During the attacks on September 11th, 7 World Trade Center was destroyed. But it wasn’t struck by a plane. So what happened?
Also See: 9/11: Were Explosives Used? (iLLuMiNuTTi.com)
NEW YORK—Academy Award-winning director Oliver Stone said Monday that his new film World Trade Center unveils “compelling and controversial” new evidence that a single plane was responsible for all four collisions in New York, Washington, D.C., and Pennsylvania on Sept. 11, 2001.
“Get ready to go through the looking glass here, people,” Stone told reporters at a Manhattan press conference before an advance screening of the movie, which premieres Wednesday. “The film you are about to see is going to blow the lid off the 9/11 Commission’s official report and expose a conspiracy that reaches the highest levels of government.”
World Trade Center, which stars Nicolas Cage as a dedicated Port Authority officer who stumbles on secret evidence amid the rubble and carnage of the terrorist attack, tells a story quite different from what Stone called “the official government line” about the event. According to the film, at 8:46 a.m., a lone commercial airliner flew diagonally through the North Tower of the World Trade Center, maintained a circular holding pattern for approximately 17 minutes, then struck the South Tower before heading to the Pentagon.
After its collision with the center of American military operations, the so-called “magic plane”—which variously and ingeniously identified itself to air-traffic controllers as “American Airlines Flight 11,”
“United Airlines Flight 175,” “American Airlines Flight 77″ and “United Airlines Flight 93″—took to the skies once again, landing at a top-secret “black-ops” Air Force base in West Virginia, where it was reloaded with a group of clones from another shadowy government program that Stone described as “shocking.”
Stone, who said he did not have time to explore the clone angle in the three-and-a-half-hour film, plans to do so in the sequel, September 12.
In a gripping sequence, undercover agents transmit pre-recorded cell-phone messages intended to fool loved ones and relatives with a false cover story as the aircraft heads to its final, prearranged crash site in the fields of southwestern Pennsylvania.
Viewers of the advance screening agreed that the most striking and pivotal scene was Cage’s character’s discovery of . . .
MORE . . .
This is a seven (7) part series by Myles Power debunking the 9/11 conspiracy theory.
This is part 1 – Free fall and how the towers collapsed – in the YouTube playlist.
If you have the time, Myles is worth watching.
Myles Power confronts 9/11 truthers to see if their claims can stand up. In this video he discusses the World Trade Center’s Design to withstand airplane impacts, fuel or oxygen-starved fires, how the World Trade Center’s Collapse, the twin towers falling at free fall speed and the damage to the lobbies.
Basic maths fail
I said if you triple the speed, you get eight times the energy. That should be nine times!
By Dave Burton via Burton Systems Software – (burtonsys.com)
Some conspiracy theorists are puzzled about why the WTC towers fell at almost free-fall speed on Sept. 11, 2001. They suppose that the speed of collapse is evidence that something or someone must have destroyed the structural integrity of the undamaged lower part of each tower.
After all, they reason, “only the upper floors of the building were damaged, so why did the lower floors collapse, and why did they fall so fast?”
This web page answers those questions, simply enough for even a conspiracy theorist to comprehend (I hope). I do use some simple math and some very basic physics, but even if you don’t understand that part you should still be able to comprehend the basic reasons that the towers fell so fast.
What the conspiracy theorists apparently don’t understand is the difference between static and dynamic loading. (“Static” means “while at rest,” “dynamic” means “while moving.”)
If you don’t think it can make a difference, consider the effect of a stationary bullet resting on your chest, compared to the effect of a moving bullet striking your chest. The stationary bullet exerts a static load on your chest. A moving bullet exerts a dynamic load.
As a more pertinent example, consider a 110 story building with a roof 1,368 feet high (like the WTC Twin Towers). Each floor is 1368/110 = 12.44 feet high, or aproximately 3.8 meters.
Now, suppose that the structural steel on the 80th floor collapses. (Note: I’m using as an example 2 WTC, which was the building that collapsed first.)
The collapse of the 80th floor drops all the floors above (which, together, are equivalent to a 30 story building!) onto the 79th floor, from a height of aproximately 12 feet.
Of course, the structure of the lower 79 floors has been holding up the weight of the top 31 floors for many years. (That’s the static load.) So should you expect it to be able to hold that same weight, dropped on it from a height of 12 feet (the dynamic load)?
The answer is, absolutely not!
Ross and I are in a coffee shop, on a miserably uncomfortable bench that may have once been a church pew, surrounded by conspiracy theorists who are yelling at us.
“Do you want your employer to know you have cancer? Or AIDS? Or AIDS?!” yells Abel, the leader of the group, his forehead bulging. Ross has asked him about digital surveillance. His question barely relates to AIDS, but we’re getting used to this kind of thing. Ross says he wouldn’t want his employer to know if he had AIDS.
We’ve been going to these “9/11 Truther” meetings for a couple of months now. The Truther movement emerged shortly after the World Trade Center attacks in 2001. Truthers hold that the United States government planned and executed the attacks to create a false justification for the war in Iraq. Here in Los Angeles, there are two prominent Truther groups seemingly in competition. We have been attending the biggest and most active one. About twenty-five people attend each meeting. Each one is four to five hours long and mostly consists of Abel showing us YouTube videos and steamrolling conversations. Say, for instance, responding to a question about surveillance with rantings about employer/employee AIDS relations.
Another issue on Abel’s agenda: his recent tweets to Tom Hanks. He calls his tweets “twitters.”
“I twittered at Tom Hanks,” Abel says, “and asked him why he isn’t calling out Hollywood for covering up 9/11. Now his eight hundred thousand followers will all see my message!”
The room breaks into applause. Several people tell him he did a good job. A small voice from the back asks, “What’s Twitter?”
When I get home, I check Tom Hanks’s Twitter profile. He has seven million followers. I wonder whom Abel actually “twittered.”
After spending about a dozen hours with these people and watching the three 9/11 documentaries they have given us as homework, Ross and I still have questions about the September 11th conspiracy stories. The Truthers try their best to field our questions, but their answers sound exasperated. They can’t believe this isn’t obvious to everyone. And they’ve grown tired of showing 9/11 videos, so the “9/11 Truth” meetings are conspicuously absent of 9/11 truth.
“There’s only so many times you can watch Building 7 fall,” says Abel. Ross and I agree that that’s a good point.
Building 7, a part of the World Trade Center complex that collapsed along with the Twin Towers during the attacks, is key to the Truthers’ argument that the tragedy was orchestrated by the U.S. government. The DVDs they gave us for homework were full of Building 7. They say Building 7 collapsed exactly how you’d expect a building to collapse if someone blew it up. To them, this is evidence that the government deliberately manufactured a “false flag” event to lead us into war. The DVDs are full of barely related details and wild assumptions. We try to broach a couple of them during the meeting.
“The videos mentioned that the World Trade Center was built to withstand a plane crash, but wasn’t it also built in the 1970s, before these kinds of planes even existed?” I ask, a bit weakly. “Wouldn’t that be part of the government’s explanation?”
“RIGHT!” shouts a fifty-year-old woman across the room, throwing her hands in the air, “They built it to withstand a strike from the strongest airliner at the time!” She seems to have missed the point, but she’s very pleased with herself. She throws her hands in the air, as if to say, “Nothing could be more obvious!” It becomes clear that this group has grown so accustomed to incredulity that scoffing is their default. Counterpoints fly past unnoticed.
Two hours later, the room has dissolved into a shouting spree that I cannot follow to save my life (which, at this point, I’m not sure I want to save). Abel is on a long diatribe about Hillary Clinton: “The Democratic party is dusting off old Hillary’s vagina and waxing it and polishing it up so you can vote for her because she’s a woman. And we all know how well it worked when they did that for the black guy!”
There’s a murmur in the crowd. Everyone mutters something quietly to him- or herself, ranging from “that’s right!” to “well, I don’t know about that…”
The man next to Ross and me, who is sporting cargo shorts and no shirt, shakes his dreadlocks at us. “They’re just MURDERERS. In a CEMETERY!” he says.
I give him a tiny smile, hopeful that this will end our interaction. Ross visibly pretends not to hear.
I raise my hand again. “I’m sorry. Can I bring this back to 9/11 for a second? I’m new to this, so maybe I’m missing something, but if so few people have even heard of Building 7, why did the government destroy it? Couldn’t they have achieved the same ends by just destroying the Twin Towers?”
Abel releases an annoyed sigh. Building 7, he says, was full of secret documents. September 11th planning documents, in fact. His voice slows and his eyes narrow on me. It’s the twelfth hour they’ve spent with us, but they seem to have just noticed us, like a smell creeping through a closed door.
“What’s your background, anyway? What do YOU think happened on September 11th?” asks Abel.
All eyes turn to us. We’ve been found out.
Today we’re going to point our skeptical eye, once again, at the events of September 11, specifically at World Trade Center 7, the building that collapsed after the twin towers for no apparent reason, in a manner consistent with a controlled demolition. We’re entering the weird wild and wacky world of conspiracy theories, men in black, deceit, doubt, mistrust, and delusion. But on which side?
First let’s be clear about what the two sides are, then we’ll examine the evidence supporting each of them.
The conspiracy theory states that World Trade Center 7 was a controlled demolition, an intentional destruction of the building by our government. The evidence supporting this theory is threefold: First, the video of the collapse and the tidy distribution of the resultant debris appear consistent with known controlled demolitions. Second, photographs of the building before it collapsed showed little or no damage to cause a collapse. Third, fire alone cannot destroy a steel building, and so the cause must lie in high-energy explosives. A great deal more information is put forward by the supporters of this theory as evidence, but it’s really only suppositions about proposed motives and observations of events perceived as unusual, and so is actually not testable evidence of a direct physical cause. This information includes government offices located in the building, the establishment of Giuliani’s emergency management headquarters on the 23rd floor, and portions of the government’s preliminary reports that openly stated that certain unknowns remained.
The competing theory is found in those very same government reports. The first, a preliminary report issued by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) only eight months after the event, concluded that fires on the 5th through 7th floors caused the collapse, but infamously noted:
The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and how they caused the building to collapse remain unknown at this time. Although the total diesel fuel on the premises contained massive potential energy, the best hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence. Further research, investigation, and analyses are needed to resolve this issue.
Three years later, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) issued a working draft of the complete theory, scheduled to be finished in 2008. (IllumiNuTTi Note: The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) released their Final Report on the Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 on November 20, 2008 [Web page here] [PDF file here]) This report states that the building suffered two major failures, either of which could have been survived on its own, but not in combination. The first failure was severe damage to ten stories of the south side of the building, dramatically shown in a single frame of video from an ABC news helicopter, which destroyed several major columns. The second failure was the fire, fed in part by diesel generator fuel from high pressure tanks, which proceeded unfought for seven hours due to a lack of water pressure, and caused terminal weakening in the remaining columns that were already overloaded from the loss of the initial columns. Firefighters noted a growing bulge between the 10th and 13th floors and major structural creaking sounds, and finally evacuated. Two hours later, the east wall began to crack and bow. The east penthouse sank into the structure, and eight seconds later, the northeast corner fell, bringing the rest of the building down on top of it.
No evidence of any explosives were ever found, but the conspiracy theory states that this is because the government took away all the debris before it could be independently tested. Since it’s normal for debris to be removed following any such destruction, this particular piece of information is too ambiguous to be given serious weight as proof of a conspiracy.
MORE . . .
When you dive into the world of conspiracy theories (either as a skeptic, or a conspiracy theorist, or just a curious onlooker) you will ultimately come across some conspiracy theories that sound really, really bizarre…
In fact ever since I started doing serious skepticism and debunking and investigating conspiracy theories I have found conspiracy theories so strange that I could never have possibly have thought of them (which is probably a good thing).
Now while there are a lot of things I have noticed about bizarre conspiracy theories, I have narrowed it down to five different things.
So here are five things I’ve noticed about bizarre conspiracy theories:
5. They’re indicators of mental illness.
First I want to say that anyone who believes that the world is controlled by shape-shifting aliens, or that the World Trade Center towers were brought down by lasers, or that the government is using radio signals to attack peoples minds, or believes in crisis actors, or believes that chemtrails are real is not necessarily mentally ill… I’m just saying it’s a pretty strong indicator of mental illness, especially when you consider the fact that others who also believe in such conspiracy theories have engaged in behavior that strongly indicates that they are mentally ill (such as making long and incoherent rants, or harassing people, or making threats), or actually has been found out or proven to be mentally ill.
It’s not just the people who believe in them either. Many of the people whom have created the most bizarre conspiracy theories out there are they themselves believed to be mentally ill. Even the ones who are very intelligent and hold college degrees, but come up with these weird conspiracy theories, are automatically assumed to be mentally ill because it’s really the most logical explanation for many skeptics concerning a person whom is very smart but believes in really weird stuff.
4. There is no deep end to them.
Have you ever heard or read about a conspiracy theory that made you think, “there is no way that there can be something stranger than this…” Well, I don’t mean to burst your bubble, but trust me when I say this, there is a conspiracy theory out there that is more bizarre than what you have just heard or read about. And if there isn’t one, one will be invented soon enough.
Now I don’t blame anyone for believing that whenever they hear about a crazy conspiracy theory that they believe that it is the craziest conspiracy theory out there, I use to believe that myself when I came across a really bizarre conspiracy, but then I would be proven wrong again and again whenever I kept coming across one even more bizarre than the next one, it kind of destroyed my ability to believe that there is a bottom to conspiracy theory craziness.
In fact some are so bizarre that…
3. They are confused for satire.
It really should not surprise anyone that there are some conspiracy theories out there that are either so weird, or so bizarre, that some people don’t believe that it is a real conspiracy theory (well, as real as one can be) and that it was made up as a parody of other conspiracy theories, or some type of satire, or, as some conspiracy theorists may claim, dis-information.
This is something that even I have assumed at times whenever I see a bizarre conspiracy theory, either in the hope that no one can seriously be so crazy that they could come up with such a thing, or that it just looks like satire.
In fact some have actually turned out to be satire (or a hoax) but because some conspiracy theorists can’t tell the difference between what is real and what is fake, some of them assume that it is real.
[ . . . ]
There’s Violet Jessop, who worked as a stewardess on the maiden voyage of the Titanic in 1912, and managed to survive the giant liner’s collision in the North Atlantic with an iceberg — only to take a job as a nurse on the Britannic, which sank in 1916 in the Aegean Sea.
And more recently, there’s the bizarre story of English tourists Jason and Jenny Cairns-Lawrence, who were visiting New York City when Al Qaeda hijackers crashed two planes into the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, and happened to be in London when the city’s public transportation system was attacked by terrorists in July 2005, and traveled to Mumbai, India in November 2008, just in time to witness a third terrorist attack.
Newspaper writers took to calling them “the world’s unluckiest couple.”
The idea that some people are destined to suffer chronic misfortune is so ingrained in our consciousness that there even have been songs written about it — for example, “Born Under a Bad Sign,” the blues classic recorded by Albert King back in 1967, in which the narrator complains that “if it wasn’t for bad luck, I wouldn’t have no luck at all.”
But is there really such a thing as chronic bad luck, and if so, why do some people seem to be plagued by it?
Psychologists and academic experts in probability and statistics, who’ve studied the phenomenon of bad luck, provide a complicated answer. It is true that in the course of a lifetime, some people have a lot more bad things happen to them than most of us do. But that outcome can be influenced by a variety of factors, including random chance, the actions of other people, and individuals’ own decision-making skills and competence at performing tasks.
But in our minds, it all blends together and forms this thing that we think of as bad luck.
Rami Zwick, a business professor at the University of California-Riverside, points out that the idea of bad luck exists, in part, because most of us don’t have a very good understanding of how the science of probability works.
“There is a difference between individual and aggregate experiences of people in a population,” he explains. If you ask 100 people to flip a coin 100 times, for example, over time, you can expect that the average result for the group will be 50 heads and 50 tails. But within the group, individuals may have more heads than tails, or vice-versa. “If we think of heads as good and tails as bad, a few people will have a sequence of mostly good outcomes, and others will have mostly bad ones.”
It didn’t take long after the tragic events of September 11, 2001 for people to begin seeking meaning in the devastation. People logged on to the Internet and in record numbers sought information on what Nostradamus – the famed 16th century French prophet – might have predicted about the tragedy. Nostradamus is credited for predicting many other major events from his time to ours, including two world wars, so certainly he must have foreseen an event so cataclysmic and profoundly affecting as the destruction of the World Trade Center towers and the thousands of deaths involved.
Over the years, people have exhausted themselves attempting to bend, twist and otherwise mutilate interpretations of Nostradamus’s quatrains into something that looks like they pertain to the September 11 tragedy. Some even made up quatrains that Nostradamus never wrote and attributed them to the great seer. The truth is, however, that none of Nostradamus’s writings quite fits. As we discussed in the article “The September 11 Tragedy: Was It Prophesied?”, Nostradamus seems, by most accounts, to have missed this one.
Not everyone agrees that Nostradamus missed this prediction. David Ovason, for one, in his book Nostradamus Prophecies for America, makes the case that Quatrain 6:97 predicts the disaster, but such interpretations can often be highly creative exercises.
Why do we need Nostradamus to have said something about it? Why were people so hungry for verification from a long-dead prophet? Perhaps it’s because we need to make sense of a seemingly senseless act: If the horrific events of that day had been prophesied, then perhaps they have meaning in a grander scheme that we cannot quite comprehend. It helps us cope with the horror. If a prophecy exists regarding 9/11, this somewhat twisted thinking goes, then perhaps it was meant to be; it was the hand of fate.
I’m not saying that people consciously want to think that 9/11 was meant to be. But on some crazy level, if it was prophesied it puts a degree of order back in the universe. The insane events of that day – two airliners crashing into the twin towers, the suicide pilots who took thousands of lives along with their own, the sight of those magnificent buildings crumbling into great clouds of dust and debris, the people on the street fleeing in terror – they are all so extraordinary, so unreal and so powerfully disorienting that we had to find ways of touching reality again.
Seeking Nostradamus’s words were, for some people, a way to try to do that. A prophecy would help put meaning and order back into a world that, at that time, seemed so meaningless and chaotic.
Once one of Britain’s principal conspiracy theorists as well as friend to David Icke and Alex Jones, Charlie Veitch, was known as a 9/11 “truther.” As soon as he realized that he had been duped, he stopped. But that was when his problems really began.
According to an interview Veitch gave to the Telegraph, Veitch, who had been Right-wing, joined the Territorial Army (TA). After a drunken night out with his best friend, his friend had turned to Veitch and told him that they had been lying to him. He told Veitch that 9/11 was not what he thought it was and that he was being given “special knowledge.” Veitch’s friend went on to show him a video entitled Terrorism: A History of Government Sponsored Terror, a video that was produced by US radio talk presenter, Alex Jones.
Veitch was shortly after made redundant, so with some of his payout, he purchased a camcorder and megaphone, in the style of Alex Jones. He used eccentric methods to publicly express his beliefs, such as swooping on public spaces and embarking public transport to make announcements to whoever was available to listen. In one piece of footage, Veitch was heard to say to a group of passengers: “I am a proponent of the idea that the Twin Towers were brought down in a controlled demolition manner. Those buildings would not have collapsed in the slightest from a Boeing 767 hit.”
But one June afternoon, in New York City’s Times Square, Veitch began to film himself on his cell phone, as he made statements to camera about the devastation of the World Trade Center. Only this time, his message was different from all the others he had posted on Youtube. In the video, he said that he no longer believed that 9/11 was an inside job.
Because of his conspiracy theory films and the fact that he was at the forefront of what is known as “The Truth Movement” arm in the UK, Veitch had been approached by the BBC to go on an all-expenses paid 9-day trip to the United States, to examine these “conspiracies” from a scientific standpoint, with a view to furnish him with real information.
In the BBC program, entitled 9/11: Conspiracy Road Trip, 4 additional individuals, with divergent opinions from the official account of events of 9/11, had been selected to go on the road trip with Veitch.
The conspiracy theorists were given the opportunity to talk to building engineers, scientists, FBI and CIA agents, demolition experts and designers of the World Trade Center. They were also allowed to talk to relatives of those who had tragically lost their lives, as well as pay a visit to the Pentagon, the World Trade Center in Manhattan and the Pennsylvania United Flight 93 site.
After all of the scientific evidence was put to Veitch, he did something completely out of the ordinary for a hardcore “truther.” He did a U-turn and changed his mind. Standing in front of the White House, on that sunny day in June, Veitch spoke to the BBC presenter and road trip leader, Andrew Maxwell. In front of the BBC camera, Veitch told him:
“I found my personal truth and you don’t have to agree with me, but I can’t push propaganda for ideas that I no longer believe in and that’s what I do, so I just need to basically… take it on the chin, admit I was wrong, be humble about it and just carry on.”
Before the end of his road trip, Charlie Veitch held up his cell phone in the middle of Times Square, pointed the phone’s camera on himself and told the world that he had changed his mind, that he had been wrong. He said:
“This universe is truly one of smoke screens, illusions and wrong paths, but also the right path, which is [to] always be committed to the truth. Do not hold on to religious dogma. If you are presented with new evidence, take it on, even if it contradicts what you or your group might be believing or wanting to believe… you have to give the truth the greatest respect… and I do.”
After Veitch posted his video, the 9/11 Truth Movement’s reaction to one of its most prominent “truthers” changing his mind was one to be expected. Veitch was labeled a flip-flop, a shill sellout who was taking cash for working for the BBC. The Truth Movement did what any organization of its kind would do to someone who, for want of a better term, came to their senses. They tried to discredit him.
Veitch told Myles Power in his BBC-funded interview, how he once had too much time on his hands, “Idle hands are the conspiracy theory world’s ideal way to get into your head,” he said, as he described how he started to watch Alex Jones and David Icke documentaries, as well as other scientific theory videos which he said spun a pretty convincing yarn on its conspiracies. He became convinced that the Illuminati were behind it all, with its so-called New World Order. After becoming absorbed by his interest in conspiracy theories, he took up his megaphone and camera and began to make films about them, which he said, elevated him to a “high priest” status of the Truth Movement.
But so with age, comes wisdom and reason. Veitch began to . . .
While I did touch upon ten of what I considered to be biggest lies, I still felt there were more lies that people in the 9/11 Truth Movement promoted that still needed to be addressed.
So, I have put together another list of ten more lies that Truther tells:
10. Nothing hit World Trade Center 7.
Actually something did hit World Trade Center 7… a skyscraper.
To be more precise falling debris from World Trade Center 1 hit World Trade Center 7 and caused huge amounts of damage to the lower floors of the building. The combination of that, and the fact that the building had been on fire for hours caused the building to collapse.
9. Only two buildings were hit, but three were destroyed.
This is not true. In fact more than three building were destroyed that day. World Trade Center 3, 4, 5, and 6 were heavily damaged that day and what was left of them had to be torn down because they could not be repaired.
Also, many other buildings around the World Trade Center were damaged as well.
8. A nuclear bomb brought down the towers.
If this was true then this would be the easiest one to prove, as all you would have to do is go down to the World Trade Center site with a Geiger counter and one would easily find large amounts of radiation there.
Also, lower Manhattan would be uninhabitable right now due to that radiation, plus the destruction caused would have been far greater, and a lot more people would have died, either from the initial blast from the weapon, or from the radiation and radioactive fall out.
Plus, there would have been an obvious flash some what similar to the Sun when the device went, and there would have been no way to hide that.
7. The towers were reduced to dust and gravel.
Primarily promoted by followers of Judy Wood and those that believe in her theory that the towers were brought down high energy lasers, their claims are that the towers were reduced to dust and gravel by these alleged lasers.
While the collapse of the towers did create a lot of dust and gravel, it also left large chunks of concrete, long pieces of steel beams, and even places where pieces of the outer wall several stories high still stood.
6. Israel did it.
Besides the fact that there is no evidence what so ever that Israel did this, the fact is that Israel had no reason to do something like this.
The United States is Israel’s biggest supporter, and President George W. Bush was one of Israel’s strongest supporters at that.
To simply put, the people in charge of Israel would have had to have lost their minds to have done something like that. Not only would they have been risking losing support from the United States, but also risked going war with the United States in order to get more support from the United States.
A serious video: The “unexplainable” collapse of 7 World Trade Center is the most compelling case put forth by 9/11 Truthers. But there is more than enough evidence that WTC7 collapsed due to fire — no secret demolition ninjas necessary.
The text below is for people interested in actual inquiry, and are legitimately examining both sides’ arguments for inconsistencies, intellectual dishonesty, and logical flaws.
1. Things conspiracy believers do not want you to know:
MORE . . .
True or False: Only explosives could have caused the buildings to collapse on 9/11.
Download HD version for reposting: http://tinyurl.com/7rjrsjr
Political Paranoia Is Everywhere, but Even False Notions Tell Us About the Anxieties of People Who Believe
By JESSE WALKER via The Wall Street Journal – WSJ.com
This November will mark the 50th anniversary of two events that are of special interest to conspiracy buffs. One is the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, a killing that has spawned dozens of theories about the hidden forces that allegedly carried out the crime. The other is a lecture the historian Richard Hofstadter delivered at Oxford, which Harper’s later published under the title “The Paranoid Style in American Politics.” Half a century of scholarship has either built on or pushed back against Hofstadter’s conclusions, some of which don’t hold up very well. But it remains the most widely cited essay on American political paranoia.
Some conspiracies are real, of course, but even a conspiracy theory that is entirely false has truths to tell us about the anxieties and experiences of the people who believe it. More, it tells us something about the ways people perceive the world.On 9/11, a Brooklyn, N.Y., photographer named Mark Phillips climbed to his roof and snapped photos of the burning World Trade Center, which were then distributed by the Associated Press. Later he learned that people were seeing an unexpected image in one of the photographs. When he examined the picture he saw it, too. “The image I saw was distinct,” he later wrote. “Eyes, nose, mouth, horns.” There, in the contours of the smoke, he found the face of Satan.
Search online and you’ll see still more 9/11 pictures in which people have perceived the shapes of demons. There is no shortage of theories about what the faces mean, from the Christian conspiracist who said they were a glimpse of the devil boasting to the Muslim writer who declared they were a warning from God “that the use of terrorism is never permitted in Islam.”
Then there is the explanation I prefer. The faces are the result of apophenia, the process of projecting patterns onto data. More specifically, they are pareidolia, in which those patterns are perceived as meaningful shapes or sounds. It is pareidolia that allows us to . . .
6 • Predictive Programming
TV, Movies, Books Hint At Events To Come
One common theme in conspiracy theories has to do with the behind-the-scenes puppet masters being fond of dropping lots of clues about their master plan, usually in plain sight. These clues almost always have to do with significant symbols, numbers, or other identifiable references to the occult, Freemasonry (the Masons being a gigantic target for conspiracy theories of all sorts), or specific dates or imagery.
This can supposedly be done in many ways (in architecture, for instance, or artwork), the most modern of which is what’s known as predictive programming. For example, the above still, from a 1997 episode of The Simpsons, appears to put that “9″ in a pretty strange place, right next to the image of the Twin Towers (which could be seen as an “11″). There are far too many potential examples of this to list here, with some obviously reaching pretty far to make the connections, and others being downright creepy—like the plot of the 1998 pilot of the short-lived Fox series The Lone Gunmen, which had government operatives hijacking a plane and crashing it into the World Trade Center.
Beyond flaunting their nefarious plots, predictive programming is said to play a role in softening up the public for the traumatic events that they predict, in ways that are undetectable to those being affected.
5 • Subliminal Messages
Tactic Is Used To Condition Consumers
It’s no secret (at least, not anymore) that extremely brief or cleverly hidden words or images can be placed within another image or film in such a way that the observer, while not making a conscious connection, is subtly mentally influenced by the message. The efficacy of this tactic has long been open for debate and has never been proven—but of course, this doesn’t stop corporations from doing things like hiding images within their logos to try to bolster positive association with their brand. It may not work, but it can’t hurt, right?
But according to this conspiracy theory, not only does subliminal messaging work, it works far more efficiently than we’ve been led to believe—and it’s everywhere. Supposedly (and honestly, you really can make the case), the practice is mostly used in advertising to induce consumers to buy, usually with references to sex. Certain Coke and Pepsi ads in the early ’90s were famously found to contain hidden sexual references (which the companies both claimed were coincidences).
One would think that, if effective, the only message necessary in subliminal advertising would fall right along the lines of “buy this product, and lots of it.” But the subliminal sexual references, odd as they may seem, are not limited to advertising. Whether coincidental or some animator’s idea of a joke, it’s also been established that hidden references to sex appear with alarming frequency in Disney cartoons. Which brings us to . . .
4 • Walt Disney
The Disney Company Is An Evil Empire
This cannot be disputed: the Walt Disney Company is one of the United States’ oldest and most successful entertainment conglomerates. It was founded in 1923, and as of this writing consists of a certifiably insane number of subsidiaries. Disney has long owned the ABC network and all of its affiliated networks, including ESPN. The company made international headlines in 2009 when it acquired Marvel Entertainment for over US$4 billion, and again in 2012 when it acquired Lucasfilm for over US$4 billion more. The “House of Mouse” is probably the most influential and powerful of the tiny handful of huge corporations that control most of the media in the United States and, by extension, the world.
It also can’t be disputed that, though a traditionally family-oriented business, Disney has allowed sexual images to make their way not only into completed cuts of their films, but also promotional and poster artwork. Many instances have been pointed out, from the overt (a couple of frames showing an image of a topless woman in The Rescuers) to the puzzling (a spire of the castle on the VHS cover of The Little Mermaid looks a hell of a lot like an erect penis) to the questionable (at one point in Aladdin, the Genie can be heard muttering offscreen something that sounds like “good teenagers, take off your clothes”). In each and every instance, changes were made to further releases, and chalked up to jokes by animators or simple misunderstandings. Why would Disney want to expose children (so to speak) to inappropriate sexual content, anyway?
Well, conspiracy theorists have their answers: Disney is all about sexualizing children. The Disney Company, they assert, wants to suck all of the money from the parents’ wallets while rendering their children compliant, subservient consumers, and early exposure to these sexualized images is the first step in that process. Also, they say, because it’s evil—mind-bogglingly, Satanically evil. And here is where some of the theories begin to tie in with each other, and the rabbit hole begins to look pretty deep, so please stay with us.
via The Soap Box
Conspiracy theories are all over the internet it seems these days, and there are a lot of things I have noticed about many of these conspiracy theories, but there is one thing that seems to be an absolute constant about conspiracy theories:
Conspiracy theories create more conspiracy theories.
Take the 9/11 conspiracy theories for example. What was probably the original conspiracy theory concerning that act of terror was the accusation that the Bush administration allowed it to happen, then it eventually progressed into the belief that the government made it happen, then into the belief that the towers were brought down by explosives, then into the belief that the towers were hit by drones, until finally you get to the really bizarre ones that claim that no planes hit the the World Trade Center towers at all.
Originally it would take years for a conspiracy theory to get to it’s most bizarre levels (as the 9/11 conspiracy theories did) but now it takes no time at all.
The Sandy Hook conspiracy theories for example took very little time to go from your basic false flag attack conspiracy theory, to the truly bizarre theory that it didn’t happen and that all the grieving parents of the children that were killed were just actors, and that all the children that were killed either were not killed, or never even existed.
That progression took less than a week.
And the conspiracy theories concerning the recent bombing of the Boston Marathon went from being an alleged false flag attack, to being an outright staged hoax in less than a day…
Precognition involves the theory that people are able to think of an event before it happens. It is still considered supernatural—a form of clairvoyance—and not generally accepted as possible. The most famous literary example is Morgan Robertson’s Futility: or the Wreck of the Titan, to which Listverse has already drawn attention. Here are eight other examples to stretch your belief in coincidence.
Game of Death was Bruce Lee’s final film, and he died before he could finish it. The film is about villains kidnapping his character’s girlfriend, and forcing him to fight them one on one. In an early scene, his character, who plays a martial arts action star, is rehearsing for a scene and is supposed to be shot at with blanks. One of the villains loads his gun with a real bullet and shoots Lee’s character in the face.
Twenty years later, Bruce Lee’s son, Brandon, was filming The Crow, which is about an ordinary man who is killed by a gang of thugs who rape and kill his fiancee as well. Lee’s character comes back from the dead and exacts revenge. With the film almost completed, one of the scenes required Lee to walk on set and be shot by FunBoy, played by Michael Massee.
The weapon is a .44 magnum revolver, and a few days earlier, a scene required a close-up view of the weapon loaded with what appears to be live ammunition. These are dummy rounds: a bullet, a casing, and a primer if the primers are required to be shown, but no gunpowder. If the primers are not shown, they are either spent primers, or the casings are unprimed. This particular gun did not require live primers, and had spent ones in its ammunition.
One of the handlers tested the weapon by dry-firing it to be sure it was safe, and heard a loud pop. Upon inspection, nothing seemed out of the ordinary, and the weapon was set aside. What had happened was one of the dummy rounds had a live primer, which it should not have had. In the absence of powder, the bullet was pushed out of the casing, but not out of the barrel.
In the fatal scene, Massee had no idea the gun had a bullet in it, and fired what he thought was a blank. The full charge of powder propelled the the bullet out of the barrel and into Lee’s abdomen just as if a live round had been used. He was shot point-blank with a .44 magnum. The bullet perforated his intestine and lodged in his spine. He bled to death about six hours later despite surgery.
• 7 – The Lone Gunmen Pilot and 9/11
The Lone Gunmen was a spin-off from The X-Files, and featured the three titular characters experiencing adventures surrounding conspiracy theories, government cover-ups, and computer hacking. The pilot episode premiered on March 4, 2001, and proved very popular. It depicted the trio uncovering a United States government plot to have a commercial airline hijacked and flown into one of the World Trade Center towers in New York City. The government’s intent is shown to be a desire to sell more weapons to American civilians, and militaries around the world in the ensuing global fear of terrorism.
Six months and one week later, both World Trade Center towers were in fact destroyed by commercial airliners hijacked by Islamic terrorists. The Lone Gunmen episode aided immeasurably in fueling paranoia about a US government conspiracy and cover-up. The conspicuous height of the WTC towers always provided fear that a plane could strike them. It was no secret that they were the most obvious targets in the entire city, much wider at their tops than the Empire State Building, which tapers. But the similarity with the pilot episode is no less uncanny.
• 6 – Platform and the 2002 Bali Bombings
Platform is a 2001 novel by French author Michel Houellebecq, in which the main character, Michel Renault, travels to Phuket, Thailand, a popular international tourist spot, for various purposes, among them sex with cheap prostitutes. While there, he is an eyewitness to a terrorist bombing of a night club that kills two hundred people. Houellebecq stated later that one number was as good as another, and he chose two hundred arbitrarily. The terrorists are depicted driving a minivan loaded with fertilizer explosives into the building.
On 12 October 2002, in Bali, Indonesia, Jemaah Islamiya terrorists detonated minivans filled with potassium chloride, sulfur, and aluminum powder, wrapped in PETN detonation cord in the street between Paddy’s Pub and Sari’s Club. A suicide bomber had first killed himself by detonating his backpack inside Paddy’s, forcing the patrons into the street where the car bomb exploded. Two hundred and two people were killed, and another two hundred and nine wounded.
The two locations are 1,134 miles (1825km) apart, but this seems to be trumped by the similarities in attack methods and numbers of dead.
• 5 – The Illuminati Card Game and 9/11
This trading card game has been marketed by Steve Jackson Games since 1982 and is still popular. Expansions, in the way of cards, are frequently added to the game, and in 1995, new conspiracy theories were propagated for the game revolving around the Illuminati effecting a “fire sacrifice to Satan” by nuking the World Trade Center in New York City. At the same time, they nuked the Pentagon.
Cards were sold depicting precisely this, and the card for blowing up the WTC is now legendary across the Internet. Though it predated the actual terrorist bombings by six years, the fiery explosion appears to occur in the South Tower, at almost the very spot where the plane struck, about the 80th floor. The tower is drawn on the card as toppling over, exactly as it did in reality, not pancaking straight down as the North Tower did.
One of the terms most commonly used by conspiracy theorists when discussing “the real story” behind incidents like the September 11th attacks or the recent Sandy Hook shooting is “false flag,” meaning that it was caused or staged deliberately to use as an excuse to perpetrate something nefarious. A quick Google search of the phrase brings up an astonishing 42 million hits, with page after page of posts at conspiracy hotbeds like Infowars/Prison Planet, Natural News, Before It’s News, etc. If one were to work solely from this, it would be easy to get the impression that our recent history is jammed with prefabricated incidents designed to enable our government to grab more power, take away the rights of the common people and/or line their already fattened pockets.
Further complicating matters, false flags are a very real phenomenon. Unlike, say, free energy machines or alien abductions, which people claim to exist, yet don’t, false flag attacks have happened, many times for many different reasons. The United States has even been involved in some. In order to debunk the conspiracy theories, it’s important to define what a false flag actually is, and have historical examples of when they’ve actually happened, in order to better define when they haven’t.
In military terms, a false flag is any act of deception designed to make your opponent think you’re someone else. The term “false flag” originated with naval warfare, when a ship would run up a flag other than its designated battle ensign for the purposes of drawing an enemy ship closer. When the target got close enough, the deceiving ship would run up the real battle flag and open fire. This tactic has long been recognized as an acceptable use of deception, and has been used in numerous forms, by both naval and ground forces, for centuries. Both World Wars feature numerous uses of false flag strategies, from ships disguising themselves as other ships to soldiers wearing enemy uniforms.
Of course, the September 11th attacks are considered the granddaddy of all false flags, with a legion of truthers accusing the government of bombing the World Trade Center as an excuse to curtail our rights, give more power to the global elite and kick off any number of wars. But after the truther theories are debunked, we’re left with one inescapable fact: unless and until definitive proof of the government’s involvement in 9/11 ever surfaces, the attacks can’t be called a false flag.
Which brings us to Sandy Hook. In the past few years, every time one of these tragedies takes place, be it in Arizona, Aurora, Milwaukee or now Newtown, conspiracy theorists instantly take to the internet, with cries of “false flag!” and accusations that the Obama administration either caused or staged the shootings as an excuse to grab our guns and curtail our rights. They offer manufactured “proof” and use the historical examples of other false flag attacks, both real and imagined, as “evidence” that “they” did it before, and will do it again.
And just like 9/11, and the other imagined false flags, these theories hold about as much water as a colander.
MORE . . .
via Pakalert Press
This much we can stipulate: President John F. Kennedy was assassinated on Nov. 22, 1963, struck by two bullets — one in the head, one in the neck — while riding in an open-topped limo through Dealey Plaza in Dallas. Lee Harvey Oswald was charged with killing him, and a presidential commission headed by Chief Justice Earl Warren found that Oswald acted alone.
That conclusion hasn’t passed muster with the public. A 2003 ABC News poll found that 70% of Americans believe Kennedy’s death was the result of a broader plot. The trajectory of the bullets, some say, didn’t square with Oswald’s perch on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository. Others suggest a second gunman — perhaps on the grassy knoll of Dealey Plaza — participated in the shooting. Others believe in an even broader conspiracy. Was Kennedy killed by CIA agents acting either out of anger over the Bay of Pigs or at the behest of Vice President Lyndon Johnson? By KGB operatives? Mobsters mad at Kennedy’s brother for initiating the prosecution of organized crime rings? Speculation over one of history’s most famous political assassinations is such a popular parlor game that most people have taken the rumors to heart: just 32% of those polled by ABC believe Oswald carried out the killing on his own.
Not since the JFK assassination has there been a national tragedy so heavily imprinted in American minds — or that has given rise to quite as many alternative explanations. While videos and photographs of the two planes striking the World Trade Center towers are famous around the world, the sheer profusion of documentary evidence has only provided even more fodder for conspiracy theories.
A May 2006 Zogby poll found that 42% of Americans believed that the government and the 9/11 commission “concealed or refused to investigate critical evidence that contradicts their official explanation of the September 11th attacks.” Why had the military failed to intercept the hijacked planes? Had the government issued a “stand down” order, to minimize interference with a secret plan to destroy the buildings and blame it on Islamic terrorists? In 2005, Popular Mechanics published a massive investigation of similar claims and responses to them. The reporting team found that the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) did not have a history of having fighter jets prepped and ready to intercept aircraft that had gone off route. And while the team found no evidence that the government had planned the attacks, lack of proof has rarely stopped conspiracy theorists before.
We may have Tang thanks to the space program, but who gave us such innovations as the Stealth fighter and Kevlar? Aliens, of course. Conspiracy theorists believe that the remains of crashed UFO spacecrafts are stored at Area 51, an Air Force base about 150 miles from Las Vegas, where government scientists reverse-engineer the aliens’ highly advanced technology. Fodder for this has come from a variety of supposed UFO sightings in the area and testimony from a retired Army colonel who says he was given access to extraterrestrial materials gathered from an alien spacecraft that crashed in Roswell, N.M. Some believe that the government studies time travel at Area 51, also known as Groom Lake or Dreamland.
The government has developed advanced aircraft and weapons systems at nearby Nellis Air Force Base, including Stealth bombers and reconnaissance planes. And the government’s official line — that the details of Area 51 are classified for purposes of national security — is only seen as further proof that the military is hiding aliens or alien spacecraft.
Paul McCartney never wrote “Maybe I’m Amazed.” He never formed the band Wings. He never clashed with Yoko, became a vegetarian, or fathered any of his children. When Queen Elizabeth knighted him in 1997, she was actually knighting someone else. This is because, conspiracy-minded Beatlemaniacs say, Paul McCartney secretly died in 1966. Theorists claim the other Beatles covered up his death — hiring someone who looked like him, sang like him, and had the same jovial personality. But the guilt eventually got to them and they began hiding clues in their music. In the song “Taxman,” George Harrison gave his “advice for those who die,” meaning Paul. The entire Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band album was awash with Paul-is-dead clues: the Beatles had formed a “new” band featuring a fictional member named Billy Shears — supposedly the name of Paul’s replacement. The album contained John Lennon’s “A Day in the Life,” which had the lyrics “He blew his mind out in a car” and the recorded phrase “Paul is dead, miss him, miss him,” which becomes evident only when the song is played backward. Lennon also mumbled, “I buried Paul” at the end of “Strawberry Fields Forever” (in interviews, Lennon said the phrase was actually “cranberry sauce” and denied the existence of any backward messages).
Paul-is-dead believers think the Beatles accompanied these backward tape loops and veiled references to death with album covers that illustrated the loss of their friend. The original cover of 1966′s Yesterday and Today album featured the Beatles posed amid raw meat and dismembered doll parts — symbolizing McCartney’s gruesome accident. If fans placed a mirror in front of the Sgt. Pepper album cover, the words Lonely Hearts on the drum logo could be read as “1 ONE 1 X HE DIE 1 ONE 1.” And of course, there’s the Abbey Road cover, on which John, George and Ringo forwent all pretense and pretended to cross the street as a funeral procession. John wore all white, like a clergyman. Ringo, the mourner, dressed in black. George donned jeans, like a gravedigger. Paul wore no shoes (he didn’t need them, because he was dead) and walked out of step with the others.
If Paul is dead, then his imposter is still at large. He met and married Linda Eastman, with whom he had four children before losing her to breast cancer in 1998. He released a live album in 1993 called Paul Is Live (likely story), and produced more than 20 solo albums — and that’s not even counting the ones released by Wings. Then he endured a horrible divorce from Heather Mills, which may have made him wish he were dead — or, at least, were still Billy Shears. So who is the real McCartney? The world may never know.
MORE . . .
Embarassing Conspiracy Theories Follow up:
9/11 Controlled Demolition: WTC 7
via The Soap Box
On my previous blog debunking the belief that the World Trade Center towers were destroyed in a control demolition, I discussed how the Twin Towers were not brought down in a controlled demolition, but as the result of massive structural damage brought on by the collision of a couple of jumbo jets.
The collapse of World Trade Center building 7.
The main reasons why so many Truthers (almost all in fact) believe that WTC 7 was brought down by explosives is because the building itself was not hit by any planes, and it doesn’t look damaged in many of the photos and videos of that day, and in the videos of the collapse it does kind of look like a controlled demolition to the untrained eye. Also, it is believed that the order “pull it”, which was given shortly before the building came down, is a common order that demolition experts use right when they bring down a building.
While the building itself was not hit by any planes, it was in fact hit by the falling debris from the World Trade Center towers, as was a lot of other building near the Twin Towers, and was heavily damaged, as was a lot of the buildings near the Twin Towers as well. Most people can’t tell this from looking at photos and videos of it after the towers collapsed because of all the smoke and dust. All that most people have ever seen is what appears to be an undamaged building.
In fact, it was very heavily damaged. 25% of it’s bottom floors were just gone. Added to the damage from the falling debris was the fact that the building was on fire, and that those fires were most likely fueled by the diesel generators located inside the building itself, so those fires just kept on going on and on.
After being on fire for seven hours, and having been heavily damaged, one of the steel trusses finally gave way, which resulted in … (Keep Reading): The Soap Box: ECT Follow up: 9/11 Controlled Demolition: WTC 7.
via The Soap Box
(Disclaimer: I considered not posting this because it is a very sensitive subject, but I also felt it needed to be posted as a way to help getting people who do “believe” in this to finally admit they are wrong)
The Holocaust was the most horrendous acts of mass murder in human history. It killed six million European Jews, and maybe just as many people in other ethnic groups and religions as well. Despite all of the imagines of this horror that has been burned into our minds through photos, videos, testimony from survivors, the soldiers rescued them, and even members of the SS, there are still a group of people who don’t believe, or at least they claim they don’t believe, the Holocaust happened.
Of all the conspiracy theories there are, Holocaust denial is one of the most disgusting and bigoted conspiracy theories in the world. This conspiracy theory is so offensive, it is illegal to promote in 17 countries, including Germany, and people have gone to prison because they promoted it in those countries.
via The Soap Box
One of the most common claims by conspiracy theorists is that there are dis-information agents all over the place. Normally these accusations of being a dis-information agent are made against skeptics and debunkers, since skeptics and debunkers are the people who show just how faulty conspiracy theories really are. But sometimes, claims of being a dis-information agent are made by conspiracy theorists, against other conspiracy theorists.
In fact, it’s actually quite common for some conspiracy theorists to accuse other conspiracy theorists of being dis-information agents, especially if those who are being accused, promote conspiracy theories that are either so radical, or so strange, that other conspiracy theorists actually debunk them. Sometime it doesn’t even have to be really weird, just very different from what another conspiracy theorist believes.
Because of this, and other actions, such as spamming the comments section on conspiracy theorists web sites, blogs, message boards, and skeptics and debunker web sites and blogs, with their extremely strange conspiracy theories, many “mainstream” conspiracy theorists have “concluded” that these people who promote these extremely strange conspiracy theories must be dis-information agents because… who else would promote such insane conspiracy theories.
Read More: The Soap Box: Embarrassing Conspiracy Theories: Radical Conspiracy Theorist = Dis-information Agent.
See also: The Soap Box: Embarrassing Conspiracy Theories: Debunker Bloggers = Dis-information Agent.
The boardroom at the Washington, D.C., headquarters of the American Institute of Architects is an impressive place: Beautiful concentric wooden desks, with microphones in front of every seat, encircle a small central dais, offering the impression that important discussions are had here. “It feels like the United Nations,” a guest recently commented.
This room recently served as a peculiar venue for the 23rd stop on the 30-city “world premiere tour” of AIA member Richard Gage’s new film 9/11: Explosive Evidence—Experts Speak Out: Final Edition.
Since 2006, Gage has been traveling all over the world under the banner of his organization, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth—an organization that has no affiliation with the AIA, express or otherwise—to preach the theory that the Twin Towers and 7 World Trade Center were actually brought down by explosives on September 11, 2001, and not the impact of two hijacked jetliners and the resulting fires and debris.
What was even more surreal than the late June screening location for his latest presentation of this argument, though, was hearing the types of speeches that accompany such an absurd event be given in such an austere room.
“I had to be dragged kicking and screaming into believing that our government and the Israeli government, the Israeli Mossad, could be responsible for the Twin Towers demolition,” one member of the DC chapter of 911truth.org declared from the AIA-emblazoned podium.
“At least three firefighters in New York at Ground Zero who came upon a large store of gold at the Twin Towers were executed by FBI… every official story turns out to be a lie,” another local activist said to applause.
Gage feigned to distance his organization, the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, from these remarks, calling the gold story “related” to his work but less “helpful” to its mission than his “irrefutable scientific evidence” that the skyscrapers were brought down by explosives.
The AIA itself, however, is firm about its relationship with Gage. “We don’t have any relationship with his organization whatsoever,” Scott Frank, head of media relations for the AIA, told me.
The former employee of the Walnut Creek, Calif.-based architectural firm Akol & Yoshii is a full-time 9/11 conspiracy theorist, but Gage tries to maintain a façade of being a scientist asking scientific questions. He does his best to avoid the murkier political questions of who could have orchestrated a conspiracy theory and cover-up of the size and scope that the 9/11 conspiracy movement alleges, but his technical views are actually quite mainstream within the Truth movement.
The accusations of Gage’s organization are the typical hodgepodge of pseudo-scientific claims. Along with other esoteric and debunked technical arguments, he says that melted steel was visible at the Ground Zero site proving that the fires burned too hot to have been caused by jet fuel; that because the buildings collapsed at “near free fall speed” there must have been a controlled demolition; and that traces of a thermitereaction found in the World Trade Center debris proves that explosives were used.
All of Gage’s so-called evidence has been rebutted in peer-reviewed papers, by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, by the National Institute for Standards and Technology, by the American Society of Civil Engineers, by the 9/11 Commission Report, and, perhaps most memorably, by the 110-year-old engineering journal Popular Mechanics.
What is more interesting than these bizarre and debunked conspiracy theories is the way that Gage places his AIA membership front and center in his presentations. He seems to be attempting to cloak his organization in the officialdom of the venerable 155-year-old professional institution, even as AIA wants nothing to do with his organization. At the start of his latest film, he explains that he is “a licensed architect of over 20 years and member of the American Institute of Architects.”
Gage often seems to wield his AIA status in promoting his conspiracy theories. In making his case, he also regularly cites that more than 100 AIA members and at least six AIA Fellows have signed his petition calling for a new investigation. In total, Gage says that more than 1,700 of the petition’s roughly 16,000 signatures are from architects and engineers.
During the screening, Gage was at the very least intimating that his organization had been invited to AIA officially.
“I can’t tell you how grateful we were to have been accepted to be here in the boardroom at the national headquarters,” Gage said. “We hope this is the beginning of a very productive relationship.”
Aside from Gage, though, there was not a single other architect in the room, much less an official from AIA, or even another member. The 80-strong crowd was made up largely of members of the local 9/11 Truth movement and other political activists.
Gage was once warned by AIA not to … (keep reading) … Architects Shy From Trutherism – Architect Magazine.
via The Soap Box
There are probably more then a dozen or so conspiracy theories involving the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the United States, and I admit, I think every one of those theories are ridiculous and false. But, there is one conspiracy theory that is so ridiculous that most 9/11 conspiracy theorists don’t talk about.
This is the theory that no planes hit the World Trade Center towers.
It is considered the craziest of all the 9/11 conspiracy theories, and talk about it has been banned from many conspiracy theorist websites. Some people who advocate these theories are even accused of being dis-information agent, and have even been threaten with violence.
There are actually two different versions this theory.
The first one is that what we all saw on TV were not planes, but computer generated images, and that every video that showed the planes hitting the towers are fakes.
Besides the fact that this claim sounds insane, it would also have to mean that every eye witness to the attack, including people who were standing in the street, and people who were actually in the buildings themselves and watched the planes hit, are lying…
via The Soap Box
For many years conspiracy theorists have been claiming that the government, or some shadowy NWO type of groups, are murdering conspiracy theorists, either to keep them from continuing to promote conspiracy theories, or to prevent them from “revealing” certain information.
It doesn’t matter how the person died. They could have died of natural causes, or they could have committed suicide, but to conspiracy theorists, the fact that another conspiracy theorist is dead, especially a top conspiracy theorist, makes many fellow conspiracy theorists suspicious.
Many conspiracy theorists who have died over years due to natural causes have died because of either …
Continue Reading: Embarrassing Conspiracy Theories: The Government Kills Conspiracy Theorists.
via The Soap Box
One of the most prominent conspiracy theories about the 9/11 attacks is that many conspiracy theorists believe that the World Trade Center towers came down as a result of explosives that were place in the building months in advanced. They base this belief on the comments and advocacy of a few engineers and demolition experts who believe that the buildings collapsed in a controlled demolition.
The major problem with this is that conspiracy theorists assume that a jumbo jet, nearly full of jet fuel, couldn’t cause enough damage to cause the buildings to collapse. They reason they believe this is because they believe these 9/11 truth engineers when they say that the steel structures of the building should not have been damaged enough in the crashes to cause them to collapse, and that the heat caused by the burning jet fuel could not have been hot enough. The problem with this theory is that it assumes that the combination of the two should not have been able to bring down the towers because neither one on their own could have brought down the towers, and what tends to not be taken into consideration by many conspiracy theorists is while one of the two might not have been enough to bring down the towers, the combination of both was enough to bring down the towers.
Also, if you watch the videos of the collapses of the towers, it clearly shows that the beginnings of the collapses began at the impact areas. If there were any explosives on those floors, they would have gone off very shortly after the impacts, if not right at the time of impact.
This is the next installment in series of articles being written by a fellow blogger. His name is Muertos and he’s one of the best thinkers in the blogging world.
Mason I. Bilderberg
This is the second installment in a series of articles entitled “Confessions of a Disinformation Agent.” For the introduction and Chapter I, go here.
On the morning of September 11, 2001, I got up very early, five o’clock. I was working on a novel, and, as I was usually too tired to write when I got home, I started doing it in the early mornings before going to work. At this time I lived alone in apartment in the central city. I got up, showered, and spent about a half hour writing. At 6:45 AM—Pacific time—as I was making breakfast my phone rang. Instantly I knew it was bad news. No one ever calls at 6:45 AM with good news. I picked up. It was a friend of mine. (Not the same one who almost caught TWA 800). “Have you seen the news?” he said. I said no. He replied, “Someone tried to kill the President!” That was how it was reported to me. Oh, and there was the small detail of the World Trade Centers on fire after planes having been crashed into them.
I switched on the TV. This was about 9:45 AM, after both towers had been struck, but just before the first of them collapsed. Like almost everyone else in America, I watched in rapt horror. I’ll never forget seeing the first of the towers collapse into a cloud of dust. I also remember seeing the little black specks of people jumping from the towers before they fell. That’s one of the most horrifying sights I’ve ever seen—even on TV—and one that will stick with me forever. Mind you, I watched the 1986 Challenger explosion live, and I also witnessed the infamous Bud Dwyer suicide as it happened. Neither of those horrible events could touch September 11.
One of the many conspiracy theories about the 9/11 attacks is that the jets that flew into the World Trade Center towers, and the Pentagon, were not manned at all, but were actually un-manned drones.
One of the theories is that the planes had all been shot down somewhere in the Atlantic ocean and quickly replaced with the un-manned drones, or that they had been secretly landed somewhere, and that the crews and passengers had simply been made to “disappear”.
The biggest problem with both of these theories are that not only would they require thousands of people who work for the NTSB and various airport air traffic control unions to be in on the conspiracy, it would also have to get perhaps thousands of other people within the military and the government to never talk about it to anybody. This is so improbable and illogical, that many people considered both theories to be theoretical impossible.
Keep Reading: The Soap Box: Embarrassing Conspiracy Theories: Drones were what really hit the WTC towers and the Pentagon on 9/11.
NOTE: The image above is a fake. Click the image for more information.
Many of us know a 9/11 “truther” but, if you’re like me, you enjoy reality too much to spend your time, exhausting your patience, entertaining wacky theories. So, here is one, comprehensive link with all the debunking information you could possibly ask for!!!: Resources for debunking 9/11 Conspiracy Theories.
This is the infamous 9/11 debunking report from Popular Mechanics. This is an excellent read to help you battle all those conspiracists in your life.