised as financiers and could be impartially heard in regard to questions relating to the mass murders on 9/11.
No doubt the ABC management has a problem with interviewing Richard Gage from the architects and engineers group at ae911trtuh.org, even though he is given reasonable airplay in the US and recently had a illuminating opportunity on C Span. (? Title) When he was in Australia in November 2009 Amanda Keller had a huge response when he was given an opportunity on one of the FM Sydney stations to explain building No 7. Pity the ABC people did not take a similar opportunity.
The Communications Minister would surely agree that it is ‘OUR’ ABC and those who question the 9/11 mass murders are entitled to be heard with impartial and courteous discussion …………….as is the duty of the ABC to provide, particularly if the ABC continues to enable misinformation from other sources.
The ABC owners and listeners are entitled to hear the opinions of those who are experts in the field of the 9/11 science, relating to the ‘imploding of the three towers on 911 and the deception of the public to justify invasions for 13 years and the killing of over a million human beings, plus all the misery caused in the Middle East……………………..which is appearing endless!!!
Not to worry, we have the internet and I have suggested to the Honourable Minister that the ABC may as well be sold; we pocket the capital and save a billion per year. Everyone is a winner!
Sincerely,
B. Antcliffe.
Member; Lawyers for 9/11 truth. Double Bay.
I would love to see the reply to this 😀
I wonder which/whose team will draft it? Surprise us!
Here’s how the tax payer’s dollars are spent :
1. to buy out the government 🙂
2. to buy out the courts 🙂
3. to buy out the media 🙂
4. to buy out witnesses 🙂
5. to pay the debunkers :-))))))))))
This last group takes the biggest heap out of the budget 🙂
(Thank you for sharing your dollar with me)
…FU,
sorry but your comment is a waste of your time and our space.
If you want to talk finance go to the site with Australia’s debt clock ticking over, presently about $A651,070,500.000. On that we, THE TAXPAYERS are paying the banks a billion or so every few days (?) [….Australiandebtclock.com.au]
We pay a billion plus for the ABC annualy for some whose ignorance and bullying hardly justifies a salary of a reported $370,000. plus perks etc . Now that/they would be a real saving/s to contemplate!! (and what about the support staff?)
Now if the ABC ‘egg layers’ (as described by Ms Lewis?) want to earn their keep they might try informing the public of some facts that may provide some large savings to pay the poor ‘hen peckers’. One contribution would have been to expose; the lies of 9/11. the lies of wmd/s the past lies in history (Lavon, Gladio, USS Liberty, Tonkin, Northwoods as poropsed. for examples) that are all used to get our silly politicians into some war somewhere and our citizens killed and creating a huge debt to be borrowed from the bankers so that the banks profit from the interest paid. By the way, the banks also lend to those who we have borrowed for, to do battle with.
AB just imagine if the banks wer exposed as warmongering profiteers and governments were banned by the citizens from borrowing to make war.
Now the ABC might try educate the public with the fact that ‘All Wars are Bankers Wars” (Mike Rivero at whatreallyhappened.com)
The ABC might educate the public with the observations of General Smedley Butler with his exposure that for thirty years in the US army with a most distignuished career, he was just a thug over three continents for big business and banks. The laying hen at at the ABC might try reading his small publication: ‘War Is A Racket’ and debating it with our Canberra warmongering lot. No way will the ABC inform the public, no way Tony Jones on Q and A or whatever will drag in our politicians and put to them the interview with General Wesley Clark referring to his exposure of pre 911 plans to go on 7 worlwide home invaions, trashing houses, killing occupnats and stealing flat model TVs.. (God forbid if someone did that out in Western Sydney, Radio 2 GB would melt down with callers)
So Tony what about it? [As an introduction play the Goodman’Clark interview] Mr Howard; were you aware that prior to 9/11, there were US plans to invade 7 countries and sucker your government into it as a willing coalition of the willing lads to get our boys killed and why were our agencies suckered by the wmd lies? (ref: the BBC production: The spies who fooled the world”? which at least the ABC broadcast. Of course the Germans were not fooled by ‘Curve Ball’, but the whole of the US intelignce house of boffins was.
So FU, want to talk money again?
Hey B. Antcliffe- I have wondered for a LONG time why no lawyer has filed lawsuits against SOME of the known culprits. Larry Silverstein, Rudy Giuliani, are living like KINGS off of the slaughter of FELLOW AMERICANS, and Iraqis, and Afghanis, and now Syrians, etc, etc, etc. After reading the comments, here’s a question I would LOVE one of you oh-so-smart TRUTH bashers to answer for me. The article is titled, “Dr. Karl, Please Explain Building 7”. Building 7 was NEVER MENTIONED in the “official 9/11 commission” report. EXPLAIN THAT ONE! A 47 story building collapses the SAME day as WTC 1 and 2, and it is NEVER MENTIONED? How smart do you have to be to figure out you’re being LIED TO? I REMEMBER the news that day in America, and they said another building had collapsed in the afternoon, but NEVER showed any footage of it. WE ALL KNOW WHY NOW. It was OBVIOUSLY controlled demolition. Another pertinent fact for the “debunkers”. In 1945, a B-24 Liberator crashed into the top of the Empire State Building. As a result of that crash, every skyscraper built in New York from then on HAD to be built to withstand the impact of an airliner. The WTC buildings were built to withstand MULTIPLE airplane crashes, according to the architect who designed them. One more piece of valuable information: NO steel framed building in history EVER collapsed due to fire, except THOSE THREE, that day, that were ALL owned by the same man, Larry Silverstein. DEBUNK THAT. You people who get so smart ass and nasty with people who are in search of the TRUTH are either pitifully stupid, or disgraceful liars. There is NO OTHER explanation.
….if there is only one thing that the man can…”explain”…using scientific and documented fact it would be this….how did the BBC know (and publicly announce…on air)…that building # 7 was / had collapsed…a full 26 minutes prior the actual implosion? They even announced it as the building smoldered a bit in the background…over the shoulder of the female news anchor? Explain that….outside of the circle of knowledge we all have in which we know it was a false flag operation.
RJ O’Guillory
Author-
Webster Groves – The Life of an Insane Family
I guess you wrote an autobiography.
Very well done, but you may have overlooked the small fact that were the Israeli involvement in the mass murder of 3,000 innocents on 911 exposed to the armed-to the-teeth American masses, it would mean the end of Israel and the expulsion of every last Jew from North America.
That’s why they won’t talk about it and ridicule anyone who does. Notice even Malcolm Fraser, who is right on and completely wise to the tribe refuses to delve into 911.
In addition the American “Veterans Today’ publication has indisputable information which suggest mini-nukes were used to bring down the WTC buildings. They have the info from Russian Intel.and the IAEA who tested soils samples in 2002 around the WTC and found Strontium and Thorium levels at 50 to 60 times normal background which can only be explained by Nuclear fission. In addition some 70,000 persons in New York are being secretly treated for cancers again explainable only by exposure to Gamma radiation.
Floda, you are so transparently a duplicitous mischief I don’t know why you bother.
Sad not one comment about Israel operatives working at WTC and security at both airports. How is it that Marvin Bush’s company got full security of all WTC towers and why did it take 4 years for a committee to be set up and meager funding?
By the way–ABC is controlled by ? As same operatives in USA–Rabid Kosher.
911 attacks were planned during Clinton years, GW Bush’it was just that dumb mule carrier
Because it’s bullshit.
Dr Karl is of the Chosen. Concealing the truth is a “religious” duty. I wonder if he’s a good dancer?
A few things that Karl will ignore because he can’t explain them without incendiaries….
“Left: Thermal Imagery of the progression of molten steel hotspots from September 18 to September 25 ”
GeoNews, October, 2001
http://lh4.ggpht.com/_WMomW_OV7Vg/S2pVU-7CkbI/AAAAAAAAAKc/58YHzJqB06A/GeoNews-02b.gif
Some beams pulled from the wreckage are still red hot more than 7 weeks after the attack, and it is suspected that temperatures beneath the debris pile are well in excess of 1,000°F. – LIRO.com
http://lh3.ggpht.com/_WMomW_OV7Vg/S2pVU7QhQNI/AAAAAAAAAKg/M6rPijPf2S8/LiRO_molten_02.jpg
“The brightness of the flame, along with the white smoke, suggests that some type of METAL IS BURNING. Aluminum will burn, but in normal fires it usually melts instead because the metal surface is protected by an oxide layer that must be breeched before ignition can take place. Aluminum oxide melts at high temperatures (2054C) that are not typically reached in normal fires.” – NIST, NCSTAR1-5A_chapter_9_AppxC – p. 344
http://history-bytes.blogspot.com/2009/04/kind-of-metal-fire.html
(metal fire + white smoke + molten iron = all the salient features of a thermite reaction.)
The Australian media knows the truth, as do most of our politicians. An ALP representative told me about the 5 explosives-tainted Israelis arrested as suspects on 911 (!). But not a single Australian media outlet reported that fact.
The ABC, in breach of their own charter, would not reply to my letters asking why. (To do so would mean they have to acknowledge facts that they refuse to report.)
The best way to deal with the ABC is to turn it off. Encourage others to do the same. Stop recognizing them.
.”…..turn it off.”
Ditto: To the rest of the MSM.
In the US, 95% of all the media is owned by 6 interests (Two in Oz?) ……………who do not care about ‘our’ interests or truth.
If they must be heard or read, then let the wallet walk ….. away from their advertisers. Nary a shot has to be fired.
Sorry.
‘Nary a fist has to be raised’ . In rememberance of those 26 who died at the Eureka stockade this day about 150 years past.
Let they, who died, be it not in vain. We shall remember them. Austrialians became free from that day.
(:-
Ps:
At Gallipoli we became a nation fighting for colonial Imperialism.
At Eureka we became a nation fighting against Imperialism.
So for whom, have our politicians being sacrificing our men for, ever since?
I guess they only used thermite in that one corner….
There was once a site called CounterKnowledge, and there, one could see the exact same behaviours that we are witness to here – disinfo agents refusing to budge from their talking points, regardless of whatever information you impart to the conversation.
My two cents: don’t waste your time. The truth of the events of September 11th, 2001 will come to light.
Yes there are 3 or 4 of them onto every 9/11 post here. They pretend not to shift their position but they have enough knowledge – as a consequence they have revealed their complicity in the cover up.
Wow….
So now you are accusing me and others of complicity….
You really are a disturbed person….
Disturbed!
Absolutely, as with many genuine citizens of the world with those who would give comfort , aid an protection to mass murderers (terrorists) who have progressed from killing 3,000 in New York to the invasions and killing of a million plus, as per the plan by the US Neocons to go to war and take out 7 countries in 5 years as exposed by General Wesley Clark to Amy Goodman in March 2007.
Pity you do not appear as ‘disturbed’ as many normal civilised informed citizens.
In Germany in the 1930’s there was a shortage of ‘disturbed’ Germans and note the results there.
Best be awake and disturbed them ignorant and naive. It would seem that you have disclosed your penchant.
Save up some soap for your team. Lord Haw Haw lost that fate.
How is that war coming along with the invasion of 7 countries? Could you let us know which countries they have occupied?
Boy.
Occupation comes per many financed agents and dupes.
Do your own research: go see how things are faring for the citizens of and refugees from:
Afghanistan.
Somalia.
Sudan,
Libya
Syria,
Iraq,
And soon from Lebanon and Iran.
Enjoy your trip and keep yor head down……. Take your family for the experience….. If not, get a job as a Obama drone killer.
Bonkers much?
JB.
Sorry, I have been a bit slow ref: Monty Python.
Wink, wink! Say no more. Wink wink eh. Nudge: nudge say no more. Wink wink. Say no more.!!!!!!
Doing a great job: Wink wink! Say no more!
Time to find a new persona, been shot here.
When we meet, first shout on me.
johnnyboy2222, as a believer of the “Muslim conspiracy theory” who do you think was the “mastermind” and what evidence has convinced you of this aspect of your conspiracy theory belief?
I have read the “mastermind” aspect of your conspiracy theory has not quite settled yet which is understandable when the information is obtained with your agreeable methods of torture and secret interrogation and trial process.
Did this mastermind organize the incredible intersection of many military and security drills on the day of 911 that assisted a confusing air traffic atmosphere to achieve the attacks or was this just plain good luck?
Why the emphasis on “Muslim conspiracy theory”? They were Extremists.
Who is the mastermind behind the truther conspiracy? What evidence has convinced you of this aspect of your conspiracy theory belief?
johnnyboy2222 comm-entity, are you shy about evidencing your “Extremist conspiracy theory”.
Your evasive and distracting response is consistent with the other moral qualities you have announced your comm-entity promotes.
In a legal sense a jury would have already noted a complete absence of substance in this comm-entity’s reply which is highly suggestive it is not at all confident.
I would instruct the jury to observe this typical distracting device and invite the jury to pay particular attention to this fascinating contrast of expectations of others compared to it’s willingness to evidence comm-entity’s own “Extremist conspiracy theory”.
I would urge a jury that this points precisely at the question is the “Extremist conspiracy theory” consistent with all the facts or are contradictions and absurdities in the evidence hidden as long as the legal process and journalism avoid honest authentic scrutiny.
With just one question we see revealed this comm-entity’s clearly displayed fear of having to state who it believes his evidence suggests was the “mastermind”.
Has this johnnyboy222 comm-entity got something he would prefer remain hidden?
I don’t claim I will know who the mastermind behind the 911 crime was until a legitimate legal process is conducted.
Consequently I object to all the policies and effects on our lives justified by the “911 Extremist conspiracy theory” that has been announced and adopted.
I am guessing you are a lawyer… You talk to much and don’t take enough action in investiating this crime.
Good reply, Ned.
It still shocks me that there are people who still believe the official fairy tale about 19 highjackers who managed to commandeer four passenger aircraft, fly them unmolested through the most well-defended airspace into the world and, despite barely being able to pilot a Cessna aircraft, managed to manuever them into three buildings, bringing two those to the ground, while destroying nearby Building 7, which was never struck, but suddenly fell at free-fall speed into its own footprint later in the afternoon.
One of the alleged highjackers’s passports, belonging to supposed ringleader Mohammed Atta, magically survived the inferno unscarred, floated to the ground and was found a few blocks from the World Trade Center. Later, we found out that seven of the 19 highjackers were alive and well and the victims of identity theft, some of whom had had had their passports stolen.
The entire tale is beyond incredible. It’s a story built on an elaborate foundation of lies designed to bamboozle and confuse the public.
@kirk,
First of all WTC 7 did not collapse suddanly, TST’s were placed to monitor any movement(instabilaty) of the building.
Second, Dr. (you all seem to fancy titlels) Judy Wood wondered why so much paper and trees did nit burn, while cars did.
She has many pictures of huge amounts of paper, and note that passports are made of somewhat more fire resistant paper, like funpaper at seelings during parties.
Now Kirk, do not tell me that you did not know this…..
You really have no clue do you?
What does the passport proof? That he was alone in the plane, because they only found this passort, which wasn’t from Atta btw. The passport proofs nothing. And there are no survivors. The BBC has already explained their mistake many years ago(2006). So you are a bit behind.
Below is the story from the BBC
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1559151.stm
If you scroll right to the bottom of the article, you will see a link to an update to that story. So read it, why don’t ya.
johnyboy… not sure how you going to keep plugging your fingers to stop the dam leaking
We know this johnnyboy2222 comm-entity is an advocate of corrupt justice, we know it is morally comfortable with torture methods of interrogation, we know it is amused by niggling facile conflict over the frustrated and exasperated genuine demands for a legitimate judicial investigation and objective balanced media consideration.
What we look forward to learning is more detail surrounding the particular version of the “911 Muslim conspiracy theory” that this comm-entity holds as proven fact and the evidence value that has justified this opinion.
This comm-entity has been very outspoken in it’s expectation that views should be backed by evidence so I know it will be generous and enthusiastically consistent in providing answers and supporting evidence for it’s belief in what many critical thinkers soberly judge to be a more sinister complex plot with a synthetically woven “Muslim conspiracy theory” cover story that matches and integrates with the factually established political climate and documented homeland and foreign policy agendas.
So now I am an entity? You really have lost it…. Did you get hit in the head too many times when you were a kid, by your parents or something?
Yes johhnyboy222 you are just a comm-entity that now feigns distracting false sensitivity instead of answering the same basic questions to evidence your “Extremist conspiracy theory” that now turns out to be a standard you apply to others but in an instant you are exposed as full of fear and totally lacking in confidence.
The one certainty is the morality your comm-entity reflects and promotes is highly consistent.
So which “mastermind” version has gained your evidence standard and fits with your “Extremist Muslim conspiracy” reality?
A comm-entity with your demonstrated superior knowledge should have not the slightest problem with this basic but foundational question.
Your entity has expressed a confident belief and confidence that your “Extremist conspiracy theory” is established proven fact but now readers would be detecting your confidence has totally evaporated.
She accuses us of having knowledge about the matter…….
Paranoid much?
No knowledge, and therefore free to fantasize
I was cc’d into this email:
Attention:
The Rt. Hon Mr. Malcolm Turnbull. MP.
Minister for Communications
Parliament House.
Canberra.
Dear Minister,
Re: ABC News 24 recordings. File C69227-14
In short:
Ms Lachlan sought from ABC “news 24’ a record of an interview broadcast in Melbourne on the “weekend’s breakfast” program recently.
From reports, it would appear that there are suggestions that many unkind and discourteous comments were made during the discussion had by Andrew Geoghegan with Dr. Karl Kruszelnicki concerning the nature/character/competence etc., (?) of those in our society who question the official government’s (and apparently the ABC’s) 9/11 conspiracy theory.
An article by Ms. Lachlan on the interview may be viewed at the http://gumshoenews site under the title; “Dr. Karl, Please Explain Building 7”.
I would trust that Minister would immediately recall the matter of building No 7 on 9/11. I raised the very circumstances of the questions concerning building 7 with you outside Edgecliff railway station, when Minister was seeking votes for the Federal elections in late 2004 and also again in 2007.
Minister of course would have a large file of my correspondence since November 2004 on 911 generally at the electorate office in Edgecliff,.
I refer you to my quick note below this message to the news 24 team sent by I phone last night and I repeat the sentiments to ‘Minister’s ’Corporation’ herein.
I would hope that the people at the ABC News 24 program would be transparent and immediately inform Ms Mclachlan as to how she may obtain an authenticated record/transcript/recording of the subject interview as broadcast.
Again, it is noted that the subject of the interview is attracting comments (48 at last count) on the Gumshoe news article referred to. I am aware that the comments are coming in from a potential large world readership and put simply; the credit of ‘our’ ABC is again a matter for discussion and observation.
Minister is respectfully reminded that there are too often, such occurrences suggesting vilification of an interviewee by the ABC staff and a recent example is found in the Faine-Fraser interview when the deliberate attack on the USS Liberty was subject to expressed misinformation during the program. I am familiar with correspondence from a survivor of that murderous attack (Mr Meadors) who has vainly requested the ABC to re-examine the ‘misinformed’ utterances to the ABC listeners. The comment/s clearly would have led to misapprehensions by some listeners in regard to an historical naval event and heinous betrayal of US servicemen. An article on that subject may also be located at the gumshoenews site with a copy of the correspondence by Mr Meadors, on behalf of the USS Liberty Association who are seeking justice and recognition.
There is another regrettable example of the apparent modus operandi of the ABC, also on the 9/11 questions from 20th October 2010 in the Faine-Bracken ‘phone in’ when 9/11 questions were raised. Suffice to say: please listen to what Mr. Lawson says of the ABC behaviour at:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tE3pMPO/ (if there is a problem with the link just search; “ABC Faine-Bracken 911 interview”.
The regrettable conduct of the ABC with the Faine-Bracken interview even flowed on to the floor of the Australian Parliament, either on the 20th or 21st October 2010. Perhaps you were present in the House when the apparently ‘uninformed’, member; Mr J Frydenburg MP. referred to the Faine-Bracken interview and asked a question of the then Australian Prime Minister about the interview, and from memory, sought that poor Mr Bracken be censured as a Labor party member/unionists for having the gall, to ask a question in regard to the official government 911 conspiracy theory of an ABC presenter, that the presenter and seemingly, Mr Frydenburg, also did not like.
It is further regrettable that an apparently uninformed Prime minister of Australia, then being Ms Julia Gillard fell for the suggestion by Mr Frydenburg MP. and described any questioning of 9/11 to be ‘stupid and wrong’. If Minister may not recall the exchange, then merely refresh the Minister’s memory with a search for the video of the very parliamentary proceedings by searching; ‘911 questions PM Gillard ‘stupid and wrong, October 2010.’”
Clearly, if must be absolutely apparent that misinformation, bullying, vilification tactics and discourtesy etc., broadcast to the Australian populace in a biased and purposeful humiliating manner, without providing recourse to determine the record and have the opportunity for a reply is a most dangerous and unprofessional practice and may even lead to errors in policies and beliefs by politicians who are not wise to the circumstances…………….as for example, the Frydenburg-Gillard exchange, which would have been communicated to a large proportion of the Australian public at the time, and to this day has not been challenged in order to be corrected.
I seek that Minister have one further horrendous thought; Political ignoramus have taken countries to wars on lies and misconceptions. Perhaps the ABC presenters may contemplate that possibility
Kindly seek to encourage the ABC provide us with ‘our’ record of the relevant interview.
Sincerely,
B Antcliffe.
Double Bay.
Federal Electorate of Wentworth.
Wow, you really are under the impression, that you are important.. Well, let me tell you a secret. You are not. The whole truth movement is a joke. This message will surely be laughed at, and then deleted. Or they hang it on the information board for people to laugh at.
I’m just a little cog in a big clock ….getting closer to the hour.
As for the Truth Movement being a joke… I’m sure they do laugh at how they have manipulated society with such skill and especially have people like you paid or unpaid doing the bidding of the Secret Crime Movement/s
Nah, I don’t get paid to do this.. I follow the truth movement for entertainment value 🙂
And that clock will never reach the hour, because its standing still, or its in reverse.
Let us wait and see whether the hour is struck. And as for you saying you just follow the truth movement for entertainment value – I just don’t believe you.
I don’t care what you believe, because its obvious you believe all kinds of nutty conspiracies.
Should the US want to blow up an empty building, owned by themselves, Well, feel free.
What’s the fuzz about an Empty building.
They also blow up empty chimneys.
Jonnyboy2222, your comm-entity has promoted an “Extremist conspiracy theory” and I am keen to learn if you have evidence to support these views.
Who is the “mastermind” and what is the evidence that has convinced you to believe as you claim?
This is a very basic question.
I think I can add “hypocrite” to the qualities demonstrated by the johnnyboy2222..comm-entity.
Who exactly is the “mastermind” of the “911 conspiracy theory”?
Who is the mastermind behind the truthers view of the conspiracy?
Johnnyboy2222…, have you ever contemplated the joker in this “entertainment” is your entity.
How is it that you cannot precisely nominate the “mastermind” of your “911 Extremist conspiracy theory”?
Perhaps you have deluded yourself believing the expectation of accountable legal standard evidence in any criminal allegation is a joke, and, adopting “Extremist Muslim conspiracy theories” without above described quality evidence is not a tragic joke on the world.
Those who have high legal standards are still waiting and making efforts to hold our MP’s and media accountable for their obstructions against a truthful revelation and justice.
Those who have low standards of political accountability are complicit, consciously or unconsciously, in allowing deceptions and lies surrounding major political crimes to go undetected and unpunished.
Well said Christopher.
Well Johnyboy2222 is like the ‘Joker’ in a pack of cards – they are discarded when the game begins.
Johnyboy2222 doesn’t demonstrate any confidence at all in his “extremist Muslim conspiracy theory”.
If nothing more, this comm-entity has provided some instruction for readers on contrasting rhetoric and logic method.
Well said Chistopher 😃
Hug hug hug and kissy
Lol, you are the one that does not believe the official story, so why don’t YOU come up with a better story. I’m happy with the official story, just like a few billion other people.
So why don’t YOU tell us, who is the mastermind behind it all. Who gave the order. Who planted the explosives. Who planted the thermite. Who pushed the button. Who blew up the Pentagon. What blew up the Pentagon. Where did the passengers go.
They do not know Johnnyboy.
They just wat to go to the Justice Office to demand the arrest of Some 1000 people, without telling who they are and why.
I take it that you were counsel for the defence at the Nurembugjh trials? Time to pass on.
There are several points that should be seriously contemplated by all readers of this site that have been illuminated, as much as anything can be in a comment forum, contrasting the various methods and rhetorical techniques that are applied to discussions surrounding 911 questions and realities.
The principles apply to all critical thinking and advocacy.
If we are seeking to advance the case for revising the populist understanding of what actually happened on 9/11/2001 the “controlled demolition” controversies are a logical blind alley.
I agree there are many circumstantial issues surrounding the leasing, insurance, building obsolescence, reported explosions and the incredible visual realities that defy accidental random probabilities.
Despite all of these highly suspicious factors that do need further legal scrutiny the general argument is based on the “expert” judgement of a small number of scientists and engineers that have not been scrutinized for motive or reliability in a proper legal fashion and many of the “pillars” of the “controlled demolition” case rely on technical complex assumptions that are not legal proven fact.
I am also uncomfortable with the blinkered concentration on this aspect of the 911 conspiracy to the detriment of the far better documented evidence found in the hijacker background official narrative.
The comment-entities that float in to sow frustration and mischief have given a lesson that they have no interest in trying to defend the “Muslim conspiracy theory” but they get fertile entertainment by exposing all the very open questions regarding the “controlled demolition” subject when posters falsely claim it is proven fact.
It is a very subjective judgement to state that you are convinced that “controlled demolition” is fact.
Once again I repeat it is a logical blind alley.
What if this blind alley has been cleverly crafted, fueled and funded to lead those seeking justice and truth on a merry dance to a tune composed by the criminals who understand what issues can be contained, and alternatively, what aspects of the crime are most vulnerable to a broad comprehension.
Consider that the fundamental narrative of the 911 official narrative is based upon the KSM entity that is still locked behind the most incredible wall of physical and legal secrecy with a regular stream of “tales” from anonymous or classified sources that may or may not contain a shred of truth or reality.
The “hijacker” information is more consistent with the methods of constructing a patsy than a real plot.
Like everything about the 911 event no proper legal scrutiny has been applied so any person has every right to challenge the legitimacy of the official narrative demanding any person who has adopted the Muslim conspiracy theory explain why they are convinced it is factual considering all the factual inconsistencies, logical absurdities and technical impossibilities contained just in the public information without legal standard scrutiny.
When the argument is so solidly weighted against the “official narrative” regarding the legal standard and process along with the flaws already exposed as above, why is all the momentum and resources of the “truth community” gathering down blind allies where they can be contained indefinitely.
We need to be alert and fully conscious of all the possibilities and subtle influences that might be infecting and controlling our perception of reality and the thinking method we apply to make our judgements and dictate our actions.
If we approach our fellows, the media, or a political desk, we must never confuse speculation with proven fact.
We must present our case as questions that have a totally rock solid foundation in constituted critical thinking.
We must learn to use charm and irresistible logical intellect inviting your opponent in discussion to point out any error in your expectations that nothing less than authentic legal process is acceptable to yourself and a very valid question is to ask what standard of truth do they teach their children.
This takes the morality to the heart of the issue.
I hope these thoughts are useful.
“but they get fertile entertainment by exposing all the very open questions regarding the “controlled demolition” subject when posters falsely claim it is proven fact.”
the destruction of building 7 via some sort of controlled demolition is the ONLY explanation.
Gee, I think you are on to something, but I would wish to consider an opinion from; the famous Dr. Karl, those who interviewed him, Jon Faine, Steve Liebmann, Ray Hadley, Mr. Scott from our ABC, the editors of The Australian, the editors of the the SMH and their affiliates, Josh Frydenburg MP, Julia Gillard, Julie Bishop and her underlings. Uncle Bill Shorten, those self righteous Green mob and all the rest, excepting Uncle Clive and Langie who may be excused from an opinion due to their limited future .
Sarcasm? Of course not, who gives a stuff that 911 is a lie and we have gone off and killed a million plus and destroyed humanity.
Not to mention acted like uncivilised barbarians torturing innocents.
Hey Mr. Ruddock. I remember your appearance on TV making light of a bit of US ‘enhanced’ interrogation. Hand in your amnesty international pin, you look silly having worn it. From memory, at the time you were the first ‘law officer’ of the Commonwealth?
So for the morality of our Federal politicians and media!
Fair Dinkum, until a legal process is conducted and the suspects and all the relevant expertise is cross examined in an open accountable prosecution we cannot know for certain and someone who doubts your assumption and judgement can fairly claim you have no hard proof.
The evidence is only circumstantial and your own judgement.
That doesn’t exclude the possibility you are correct and your
critic is not.
The Bin Laden confession translation contradictions, the hijacker pilot skills, the pattern of hijacker movements over time and on the day of 911, the “evidence” in airport car parks, and a whole list of documented factual material is available that is so strong it makes the “official version” impossible to believe once it is examined because you have to accept ridiculous contradictions and bewildering risks in timing and activities were deliberately planned.
A great deal has been uncovered regarding the background and back story to the 911 event but you won’t ever see this aspect mentioned when the conspiracy theory poisoning teams go into battle to discredit questions and demands for an accountable legal standard investigation.
Indeed there is so much background material. It need thousand of pages to document the evidence and examine.
Blogs are limited by individuals. knowledge , studies, correlation of material and time to sit with thick fingers on an I Phone.
911 is a complex masterful mass murder with many interests and motives with fire walls at every investigative threshold as the cover up proceeds.
It is a brilliant crime and coverup, but not insurmountable with proper resources for a competent investigation. Including bringing those responsible for the cover up to justice.
The perpetrators are counting on obfuscation, misinformation and the Castiniam modus of infiltration and deceptions .
Interesting challenge for we, who accept it. Eh, Johnny Boy?
As a starter: search: e p Heidner 911 commission report revised December 2008 at Scribd where the three parts may be found. Start with ‘collateral’ and ‘collateral 1’.
I agree the evidence of controlled demolition — not only in building 7, but also in trade towers 1 and 2, is overwhelming. I researched the evidence for at least nine months and arrived at this inescapable conclusion: demolition charges of some sort were planted in all three buildings. There is evidence, found by Dr. Steven Jones, former physicist at Brigham Young University, of what appears to be super thermite, or thermate, in sections of charred steel columns he was able to test (not all the evidence was carted away to China). Dr. Jones was ran out of BYU for telling the truth. Alpparently, the university and Dr. Jones were threatened by government officials.
Regarding Dr. Karl’s dismissive, non-response, it’s entirely predictable. He’s a careerist who will not jeopardize his public reputation or substantial honorariums by daring to research and attempt to confirm the theory of controlled demolition — a truth that already been demonstrated and confirmed again and again by other noteworthy engineers and architects as well as scores of firefighters and other first responders.
Just sent this one to Gage(see below this paragraph)
You think you have the right to demand answers, well so do I
Please note that I had something with Gage, just compare it with Xavier and Magneto.
Here it is, just sent:
I am a highrise builder from the Netherlands, and discussed the FOIA drawings regarding WTC 7 with your Ron Brookman.
I have only one question to you:
Why do you only show footages of the last 6sec of a 18sec collapse? And more important, why do you force people to make an opinion based upon incomplete information?, the last part of the footage?
And please, do not tell me that Gage is not aware.
It takes 10 min to boil an egg, should I only record the last 6 sec did I break a record boiling an egg?
Gage is not stupid, and therefore I want Gage to answer me, like Mr. Brookman did, plain, simple and based upon knowledge and experience.
Same goes for your Tony Szamboti.
I hate tube structures while you make them wider and wider, until you fail and learn, we all learn while we design and build.
El Kammo you are back I see: Highrise El Kammo that gave me a nonsense example of another building that collapsed by fire – just like B7. How long have you been sprouting this –
El Kammo – I’ll tell you what happened. The fires raged in Building 7 – for hours and hours…. but they were SHY fires so didn’t burn on the one side – only showed themselves through a few windows. Then when they had eaten through C79 – a miracle happened …. It pulled at the other pillars simultaneously but left the building as a shell. Then when all the pillars were ready to collapse, the fire blew the whistle and the whole building came down without a kink or resistance.
As for your ‘tube’ theory – Lets test your tube theory along with other theories in an investigations (incl demolition).
El Kammo why are you terrified – terrified of an open investigation that WILL test demolition as an option. WHY WHY WHY?
As Jonathan Barnett told me in person. “We never tested for explosives” -They made the assumption it was not a possibility. So don’t come with your usual BS – “they had an investigation”
Get over your FEAR and your FINGER POINTING El Kammo and accept that all options should be put on the table.
Hehehehe, You also have no clue. The Firedepartment had cordonned off the surroundings of WTC 7 because they knew it would collapse. Before column 79 collapsed, something else had already happened. So what was that exactly?
NIST tested for explosives for WTC 7. Not for WTC 1 and 2, where Jonathan Barnett is referring to. He was not part of the WTC 7 investigation.
Oh johnyboy – you’re back with your BS. You know that witnesses heard a countdown off a fire dept radio. You have investigated this so thoroughly so that you can provide your disinfo BS. Barnett was a group leader for FEMA – then worked for NIST later.
“NIST concluded that blast events inside the building did not occur and found no evidence supporting the existence of a blast event.”
And JFK was definitely shot by Harvey with a magic bullet.
You too are TERRIFIED of an open unhindered investigation.
You mean this countdown?
So I guess the red cross is also part of the conspiracy. You can’t seriously believe this guy?
And Barnett was not part of WTC7 investigation.
“Tower 7 is another issue. I was under the impression that the fires were unusual in that diesel fuel in large quantities became involved in the mid-afternoon. This would exceed the protection provided by the fire proofing. Of course the mechanism of collapse is still an unknown. There were large transfer trusses in the building, so perhaps those we compromised. I don’t pretend to have the answer to tower 7. But I anxiously await NIST’s final report on that tower.”
http://911-engineers.blogspot.com/2007/04/professor-jonathan-r-barnett.html
And it wasn’t multiple witnessess as you say. It was this one guy who was talking to someone from the red cross, as he claims. So you don’t even know the correct version of your conspiracy. How sad is that?
The sad thing is, that you really have no critical skills whatsoever.
Dont you ask yourself questions when you hear someone say that there was a countdown?
Why was there a countdown(It was supposed to be a secret operation wasn’t it)? So why could someone from the red Cross hear this countdown(Was he in on the plot)?
Was the countdown so people could escape(Everyone was allready gone around WTC7, because the firedepartment had cordonned it off)? Why was there no countdown for WTC 1 and 2(The firedpartment lost alsmost 350 people during those collapses)?
Did the perpetrators tell the firedepartment as you say, or the red cross as the guy says, in on their operation(Again, almost 350 firefighters lost their lives in the collapses of WTC 1 and 2)?
Why hasn’t the firedepartment or red cross come foreward with this information?
Why was there no mention of this on any of the released first responder tapes?
Why did not one of the first responders make note of this during their interviews?
So yes, this guy is full off bullshit. And you can see it from a mile away. To bad you can’t though….
@johnnyboy,
According to Mae, controlled demolitions go like this:
People are gathered for the event.
Someone hears an explosion, at least it sounded like an explosion.
Cheer cheer, but nothing happens.
Then planes are brought in to fly into the buildings to be demolished.
Cheer cheer, but nothing happens.
Beer and sandwich, nothing happens.
Then, without a countdown it happens.
Cheer cheer.
One building(supposedly)left.
They set it on fire.
Cheer cheer, but nothing happens.
Beer and sandwich, nothing happens, what a bummer.
Then a countdown Cheer cheer, but wait, no sound and fireworks, bummer, only a penthouse fell into the building, was that it? can’t be can it?
Nope, 12 sec later the remaining facade buckles and collapses, but due to beer and sandwiches they missed the first part.
That is how professionals bring buidings down nowadays
Shows how accurate you are. Boil an egg in 10 minutes el kammo ? ……. Maybe a huge goose egg you goose
@dalia mae,
Nice way to avoid the content of my comment.
And yes, it takes 10min to boil a hard cooked egg, without explosives that is.
4 minutes for a perfect egg. And in perfect El Kammo style – another distraction from why there should not be an open investigation. Lets talk eggs
Funny. You seem to be bothered with El Kammo bringing up the egg, but that was just a small part of his reply. For some reason, the egg is the only part you are replying to. Is the rest of his reply to hard for you?
You both are a waste of time. Designed to waste my time. Not bothering. Let El Kammo come up with a similar B7 example
There isn’t one, because the building was unique. I don’t understand why we have to keep telling you this. And just because you think you have something here, it doesn’t mean you actually have. So you can ask the same stupid question over and over again, with the same answer. So be my guest and keep sticking to that one question you have and dismiss everything else.
Only makes you look stupid.
Don’t you understand anything about variables? If not, look it up….
So, @kirk,
After 9 months of (what?) you came no further than the inglorious, infamous CNN footage, and you take that as the only available visual evidence and therefore as proof of controlled demolition, even with the sound “off” and the flashes “off”.
@kirk must be a mutant or a psychic.
He takes a look at a part of a footage and knows it all, and he works fast, he did it in 9 months.
So what is it? Thermite or Super Thermite?
And can you enlighten us, to what part of your 9 months research led you to the conclusion that demolition charges of some sort were planted in all three buildings?
No, it’s not.
I overwhelmed by your intellect. Your parents and/or your educators should be sued for turning you into an idiot. You should get a verdict for sufficient for your nursing home.
At least I show some intellect. You sir, only show what an idiot you truly are, which is fine by me 🙂 So keep em coming.
You. Should be sued by acusing people of mass murder without anything to back it up.
And not a peep from Dr Karl yet.
Perhaps the good doctor for is trying to work out how the failure at column 79 from thermal expansion resulted in the commencement of a free fall scenario from the top of No 7 for 2.5 seconds and the whole shebang ended on its own foot step in just over 6 seconds.
After all, he is a scientist of great regard and his reputation as such has to be considered by himself.
No doubt, with his research he has come across David Chandler’s descriptive video accounts of the failures of no’s 1 and 2. [notwithstanding that Mr Chandler is a mere high school physics teacher]
He also has to consider the firefighter’s accounts of: molten metal running as in a foundry underground and the other two firefighters with dust and bloody nose describing the explosions whilst they were waiting to go up the building.
Give the good Dr. for a break, he probably has not heard of this material before .
With his intellect one would trust that he will be on top of the scientific evidence before Christmas………. 20033.
We can wait!
Maybe he watched the video from Jowenko, who said that WTC 1 and 2 collapsed in a normal matter. Maybe you should look up what metal actually means.
Because you are not important.
True, as are you, but the topic is
and the lack of reply is significant.
Of course i am unimportant. Never said I was 🙂 But just because this is posted on a blog, does not mean there is any importance to this post. And why would he need to reply to an unimportant post? I am sure he has other, real important stuff to tend to.
Absolutely, he is too busy not explaining no 7 other than by vilification of those who question the official narrative.
Very UnAustralian.
Are you Australian?
Why would he need to explain anything to you? You would not understand it anyway. And he can always point you to the NIST report on WTC7, but you would not understand that either, so why would he bother?
But he did bother to enjoin in the vilification and bullying of those who question the NIST report without dealing with the questions, as he continues to do.
Is not the great Dr. Karl an educator?
Educators converse with those of his students in the normal course and have the backbone to challenge students just as students do to educators.
I take it that you have never experienced witnessing a challenge in education.
And therefore I do not feel the need to put desinfo on this woman’s blog
I take it that you regard the manner of and those who are responsible for the mass murder of 3000 is to our marvellous Dr, Karl unimportant?
Of course not. But unless you can come up with a better narrative for that day, why would he bother questioning the official story.
So, Mad Maxes, come up with your theses
WTC 7 was an empty building, so, do not bring out the dead.
This topic is not important, it comes from the mind of one stupid woman.
Johnny boy and team seem hot to trot in defence of good Dr. Karl.
Why?
To be honest, I never heard of him, before I came to this site lol. And I am not defending him, I am pointing out to you truthers, that you are unimportant. Why would he react to a bunch of idiots making stupid claims on some obscure website?
I have other things to do Johnny go and converse with brother Jonathon Faine of the ABC in Melbourne on $370,000 per year of our money and search:
Faine Bracken phone in Anthony Lawson 911.
You have the most boring modus operandi.
Very shit boring,
While you at at it search:
Radio 2ue Sydney Steve Liebmann conspiracy claptrap and read the 30 plus comments.
If you are not exhausted, look up:
PM Julia Gillard answering Frydenburg MP in the Oz parliament on 21 oct’ 2010 ‘911 PM Gillard ‘stupid and wrong’
Go away and catch up on some 911 history in Oz.
Pass it on to Dr, Karl.
PS: Johnny: I do not care if you take notice, others reading this may and they are your problem.
Cheers.
Please enlighten me, on how they are my problem. I am not from Oz.
“I believe the official story is a conspiracy theory that doesn’t stand up to scientific scrutiny. In my mind, the buildings were imploded,” Bracken said.
After being accused by Liberal frontbencher Christopher Pyne of not answering the question on discipline, Gillard said: “If it is the intention of the Leader of the Opposition to expel every member who says something stupid, I’ll start sending him a weekly list.”
Trades Hall secretary Brian Boyd said Bracken did not speak on behalf of the organisation.
“The official Trades Hall position is not to entertain that theory,” Boyd said.
“He (Bracken) is entitled to his views and we’ve discussed his theories,” he said.
“But I totally disagree,” Boyd added. (ANI)
So!
No Dr. Karl known to me either.
So let the Mad Maxes chase him, fine with me.
I do not know Karl either 😀
Who are U to demand a peep from Karl ?
He ‘discredited’ people who don’t believe the official theory – thus he must explain.
Oh god I’m so sick of Sept-11 truther idiots.
No ‘free fall’, please stop using that term, it just makes you look like the morons you are. The building fell at the rate allowed by gravity, the failure of the next floor under the pancake, and the compression of the air (and burning jet-fuel) in between.
Unless you are SUPERMAN, you cannot tell by eye how fast they were falling – particularly as you dont know HOW BIG THEY WERE. And anything you’ve got as far as facts and figures go is just wrong. I’ve done the numbers myself. LEARN WHAT FREE FALL ACTUALLY MEANS YOU NUMBSKULL DROOLING KNUCKLE DRAGGING TROGS!!!!
The small building that burned down: I think this is building 7, I dunno, I just know there was a much smaller building that burned down – after it got hit by flying burning debris from the 150 ton 767 aircraft full of 90,000 lt of Jet-AI that had just exploded above it. The port authority handed in a report indicating it just wan’t very well designed, and burned down. Cos that NEEEEVVVVER EEEEVVVVER happens in normal life! Oh, hang on, YES IT DOES, ALL THE TIME.
And one final note, I haven’t bothered going back and seeing if the standard piece of Incorectitude is in the above article and comments, I just can’t do it to myself anymore. But here are THE FACTS, just in case:
Jet-AI Aviation Kerosene burns at approximately 2000 Celsius, which is hot enough to liquefy carbon steel. It is also rather thick, a so-so solvent, and corrosive. It is hard to light, requiring a spark, burner, or, say, an impact with a skyscraper.
Household Kerosene burns at approximately 300 Celsius, which is why it is NOT what goes in Jet Aircraft. It is thin, a very good solvent, and not particularly corrosive. It is very easy to light. It is easy to get hold of.
RP1 Rocket-grade Kerosene burns at approximately 2800 Celsius, and is hard to get hold of. It is closer to Jet fuel in its properties than Household Kerosene.
All 3 are called ‘Kerosene’. The same way Petrol, and AvGas (which is very high Octane-rating Petrol), are both called ‘Gasoline’ (you can run a car or a motorcycle on AvGas, but you cannot run a piston-powered aircraft on car Petrol, it doesn’t have a fraction of the energy.) Or Budvar and Henninger are both called Beer.
Ignore wikipedia. In fact, just ignore the web.
Contact actual engineers and physicists, and don’t cherry-pick like you always do.
For the fuel properties – contact the petroleum companies themselves: this is where I first got the acurate properties of Jet-AI from, everything on the net is fiction.
That means, look up and find the phone numbers, email addresses and postal addresses for:
Shell Aviation
BP Aviation
Caltex Aviation
etc.
NOW, GO EDUCATE YOURSELVES.
Yaya, take heed of your own advice. Do your homework. Your seem to have no knowledge of the building 7 details. That “small building that burned down…. B 7…. I dunno”
Well it was 47 floors… And it didn’t burn down.
Do your research.
It collapsed because of the fire, so Yaha is actually right.
Absolute rubbish johnyboy. You can’t see a single window alight when it collapses. Causation not fire. Try something that actually matches the collapse. Also Yaya doesn’t even know the details of B 7.
Well, it seems he knows more about WTC7 than you.
Johnnyboy,
The only thing she knows is the infamous CNN footage.
No fire to be seen there, to lazy to take a look at the other sides.
Dalia,
Are you too lazy to look at the 3 other sides of the building ?
So U know huh?
I state that the widht of the tube was exeeded, and therefore became the Achillesheel of the structure.
We learn as we build, codes are changed constantly.
So U know the details? Look at the connections of girders with 79 and 80. and give your opinion Ms. Expert, and also take a look at the connections of the same girders with the core that was no core.
There was no way for the structure to adapt to horizontal interior forces, madame Expert, the simpel connections just don’t let it.
One other thing Madame Expert,
In my current project we work with several girders and thrusses of over 20 meters in lenght.
We fix them on one side and let them freely distract and extract on the other end, it can slide by 12micrometer/M1/C
So there you have it madame Expert. I take expansion and detraction into account, they did not.
Have fun madame Expert.
Your explanation of building 7 should say: the cause of collapse (part in free fall) was due to catastrophic failures in the construction of the building…. And not specifically fire. As a result of a fire causing failure of a single column the building then was internally destroyed leaving the outer shell which then collapses without a kink.
Causation …. A very unusually designed building that defies any normal construction methodology.
It is not up to you to determine what I should say about structural engineering.
ditto John
Yaha comm-entity, if you are so sick of the subject matter just read somewhere else and feel well.
It seems such a sensible course of action I just don’t know why you didn’t think it yourself.
Building 7, no jet fuel, no significant diesel fires according to NIST. No debris from the twin towers according to NIST.
Apparently, random fires can bring down a building which would be in the top 10 highest buildings in Australia, symmetrically at freefall acceleration into its own footprint. Come on. Some of us went to school and had an education.
After the building 7 collapse, there were changes to the building codes for all high rises. These changes consisted of nothing more than paperwork from the builder providing a new form showing that the building has fire proofing. I am sure that the new form will prevent any future collapses. There were no changes to any building codes outside the US.
Building codes are not meant to protect buidings.
To simply put it, it is Hello saved people, beye beye building.
El -Kammo,
I have been involved several times with the ABCB who are the people responsible for the BCA (building code of Australia.) the purpose of the BCA is in order of priority:
A. To ensure the building is safe for the occupants.
B. To ensure the building is safe for the public.
C. To ensure the building itself is structurally sound and is safe from fire or any other calamity for the building owners.
You are really struggling if you suggest that building codes are not meant to protect buildings.
It looks like you have too many 9/11 truth websites to cover as you are making many elementary errors and your grammar and spelling is getting worse. Tell your boss that you require some additional assistance.
I just work with Dutch codes.
Should Aussies want to protect their buildings it is fine with me.
The last part of “C” of your code comes at a major cost per m2.
Nobody died in WTC 7, it had no water.
Now, let’s design all future buildings for not having water, just skip the sprinkler system, and we all have to pay for it by increased lease and rent.
About the Aboriginal language I just say that this is not Aboriginal class, attack me in Dutch if you dare.
So nothing ever collapses in the land of Oz?
Water and mud resistant?
Any other calamity resistant?
That’s a big mouthfull.
Back it up.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_structural_failures_and_collapses
Great fun with your codes
El-Kammo
I have spent more time trying to prove the official story is correct than not. I have looked at many if not all of your list of building failures and I haven’t found one that has collapsed at freefall acceleration, symmetrically into its own footprint other than on sept 11, 2001.
I have spent around 35 years in the construction industry and I have yet to meet an independent structural engineer who can believe or understand the collapse of building 7 and I have asked many of them.
WTC7 This is an orange.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Zv7BImVvEyk
Not one of the 3 buildings collapsed in its own footprint. Many surrounding buildings were so badly damaged that they had to be demolsihed.
So I link to a list of Wikipedea and then it’s mine ?
All Mad Maxes should start their cars to tell the Lloyd company what really happened. All Mad Maxes are bounty hunters in the process. They can collect their bounty if they are right.
So come on Aussies, start your afterburners, collect the bounty by yourselves, no need to share with Gage, he takes 60.000 out of his foundation yearly.
The visiting comm-entities continue to reinforce their own logical contradictions and rhetorical bluff running a line that would be great amusement in a court room.
I stress, there is no authentic legal proof to support the “Muslim conspiracy theory” and the incredible lengths taken to avoid discussion of this fact should alert all critical thought and guide how we respond.
Well, why don’t you show us the proof that it was an inside job. That the buildings could not have collapsed the way they did. That no plane hit the Pentagon.
Easy questions, so easy answers.
johnnyboy2222 comm-entity, every time you post you reveal another trait. You seem to have a touch of amnesia.
I’m patient, I’m sure it’s just an honest error.
Did you forget I clearly stated I am waiting for a properly conducted investigation before declaring war.
Unfortunately the hundreds of thousands of victims of the Iraq invasion didn’t get the benefit of justice thanks to the moral standard championed by your comm-entity and reflected in “show trials”, torture and a very obvious evasion of accountability for the “Muslim conspiracy theory” crime allegations and subsequent war policies.
Just in case you have forgotten already.
Did you forget I clearly stated I am waiting for a properly conducted investigation before declaring war.
Can you recall that previous simple point.
Did you forget I clearly stated I am waiting for a properly conducted investigation before declaring war.
A bad memory is really annoying.
Did you forget I clearly stated I am waiting for a properly conducted investigation before declaring war.
Just another quick reminder, just in case.
Did you forget I clearly stated I am waiting for a properly conducted investigation before declaring war.
I guess that memory issue explains why you feel uncomfortable nominating your 911 “mastermind” that fits with the evidence that convinced you to believe in an “Extremist Muslim Conspiracy Theory”.
No doubt it will all slip your mind before your comm-entity next hits the keyboard.
So world,
There above presents an example
of a spokesperson for the official
government/’s 911 conspiracy theory.
‘Nuff said’.
And people still think you are an idiot to.
Johnnyboy,
You want proof.
How can a 47 storey EARTHQUAKE PROOF building (as all important building are, I’ve built a few) fall symmetrically at freefall acceleration into its own footprint without all columns being severed within a few decimal points of a second of each other. I recently showed a reasonably intelligent 14 year old the following video and he immediately said ‘that is completely controlled.’ He could see it instantly. Even a child can see it.
This building was not hit by a plane. According to the official national institute of standards & technology who did the SEVEN year investigation, it was not damaged by the any debris from the twin towers but came down due to RANDOM OFFICE FIRES (their words.) Even NIST acknowledge freefall acceleration.
Why is it almost never seen on the telly?
WTC7 This is an orange.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Zv7BImVvEyk
Wackos,
Come up with video’s with the eastern penthouse, added in 1984, still intact, and then, just then, point out the onset of collapse and the time it took.
Your CNN foutage will fail massively.
So go make fooles of yourselves.
So what are the Canadians going to to about it? (See A$E)?
Well, absolutely nothing.
Please deposit your money into nothing.
Even a 14 year old can see that Santa exits.
Morones
El kammo, johnnyboy and others,
You spend an awful lot of time coming up with nothing but insults. I ask myself why? If I believed the official story, I wouldn’t spend anytime on this or similar website unless
A) I was extremely immature or very young or very stupid.
B) I was getting paid to do it as part of my job.
Which category do you lot fall into.
Can you actually come up with a sensible argument rather that insults? I would love to hear an argument that proves the official story as I would rather believe the official story but I’m struggling to argue with Sir Isaac Newton.
Sensibel arguements are explained as brainwashed.
Newton has to obey to the laws of mechanics, kinetics and ballistics.
Very smug in your knowledge el kammo ?
I wouldn’t be too sure if I was you.
Well next time we want advise on the structural integrity of a building, or how to construct a 47 story building, we will contact the 14 year old, ok? So please inform us of what his name is, and where he lives, so we can contact him.
Try our good Dr, Karl and
The ABC for an answer, after all he they would Know
But strangely they are AWO.
So for our ABC journos feeding in the public’s trough.
So for their confidence in their deceitful claims and misinformation sprinkled to their Listeners.
So for the ABC, flog it
Off and save a billion per year.
We can find plenty of liars and whoremongers for free in the msm.
Why would I? We got a 14 year old kid who can just look at a video, and has all the answers.
Ned,
We (pleased to meet you) do not need answers, it is you.
14 year olds are banned from my project floor, along with pets.
Not yet encountered even one Aboriginal that referred to a page of 1-9 or 1-9A.
Now they come up with their 14 year old Wunderkind.
They showed the Wunderkind a bloody video and it came up with it’s answer.
Hallelujah, praise the Wunderkind and the Lord.
BTW: do you really believe that Terrance and Phillipe, the farting Canadians, are oblidged to call in the Bush administration, the Obama administration, the FBI, the CIA, the Homeland Security, the US Airforce, the Navy Seals,the US civil guard, the NY Port Authority, the NY FD, NY Police department, FEMA, NIST, US customs, American Airlines, NY administration, Frankel Steel, NORAD, an Amarican Aviation school, Cantor, the 10 (sub)contractors for the cleanup, the 911 commission, the zillions of photographs and footages made by bystanders, the DNA researchers, the Fresh Kills workers, the media, foreign or domestic, Popular Mechanics, the labs that worked on the dust samples long before your Niels Harrit did, the seismoligic stations and their crewmembers, data from US satelletites, spyplanes, data from Iran(they would love it but did not succeed), so, what do you expect ?
Well, the Alpha mail, Gage the Beast, only expects 60.000/year to show his ass on the top of his rock untill his retirement. He just proudly announced that the money for a new poll is in, not the money for Terrance and Phillipe.
So good luck with your quest, bunch of hippies.
And Ned, keep on complimenting your female Alpha hippie in every of her new post, in the hope to copulatie.
Have great fun.
We are most honoured that you are one of ten.
So, Do r a more effective and worthwhile use of your time lime and use of financial resources go and blog elsewhere,
Try the informationclearinghousenews site.
They await your commentary.
More than ten read the site and you can forget our nine contributors to gumshoe..
We await your informed and considered comments at ICH.
Ps. I am Ned.
Who
WOW – in all my year of reading blogs i have NEVER seen so much disinformation and ridicule on an Australian website ! Truth must live here! – Congratulations on attracting so many Shills and payed for morons (they will burn you first guys 😉 observe how they are about to make scape goats out of their own naughty little CIA scumbag rapists.)
Evidently they are concerned about your intellect, understanding and perseverance.
NO person without a vested interest continues such a dialogue.
You think you a clever and you think you are hiding – you are so laughable i can barely type.
Please keep going – i am forwarding this thread to my friend for their amusement! 🙂
P.S – if you would ever like to meet in public to discuss the issue – just name the time and the place and we will see you there.
Yes Justin—like flies to a s***, these guys won’t be buzzed away. They have invested so much time. After a couple of months one of them declared he had done research and put it on a blog on witness accounts of 911. Well – why disclose so late in the game, and casually – when the blog was months and months of work. Amazing!!!!!!!!!!
I like flies. They must have some purpose, otherwise they would not exist. Just like Mosquitos and cockroaches.
Perhaps their purpose is to annoy, so that we appreciate periods of contemplation during
their occasional absence .
Aaaah, Ned,
You ask for some time and safe space on the internet to hug your 911 friends ?
Go to Facebook/groups and hug as much as you want.
Meet live?
Done that, with a beamer and a blackboard with a handfull of chalk.
It is the best way to Exchange information.
I did it with Food and beverage in a friendly environment.
My spot to (maybe) set this up is Belgium.
Therefore I suggest that you go live with critics within a car drive distance.
one really has to wonder about all the negative posts apparently from disparate ‘believers in the official story’. Why do they care so much? If they believe the official story- after 13 years- why do they feel the need to seek out those who do not believe and waste their time personally insulting them so much? What motivates them? Is it a (misguided) love of the truth? Is it just trolling? Or is it Cass Sunstein and his ‘cognitive infiltration’ agents at work? Most darkly Is it the Ministry of Truth in Operation? 🙁
Who really knows- maybe it’s all of the above?
whatever the case the critical point is: as a group these ‘folks’ cannot offer a cohesive or sensible account of what actually happened. They display a collective and willful ignorance of the facts of the matters at hand. There is seemingly no point trying to edify them- however once again:
Discussing Building 7 Mr Sunder of NIST first stated that freefall of buliding 7 ‘would be impossible: except in the case of a controlled demolition due to structural resistance’. Very good and quite true. However NIST later accepted that freefall DID in FACT Occur for roughly 2.5 seconds! One third of the total collapse time!! This is the final official NIST report into building 7: not some ‘idiotic troofer’ statement. It is a fact that can be/has been verified from incontrovertible primary source video evidence of the event.
so: Can this symmetric freefall be explained by fire and asymmetric structural damage in a scientific manner? I would like to see Dr. Karl try and do so. I doubt I ever will as I believe it isn’t even possible. Whilst the good Dr is a proponent of Science: his assumptions about what occurred all those years ago on9/11- are almost certainly ‘faith based assumptions’. Definitely not science!’… Thinking like this: ‘I don’t think they are capable of doing it: therefore I conclude they didn’t/couldn’t have done it. No one I trust has told me any different so the Case is Closed. Any evidence to the contrary can be studiously ignored: as it is/must be irrelevant’.
As Hitler famously said,
“It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation.”
despite this worrying fact Hitler concludes (perhaps with some sadness):
“the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying…”
2.5 seconds of freefall is just such a trace of (arguably) the Biggest Big Lie of the 21st Century.
They have been onto every 9/11 posts for sometime. Busy bees – but they’re not collecting honey.
It is you who has to collect the honey.
May I add that I leave her other weird threads just be.
2,5sec of a 18,5sec collapse is NOT roughly 1/3 of the collapse.
Still looking at the famous CNN footage ?
No idea that this footage is missing the first 12sec ?
Start the footage, freeze, and point out the Eastern penthouse and the roofing floor.
You will fail.
you sir are an a-grade idiot; or a paid liar: either way you are quite wrong. The eastern penthouse impossibly sinking (imploding) into the building roof-line is actually yet more striking evidence of a classic controlled demolition. The collapse of the 47 stories BELOW the penthouse took 6.5 seconds as verified by multiple videos of the event and conceded in the final NIST report.
But let’s assume you are right: how do YOU explain the one story Penthouse collapsing in 12 seconds: whilst the 47 story building below collapses in just 6.5? I suppose you think it was the weight of the penthouse that crushed the building below? A variant of the pile-driver theory? I put it to you that it is you that will fail.
Lol! The East penthouse sunk, because the structure below failed. There is video of the Penthouse sinking into the building, and after that you can see right through the other side of the building at the sky through some windows. A few seconds later the rest of the building collapses. And you are wrong about that 6,5 seconds. Thats only 6,5 seconds for the part thats visible. The rest is obscured by clouds. Seismic records show a collapse time of 18 seconds in total.
Ow, and if this sollapse of the Penthouse only proofs controlled demolition, why do truthers only show the last part of the collapse and never the part where the penthuose collapses? Which collapses in just over 1 second btw, and not 12 as you say.
http://rethink911.org/news/new-poll-finds-a-majority-of-canadians-side-with-ads-questioning-911/
Show me where the Penthouse collapses.
Here is a video with the collapsing Penthouse.
Johnnyboy222,
Now why is there no reply on the full footage of the collapse?
Are the aboriginals embarrassed, ashamed? afraid to fail?
Did they learn something?
Skip your 6,5 sec CNN footage because it fails, any new investigators will find that out by themselves.
Why should I explain what allready is explained but you just did not read or understand ?
The penthouse did not go first.
What possible explanation could there be to explain why the feisty comm-entities are afraid to nominate who they believe is the “Mastermind” of their “Muslim conspiracy theory”?
El Kammoflage and Jonhyboy are making a flurry of nonsense once again and just before Xmas. I am, they say, “too lazy to look at the fire burning from the other sides of the B7”. Poor fellows. They are desperate to try dissuade people who just can’t believe that fire alone brought down B7 in such spectacular style.
Yes boys, the collapse of B7 was truly A SPECTACULAR EVENT and a XMAS MIRACLE if it was brought down by fire ALONE – when there is no fire blazing in all the front of the building. Although there had been fires (pictures) in other parts of the building – apparently the fires were not doing so well by 5 in the afternoon and were just smokin’ away.
And then whammo – the miracle of the fire happens and manages to burn and weaken ALL the columns simultaneously to create a uniform and perfect collapse – A TRUE MIRACLE.
The other miracle is that you el kammo and johny actually believe that. (But maybe you don’t) Have a happy festive season while you take a day off from your disinfo duties.
@Dalia,
First of all, a good Christmas to all on this blog.
Secondly, a cheerfull newyears eve.
I Will respond to your column faillures in about a week.
@dalia,
“simultaneously”
Now You surprise me, because these are not your words but Szamboti’s.
Therefore I do not yet know to whom to answer.
Johnyboy222 is also adressed, so he could be ahead of me.
I can tell you right now that Szamboti’s arguement will fail massively.
This is still not my answer.
So a bird of somekind takes a shit on the east penthouse and therfore it tumbles into the building. The bird is surprised and takes another shit on the rooffloor at the east, which also tumbles into the building.
CNN did not notice this event because they were taking a shit.
Then the panic starts, roll the camera’s, but too late.
No problem, just cut the missed 12sec and act like we had the full coverage. No one will ever notice the missing eastern penthouse and rooffloor. We just say that the building was completely intact when our camera started rolling and that we forgot to turn the sound on. Not mention the Total stations (TST) to monitor movement of the building, let’s call it a total surprise.
To make sure we have it right we paste several 6,5sec and call it a reel. No dumb ass will ever find out that some crucial parts of the structure are missing. Hell, we can even paste a 3 hour reel, just to rubb it in.
But I, El-Kammo, have a problem with that reel, because there are other footages, that include your missing 12sec.
My answer could include an explanation of the NIST hypotheses about the progressieve collapse, but it could very well be a good luck for you hto fail massively.
Still thinking about that one.
@dalia,
Here is my answer to you and Szamboti regarding the both of your assumed simultaniusly failed columns due to a miraculeus fire, resulting in an unexpected highly surprising 6,5sec collapse of WTC 7:
Good Luck !!!! (And fail massively)
Szamboti is the rooster and you are just the hen that goes “pok pok pok pok”
Claiming to seek the thruth, but way too lazy to check the collapsetime of WTC7, but hey, do not bother, the time is monitored, checked and set. All you need to do is fail.
Pok pok pok pok
El-Kammo. Maybe you are on something. Or the alcohol over the festive period has got to you.
However, I am still waiting for any one other example that is remotely similar to the collapse of B7. Been waiting months now for you – the high rise expert.
I bet you also want to see a ship the size of the titanic hitting an iceberg and sinking. Else that didn’t happen to, right?
Well, why don’t you show us an example of a similar constructed building, that was on fire for 7 hours and did not colleapse. I bet you can’t.
Johnyboy – emphasis on the boy – you have exposed yourself. Maybe try another tack – because trying to pretend that there was an investigation is ridiculous,
@dalia,
First events do not have examples.
Or dou you have an example of the controlled demolition of 2 410m high towers in which the crew used 2 airplanes, then waited and then blew it up top down ?
We live in different cities. But nice try.
It wasn’t a miracle… The firedepartment knew very early on that it would come down. They even cordonned off the surroundings of the building. But I am guessing, you didn’t know that either. Since you spent zero time looking into what really happened that day.
Boy Johnny, Et. all .
Re No 7, please support a proper investigation, nothing is going to be definitive here.
Please consider the reports by Alan Zabrosky and others re. The bigger picture as to who did 911.
By the way, the defend 911 at all costs team is bloody boring. We want to await a proper investigation.
I appreciate the limits of your intellects are governed by your instructions, but we do not care. Screw your employers for all you can get.
On a personal note, try and handle more recent posts and debate on this site. Try having a word with you masters and ask them about how their’s and your descendants are going to handle the exposures by Dr. Day in 1969…… Or are you one in support of Nazi supremacists beliefs (or the equivalent) and totalitarian dictatorship?
If not, then look up Dr. Day’s report on the future use of terrorism to enforce compliance to the agenda.
Your limited mantra is SH boring an inconsequenrtrial.
There was a proper investigation. Just because you don’t like the outcome, doesn’t mean there wasn’t a proper investigation…. Only kooks like you, seem to have a problem with the investigation. Which is weird, since you spent zero time looking at the investigation. So how can you tell that the investigation was bad, if you didn’t even bother to look into that investigation?
‘Zero time’?
Examined my bookcase you presuming arrogant and ignorant little twit?
Get lost.
Lol, have you looked at what Dr. Day, alledgedly else said? I think Dr. Lawrence Dunegan, was really delusional 19 years after that meeting, at the time he taped his recordings.
A lot of it has come to pass – delusional or not.
Comments just before Xmas?
I can see that you keep on shoveling your “they did it” posts, no matter Xmas or NY.
Busy ant, but ants are allways busy 😃
An excellent video.
The Corbett Report is the Apple/iphone of new media.
We need to link, build and magnify through associations.
Brilliant video.
I know this voice, he made more brilliant videos.
They are on youtube so they must be true.
Well said Chrisopher
I thought there were no Hijackers?
Is that similar to no Mastermind?
DR KARL REPLIED TO TWITTER
@DoctorKarl GumshoeNews has a challenge for you – to explain the demise of B7. The post has attracted 200 comments. gumshoenews.com/2014/12/01/dr-… – 28 Dec
Dr Karl @DoctorKarl
@GumshoeNews Already explained in Y1 Engineering
05:48 AM – 28 Dec 14
Simple blog?!
And you are here persistently!?
Now which part of a progessive collapse do they not understand? Is it the progressing part?
[…] recap one of the 9/11 articles: Dr Karl – we are still waiting for a sensible reply regarding building 7. Until you do, I’d suggest you refrain from besmirching those who might […]
Few questions that you can surely answer, concidering the amount of time you have you have put in your “investigation” of the case:
Why was decided not to spend an empty bucket of water on WTC 7?
Why was it that no one was in the building during this “terrible and horrifying” event ?
Why was it that the NYFD and the PA knew that this building would not remain standing?
I bet that you have all the wrong answers.
@Dalia Mae,
Yes, it takes 10min to boil an egg, so again learn to measure time girl:
http://www.thekitchn.com/how-to-hard-boil-an-egg-cooking-lessons-from-the-kitchn-138705
[…] asked you before, Dr Karl, in a Gumshoe article, “Dr Karl, Please Explain Building 7,” but you didn’t give a real answer. You replied with this tweet (which kind of shocked […]
[…] We are hoping to get an explanation from ABC’s resident expert scientist on WTC7 — Dr Karl Kruszelnicki. (re: Gumshoe article “Dr Karl, Please Explain“) […]
[…] Dr Karl laughed mockingly one morning at 9/11 conspiracy nuts, I put forward a challenge to him (on Gumshoe), to explain the free-fall of Building 7 — from office furnishing fires. […]
[…] ad. Disgraceful. I published articles before on ABC’s Dr Karl and challenged him in 2014 to a debate on Building 7 — which he naturally […]