World Trade Center Buildings (and Others?) Pre-Rigged for Controlled Demolition: A Hypothesis

[Lauren Johnson]

Rather than speculate bizarre hypotheses... why not study the observables and the science which explains them?

bizarre [bɪˈzɑː]
adj
odd or unusual, esp in an interesting or amusing way

Because, young Jeffrey, here we study Deep Politics, which is defined by the coiner of the term as:

"All those political practices and arrangements, deliberate or not, which are usually repressed rather than acknowledged."


Because, young Jeffrey, here we conduct deep political analysis, which is defined by the coiner of the term as:

"Looking beneath public formulations of policy issues to the bureaucratic, economic, and ultimately covert and criminal activities which underlie them."


Because, young Jeffrey:

The Deep Politics Forum is an online community dedicated to shining light into the shadowy reaches of historical and contemporary deep political systems.

We aim to expose deep political objectives, strategies, tactics, and operatives, and to understand their social, economic, and cultural impacts.

Our mission transcends academic inquiry, which we accept as an invaluable tactic in a broader strategy to wield knowledge and truth as weapons in a coordinated assault on the manipulators who operate within deep political shadows.


The choice you would have us make between study of the observables OR the unobservables is a false, debilitating choice. Until you are prepared to recognize this reality, your observations here are of EXTREMELY limited value.

JO actually in his hypothesizing actually sticks a toe into the world of the deep political. He is willing to go so far as to say that various factions can hope for disaster and even let it happen on purpose. I have found it so puzzling that he was not willing to look further. But then I have called him a disinfo agent at times. Ultimately, I think he is just a rigid person with honest intent.

His endless lectures I would have to admit ultimately forced me get a clearer sense of my own position. First, I came to realize that some of the best evidence for a against govt explanation AND some version of LIHOP is all the massive evidence of prior knowledge. Whether there was CD of the buildings, is secondary. But second, I had viewed the CD hypothesis as very likely, but not proven. The Ashley Banfield video as I have said is as close to clinching the case for CD as were are going to get baring undeniable proof of explosives. (I think the red-grey chip nano-thermite studies still need to be defended and would certainly take the proof all the way home.)

My guess is that the Ashley Banfield video was the thing that did him in. He has argued for lo all these months that his technical knowledge revealed the 9/11 truth movement as a bunch idiots. He had only blather to offer in response. His great rational mind exploded; and he went after Charles. I agree. He wanted to get banned. It was a cry for help.