The Year of 9-11 Troof--April

April was a big month for Troof news. Newt Gingrich reiterated that he thinks 9-11 Troofers are crazy:



German "Gary" Talis got his 15 minutes of fame when he attacked Maureen Lovetro, a 17-year-old girl in a wheelchair. As an aside, I periodically check Google news for "Lovetro" and "Talis" and have not seen any updates on this story. Anybody know what happened?

Nick Kollerstrom, a very weird British "Truther", was sacked from an honorary position at a London university when his Holocaust denial "research" was revealed.

Blair Gadsby announced his impending hunger strike outside John McCain's office, which would begin on Memorial Day.

Troof Week came and went. The 9-11 Fruitcakes decided to organize to push Steve Alten's dull novel into the upper reaches of the NY Times Bestseller List. The result? They sold about 1000 copies, when the required total was about 10,000 to 12,000 copies. Better still, Alten actually paid $5,000 out of his own pocket to get the book better placement in Barnes & Noble and Borders Books, so in all probablility the Troofers did not account for all those 1,000 copies. The result was such a fiasco that there has not been another "Week of Truth" since.

Nico and Luke went a few rounds for a no-decision when Nico tried to put a paper mustache on Sabrina Rivera. Needless to say, Luke sought out the nearest representatives of the New World Order (the PO-lice as he usually puts it) and tried to have Nicohitler arrested.

Arizona State Senator and longtime kook Karen Johnson came out as a 9-11 Troofer, making her then the highest ranking public official in office to be a Troofer. She has since retired.

Steven Jones got a peer-reviewed paper published in an online urinal--err, journal. Unfortunately for the Troofers it consisted of areas of agreement he has with the "official" story.

Natalie Woods's less famous sister, who played Plenty O'Toole (not Plenty O'Brains) in a James Bond movie came out as a fruitcake.

WAC-Job Troofer Jason Gerhard was found guilty of aiding tax protesters Ed Brown and his wife in their armed standoff with the authorities. He would later be sentenced to 20 years in federal prison.

Jon Gold and Betsy Metz donated the entire proceeds (about $1,700) of their "Truth Tuesday" movie showings at the Wayne Movie Theater to the FealGood Foundation (for which we applauded them). I see that as usual, a troofer lied to me in the January post, claiming that 200 people came out to see the January 28th showing. It appears that the entire audience for all 10 Tuesdays was about 200.

The Year of 9-11 Troof--February/March

February of 2008 was the month that I first noticed that the number of visitors were declining at 9-11 Blogger. We also caught on that the 9-11 Troofers were starting to tick off regular liberals, as you can hear in this video of the crowd at a Bill Clinton campaign rally for Hillary:



The Troofers were thrilled when Dennis Kucinich announced that his subcommittee would be investigating the claims of insider trading. Any word on how that turned out, Frodo?

In March, Margaret Cho became yet another celebrity with no background in structural engineering to board the Titanic. The Troofers' main website, 9-11 Blogger announced that it was expanding the varieties of Troof it would offer to include JFK, RFK and MLK Troof. Erica Jong started up the zipless authors for 9-11 "Truth".

The terrific Italian debunker, Henry62, confirmed that NIST was referring to an
"Uninterrupted Power Supply" on the 81st floor of the South Tower, which indicates that the molten metal seen flowing from that floor prior to the collapse was probably lead.

The Troofers picked up an Oscar, or rather an Oscar-winner in Marion Cotillard. Celebrities, celebrities everywhere, and not a structural engineer to drink!

Jew World Order Tries to Eliminate McNinney

And fortunately fails. (Fortunately because who needs another martyr?)

Former Georgia Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, standing beside a damaged yacht, Tuesday accused the Israeli navy of ramming the vessel to halt the delivery of medical supplies to the embattled Gaza Strip.

“Our mission was a peaceful mission,” McKinney told CNN after she and 15 others aboard the boat made it safely to the harbor in the Lebanese seaport of Tyre.

And:

A spokesman for the Israeli Embassy in Washington described the incident as an accidental “collision” after the aid vessel drew near to an Israeli military craft and was warned away.

“The boat came very close, we called the ship to basically to turn around, we informed the ship that they wouldn’t be allowed to enter Gaza,” said the embassy spokesman, Jonathan Peled. “The ship wasn’t rammed, that definitely wasn’t the idea.”

The Israeli naval craft did, however, prevent the aid ship from landing in Gaza, he said in a telephone interview. “We see all these ships as pure propaganda, they have journalists on them and all kinds of other people who are coming basically to provoke.”

Jew think so? Elder of Ziyon points out that the ship's humanitarian supplies pale in comparison to those furnished by, gasp, Israel:

Just for context: The Free Gaza boat was supposed to have 3 tons of medical aid. During the past three days, Israel has sent 186 trucks filled with aid to Gaza - plus ten ambulances. Each truck, from past experience, holds between 10 and 20 tons of material.

Update: McKinney speaks:



Predictably the USS Liberty comes up. Will they award Cynthia the Congressional Medal of Honor in a private ceremony?

The Year of 9-11 Troof at 9-11 Blogger

Ignore the March reading; they turned sitemeter off for awhile that month due to problems. And you can argue that at least part of the collapse of traffic has to do with them using the ban hammer more vigorously. But it's hard to argue that the Troof Movement is growing with a trendline like that.

The Year of 9-11 Troof--January

In January the Troofers were all excited about their candidates for the election. Ron Paul had won every internet poll and clearly was going to rocket to the nomination. While Mike Gravel had not done much aside from throwing a big rock in a pond, surely the ripples were going to eventually swamp the boats of Hillary and Barack.

Lynn Margulis, Carl Sagan's first wife, became one of the billions and billions of 9-11 "Truthers".

For those who think Jenny Sparks is the first to take up the cause of revealing the home addresses of people who disagree with them, remember that Kevin Barrett started a website dedicated to just that called Where They Live. Jenny and Hang 'Em High, two peas in a pod under the wing.

Update: Commenter Anonymous notes that the Truth Tuesdays started in January of 2008, where Jon Gold and Betsy Metz rented out a theater in Wayne, PA and showed several 9-11 Troof films. James commented on the incredible turnout they had for the January 9th showing: an estimated 10 people showed up. Reportedly they had 200 people show up on January 28th for a special showing of 9-11 Press for Truth.

The Sensitive Side of Dylan Avery

Over on the Loose Change blog Dylan is upset over a news report of an Egyptian couple holding a girl in slavery as a housekeeper:

I’d take a look through the full article if you have a chance. Although I’m fully aware the world is a cruel and unjust place sometimes, it still boggles my mind that two people could put another human being through conditions like this, or worse.

Oddly enough he is not at all concerned about how cruel fellow Egyptians Ayman al-Zawahiri and Mohammed Atta were...

The Year in 9-11 Troof

I'm looking for suggestions from our readers here for a recap of 2008, the fiascos and failures, and yes, the great successes that the Troofers experienced during the past year. The failures include:

1. NYC petition drive.
2. Week of Truth--Steve Alten's book sells about 8% of the copies needed to get it to the top ten of the NY Times' Bestseller List, and the whole concept of a "Week of Truth" dies.
3. Box Boy Richard Gage's effort to get 1000 architects and engineers to join his gaggle by 9-11-08 comes up about 500 short.

While the successes include:

1. Arizona State Senator (and longtime nutbar) Karen Johnson comes out as a 9-11 Troofer.
2. Steven Jones and others get a paper published in a peer-reviewed journal. Granted, it consisted of areas of agreement between the Troofers and the official story, and it was published in an online journal where you pay to be published, but it's still one of the things that Troofers would point to as a highlight.
3. ?

Have at it!

Finally A Good Reason for Music in a 9-11 Troof Video

Because it covers up the sounds of the explosions in the real controlled demolitions. Nice try.

Welcome to Belgian Debunkers!

Our buddy Walter Ego points us to a new 9-11 debunking site in Belgium. The site is written in Dutch, like our buddies at Zapburu. Welcome to twoofersRliars!

Update: Our JREF buddy MrBaracuda has a German language website for debunking called InfoKriegTV which I completely spaced on linking despite promising to do so. Go check it out, mach schnell!

Yet Another Richard Dreyfus Wannabe

I don't even know what he thinks he's proven with this model. Like all Troofers, he mentions only one of the elements that led to the collapses of the towers. But whereas most of them claim fire alone brought down the buildings, he said that the plane alone did the deed.

Cincinnati Kooks

Good Lord, it's like watching Loose Change II all over again. Kerosene fires can't melt steel! Two planes, three buildings? Only molten metal under the buildings that collapsed (as James pointed out in the previous post, this is wrong). Your high school physics professor might lie to you if he knows why you're asking! Absolutely my favorite point in the video; who knew we had the physics teachers in the NWO?

Maybe April Gallop is a Fire-Walker!

My favorite thread at Truth Action continues to provide amusement. After the momentary diversion into "I've got Pat Curley's home address", we learn the suspicious thing that chek NI has figured out:

I'm adding a pic of two images we are probably all reasonably familiar with - one of the famous gatehouse frames, and another found on Jim Hoffman's 911 Research, known to be taken before any fire suppression measures had begun after the strike.

My purpose in starting this thread was and is not to cause disruption/insult anyone's intelligence/stamp on anybody's bunions, but rather to reconcile in my own mind the yawning chasm of mystery between these images and April Gallop's now very topical testimony.

Which to remind everybody, included exiting barefoot and carrying her infant son from her exploded office less than 50ft from the alleged impact out through the hole and onto the lawn. Without being burned or seeing any fire or aircraft wreckage.

Here's are the photos he points to:

Given that an awful lot of people have admitted not taking much interest in the Pentagon issue, then they just might have found some slight incongruity between those photos of the alleged actual strike and those infernos that they've "all seen 5000 times before" and the testimony of a living, law-suit bringing witness who walked out of that exact location with a different story.

I would hope that it rocks some cognitively dissonant little socks off.

Yes! They have proven the "official story" can't be true! The fires weren't there! It was secretly just a tiny, oxygen-starved fire. All the eyewitnesses work for the government and won't get their pensions if they admit it! So when one of the other morons over there says "What's your point? Is April lying or were the fires faked?", the response is:

For some strange reason, you left out out the most obvious:

Yet another of the many occasions when the sophisticated 911 Cover Up Myth aka the OCT fails to match up with what actually happened.

Translation: I'm just asking questions! But Stefan the British troofer has a scenario:

What if there was more than one device used inside the Pentagon, and that these did not go off in synchrony, but over a period of time? Perhaps they were meant to and it didn’t go to plan, perhaps that was the way it was planned, who knows? And perhaps the fires were not started by the first explosion, but by the second or even the third?

That would of course explain how April was able to leave the building without being burned to a crisp, but is there any evidence for a second explosion, after the first yet before the larger collapse of the outer face?

And the new guy Daniel is thrilled:

Excellent piece of detective work, Stefan. Seems very reasonable to me. This is exactly the kind of invaluable collaborative work that can result from the efforts of many hardworking and reasonable open-minded citizen investigators working together to collectively seek the truth that I like to see this network being used for.

Yes indeed, it is a much better explanation than that she did not go out through the main part of the fire, but in the confusion and shock she remembers things inexactly.

Maybe our commenter anonymous is right and we're wasting our time covering the chess match at the Special Olympics. Not without its amusement value, but we really don't need to add the laugh track.

Update: Truthmover is suspicious:

Very revealing!

Do a search for "April Gallup" or "April Gallup" + "William Veale" or "April Gallup" + 9/11. What do you find?

Answer: You find those sites that are too stupid to spell Ms Gallop's name correctly.

Sorry Tony

I was perusing the comments on 911 Blogger, although due to their flagging readership and tight censorship policies, there aren't that many anymore, and came across this statement from Tony Szamboti, who stands out in the truth movement as one of the few people with some type of engineering background, but he still manages to get things wrong.

Molten metal was only under the buildings that collapsed

One of the panel members was trying to make a point about molten metal under WTC 7 and said it wasn't under other buildings, and then said well some of them.

I think he was trying to make the point, but couldn't quite get the thought right, that the molten metal was ONLY under those buildings that collapsed, which of course were the two towers and WTC 7. The second part of the point is that there were other buildings like WTC 5 and 6 which had been burning fiercely and were heavily damaged by debris but did not collapse to the ground and did not have molten metal under them.

Additionally, the NASA and NOAA infrared imagery ONLY shows the hot spots under the two towers and WTC 7.

Except this is not true, if Tony had actually been one of the few people to watch Loose Change: The Final Cut, he would have noticed this quote from Ken Holden

Underground it was still so hot that molten metal dripped down the sides of a wall from Building 6.

So care to revise that theory there, Tony?

Troofer Burn Video

Some of you may recall that the Troofers raised $20,000 to put together this sign, which the artist was going to destroy the vertical supports of with diagonal thermite charges at Burning Man.



Technical assistance was reportedly provided by Steven Jones. It was going to be a demonstration of how thermite brought down the towers.

But as with everything the Troofers touch, it didn't quite work out as planned. It was windy that day, and so what they did instead is burn some thermite in a pot under the sign (shown in the video). Of course, that doesn't explain why they couldn't have done the destruction of the sign on a non-windy day. My first guess is that the diagonal thermite charges didn't work.

Detective Jenny Sparks--Still A Retard

I hear among the Troofers she's considered quite the dangerous intellect. She's posted over at her blog that she--dundunduh!--knows my "physical" address--as compared to my metaphysical address I suppose. Of course, if she weren't retarded, she'd know that there's this website where you enter a person's name and city they live in and it--dundunduh!--spits out the persons address. I just checked it, and yep, I'm listed.

Patrick Curley
3725 E. Columbine Drive
Phoenix, Arizona 85032

So whatcha gonna threaten me with now, Jenny?

I'd rebut the rest of what she posted over there, but I don't quite understand it. The Screw Loose Change Myspace page (not run by either James or me) has Unsecured Coins as a friend who has somebody as a friend who's Killclown's girlfriend or something. You can probably see the flaw in this theory already. I doubt that Killclown has a girlfriend for starters and most people on Myspace autoadd people as friends anyway. I see that Old Foggy himself, Alex Jones is a friend of the guy who has the SLC Myspace page.

At the close of the post, she links to this video. Nope, she's not a psycho stalking bitch:



Sounds like another not-so-oblique-but-deniable death threat to me. Yawn. Jenny Sparks is the nom de troof of one Jo Cressy who reportedly lives somewhere in the Portland area. But on the off chance something happens to me, here's what she supposedly looks like; a friend of hers confirmed this a year or so ago:



Uglier on the inside than the outside, which is going some.

Update: She has my phone number too! Which was available at the same site, probably because it's called--dundunduh!--whitepages.com. Not going to post it here because hey, there are still troofers who wouldn't be able to figure out how to find it with all those clues.

They're Onto Us!

I love that he laughs at the No-Planers at the WTC, then segues right into "no evidence of a plane at the Pentagon". He also needs to ground his microphone and stop tapping the desk as he speaks.

Further Doings With the WAC-Jobs

Some dude named Jim Stachowiak gets expellled from the WAC-Georgia leadership:



More of them arguing:



Apparently he was booted out of WAC for psychotic behavior. Isn't that sort of a requirement rather than a disqualifier? He mentions that he's going to bring up We Are Change's support for socialism, which is not exactly news around these parts.

More discussion of Stachowiak from NAU fruitcake Jerome Corsi:

Organizer Jim Stachowiak of Freedom Fighter Radio explained that a 9 mm gunshot round was fired into his suburban home Saturday at about 5:40 a.m. on the day of the marches.

Stachowiak apparently puts his life on the line every day for the troof:

One Graham supporter was so enraged witness’s claim she aimed her silver G35 Infinity at Stachowiak and his group. Fortunately Stachowiak was able to get his friend seen in the video out of the path of the vehicle but he was slightly grazed as the car passed.

Here's a video they shot after the near miss:



Hat Tip: Walter Ego

The Gift That Keeps On Giving

That thread that I pointed out the other day at Truth Action is like the Energizer Bunny.

The CIT-heads keep asking, "Where was North of the Citgo debunked?" They parrot the CIT line that "All the witnesses we have corroborate each other!" and moan about how nobody will discuss the evidence with them, they just dismiss it.

Enlighten me.

That's all I'm asking.

What is your theory for the witnesses who all place the plane on the North of citgo?

Are they all complicit in the crime? Is this some elaborate conspiracy to throw us all off the mark perhaps?

Why is it I'm supposed to be rejecting this strongly and independently corroborated testimony?

Great fun! My favorite part is when I come up:

But don't worry - he gives a special li'll patronising pat on the head to those "responsible" truthers who took care to successfully distance themselves from this April Gallop nonsense.

As usual by applauding one group over the other, I end up sabotaging the credibility of the former among the latter. If I really wanted to beat the CIT-heads into the ground I should talk about how strong and compelling the North of Citgo evidence is. Which it is; one day Aldo and Craig will be recognized as the "Truthers" who dismantled the entire "official" story.

Update: Still more humor. When John Albanese suggests they check out Arabesque's solid post on the Pentacon, which has an incredible 251 footnotes, one of the CIT-heads replies:

John A, how can I put this; ah yes - that article relies on a lot of padding
Examples: “I saw it clip a light pole.”[38]
[38]Unnamed Navy Admiral.

“The plane flew very low over his car and hit the building and blew his windows out of the vehicle and he’s on interstate 395.”[16]
[16] Unidentified Pentagon Worker.

No kidding, he finds that two of the 251 footnotes are poorly sourced, and from that he deduces that Arabesque's review is "padded"? Look, I think Arabesque's post is a little weaselly (like when he says, "Arabesque’s Hypothesis: A large commercial airliner with American Airlines markings hit the Pentagon (note: this does not necessarily prove it was flight 77, or even a 757. The government has never convincingly proven that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon)."

But for crying out loud, if I debunk 104 of DRG's 115 points there will be Troofers rambling on about the 11 that I didn't cover. What a bunch of fruittards.

What Dylan Avery Thinks the Flight 93 Crash Site Should Have Looked Like

Great job by 9-11 Truthinator!

Hat Tip: Commenter AE911TruthHero.

Is Jim Corr Disinfo?

The ugly member of the Coors has a website for his various nutjob theories.

This becomes evident when one studies 9/11. Indeed that event is the nexus doorway into the bigger picture, being the push towards global governance, the formation of an elite run totalitarian One World Government with the subjugated masses underneath.

The light at the end of the tunnel is that millions upon millions of people are waking up to this unfolding Orwellian nightmarish agenda which I have spoken about on radio, and which will be averted when we collectively wake up!

Pretty classic paranoia, but look at what films he's pushing on his 9-11 page:

9/11 Mysteries

Loose Change

The Great Conspiracy

911 Ripple Effect

Ruh-roh! 9-11 Mysteries? 9-11 Ripple Effect? And the Loose Change version he links is V2SE, the one that even Dylan admitted contains errors and comes to conclusions that are not supported by the facts. The Great Conspiracy is Barrie Zwicker's snoooze-fest. He also links to well-known disinformation sites like Rinf and Rense.

Alex Jones and the Alien Channelers

Someone posted this in response to my Alex Jones' Toys for Tots clip. Damn, I am always being one-upped.

The Greatest Conspiracy Theory Evah

I wasn't sure whether to laugh or cry at this bit of a nuttiness. Hat tip to Hot Air for pointing this gem out. I assume it is a parody, but you never know...

Crazy Canuck Redux

Not the original phone calls to the FBI about watching Loose Change, these are the new ones about TV Fakery.

Dumbest Troofer Ever?

Obviously there's quite a bit of competition for that honor; after all, we've got Spooked911 who proved that kerosene and a newspaper burning could not bring down a piece of rabbit fencing, and Killclown, who thought he saw the numbers 9 and 11 in the smoke at the WTC (because the New World Order places clues like that in grainy videos to drive Troofers nuts), but Tweeter over at JREF is making a strong case. Looking at the martyrdom/will videos of the hijackers, he spots a flaw:

These are the hijackers???
Why are there pictures of the wtc exploding in the background of some of the "hijackers" video wills?

And when it's pointed out that the pictures of the WTC exploding were added later, he asks:

Some of these videos wills were taken after 911, obviously. Proof? A few of them say they are attacking because we are invading Muslim lands. I dont remember our forces invading till after 911, do you?

Sweet mother of mercy! There are pieces of dog poop in the yard that are smarter than Tweeter.

Still More April Gallop

James posted the other day about her lawsuit. Apparently it includes some mention of the CIT "flyover" nonsense, which generates some amusing commentary over at Truth Action Forum.

One of the overwhelming factors for those concerned about "disinfo" is the citing of witnesses who claim to have seen the strike happen. Indeed on 911 Blogger, this is exactly the case and has resulted in some voting down of those who are prepared to see beyond the implications of the infamous "honeypot" warning, as I believe Jim Hoffman christened it.

I examined a cited witness claim in detail to see what gives, and this is what I found. But I couldn't see a way to post it at Blogger so here it is here.

He goes on to parse the witness claim and shows an aerial which "proves" she could not have seen what she claims to have seen, and we're off to the races:

CIT have applied similar scrutiny to the oft-quoted "witnesses", but again of course, most of us are too lazy to double check, and accept words such as those of Ms. James at face value. God help us.

A couple of the responsible (I won't use the scare quotes this time) folks over there moan about the inclusion of the CIT nuttiness. But it's like trying to herd cats and before long the accusations are flying:

We know what highway she was on & we know where the trees are/were (trees take years to grow) & therefore we can prove exactly where or where not she might have EXACTLY been when she saw the plane & if she could or could not have seen it impact the Pentagon!It appears as if she could not have both had her view blocked by trees & seen a plane hit the Pentagon!Either way we have her pegged as a liar.

Another co-conspirator!

Thanks W, that was exactly the kind of rational response I was hoping for. Except perhaps for the liar part...

Somebody says that CIT's claims have been debunked by Frustrating Fraud (true), but Stefan demurs:

I haven't found CIT's claims to be debunked at all, by FF or Arabesque (who after all, just repeats FF's arguments).

And chek NI:

Rebutted to your satisfaction perhaps, but not to mine or apparently April Gallop's. And most definitely not "debunked". Repeating US Govt. "evidence" does not equate to being on 'solid ground'.
Have you even begun critically examining those alleged "100+" witness statements or do you just take it as read that someone else has?

Daniel (who just joined over there today) brings up the Great God Griffin:

No, you are definately *NOT* the only one. And recent polls indicate that as of 2006 at least 12% of Americans - 36 million - and a majority of 9/11 skeptics including leading researchers such as David Ray Griffen, do NOT accept the government's version that a Boeing 757 smacked into the Pentagon. However, it doesn't appear that this view is welcome here on this forum, so I'm afraid to say any more.

Leading researcher? Exactly what research has David Ray Grifter done?

Siddhartha attempts to be reasonable:

Do you feel the inclusion of missile and flyover theories strengthens Gallop's case? Or are you just cheering it because you support those theories?

But hastens to assure us he's solidly agnostic:

By the way, just to be clear, I don't adhere to any particular theory regarding what did or did not hit the Pentagon.

LOL! It's times like these that I almost feel sorry for the responsible "Truthers". Almost.

Update: The thread over there just keeps getting better and better:

Are we to pretend that internal explosions before the alleged impact didn't occur?
What the hell was going on between 9.32 and 9.38?

LOL! Yes, of course there were lots of explosions going on inside the Pentagon six minutes before Flight 77 hit.

I am talking about many honest researchers/activists who have been branded "disinfo", etc., for merely presenting *EVIDENCE* regarding holes in the government's Pentagon claims - folks such as PFT and many others who don't fall into your presumptuous box. Some of these people, including the CIT researchers, actually traveled to Arlington and gathered first hand evidence and interviews, which is way more than what many of those who have viscously attacked them have done for bringing any sort of clarity to this contentious area of 9/11 truth, I must say.

Aldo and Craig honest researchers? The guy goes on and on about "David Ray Griffen"; one would think such an acolyte would at least know how to spell the grand poobah's last name!

Ed Asner and Richard Falk: Still Kooks

Asner has signed Box Boy Gage's petition:

I would like to thank Richard Gage, AIA and Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth for presenting the scientific facts behind the unprecedented destruction of the World Trade Center Twin Towers and Building 7. AE911Truth presents solid research that contradicts the official story of the building's destruction with the overwhelming evidence of explosive controlled demolition.

Falk falls back on the old "just asking questions dodge":

AMY GOODMAN: Professor Falk, the New York Times had a piece called “UN Rights Investigator Expelled by Israel,” not exactly what I would call sympathetic to you. I just wanted to read one quote from that article. It says, Richard Falk “has compared Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians to Nazi atrocities and has called for more serious examination of the conspiracy theories surrounding the Sept. 11 attacks. Pointing to discrepancies between the official version of events and other versions, he recently wrote that ‘only willful ignorance can maintain that the 9/11 narrative should be treated as a closed book.’” Your response?

RICHARD FALK: Yeah. Well, that’s part of this whole effort to shift the focus to me and away from the reality and, at the same time, to somehow paint me as some kind of conspiracy person or theorist, which is absolutely untrue. What is true is that I wrote the forward to the original book of David Griffin, a longtime friend of mine, which is the most prominent challenge to the validity of the official version of 9/11, and I continue to hold the view that the 9/11 Commission did not adequately address the difficult questions about what happened on 9/11 that he raised. But I haven’t ever and do not now endorse any kind of conspiracy theory. All I think that is true is that the American people and the world deserve a fuller and more credible investigation of those events.

Larisa Alexandrovna: Not a Tinfoil Hatter

Nope, not her.

I am not saying that this was a hit nor am I resigned to this being simply an accident either. I am no expert on aviation and cannot provide an opinion on the matter. What I am saying, however, is that given the context, this event needs to be examined carefully.

Nope, she's not a crackpot:

Just to be very clear and state again, I am not claiming conspiracy theory or direct relation to Karl Rove or the White House in any of these events. What I am saying, however, is that these possible relationships cannot and should not be overlooked by investigators. There are far too many serious and reasonable questions that must be answered for the public.

Not a tinfoil hatter:

Okay children - because that is what I am going to call adults who willfully mis-read information. I will say this AGAIN (as I have twice in the above entry and also used bold case so that no one would miss the caveat), I am NOT - I repeat NOT - saying this was a). a murder, b). that it was in any way connected to the White House or to Karl Rove, and c). that I am convinced of any of the above three.

Well, except that she has dabbled her toes in the 9-11 nutbar swamp:

At least this might finally explain a nagging problem I have had with the FBI's most wanted poster of OBL, which makes no mention of September 11, 2001 among the crimes OBL is wanted for....

This of course is one of the things that the conspiracy kooks always bring up. But the fact of the matter is that the FBI's most wanted posters list crimes that the perp has actually been indicted for. The Feds have not yet indicted Osama for 9-11 because they already have enough to hold him for on the 1998 embassy bombings, for which he has been indicted.

Raw Story, the site she is the managing editor for, has consistently been more sympathetic to the 9-11 "Truthers" than any other major liberal website. And I do find one interesting thing in her biography:

Larisa was born inside the iron curtain of the former USSR....

How many 9-11 Troofers were born in the former communist block? Gypsy Taub, Luke Rudkowski, Boris Epstein (I suspect) and Giancarlo from the Seattle Troofers. I'm not sure there's any significance to this, but it is an oddity.

Update: Gateway Pundit points us to this post by Larisa at the HuffPo where she hyperventilates about the coming "coup" in the USA and notes that the options to prevent it are either immediate impeachment or "revolution".

It seems this time around, the Bush family is trying the more subtle approach to open bloodshed: first create a crisis, then under the guise of addressing that crisis, overthrow democracy. Yes, it does sound terribly conspiracy-theory-esque when explained just this way. But what else does one call a criminal conspiracy to destroy Congressional powers permanently, alter Judicial powers permanently, and steal public funds?

Good lord. I did not support Barack Obama in the election, but one signal benefit of his inauguration is that we will hear less of this whining about the overthrowing of democracy. Well, less from the Left, although I fully admit we'll hear more of it from the kooks on the right.

Correction: Confederate Yankee pointed out the "coup" post by Larisa the loon.

Update II: Larisa entitles her piece at OpEd News, a very fruitcake-friendly site a little more forcefully:

White House consultant who rigged 2004 election dies suspiciously

So, remember, she's no tinfoil hatter. She's a freaking retard.

Some Things Never Change

Dylan recently was interviewed for a National Geographic special on 9-11 Conspiracy theories.

I will say this ... the crew at Creative Differences were the coolest and most level-headed bunch I've been interviewed by so far. They took the time to actually listen to my answers, and the main producer was not interested in mining sound bites from me or forcing me into a corner. When I asked to discuss certain things, he gladly accepted. When I told him that Sibel Edmonds was the most gagged woman in history and that she's willing to share her classified information on a national platform such as CNN, FOX, MSNBC, or, say, National Geographic, their interest was peaked. And I was invited out for drinks later that night.

So ... we might be pleasantly surprised by the results. We might not be. Time will tell.

Third Annual Milwaukee Book Burning

Stand together in indignance? They got a grand total of six people there; four nuts up front including the guy holding a boot on a pole. It does look like it would be fun to throw shoes at Matt. But this still stands as his best video ever:

Troy and StilRob "Debate"

Lots of profanity, so definitely not safe for work. But I found it amusing.





An aside to Troy: Could you do me a favor and put back up the video that you did where you duplicated Richard Gage's Experiment That Changed the World? I have some friends I want to show that one to and it apparently got deleted with the kookloons account.

Olbermann Buys Into Warnings Conspiracy Theory

The worst political commentator in the world on the supposed warnings that Bush received:

Olbermann then ran through a list of pre-9/11 warnings of potential al Qaeda hijackings, noting, "A president's daily brief as far back as December 1998 said bin Laden was 'preparing to hijack US aircraft in hopes of trading hostages for jailed radicals.' ... The August 6, 2001 brief, of course, told President Bush -- if he read it -- that there were 'patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings.'"

Olbermann did not mention either the use of airplanes as weapons by the Japanese kamikaze suicide pilots during World War II or the abortive al Qaeda plot of the 1990's known as Project Bojinka, which would have involved both blowing up airliners and crashing a plane into CIA headquarters in Virginia and which may have been the inspiration for 9/11.

Hmmmm, if there was a 1998 PDB on hijackings, didn't that come during the Clinton Administration? And given that Operation Bojinka was uncovered in 1995, shouldn't the Clinton people have required the airlines to reinforce the cockpit doors? Aren't they to blame?

And the answer is no, not any more than the Bush Administration is to blame. Hindsight is 20/20. It is easy to see the warnings that should have been heeded, after the fact. Richard Clarke (no Bush apologist) pointed out in his book Against All Enemies that the counter-terrorism unit receives information about thousands of threats in a year. Obviously only a tiny percentage turn out to be real.

If you're searching for someone to blame for 9-11, start with guys like KSM, Mohamed Atta, Ramzi Bin-al-Shibh, Osama Bin Laden.

They Did It With Electromagnets

The latest theory from the controlled demolition fruitcakes:

Hour 2: Geophysicist Leuren Moret presents information that she believes constitutes proof of the electromagnetic demolition of the Twin Towers, rather than explosives having been used as the means. Unfortunately, time runs out before a discussion can ensue about the points brought up, either with callers or with the show's host (also creator of the popular film "911 Mysteries," which many consider to be the definitive video on the WTC destruction). Could HAARP conceivably be the singular energy source for the "emulsion of dust" created from the robust steel-framed Twins?

You know how it is; we'll be castigated for highlighting this bit of nuttery. "No true Truther believes, etc." But this theory does have an advantage over conventional controlled demolition theories. CD requires extremely loud explosions; presumably CD with electromagnets would be comparatively quiet. Of course, this just substitutes one problem for another; to wit, how exactly do you bring down a building with electromagnets, and what sort of power source would it require.

I have to sympathize with Sofia a bit in this interview; Leuren Moret blathers on and doesn't let Sofia pin her down, insisting that she must finish. The best bit is when Leuren starts talking about the Minneapolis bridge collapse, which was apparently intended to distract people from the Madison conference of the no-planers and beam-weapon folks which happened at nearly the same time. Sofia finally loses it at this point, saying that she doesn't want to get into the bridge collapse that she wants to stick to the WTC. There's also a very odd bit about how they were "lathering up" the buildings to prepare them for this beam weapon.

The Latest Conspiracy Nutbar

At least it isn't a washed up white professor, but this guy sets new standards for a lack of connection to reality. I could only make it through the first 5 minutes where he went on about how the Twin Towers were losing money, Osama bin Laden was really "Tom" Ossman, there was no way that an Afghan and 19 Saudis could have hijacked the planes, and the planes were really drones firing missiles. Oh boy, we got a live one here.

Update: The embed doesn't seem to be working right, you can find it here, if you are that much of a masochist.

Howard Zinn Redux

I don't know why these Troofers think that Howard Zinn will bring their message into the mainstream, but good on him for declining. Watch the Troofer at the beginning; doesn't he look like he's about to go Taxi Driver on Zinn?

What Must It Be Like to Be a "Truther"

Can you imagine the paranoia these guys have? A couple of rent-a-cops have weapons and he's convinced they're mercenaries who can kill us by (sic) their own discretion? The video also features Jeremy Rothe-Kushel, whom I exchanged a few emails with (and who I probably owe a response to) raging about Jerome Hauer, who was on the board of the company responsible for security at the WTC on 9-11. Of course, in the Troofers world this makes him guilty of being part of the 9-11 plot.

Creative Lawsuits

I was shaking my head at the headline over at 911 Blogger:

Career Army Officer Sues Rumsfeld, Cheney, Saying No Evacuation Order Given On 9/11

Which describes former Army Specialist April Gallop, who despite the headline is not an an officer (unless she recently went to OCS without telling anyone), and arguably not really a career soldier either. I think she is going to have a difficult time with her case though, because rather than suing for damages, she is accusing Dick Cheney and a myriad of unnamed conspirators of being behind the whole thing:

Plaintiff, Jury Trial Demanded
vs.
DICK CHENEY, Vice President of the U.S.A., DONALD RUMSFELD, former U.S. Secretary of Defense, General RICHARD MYERS, U.S.A.F. (Ret.), and John Does Nos. 1– X, all in their individual capacities, Defendants.

The main complaint seems to be that they didn't evacuate the Pentagon, and thus had foreknowledge. This seems a bit backward to me. All they knew, and somewhat late at that, was that a plane was headed toward Washington. Short of evacuating every major building in the Washington DC area, and there are quite a number, wouldn't evacuating the Pentagon indicate that they had foreknowledge? Well, heads I win, tails you lose.

Included in this complaint are the usual bizarre statements. I would love to see this one argued in court:

26. Likewise, by the acts of one or more defendants in furtherance of the conspiracy, no defenses at the Pentagon responded either, no missile or anti-aircraft batteries opening from the ground around the building, or the roof; no sharpshooters deployed with hand-held missiles at stations close by; nothing. And, shockingly, when the towers in New York had already been hit, and Flight 77 (or a substitute, see below) was out of radio contact and headed back towards the capital; and even when the plane approached, and then doubled back and headed toward the building in a long dive, no alarm was sounded.

Where were the sharpshooters?!

And apparently we have lawsuits by Googling, poorly.

Further, it should be noted that on September 10, 2001, the day before the attack, Defendant Rumsfeld conducted a press conference at the Pentagon in which he publicly announced that auditors had determined that some 2.3 trillion dollars in Defense Department funds —$2.300,000,000,000 — could not be accounted for. To plaintiff’s knowledge and belief, part of the area of the ground floor of the Pentagon that was destroyed in the bombing is a location where records were kept that would be used to trace those funds, and where people worked who knew about them. On information and belief, there has been to this day no public report concerning the fate of those records, or that money.

And who knew that gunpowder was a high explosive.

Several trained and experienced military personnel at the scene noted the distinctive odor of cordite, a high explosive used in gunpowder, in the aftermath of the attack at the Pentagon. This suggests explosives as the cause for the destruction rather than the impact and fire resulting from burning jet fuel.

As a veteran myself, I hope SPC Gallop gets all the medical and financial help she deserves, but I don't think suing Dick Cheney and John Doe is going to get her anywhere.

Those Wacky Pacifists and Their Death Threats

Troy's gotten one from the head of that noted Gandhi-inspired group, We Are Change Colorado, affectionately known around here as WAC-CO. Of course, death threats from them are a little more serious, given that one of their members has actually committed a murder.

Luke, I think you need a new leader for your Colorado Branch, this one hasn't quite gotten the whole Satyagraha thing.

I got one from a particularly foolish and grammar-challenged computer science major:

I think youre a TERRORIST for no tinforming the people the right information, and educating them on whats right. You should be arrested and HUNG for treason. No worries though because in due time ALL secrets will be revealed. When that happens you will be the first to be decapitated, and be judged left to suffer the horrors of the coming of your god! Have a wonderful day. Thank you for your time, MAYA.

Gravy's gotten at least one:

Mark…. I know you read this forum so bear this in mind, one day whilst you are showing people around the city you will see lots of pairs of eyes but one day you will look into a pair of eyes that will be mine and you know instantly that you will never forget my eyes because they will be the last thing you see.

Markyx got some after he released Screw Loose Change (the movie).

Danny Bonaduce had one against his wife and daughter:

Ok, folks...some clowns have been posting stuff on Danny Bonaduce's 12 year old daughter's page, and on his wife's page which is completely unacceptable. and he told me THAT SOME PEOPLE SENT HIM DEATH THREATS, AND SENT THEM TO HIS 12 YEAR OLD DAUGHTER!

And of course we need hardly mention Kevin Barrett, who regularly fantasies about half of America up on the scaffold.

North of the Border

The Canadian kooks get a rather glowing profile in Back of the Book, which I presume is .

Get the usual casual racism from Ian Woods:

“I first became suspicious of the official story released by the Bush administration as soon as the White House and FBI fingered Osama bin Laden and the 19 so-called hijackers as being the culprits. I asked myself, 'How could a rag tag bunch of goat herders pull off a stunt like that?'”

Yeah, how could a bunch of camel jockeys hijack four planes? Heck, how could they even get on four planes with those camels? Or goats, for that matter.

Graham MacQueene wants us all to know he's not a theologian:

“Occasionally 'debunkers' have criticized me for my work on the Towers, sneering that I’m just a religious studies prof -- often they mistakenly say theologian -- and don’t know anything about engineering. [However], I’ve never pretended to be an engineer or a physicist. My main contributions have been in the analysis of texts, which I’m obviously trained for. The main body of texts I’ve concentrated on is the oral histories of the New York Fire Department, which constitute about 10,000 pages of very rich material. When, on occasion, I do research that requires skill in engineering, I ask engineers to help me. I’m currently completing an article with a co-author who is an engineer.”

Tell us, Graham, what do you think about the oral history from John Peruggia? Don't you think it pretty much rules out controlled demolition of the towers? Don't you think it explains where Rudy Giuliani got his information that the towers were going to collapse? Oh, no, that's right, your whole reason for being a Troofer is:

“It was the 'collapse' of the Towers -- the physical impossibility of it -- that led [me] to [the] certainty of fraud.”

I suggest that you read Peruggia's testimony again, and about the city building engineer who told him he was worried that the North Tower was going to collapse.

I was in a discussion with Mr. Rotanz and I believe it was a representative from the Department of Buildings, but I'm not sure. Some engineer type person, and several of us were huddled talking in the lobby and it was brought to my attention, it was believed that the structural damage that was suffered to the towers was quite significant and they were very confident that the building's stability was compromised and they felt that the north tower was in danger of a near imminent collapse.

That this is far from an objective piece, but instead a glowing profile, is obvious from the ending:

The slow exposure of the Bush/Cheney deceit machine pushes against the fog of trauma and pain left by 9/11. Their bag of tricks has included unprovoked invasions of other nations, huge tax paybacks to large corporations, the looting of natural resources, war profiteering, illegal wiretapping, the outing of an undercover CIA operative, torture and human rights offences, the recent Wall Street bailout, the USA Patriot Act, and the violent deaths of a million innocent civilian men, women, and children in Iraq and Afghanistan, based on lies. While many still want to believe that the Bush/Cheney gang are telling the truth about 9/11, it’s increasingly hard not see that as an incredible leap of faith.

I love the guys who point out in exhaustive detail the Bush/Cheney Administration's many exhaustively-reported (supposed) scandals, and then append that they brilliantly staged 9-11 and fooled all the media.

The History of 9/11

As a bit of a follow-up to Pat's comment regarding how much of the history of 9/11 has actually been written, despite the deniers bizarre assertion that only they have looked into it. Courtesy of Wikipedia.

Pulitzer Prizes Awarded for 9/11 and Related Subjects

Public Service
2002: The New York Times, "for a special section published regularly after the September 11th terrorist attacks on America, which coherently and comprehensively covered the tragic events, profiled the victims, and tracked the developing story, locally and globally."

Breaking News Reporting
2002: The Wall Street Journal staff, "for its coverage of the September 11 attack on the World Trade Center."

Explanatory Reporting
2002: Staff of The New York Times, "for its informed and detailed reporting, before and after the September 11th attacks on America, that profiled the global terrorism network and the threats it posed."

National Reporting
2002: The Washington Post staff, "for its comprehensive coverage of America's War on Terrorism, which regularly brought forth new information together with skilled analysis of unfolding developments."

International Reporting
2002: Barry Bearak, New York Times, "for his deeply affecting and illuminating coverage of daily life in war-torn Afghanistan."

Breaking News Photography
2002: Staff of The New York Times, "for its coverage of the September 11 attack on the World Trade Center."

General Non-Fiction
2005: Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and Bin Laden, from the Soviet Invasion to September 10, 2001 by Steve Coll

2007: The Looming Tower: Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9/11 by Lawrence Wright

Total number of Pulitzer Prizes won by 9/11 deniers... uhh... zero.

Pilots for 9-11 Truth R02 Flight Path Verified

And why that's pretty bad news for the CIT boys:

The P4T RO2 is the flight data recorder decoded, not a theory. The short of it, the distance from navigation aids (VOR's) has been confirmed as recorded in the RO2 (fdr). The positional data has been confirmed using multiple radar sites along the flight path to verify that data as well. There are no holes in the data, so contrary to some theories, the plane did not land in KY/Ohio/WV and get replaced by a drone of some kind. The radar and RO2 data ends at the Sheraton Hotel area (to the south). Projected forward, it corresponds to the downed light poles and impact area (south of the Citgo). There is no evidence of a "fly-over" or other such hypothetical outcome. The data ends at the Pentagon area.

(Bolding added)

Excellent work by 9-11 Files, and thanks to him for translating it into non-technical jargon for me.

A Response to John Albanese

Promoted from the comments:

This question is loaded with assumptions designed to lead the jury. For example: “When did you stop beating your wife?”

Here are the ‘gotcha’ parts of your question – that make it dishonest:

1 – “…destroyed by controlled demolitions rigged by US government agencies.”

Not all 9/11 Truth activists have embraced the ‘controlled demolition’ theory. And, among those that do, it is not necessarily clear that a ‘US government agency’ is responsible. Some do. Some are not sure. And some believe completely different things. But that’s the point of a legal system – right? It does not matter what people believe. In the USA, when people are killed, mass murdered, we generally seat a grand jury and investigate. After 9/11 we didn’t. No subpoenas. No testifying under oath. No prosecutorial emphasis or requisite parameters for the ‘burden of proof’ was defined or pursued.

To date, 549 architectural and engineering professionals have signed a petition to Congress, claiming that the collapse 3 building on 9/11 are scientifically problematic – and are not adequately explained by the National Institute of Science and Technology. Many of these signatories possess advanced degrees, and are licensed professionals in their field. Simply using silly words like ‘Troofers” does not make these questions go away – and fails to diminish the professional opinions of these degreed experts.

Do YOU have a Master’s degree in engineering? Have you designed buildings for 20 years? Many of these signatories do. Shouldn’t THEY be asking the questions – not you?

John, don't start playing the credentials game unless you really want to compare, say, Dr Shyam Sunder's resume with that of Richard "I designed a steel-framed gymnasium" Gage. The real experts are on our side; your side has swimming pool engineers and water engineers and HVAC engineers.

2 - why were the fake terrorist attacks used to cover up these controlled demolitions so insanely convoluted?

Again – why are you speaking for 9/11 Truth activists? While some activists may believe the terrorist attacks were ‘faked’ – many do not. Many believe that 9/11 represented criminal negligence on the part of the US government. Others believe that the government was aware the attacks would take place, and allowed them to go forward unchallenged. Others still believe that the war games that morning were designed to confuse air control protocols, and provide a window of opportunity for very real terrorists to strike amidst the confusion.

This question is aimed at the activists who believe the terrorist attacks were faked. As James pointed out, the notion that your movement encompasses everything but stands behind nothing is not a strength, it's a remarkable weakness. It betrays a lack of seriousness.

But – opinions are like belly buttons. Everyone’s got one. I keep mine under wraps – and so should you.

You're not a blogger. We're like the callers to Jim Rome; our motto is, "Have a take and don't suck."

The bottom line here is that the answers that were provided to the American public after 9/11 were demonstrably inaccurate. You appear to be attempting to tar all 9/11 Truth activists with the same ‘wacko conspiracy theory’ brush – and as such – your questions are loaded, dishonest and give a ‘leading the jury’ representation of the movement.

Which answers were demonstrably inaccurate?

3 - ..involving complicated planning involving remote controlled flights timed with explosives detonated in the towers

And this is where you basically prove my point. Remote controlled planes? Timed explosives? This appears to be a deliberate attempt to obscure the LEGITIMATE questions surrounding the events of 9/11 with straw men issues you can easily knock down.

Willie Rodriguez claims that there was an explosion just before the plane hit. I hear this constantly from Troofers as big evidence. It's not a strawman, it's a very common claim. That you apparently don't buy that one is great; don't presume to speak for everybody in your movement. Remote controlled planes is another very common claim.

9/11 Truth does not exist because we claim to HAVE the answers. 9/11 Truth exists because we DON’T have the answers.

There we can agree.

You can throw space beams and no-planes into the mix to confuse people, but I’m not so sure how you will get the underlying questions to go away. You may be able to temporarily discredit these questions – with fake ones of your own. You may be able to focus all your attention on the fringe elements of the movement who make outrageous claims – or claim to know things they simply cannot know. But, I am unsure how this strategy will withstand the test of time.

I encourage you to look through this blog and tell me how many of our posts are on space beams and no-planes. The list of 15 questions linked below at Counterknowledge did not include any questions about space beams or no-planes.

At some point historians will have to account for all of this – in detail. It is not a matter of ‘if’ – it is a matter of ‘when.’

You seem to want to block that.

strange
John Albanese | 12.15.08 - 5:32 pm | #

True historians like Wright and McDermott and (yes) Zelikow have already assembled a good part of the story.

A Few Thoughts on Truthers and the Scientific Method

Just a short rant for the day.... I am getting rather annoyed at the truthers who come on this blog, like Jon Gold and John Albanese, along with "just-asking-questions" truther figures like David Ray Griffin, who are constantly complaining about "strawmen" arguments anytime we make a comment about their movement. Apparently we are not allowed to point out a single thing said by anyone in their movement unless it is universally held by every member, which would reduce the number of allowable beliefs to basically zero.

Listen you idiots. The scientific method is based on a number of core concepts regarding the strengths of hypotheses, such as the reproducibility, predictability, and falsifiability of your assertions. We are not talking about obscure facts like what was the name, rank, and service number of the pilot of the F-16 which took off from Langley here. The fact that truthers cannot agree on even the most basic facts, such as whether a freaking 200,000 pound airplane smashed into the Pentagon in broad daylight in front of hundreds of witnesses, is not a sign of strength and intellectual diversity in your movement.

Quite the opposite, it is a sign of the weakness of your argument, the fact that your interpretation of the facts is so (to quote ROD BLAGOJEVICH) F____ screwed up that even your own politically driven movement cannot vaguely agree on what to consider reality. A strong argument is based on the consistency of its supporting evidence. The fact that you can come up with 37 different and contradicting reasons why 9/11 was an inside job, is not better than the one coherent, consistent and well backed argument that Islamic terrorists did it. This is not a multiple choice test, you don't get credit for guessing.

This is not a good thing, this is not something to be proud about, this is not something to come on blogs to brag about as some sort of defense. This is something about which you should be profoundly embarrassed!

OK, that is the end of my rant.

15 Questions for the Troofers

Joseph Welch of Counterknowledge turns the tables on the Troofers and their "just asking questions" wheeze:

(10) If the WTC towers in New York City were destroyed by controlled demolitions rigged by US government agencies, then why were the fake terrorist attacks used to cover up these controlled demolitions so insanely convoluted? Why concoct a scenario involving the hijacking of planes which are then crashed into tower blocks (involving complicated planning involving remote controlled flights timed with explosives detonated in the towers, which allow plenty of opportunities for gliches and technical errors)? Why not use a more simple means, such as a truck bomb?

The questions are well-thought out and of course the Troofers who have responded have not answered a single one, rather they have attacked Mr Welch. Very highly recommended!

Update: Two marvelous comments over there deserve to be highlighted. WJA says:

Good post. An even quicker way of deflating the Truther’s is ask them just this one question:

“What fact, if proved, would cause you to seriously question your ‘inside job’ hypothesis?”

This was Ron Wieck's most devastating question to Dylan and Jason during the Hardfire debate, where they were forced to admit that nothing would change their mind.

And another commenter named Queenie has a suggested experiment:

What we should do, is build a large, open steel, tower. With an elevator at the centre, to take passengers up to the top. 1300 feet. Into a compartment.

And then we should convey the assembled troofers into the elevator, and up to the top. If they are so confident that the WTC was not brought down by the fire load, they will demonstrate the integrity of their stance, by remaining in the compartment while the steel at the base, is raised to the temperatures caused during the attack. What could they possibly have to fear?

Update II: Troy provides us with this photo of Donald Stahl, one of the Troofer commenters over there:



That's him in the middle with the belly button hanging out. Troy himself is at the far right, in Dodger Blue, making fun of the kooks.

Troofer Falk Denied Entry to Israel

9-11 Troofer and UN envoy Richard Falk gets turned away:

Israel's Foreign Ministry said in September that it would not allow Falk to enter the country, after the BBC quoted Falk as defending statements he made last year equating Israel's treatment of Palestinians with Nazi treatment of Jews during the Holocaust. Falk told BBC that Israel had been unfairly shielded from international criticism.

Israel has also complained that Falk's mandate as an investigator was confined to human rights violations by Israel toward Palestinians and did not encompass violations by Palestinians toward Israelis.

This should enhance Falk's standing among the Troofers who rail about the Zionists.

Hat Tip: Commenter Adversity1

Update: Our buddy Walter Ego reminds us of this video featuring our buddy Stephen Lemons confronting the Troofers at the 9-11 Denial of Accountability Conference on Eric D. Williams:



Walter does get one label wrong; the guy who asks Eric if people got killed as a result of state policy in World War II is not Kent "Cow-Killer" Knudson, but Jim Marrs. But a great job otherwise, Walter!

BTW, has anybody seen the closing of that conference video, where they invited Eric Williams up onto the stage for a show of unity? I've been looking for that one for awhile now, but (not surprisingly) it doesn't seem to be around.

From Loony Left to Loony Bin

This is a bit too rich, but it is certainly a sad tale of how one Sheila Casey went from being a left-liberal to a kook:

It didn’t take long. The evidence was overwhelming and her jaw dropped and stayed dropped for a week. What of all the astute writers whose words she had devoured daily, year after year? What of her heroes: Robert Scheer, Josh Marshall, Paul Krugman? What of the many leftist websites she frequented: Buzzflash, Alternet, Counterpunch, TPM, Crooks & Liars, Salon? The pod casts she savored, like Left, Right and Center? The TV shows she giggled at, like The Daily Show? How could it be, that not one of these sources had told her the truth about 9/11? And if they were lying about 9/11, what else might they be lying about? She had to know.

She began investigating again. Her new plasma TV sat idle and unused, DVDs from Netflix piled up, unwatched, and dust lay thickly on dresser-tops, un-noticed. The UPS man became a frequent visitor, bearing books from Amazon, and she dug deeper into the far reaches of the Internet, following link, after link, after link, to get to the long buried truth that someone didn’t want her to know.

JFK. RFK. MLK. JFK Jr. Oklahoma City bombing. World Trade Center bombing 1993. Shoot down of KAL 007, TWA 800. Deaths of Paul Wellstone, William Colby, Vince Foster. All lies! Nothing had happened the way she had been told. The government—her government—had been killing people who were inconvenient for at least 50 years. The media spun tales as absurd as an Escher drawing, and the placid public accepted their wild tales as fact.

Get this:

She learned that there was a single family with net worth of $100 trillion dollars—twenty times the amount of the entire US money supply (M3) and enough to finance the US military’s current budget for 200 years.

Come on, Sheila! The only man in the world who's worth over a trillion dollars is Ambassador Leo Wanta.

Something must be done! she resolved. She began writing, speaking, informing. But old friends backed away and her op-eds weren’t published. She appeared as little more than a lone, lunatic fly flailing in a solid web of geometrically perfect, internally consistent lies expanding outward indefinitely in all directions. Slowly, the full horror of the awful truth dawned upon her, as the fate of humanity became ever more apparent.

It's a cookbook!

Q and A With David Ray

One of the troofer sites posted video from David Ray Griffin's appearance in Olympia last week. I clipped the part where I got to ask him a question and watch him spin like a top. As I mentioned, this was not the most productive use of an evening in my life, but at least this part is not as mind-numbingly boring as the rest of his speech.

Free Fallin' Yet Again

Apparently a physics teacher and 9-11 Troofer named David Chandler "discovered" that WTC-7 had been in freefall for part of its collapse. Never mind that the Troofers have always claimed it was in freefall (or, humorously, faster than freefall) for the entirety of its collapse, they greeted this news as evidence that backed up their fruitcake theories of controlled demolition.

I'm not going to take on Mr Chandler; let's allow JREFers like Ryan Mackey and Tfk handle it. Mr Mackey first:

To stimulate further discussion, may I also point out that we have accepted the possibility of very high accelerations, approaching 1 g, all along. See this thread for an example of such a discussion, concluding that the actual descent rate could indeed wind up within the margin of error of "free fall," yet have nothing whatsoever to do with explosives. I remind readers that the thread starter is under no circumstances a "government stooge" or what have you, but instead approached the problem from the opposite initial viewpoint.

Furthermore, supposing there were explosives used, one expects their placement would result in a very similar core damage sequence to the one that NIST found likely as a result of fire. This suggests that NIST and a typical CD hypothesis would be indistinguishable on the basis of a roofline velocity test. Instead we look to other tests, such as the sound and blast effect on windows, and these rule conclusively against explosives.

Tfk points out:

However, the crucial point here is that Chandler's results agree EXACTLY with NIST's. Chandler didn't have to do this work at all. He replicates EXACTLY NIST's graph shown in Fig 12-77 on page 603 of NCSTAR 1-9 (Vol 2). This is page 265 of the downloadable pdf file. The slope of the best fit linear curve is "32.196". (Keeerist, don't they teach kids about "significant digits" any more??!!! It should be 32.2, probably ±0.5 or so.) A glaring omission in both papers is an error analysis - a CRITICAL component of any competent engineering paper.

Conclusion: Freefall doesn't prove anything. Indeed, I have consistently argued that Troofers just assume that controlled demolitions fall at freefall speed when they do not.

The Moderate Voice Publishing Troofer Diaries?

That was not my initial reaction on reading this post. My initial reaction was, wow this is going to give the Troofers a shot in the arm. The Moderate Voice is a moderate(ly liberal) blog with at least some pretensions to seriousness; its posts are commonly picked up by Memeorandum (as was this one), a blog tracking website that is very influential.

It is getting murkier and murkier. Dawood Ibrahim, India-born mafia don (who is said to be safely hiding in Pakistan), is emerging as a key suspect in “the funding and logistical support for the November 26 terrorist strike on Mumbai.”

Dubbed as “India’s Osama Bin Laden”, Dawood is also allegedly behind the 2006 Mumbai train bombings (which killed at least 200 people); and 1993 bomb attacks in Mumbai (which killed 260 people). Last month’s Mumbai terrorist carnage killed nearly 180 people and left more than 200 injured.

According to Asia Time Online: Dawood has been identified by journalists and investigators as a long-time asset of both the CIA and Pakistan’s notorious Inter Services Intelligence agency (ISI). (Maybe this explains the US administrations’ kid glove approach towards ISI.)

I'm thinking, oh, man, this is going to boost the ISI wing of the Troofers quite a bit. But I was a little suspicious of this part:

“While American ‘counter-terrorism officials’ are now calling for the heads of (Dawood) Ibrahim, his associate Tiger Memon and former ISI Director, retired Lieutenant General Hamid Gul, the United States and their NATO partners have made liberal use of these jokers in a score of destabilization ops that span continents.

Why are counter-terrorism officials scare-quoted in that paragraph? Well, the answer wasn't far away. The post at the Moderate(ly Troofer) Voice ends with a "more here". And when you click on "more here" you go to Globalresearch.ca, a well-known 9-11 kook site.

The site is run by Michel Chossudovsky. Chossudovsky wrote America's "War On Terror", which claims:

In this new and expanded edition of Michel Chossudovsky's 2002 best seller, the author blows away the smokescreen put up by the mainstream media, that 9/11 was an attack on America by "Islamic terrorists". Through meticulous research, the author uncovers a military-intelligence ploy behind the September 11 attacks, and the cover-up and complicity of key members of the Bush Administration.

According to Chossudovsky, the "war on terrorism" is a complete fabrication based on the illusion that one man, Osama bin Laden, outwitted the $40 billion-a-year American intelligence apparatus. The "war on terrorism" is a war of conquest. Globalisation is the final march to the "New World Order", dominated by Wall Street and the U.S. military-industrial complex.

The post there (which was basically cut and pasted to the Moderate(ly Nutty) Voice is written by Tom Burghardt, who's clearly another paranoid nutter. Among Mr Burghardt's other articles:

"Emergency Preparedness" or Martial Law?
Vigilant Shield 09: A Cover for Illegal Domestic Operations?
- by Tom Burghardt - 2008-11-23

Big Brother: Radio frequency (RF) "Geolocation" of "Opponents" of the New World Order 'Tying the room together': DARPA's Project Gandalf
- by Tom Burghardt - 2008-10-20

Secret Bush Administration Plan to Suspend US Constitution
"Continuity of Government" (COG) Provisions activated in 2001
- by Tom Burghardt - 2008-10-06

Let me make it clear here that Dawood and the ISI may have been involved in the Mumbai attacks; it's the reliance on a fruitcake site like Global Research to tie it to the USA and the CIA that discredits the Moderate Voice in this instance.