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


jts

Recommended Posts

Jonathan:

I would be interested in your expert opinion/analysis of:

1) the Abraham Zapruder film; and

2) film of Lee Harvey Oswald's assassination by Jack Ruby in the "transfer" operation.

If you wish to send it off list, that would be fine for me.

A...

I haven't offered comprehensive analyses of the events that I listed, but only limited visual analyses of a variety of specific claims made by conspiracy nutters. They'll claim something like, "If X actually happened and the film was real and not faked, then we'd be able to see Y in the footage at time Z. But there is no Y at time Z!" And I then show that Y can indeed be seen at time Z.

I'll see if I can find some of the discussions and post links.

J

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mikee: "And the motive is money? They have complete control over all the money they see fit to print already." Sure they can print it, but they need reason to print it. They make money by acting as an intermediary, they need more spending in order to be an intermediate more. 9/11's fear helped keep Americans motivated to increase/maintain military spending and attack terrorist groups in the middle east and overthrow Saddam. 9/11 also destroyed evidence of Rumsfeld's missing 2.3 trillion. 9/11 also resulted in the Patriot act, naked body scanners at airports, etc, many things that increased survailence, which reduces citizen security and financial anonymity. Should our government really have the info on all financial transactions and balances? Whether or not 9/11 was orchestrated by factions of the US Gov, theres no question the US Gov benefited from it.

Jonathan, In public there is the chance that non in-group entities might collect evidence that contradicts the in-group story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you are emotionally empty and get great satisfaction out of piling gratuitous insults onto people you think are vulnerable.

Vulnerable? I think that Dean is anything but. In this case, he seems to be immune to things like empathy and other normal human traits. Reread this thread. Dean is the one who is piling gratuitous insults on people who have lost lives and limbs. His behavior is what is "emotionally empty."

And you said "people." Plural. Who else, other than Vulnerable Dean, are you accusing me of gratuitously insulting while they are vulnerable?

Do you torture small animals as well?

Do you mean, do I kick people when they're down, like, say, when they're victims of a bombing? No, I don't. I do, however, stand up for such people, and I have no reservations whatsoever about confronting assholes who try to add to their burden.

Now, perhaps you're trying to say that you know something about Vulnerable Dean that I don't, such as that he's been having some personal problems in his private life? If so, I haven't been referring to anything like that, since I don't know about it. I've been referring only to his public behavior here, and specifically to the issues that he has chosen to discuss. In short, I'm not responding to him because I think he's weak and because I like to bully people, but because he is being a bully.

That's the point. Didn't you get it? I'll never understand how a person who can produce beautiful paintings can be so ugly inside.

You're misidentifying who is "ugly inside." Again, I suggest that you reread this thread. Read what your dear little Vulnerable Dean wrote about the bombing victims. That is what is ugly. My intolerance of that ugliness is due to the strength of my inner beauty. I think the same is true of Bill Scherk's also being disgusted by Vulnerable Dean's inner ugliness.

I guess that's an insult, but not a gratuitous one. You earned it bud.

I'm not your bud, pal.

J

There are no 'victims' here being insulted or ridiculed. The only person being insulted is a member of OL and he is being personally insulted by yourself. Dean has hypothesized we are the victims of a hoax. He's suggesting individuals working their own nefarious ends presumably in control of resources of the United States (taxpayer funded) has executed a monstrous propaganda scheme in order to maintain their control over the money and power of this country. He has made a giant leap from what we know are the daily deceptions and predations of the government and its agencies to a monstrous evil plot. That is Dean's nature, he makes giant leaps, his imagination is unbounded. He is also extremely intelligent. That does not mean his giant leaps don't sometimes go off the rails. I have known Dean for nearly ten years, I find him interesting, thought provoking and am curious to see where he will end up. I consider Dean an on line friend. If you see a friend go off the rails you naturally try to get him back on the rails. I think where I see a rabid dog Deans sees a fire breathing dragon. I would like to persuade Dean of my view. That's difficult when the likes of you continues with the insults. Your goal is not to enlighten but crush the life out of a person and drive off someone you don't understand and don't like. William also is quite vocal, insulting and livid with indignation at Dean's suggestions. There is a qualitative difference between William and yourself. Even in the most heated parts of his exchanges William leaves an opening, he would put the train back on the rails if he could. He would reason together with Dean if he could. You would toss Dean into the dustbin, you see no use in someone that takes great leaps and the long way around. In the end collaboration with Dean will take me a lot farther than collaborating with your stunted imagination and calculated meanness.

We're not pals, bud.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jonathan:

I would be interested in your expert opinion/analysis of:

1) the Abraham Zapruder film; and

2) film of Lee Harvey Oswald's assassination by Jack Ruby in the "transfer" operation.

If you wish to send it off list, that would be fine for me.

A...

I haven't offered comprehensive analyses of the events that I listed, but only limited visual analyses of a variety of specific claims made by conspiracy nutters. They'll claim something like, "If X actually happened and the film was real and not faked, then we'd be able to see Y in the footage at time Z. But there is no Y at time Z!" And I then show that Y can indeed be seen at time Z.

I'll see if I can find some of the discussions and post links.

J

Thanks J.

Much of what you stated up thread about:

the different effects that can occur due to lighting or to a longer or shorter lens, etc.

foreshortening, depth of field, or the potential illusions that can happen due to cameras having a single lens where we have binocular vision.

misinterpret distances, shadows, reflections, and even digital compression artifacts

low-resolution copies of copies of video evidence, rather than on full-resolution original footage

that speeds of objects don't add up, etc.

interest me in terms of both "films."

For eample, how long in "time" is each frame in the Zapruder film?

Or, because of the mechanism that "runs" the film through the camera does not, or, does, make each frame the same speed, or, does it vary?

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Selene,

People propose doing all sorts of nefarius things to other groups of people. I guess that would add to something we should watch out for... but here I'm more concerned about physical/engineering and biological evidence captured on camera. That's all I've got to go on personally, I wasn't there. Everything else is just he said she said, which I can never trust.

For example, I look at the collapse of building 7...

neverforgetwtc7lt5.gif

And I wonder how office fires could cause a symetric freefall collapse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Selene,

People propose doing all sorts of nefarius things to other groups of people. I guess that would add to something we should watch out for... but here I'm more concerned about physical/engineering and biological evidence captured on camera. That's all I've got to go on personally, I wasn't there. Everything else is just he said she said, which I can never trust.

I see, so the "evidence" that I posted from Scientific American in post # 19 supra does not qualify?

Additionally, what do you mena by "nefarious things?"

Do you mean nefarious "things" like popularizing conspiracy theories that place stress on folks who were crippled in a bombing?\\

Or, suggesting to a grieving mother who is suffering extreme depression having lost her son to a bomber, that he is not dead, or, that he was killed by her own government?

Those types of nefarious "things."

I have made two commitments to language over the last year.

One is to not use the generic word "things" rather than be specific.

And two, to eliminate the word "but" and substitute "however."

Try it on for awhile.

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)

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...

The insulation material fell off the structural steel which led to fire induced failure. That material was not the original architect specified asbestos-based insulation. An engineer in a letter published in the NYT around 1972 (no further reference available by me) stated a serious fire would bring down either building as a consequence of changing insulation type to exclude asbestos as per a new city ordinance in mid construction on one tower and maybe 1/3 up the second.

--Brant

The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey probably could have told NYC to stuff it but didn't, but the Political Port Authority of New York and New Jersey SHOULD NEVER HAVE BUILT THEM IN THE FIRST PLACE!

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm more concerned about physical/engineering and biological evidence captured on camera. That's all I've got to go on personally, I wasn't there. Everything else is just he said she said, which I can never trust.

For example, I look at the collapse of building 7...

...

And I wonder how office fires could cause a symetric freefall collapse.

Dean, have you read much material that challenges the notion of 'freefall'? There are indeed plenty of claims of demolition being the cause of WTC7's collapse, and more than plenty claims surrounding 'freefall.'

But, have you examined any/many/some 'contra' materials?

My point being that millions of words have been recorded, thousands of websites have been constructed -- there is a massive amount of material both pro-conspiracy (demolition) and anti-conspiracy (collapse).

Point: have you assessed counter-arguments? Have you seen or read arguments where the claims of 'freefall' are examined and refuted?

What do you say is the rate of freefall, Dean? Or rather, what is the actual speed/distance of the 'freefall' that you witness or assume when you see videos of the collapse? How did you calculate the rate or speed of the WTC7 collapse?

There are many many more such questions that suggest themselves to me.

Regardless of your answer, are you willing to concede that you could be wrong? And will you say you'll give a fair shake to any particular WTC7 information I or others might bring forward?

I think I have left out any borderline 'ad hominem' or insult. I don't know if you think I operate on good faith or not, but I hope you honestly answer, if not for my benefit, then for the benefit of other OL readers. I hope you might want to either more firmly support your beliefs -- or give the erstwhile official/accepted accounts a 'fair shake.'

If you do choose to answer in detail, I'd be happy to discuss why I believe you are mistaken in your conclusions about WTC7. I'd be happy to bring forward material for examination. (I'd also hope you would keep strictly to the topic of WTC7's destruction.)

_____________________

Anticipating Dean is open to examining 'official/accepted' accounts of the collapse of WTC7, I give a link to the NIST Q&A that explains its findings in re 'freefall' ...

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

There are no 'victims' here being insulted or ridiculed. The only person being insulted is a member of OL and he is being personally insulted by yourself. Dean has hypothesized we are the victims of a hoax.

Ah, I see! Your sweetheart Vulnerable Dean has merely been politely and scientifically "hypothesizing"!

Reread his comments about one victim giving another a blow job, etc.

He's suggesting individuals working their own nefarious ends presumably in control of resources of the United States (taxpayer funded) has executed a monstrous propaganda scheme in order to maintain their control over the money and power of this country.

He's not "suggesting" it. He is stating it, and he is smearing the victims and their rescuers.

He has made a giant leap from what we know are the daily deceptions and predations of the government and its agencies to a monstrous evil plot. That is Dean's nature, he makes giant leaps, his imagination is unbounded.

Wow, you totally have a crush on him! Do you dream about his sweet kisses?

Heh. Um, as for his "unbounded imagination," he appears to me to be very lacking in imagination. I think that a person has to be quite dull and unimaginative to fall for the crap that he's falling for. Seriously. It is anything but imaginative.

He is also extremely intelligent.

I think that's probably true in regard to very limited areas of knowledge.

That does not mean his giant leaps don't sometimes go off the rails. I have known Dean for nearly ten years, I find him interesting, thought provoking and am curious to see where he will end up. I consider Dean an on line friend. If you see a friend go off the rails you naturally try to get him back on the rails. I think where I see a rabid dog Deans sees a fire breathing dragon. I would like to persuade Dean of my view. That's difficult when the likes of you continues with the insults.

Oh, but I'm not insulting him, but very politely and scientifically "hypothesizing." Just as Bill Scherk is. He and I have been online BFFs for quite some time now, and I'm sure he'll vouch for my unbound imagination, intelligence and all-around goodness.

Your goal is not to enlighten but crush the life out of a person and drive off someone you don't understand and don't like.

No, my goal isn't to crush the life out of anyone, but to crush their shitbag behavior. Notice that I haven't been criticizing Vulnerable Dean's virtues, but his vices. So don't try to spin my motives as attacking "life" rather than attacking viciousness. It's dishonest of you to do so, and really lame and unimaginative.

William also is quite vocal, insulting and livid with indignation at Dean's suggestions. There is a qualitative difference between William and yourself. Even in the most heated parts of his exchanges William leaves an opening, he would put the train back on the rails if he could.

Actually, I did leave an opening: I said that in a few years Vulnerable Dean will probably come to his senses and forget all about this current batshit insanity. I suggested that Bill should give Vulnerable Dean time because his rationality and "filters" seem to take a long time to kick in.

He would reason together with Dean if he could. You would toss Dean into the dustbin, you see no use in someone that takes great leaps and the long way around.

No, I'm not going to go along with your pretending that I'm opposed to great leaps of imagination. That's a really unimaginative attempt at spin. Dean isn't taking "great leaps the long way around." He's taking stupid, petty whacks. He's repeating nonsense that other non-imaginative people came up with.

In the end collaboration with Dean will take me a lot farther than collaborating with your stunted imagination and calculated meanness.

Well, then you should "collaborate" with your sweet Vulnerable Dean to your heart's content!

We're not pals, bud.

I'm not your bud, guy.

J

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For eample, how long in "time" is each frame in the Zapruder film?

Or, because of the mechanism that "runs" the film through the camera does not, or, does, make each frame the same speed, or, does it vary?

A...

The Zapruder film runs at 18.3 frames per second. The exposure time of each frame does not vary.

J

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The insulation material fell off the structural steel which led to fire induced failure. That material was not the original architect specified asbestos-based insulation. An engineer in a letter published in the NYT around 1972 (no further reference available by me) stated a serious fire would bring down either building as a consequence of changing insulation type to exclude asbestos as per a new city ordinance in mid construction on one tower and maybe 1/3 up the second.

--Brant

The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey probably could have told NYC to stuff it but didn't, but the Political Port Authority of New York and New Jersey SHOULD NEVER HAVE BUILT THEM IN THE FIRST PLACE!

--Brant

Correct.

And there were a lot of unions that got enhanced "payments" through various channels.

The key is the word "Authority" which was the sheer genius of Robert Moses and what he wrote into the law when he was a legislative aide. Mommy was CONNECTED to lower Manhattan's powerful Democratic machine.

The Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority was his personal Castle.

The New York Court of Appeals provided a thorough history of state laws regarding public authorities in the 1994 case Schulz v. State, 84 N.Y.2d 231. As the court explained, state debt limits were first enacted as a reaction to fiscal crises caused by the state's lending of its credit to "irresponsible" canal and railroad corporations in the early nineteenth century. The state was forced to assume these obligations, which amounted to more than three fifth's of the state's entire debt. In 1846, a referendum requirement was added to the state constitution, prohibiting the state from contracting long term debt without approval by the voters.

The link above is from our good friend Bob Schultz****[see post #63] who was a courageous and tenacious fighter for freedom. That link is a true history lesson beginning at III.

Moses used authorities to control the City and the State of New York.

His protogees and disciples changed the face of American when Ike began the inter state highway system essentially as a military corporate industrialist web.

In 1921, the legislature chartered the first state public authority, the Port of New York Authority, as a new vehicle for financing public projects while insulating the state from long term debt obligations. In 1926, the Court of Appeals held in Williamsburgh Savings Bank v. State, 243 N.Y. 231, that the state could disclaim any moral obligation for public authority debts. However, amendments to the 1938 Constitution overruled this case and completely disclaimed the state's responsibility for any public authority debt.

The widespread use of public authorities in New York State was pioneered by Robert Moses in the 1950s and 60s. Much of Moses' power base resulted from his tight control of the Triborough Bridge Authority, which allowed him to earmark revenues from tolls on the bridge for other projects in New York City and around the state. He also served as president of the Jones Beach Parkway Authority (1933–1963), president of the Bethpage State Park Authority (1933–1963), and chairman of the New York Power Authority (1954–1962). Moses, through his control of these authorities, was able to build some of New York's most important public works projects, including the Cross-Bronx Expressway, the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway, and various bridges and parkways. The public authority model allowed Moses to bypass many of the legal restrictions placed on state agencies, allowing him to expedite

development but also allowing him to hide project financing, contracting and operational information from public scrutiny. Because of this, he has been criticized for wasteful spending, patronage, and refusing to consider public opposition to his projects.

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

**** Bob:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_L._Schulz


Robert Louis Schulz, the Founder and Chairman of We the People Foundation for Constitutional Education and We the People Congress, is a constitutional activist with a decades-long focus on holding government accountable to the Constitution, through the First Amendment Right to Petition.

An engineer by training, Schulz has filed well over one hundred court actions on a pro se basis, against government actions he asserts are unconstitutional deprivations of individual liberty.[citation needed]

In 1994, Schulz was on the New York State ballot as the Libertarian candidate for Governor.[1]

In 2009, Schulz organized a "Continental Congress" which convened in November of that year.

Contents

1 Federal tax problems
1.1 Injunction against Schulz
1.2 Contempt proceeding
2 Other activities
3 References
4 External links

Federal tax problems

In 2006, Schulz was under investigation by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in connection with an alleged failure to file Federal income tax returns for years 2001 through 2004.[2]
Injunction against Schulz

On August 9, 2007, the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York issued an order including an injunction permanently barring Schulz and his We the People Foundation from (1) advising or instructing persons or entities that they are not required to file federal tax returns or pay federal taxes (see Tax protester arguments); (2) selling or furnishing any materials purporting to enable individuals to discontinue or stop withholding or paying federal taxes; (3) instructing, advising or assisting anyone to stop withholding or stop paying federal employment or income taxes; and (4) obstructing or advising anyone to obstruct IRS examinations, collections, or other IRS proceedings.[3] The court found that Schulz and the We the People Foundation were engaging in illegal activity that was exposing individuals to criminal liability in connection with federal income taxes. In February 2008, that decision was affirmed by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. In its decision, the Court of Appeals stated:

The district court found that defendants' illegal activities were harming individuals, who were exposing themselves to criminal liability by following the defendants' ill-conceived instructions. ... Requiring defendants to provide the identity and contact information of the recipients of the tax materials enables the government to monitor the defendants' obligation under the injunction to provide a copy of the district court's order to recipients of the tax materials. Moreover, the district court found that the defendants' illegal actions were harming the government ... Requiring defendants to provide the identity and contact information [ . . . ] enables the government to monitor whether the recipients of defendants' materials are violating the tax laws. Thus, we find no abuse of discretion with respect to the district court's imposition of the reporting requirements in Paragraph C of the injunction.[4]

Contempt proceeding

On April 7, 2008, the government filed a motion in the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York, asking the court to hold Robert L. Schulz and the We the People Foundation in civil contempt of court for failure to comply with the court order requiring Schulz to turn over, to the government, the names and contact information of the individuals who had received tax materials from the Foundation.[5] On April 28, 2008, the District Court issued an order holding Schulz and the other defendants in contempt of court, imposing fines of $2,000 per day[6] on Schulz, the We the People Foundation, and the We the People Congress, effective retroactively to April 28, 2008, if the defendants did not comply with the court order by 4:00 p.m. on Monday, May 5, 2008.[7] At 3:55 pm on May 5, 2008, Schulz filed a document with the court asserting that he had turned the material over to the United States attorney's office earlier that day.[8]

Other activities

On December 1, 2008, Schulz questioned whether President-elect Obama is a natural born citizen of the United States. He placed an ad which he claimed to be worth "tens of thousands" of dollars in the Chicago Tribune to express his foundation's belief.[9][10] The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) has published an article asserting that in 2009, Schulz began "to play a key role in building a larger movement, one with concerns that went far beyond challenging the legality of taxes and Obama's holding the office of president."[11] The SPLC asserts that Schulz has been playing a "key, and little-noticed, part in the dramatic expansion of the radical right...."[12]

Great man Bob...

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the record, my blowjob comment was a sarcastic comment on my part to help me relieve my anger caused by William Scherk's post #20 where he used ad hominem attacks against me and displayed strawman graphic pictures to argue against my pictures that show lack of blood on Jeff (the amputee), the red sweater woman, and the grey hooded sunglasses man, who were both sitting right there between Jeff's "legs" and touching Jeff's "legs".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the record, my blowjob comment was a sarcastic comment on my part to help me relieve my anger caused by William Scherk's post #20 where he used ad hominem attacks against me and displayed strawman graphic pictures to argue against my pictures that show lack of blood on Jeff (the amputee), the red sweater woman, and the grey hooded sunglasses man, who were both sitting right there between Jeff's "legs" and touching Jeff's "legs".

That's a lie. You already made a comment about the woman giving the other victim a blow job in post #14, and then you repeated it in post #21. Apparently you think it's really fucking funny.

Dean, you really should work on yourself. Try to quit being such a piece of shit.

J

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the record, my blowjob comment was a sarcastic comment on my part to help me relieve my anger caused by William Scherk's post #20 where he used ad hominem attacks against me and displayed strawman graphic pictures to argue against my pictures that show lack of blood on Jeff (the amputee), the red sweater woman, and the grey hooded sunglasses man, who were both sitting right there between Jeff's "legs" and touching Jeff's "legs".

That's a lie. You already made a comment about the woman giving the other victim a blow job in post #14, and then you repeated it in post #21. Apparently you think it's really fucking funny.

Dean, you really should work on yourself. Try to quit being such a piece of shit.

J

You just can't help yourself can you? What a loser. QED my previous comments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dean, I just really read your post 14. That's really disappointing.

The reason there weren't many wounded children in Sandy Hook is the devastating effect of the high velocity .223 bullet and their low body mass compared to an adult.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brant,

Oh, I said it in post 14 too. Thanks for the correction. I must be a really evil person for having a dark sense of humor.

Anyways, it still stands that those 3x people lack blood on them when the guy's supposed legs were vaporized.

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

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

Edit: Any idea if the .223 rounds were Full Metal Jacket or Hollow Point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dean,

I think the plausibility of 911 being a conspiracy (the buildings wired w/ explosives and detonated after 'someone' at the behest of the conspirators flew planes into the twin towers) is zero. I don't say near zero, but zero. The plausibility of the Boston marathon bombing being a fake, also zero. I admit I don't remember seeing any pictures from Sandy Hook and I am concerned about law enforcement acting more like storm troopers than peace keepers; i.e. they take total control of a large area around a crime, call it the crime scene and don't allow any private investigation at all to corroborate their own findings. Nevertheless, I find it bizarre to even consider that this was a hoax. It would take too many people, too much planning, it's too elaborate and the motive is fuzzy. It would an absolute total control of information with no leaks to pull it off. If they had that much control they wouldn't need elaborate hoaxes. I did dig a little and found this NIST report about building 7. This is the second or third time I've looked at this stuff and drawn the same conclusion. They happened as reported, there was a conspiracy and careful planning by outside actors (terrorists) in the first two and a very sick individual who also killed his mother carried out the third. Dean, I do failure analysis on complex systems (electronics) for a living. I don't jump to conclusions, I look at data, I calculate probabilities, I perform experiments, I don't always find root cause. But I'm not a physics or building engineering or explosives expert. Reading these reports (like the NIST report) I don't see them as being fabricated by conspirators. They seem professional, well reasoned, conservative, I don't get any alarms bells from them. I would have to know a lot more than I know to do the math. A follow up might be, they talk about the type of construction, the long beams as an engineering mistake and there are many other building with similar construction. Do you know, or can you find out, if they are retrofitting buildings with similar construction as building seven? Are they changing building practices as a result of this report? If they are not that may be an alarm that the report is bogus. I'm absolutely positive that's not the case but that would be something to check. Sorry you got so much flak from some of the OL denizens citizens. Believe me, as bad as it is when you're wrong, it's much worse when you're right. BTW, an apology is hard to miss if you say "I apologize" i.e. for the off color remarks made in the heat of anger. I intend to apologize to Jonathon for characterizing him as "ugly inside", hopefully after he apologizes to you for his shitbag or whatever remarks. Whatever it is that allows him to create paintings with the extraordinary detail and beauty that he is capable of may predispose him to intolerance in other circumstances. I think he would like to remake OL in his own image... William has proven he can very graciously give an apology if he changes his mind or comes to a different understand of another pov. Though we disagree on many things I think William is a class act. He does have a temper but he doesn't try to be cruel, I don't see that in him at all. I think most of OL represents the top 1% of humanity, even with the wildly different opinions about things. Groups of people are like fractals, no matter how you try to group people with similar properties together you get the same repeating patterns. Even among geniuses you get the assholes and the saints, the outgoing and the loners. It takes all kinds to make a world. I probably pissed off both Jonathon and William by talking about them publicly but not directly to them. Oh well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brant,

Oh, I said it in post 14 too. Thanks for the correction. I must be a really evil person for having a dark sense of humor.

Anyways, it still stands that those 3x people lack blood on them when the guy's supposed legs were vaporized.

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

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

Edit: Any idea if the .223 rounds were Full Metal Jacket or Hollow Point?

It would make little practical difference at close range, especially. Military rounds, of course, are FMJ. I used an M-16 in the Vietnam War as a medic.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brant,

Oh, I said it in post 14 too. Thanks for the correction. I must be a really evil person for having a dark sense of humor.

Anyways, it still stands that those 3x people lack blood on them when the guy's supposed legs were vaporized.

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

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

Edit: Any idea if the .223 rounds were Full Metal Jacket or Hollow Point?

It would make little practical difference at close range, especially. Military rounds, of course, are FMJ. I used an M-16 in the Vietnam War as a medic.

--Brant

Correct. The .223 can travel between 2700 & 3700 fps, depending on the bullet weight/ type. At close range the energy & damage is intense on impact with either bullet type.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ventura's nine questions:

ventura1.jpg

This is the most trenchant of Ventura's criticisms. As Sheldon Richman has written, "Despite all its guarantees -- contrary to its ideological justification for existing -- the state can't protect us -- even from a ragtag group of hijackers. Trillions of dollars spent over many years built a "national security apparatus" that could not stop attacks on the two most prominent buildings in the most prominent city in the country -- or its own headquarters. That says a lot. No. That says it all. The state is a fraud. We have been duped."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ventura's nine questions:

ventura1.jpg

This is the most trenchant of Ventura's criticisms. As Sheldon Richman has written, "Despite all its guarantees -- contrary to its ideological justification for existing -- the state can't protect us -- even from a ragtag group of hijackers. Trillions of dollars spent over many years built a "national security apparatus" that could not stop attacks on the two most prominent buildings in the most prominent city in the country -- or its own headquarters. That says a lot. No. That says it all. The state is a fraud. We have been duped."

Who is he criticizing, the state or its citizens? It can't be the former for it can't be criticized for what it cannot do.

After the initial attack on the WTC by agents of "The Blind Sheikh," why didn't the Eloi move out?

--Brant

those buildings always scared me to be inside them; their scale was all wrong but greatly impressive

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brant:

I played chess at the Top of the World.

I was part of the "transportation" agency's chess team.

Talk about a view on a crystal clear Autumn night. However, I almost felt vertigo when I hit my time clock and got up from the

table, knowing that I had the game in my pocket.

New my opponent well also and knew that he would take his time because a stalemate was still possihble for our game.

However, a stalemate for white is a "loss" in terms of points for the team match.

How was the scale wrong? That's an interesting statement.

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry you got so much flak from some of the OL denizens citizens.

Believe me, as bad as it is when you're wrong, it's much worse when you're right.

A great example is the amount of flak that I'm getting for being right on this thread!

BTW, an apology is hard to miss if you say "I apologize" i.e. for the off color remarks made in the heat of anger. I intend to apologize to Jonathon for characterizing him as "ugly inside", hopefully after he apologizes to you for his shitbag or whatever remarks.

Why would I apologize? I'm giving Vulnerable Dean exactly what he wants! He's trolling. He craves the reactions that he's getting. He wants to shock, and to be cruel and vulgar. I wouldn't be surprised if he ramps it up even further in the future, and finds a way to be an even bigger douchebag in pissing on victims of atrocities, just to get his next fix.

It'll be fun to see if you have a limit in putting up with it.

Whatever it is that allows him to create paintings with the extraordinary detail and beauty that he is capable of may predispose him to intolerance in other circumstances. I think he would like to remake OL in his own image....

Heh. You're not thinking clearly. You're reacting purely emotionally. My history on OL and elsewhere is that of opposing gurus who want to tell everyone what they should think and like.

If you want to believe in fairies or leprechauns or manbearpig or alien abductions, go for it. I'll probably laugh at you for it, but knock yourself out. If you want to entertain nonsense theories and make a fool of yourself, have a ball. But, if, in doing so, you want to piss on victims of atrocities, I'm going to tell you in no uncertain terms that it's time for you to rein in the crazy. And that maybe it's time to get some professional help. Same with killing kittens and puppies for the fun of it. So please stop with the lame attempts at spin. Stop trying to pretend that this is about my wanting to have control over everyone. Start focusing on the behavior of your friend, rather than excusing it, overlooking it, and trying to deflect recognition of the cause to elsewhere.

He does have a temper but he doesn't try to be cruel, I don't see that in him at all.

You're complaining about cruelty while coddling Vulnerable Dean and trying to protect him from criticism of his cruelty? It sounds to be a lot like what Rand said about "psychologizing": "...excusing specific individuals on the grounds of their psychological problems." Is that what's going on here? That's what it sounds like.

J

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