Some Misunderstandings Related to WTC Collapse Analysis

[Jan Klimkowski]

Jan, Magda et al.

I am sorry I fail to grasp your meme here. I am not an unintelligent person and have a decent education and have been kicking around since the middle of the last century. I have asked you to articulate to me how Gladio, for example was not a right wing strategy and you appear to be saying that the right-left is a false conception... then mentioning it's all about power and control... and fail to define:

whose power and control
what is the nature of the power
who is being controlled
and to what end? Simply because it can?
Why is left and right a nonsense frame of the struggle?

Why is so difficult to articulate this concept?

And while we are at it... how can you say that human behavior is not an emergent attribute/feature or even strategy of biological or genetic programming?

And have you read the Dawkins book?

Jeffrey - think.

Then come back to this thread, if you must.

[Danny Jarman]

When you say Gladio is a right wing strategy it implies that Gladio is political in its manifestation. In Italy there may have been a few fingers pointed at the communists after the bombings, but Gladio is something far beyond that. It's not about framing 'lefties" but about tightening the grip of power and control through shock and fear. The right and left ideals in this case conform everything to a very small, constricting box.

I'm still an early student of deep political thought compared most other members here, but this is at least what i have learned so far.

[Jeffrey Orling]

Jan,
With all due respect... that comment is very dismissive. I am thinking and it is you that is not engaging in a dialog.

I have asked you to explain something... something that i can't comprehend by THINKING, reasoning and using the tools of logic I have... and your reply is

THINK

are you serious?

[Jeffrey Orling]

When you say Gladio was a right wing strategy it implies that Gladio was a political in its manifestation. In Italy there may have been a few fingers pointed at the communists after the bombings, but Gladio is something far beyond that. It's not about framing 'lefties" but about tightening the grip of power and control through shock and fear. The right and left ideals in this case conform everything to a very small, constricting box.

Basically I think this is rubbish. But I am open to your explanation about how Gladio was "far beyond that"

WHOSE POWER and grip was it tightening...be specific?????

please explain.

[Jan Klimkowski]

Jan,
With all due respect... that comment is very dismissive. I am thinking and it is you that is not engaging in a dialog.

I have asked you to explain something... something that i can't comprehend by THINKING, reasoning and using the tools of logic I have... and your reply is

THINK

are you serious?

Jeffrey - I am dismissive of your comments because you post assertive deep political statements without undertaking any research or performing due diligence.

There are numerous threads about Gladio, and its successor operations, here. Indeed, I can confidently say that DPF is the internet forum which has the most material about, and analysis of, Gladio.

You appear to have read none of it.

Or if you have read some of it, you haven't understood it.

Exhibit #1:

Gladio was created after WWII as a check by the right on the leftists who were being supported by the USSR.

This is completely and utterly wrong. I have shown you why it is wrong. More than once. And then you drag Dawkins and biological determinism into it.....

DPF is not a deep political kindergarten.

[Tony Szamboti]

[

Tony, you said the initiation of a ROOSD would require five floors of core columns and their support structure to vanish to provide the sufficient force. I believe Jeffrey, said it would require only one floor.

That is helpful.

If I read it correctly Tony said it would take the mass of a 5 storey section to break the static resistance of the intact building below it. What static resistance means is simply the structural strength of the building below in its total state or stasis. When I pointed-out to him that a 12 storey section clearly fell on the rest of the building in the North Tower he failed to give a straight answer.

I said it would take 5 floors falling on one floor to break the connections of the floor to the columns. You are confusing impact of floors with impact of columns. There is a big difference. 12 floors could not fall on one floor. You are not realizing the columns would have prevented that in a natural collapse and they are designed to support many times the story load above them. The columns of the 98th floor, which were supporting 12 stories above them, had enough reserve strength to support about 48 stories with no margin.

You need to separate impact of floors (think floor slabs) from impact of columns in your thinking.

[Magda Hassan]

Jeffrey, perhaps some reading about psychopathology would be more informative than what Dawkins writes about. Not really his subject area. More Jungian.

[Jan Klimkowski]

Jeffrey, perhaps some reading about psychopathology would be more informative than what Dawkins writes about. Not really his subject area. More Jungian.

:danceing:

:wheel:

[Jeffrey Orling]

Jan,
With all due respect... that comment is very dismissive. I am thinking and it is you that is not engaging in a dialog.

I have asked you to explain something... something that i can't comprehend by THINKING, reasoning and using the tools of logic I have... and your reply is

THINK

are you serious?

Jeffrey - I am dismissive of your comments because you post assertive deep political statements without undertaking any research or performing due diligence.

There are numerous threads about Gladio, and its successor operations, here. Indeed, I can confidently say that DPF is the internet forum which has the most material about, and analysis of, Gladio.

You appear to have read none of it.

Or if you have read some of it, you haven't understood it.

Exhibit #1:

Gladio was created after WWII as a check by the right on the leftists who were being supported by the USSR.

This is completely and utterly wrong. I have shown you why it is wrong. More than once. And then you drag Dawkins and biological determinism into it.....

DPF is not a deep political kindergarten.

Jan,
I signed up at DPF because Ed Jewit thought I could add something of use to the 911 discussions. That was no easy task consider the technical perspective I was trying to bring to the discussion. But there was some uninformed nonsense coming from Fetzer and Boldwyn with Lemkin parroting whatever he read and dropping it into the discussion along with insults.

I did not read the Gladio thread and have barely a cursory interest in Deep Politics, although I am interests in political analysis and not the rubbish in the MSM and what passes for politics in the USA.

I don't like to be sent off to do homework when a summary in a response should be enough to explain the (gladio) matter. If the summary book jacket interests me I will read the book.

Whatever Gladio IS or was... when it began and so forth, precipitating it down to:

it's a power and control extending power and control is hardly distinguishing Gladio from any other entrenched power structure is in constant self preservation mode and seeking to secure this... obviously through... you guessed it.. power and control.

So no 911 was not simply about knocking down a few buildings... it had a bigger purpose to whomever was behind it. That's pretty fundamental.

[Jan Klimkowski]

I did not read the Gladio thread and have barely a cursory interest in Deep Politics, although I am interests in political analysis and not the rubbish in the MSM and what passes for politics in the USA.

Condemned out of your own mouth.

If you have no interest in deep politics, why do you make endless rambling posts wrongly defining the nature of Gladio and false flag attacks for members of the forum?

You claim to be an intelligent man and yet you do not see the hypocrisy and arrogance in this?