AE, I believe that most people who visit this forum would agree that the jews, and their shabboz goy servants, control the "mainstream" media. Correct?

Why would the masters of the media allow the very same media, that they own and control, to be used against them?

Why do they report TAA?

Jews control it not by OKing every single story, but by training people in a "party line" and conditioning them to interpret events in a certain way. There is no secret jewsquad of Jewsinblack showing up to hypnotize Gentiles liberals into their complicity. It works through academic indoctrination and socialization. Indirect control mechanisms, not direct. Big difference. Print is under far less DIRECT control by Jews, than TV and radio.

So, a Jew might choose to black out a TAA distro, but a Gentile might choose to report on it as a 'bias incident." We prefer the latter to blackout. Either way, they're not going to say something nice right?

So, as to reporting on the WTC collapse, it's such a unique event, that it's hard to draw any useful generalizations about the reporting. The only thing I can compare it to, was the first WTC bombing, with the blind sheik, and the MacVeigh bombing. The latter, it bears some serious resemblance to, in some unsettling ways.... but again, not enough data to support any grand generalizations in terms of media coverage of big domestic terror incidents.

Note that he says it was "plausible" that explosives were placed in the building. Well it is also "plausible" that alien Kamikaze pilots, who are invisible and have the ability to possess humans, hit the building. After all, there is no way of DISPROVING the existence of the alien Kamikazes. However, as "plausible" as this may be, there is still no proof to suggest that they did it, and that's where the burden lies.

1. He is a physics professor, he clearly has no understanding of demolitions, engineering, or architecture.

2. Note that he repeats the same misconceptions about the 9-11 event and the same strawman tactics used by other conspiracy nuts. His arguments are identical to the other conspiracy theorists.

3. #2 is a perfect example of how conspiracy theories start. You start with an individual predisposed to believe in some kind of a conspiracy. Taking stock of all the knowledge he personally has of the event- and assuming that what he knows thus far is what EVERYBODY knows. As a result of this, and as you have seen demonstrated on this board numerous times, conspiracy theorists often get even the smallest details wrong regarding these events. The espousing of these ideas, spread far enough, begins to attract others who are impressed by the alleged "inconsistencies". Nobody ever takes the time to do actual get-out-of-the-house-and-dig research, and they never trace the stories they hear to the source to check if even the basic facts are real.

James Randi did an interesting experiment on this same phenomenon, which has been the meat-and-potatoes of the UFO movement for decades. If you were to say on the radio that you witnessed "strange lights" over some local highway or landmark on your way to the studio- sure enough you will find hundreds of people coming forth to corraborate your story with lurid details.

What is your problem? He is calling for a scientific investigation of a crime. He presents some suspicious evidence - like the squibs - and calls for expert analysis and opinions. This has nothing to do with nutty people making up stories that can't be proved or disproved.

Add this to the stew
Dov Zakheim's Homeland Security biz and the remote control of aircraft

Remote control aircraft exist- ergo the planes on 9-11 must have been flown via remote control. More flawed logic.

What is your problem? He is calling for a scientific investigation of a crime. He presents some suspicious evidence - like the squibs - and calls for expert analysis and opinions. This has nothing to do with nutty people making up stories that can't be proved or disproved.

I'm not a scientist or demolition expert, but I watched the entire 9/11 debacle as it happened and as I watched the towers collapsing I thought to myself, "Hey, that looks like when they deliberately implode buildings----straight down---they didn't topple."

It was just a passing thought, but I can't forget it.

What is your problem? He is calling for a scientific investigation of a crime. He presents some suspicious evidence - like the squibs - and calls for expert analysis and opinions. This has nothing to do with nutty people making up stories that can't be proved or disproved.

Oh I would LOVE for there to be a scientific debate and investigation on 9-11. But when the conspiracy nuts face facts that they can't explain they'll just claim the opposition is lying or covering something up.

hmmm, seems like one of the more qualified expert opinions we have seen!

This professor is now realizing what some of us have been saying for quite a while. The WTC buildings collapsed due to something other than simple impact and fire damage.

It doesn't take a degree in physics to see that the "official story" is a pack of lies. I had a year of physics in high school and a year in college but even if I hadn't, 9/11 would still look mighty suspicious to me.

The truth will be known soon. Many liars will hang. :cheers:

This professor is now realizing what some of us have been saying for quite a while. The WTC buildings collapsed due to something other than simple impact and fire damage.

It doesn't take a degree in physics to see that the "official story" is a pack of lies. I had a year of physics in high school and a year in college but even if I hadn't, 9/11 would still look mighty suspicious to me.

The truth will be known soon. Many liars will hang. :cheers:

Well first of all you need to make sure you actually KNOW WHAT THE OFFICIAL STORY IS instead of making it up yourself.

Note that he says it was "plausible" that explosives were placed in the building. Well it is also "plausible" that alien Kamikaze pilots, who are invisible and have the ability to possess humans, hit the building.

Doing 'Lucky' Larry Silversteins bidding again JP? I'll give you this much, you're on the ball, maybe you should ask Larry for a pay rise. I went to the VNN Forum and see this thread and sure enough, here you are again. First Cab off the rank, an intellectual midget like you insulting a Professor of Physics who has FORGOTTEN more than you'll ever learn. You're a pest whose function is to pollute this debate with insults and falsehoods, the effect of which is irritating new readers into leaving.

I expect the usual coterie of trolls to join you here very soon.

Well first of all you need to make sure you actually KNOW WHAT THE OFFICIAL STORY IS instead of making it up yourself.

Here YOU are, with THE OFFICIAL STORY!

I'm not a scientist or demolition expert, but I watched the entire 9/11 debacle as it happened and as I watched the towers collapsing I thought to myself, "Hey, that looks like when they deliberately implode buildings----straight down---they didn't topple." It was just a passing thought, but I can't forget it.

You're obviously a person with good eyesight, because that's actually what happened. Three giant buildings fell exactly into their own footprint leaving nearby buildings relatively undamaged. A controlled demolition team could not have done a better job.

Unfortunately, a controlled demolition would have cost Mr Silverstein LOTS of money. And then there's the cost of removing all that rubble, that alone would have cost him a motza. Then he's got to rebuild! Jesus Christ, what would that cost?

But if he INSURED the buildings, specifically against 'terrorist attacks' for $3.5 Billion each and demolished them in broad daylight using a spectacular diversion to get the schmuks to believe Arabs hijackers did it beacuse they hate how 'free' Americans are he's in great shape! I can hear his 'urgers' saying, 'trust me, more than 70% percent of the dopey goy bastards will fall for it. You're home free! The gummint will pay for the removal of debris and you've got $7 Billion of the folding stuff in the Bank!'

If you've got connections in the Media, the Government, the Military you can pretty much get away with these things. The dumb sheeple are too confused and have over many years been conditioned to believe that Arabs are inherently suicidal nutcases.

The real danger lies with people in prominent positions who might bring to light certain inconvienient facts. The way to deal with these is to hold them out to ridicule as conspiracy theorists by the Media. If they persist threaten them economically, career destruction, that kind of thing. If they continue to be a threat arrange an 'accident'.

'The dammed internet cannot yet be controlled in this manner but we can put 'red herrings' and disinformants in there to confuse the punters. In the case of the Forums where people debate such things we can use a few disinformation agents to pollute the discussions with insults and bad language to deter visitors and make them go back to reading the Tabloids. You pay them peanuts of course.'

But they keep asking awkward questions, like how is it that huge pools of molten steel were found buried under the rubble? Melting steel requires super high temperatures like 5,000 Deg.F. Jet Fuel burns at Kerosine temperatures which could NEVER melt, or even soften steel.

What melted the steel?

AE, I believe that most people who visit this forum would agree that the jews, and their shabboz goy servants, control the "mainstream" media. Correct? Why would the masters of the media allow the very same media, that they own and control, to be used against them?

There is an implication in your question isn't there? You're saying that the jewspaper, by permitting the publication of that article by the good Professor is 'going against' their interests. The implication as I read it, is that you believe, 'their interests' lie in keeping the Professor's mouth well and truly shut about the many anomalies about 911 which overwhelmingly point the accusing finger of scorn at them.

Remember, five of their tribe were arrested on a roof in Manhatten with film equipment, 'recording the event' jubilantly dancing, and high fiveing each other as the buildings came down and 3,000 people were murdered.

So goes your logic that in permitting the Prof. to speak out and PUBLISH it in a jewspaper it follows that the jews interests are in no way threatened by his paper, because they really are as innocent as new born lambs and have nothing whatever to hide.

Mate they've got plenty to hide, as do their Goy collaboraters. This will come out some day and there will be hangings.

Doing 'Lucky' Larry Silversteins bidding again JP? I'll give you this much, you're on the ball, maybe you should ask Larry for a pay rise. I went to the VNN Forum and see this thread and sure enough, here you are again. First Cab off the rank, an intellectual midget like you insulting a Professor of Physics who has FORGOTTEN more than you'll ever learn. You're a pest whose function is to pollute this debate with insults and falsehoods, the effect of which is irritating new readers into leaving.

I expect the usual coterie of trolls to join you here very soon.

You do realize that your belief that Larry Silverstein pays agents to go on this and other forums to "do his bidding" makes it very likely that you suffer from some form of schizophrenia right?

Is there ANY reason why any of us should listen to you based on that alone? It's also funny that you accuse people of writing falsehoods when we have seen again and again you don't even know the simplest details about the 9-11 case, nor are you even aware of what the "official story" claims.

you don't even know the simplest details about the 9-11 case, nor are you even aware of what the "official story" claims.

No, most of us haven't read your whole book Mr. Wolfowitz.

However, we do know the REAL details about 9/11. Those details include videotapes of numerous witnesses describing at least three explosions distinct from the airplane impacts, and the firefighters on site describing "detonators" blasting the towers to bits.
(Video: 5MB)
http://letsroll911.org/discussion_in_firehouse.mpg

Here YOU are, with THE OFFICIAL STORY!

That picture says it all! I think we should have a contest for the best caption. Mine is, "We really put one over on you goyim this time, didn't we?!!"

http://www.whitealert.com

Why did the Neocons try to block, lie to, and slander the 9-11 commission if it was so fake then?