Some Misunderstandings Related to WTC Collapse Analysis

[Jeffrey Orling]

How could there be any major international matter without intel's fingerprints NOT on it?

[Albert Rossi]

Albert Rossi

Your linked pdf articles are key to the run-up. Here then is a synopsis:

Phil, thanks for doing this. Does DPF consider it better protocol to inline or to attach information? If the former, my apologies for not summarizing as you did.

Yes, offhand, I do see a rhyme of history here of sorts. Choose a group that you have been working with, who has potential "blowback" capabilities, and monitor, manipulate, and fund them (like the Cubans in 1963: "You must eliminate Kennedy"). Run operations in parallel which preempt others, hold them at arms length, or even tell them to stand down ("hey, FBI, hands off Oswald: he's working for us, and we're running him in a special anti-FPCC program aimed at non-domestic penetration; that's why we sent him to Mexico"; so off goes the FLASH switch). Obviously, the JFK/WTC scenarios are not "exact" replicas of each other, but "intelligence operation" is written all over both of them. It certainly looks like more than just waiting around for it to happen.

I think this makes a lot of sense... and demonstrates the nature of the complicity but is hardly the so called inside job which planned the entire event to a T. Maybe

Well, as I said earlier, I am not in a position to pronounce on 9/11, but it is my view that the JFK assassination was indeed planned to a T from the inside, even if it may not have come off perfectly.

[Jeffrey Orling]

Well, as I said earlier, I am not in a position to pronounce on 9/11, but it is my view that the JFK assassination was indeed planned to a T from the inside, even if it may not have come off perfectly.

I tend to agree... JFK was complex but much smaller scope and very much more manageable as an intel black operation. The element of surprise also worked in the conspirators' favor and the outcome put them and their people firmly in control after the fact. That helps.

[Jeffrey Orling]

The public's response to 9/11 was vengenace... and this channled all energy away from looking closely at the event and accepting the cartoon narrative which was quickly stood up. With JFK there was either total shock and numbness and a short of loss of innocense but with the convenient patsy and quickly disposed of it was easly laid to rest. Mission accomplished.

But researchers have exposed what went down... and it's not the story in the history books.

[Albert Rossi]

How could there be any major international matter without intel's fingerprints NOT on it?

Well, what I meant was not just info collection & analysis, but covert/black op. But I suppose that even in that sense the statement is a truism, at least these days.

[Jeffrey Orling]

I think there is another issue operating here. People see the events of the world through a filter...a filter which blocks out some things and hilights others... much the way polarized sun glasses make the world look different from non polarized ones. But it's rather hard at some point to even realize that we are seeing the world through these filters... loosely referred to as subjectivity.

People who are firm in the belief of the JFK conspiracy tend then to see all events through a conspiracy filter as it were... and surely lots of what we see is not what actually is. We're subjected to deception 24/7 by advertising and PR and spin. At some point people simply accept whatever they want to see behind this all because deception is purposeful and the motives for it are no damn good.... ever.

[Jeffrey Orling]

I try very hard to not be too influence by my distrust of the government... and my views about things are not as fixed and immutable but more nuanced and evolving. This makes all the extreme positions find mine wrong. To the OCT supporters I am a truther.. to the truthers I am a gov shill. Fine... it is what it is.

[Dawn Meredith]

Excellent imagination and projection! But there was no reason to drop 7... the twins would have served the purpose you envision.

"No reason" ... unless, of course, your reasoning is informed by the serious study of deep politics.

I see building 7 as done with far more sinister reasons. Similar to blowing JFK's head off in the strees of Dallas. They could have gotten rid of him in many other scenarios but this method was chosen for a reason.
Same with building 7. For the life of me I do not understand why people cannot see this.

Dawn

[Charles Drago]

I'm bumping this post because, due to the "moderation" I am enduring, it appeared FIVE PAGES after its initial offering.

Draw your own interpretations.

FYI, I'm posting this at 10:41 AM, East Coast USA, on August 8, 2013.

All one has to read is this from Jeff Orling:

"Building 7 in many ways is the key to understanding that 9/11 was not an inside job"

9-11 was absolutely an inside job designed to carry out the Plan For A New American Century by our generation of the Kennedy killers.

That is precisely how I have come to view it.

Both situations were massive crimes used to change national policies, which would not have been changed otherwise.

Both were blamed on patsies who could not have accomplished the observations.

Both were covered up by powerful people who are/were very likely a part of the same group, with the same type of motivations now, as they were in 1963.

Of course, in both cases the cover-ups did not hold permanently and needed to be brute force protected by politics limiting re-investigations. Anyone protecting the now obvious cover-ups in both cases is fully deserving of any ridicule they might receive.

Ridicule, if masterfully and appropriately applied, can be a powerful rhetorical weapon. For years I have ridiculed publicly -- and at times face-to-face -- proponents of the LN lies of the JFK, RFK, and MLK assassinations.

Alas, the more clever, better trained accessories after the facts to those murders and/or other deep political crimes too often gain safe public haven on sympathetic-to-the-truth Internet forums that forbid ridicule of their members on pain of banishment. All the accessories need do is profess some sort of simplistic belief in some sort of conspiracy, eschew rudeness toward fellow correspondents, and BINGO, they are free to spread sophisticated disinformation.

All the while, they enjoy the impassioned protection of tragically unsophisticated but otherwise honorable pursuers of truth for whom civility trumps truth.

This war in which we find ourselves was lost before it began.

[Albert Rossi]

I think there is another issue operating here. People see the events of the world through a filter...a filter which blocks out some things and hilights others... much the way polarized sun glasses make the world look different from non polarized ones. But it's rather hard at some point to even realize that we are seeing the world through these filters... loosely referred to as subjectivity.

People who are firm in the belief of the JFK conspiracy tend then to see all events through a conspiracy filter as it were... and surely lots of what we see is not what actually is. We're subjected to deception 24/7 by advertising and PR and spin. At some point people simply accept whatever they want to see behind this all because deception is purposeful and the motives for it are no damn good.... ever.

I cannot speak for others, but I certainly do not see all events through a conspiracy filter. And "conspiracy" is such a vague and all-embracing concept anyway that to say conspiracy is to say little.

I think there is much truth in what you say about filtering, Jeffrey, and it does not apply only to belief in conspiracy, but could be seen as a general epistemological precept. I think all scholars of history or the human sciences worth their salt are constantly aware of this problem. I think that natural scientists have analogous problems (witness the anthropic principle, at least in some of its manifestations). Ultimately there is no absolute way out of it, but we all must be honest enough to admit that it operates in subtle ways that sometimes we cannot control. But awareness is half the battle.