Did Muslims Attack America on 9/11?

[Albert Doyle]

While the US government, the MIC, the national security state are disgusting in their actions, and policies, practices and lie and deceive the public frequently to hide their imperial agenda there is no evidence that they conspired to DO 9/11 as much as exploit it and likely cover up their incompetence and perhaps willingness of some to let it happen. You can't fight a war without an enemy now can you? And the MIC was *enemy shopping* since the USSR folded.

If you read what you wrote carefully there's really no difference between MIHOP and LIHOP in this regard is there?

[Lauren Johnson]

While the US government, the MIC, the national security state are disgusting in their actions, and policies, practices and lie and deceive the public frequently to hide their imperial agenda there is no evidence that they conspired to DO 9/11 as much as exploit it and likely cover up their incompetence and perhaps willingness of some to let it happen. You can't fight a war without an enemy now can you? And the MIC was *enemy shopping* since the USSR folded.

If you read what you wrote carefully there's really no difference between MIHOP and LIHOP in this regard is there?

Albert, this has been pointed out to JO before; it hasn't made a dent.

[David Guyatt]

Jeff said:

Adele is no different here of course. She simply is clueless and a parrot posting and linking to others who link and quote others who don't know what they are talking about.

Jeff, are you ill?

This "clueless parrot" asks you, Jeff:

Just how much physics and chemistry have you studied? Dr. Enrico Fermi was one of the many fine scientists who educated me in the sciences.
You should read what the Architects and Engineers, some who built the Towers, have to say.

http://ae911truth.org. Do some homework and try to learn something.

Adele E.U. Edisen, Ph.D.

That's quite a name to have on your vitae Adele.

I've only got crooked bankers on mine...

[Jeffrey Orling]

Jeff said:

Adele is no different here of course. She simply is clueless and a parrot posting and linking to others who link and quote others who don't know what they are talking about.

Jeff, are you ill?

This "clueless parrot" asks you, Jeff:

Just how much physics and chemistry have you studied? Dr. Enrico Fermi was one of the many fine scientists who educated me in the sciences.
You should read what the Architects and Engineers, some who built the Towers, have to say.

http://ae911truth.org. Do some homework and try to learn something.

Adele E.U. Edisen, Ph.D.

That's quite a name to have on your vitae Adele.

I've only got crooked bankers on mine...

Mr. Guyatt,

My point is simple. Being educated and intelligent in one field or several, does not make one competent in another. I am an architect for 40 yrs, a former board member of AE911T, but I am not a physicist, a chemist, a materials scientist, a forensic investigator. My own technical education and career allows me a bit of advantage in understanding structures and structural failures.

And I worked for the Emery Roth & Sons in 1970, architects of the twin towers during the period when they were being designed and built. This doesn't make me an expert. But it does make me realize how little most know about those towers including the signers of AE911T's petition asking for a new investigation.

Yes the first go round of investigations was flawed and contain missing information and errors made inadvertantly or intentionally for some unknown reasons. There's a lot of misunderstanding about those structures and how they came down.

I don't know Ms Edisen's background as related to engineering or physics. I don't question her intention, and understand how she and others have been essentially fooled by all manner of false information coming from almost every direction about the destruction of the WTC. I was making the point that she was simply posting an article, presumably because she believed it to be factual and I doubt she was competent in the relevant technical disciplines to understand the issues and how the conclusions were made.

Who is Ibn e Abdul Haq? What are his qualifications? Should any article appearing on the www be posted in this discussion giving it a sort of imprimatur and credibility?

I have gone after Lemkin for doing the same thing... parroting. DRG has made a new career out of quote clipping and connecting dots. Do you think a retired theology professor should be considered an expert and the collapse of a steel structure? Sure he can publish. But his opinions need to be considered for what they are... those of a layman, an amateur and one with a political agenda which is influencing his thinking.

I am not giving a pass to NIST or FEMA either. But let's try to be serious in scholarship and research and look for rigorous scientific work... and not be fooled by junk science trying to pass as the real deal. You've seen what a loose cannon Fetzer is, no?

Go read the Where did the Towers Go now in the bear pit.... (it should be restored) where you can see all manner of smart idiots revealing themselves.

[David Guyatt]

While I accept all that Jeff (and btw, I'm never "Mr"... always David, please), I am British. And being British means that the use of harsh, unpleasant or insulting language is almost a hanging offence. Apart from anything else it's very clearly counter-productive.

Modesty in language, even though disagreeing with somebody, anybody, everybody, allows points to be made intelligently and to ensure you are listened to -- even though others may still disagree. That's everyone's right and prerogative and the whole basis of a discussion forum such as ours.

I like intelligent disagreements because I usually am informed by them.

I can talk with considerable insight into international banking because for almost 30 years that's what I did professionally. But my professional field, like most I suspect, was relatively specialist and therefore narrow. Over time I learned more and more about less and less. I certainly cannot claim any great knowledge of all of banking, only some, and there are specialities that remain a mystery to me.

I rarely get involved in JFK, MLK or 911 because I can't be bothered to put the effort into understanding and remembering the minutiae - or much care about it either, to be perfectly frank about it. I am content, based on a reasonable amount of reading, that 911 was either permitted to proceed or was an inside job - and this was probably engineered by a small insider power group within the ruling elite for their own financial, geo-strategic and political benefit. That's all I need to know, as I am much, much more interested in identifying the members of the power group and knowing their motives - the "big picture" if you will.

The detail I'm happy to leave to others to attend to.

The foregoing is just for the record.

No offence is intended to anyone.

Signed,

Modesty Blaise

[Lauren Johnson]

David, you said 9/11 ...

was probably engineered by a small insider power group within the ruling elite for their own financial, geo-strategic and political benefit.

Do you have the sense about the identity of this power group and who its sponsors were? Or were they their own sponsors so to speak?

[Jeffrey Orling]

Let's consult the crystal ball... the elites of the ruling class runs the world already.

[Magda Hassan]

There is not one 'elite' or one homogenous 'ruling class'. They work with each other on some things and are in conflict with each other on others. They win some and they lose some.

[Jeffrey Orling]

Sort of like crony capitalism

[David Guyatt]

David, you said 9/11 ...

was probably engineered by a small insider power group within the ruling elite for their own financial, geo-strategic and political benefit.

Do you have the sense about the identity of this power group and who its sponsors were? Or were they their own sponsors so to speak?

Lauren, my sense here was guided to a large extent by Peter Dale Scott and his book on the subject, plus Sibel Edmonds and Gladio B, and the small military unit Able Danger, that tracked the 9/11 perps prior to the event (and the rapid scarpering of a plane load of Saudi's during the no fly lock down).

But additionally, I note that the US has been very keen to follow the lead of Bush and continue using the 9/11 atrocity as a means of engaging in global warfare. Ergo, there is a group mind that does not object to the death of thousands of people in this attack and who are content to use it to further project US military hegemony in support of US wealth and business interests around the world.

In other words the same old business as usual mob.

And I think, from what I've read on this forum, that Jeffrey also agrees with this broad analysis, although there may be differences if the detail.

I hope this helps.