9 QUESTIONS FOR THE 9/11 COMMISSION | Jesse Ventura Off The Grid


jts

Recommended Posts

Ventura's nine questions:

ventura1.jpg

ventura2.jpg

ventura3.jpg

ventura4.jpg

ventura5.jpg

ventura6.jpg

ventura7.jpg

ventura7.jpg

ventura8.jpg

ventura9.jpg

My favourite question is number five, which is accompanied by reference to April Gallop, who believes that no plane hit the Pentagon (she was injured working at the Pentagon that day, and is on record saying she saw no aircraft wreckage, no luggage, and no bodies on the lawn -- once she staggered out and lost consciousness).

My reaction to number five is: how many supposed 'other' cameras were there actually recording; what was their field of view; how would the other footage, if extant, refute the testimony of eyewitnesses to the plane smashing into the Pentagon?

April Gallop, bless her soul, has numerous media interviews and articles under her belt. Here's one with the Washington Post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question 6 is not valid. The buildings did not fall at the speed of gravity. This can be proved by videos showing debris falling faster than the building.

The other 8 questions are not valid because it is easy to make clever ad hominem jokes against Jesse Ventura.

And besides, questioning government is unpatriotic and politically incorrect and irrational. Whatever government says should be taken as written in stone by the finger of God.

Every government is 100% infallible and 100% benevolent, no exception. At the moment I am unable to provide an example but I am sure there are examples.

I accept as an article of unthinking faith that all governments are perfect. That's why there is never any conflict between governments and never in all of history was a war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question 6 is not valid. The buildings did not fall at the speed of gravity. This can be proved by videos showing debris falling faster than the building.

The other 8 questions are not valid because it is easy to make clever ad hominem jokes against Jesse Ventura.

And besides, questioning government is unpatriotic and politically incorrect and irrational. Whatever government says should be taken as written in stone by the finger of God.

Every government is 100% infallible and 100% benevolent, no exception. At the moment I am unable to provide an example but I am sure there are examples.

I accept as an article of unthinking faith that all governments are perfect. That's why there is never any conflict between governments and never in all of history was a war.

Beyond self-parody, what is your point JTS?

Is your point that 9/11 was an "inside job" and that anybody who disagrees is a lemming of some kind, being led off the cliff by our overlords?

If so, come out and say it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Beyond self-parody, what is your point JTS?

Is your point that 9/11 was an "inside job" and that anybody who disagrees is a lemming of some kind, being led off the cliff by our overlords?

If so, come out and say it.

Inside job? How dare you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jerry, this sarcasm is hard to cut through. Your argument is a martyr's argument -- you have put down tools and gone silent on what you actually believe. I don't see why you don't simply argue for what you believe in a straightforward manner.

I would Fisk your contribution to better dig out what argumentation remains after stripping out the ironic detachment and disingenuous side-stepping, but there isn't much.

Question 6 is not valid. The buildings did not fall at the speed of gravity. This can be proved by videos showing debris falling faster than the building.


Question six is "How were the towers [WTC 1 and 2] able to fall at the rate of gravity? Doesn't this defy physics?"

As you suggest in your swan-dive, question six is not valid, for the twin towers did not pancake at 'free fall'. This is elementary, Jerry, and puts the question in the area of disinformation or willful ignorance. Don't tell me you haven't gone out and found debunkings of the notion of 'free-fall' ...

The other 8 questions are not valid because it is easy to make clever ad hominem jokes against Jesse Ventura.

And besides, questioning government is unpatriotic and politically incorrect and irrational. Whatever government says should be taken as written in stone by the finger of God.

Every government is 100% infallible and 100% benevolent, no exception. At the moment I am unable to provide an example but I am sure there are examples.

I accept as an article of unthinking faith that all governments are perfect. That's why there is never any conflict between governments and never in all of history was a war.


Jerry, isn't this just a shimmy shake? I'd say the sarcastic inversion of your own beliefs does not present an argument nor attempt to analyze the shonky assumptions undergirding Ventura's questions.

What irked me the most about his crappy questions was what he forked up as witnesses to events. One notable was the story-shifting Rodriguez and another was April Gallop.

What irked me about the reliance on Gallop was that the existence of scores of other primary witness statements was not acknowledged. The weakness of her attestations was not explored, nor contrasted with other more probable attestations, and so a trove of evidence is seemingly discarded, unexamined. Ventura's question then becomes a sneer towards victims and witnesses. The bodies were identified. The victims had names. They died because an American Airlines plane slammed into the Pentagon.

Jerry, the martyr ploy and the propagation of Truther nonsense on the anniversary of 9/11 revolts me. It also saddens me that you have no grace and no sense on this subject.

Edited by william.scherk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most of the regulars here seem to learn stuff from being here -not just facts - and then there is you, jts. I know you are not without humour but you also seem to be without rational parameters. Jesse Ventura for godsakes.

Ms. Carol:

His brain is fried from eating all that healthy shit...

Glad to see you out and about in the internet ether.

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jerry, this sarcasm is hard to cut through. Your argument is a martyr's argument -- you have put down tools and gone silent on what you actually believe. I don't see why you don't simply argue for what you believe in a straightforward manner.

I would Fisk your contribution to better dig out what argumentation remains after stripping out the ironic detachment and disingenuous side-stepping, but there isn't much.

Question 6 is not valid. The buildings did not fall at the speed of gravity. This can be proved by videos showing debris falling faster than the building.

Question six is "How were the towers [WTC 1 and 2] able to fall at the rate of gravity? Doesn't this defy physics?"

As you suggest in your swan-dive, question six is not valid, for the twin towers did not pancake at 'free fall'. This is elementary, Jerry, and puts the question in the area of disinformation or willful ignorance. Don't tell me you haven't gone out and found debunkings of the notion of 'free-fall' ...

The other 8 questions are not valid because it is easy to make clever ad hominem jokes against Jesse Ventura.

And besides, questioning government is unpatriotic and politically incorrect and irrational. Whatever government says should be taken as written in stone by the finger of God.

Every government is 100% infallible and 100% benevolent, no exception. At the moment I am unable to provide an example but I am sure there are examples.

I accept as an article of unthinking faith that all governments are perfect. That's why there is never any conflict between governments and never in all of history was a war.

Jerry, isn't this just a shimmy shake? I'd say the sarcastic inversion of your own beliefs does not present an argument nor attempt to analyze the shonky assumptions undergirding Ventura's questions.

What irked me the most about his crappy questions was what he forked up as witnesses to events. One notable was the story-shifting Rodriguez and another was April Gallop.

What irked me about the reliance on Gallop was that the existence of scores of other primary witness statements was not acknowledged. The weakness of her attestations was not explored, nor contrasted with other more probable attestations, and so a trove of evidence is seemingly discarded, unexamined. Ventura's question then becomes a sneer towards victims and witnesses. The bodies were identified. The victims had names. They died because an American Airlines plane slammed into the Pentagon.

Jerry, the martyr ploy and the propagation of Truther nonsense on the anniversary of 9/11 revolts me. It also saddens me that you have no grace and no sense on this subject.

Thank you, William.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you, William.

Seconded and thirded...move the question.

Jerry I am a New Yorker. I probably attended 50 or so firefighter funerals with my father who served

in the NYFD for 35 years as a firefighter, fire marshal and officer.

Lost two very close friends and countless other acquaintances.

Show some human decency and have some class.

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

William Scherk & Selene,

I don't see how the suggestion that some factions within the federal government carried out the 9/11 attack is somehow displaying a lack of decency, class, grace, or sense.

jts,

I enjoyed your predictive ad hominem and strawman sarcasm. Building 7 did fall at freefall... but the twin towers were slower.

===============

My conclusion:

Was there more to causing the twin towers collapse than just planes crashing and burning into them? Watch building 7 collapse. That right there leaves no question that explosive demolition was used. Hence there was a most assuradly a cover up, strongly indicating that it was a false flag.

Not sure if you guys have seen these Boston Marathon pictures. Where is the blood? Shouldn't that black lady in the red and white shirt be covered in blood after giving the amputee a blowjob (or whatever she was doing between his "legs")? Maybe the media got their events mixed up when they reported 9/11 as dust puffs and this as explosions?

Sandy Hook... where's the video survailence? Where's the pictures of the dead kids? Evidence of any kids leaving the school? How did the perp kill so many kids and injure so few? Why didn't EMT ambulances and helicoptors rush kids to the hospital (instead, police blocked off the school, no helicoptors, and police declared the children's death when actually only doctors can declare death)? How can that "father" be laughing so soon after his child was "murdered"? Where's the tears in the interviews?

Recent behedding: knife didn't draw blood, fade out to still camera pan... hahahaha, thats a pretty low budget false flag hoax.

With all of the above media sensationalization with so many questions left unanswered, and information withheld from the public, with visuals conflicting with official explanations... I no longer feel worried about social rejection when proclaiming that I think all of these events are false flags and hoaxes.

=================

Let me be clear about what I think happened in each of these events:

9/11: I acknoledge that many innocent people died, and it was a tragety. I'm not sure who were on the planes. Maybe they were drones. The twin towers were damaged by the planes. The twin towers and building 7 were brought down by demolition explosives. The pentagon: I'm not sure what hit it... not that it really matters at this point whether it was a plane. US government faction working with banking faction to: 1. Destroy incriminating financial evidence; 2. Enhance American fear and hate in order to motivate increased military industrial complex spending & increase survailence; 3. Marginal: even the owner of the buildings made out with his insurance policy.

Boston Marathon: All actors. "Bombs" were just sound, smoke, and flash, no damaging force/heat, no shrapnel. Fake blood & injuries. Performed by federal government faction in order to increase fear, gun control, police militarization, and survailence.

Sandy Hook: All actors. I'm not sure whats more funny, the guy laughing before his press conference, or his supposedly dead kid getting her picture taken with the president after she died. Performed by federal government faction in order to increase fear, gun control, police militarization, and survailence.

Recent Behedding: Actors. False flag hoax, to increase hate towards muslims and justify attacking Syria/Iraq more.

Maybe its all hard to believe for you. How could "our own people" be so evil to their fellows? You've gotta take into account that the Federal Government's primary source of power is its enforcement of the monopoly of money (USD fiat)... and that the people who are in control of the Federal Reserve and biggest banks are pyschopathical manipulative dictators. There is a reason why they preach Keynesian instead of Austrian. You may consider those elites as part of your tribe... but to them, you are sheep.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dean, you

...don't see how the suggestion that some factions within the federal government carried out the 9/11 attack is somehow displaying a lack of decency, class, grace, or sense.

Is that how you see Jesse Ventura's rhetoric, as a "suggestion?"

A...

Post Script: Hope this finds you doing well and in good health.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Selene,

What I remembered I saw by his rhetoric:

He is suggesting the fed is covering things up, that there is more to the story than what we were told, that the fed's story doesn't hold up to available evidence. He is demanding the fed release information that is being withheld, so that we can better figure out what happened. I fail to see how demanding information that is being withheld is in any way disrespectful for people who died on 9/11. I fail to see how suggesting that US government factions were responsible is in any way disrespectful to the people that died.

Instead what I figure you are feeling is your stomach launching up to your mouth as you fall down the rabbit hole of what such a conclusion would imply. That the media and Federal government could be so corruptly manipulated by the powers that be. Emotionaly, you attach this feeling to "truthers" because their questions cause you to feel this way. Saying that such is disrespectful to innocent victims is a manipulation used by shills and cop out by sheep.

Edit: Thanks. I'm doing ok. I really should be working more, I've been slacking lately. The recent behedding mentioned above kind of made me want to talk about this stuff... hence me bringing this thread back up from a month of dust.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Edit: Thanks. I'm doing ok. I really should be working more, I've been slacking lately. The recent behedding mentioned above kind of made me want to talk about this stuff... hence me bringing this thread back up from a month of dust.

Dean:

The beheading is a reflected glimpse of what is on the way. What is on the way is not going to be pretty.

You should know by now that I have no problem understanding what this government is capable of. So, respectfully, lose the internet speak.

I lost two (2) very close friends and numerous members of the NY Fire Department who we knew very well, including the Department Chaplain who was a close friend of my father.

Losing friends would only make me more laserlike in my focus to seek out the truth.

I worked for almost two (2) years with groups that believed that their was more than one assassin in Dealy

Square November 22, 1963 at midday.

I disagree with the statement that " the fed's story doesn't hold up to available evidence."

I will welcome that debate.

Additionally, this "smoke screen" statement does not wash with me:

"He is demanding the fed release information that is being withheld,..."

That is a form of question begging. However, if Jesse, or, his group filed FOIL demands and were denied, I

am willing to listen.

Think that they did, Dean?

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Selene,

What do you mean "internet speak"?

I read about some guy who requested FOIA on the pentagon videos... the pentagon released one video, but it only has one frame showing maybe what hit it, and its really poor resolution/quality, so its hard to tell what it was. But yea, I guess Jesse isn't really demanding information from the government by making the youtube video. FOIA for black box release doesn't really work when the FBI claims they never found them.

The Building 7 collapse is claimed by the feds to have been caused by office fires. The videos show building 7 collapsed at freefall acceleration symetrically into its own footprint. Please explain how office fires can do this.

Explosion before collapse of twin tower building. (from NIST FOIA request)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Selene,

What do you mean "internet speak"?

I read about some guy who requested FOIA on the pentagon videos... the pentagon released one video, but it only has one frame showing maybe what hit it, and its really poor resolution/quality, so its hard to tell what it was. But yea, I guess Jesse isn't really demanding information from the government by making the youtube video. FOIA for black box release doesn't really work when the FBI claims they never found them.

The Building 7 collapse is claimed by the feds to have been caused by office fires. The videos show building 7 collapsed at freefall acceleration symetrically into its own footprint. Please explain how office fires can do this.

Explosion before collapse of twin tower building. (from NIST FOIA request)

NIST -

The greatest challenge that U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) investigators faced when they began in 2002 was the destruction of the main bodies of evidence that they would normally probe in such a disaster. "Most of the buildings and their contents, save the structural steel skeletons, was demolished to the point that they were unrecognizable and of no practical use in reconstructing the conditions prior to aircraft impact," says structural engineer Shyam Sunder, lead investigator of the NIST report on the World Trade Center disaster.

Apparently, the investigative teams had a monumental problem gathering evidence.

They analyzed 236 pieces of steel obtained from the wreckage, representing all grades of steel used in the buildings and including several pieces impacted by the aircraft or affected by fire. They obtained some 7,000 photographs and roughly 7,000 video segments totaling in excess of 150 hours from the media, public agencies and individual photographers. They compiled and reviewed tens of thousands of pages of documents and interviewed more than 1,000 people who had been on the scene or had been involved with the design, construction and maintenance of the buildings. They conducted lab tests involving large fires and the heating of structural components.

Additionally, the investigators had to develope new analytical tools and models:

The investigators then developed computer models of how each tower was damaged upon impact, how the jet fuel dispersed, how the fires evolved across each floor, how the structures heated and how they ultimately failed. These simulations of the structures and the physical properties of their materials were extraordinarily complex, with the aircraft impact analysis requiring computations "that were accurate over microseconds," Sunder recalls. At times, researchers had to invent new modeling capabilities to get the simulations to work, such as mapping of fire-generated environmental temperatures onto the structural components of the buildings. Also, "new scientific understanding of spray-applied fire-resistive materials had to be developed," Sunder says.

It turns out that even a combination of high-speed collisions by two airliners and fires across multiple floors would not have destroyed the Twin Towers, according to NIST's final 2005 report on their collapse. The robustness and size of the structures helped them withstand the hits, and in the absence of damage, fires as intense as the ones the towers faced would likely not have led to collapse.

As to building # 7, which apparently caught fire from the flaming debris of the towers...

On the other hand, World Trade Center Building 7 (WTC 7) collapsed even though it was not hit by aircraft. The 47-story office building caught fire after debris from WTC 1 fell on it, and the flames spread uncontrolled because its sprinklers also did not work—city water lines were damaged in the destruction of the Twin Towers. In the 2008 report on the breakdown of WTC 7, NIST investigators concluded the fire then caused steel floor beams and girders to expand, resulting in unexpected structural weakness and triggering a progressive collapse, the first known instance of a tall building brought down primarily by uncontrolled fires.

I am quite familiar with large structural construction as well as fire/arson issues.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/twin-towers-forensic-investigation-revise-building-codes/

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

William Scherk & Selene,

I don't see how the suggestion that some factions within the federal government carried out the 9/11 attack is somehow displaying a lack of decency, class, grace, or sense.

I wrote: "Jerry, the martyr ploy and the propagation of Truther nonsense on the anniversary of 9/11 revolts me."

Not sure if you guys have seen these Boston Marathon pictures. Where is the blood? Shouldn't that black lady in the red and white shirt be covered in blood after giving the amputee a blowjob (or whatever she was doing between his "legs")?

Disgusting. The link you provide goes to a crazy place. I think you are in a crazy place yourself.

The problem as I see it is that you have loaded only 'conspiracy' tales into your mind, and you haven't done due diligence in putting the tales to a test. This means you only can see the conspiracy 'evidence' and have no room in your mind to contest it. Your filters are broken. I find this very very sad.

Regarding 'where is the blood' -- there is no way to engage this question. People died, people were maimed, limbs were shredded, amputations were necessary.

People died, Dean. Two bombs injured 180 people.

I can't express how sad your falling down the rabbit hole appears to me.

Here's some blood for you, you ghoul:

article-2310483-1950B0F5000005DC-176_638

This lady lost her legs. What do you say to her, Dean? What do you say to the other people maimed? What do you say to the witnesses and victims of the explosions?

You don't believe them, I guess. An enormously complicated hoax with hundreds of actors and scene-dressers and producers and blood-drippers is more believable, it seems.

Boston_marathon_bombing_29.jpg

aoapdVX.jpg

Edited by william.scherk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your pictures are strawmen. How about showing the pictures I linked to?

"Here's some blood for you, you ghoul"

Ad hominem

"This lady lost her legs. What do you say to her, Dean? What do you say to the other people maimed? What do you say to the witnesses and victims of the explosions?"

I say: Sorry, next time use more smoke and more fake blood. Smoke to screen from non-member video captures like these. Try to get some blood that quickly dries and turns dark brown like real blood.

Bostonfakery5edit1000w.jpg

Shouldn't that lady in red sweater have more blood on her after giving the double amputee Jeff a blowjob (or whatever she was doing down there in his crotch)? Wow Jeff has some really wide hips! (Or maybe his right fake prosthetic wasn't attached yet?)

leg1edit1200w.jpg

Oh, he didn't bleed that much after losing his legs. That explains it! But wait, shouldn't he have bled more? Hmm. Where's the lady in the red sweater? She was tended to first and taken away in a stretcher... before Jeff? What??? yea, lets tend to all of the other people first before Jeff. He looks fine to me, cause somehow his "legs" stopped bleeding.

bostonfakery17edit900w.jpg

Where's the trail of blood? Oh, the cowboy hero is taughtly pulling the "tourniquet", which is previnging the blood from flowing onto the pavement. Cowboy has blood on his hands. Jeff... where's the blood on your hands? Shouldn't you have some more blood on yourself after laying in a pool of your own blood? You did a great job keeping your shirt clean!

Funny that they took the lady in red & white away on a strecher, before the double amputee on a wheelchair. Amazing that he has the strength and awareness to balance himself upright on that chair all by himself after he dumped all that blood out onto the pavement from his leg arteries. Oh wait, he didn't bleed that much for some reason, so he is probably fine.

missing-legmanedit1200w.jpg

Where's the blood on red sweater lady here? Look at the shrapnel holes in the red and black shirt girl on the right. Oh, the holes are only in her shirt, not her arm. She's got a pretty clean looking sock given the apparent condition of the back of her calf. Her right leg isn't dripping any blood. In your photo with the red sweater lady on stretcher, look, lets apply a yellow shirt around her thigh!

Where's the blood on the grey hooded guy's hand after helping Jeff? Where's the blood you showed of the red sweater lady in the stretcher in these video snapshots?

More photos

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What you are doing is disgusting, Dean. You obviously haven't done the necessary work to examine the Marathon hoax claims. I don't know why you specifically call out the maimed as actors, and I cannot explain how you became endowed with expertise in decoding disaster footage.

What is disgusting is the victim-snuffing. You deny the deaths and you deny the injuries and you deny every single witness to the events. They are participants in a hoax. You deny their suffering. That is foul to me.

I find it deeply depressing that you have given up the tools of reason to investigate and debunk these fearsome tales.

I am shocked, too, still, that you could not see the delusional reasoning at the sites you cite, It's as if you read them once and did not seek counter-arguments, other critical sites and information.

There is something wrong here, Dean. Your reason is not working on the Marathon issue. It's not just that you are incurious about the rational arguments made against the nutterzone crap on Marathon. It's also that you don't know when you are wrong. How would you know if you are wrong here, Dean?

I won't respond to you on these subjects. I think you need some help getting at the truth, or at least some knuckling down to do a critical review of your own. Reason should instruct you that the ramifications of a hoax in this instance mean that many hundreds of people were deeply implicated.

That is where you can go crazy, imaging the entire scenario of the Marathon bombing, now under the control of a Hollywood "them."

I hope you haven't gone permanently crazy already. This side-thread deserves exile in the Garbage Pile.

Edited by william.scherk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ad hominem and call for censorship. Necessary work = look at pictures and think for oneself rather then allowing others such as william scherk to think for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dean,

William certainly doesn't think for me.

I've tried to figure out where you're coming from on this. I've read your arguments, read the pro's and con's by experts on both sides of the arguments and concluded the cause of the collapse of the buildings was due to the crash of the airplanes and the burning of jet fuel weakening the structure of the building. The flaws in the building design were well covered, no one considered crashing an airplane and thousands of gallons of burning jet fuel into the considerations for design. Future buildings will take possibilities like this into account. I've looked at the photos and explanations of the 'explosions', I've concluded there were no explosions. I've only revisited this in the past because of your concerns, I'm not going to go back to it again. The larger, bigger question has nothing to do with the physics of exactly what happened. It has to do with the assumptions you would have to make to conclude absolutely that this was a conspiracy of US government actors to purposely murder thousands of people and destroy the trade center. You would have to have dozens if not hundreds of people in critical positions who each make Ted Bundy and Kim Jong-il look like choir boys. And completely cover their tracks. Believing this is possible is decidedly a different view of human nature than an objectivist one where malignant evil is the exception not the rule. It has occurred to me that you don't really believe this but believe a revolution is necessary and are promoting ideas that lead to revolution sooner rather than later. If this is true, be careful what you wish for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, Dean and William, I wish you hadn't put up those pictures. They were worse than a lot of war wounds and I've seen hundreds. Pictures are not arguments and tend to spike thinking.

There is another problem of non-experts pretending to be expert enough to tell the world what really happened. There is more mileage in the Grassy Knoll. Please go there instead. Especially if you have no autopsy photographs.

--Brant

dueling photographs--yecht!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now