Page 1 of 2
Posted on September 29 at 10:23 p.m.
Herschel Greenspan says, "stop it... you are killing me.. I can't stop laughing."
Russell says: Well if your laughter sounds as demented as the crap you've been posting here, it's evident that you're ready to be fitted for your straitjacket now... No surprise... it figures that a mind as rigid as yours would undergo a meltdown as the little fantasy world it has constructed begins to come apart...
But hey, you put up a spirited defense of the A-rabs with box cutters, Bush/Cheney certified conspiracy theory... for a little while anyway... but the arguments in support of the official version have become increasingly thin as more evidence has emerged. They are now revealed (as you have been so helpful in demonstrating) totally untenable, transparent lies.
And now, with your back against the wall, you've resorted to your ultimate weapon, you've pulled out your big gun: "Don't you dare say anything that contradicts the official conspiracy theory, or I, HERSCHEL GREENSPAN, will call you a 'TARD." Wow... that'll shut 'em up Herschel. You da man... LOL...
Hey Max, good job on the "who was in the west wing?" question...over half of the auditors and accountants looking for the $2.3 trillion, among other monies, were killed in that attack, and of course ALL of the records were destroyed...
On Twin Towers, Twin Myths?
Posted on September 29 at 1:11 a.m.
So much for your arguments... you know they are bogus, and at the end, all you've got left is to fling out some hackneyed insults. To wit: "I suggest that you let go of your dolphin, put the cheetos down and come out of mom and dad' s garage and join the rest of us in real world."
Herschel, your talent for cutting insults is exceeded only by your grasp of the subtleties of politics and science... oh yeah, and no doubt economics. You say, "It is almost as much fun as jousting with the Ron Paultards." It's a bit of a digression, but are you aware that the so-called Federal Reserve (for which Ron Paul would like to commission an audit) isn't a government institution? That it's a private enterprise, owned by heirs to the banksters to whom Woodrow Wilson and a corrupt Congress ceded the power to create money in 1913? And do you know, BTW, that the US, the vaunted 'Land of the Free' has more people in jails and prisons, both per capita and in sum, than any other country on the planet? Anyhow, I would assume that you're spewing insults and misinformation in those other forums as well as here, and you're obviously every bit as proud of it: but hey, as long as you're having fun... and you do make a good foil in these dialogues.
Back on topic, you've so far ignored my little challenge question, the one that Kratatoa is even now struggling so hard to understand. Remember? The setup is:
1) On 9/10/'01 we have video of Ronnie Rumsfeld announcing that the Pentagon has lost track of 2.3 TRILLION dollars! But we'll find it, he says:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xU4GdH....
2) The next day, an hour after a plane hit WTC1, an errant jet lumbers southward through the most heavily protected airspace on the planet, straight toward the headquarters of the mightiest military on Earth. Even though the nearby Andrews Air Force base normally has two squadrons of fighters on alert, none are sent up to intercept the plane. It now has only to dive straight into the Pentagon to wipe out Rumsfeld and most of the upper echelons of the military command; but, inexplicably, it swings left and executes a tight, aerobatic, 270 degree turn that brings it around to the west wall.
3) The section of the Pentagon called the 'West Wall' had been undergoing reinforcement and remodeling for about two years. Most of the tenants, including the Marines, had long since been relocated to other offices. But some remained...
The question is:
What were the duties of most of those still working in the section of the Pentagon that was so severely damaged on 9/11/'01?
It's obvious once you get it, but only a few people have seen it right away...
Posted on September 29 at 12:53 a.m.
As for the chain of custody and methodology, you need only read the paper 'Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe.' But that's probably more than you can handle, so here's the abstract:
"We have discovered distinctive red/gray chips in all the samples we have studied of the dust produced by the destruction of the World Trade Center. Examination of four of these samples, collected from separate sites, is reported in this paper. These red/gray chips show marked similarities in all four samples. One sample was collected by a Manhattan resident about ten minutes after the collapse of the second WTC Tower, two the next day, and a fourth about a week later. The properties of these chips were analyzed using optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray energy dispersive spectroscopy (XEDS), and differential scanning calorimetry (DSC). The red material contains grains approximately 100 nm across which are largely iron oxide, while aluminum is contained in tiny plate-like structures. Separation of components using methyl ethyl ketone demonstrated that elemental aluminum is present. The iron oxide and aluminum are intimately mixed in the red material. When ignited in a DSC device the chips exhibit large but narrow exotherms occurring at approximately 430 Â°C, far below the normal ignition temperature for conventional thermite. Numerous iron-rich spheres are clearly observed in the residue following the ignition of these peculiar red/gray chips. The red portion of these chips is found to be an unreacted thermitic material and highly energetic."http://tinyurl.com/de6448
Herschel_Greenspan says, "The elements present in the "nano particles" were present in large amounts in the massive furnace that was the twin towers."
Russell says: "massive furnace"... more nonsense. There were the initial short-lived fuel explosions, but they had no more effect on the structural steel than does the fire from a gas stove's burner on the grate above it. In a very short time the WTC fires were pouring out black smoke, a signature of oxygen starvation and, hence, low heat. After the buildings disintegrated, there was molten metal detected in the remains of all three structures... but you can't have it both ways here. Molten metal is a signature not of an ordinary hydrocarbon fire, but of thermite.
As for the 'elements' present, there was lots of iron, but it was mostly alloyed in the steel; it was not present in any significant quantity as the chemical compound and thermite ingredient ferric oxide. There was probably a bit of aluminum around, and the airplanes delivered a bit more, but there is no way, outside of your bizarre fantasies, that the impacts shredded the plane's fuselages down to the nano-scale.
See part VI
Posted on September 29 at 12:43 a.m.
Moreover, if you examine the testimony of those who saw a plane approach the Pentagon, they all describe a trajectory that is at odds with the official account. I.e., whatever hit the building came in at an angle different from the path of the plane. The reason that the hole in the west wall is so tiny is not because "THE G.D. BULIDINGS HAD COMPLETELY DIFFERENT CONSTRUCTION." It is because whatever hit the Pentagon didn't have any effing wings! That is what is established in Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski's "priceless" comment and Major General Stubblebine's observations.
Herschel_Greenspan says that, "human dna matching all but one of the passengers on flight 77 was found at the Pentagon."
Russell says: So who says that... the same people that told you a plane hit the Pentagon? They couldn't find luggage, seats, airplane parts... just a black box, showing that a plane overflew the building, and some little chunks of flesh... that's bloody unlikely. But if those DNA samples did in fact exist, where did they get them? When a new investigation finds out what really happened the passengers of Flight 77, we'll know.
Herschel_Greenspan says, "IAs for the nano particle hoax, I will beleive it when someone other than a fringe scientist working a comminity college can show me the chian of custody of the "dust" and their methodology."
Russell says: The authors are hardly in the "comminity college" realm. E.g., the lead author, Niels H. Harrit, is an associate professor of chemistry at the University of Copenhagen in Denmark and is the author/or co-author of nearly 60 peer reviewed scientific papers. Dr. Harrit has also served on numerous occasions as a peer reviewer/referee for scientific papers written by others. Here he discusses the evidence of nano-thermite in WTC dust on Danish television:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=56KFHI...
Look up the rest of the authors yourself. They are Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley and Bradley R. Larsen.
See part IV
Posted on September 29 at 12:38 a.m.
"General Stubblebine: I am Major General Albert Stubblebine. I am retired Army Major-General. In my last assignment -- my last command -- I was responsible for all of the Army's strategic intelligence forces around the world. I had responsibility for the Signals Intelligence, Photo Intelligence, Counter Intelligence, Human Intelligence. They all belonged to me, in my last assignment. :
I was supposed to find out what the enemy was doing, before the enemy did it so that we could take action against the enemy. That's Intelligence, OK, before the fact. So, we always -- always -- rely not on a single piece of data, before we make a statement, but on multiple and the more pieces of data that you have that correlate, the better you know exactly what is going on. :
So I have had a lot of experience looking at photographs. I have looked at many, many different kinds of photographs, from many, many different platforms on many, many different countries, around the world.
Interviewer: OK. So on September the 11th, in 2001, what hit the Pentagon?
General Stubblebine: I don't know exactly what hit it, but I do know, from the photographs that I have analyzed and looked at very, very carefully, it was not an airplane.
Interviewer: What made you believe that?
General Stubblebine: Well, for one thing, if you look at the hole that was made in the Pentagon, the nose penetrated far enough so that there should have been wing marks on the walls of the Pentagon. I have been unable to find those wing marks. So where were they? Did this vessel -- vehicle, or whatever it was -- have wings? Apparently not, because if it had had wings, they would have made marks on the side of the Pentagon.
One person counteracted my theory, and said, "Oh, you've got it all wrong. And the reason that it's wrong is that as the airplane came across, one wing tipped down and hit the ground and broke off." I said, "Fine, that's possible, one wing could have broken off." But if I understand airplanes correctly, most airplanes have two wings. I haven't met an airplane with only one wing. So where was the mark for the second wing? OK, one broke off -- there should have been a mark for the second wing. I could not find that in any of the photographs that I've analyzed. Now I've been very careful to not say what went in there. Why? Because you don't have that evidence. :
I did -- I've never believed that it was an airplane since I've looked at the photographs. Up until the time I looked at the photographs, I accepted what was being said. After I looked at it -- NO WAY! "http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=daNr_T...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9CNTo...
See part III
Posted on September 29 at 12:35 a.m.
Herschel_Greenspan says, "Hundereds of people saw the plane crash into the the building."
Russell says: Where are the links to these "Hundereds" of eyewitness accounts? You said earlier that "A security camera at a gas station recorded the plane milliseconds before impact." I said BS, where's the photo? You didn't provide it because it doesn't exist. Like your imaginary roster of witnesses, it's a fantasy. A handful of people saw a plane approach the Pentagon, and their accounts do not, in most cases, confirm the government's story. A few witnesses perhaps thought they saw, from a distance, a plane strike the building, yet the data from the black box itself says that they are in error. See the Pandora's Black Box video on the Pilots For 9/11 Truth website athttp://pilotsfor911truth.org/or in four parts athttp://tinyurl.com/y8semqt
Herschel_Greenspan says, "This sentence is priceless, "The scene, in short, was not what I would have expected from a strike by a large jetliner. It was, however, exactly what one would expect if a missile had struck the Pentagon."
Russell says: Recall that this is testimony from Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski, Pentagon employee and eyewitness to the events at the Pentagon on 9/11. She feels that the official story is not a satisfactory explanation, and that "More information is certainly needed regarding the events of 9/11 and the events leading up to that terrible day."http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/#K....
Herschel Greenspan says, "How many airliners have crashed into buildings at hight speed Russ? Yeh, that's right only the three on 911. The reason that the impressions on the buildings were different than the one at the Pentagon is THAT THE G.D. BULIDINGS HAD COMPLETELY DIFFERENT CONSTRUCTION."
Russell says: WHOA! Chill dogg, no need to get your panties all in a bunch about it... just take a few deep breaths and try to follow the logic. First, the "COMPLETELY DIFFERENT CONSTRUCTION." mantra is BS. Yes, steel reinforced concrete predominated at the Pentagon, and steel supports with concrete floors was the mode at the towers, but they were both multistory building with lots of windows. There is no way that a Boeing 757 with 124 ft 10 in wingspan can enter a 20x20 ft hole in a wall and not even damage the windows to either side. Get it? That's where the official story begins to fall apart. Indeed, here's what Major General Albert Stubblebine (U.S. Army (ret) Former Commanding General of U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command, 1981 - 1984. Also commanded the U.S. Army's Electronic Research and Development Command and the U.S. Army's Intelligence School and Center. Former head of Imagery Interpretation for Scientific and Technical Intelligence. 32-year Army career) has to say on the subject:
Oops... I hit the word count limit again. See part II
Posted on September 26 at 11:45 p.m.
Kratatoa says, "Go on ..."
Sure, after you solve the question of "What were the duties of most of those still working in the section of the Pentagon that was so severely damaged on 9/11/'01?" Do you need a clue?
Posted on September 26 at 11:19 p.m.
Reply part VI
Herschel says, "Any of the wild theories you propose would involve hundreds if not thousands of individuals, but eight years later not a wisper."
Russell says: Who are you going to turn to in such a situation... the government? Check out the story of Kurt Sonnenfeld, the FEMA photographer who now lives in exile in Argentina:http://www.voltairenet.org/article160...
Herschel says, "Finally prove to me that this thermatic material was not created by the tens of thousands of computers, telephones, printers, fax machines, cell phones, electrical wiring, insulation and other items that were burning for hours and then days after the tower's collapse."
Russell says: What an absurd comment... have you no understanding of how basic chemistry and chemical manufacturing works? Aside from the fact that the components of all of the items you list above have little if anything in common with thermite/thermate, nano-thermite requires extremely sophisticated equipment and techniques for its fabrication. By your reasoning, you could throw a hand grenade in a hardware store and expect iPods and Blackberrys to fly out...
But in spite of the fact you've offered so much erroneous information here Herschel, thanks for playing. The more that discussions such as these are conducted, the more the awareness of the various issues is raised.
PS: here's more on the strange pod seen on the fuselage of the plane that hit WTC2http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V38Slq...
Posted on September 26 at 11:16 p.m.
Reply part V
You say, "Hundreds of people reported seeing a jetliner crash into the building." but it's not true. A few people saw a large plane approach the Pentagon, but I've yet to hear a first person account of the collision.
You say, "A security camera at a gas station recorded the plane milliseconds before impact." BS: you can't provide a link to any footage showing a plane hitting that building. Save for the few inconclusive frames that were eventually released, the tapes from every camera that might have captured the events at the west wall have been seized and kept from the public, even in the face of FOIA suits.
Like I say, you swung wildly at everything and whiffed. But, hey, you tried so hard that I'll give you another turn at bat here... but I'm not making concessions to your ineptitude at this point, so it's not a lob.
A Conundrum:1) On 9/10/'01 we have video of Ronnie Rumsfeld announcing that the Pentagon has lost track of 2.3 TRILLION dollars! But we'll find it, he says:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xU4GdH...
Question: What were the duties of most of those still working in the section of the Pentagon that was so severely damaged on 9/11/'01?
Can you understand the question? Do you want to take a swing?
Herschel says, "The WTC was the center of finance in the US, there is no way that any American dark group entity would sacrifice such a vital structure."
Russell says: Just for starters, WTC7 housed offices of the Security and Exchange Commission, along with those of other government agencies. Remember WTC7? I only heard about it a few years back, and to this day there are those who are unaware of its destruction. Why would WTC7 be marked for demolition? Maybe that the records for SEC cases against some well-connected players in finance and other related realms were destroyed has something to do with it...
Posted on September 26 at 11:04 p.m.
Reply part IV
Herschel says, "Thank you for the softball and letting me hit it over the fence."
Russell says: Dude, you whiffed it... you struck out again. E.g., your question "Why would you think that an almost half a million pound jetliner flying hundreds of miles per hour make a cartoon like cut out in a concrete and steel building?" Oy vey... Well you see, Herschel, there were other planes that hit buildings on 9/11... like, for example, the one that hit the concrete and steel WTC1... did you hear about that? Look it up and see for yourself what sort of hole that impact made... And this: "There were thousands of items of debris recovered from the Pentagon including jet engine parts, seats and human dna from the passengers." Nonsense. Virtually the only aircraft debris was ONE engine, and the photographs show that it doesn't match those of a Boeing 757. Oh, there was a flight data recorder they claim was recovered at the scene, and after a long fight, the data was made public under the Freedom of Information Act. But the info from the black box shows that the plane must have overflown the Pentagon; else it would have had to make a very steep descent to hit it. See the Pandora's Black Box video on the Pilots For 9/11 Truth website athttp://pilotsfor911truth.org/or in four parts athttp://tinyurl.com/y8semqt
Also, here's testimony from Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski, Pentagon employee and eyewitness to the events at the Pentagon on 9/11.
"There was a dearth of visible debris on the relatively unmarked [Pentagon] lawn, where I stood only minutes after the impact. Beyond this strange absence of airliner debris, there was no sign of the kind of damage to the Pentagon structure one would expect from the impact of a large airliner. This visible evidence or lack thereof may also have been apparent to the secretary of defense [Donald Rumsfeld], who in an unfortunate slip of the tongue referred to the aircraft that slammed into the Pentagon as a "missile". ...
I saw nothing of significance at the point of impact - no airplane metal or cargo debris was blowing on the lawn in front of the damaged building as smoke billowed from within the Pentagon. ... all of us staring at the Pentagon that morning were indeed looking for such debris, but what we expected to see was not evident.
The same is true with regard to the kind of damage we expected. ... But I did not see this kind of damage. Rather, the facade had a rather small hole, no larger than 20 feet in diameter. Although this facade later collapsed, it remained standing for 30 or 40 minutes, with the roofline remaining relatively straight.
The scene, in short, was not what I would have expected from a strike by a large jetliner. It was, however, exactly what one would expect if a missile had struck the Pentagon. ...
More information is certainly needed regarding the events of 9/11 and the events leading up to that terrible day."http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/#K...