mhgaffney to speak at 9/11 film festival

[mhgaffney]

If you live in or near the SF Bay Area -- don't miss this!
MHG

9/11 Truth Film Festival 2012
— An Exploration of Deep Events

Grand Lake Theater, Oakland, CA
September 11
2:00 PM – 11:00 PM


for more information go to: http://sf911truth.org/

[DenverBrit]

Still trying to make a buck off the victims of terrorism.

You're the worst kind of conspiracy nut.........you're a leach! Go and do an honest days work.

[Rohirrim]

Wow!

They built a theater in Oakland? Who woulda thought? ???

[myMind]

Your truth is a house of straw old man. How many of these facts you are about to impart onto any gullible attendee have you empirically proven firsthand?

[spdirty]

Do your thing Gaff. And keep posting here. Your presence on these forums is good entertainment.:thumbs:

[SoCalBronco]

You are participating in a 9/11 troofer film festival in the Bay area?

Yeah, you're definitely credible now, Gaff.

[The Lone Bolt]

I'm sure the five people who show up will be very impressed with your presentation.

[ghwk]

Boy it's close to where I live. Pass.

[W*GS]

I'd love to heckle gaffe.

It would be ****ing hilarious.

I'd start with asking him what Venus is.

[cutthemdown]

I'd love to heckle gaffe.

It would be ****ing hilarious.

I'd start with asking him what Venus is.

LOL me to.....this is why I don't post my gigs to the Mane lol. Hilarious!

[Marshall Dumervil]

When am I going to die from ***ishima? Wasn't I supposed to be dead by now?

[mhgaffney]

Your truth is a house of straw old man. How many of these facts you are about to impart onto any gullible attendee have you empirically proven firsthand?

It is not my truth. Anyone who digs for it will find it. At this point, it does not even take that much effort.

Researchers have already done the hard work.

For example, check out this interview with Robert Schopmeyer -- a Palo Alto based engineer who went beyond Lawrence Wright (The Looming Tower). Schopmeyer fills in the gaps left by Wright -- and shows how the CIA knew about the coming attacks and deliberately kept the FBI in the dark.

Schopmeyer also exposed the CIA chain of command -- showing that the orders came from the top, that is, from Tenet through Cofer Black to Richard Blee to Tom Wilshire.

Conversation with Robert Schopmeyer - Prior Knowledge of 9/11: Who knew what when?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75UzaNOjOb0

[Rohirrim]

I think Gaffo should have no problem building a following in Raidertown. After all, look at them!

http://media.sacbee.com/smedia/2010/09/26/18/RaidersCardinalsFoot8.standalone.prod_affiliate.4. jpg

[mhgaffney]

A Noble Lie:

is one of the films to be shown at the Oakland film festival. It's the best documentary yet about the 1995 bombing of the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City.

The film shows that the terror bombing was a false flag attack. Unexploded bombs were found in the basement of the building -- and removed by bomb squads. This was reported by the local press -- but was never picked up by the national media.

Timothy McVeigh was a patsy.

http://www.anoblelie.com/

[mhgaffney]

I think Gaffo should have no problem building a following in Raidertown. After all, look at them!

http://media.sacbee.com/smedia/2010/09/26/18/RaidersCardinalsFoot8.standalone.prod_affiliate.4. jpg

hey Dufus -- you're the big fan of Wright, correct? You still have not figured out that Wright only had part of the picture.

Schopmeyer put together the rest of it -- which brings the whole into focus.

Your CIA chief is a pathological liar and mass murderer -- and you don't give a hoot?

[Rohirrim]

Hey, Gaffo. Who do you think killed John Lennon?

[Rohirrim]

hey Dufus -- you're the big fan of Wright, correct? You still have not figured out that Wright only had part of the picture.

Schopmeyer put together the rest of it -- which brings the whole into focus.

Your CIA chief is a pathological liar and mass murderer -- and you don't give a hoot?

Even when I'm trying to be supportive you jump on my case. :pity:

[DenverBrit]

......and the crowd went wild when Gaffney's appearance was announced.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_PVyDmTkfk6s/ScVYragvDOI/AAAAAAAAB-M/4Lr-bfCaMzg/s400/2009_03210051.JPG

[mhgaffney]

The bozos on this board don't give a hoot about their own country.

If they cared -- they would honestly review the evidence.

Instead -- they go the escapist route -- which is an expression of their deep denial and inner despair (nothing can be done, anyway, so why bother).

If they reviewed the evidence they would have to alter their beliefs and behavior. They'd have to get off their sorry asses and actually do something.

Instead they sit around blowing smoke, sucking down beer, and tuning out...

What a pathetic crew.

[DenverBrit]

How do you type in a straight jacket Gaffney?

It's impressive!!

[Rohirrim]

The bozos on this board don't give a hoot about their own country.

If they cared -- they would honestly review the evidence.

Instead -- they go the escapist route -- which is an expression of their deep denial and inner despair (nothing can be done, anyway, so why bother).

If they reviewed the evidence they would have to alter their beliefs and behavior. They'd have to get off their sorry asses and actually do something.

Instead they sit around blowing smoke, sucking down beer, and tuning out...

What a pathetic crew.

Who are you talking to in the third person? The secret audience?

You see, this is my life! It always will be! Nothing else! Just us, the cameras, and those wonderful people out there in the dark!... All right, Mr. DeMille, I'm ready for my close-up!

[W*GS]

The best thing about gaffe?

He unites us in mockery of him.

PS - He can't even answer a couple questions. He's a gutless chicken****. "He" is a eunuch.

[SoCalBronco]

Gaff, serious question: what would Methwolfe think about 9/11 ?

[The Lone Bolt]

The bozos on this board don't give a hoot about their own country.

If they cared -- they would honestly review the evidence.

Instead -- they go the escapist route -- which is an expression of their deep denial and inner despair (nothing can be done, anyway, so why bother).

If they reviewed the evidence they would have to alter their beliefs and behavior. They'd have to get off their sorry asses and actually do something.

Instead they sit around blowing smoke, sucking down beer, and tuning out...

What a pathetic crew.

Here's the real truth that you're too psychotic to understand.

We HAVE reviewed the evidence. The truthers have no case. We have told you over and over again why. You refuse to listen because you are too deeply paranoid.

You are the one living in a fantasy.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

If you live in or near the SF Bay Area -- don't miss this!
MHG

9/11 Truth Film Festival 2012
— An Exploration of Deep Events

Grand Lake Theater, Oakland, CA
September 11
2:00 PM – 11:00 PM


for more information go to: http://sf911truth.org/

Good for you, Mark!

Hope this goes well. :thumbsup:

The official BushCo account of 9/11 is a huge sham and an insult to our collective intelligence as Americans, and I salute anyone who has the guts to publicly call BS on it.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Here's the real truth that you're too psychotic to understand.

We HAVE reviewed the evidence. The truthers have no case. We have told you over and over again why. You refuse to listen because you are too deeply paranoid.

You are the one living in a fantasy.

What a f_cking hypocrite you are.

The exact same things could be said about you and your refusal to accept the evidence that Bush lied us into Iraq.

[Rohirrim]

So, Gaffo. Got any inside info on why Lennon was killed?

[The Lone Bolt]

What a f_cking hypocrite you are.

The exact same things could be said about you and your refusal to accept the evidence that Bush lied us into Iraq.



Yeah yeah yeah. We've been over this as well. No evidence the bush deliberately misled the public. Bad prewar intel and administration bias has not been eliminated as a reasonable alternative explanation. You too need to face the truth.

PS ever heard of Hanlon's Razor?

[mhgaffney]

Yeah yeah yeah. We've been over this as well. No evidence the bush deliberately misled the public. Bad prewar intel and administration bias has not been eliminated as a reasonable alternative explanation. You too need to face the truth.

PS ever heard of Hanlon's Razor?


What an idiot you are.

We know that Dick Cheney cooked the intel. The Bush administration did an end run around CIA - and set up its own intelligence operation to justify the planned war.

This means Bush & Cheney lied. The most serious crime a leader can commit is to knowingly lie a nation into war.

[mhgaffney]

Gaff, serious question: what would Methwolfe think about 9/11 ?

Why don't you ask him?

[Requiem]

Why do you guys have to be mean to MHG? Maybe the festival will be worth a look. They could have some good food there.

[mhgaffney]

This is one of the films that will be shown in Oakland on Sept 11. You can watch here for free:

AE911Truth Experts Speak Out

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YW6mJOqRDI4&feature=player_embedded

[DenverBrit]

This is one of the films that will be shown in Oakland on Sept 11. You can watch here for free:

AE911Truth Experts Speak Out

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YW6mJOqRDI4&feature=player_embedded

Excellent. I'll cancel my flight.

[W*GS]

What's Venus, gaffe?

[Rohirrim]

Why do you guys have to be mean to MHG? Maybe the festival will be worth a look. They could have some good food there.

I've given up on der Gaffo. Even when I try to agree with him he insults me.

[hookemhess]

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/XjrZj3GXjoA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[orangeatheist]

Why do you guys have to be mean to MHG? Maybe the festival will be worth a look. They could have some good food there.

There will definitely be brownies. How else do folks like Looney Gaffe get inspired to come up with this stuff?

Bet you could probably score some meth, too. Little know fact: minimethbombs were used to help bring down the towers. True story.

Then, of course, there's the methbanks, methJews, methVenus...

[mhgaffney]

So, Gaffo. Got any inside info on why Lennon was killed?

You post nonsense like this -- and expect to be taken seriously?

[Rohirrim]

You post nonsense like this -- and expect to be taken seriously?

I'm thinking you might have some inside info.

[mhgaffney]

I'm thinking you might have some inside info.

And how would I have inside info about John Lennon's killer? Get real.

You live in fantasyland.

[The Lone Bolt]

I'm thinking you might have some inside info.

I think the Mossad blew up Lennon with spray-on nanothermite and mininukes in his underwear. Chapman was framed.

REVIEW THE EVIDENCE PEOPLE!!!

[mhgaffney]

The dolt is just noise -- which gets in the way of the message.

Nothing new, here. Same old shyte.

[DenverBrit]

And how would I have inside info about John Lennon's killer? Get real.

You live in fantasyland.

Oh, much the same way you think you have inside info about 911, OKC bombing and I've lost count of the times you claim to know war with Iran is tomorrow.

And YOU talk about living in a fantasy land??

[houghtam]

Oh, much the same way you think you have inside info about 911, OKC bombing and I've lost count of the times you claim to know war with Iran is tomorrow.

And YOU talk about living in a fantasy land??

It's not inside knowledge. It's all there for us to plainly see. WHY CAN'T WE PLAINLY SEE?

[Rohirrim]

And how would I have inside info about John Lennon's killer? Get real.

You live in fantasyland.

Well, you think Oswald, Sirhan and bin Laden were innocent. I figured you think Chapman is innocent as well. Maybe he was a Nixon stooge? Nixon had it in for Lennon, you know?

[mhgaffney]

Oh, much the same way you think you have inside info about 911, OKC bombing and I've lost count of the times you claim to know war with Iran is tomorrow.

And YOU talk about living in a fantasy land??

Watch the film A Noble Lie --

There is plenty of evidence that the 1995 OK City bombing was staged to push through the Patriot Act. Dog squads removed bombs from inside the building that failed to go off. No way did Tim McVeigh's truck bomb cause that kind of destruction.

Idiots like you wouldn't know evidence if it bit you on the ass.
MHG

[mhgaffney]

Well, you think Oswald, Sirhan and bin Laden were innocent. I figured you think Chapman is innocent as well. Maybe he was a Nixon stooge? Nixon had it in for Lennon, you know?

Oswald was an FBI agent -- set up to be the patsy.

Sirhan was a manchurian candidate -- the subject of mind control.

I never said bin Laden was innocent.

So, you mis-stated my views -- on all points. This is why I do not take you seriously.

MHG

[W*GS]

Watch the film A Noble Lie --

Why? Because it's chock-full of the mindless and breathless paranoia and downright mental insanity that you are?

There is plenty of evidence that the 1995 OK City bombing was staged to push through the Patriot Act.

Six years earlier? Wow.

Actually, the death of William Henry Harrison was staged to push through the PATRIOT Act. Plenty of evidence for that - just look it up!

Dog squads removed bombs from inside the building that failed to go off. No way did Tim McVeigh's truck bomb cause that kind of destruction.

So McVeigh was just another innocent patsy, eh?

Idiots like you wouldn't know evidence if it bit you on the ass.

You don't know your ass from evidence.

When was America really America, gaffe?

Oh, and what is Venus?

[DenverBrit]

Watch the film A Noble Lie --

There is plenty of evidence that the 1995 OK City bombing was staged to push through the Patriot Act. Dog squads removed bombs from inside the building that failed to go off. No way did Tim McVeigh's truck bomb cause that kind of destruction.

Idiots like you wouldn't know evidence if it bit you on the ass.
MHG

When my friend's ex wife was killed in that bombing, we attended a funeral where we buried her only remains, her teeth. So excuse me if I think you're the lowest kind of human being; a pathological liar, who tries to make a buck from the tragedy.

You're a leach, Gaffney, posing as a whistle blower. Your ignorance is monumental, your craziness is clinical and your self promotion both obnoxious and offensive.
So go and screw yourself, you pathetic little excuse for a man!

[mhgaffney]

When my friend's ex wife was killed in that bombing, we attended a funeral where we buried her only remains, her teeth. So excuse me if I think you're the lowest kind of human being; a pathological liar, who tries to make a buck from the tragedy.

You're a leach, Gaffney, posing as a whistle blower. Your ignorance is monumental, your craziness is clinical and your self promotion both obnoxious and offensive.
So go and screw yourself, you pathetic little excuse for a man!

I'm a writer. I've never claimed to be a whistleblower, though at least seven whistleblowers are featured in my book Black 9/11.

What would you know about evidence? You never read -- never study.

Typical no nothing dumbed down American.

MHG

[DenverBrit]

I'm a writer. I've never claimed to be a whistleblower, though at least seven whistleblowers are featured in my book Black 9/11.


MHG

No, you're pond scum.

[Obushma]

No, you're pond scum.

...and you're a douchebag, if you don't like what Gaffney has to say, just ignore him. Nobody in America gives a **** what a Brit thinks anyway.

[DenverBrit]

...and you're a douchebag, if you don't like what Gaffney has to say, just ignore him. Nobody in America gives a **** what a Brit thinks anyway.

Ever take your own advice?? Hilarious!

[Rohirrim]

Watch the film A Noble Lie --

There is plenty of evidence that the 1995 OK City bombing was staged to push through the Patriot Act. Dog squads removed bombs from inside the building that failed to go off. No way did Tim McVeigh's truck bomb cause that kind of destruction.

Idiots like you wouldn't know evidence if it bit you on the ass.
MHG

McVeigh was a cold blooded killer who admitted to the crime, had no remorse for killing children and would have done it all over again if he could have. You're so grossly misinformed and misguided that it's pathetic.

[mhgaffney]

McVeigh was a cold blooded killer who admitted to the crime, had no remorse for killing children and would have done it all over again if he could have. You're so grossly misinformed and misguided that it's pathetic.

Did you watch the new film about the Oklahoma City bombing, A Noble Lie?

Of course not. Nuf said.

[W*GS]

Did you watch the new film about the Oklahoma City bombing, A Noble Lie?

Of course not. Nuf said.

When was America really America, gaffe?

Oh, and what is Venus?

[colorado jones]

The bozos on this board don't give a hoot about their own country.

If they cared -- they would honestly review the evidence.

Instead -- they go the escapist route -- which is an expression of their deep denial and inner despair (nothing can be done, anyway, so why bother).

If they reviewed the evidence they would have to alter their beliefs and behavior. They'd have to get off their sorry asses and actually do something.

Instead they sit around blowing smoke, sucking down beer, and tuning out...

What a pathetic crew.

AKA: I cannot get the orange maners to buy my books. And I thought Internet marketing actually WORKED!

[houghtam]

Just out of curiosity...

What IS Venus?

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Just out of curiosity...

What IS Venus?

The Roman goddess whose functions encompassed love, beauty, sex, fertility, prosperity and victory.

http://www.artchive.com/artchive/b/botticelli/venus.jpg

[mhgaffney]

Gaffney on the Corbett Report

This went up in anticipation of the 11th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks.

http://www.corbettreport.com/interview-539-mark-gaffney-on-black-911/

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Gaffney on the Corbett Report

This went up in anticipation of the 11th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks.

http://www.corbettreport.com/interview-539-mark-gaffney-on-black-911/

Excellent! :thumbsup:

Keep up the good work, man!

[W*GS]

How much money have you made from the charred and pulverized corpses of 9/11, gaffe?

[mhgaffney]

Here's the schedule for Tuesday.

[mhgaffney]

Here is one of the films that will be shown on Tuesday. It will also appear soon on Colorado PBS. You can watch it here for free:

http://video.pbs.org/video/2270078138

[Crushaholic]

Just out of curiosity...

What IS Venus?

not Uranus? :ouwknow:

[mhgaffney]

Nothing compares to 9/11 -- when it comes to talking (and dancing) around an issue.

Now why is that?

[The Lone Bolt]

Nothing compares to 9/11 -- when it comes to talking (and dancing) around an issue.

Now why is that?

Umm... because truthers are paranoid idiots who have no case and nobody's interested in engaging their sad delusions?

[maher_tyler]

Serious question...did they ever find any parts to the 747 that hit the Pentagon?

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Umm... because truthers are paranoid idiots who have no case and nobody's interested in engaging their sad delusions?

So, in your mind, the official account is unassailable and it's impossible that the "truthers" could be right about anything?

Doesn't this strike you as a really extreme example of "black or white" thinking?

[mhgaffney]

Serious question...did they ever find any parts to the 747 that hit the Pentagon?

It was a 757 -- and yes parts were found.

[Mecklomaniac]

Bill got a pass for Mena, yes, but HW Bush was Mr teflon when it came to investigations. Bush got away with the October Surprise -- and much worse since.

Bush junior rode his daddy's teflon coat tails.


October surprise?

Was that the one where in 1980 former WWII pilot, George HW Bush, put on a space suit, climbed into the 2nd seat of a SR-71, flew at Mach 4 back from Paris, refueling over the Alantic, after he payed Iran a $40,000,000 bribe not to release the hostages until after Jimmy Carter was out of office. And I thought Putin was the action hero.

Did Bush shoot down TWA 800?

Did Chuck Norris really shave Bigfoot with Occam's razor?

Who is buried in Grants tomb?

[Garcia Bronco]

Gaffney's Mind, you will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy.

[The Lone Bolt]

So, in your mind, the official account is unassailable and it's impossible that the "truthers" could be right about anything?

Doesn't this strike you as a really extreme example of "black or white" thinking?

Not at all. Just show me some real evidence that the "official story" is wrong and I'll seriously consider it.

Is your belief that the "gubmint dunnit" unassailable (like it is with Gaffney)?

[maher_tyler]

Not at all. Just show me some real evidence that the "official story" is wrong and I'll seriously consider it.

Is your belief that the "gubmint dunnit" unassailable (like it is with Gaffney)?

A few things that have baffled me. 1) people heard explosions. 2) entire buildings that weren't hit collapsed. 3) the way the buildings fell looked exactly like a controlled demolition.

[The Lone Bolt]

A few things that have baffled me. 1) people heard explosions. 2) entire buildings that weren't hit collapsed. 3) the way the buildings fell looked exactly like a controlled demolition.

1) People heard loud noises. No evidence that they were explosions.

2) WTC 7 was hit by debris. Collapsed due to fires. http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc7_damage.html

3) How would you know? Watch the videos. Collapses started at the point that the planes collided with the buildings.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

1) People heard loud noises. No evidence that they were explosions.


Not quite.

Many of the witnesses were people who definitely knew what explosions sound like.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Not at all. Just show me some real evidence that the "official story" is wrong and I'll seriously consider it.

Is your belief that the "gubmint dunnit" unassailable (like it is with Gaffney)?

Even one of the co-chairs of the Commission said it was a joke.

Various intelligence experts have called it a sham.

If their evidence doesn't persuade you, then your mind is probably already made up and nothing is going to change it.

[The Lone Bolt]

Even one of the co-chairs of the Commission said it was a joke.

Various intelligence experts have called it a sham.

If their evidence doesn't persuade you, then your mind is probably already made up and nothing is going to change it.

Is your belief that the "gubmint dunnit" unassailable (like it is with Gaffney)?

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Is your belief that the "gubmint dunnit" unassailable (like it is with Gaffney)?

It's not a question of whether it's unassailable - it's a question of preponderance of evidence.

There is at least enough evidence to show that the official account is a fraud.

[broncocalijohn]

September 11th anniversary: McGaffney holiday.

[mhgaffney]

1) People heard loud noises. No evidence that they were explosions.

2) WTC 7 was hit by debris. Collapsed due to fires. http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc7_damage.html

3) How would you know? Watch the videos. Collapses started at the point that the planes collided with the buildings.

Dolt keeps repeating the same nonsense.

NIST conceded in its final report on WTC-7 in 2008 that falling debris from WTC-1 played no role in the collapse of building 7.

[Fedaykin]

3) the way the buildings fell looked exactly like a controlled demolition.

High rise buildings are engined to fail "gracefully" -- that is to say, collapse upon itself. The last thing you want is a building that will topple over like a domino or fail in some other "ungraceful" way.

Image how much worse it would have been if the towers fell like dominoes. They would have taken out dozens of other buildings.

[The Lone Bolt]

Dolt keeps repeating the same nonsense.

NIST conceded in its final report on WTC-7 in 2008 that falling debris from WTC-1 played no role in the collapse of building 7.

Hey Gaffney, what's Venus?

[DenverBrit]

Hey, Gaffney, why don't you go to ground zero today and piss off everyone while they remember their loved ones.

You're another Rev Phelps! Leach!

[The Lone Bolt]

It's not a question of whether it's unassailable - it's a question of preponderance of evidence.

There is at least enough evidence to show that the official account is a fraud.

Nice dodge. First you accuse me of this:

So, in your mind, the official account is unassailable and it's impossible that the "truthers" could be right about anything?

But then when I ask you if this is true of your own beliefs you give me the above deflection.

So how about answering the question?

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Nice dodge. First you accuse me of this:



But then when I ask you if this is true of your own beliefs you give me the above deflection.

So how about answering the question?

I didn't "accuse" you of anything - I asked you if you believed the official account was unassailable.

And what "deflection" are you talking about?

I said it was a question of evidence vs. a question of whether the account was unassailable or not. This holds true for both sides.

Not my fault if you have comprehension problems.

In any event, it's obvious that your emotional resistance to looking at evidence that contradicts the official account is the driving force behind your position.

You constant, vicious personal attacks and smears on Gaffney make that abundantly clear.

[maher_tyler]

1) People heard loud noises. No evidence that they were explosions.

2) WTC 7 was hit by debris. Collapsed due to fires. http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc7_damage.html

3) How would you know? Watch the videos. Collapses started at the point that the planes collided with the buildings.

1) People know what a explosion sounds like and its not like it was one person that heard it.

2) So entire buildings can collapse from debris and fire, gotcha! /sarcasm

We can build buildings in a way that they can collapse in a way that it looks like a demo but can't stop them from collapsing from debris and a fire??

I'm not 100% sure what happened 11 years ago but the whole thing seems pretty fishy to me and i am by no means a conspiracy theorist.

[The Lone Bolt]

1) People know what a explosion sounds like and its not like it was one person that heard it.

Oh jeez.

Look over the quotes again. The eyewitnesses didn't say what you think. Most of the said that the noises "sounded like" explosions, not that they were explosions. Troofers like to exaggerate what those folks really said.

And if there were explosions, how do you explain the complete lack of such sounds in every amateur video made in the immediate area?

Here's one right underneath one of the collapses:

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/smreRx51cus" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Show me the explosions. There are many other videos just like this one too. Show me the explosions.

Furthermore explosive detonations that can tear through steel girders (as the troofers claim happened on 9-11) would create high-decibel shockwaves powerful enough to shatter every window for blocks around. Show me the shattered glass.

2) So entire buildings can collapse from debris and fire, gotcha! /sarcasm

We can build buildings in a way that they can collapse in a way that it looks like a demo but can't stop them from collapsing from debris and a fire??

Argument from personal incredulity. In fact there are many examples of buildings collapsing due to fires.

I'm not 100% sure what happened 11 years ago but the whole thing seems pretty fishy to me and i am by no means a conspiracy theorist.

That's because you have not seriously examined the evidence.

[Missouribronc]

I didn't "accuse" you of anything - I asked you if you believed the official account was unassailable.

And what "deflection" are you talking about?

I said it was a question of evidence vs. a question of whether the account was unassailable or not. This holds true for both sides.

Not my fault if you have comprehension problems.

In any event, it's obvious that your emotional resistance to looking at evidence that contradicts the official account is the driving force behind your position.

You constant, vicious personal attacks and smears on Gaffney make that abundantly clear.

Your defense of these lunatic theories is sad, and disturbing.

Maybe I should reflect this on the Democratic party you defend to the death?

[broncocalijohn]

Your defense of these lunatic theories is sad, and disturbing.

Maybe I should reflect this on the Democratic party you defend to the death?

You cant pen this on the dems. This is for those that believe US needs an excuse for what happened.. Either they want to believe we can never be dupped from another country or terrorist group or they want to blame an innocent group ie. JEEEEEEEEWS!

[The Lone Bolt]

Hey Maher, any idea how long it takes to rig a building for demolition?

A simple structure like a chimney can be prepared for demolition in less than a day. Larger or more complex structures can take up to six months of preparation to remove internal walls and wrap columns with fabric and fencing before firing the explosives.

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

Explosives can't be just thrown in anywhere. They have to be strategically placed. Walls have to be torn out. Girders have to be cut. Miles of det wire have to be laid out.

The WTC Towers were two of the largest buildings in the world. How long would it take to rig them for detonation? How is it that nobody noticed?

Of course this is where the troofer argument really falls apart and they have to invent exotic weapons such as spray-on nanothermite, mini-nukes, and even space rays to explain away this problem. LA Bronco Fan is apparently gullible enough to believe such nonsense. Are you?

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Your defense of these lunatic theories is sad, and disturbing.



Not as pathetic as this retarded, ad hominem drivel you're trying to pass off as a "rebuttal."

[mhgaffney]

Hey Gaffney, what's Venus?

Notice how -- when Dolt gets aced -- he opts into fantasy.

Here are the experts -- explaining how planes and fires could not cause the towers to collapse in demolition fashion into their own footprints.

If it waddles like a duck, quacks like a duck, and looks like a duck -- it's a duck.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YW6mJOqRDI4&feature=player_embedded

[mhgaffney]

New 9/11 truth documentary among 'most watched' on PBS this week

http://digitaljournal.com/article/332051

"9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out" is getting public attention and casting doubt on the scientific validity of the U.S. government's investigation into the WTC tragedy.

PBS is the first major network to air the program.

Just days away from the 11th anniversary of the World Trade Center tragedy and months away from the U.S. presidential election, a game-changing 9/11 documentary is ranking number three among "most watched" documentaries on PBS and number one among "most shared." Available for free online August 18th - September 4th, the documentary could have a significant effect on public opinion. [Update: PBS has extended viewing indefinitely.] Both the Republicans and Democrats, as equally staunch defenders of the official story, stand to be affected if the public's suspicion of government corruption grows deeper.

An earlier report on Digital Journal
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/326622
found that the claims made in the documentary can be verified by reading the government reports themselves. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the government agency charged with the investigation, did not provide any data -- no measurements or estimates -- of the mass or energy that would be required to bring down the buildings in about ten seconds. Normally a scientific report would present all the data that is used to construct a theory. The omission of data is a red flag to anyone familiar with scientific procedure. It appears that the investigators may have intentionally produced reports that the scientific community would reject.

According to the experts appearing in Explosive Evidence, the scientific community did reject the reports immediately, but it has taken a very long time for this message to reach the public. Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, the producers of the documentary, have been trying to educate the public for a number of years. The PBS broadcast of their work represents a major step forward for them.

While most people have probably heard that a scientific investigation has been conducted and that the building collapses were explained, few have probably looked at the NIST reports themselves. Links to the NIST reports can be found in the above mentioned Digital Journal article. NIST provides no data whatsoever on the actual collapse sequence itself.

The new attention to the issue could be significant for the U.S. presidential election. Prior to the publication of the reports in 2005 and 2008, almost half the population was suspicious of the official story of 9/11, according to several opinion polls. Since then the 9/11 tragedy has been used to direct the policies that have led to the enormous increases in military spending and to a loss of civil liberties in the U.S. and worldwide


Read more: http://digitaljournal.com/article/332051#ixzz26GtAdHag

[mhgaffney]

I posted my analysis of the NIST report back in December 2006. Spot on.

[houghtam]

God, some of this has got to be the stupidest **** I've ever heard.

People heard explosions? Ha!

I know exactly what an explosion sounds like. The other night, we weren't expecting a storm, I heard a big boom that sounded like an explosion...turns out it was thunder.

I know exactly what gunfire sounds like. Earlier this summer, in June, several weeks before the 4th of July, I heard a string of fireworks go off down the street from my brother's house, which is not in a good neighborhood. Thought it was gunfire for a second.

I know exactly what a cricket sounds like. I have a friend who can chirp so dead on that you'd think there's a cricket in the room. Was great fun in middle school!

This is the real world, folks. Things sound like things. Things look like things. Stop perpetuating the myth. Move. The ****. On.

[W*GS]

Not this **** again.

[The Lone Bolt]

So Gaff, it's now 9/12. How did the truther film festival go? How many people showed up?

[maher_tyler]

???

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/c2cViy34b1A" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[The Lone Bolt]

???

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/c2cViy34b1A" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

So if these were explosive charges going off, where are the detonations in all of the amateur videos? ???

Are you suggesting that a few cherry-picked statements override the audio and visual evidence? ???

Where's the shattered glass? ???

And how were the towers rigged to explode? ???

[The Lone Bolt]

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ZR24kKaToio" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Show me the explosions Maher. ???

[houghtam]

So if these were explosive charges going off, where are the detonations in all of the amateur videos? ???

Are you suggesting that a few cherry-picked statements override the audio and visual evidence? ???

Where's the shattered glass? ???

And how were the towers rigged to explode? ???

Let's also ask an average lawyer how reliable eyewitness accounts are even 30 seconds after an event happening.

Tripe.

[maher_tyler]

So if these were explosive charges going off, where are the detonations in all of the amateur videos? ???

Are you suggesting that a few cherry-picked statements override the audio and visual evidence? ???

Where's the shattered glass? ???

And how were the towers rigged to explode? ???

I wasn't there...just making an opinion off of people who were there like those Firefighters, who imo are very credible people. The explosions those firefighters heard happened after the first plane hit and before it collapsed. What exactly did they hear?? We will most likely never know what ALL happened on that day. I have an open mind when it comes to this topic. I can't completely ignore what people who were actually there saw/heard and chalk it up to them being in shock etc. Just because a shocking event takes place, doesn't mean they didn't see or hear what they said they did.

[DenverBrit]

So if these were explosive charges going off, where are the detonations in all of the amateur videos? ???

Are you suggesting that a few cherry-picked statements override the audio and visual evidence? ???

Where's the shattered glass? ???

And how were the towers rigged to explode? ???

And why?

[houghtam]

Just because a shocking event takes place, doesn't mean they didn't think they saw or heard what they said they did.

I fixed your post.

Statistically speaking, eyewitnesses are notoriously unreliable, and the fact that a firefighter said it only means it came from someone who has a respectable profession, not from a necessarily credible person.

Eyewitness testimony can play a big part in criminal court cases. Whether or not a person is convicted of a crime can come down to the reliability of an eyewitness and how confidently he or she conveys testimony to a jury. The problem is these eyewitness accounts aren't always accurate. The Innocence Project is a nonprofit team of attorneys and law students that re-examines questionable murder convictions with the hope of using DNA evidence to overturn the sentences of defendents who've been wrongfully imprisoned. In the first 130 cases the Innocence Project overturned, eyewitness testimony played a part in 78 percent of those wrongful convictions [source: Stambor].

http://people.howstuffworks.com/eyewitnesses-unreliable.htm

Here's a very good article on the why's...

Studies have shown that mistaken eyewitness testimony accounts for about half of all wrongful convictions. Researchers at Ohio State University examined hundreds of wrongful convictions and determined that roughly 52 percent of the errors resulted from eyewitness mistakes. Legal scholar Edwin Borchard studied 65 cases of "erroneous criminal convictions of innocent people." Mistaken eyewitness identification was responsible for approximately 45 percent of Borchard's case studies.

http://www.crf-usa.org/bill-of-rights-in-action/bria-13-3-c-how-reliable-are-eyewitnesses

[maher_tyler]

I fixed your post.

Statistically speaking, eyewitnesses are notoriously unreliable, and the fact that a firefighter said it only means it came from someone who has a respectable profession, not from a necessarily credible person.



http://people.howstuffworks.com/eyewitnesses-unreliable.htm

Here's a very good article on the why's...



http://www.crf-usa.org/bill-of-rights-in-action/bria-13-3-c-how-reliable-are-eyewitnesses

Thats true when there is one or two witnesses. A simple youtube search will show there were a number of people who heard explosions. Not just the planes hitting the buildings.

Basically all i wanna know is 1) what did they hear 2) how can a fire and some debris take down a building made of Iron/steel?

[houghtam]

Thats true when there is one or two witnesses. A simple youtube search will show there were a number of people who heard explosions. Not just the planes hitting the buildings.

Basically all i wanna know is 1) what did they hear 2) how can a fire and some debris take down a building made of Iron/steel?

No, it's true of all witnesses. Groups are not only not immune to poor reliability when it comes to eyewitness accounts, they are arguably a bigger factor.

Ever heard of mass hysteria? Thousands of people thinking they see god crying out of a cloud?

It was rain, guys.

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

[mhgaffney]

So Gaff, it's now 9/12. How did the truther film festival go? How many people showed up?

It went well. A large crowd. I will post stuff as I receive it.

[mhgaffney]

Let's also ask an average lawyer how reliable eyewitness accounts are even 30 seconds after an event happening.

Tripe.

Yeah -- but not true in the case of 9/11.

It so happens the NY fire department recorded testimonies of firemen soon after the event. 119 firefighters reported seeing, hearing and feeling explosions.

The 9/11 Commission had these testimonies -- but ignored them in its final report.

The fix was in. The commission only reported evidence that (it could claim) supported the story it wanted to tell.

MHG

[mhgaffney]

The WTC core columns were seven inches thick -- at the base. No way fire severed those columns.

[broncocalijohn]

I wasn't there...just making an opinion off of people who were there like those Firefighters, who imo are very credible people. The explosions those firefighters heard happened after the first plane hit and before it collapsed. What exactly did they hear?? We will most likely never know what ALL happened on that day. I have an open mind when it comes to this topic. I can't completely ignore what people who were actually there saw/heard and chalk it up to them being in shock etc. Just because a shocking event takes place, doesn't mean they didn't see or hear what they said they did.

It is the same thing that the reporter heard at the Pentagon when he was describing what happened to the Today Show on 9/11? Did they ever have an experience of knowing what a plane sounds at hundreds of miles per hour and then suddenly hit steel and concrete?

[houghtam]

It is the same thing that the reporter heard at the Pentagon when he was describing what happened to the Today Show on 9/11? Did they ever have an experience of knowing what a plane sounds at hundreds of miles per hour and then suddenly hit steel and concrete?

Or the sound of a floor collapsing on another floor from ten floors below. Or a steel beam snapping in half. Or, or, or...

Hey, did you guys know if you fold a $20 bill a certain way...it looks like the WTC towers?

[Meck77]

I was curious if anyone has ever seen footage of the plane actually flying over, near, or into the pentagon? I looked for a few years after the event but never found it. The only footage they ever released was a poor quality security camera at the pentagon showing it whiz by.

[maher_tyler]

It is the same thing that the reporter heard at the Pentagon when he was describing what happened to the Today Show on 9/11? Did they ever have an experience of knowing what a plane sounds at hundreds of miles per hour and then suddenly hit steel and concrete?

Watch the first few minutes of that video I posted on page 4. Sounds like an explosion to me and I'm not in some mass hysteria. I don't agree with these findings at all. Still doesn't explain why building 7 collapsed. Fire and debris don't cause buildings that big to collapse. It takes iron/steel 2000+ degrees to melt. Even with an accelerant such as jet fuel doesn't cause a fire to get that hot. It doesn't add up.

[The Lone Bolt]

Watch the first few minutes of that video I posted on page 4. Sounds like an explosion to me and I'm not in some mass hysteria.

Watch this video, especially after 2:13

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/tacYjsS-g6k" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Note that in a controlled demolition there is a series of loud booms. Do you hear that in any of the videos of the WTC tower collapses? No? Then what you were hearing was clearly not charges from a contolled demolition.

I don't agree with these findings at all. Still doesn't explain why building 7 collapsed. Fire and debris don't cause buildings that big to collapse.

Yes they do.

The McCormick Center in Chicago and the Sight and Sound Theater in Pennsylvania are examples of steel structures collapsing. The theater was fire protected using drywall and spray on material. A high rise in Philly didn't collapse after a long fire but firefighters evacuated the building when a pancake structural collapse was considered likely. Other steel-framed buildings partially collapsed due fires one after only 20 minutes.

The steel framed McCormick Center was at the time the World's largest exhibition center. It like the WTC used long steel trusses to create a large open space without columns. Those trusses were unprotected but of course much of the WTC lost it's fire protection due to the impacts.

"As an example of the damaging effect of fire on steel, in 1967, the original heavy steel-constructed McCormick Place exhibition hall in Chicago collapsed only 30 minutes after the start of a small electrical fire."

http://www.wconline.com/CDA/Archive/
24ae78779d768010VgnVCM100000f932a8c0____

-------------------------

On the morning of January 28, 1997, in the Lancaster County, Pennsylvania township of Strasburg, a fire caused the collapse of the state-of-the-art, seven year old Sight and Sound Theater and resulted in structural damage to most of the connecting buildings.
The theater was a total loss, valued at over $15 million.

---------------------------

In February 1991, a fire broke out in One Meridian Plaza - a 38 story office building in Philadelphia. The building was built during the same period as the WTC and had spray-on fire protection on its steel frame. Despite not suffering impact damage, authorities were worried it might collapse.

"All interior firefighting efforts were halted after almost 11 hours of uninterrupted fire in the building. Consultation with a structural engineer and structural damage observed by units operating in the building led to the belief that there was a
possibility of a pancake structural collapse of the fire damaged
floors."

http://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/txt/publications/tr-049.txt

About 2 years later, the NYFD was concerned that a steel framed building that partially collapsed during after a gas explosion might collapse entirely due to the resulting fire.

http://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/publications/TR-068.pdf


Part of a floor of an unprotected steel frame building collapsed in Brackenridge, Pennsylvania on, December 20, 1991, Killing 4 volunteer firemen
http://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/publications/TR-061.pdf


Part of the roof of a steel framed school in Virginia collapsed about 20 minutes after fire broke out


http://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/publications/tr-135.pdf

http://debunking911.com/firsttime.htm

It takes iron/steel 2000+ degrees to melt.

Iron/steel does not have to melt to cause a collapse. It only has to weaken enough to compromise the building's structural integrity. That occurs at much lower temperatures.

Even with an accelerant such as jet fuel doesn't cause a fire to get that hot.

The jet fuel was not the only thing burning in the WTC towers. The floors were filled with tons of flammible material which when ignited kept the fires raging for hours.

It doesn't add up.

It does when you seriously examine the evidence and not base your opinions on personal incredulity.

[houghtam]

It just doesn't make sense, though, Bolt. Why would anyone attack us after years and years of meddling in affairs that aren't our business, and after months and months of warning us they were going to attack us?

It had to be staged. There's no way anyone would follow through on a threat against the greatest country the world has ever known.*



*This statement has not been reviewed by the rest of the world.

[maher_tyler]

Watch this video, especially after 2:13

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/tacYjsS-g6k" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Note that in a controlled demolition there is a series of loud booms. Do you hear that in any of the videos of the WTC tower collapses? No? Then what you were hearing was clearly not charges from a contolled demolition.



Yes they do.



http://debunking911.com/firsttime.htm



Iron/steel does not have to melt to cause a collapse. It only has to weaken enough to compromise the building's structural integrity. That occurs at much lower temperatures.



The jet fuel was not the only thing burning in the WTC towers. The floors were filled with tons of flammible material which when ignited kept the fires raging for hours.



It does when you seriously examine the evidence and not base your opinions on personal incredulity.

If what you say is true then why didn't it topple over? Wouldn't it have toppled in the direction in which the plane hit? Kinda like how a tree falls in the direction from where you were hitting it?? That didn't happen..the entire building fell in unison. You are also assuming that those fires stayed in the same spot the entire time. For the way the building fell, all the collums/beams etc would have had to fail at exactly the same time.

[The Lone Bolt]

If what you say is true then why didn't it topple over? Wouldn't it have toppled in the direction in which the plane hit? Kinda like how a tree falls in the direction from where you were hitting it?? That didn't happen..the entire building fell in unison. You are also assuming that those fires stayed in the same spot the entire time. For the way the building fell, all the collums/beams etc would have had to fail at exactly the same time.

I tell you what: you've aready posed a number of questions to me that in your mind "didn't add up", and I provided answers complete with evidence.

Quid pro quo. I have a few questions of my own about the truther controlled demo theory that don't add up. How about you answering some of my questions?

Let's just start with one: How were the twin towers rigged for demolition given that it normally takes months to make such preparations?

[GreasyQtip]

To the post above me. I am not taking sides here, but you are comparing a tree to a building and don't see a problem? One is a solid single entity with no hollow openings. The other is a grid of steel held together by bolts almost entirely empty space. I doubt they would fall the same, I'd love to see you implode a tree with explosives if you are going to make the connection.

If you just picture it for a second, a plane would make a big hole in a building which would make a big hollow area for a roof to collapse down. No way for this to happen to a tree. Please confirm you do not think a tree is a good comparison.

Can someone please please explain this Venus thing to me?
I am dieing to catch up on this one

[nyuk nyuk]

OH Jesus H. Christ on a popsickle stick. We have Truther moonbats...

http://i50.tinypic.com/35370c7.gif

[maher_tyler]

I tell you what: you've aready posed a number of questions to me that in your mind "didn't add up", and I provided answers complete with evidence.

Quid pro quo. I have a few questions of my own about the truther controlled demo theory that don't add up. How about you answering some of my questions?

Let's just start with one: How were the twin towers rigged for demolition given that it normally takes months to make such preparations?

You have your opinion and i have mine. I don't think either of us is going to change the others opinion in this matter. Would i be wrong in saying that the gov't lies to us?

[W*GS]

Can someone please please explain this Venus thing to me?
I am dieing to catch up on this one

I'm just trying to get gaffe to 'fess up that he thinks Venus is a comet that was ejected from Jupiter and made a bunch of passes around the inner solar system and caused the events described during the Hebrew exodus from Egypt, as noted in the OT.

No ****.

[mhgaffney]

I tell you what: you've aready posed a number of questions to me that in your mind "didn't add up", and I provided answers complete with evidence.

Quid pro quo. I have a few questions of my own about the truther controlled demo theory that don't add up. How about you answering some of my questions?

Let's just start with one: How were the twin towers rigged for demolition given that it normally takes months to make such preparations?

A large explosion was heard and reported by numerous witnesses before the collapse pf WTC-7

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=783mtK_0zhE

[mhgaffney]

That explosion was also documented in a seismic event -- - as per the video

[The Lone Bolt]

That explosion was also documented in a seismic event -- - as per the video

Yes-- and it wuz MINI-NUKES!!

http://www.presentationsunplugged.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/catintinfoilhat.jpg

[The Lone Bolt]

Say Gaffney, what's Venus?

[W*GS]

Say Gaffney, what's Venus?

If he ever gets the balls to answer, he can then tell us what mons veneris is.

Not that he would know.

[mhgaffney]

Yes-- and it wuz MINI-NUKES!!

http://www.presentationsunplugged.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/catintinfoilhat.jpg

The deeper the denial -- the more difficult to face reality.

Here's the full length definitive video about the WTC collapse. 1700 architects and engineers disagree that the planes/fires caused the collapses.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YW6mJOqRDI4&feature=player_embedded

A one-hour version of this video just ran on PBS in Colorado.

[mhgaffney]

Say Gaffney, what's Venus?

This begins to answer your questions about who was responsible for 9/11 -- and how the explosives were placed inside the towers.

One important detail this video does not mention: Marsh & McLennan had the second most put options just before 9/11 -- United Airlines had the most.

The offices of M & M on the 95th floor of WTC - 1 was the precise point of impact of AA 11.

MHG

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LDdRVthqQU

[The Lone Bolt]

This begins to answer your questions about who was responsible for 9/11 -- and how the explosives were placed inside the towers.

One important detail this video does not mention: Marsh & McLennan had the second most put options just before 9/11 -- United Airlines had the most.

The offices of M & M on the 95th floor of WTC - 1 was the precise point of impact of AA 11.

MHG

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LDdRVthqQU

Um... yeah. Doesn't even begin to explain how the towers were rigged for demolition. The Komatsu patent is for an enhanced plasma torch, not an explosive device.

Then afterward the narrator flat lies by saying that thermite residue was found at the WTC site. No it wasn't. Stephen Jones is the only one who has "confirmed" that, and he has refused to submit his alleged "thermite" samples for independent analysis by reputable laboratories.

And you've already been told this but you keep repeating the same nonsense.

The rest of the video appears to be the narrator making a long list of alleged "connections" between the Bush family, security companies, the Bilderbergs, etc. which, even if true, prove absolutely nothing. Endless inuendo about all these "connections" and no evidence of anything. It got so boring that I just skipped through most of it. Wake me when he proves something.

Honestly it's just the same old BS from you Gaffney. You breathlessly announce that you have "explosive" evidence and then when I actually bother to watch it it turns out to be complete garbage. I only looked this morning because I had some time on my hands. But I knew what to expect and I was right.

[The Lone Bolt]

OK I took a closer look at the Komatsu patent:

A plasma arc can be employed to demolish a concrete structure at a high efficiency, while preventing a secondary problem due to noise, flying dust and chips, and the like. The concrete structure can be demolished by melting a surface of the concrete structure by generating a plasma arc from a plasma torch (15) of a plasma arc generator, mixing thermite powder (T) with a supply gas (Gc) for the plasma torch (15), directing the plasma arc at the surface of the concrete structure, and controlling the rate of supply of the thermite powder (T) to the plasma torch (15) in response to the operation of the plasma arc, including initiating and stopping the supply of the thermite powder (T) to the plasma torch (15) in a manner coordinated with the initiation and stoppage of the plasma arc, thereby controlling the heat generated by the thermite reaction, and melting the surface of the concrete structure. The plasma generator (1) can be provided with a feeder (20) for mixing the thermite powder (T) with the supply gas (Gc), and controller (30) for controlling the rate of supply of the thermite powder (T) or for stopping the supply of the thermite powder (T).

Once again, this is not an explosive device. It is an enhanced plasma torch.

Are you suggesting that these torches were planted all over the WTC towers and set off all at once? This still leaves the problem of how the conspirators managed to tear out walls and place the devices at steel girders all over the structures without anybody noticing. And then they needed to be set off simultaneously.

And then why weren't hundreds (or thousands) of plasma torches found in the WTC wreckage?

This explanation is even more problematic than simple explosives.

[bpc]

Gaff: "THE WESTERN FRONT HAS CAUSED THE RUIN OF THE WORLD!"

[DenverBrit]

The deeper the denial -- the more difficult to face reality.

Here's the full length definitive video about the WTC collapse. 1700 architects and engineers disagree that the planes/fires caused the collapses.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YW6mJOqRDI4&feature=player_embedded

A one-hour version of this video just ran on PBS in Colorado.


<iframe width="480" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/DFVoencqfZw?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I can't believe you're still referring to the great fraud and fellow leach, Richard Gage. He has been debunked over and over....merely by using his resume. The last time I looked at his 'current projects' he was renovating a school gym in CA. Hilarious!

That hack is nothing more than a minor strip mall architect, who by his own admission, isn't qualified to discuss high rises, structural engineering or demolitions. What he does do....just like you other leaches, is sell t shirts and bumper stickers.....and reportedly takes a $70,000 annual fee from his little organization.

You clowns are not only con men and leaches, you're downright arrogant in your assumption that no one notices.

Want to know the truth about Gage? here: https://sites.google.com/site/911guide/ae911truth Take a look at his resume....in particular, his work experience. ;D

[The Lone Bolt]

Usually after your nonsense is debunked you resort to screaming at us and calling us names over the internet. We can expect that next right Gaff?

[mhgaffney]

Usually after your nonsense is debunked you resort to screaming at us and calling us names over the internet. We can expect that next right Gaff?

The only ones around here screaming are the fools who still labor in denial.

I must (again) correct you. The evidence that the WTC was brought down by explosives has not repeat not been refuted.

Here is a good summary of the evidence:

Nano Thermite Found in WTC Dust

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GM3DkC1skY0

[DenverBrit]

The only ones around here screaming are the fools who still labor in denial.

I must (again) correct you. The evidence that the WTC was brought down by explosives has not repeat not been refuted.

Here is a good summary of the evidence:

Nano Thermite Found in WTC Dust

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GM3DkC1skY0

Yes it has, repeatedly, but you're in denial.

[barryr]

The real reason the liberals around here don't believe 9/11 was staged is because that would mean the government was involved and the "government is the only answer to all ills" group can't not get themselves to believe the government would so something like that. Not to mention even they couldn't state "only republicans did it while democrats knew nothing" with a straight face.

[W*GS]

The real reason the liberals around here don't believe 9/11 was staged is because that would mean the government was involved and the "government is the only answer to all ills" group can't not get themselves to believe the government would so something like that. Not to mention even they couldn't state "only republicans did it while democrats knew nothing" with a straight face.

You've somehow managed to be even more brain-damaged than gaffe, and that's saying something.

[DenverBrit]

The real reason the liberals around here don't believe 9/11 was staged is because that would mean the government was involved and the "government is the only answer to all ills" group can't not get themselves to believe the government would so something like that. Not to mention even they couldn't state "only republicans did it while democrats knew nothing" with a straight face.

You're taking your 'stupid' to stratospheric levels.

You and Gaffney make a nice 'couple.' :loopy:

[The Lone Bolt]

Yes it has, repeatedly, but you're in denial.

QFT. Your "nanothermite" crappola has been thoroughly debunked. If not, when is Jones submitting his samples anonymously to a reputable lab for verification, hmm?

Answer: never. Because it's not nanothermite (or any other kind of thermite).

Jones is a con-artist and you Gaff are a gullible fool.

[mhgaffney]

QFT. Your "nanothermite" crappola has been thoroughly debunked. If not, when is Jones submitting his samples anonymously to a reputable lab for verification, hmm?

Answer: never. Because it's not nanothermite (or any other kind of thermite).

Jones is a con-artist and you Gaff are a gullible fool.

Total bs.

It's been debunked only in your mind. As Jones pointed out in the video -- the scientific papers on this have never been rebutted.

BTW, other evidence supports the presence of nano thermite i the WTC dust. EVERY sample of dust examined thus far -- including the work done by the geological survey -- showed the presence of iron micro spheres. About 5-6 % of the dust by weight was composed of tiny iron spherules. This is hard proof that the steel melted.

As we know -- neither building fires nor jet fuel fires can melt steel. Yet something melted it.

MHG

[barryr]

You're taking your 'stupid' to stratospheric levels.

You and Gaffney make a nice 'couple.' :loopy:

Says the bozo who wants people to guess what you're thinking LOL Yeah, I remember that about you. Dope :welcome:

[DenverBrit]

Says the bozo who wants people to guess what you're thinking LOL Yeah, I remember that about you. Dope :welcome:


No you don't, but nice try at another deflection. How does it feel to be in bed with Liberals......you're a Troofer no less! Ha!

What you think (and I use that term loosely) you remember, was that I bet you couldn't prove how I voted after you claimed you knew.

But you were too much of a p***Y to take the bet and spent the rest of the thread back-peddling and deflecting.

Thanks for the reminder. http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showpost.php?p=2952797&postcount=234

[W*GS]

Haven't we all had enough of gaffe's bull****?

[barryr]

No you don't, but nice try at another deflection. How does it feel to be in bed with Liberals......you're a Troofer no less! Ha!

What you think (and I use that term loosely) you remember, was that I bet you couldn't prove how I voted after you claimed you knew.

But you were too much of a p***Y to take the bet and spent the rest of the thread back-peddling and deflecting.

Thanks for the reminder. http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showpost.php?p=2952797&postcount=234

Yeah, take a bet trying to guess what you are thinking. It is always a sound betting practice to bet on something that couldn't be proven honestly and no, liberals are the biggest liars around, so no, couldn't trust you in the least. You are so stupid and can't even see it. Keep worrying about needing to respond to all my posts, joker LOL

[DenverBrit]

Yeah, take a bet trying to guess what you are thinking. It is always a sound betting practice to bet on something that couldn't be proven honestly and no, liberals are the biggest liars around, so no, couldn't trust you in the least. You are so stupid and can't even see it. Keep worrying about needing to respond to all my posts, joker LOL

Now I know you're a dim bulb, but the bet was about YOU claiming you knew exactly how I voted. Not what I think.

You're a liar, even when presented with your own posts. Grow up and grow a pair.

[DenverBrit]

Yeah, take a bet trying to guess what you are thinking. It is always a sound betting practice to bet on something that couldn't be proven honestly and no, liberals are the biggest liars around, so no, couldn't trust you in the least. You are so stupid and can't even see it. Keep worrying about needing to respond to all my posts, joker LOL

I would have had no problem at all proving how I voted. You, on the other hand, couldn't.

You were lying though your teeth and ran like a little girl when challenged. :curtsey:

[mhgaffney]

MHGaffney on the Power Hour:

On the morning of September 11. 2012, mhgaffney was a guest on the Power Hour, with radio host Joyce Riley.

first hour: fast forward to 11:26 for start of interview
http://archives2012.gcnlive.com/Archives2012/sep12/PowerHour/0911122.mp3

second hour:
http://archives2012.gcnlive.com/Archives2012/sep12/PowerHour/0911123.mp3

[mhgaffney]

9/11 official story doubts becoming more mainstream

SEPTEMBER 23, 2012BY: GREGORY PATIN

http://www.examiner.com/article/9-11-official-story-doubts-becoming-more-mainstream

More and more people from all walks of life and all professions seem to be questioning the “official” narrative of what happened on 9/11. Those who are questioning the events of 9/11 may be moving under the radar of the corporate media from being labeled “conspiracy theorists” to legitimate investigators with legitimate questions and concerns.

A good example is Jesse Ventura’s recent appearance on CNN’s Piers Morgan. Ventura, an ex-navy SEAL and former governor of Minnesota who hosts a program on TruTV called “Conspiracy Theory,” appeared on Morgan’s show last week. After discussing 9/11, Morgan tried to dismiss Ventura and said he has “crackpot” ideas. Ventura then asked the audience, “How many people think I make crackpot points?” Only one audience member acknowledged. He then asked, “How many people think I make sensible points?” Almost the entire audience applauded him. See video here. That segment can be found at 32:10.


Video: 9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out
Another good example is Colorado PBS’s airing of a documentary film that was created by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 truth. It is the first time a major news network has aired anything like it. The documentary, entitled “9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out,” features dozens of architects and engineers who unequivocally state that the twin towers, and WTC 7 which was not hit by a plane, were brought down by controlled demolition. (You can watch the full-length film in the video to the left for a limited time before it is only available for purchase on DVD).

If the official story that fires brought the buildings down is to be believed, then 9/11 was an architectural and engineering disaster that should have led to an urgent and exhaustive inquiry, along with suggestions for improvements and upgrades for other buildings of the same construction.

The film has a section near the end in which psychologists explain why the media and many of the public are so reluctant to question the official story. The reasons come down to trauma, belief in authority and cognitive dissonance. People simply do not want to believe anything that contradicts their “world view” and their faith in the authorities that provide their security. Confronted with contradictory evidence, people resort to denial as a defense mechanism.

According to Victoria Alexander, writing for Digital Journal, three days before the 11th anniversary of the World Trade Center tragedy, the documentary ranked number three among "most watched" documentaries on PBS and number one among "most shared." “With the presidential election only weeks away, both the Republicans and Democrats, as equally staunch defenders of the official story, stand to be affected if the public's suspicion of government corruption grows deeper.”

[W*GS]

Drumming up book sales, gaffe?

How much of your personal take have you given to the victim's families and the first responders?

You're right down there with the Nazis who made lampshades of human skin.

[houghtam]

Drumming up book sales, gaffe?

How much of your personal take have you given to the victim's families and the first responders?

You're right down there with the Nazis who made lampshades of human skin.

Personal insults aside, amusing that they are, that is a valid question.

How much money have you made off of it, and how much have you donated?

Just curious.

[Marshall Dumervil]

Personal insults aside, amusing that they are, that is a valid question.

How much money have you made off of it, and how much have you donated?

Just curious.

Good luck getting an answer. I still haven't found out when ***ishima is going to kill us all. Last I knew it was on a "razors edge". ???

[mhgaffney]

Serious writers are not motivated by money. Making money is not why they write.

Mysterious Currency Transfers Before 9-11

Bill Bergman contacted me after he read one of my articles. I tell his story in my new book.

Bergman worked at the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago for 13 years -- before being fired while investigating suspicious money transfers that occurred in the weeks before 9/11.

The $half million that supposedly funded the terrorist attack (according to the 9/11 Commission Report) was puny compared with the $5 billion increase in the US money supply just before 9/11. Someone withdrew vast amounts of hundred dollar bills in the 2-month period prior to 9/11.

This was the largest spike in the US money supply since the Fed began record keeping in the 1940s. It remains unexplained.

http://www.911blogger.com/news/2012-07-16/mysterious-currency-transfers-9-11

[W*GS]

http://www.liquidass.com/images/dog_poo_close-up.JPG

[houghtam]

Serious writers are not motivated by money. Making money is not why they write.

I didn't ask what motivated you.

I asked if you've profited from the deaths of thousands of innocent civilians, and how much if any you have given to the families of the people you insinuate were killed by their own government.

It's a perfectly fair question to ask, but considering you are tapdancing around the subject now, and that others have alluded to the fact that this question has been asked before without an answer, I somehow doubt you're going to answer it.

[W*GS]

It's a perfectly fair question to ask, but considering you are tapdancing around the subject now, and that others have alluded to the fact that this question has been asked before without an answer, I somehow doubt you're going to answer it.

gaffe never answers questions.

He only pontificates.

[DenverBrit]

I didn't ask what motivated you.

I asked if you've profited from the deaths of thousands of innocent civilians, and how much if any you have given to the families of the people you insinuate were killed by their own government.

It's a perfectly fair question to ask, but considering you are tapdancing around the subject now, and that others have alluded to the fact that this question has been asked before without an answer, I somehow doubt you're going to answer it.

The answer is: Gaffney keeps it all.

He has no interest in the families of those who died in 911.......except how to make a buck from their pain.

[mhgaffney]

I didn't ask what motivated you.

I asked if you've profited from the deaths of thousands of innocent civilians, and how much if any you have given to the families of the people you insinuate were killed by their own government.

It's a perfectly fair question to ask, but considering you are tapdancing around the subject now, and that others have alluded to the fact that this question has been asked before without an answer, I somehow doubt you're going to answer it.

No of course not.

These days, muckraking writers are an endangered species in the US of A. No one reads books any more. You clowns lurch from one sound byte to the next.

[mhgaffney]

The best way to honor the 9/11 dead is to hold the guilty accountable. That was not done. Indeed, the crime of 9/11 remains unsolved.

The guilty walk the streets of Amerikkka.

In case you didn't know it -- there is no stature of limitations for murder.

[Rohirrim]

No of course not.

These days, muckraking writers are an endangered species in the US of A. No one reads books any more. You clowns lurch from one sound byte to the next.

I read about a book a week. This week I'm reading Pressfield's The Afghan Campaign.

Making **** up does not inform. It confuses.

[mhgaffney]

I read about a book a week. This week I'm reading Pressfield's The Afghan Campaign.

Making **** up does not inform. It confuses.

Yeah -- I agree.

I just finished Ali Soufan's Black Banners. Much of the book was blacked out by the CIA.

They still have plenty to hide.

Sunday morning, I do an interview on Swedish radio.

[W*GS]

gaffe, what's Venus?

When was America at its best - name the period and justify your response.

Quit being such a coward and a pussy.

[mhgaffney]

Check out this interview of econometrics professor Paul Zarembka by German financial analyst Lars Schall.

The topic: insider trading pre-9/11.

Zarembka says that economists are "scared" of the issue. Anyone who has done any research knows why.
MHG

'Economists are scared'

By Lars Schall

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/ND27Dj02.html

[W*GS]

Gaffe is scared

gaffe, what's Venus?

When was America at its best - name the period and justify your response.

Quit being such a coward and a pyussy.

[mhgaffney]

Primer on World Trade Center demolition on 9/11

Hard evidence supports the use of explosives to bring down WTC 1, 2 and & 7 on 9/11.

As I have noted, in 2007 studies by independent scientists found residues of nanothermite -- as well as tiny fakes of un exploded nanothermite -- in WTC dust samples.

And there is also other hard evidence supporting demolition. Every study of WTC dust has turned up a high volume (5-6% of the dust by weight) of iron in the form of tiny spherules. The iron spherules prove that large amounts of WTC steel was melted on 9/11.

This page provides links to the USGS study and also one contracted by Deutschbank.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/residues.html

To understand how the spherules were formed -- watch this short 28 second video of burning thermite. Notice the shower of sparks -- each one of which is a tiny droplet of molten iron.

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

When the droplets cool they form tiny spheres -- as below. The presence of large amounts of iron spherules in the WTC dust is irrefutable evidence that the steel was melted. Only explosives could have done this.

Nanothermite differs from thermite in that the particle size of its ingredients of very very small -- which makes the reaction progress much faster - in an explosion.

MHG

[W*GS]

NTSA.

[Obushma]

http://www.liquidass.com/images/dog_poo_close-up.JPG

Aren't you the same guy who was here sucking Bush's dick six years ago? In fact, you and lone bolt were both here to swallow all of Bush's baby yogurt, now you both carry Obama's water, how cute

[W*GS]

Aren't you the same guy who was here sucking Bush's dick six years ago? In fact, you and lone bolt were both here to swallow all of Bush's baby yogurt, now you both carry Obama's water, how cute

My opinions change in light of facts. What do your opinions do?

[Obushma]

My opinions change in light of facts. What do your opinions do?

Its just funny to watch you carry the water for the Oligarchs. My opinion has stayed the same, R or D doesnt matter, two heads to the same coin, neither give a **** about the American people. Dumb ****s like you help to continue this trend.

[W*GS]

Its just funny to watch you carry the water for the Oligarchs. My opinion has stayed the same, R or D doesnt matter, two heads to the same coin, neither give a **** about the American people. Dumb ****s like you help to continue this trend.

You're just a chicken****. It's easiest to sit on the sidelines and be a pussy.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Your defense of these lunatic theories is sad, and disturbing.

You live in a stunningly ignorant, uninformed bubble...

In 2006 The Washington Post reported (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/01/AR2006080101300.html?sub=new) that even members of 9/11 commission suspected deception on the part of authorities. "We to this day don't know why NORAD [the North American Aerospace Defense Command] told us what they told us," said Thomas H. Kean, the former New Jersey Republican governor who led the commission. "It was just so far from the truth....It's one of those loose ends that never got tied."

[The Lone Bolt]

(sigh) ::)

There's a long list of potential sources for those iron spherules, including the blow torches that were used by clean-up crews to cut through girders in the wreckage. Hell, even printer ink contains iron spherules. This has been explained to you many times before but you continue to ignore it.

And Jones did not find nanothermite or any other kind. This has been proven to you as well but you continue to ignore it.

You just keep repeating the same debunked nonsense over and over again and pretend that it's relevant.

[mhgaffney]

(sigh) ::)

There's a long list of potential sources for those iron spherules, including the blow torches that were used by clean-up crews to cut through girders in the wreckage. Hell, even printer ink contains iron spherules. This has been explained to you many times before but you continue to ignore it.

And Jones did not find nanothermite or any other kind. This has been proven to you as well but you continue to ignore it.

You just keep repeating the same debunked nonsense over and over again and pretend that it's relevant.

More BS -- as usual.

The dust samples were collected BEFORE the clean up crews began torching. Even if printer ink were plausible -- it isn't - the amount of ink necessary to account for 5-6% of the WTC dust makes this attempt at an explanation absurd on its face.

Nor can Dolt cite a published scientific paper refuting the nanothermite evidence. He can't because no such paper has been forthcoming, to date. The scientific papers by Jones et al stand unanswered.

But let us be clear: They stand unanswered because no one in the scientific community dares to stick his neck out on this issue. Why not? Because the case for explosives is now airtight.

A similar situation exists with regard to insider trading. Serious economists won't touch it -- even tho its a sexy issue - because they fear their careers will suffer. Or worse.

MHG

[W*GS]

gaffe, you're effing hilarious.

You knew that the thermite angle, nano- or no, was a dead end, so you came up with the pure fusion red-mercury-powered mini-nukes BS, to solve the fatal problems with the thermite theory.

Now you've decided that the PFRMPMNs were even wronger, so you're back to thermite. But the fatal problems with thermite than you hoped would be solved by the PRFMPMNs are still there.

You're one funny ****head. You contradict yourself and don't even remember.

[The Lone Bolt]

More BS -- as usual.

The dust samples were collected BEFORE the clean up crews began torching. Even if printer ink were plausible -- it isn't - the amount of ink necessary to account for 5-6% of the WTC dust makes this attempt at an explanation absurd on its face.

Nor can Dolt cite a published scientific paper refuting the nanothermite evidence. He can't because no such paper has been forthcoming, to date. The scientific papers by Jones et al stand unanswered.

Here ya go: http://11-settembre.blogspot.com/2009/04/active-thermitic-material-claimed-in.html

Now you can stop saying that Jones' so called "scientific" papers have never been refuted.

Oh wait. Of course you won't stop saying that. You'll just ignore this debunking and others and pretend they don't exist.

But since you're so convinced that the case for explosives is all but proven, how about telling us how the WTC Towers were rigged with these alleged explosives?

Edit: Oh yes, looks like the author debunks your spherules too:

Spheroidal particles found in Ground Zero dust some time after the collapse and after work to demolish and clear the rubble had begun:

[mhgaffney]

Here ya go: http://11-settembre.blogspot.com/2009/04/active-thermitic-material-claimed-in.html

Now you can stop saying that Jones' so called "scientific" papers have never been refuted.

Oh wait. Of course you won't stop saying that. You'll just ignore this debunking and others and pretend they don't exist.

But since you're so convinced that the case for explosives is all but proven, how about telling us how the WTC Towers were rigged with these alleged explosives?

Edit: Oh yes, looks like the author debunks your spherules too:

Your debunker makes the oft-repeated charge that the red flakes in the dust were paint chips.

The problem here is that Jones et al ran tests as a part of their analysis to determine if the red material in the dust was paint. It wasn't.

The red and grey chips in the dust was a designer material -- very different from paint. It was created by a hugh-tech process.

As for the dust samples -- each sample has a chain of custody record indicating when and where it was collected. All the samples date to the first couple of days after the attack. Some samples were collected within hours of 9/11.

This rules out any chance the samples were contaminated with material from the clean up.

Dolt is really scraping the barrel. Next, he'll be claiming that printer ink severed the 7-inch thick core columns.

MHG

[The Lone Bolt]

Your debunker makes the oft-repeated charge that the red flakes in the dust were paint chips.

The problem here is that Jones et al ran tests as a part of their analysis to determine if the red material in the dust was paint. It wasn't.

The red and grey chips in the dust was a designer material -- very different from paint. It was created by a hugh-tech process.

As for the dust samples -- each sample has a chain of custody record indicating when and where it was collected. All the samples date to the first couple of days after the attack. Some samples were collected within hours of 9/11.

This rules out any chance the samples were contaminated with material from the clean up.

Dolt is really scraping the barrel. Next, he'll be claiming that printer ink severed the 7-inch thick core columns.

MHG


Setting aside all this BS for a moment (and it is BS), how about explaining to all of us how the WTC towers were rigged for demolition?

[houghtam]

Setting aside all this BS for a moment (and it is BS), how about explaining to all of us how the WTC towers were rigged for demolition?

I wonder if the people flying the planes knew all of this was done prior to getting in.

[mhgaffney]

I wonder if the people flying the planes knew all of this (i.e. rigging the WTC with explosives) was done prior to getting in.

Of course not. But you raise an interesting question: Just what did the hijackers think was supposed to happen.

The chances of a novice pilot hitting a building at high speed in a commercial airliner was approximately zero --

about the same chance of a novice golfer hitting a hole in one on the first attempt.

In my new book Black 9/11 I present two separate lines of evidence that the technology to remotely access and control commercial airliners already existed in 2001. The chances are high that it was used.

MHG

[Rohirrim]

Of course not. But you raise an interesting question: Just what did the hijackers think was supposed to happen.

The chances of a novice pilot hitting a building at high speed in a commercial airliner was approximately zero --

about the same chance of a novice golfer hitting a hole in one on the first attempt.

In my new book Black 9/11 I present two separate lines of evidence that the technology to remotely access and control commercial airliners already existed in 2001. The chances are high that it was used.

MHG


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5a/Looney_tunes_careta.png/220px-Looney_tunes_careta.png

[mhgaffney]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5a/Looney_tunes_careta.png/220px-Looney_tunes_careta.png

The joke's on you, dude.

Try doing some research before you post. I covered this in The 9/11 Mystery Plane (2008). Elias Davidsson gives a brief capsule below -- i.e., the case of Dan Govatos, flight instructor, whose Boeing 737 students (all professional pilots) tried but despite multiple attempts were unable to hit the WTC at high speed.

MHG


The difficulties of hitting a building at 500 mph

http://www.aldeilis.net/english/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3156:the-difficulties-of-hitting-a-building-at-500-mph&catid=265:hijackers-flying-skills&Itemid=333

by Elias Davidsson

John Lear, a retired commercial airline pilot with over 19,000+ total hours flown in over 100 different types of planes for 10 different airlines in 60 different countries around the world, doubted that even a professional pilot could fly into the World Trade Center at 500 miles an hour.1 He said in an interview with Rob Balsamo, himself a pilot:

[N]o Arab hijacker, ever in a million years, ever flew into the World Trade Center. And if you got 30 minutes I'll tell you exactly why he couldn't do it the first time. Now, I'd have trouble doing it the first time...Maybe if I had a couple tries to line up a few building, I could have done it. But certainly not the first time and certainly not at 500 or 600 miles an hour.2

Rob Balsamo then added:

Yeah, as a matter of fact, one of our members [Pilots for 9/11 Truth3], he was a 737 Check Airman. He was in the sim at the time on September 11 and right after it happened they tried to duplicate it in the simulator and they said they couldn't do it. They were trying to hit the Towers and they couldn't do it.4

Capt. Russ Wittenberg, a retired commercial pilot who flew for Pan Am and United Airlines for 35 years on most commercial aircraft said:

I don't believe it's possible for (…) a so-called terrorist to train on a [Cessna] 172, then jump in a cockpit of a 757-767 class cockpit, and vertical navigate the aircraft, lateral navigate the aircraft, and fly the airplane at speeds exceeding it's design limit speed by over 100 knots, make high-speed high-banked turns, exceeding – pulling probably 5, 6, 7 G's. And the aircraft would literally fall out of the sky. I couldn't do it and I'm absolutely positive they couldn't do it.5

Commander Ralph Kolstad, retired commercial airline captain with 27 years experience on most commercial aircraft said:

I was also a Navy fighter pilot and Air Combat Instructor, U.S. Navy Fighter Weapons School and have experience flying low altitude, high speed aircraft. I could not have done what these beginners [apparently] did. Something stinks to high heaven!6

Gaffney (p. 199-200) reports the remarkable story of a flight instructor named Dan Govatos, who was on 9/11 training a class on a Boeing 737 flight simulator. The next morning Govatos said, “Hey, guys, let’s try something. Let’s see if we can hit those buildings [the WTC]. Like we saw happen.” So they all took turns trying to crash the Boeing 737 into the WTC. They all had many years flight experience, but none of them could do it, not even after ten high-speed runs at the building. They only succeeded to hit the building when slowing down to near-landing speeds. During the radio interview Govatos explained why his pilots had failed to replicate the impacts at the WTC:

You’ve to understand, when you’re going 300 knots in a Boeing airliner and you move the controls like you would expect to do in a little airplane, you couldn’t stand the “G” forces. Everything has to be fingertip control. Even pilots who have logged thousands of hours of flight time have an extremely difficult time controlling a large airplane at those speeds.

[W*GS]

gaffe is off to loonyland, again.

The WTC was rigged to demolish, but no-one noticed a thing.

Now the planes were remotely-controlled, but the pilots that flew the planes, and the mechanics that serviced them, didn't notice a thing.

gaffe is dropping huge piles of bull**** and expects us to believe him. He puts Romney to shame in the BS department...

[The Lone Bolt]

gaffe is off to loonyland, again.

The WTC was rigged to demolish, but no-one noticed a thing.

Now the planes were remotely-controlled, but the pilots that flew the planes, and the mechanics that serviced them, didn't notice a thing.

gaffe is dropping huge piles of bull**** and expects us to believe him. He puts Romney to shame in the BS department...

Not to mention that there are millions of professional pilots all over the world and Gaffney is only able to dig up a handful who think that what the hijackers did was impossible.

[mhgaffney]

mhgaffney on Swedish Radio

We taped this interview last weekend

http://www.redicecreations.com/radio/2012/10/RIR-121004.php

[W*GS]

Vad är Venus?

När var Amerika som bäst, och försvara ditt val.