Conspiracies

[dougplumb]

Wrt Stephen Jones, he was a prof with good standing until he started investigating 9/11 then he lost his tenure. Of course they don't say "you were asking questions about 9/11 so we are taking your tenure away". They find another reason. They have to be protected from the courts. There are a few others. Jones has a very impressive CV.

[dougplumb]

Selene: "Doug kinda reminds me of the last juror in 12 Angry Men"

I never saw the movie - did this guy keep talking about evidence or something ?

[Alfonso Jones]

Wrt Stephen Jones, he was a prof with good standing until he started investigating 9/11 then he lost his tenure. Of course they don't say "you were asking questions about 9/11 so we are taking your tenure away". They find another reason. They have to be protected from the courts. There are a few others. Jones has a very impressive CV.

I think it is worth noting that what started out as a statement by you to the effect that "anyone that questions the official version of 9/11 in the universities loses their tenure" has thus far led to the listing by you of ONE professor at an institution which does not even actually grant tenure who had their "continuing status" (which is NOT the same thing as tenure) removed.

May we infer that Stephen Jones is your best or only example? (Or is it Steven Jones, as I find it spelled at some sites...?)

Bill P

[dougplumb]

"May we infer that Stephen Jones is your best or only example? (Or is it Steven Jones, as I find it spelled at some sites...?)"

No I know of others but its been a while since I have argued 9/11. I may have stated things a little loosely there, but Jones (Steven) was outed because of his questioning and investigation of 9/11. I know of another prof that specialized in Islamic study that was also on the outs.

Everyone knows what the universities are like - hardly free thinking institutions. I went to university and had conversations with all kinds of profs about this, engineering, arts, - all kinds. In university you tow the political line as a prof or you are out. You will never see a university prof teaching about honest money in a first year economics class ! - maybe in a philosophy class.

I have heard this from many profs in person, I can't give names.

We all know they teach that man made global warming is real in universities.

Edited May 24, 2009 by Doug Plumb

[Jonathan]

Johnathan, I looked at the photographic evidence a long time ago. I don't depend on it for my case on 9/11 being an inside job. many people on my side agree with your take on the photographic evidence. With the photos you presented, the faces do look similar but there aremany problems with this confession tape, missing audio is only one of them.

If you don't rely on the photographic evidence, then why do you keep citing it and making false claims about what it contains, and why do you refuse to retract your false claims? Why are you so resistant to correcting your errors?

My case for 9/11 being an inside job is based purely on science, as I have explained earlier. The buildings were demolished, there is no shortage of building experts that agree with me, there are hundreds.

Are these the same "experts" who, like you, can't even get their interpretations of simple, objectively measurable photographic evidence right? You can't reliably measure and compare something as simple as images of noses on faces, or compensate for the exposure density differences between different video sources, yet you expect people to believe that you've done accurate "science" in regard to much more complex physical issues which are less objectively measurable than images of noses on faces and exposure densities?

University profs in civil engineering up here in Canada WILL NOT discuss 9/11 with their engineering students. This is from two different students from two different schools who did not know each other. I have heard it from others as well.

Perhaps it's because some of these students, like you, are very aggressive in pushing an agenda, and they come across as being unwilling to be reasonable and to admit to their own obvious errors? Perhaps the profs quickly learned that the 9/11 issue brought out the zealots and disrupted the process of educating students?

J

[Alfonso Jones]

"May we infer that Stephen Jones is your best or only example? (Or is it Steven Jones, as I find it spelled at some sites...?)"

No I know of others but its been a while since I have argued 9/11. I may have stated things a little loosely there, but Jones (Steven) was outed because of his questioning and investigation of 9/11. I know of another prof that specialized in Islamic study that was also on the outs.

Everyone knows what the universities are like - hardly free thinking institutions. I went to university and had conversations with all kinds of profs about this, engineering, arts, - all kinds. In university you tow the political line as a prof or you are out. You will never see a university prof teaching about honest money in a first year economics class ! - maybe in a philosophy class.

I have heard this from many profs in person, I can't give names.

We all know they teach that man made global warming is real in universities.

So, to summarize:

You are unable to list even one single faculty member who was tenured, and was denied tenure and who has claimed said denial was somehow linked to them having taken the view that 9/11 was, as you term it, "an inside job."

Doug - - beware of the mistake of concluding that because someone tells you "I have heard about lots of people who . . . ." there really are very many. Rumors of some of the strangest sorts can start and grow in the absence of any corroborating facts.

Bill P

[dougplumb]

"You are unable to list even one single faculty member who was tenured, and was denied tenure and who has claimed said denial was somehow linked to them having taken the view that 9/11 was, as you term it, "an inside job.""

Jones was not tenured, but he was given early retirement. Pardon me - he wasn't tenured.

You guys should try making some statements. You sit in the bushes waiting for me to trip up. I have stated in very clear terms my case, but none of you will state yours. If you want to criticise what I say when standing up, then stand up yourselves and earn the right. Anyone can be an arm chair quarter-back.

I've given Johnathan the link to investigate the videos in detail www.whatreallyhappened.com (Mike Rivero) The videos or any form of speculation are not part of my case for 9/11 being an inside job.

[dougplumb]

Johnathan: "Are these the same "experts" who, like you, can't even get their interpretations of simple, objectively measurable photographic evidence right? You can't reliably measure and compare something as simple as images of noses on faces, or compensate for the exposure density differences between different video sources, yet you expect people to believe that you've done accurate "science" in regard to much more complex physical issues which are less objectively measurable than images of noses on faces and exposure densities?"

I have given you links to Patriots Question 9/11 and Architects and Engineers for 9/11 truth.

What does anyone think Usama bin Ladens motive was in bombing the wtc's ? Did he want Afghanistan or Iraq bombed for it ? Who benefited from the attacks ?

[dougplumb]

Bill P "beware of the mistake of concluding that because someone tells you "I have heard about lots of people who . . . ." there really are very many. Rumors of some of the strangest sorts can start and grow in the absence of any corroborating facts."

I personally have been told the nature of universities and towing the line before I realized that gov had been taken over by criminals. I wasn't political then and wondered about why that would be or what the motivation for them telling me was. This isn't a rumour that I am saying to you. If you repeat it it becomes rumour from you.

I learned about it in eco class after asking about where all the money came from and in science when man made global warming was taught. Plus in the pub. I thought everyone knew universities had all been corrupted by the tax free foundations who provide the research grants. I didn't understand it until after I graduated and started educating myelf.

We know they are corrupt because they teach man made global warming.

[Selene]

"In university you tow the political line as a prof or you are out." << not if you have integrity and you are a good teacher, you just invite folks to the faculty meeting.

If they are barred, you hold your faculty meeting on the lawn outside the administration building.

I did.

Adam

[Rich Engle]

We should have allowed for this earlier, at least I should have.

One thing to consider with how the destruction was deployed, is all.

It was the old Soviet cell system. Work teams, unknown to each other. That's just good business.

Doug, elaborate if you have something on that....

[Judith]

As to the "Illuminati" thing...that's just a tagline people use.

I know. I kind of like it, so I use it. (I didn't see the movie until last night.) I read the history of the real Illuminati back in February.

Judith

[dougplumb]

""In university you tow the political line as a prof or you are out." << not if you have integrity and you are a good teacher, you just invite folks to the faculty meeting.

If they are barred, you hold your faculty meeting on the lawn outside the administration building."

What motivates perfectly qualified profs to teach man made global warming ?

All I am saying is that many academics have said to me that you have to tow the line. You can't start teaching real history, real economics or real science. I was warned about what I was taught about global warming and about banking in school by profs, it was explained to me that there are some things they cannot teach. Everyone knows these guys are dep on NGO's and foundations for research grants and that NGO's and foundations are the real gov- they establish and sometimes direct policy, not these morons we elect and see on TV - they are ceremonial or symbolic just like the hood ornament isn't your car.

Why is it that we can have long discussions about things that can never really be stated objectively, but then when I start stating objective facts there is no discussion ?

It seems you are all hovering waiting for an excuse to attack, yet really have added nothing to this discussion on 9/11 or why you believe what you do regarding any conspiracy theory.

Attack my reasoning on why I think 9/11 was an inside job.

[Selene]

Doug:

"Everyone knows these guys are dep on NGO's..." <<<< once again - everyone does not know this and I would hazard a reasonable amount of money that Bill is not "one of these guys".

Dr. Noone at City University Philosophy Department was not. Dr. Fales in linguistics was not. Dr. Armand Crezenzi was not. Dr, Robert Leighton was not.

I can go on for a long long time on this list.

Adam

Post Script: There is an extremely fast cure for prostitution and that is to stop fucking people for money.

You need to stop mind fucking yourself.

Edited May 25, 2009 by Selene

[Rich Engle]

Wow, that was kind of harsh.

The worst thing that can ever happen to a reasonably-evolved human is to wake up one day and realize there are actual big dogs out there, who want to eat them.

Edited May 25, 2009 by Rich Engle

[Selene]

You are right Rich - I expected better from Doug and it pissed me off.

Thanks.

It must have been the Roti!

Adam

[Alfonso Jones]

Doug:

"Everyone knows these guys are dep on NGO's..." <<<< once again - everyone does not know this and I would hazard a reasonable amount of money that Bill is not "one of these guys".

Dr. Noone at City University Philosophy Department was not. Dr. Fales in linguistics was not. Dr. Armand Crezenzi was not. Dr, Robert Leighton was not.

I can go on for a long long time on this list.

Adam

Post Script: There is an extremely fast cure for prostitution and that is to stop fucking people for money.

You need to stop mind fucking yourself.

Dependent on NGOs? Not so.

Paint with a broad brush and you can always get a lot of attention and make a dramatic statements. (Rand connection . . . Rand was not immune to doing this - - - see the title essay in For The New Intellectual for particularly eloquent, dramatic, and regrettable examples of this.)

But it's not part of a search for truth. Searching for truth means speaking carefully, checking facts, etc... And realizing that the series X-Files was NOT a documentary.

Bill P

Edited May 25, 2009 by Bill P

[dougplumb]

I guess it depends on how you define government. I define it as those who create and implement policy. Its not the clowns we "vote" for - they are salesmen and nothing more.

You just want to sit in your ivory tower and be an arm chair critic. If you start telling me why you believe the official version of 9/11 you know that you will have to speak in general terms and that you cannot back up anything you say. You cannot back up your beliefs in any way, that is why you must sit back and criticize and never stick your neck out.

Lets hear some evidence that supports your beliefs.

[Alfonso Jones]

I guess it depends on how you define government. I define it as those who create and implement policy. Its not the clowns we "vote" for - they are salesmen and nothing more.

You just want to sit in your ivory tower and be an arm chair critic. If you start telling me why you believe the official version of 9/11 you know that you will have to speak in general terms and that you cannot back up anything you say. You cannot back up your beliefs in any way, that is why you must sit back and criticize and never stick your neck out.

Lets hear some evidence that supports your beliefs.

Doug -

I assume you are addressing me, though you do not indicate so clearly. Please advise how you know how I comport myself in ways supportive of liberty and openness. I would be interested in what means of special knowledge you possess. I would find it even more fascinating how you go beyond knowing what I do (without, to my knowledge, ever having met me or asked me questions about me) to the psychic-like level of knowing my desires (that I "just want to sit in [my] ivory tower and be an arm chair critic"). And if you believe me to be in the thrall of NGO's, please document the evidence for your belief.

I will speak to you frankly: The "evidence" you have been presenting has been of such low quality as to take what was an initial willingness on my part to consider alternative explanations for 9/11 if evidence were presented to support such and instead to induce me to be more skeptical of alternative explanations - at least until someone comes up with better ones than you have. You have trotted out and announced as some of the best resources:

1) Religious zealots (see the WWW site you led us to)

2) Alex Jones - - whose "street antics" in HIS OWN VIDEOS undermine his credibility. Is this man an advocate of reason, in your assessment?

You are not building credibility. If you want to come up with conspiracy theories which attempt to overturn existing explanations, it would be good to

a) Have credible alternative theories

B) Provide actual evidence to show the existing explanations are less credible than your alternative theories

You have, frankly, done better at casting doubt on existing explanations than at producing credible alternative theories. The "straight vertical" collapse of the buildings has never explained. But the greater mystery to explain would be how an "inside job" such as you contend happened was kept secret and carried out, when so many would have strong motivation to reveal such a dastardly plot. We have yet to hear credible method or motive from you - - - how in your opinion this "inside job" was carried out, and what was in your opinion the purpose. The existing explanation is imperfect. What you have offered thus far asks to accept on faith things much less credible than the existing explanation.

We will wait... Telling us that we have to prove that none of your theories is correct (when you have not even indicated clearly what your SPECIFIC theory is and the best supporting credible evidence for it is) is not persuasive. You have arrived and are trying to persuade us. I suggest that you build your case - don't just announce to us that we haven't proven ours.

Bill P

Edited May 25, 2009 by Bill P

[Rich Engle]

In all fairness, whether or not you find things from religious folk, or from Alex funning around on camera has nothing whatsoever to do with the matters at hand.

What, should they all wear conservative atheist outfits and never end sentences with prepositions? It is a non-issue.

[Alfonso Jones]

In all fairness, whether or not you find things from religious folk, or from Alex funning around on camera has nothing whatsoever to do with the matters at hand.

What, should they all wear conservative atheist outfits and never end sentences with prepositions? It is a non-issue.

Rich -

Visit the site I mention above (highly touted by Doug) and view the videos. See if you find these people's arguments to be credible.

I did, and don't find them credible. And I don't mind occasionally ending a proposition with a preposition.

Bill P

[Chris Grieb]

Bill P; I am sure Doug will accuse you of having your Bliderberger card.

I am the only person on OL who finds Doug's quote from of all people J. Edgar Hoover curious.

I experienced something similar when I watched the movie New World Order noting that one of the talk show hosts shown in the movie broadcast from station KLBJ the radio station that made Lyndon Johnson a millionaire. It was for many years the only radio station in Austin, Texas. This was a real conspiracy that made Lyndon Johnson a rich man and President of the United States.

[ThatGuy]

On 5/21/2009 at 6:34 AM, dougplumb said:

The neoconservatives follow the philosophy of Leo Strauss, who in turn got his education from Carl Schmidt, who was Hitlers guide. The democrats are on board and following the same agenda, although the liberal agenda was originally to squeeze our rights out of us much more slowly.

In the end 80% - 95 % of the worlds population will be killed off, the remaining members will not have the right to happinesss or any kind of freedom. Those that survive will live under total socialism and society will be shaped to maximize their ability to serve a very small ruling class.

"Thirteen Years Later..." (give or take a few):

"You will own nothing, and you will be happy." -Klaus Schwab