9/11 Weekend - New hypothesis to Explain 9/11 - Part I

[Jeffrey Orling]

Excusez Moi Lauren...

This may apply to you:

"Bingo. Agreeing to disagree does not cut it with INSERT NAME . (S) He does not know what (s)he is disagreeing with. Wilfull ignorance is on display over and over again."

I understand this forum is named "Deep Politics" :

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.

My thrust has always been to shed light on the technical aspects of the WTC destruction. Many seem to assume a priori that 9-11 was a deep political event, ergo a MIHOP if you will, a complex and grand conspiracy where everything was choreographed and nothing was left to happenstance... Hollywood come to life... thousands of actors, scripts and using the most advanced systems for command, control, PR and of course demolition and an army of dis info agents to sew confusion.

My political perspective is to not trust authority and this has been proven on 9-11 as the official narrative contains so many lies and deceptions as to bare little resemblance to reality.

There is little doubt that there is an unstated agenda of hegemony and world domination carried out by the MIC for the corporations who have essentially hijacked what little democracy existed in this country. There is also little doubt that the people around the world are reacting to this and taking up arms and engaging in asymmetrical warfare (terrorism) as they have no other means to address their grievances. Terrorism exists. And terrorism is manipulated for the political objectives of the *empire*. In fact MOST catastrophies that occur are manipulated for the political objectives of the *empire*. Katrina Fukishima come to mind as does ... dare I say... 9-11.

The deep staters (and 9-11 truthers) seem to dismiss the notion that 9-11 could have been a *hybrid event*... terrorism (exploited, facilitated, managed)... and a natural-like disaster... manipulated for the political objective as suggested by Naomi Klein in The Shock Doctrine -- the rise of Disaster Capitalism. This makes it more of a LIHOP event without the complex and grand conspiracy where everything was choreographed and nothing was left to happenstance... than a MIHOP where a complex and grand conspiracy where everything was choreographed and nothing was left to happenstance.

I'm in the LIHOP camp at present because my technical research does not confirm CD or any devices were required to collapse any of the 3 towers... that is... they were a series of cascading growing progressive structural failures which when they reached a critical level... each of the towers no longer could stand up. The plane strikes seem to have provided the initial damage / weakening. But this alone was not sufficient. There were multiple factors which acted synergistically to reach the critical point where the structure was overwhelmed.

Of course one can deny the engineering, observations and physics and read into the event what you want to and come up with whatever experts who will support your narrative and call anyone who disagrees willfully ignorant. I've been working on this for over 4 yrs and I would not call that willful ignorance as much as I would those who make claims without having done any heavy lifting in terms of science and physics... but cite experts in areas where they themselves know little or nothing. And them slam anyone who disagrees as a dis info agent and a shill for the official narrative.

(S) He does not know what (s)he is disagreeing with. Wilfull ignorance is on display over and over again."

Oh my.. what hubris on display.

[Albert Doyle]

Weeks ago when I first read this thread I realized in this situation LIHOP has to be MIHOP because once you allowed arab terrorists to attack the US that is the same as MIHOP when you consider the consequences - Towers falling or not.


The worst hubris, to me, is Americans pretending everything is normal and that we have a sound democracy when elements of the deep government commit satantic human rights violations.

[Charles Drago]

I'm in the LIHOP camp at present because my technical research does not confirm CD or any devices were required to collapse any of the 3 towers...

Non sequitur.

Worthy of a Rahn or McAdams.

While you're signing up for Deep Politics 101, check to see if Introduction to Logic is still open.

[Jeffrey Orling]

Charles,

Let's not act so condescending and dismissive. I use the term MIHOP meaning intentionally placed devices with all three towers to destroy them.

Albert is correct that a LIHOP is tantamount to MIHOP because the outcome is more or less the same. The difference is that I contend that there is no hard evidence of CD and the towers seemed to have collapsed without CD devices... but from a sequence beginning with planes hitting them.

Could your sponsor friends and their mechanics/operative have known that hitting two towers would knock 3 towers down? I seriously doubt it. So... one might analyze as follows:

WTC 7 not a CD -> likely Twins not a CD either

WTC 7 is a CD -> twins likely CD also

Why would they CD 7 and not 1 & 2? Who would believe that? answer no one. Two plane slam into the towers and what do you know WTC 7 collapses...

Charles I may not be the sharpest knife in the drawer... but I wasn't born yesterday either.

In a sense understanding (my MIHOP) view wtc 7 is key. If it's not a CD then it looks like the entire destruction was not CD and was a result of the plane damage and this may or may not have been intended.. complete destruction of the complex. My guess is that it wasn't and it went out of control so to speak. But they got the same results ultimately and simply had to cover their asses a bit more with deeper lies.

You don't like this theory? Tough nuggies. It's a free country! :dancingman: lighten up dude!

[Peter Lemkin]

Charles,

Let's not act so condescending and dismissive. I use the term MIHOP meaning intentionally placed devices with all three towers to destroy them.

Albert is correct that a LIHOP is tantamount to MIHOP because the outcome is more or less the same. The difference is that I contend that there is no hard evidence of CD and the towers seemed to have collapsed without CD devices... but from a sequence beginning with planes hitting them.

Could your sponsor friends and their mechanics/operative have known that hitting two towers would knock 3 towers down? I seriously doubt it. So... one might analyze as follows:

WTC 7 not a CD -> likely Twins not a CD either

WTC 7 is a CD -> twins likely CD also

Why would they CD 7 and not 1 & 2? Who would believe that? answer no one. Two plane slam into the towers and what do you know WTC 7 collapses...

Charles I may not be the sharpest knife in the drawer... but I wasn't born yesterday either.

In a sense understanding (my MIHOP) view wtc 7 is key. If it's not a CD then it looks like the entire destruction was not CD and was a result of the plane damage and this may or may not have been intended.. complete destruction of the complex. My guess is that it wasn't and it went out of control so to speak. But they got the same results ultimately and simply had to cover their asses a bit more with deeper lies.

You don't like this theory? Tough nuggies. It's a free country! :dancingman: lighten up dude!

Jeff, our very nation's polity and future [and the World are on the line...light polite conversation/banter will not do]. IMO, you are either totally delusional, uninformed, or working for the dark side on 911 if you think WTC was not a CD...it almost more than the others is unexplainable but by nanothermite and deliberate demolition...with even better 'reasons' than the twin towers for what is contained and its destruction would hide...or you are a fool and never learned anything of physics, chemistry nor logic while attending university. Sorry, mate...but YOU are the problem here - you have been politely removed from AE-911 Truth and less politely from many other forums...why? Your unique [believed by ONE person on the Planet] unzip theory holds no water and has more flaws than I care to go into...yet you endlessly push [peddle it] Who do you work for...or what agenda do you work for?! Physics, chemistry, science, engineering, logic nor architectural experience are on you side...yet you persist...I myself classify you as an Sunstein disinfo [cognitive dissonance] agent. You support the official version, but make it 'seem' you do not. I for one am not fooled. AW-911-Truth was not and many others are not. I personally do not think you belong on this Forum and are antithetical to it. It is not, however, my decision. I do not find your theory plausible by any science I know [and I have a doctorate in related sciences]....and while you are 'polite', I sense it is just your ploy to spread your 'doubt' of anything but the official version - though you couch it as if it were a version opposed to the official one...it is NOT.

[Jeffrey Orling]

Lemkin,

You're entitled to your opinions, regardless of whether they are gounded in reality. Religions have billions of followers and these religions are essentially built on myth. You appear to be a follower of another set of myths which you are convinced are grounded in science and physics and any other readings of the events is either that of a fool, a paid agent or someone who was asleep in statics, strength of materials, physics class and faked a 5 day license exam and knows nothing about structure or architecture.

Not only was a asked to leave the board of AE911T, but I asked them to remove my signature from their petition. I do lock horns with various true believers. Some are more polite and others, such as you, Fetzer and unnamed others resort right away to the insults and ad homs. None of it is very impressive.

If you are familiar with the history of science you will know that many have been ridiculed, jailed and perhaps killed for their beliefs only to be proven correct years later. How bout Galileo for one!

I'm fine with where I sit and I have read most of what has been available on the www about 9/11. There are mostly uniformed opinions out there, yours among them.


Congregation... please be seated.

[Charles Drago]

Charles,

Let's not act so condescending and dismissive. I use the term MIHOP meaning intentionally placed devices with all three towers to destroy them.

Then you strip the term of all deep political meaning -- and for reasons that defy logic.

Utter nonsense.

Could your sponsor friends and their mechanics/operative have known that hitting two towers would knock 3 towers down? I seriously doubt it.

Irrelevant to the MIHOP/LIHOP issue.

Why would they CD 7 and not 1 & 2? Who would believe that? answer no one. Two plane slam into the towers and what do you know WTC 7 collapses...

Circular reasoning.

Sophistry -- argument based on a false premise.

Utterly ignorant of the importance of the creation and maintenance of broad-based cognitive dissonance to the maintenance of a cover-up of a major deep political crime.

Charles I may not be the sharpest knife in the drawer... but I wasn't born yesterday either.

In a sense understanding (my MIHOP) view wtc 7 is key. If it's not a CD then it looks like the entire destruction was not CD and was a result of the plane damage and this may or may not have been intended.. complete destruction of the complex. My guess is that it wasn't and it went out of control so to speak. But they got the same results ultimately and simply had to cover their asses a bit more with deeper lies.

You don't like this theory? Tough nuggies. It's a free country! :dancingman: lighten up dude!

Alas, Jeffrey, America is not a "free country" in the sense you would convey.

But I do appreciate your "[t]ough nuggies" sentiment insofar as it stands as an exemplar of the intellectual level of your deep politics-related analyses.

As for your theory: It is fatally under-informed, tediously presented, and otherwise worthless accept as a reminder of just how lame a deep political thinker you truly are.

[Jeffrey Orling]

Charles,

Thank you for the analysis of the nature of my thinking. It is interesting to note that when one does not view the world as you do, they are cast aside and ridiculed as woefully ignorant and missing the correct frame - deep politics... the big bad conspiracy running everything for decades or centuries back to the illuminati or some such cabal. The Truman show we all can't get out of.

As many other observers I see extra national forces driving the agenda of nation states (corporations and intel to name two). Whether this is deep state or not matters not to me. I believe that we may not have a democracy, but we do still have some free will and the ability to form our own ideas (even when they are ridiculed).

What's in a name?



My logic is always flawed and circular because it produces different conclusions... so says you. That and 15 cents will get you on the subway in 1950.

[Charles Drago]

Charles,- deep politics... the big bad conspiracy running everything for decades or centuries back to the illuminati or some such cabal. The Truman show we all can't get out of.

The ignorance and arrogance revealed in your definition of "deep politics" is staggering.

Fewer and fewer participants in DPF take seriously anything you offer. But by all means stick around. The more you post, the more we all learn about who and what you are.

[Jeffrey Orling]

Charles,

I don't take many of the posters on the topic of 9-11 too seriously either. I don't dismiss them because they are entitled to their beliefs. But few have anything new or interesting to offer. Most are parrots and parishioners in the church of 911 truth. I am not terribly interested in Deep Politics from the little I understand of it.

I read an interview with Peter Dale Scott where he wondered how odd it was that WTC 5&6 did not collapse and and they were so tiny... only about 9 stories and sandwiched between WTC 1 and WTC 7 which both collapse straight down in a NY moment. His bewilderment about this displays the lack of understanding of engineering ad physics and how easily he appears to be able to be led by what he perceives as *experts*... on technical matters.

As the father of Deep Politics, showing this kind of lapse in thinking and therefore understanding, I tend to not take people seriously who build a belief system or fuel it with mistaken observations and understanding. I do not dismiss everything that I've hear Scott say or write. Much of what he says and writes wrings true. But on some things I can't take him seriously. At least he does profess some humility about 9/11 in not understanding how the towers collapsed.

But other members here such as Fetzer cannot be taken seriously either.

No problem mon. We supposedly have religious freedom in the West. You can have your belief system and laugh at the non believers.

Have a nice day.