September 11, 2001

[Blair]

I can not, and will not let this pass. I have been screwed in the head from this. Totally and Royally screwed in the head.

I am so disgusted about what happened that day, even now. There is not a day goes by, when I don't think of this.

So fuck you, terrorists, cunts, you did a number on my head for sure. Happy now, you spineless fucks? Eat your karmic shit you turds.

[Ryan Rudolph]

Prince,

How is September 11, 2001 any different to other acts of violence that have recently happened? Why doesn’t the genocide in Darfur bother you to the same extent? Why have you been psychologically affected by this act alone?

Anything that is possible can happen. A terrorist attack on the world trade center is very tame compared to what is possible. I predict that some of these organizations will eventually get their hands on biological or chemical weapons that are capable of killing hundreds of thousands of people in densely populated areas.

The goal is not not allow the irrational acts of humans to affect one in an emotional sense. The big problem Prince is that you intrepret this as a personal attack agaisnt you. Moroever, you identity with the nation as a whole, and the members that run it. And then you label the terrorist group as them, and establish this divisive and conflicting duality in your psyche. However, you should not emotionally identity yourself with any group of humans at all, it is a form of tribalism. Members of the bush adminstration are just as ignorant as the Al-queda terrorist group, the two feed off each other.

Here is one way to view September 11: The terrorist’s irrational acts are intimately linked to the USA’s exploitative foreign policy that has been present in the middle-east for decades. Its not rational, but It's very understandable why an ignorant powerless force that lives in poverty will strike out against an ignorant powerful force that is very rich as a result. The duality plays off the other, and some degree of this type of irrational behavior will always exist in this world.

So one needs to be emotionally ready for anything, anywhere, anytime, because anything that is possible could occur, there is nothing secure.

[Katy]

Another thing, though, too, is that there's a lot of media hype and pressure to be more upset about this. They shove it in your face a lot more than they do other things.

Also, fuckers took my job. But other than that, worse things have happened and continue to happen.

[Matt Gregory]

I think 9/11 was just politics as usual. One thing that I know won't help is to get angry about it. Not only is anger useless in a carve-crosses-on-your-arm-with-a-knife kind of way, it leads to the mentality of vengeance, which is what causes things like this to happen in the first place. Just my 2c.

[Nordicvs]

I can not, and will not let this pass. I have been screwed in the head from this. Totally and Royally screwed in the head.

That's your choice...?

I am (*) so disgusted about what happened that day, even now. There is not a day goes by, when I don't think of this.

(*) Why?

Of course you'll never forget it; they'll trot it out, in shiny monuments and collectors' pink lawn ornaments and stroke it like the Alamo (until you wienies really do have, yunno, an actual war on your own flabby-assed Wallyland soil---yunno, not the usual ones, involving throwing fire on poor people in other countries).

So fuck you, terrorists, cunts, you did a number on my head for sure. Happy now, you spineless fucks? Eat your karmic shit you turds.

How the fuck (a) are they spineless, (b) how do you even have a flying furry fuck of a clue that they were "terrorists?" And (c) who the fuck cares anyway?

You think those two itty-bitty buildings falling over was some sort of benchmark for suffering? A real horror of horrors, was it? Coddled bunch of creampuff Yanklie limp dooodles. Come on. Check out London during the first two years of WWII, or any fucking city that had a major battle in either World War.

By the way, spineless types don't fight humanity's greatest self-preservation defense system---via fear of death---and throw their lives away for a cause. No, they wouldn't stick their toe out for anyone or anything. You sound like a fucking Brit pondering those dirty Irish rebels. Suicide takes courage, no matter what your jingoist flag-waving hypo-fucking-critical patriot ego feels about the effect.

Kids these days...

[HUNTEDvsINVIS]

I remember that day. I could not believe it either. I suspect weapons dealers in all of this, not even the government, unless the government struck a deal with them. This MI5 agent ( I think that's what he was ) believed that the government planted bombs inside the buildings as well, and he says it was very suspicious that all the rubble was immediately shipped off to China before it could be properly examined. This guy actually quit his job to get this story out. But I am not sure. It's all just capitalism and on a very greedy scale. Anyway, you guys know what keeps us all in check: The major powers are reluctant to bomb each other because then the whole world loses. So the weapons dealers rely on small scale wars and laugh all the way to the bank in the long process. Who supplies America with most weapons anyway?

Then again, the US government is such a cheese ball. That day when Bush heard about the attacks...It was like it was all planned out. He was on camera and everything doing the work of an angel: reading cute little stories to little kids. So you are left thinking "hey, could a guy like that really bomb his own people?"

Anyway, capitalism must be controlled. We moved out of the state of nature and got laws so we could live in peace. Blood-thirsty capitalist governments had better re-evaluate what shit they cause. Are we living in societies or jungles? I am doing a task on Herbert Spencer right now, yes, that dude who thought capitalism would ultimately result in complete world peace and who condemned helping the poor. Unfortunately for Spencer, like I said, we struck up laws to live in less fear and terror of being exploited by one another.

[Elizabeth Isabelle]

I can not, and will not let this pass. I have been screwed in the head from this. Totally and Royally screwed in the head.

I am so disgusted about what happened that day, even now. There is not a day goes by, when I don't think of this.

So fuck you, terrorists, cunts, you did a number on my head for sure. Happy now, you spineless fucks? Eat your karmic shit you turds.

Who did you lose, prince?
.

[sschaula]

Anger towards terrorists does nothing. It doesn't stop the terror or make you peaceful again. Killing them does everything.

[Shahrazad]

I lost much more when Panama was invaded, and nobody in the US gives a fuck about that.

Bullies will be bullies, until a bigger bully than them comes along.

[Elizabeth Isabelle]

I lost much more when Panama was invaded, and nobody in the US gives a fuck about that.

Too broad of a generalization. There are many people who do care when they hear individual stories like yours, or even become aware of major disasters. Americans donated millions of dollars to the tsunami relief effort because Americans became aware of that through the media. By January 5, 2005, Americans had donated $342 million to the relief efforts, and only 3 days later, the amount was up to $406 milliion

Before the US Congress allocated $20.9 billion to rebuild Iraq, there were frequent advertisements from charities to collect donations for the children in Iraq. I couldn't find the statistic on how much was donated, but they would not have continued the advertising if it was not bringing in money.

Quite honestly, most Americans have no idea that we invaded Panama. Americans understand some of what gets thrown in their face, but the American media is full of fluff and has a truly appalling rate of inaccuracy. 3 times in my life, I have been portrayed inaccurately by the media - once on television and twice in the newspaper - and I'm a nobody . The media didn't really cover the Panama invasion (actually, I don't recall it being covered at all), so Americans don't know about it.

Actually, there are a lot of things Americans are not aware of. In 2005, only 59% of Americans believed in global warming.as of January this year,
13% of Americans have still never even heard of global warming. Sher, American's don't know, and don't even know that they should know.

Bullies will be bullies, until a bigger bully than them comes along.

That is true a great deal of the time, whether it is just regular people or powerful political leaders. People are also rife with misperception, illogic, egocentricism, and prejudice, just to name a few. Condemning all of one country, even America, for the misdeeds of leaders we are only told we have control over (Bush did not win the election by popular vote), or for powerful systems gone out of control (the media and education systems) is not going to help matters. Telling everyone you can about the truth yourself does help. Each of us can only do so much, and each of us has our limits, but if we each go about spreading the truth to the best of our abilities (which I believe that most of us are naturally inclined to do anyway, and it only gets trained out of us), then we have a chance at improving matters.
.

[Shahrazad]

In a very small way, I have made some people more aware. With years of me posting on discussion forums, a handful of people are now aware of calamities that have occurred in our world that would not have been aware otherwise. But it does take a lot more than that to change the world.

[sschaula]

I'm pretty ignorant of what happened during Just Cause. Care to explain to me, Shah?

[Unidian]

Several people here seem to take for granted that terrorists actually did it. While this is quite possible and may in fact be the case, I remain open to alternative explanations, some of which are supported by fairly compelling arguments.

There's a lot of blatantly nutty nonsense out there on this subject, but one "conspiracy theory" website stands above all others in my view:

http://911research.com

I think that a thorough reading of the research and arguments at this site makes it very difficult to place our full faith in the official account.

[Elizabeth Isabelle]

Of course there is stuff that we don't know, and stuff that we don't need to know for the sake of national security - especially in regards to the pentagon. Just use your head and you can figure some of that out. Sure, it was awfully convenient that the segment of the pentagon that got hit had recently undergone reinforcement upgrades and there is no way to know if intelligence had anything to do with that or not, but as for the explosion and the lack of pictures of the plane, and the government confiscation of all local video except a few frames, do you really think that the pentagon would not be armed? Do you think the government would release photos of exactly what the pentagon is armed with that likely blew up the plane before impact?

Building 7 of the WTC complex is also fishy, but there is a lot that we can not know.
.

[Unidian]

I'm not into "no plane at Pentagon" theories. I agree with 9/11 Research that they are a red herring. There is considerable physical and photographic evidence that a plane did impact at the Pentagon. Unfortunately for the credibility of the 9/11 skepticism movement, this evidence is ignored or misrepresented by popular conspiracy films such as Loose Change.

Building 7 is more than just "fishy," in my view. It resembles a controlled demolition to the extent that proponents of the official account ought to be very worried about it. And I think they are, because the subject of WTC 7 is consistently avoided in the media, even on shows which attempt to "debunk" other (less substantial) aspects of various conspiracy theories.

In the case of WTC 7, we literally have to refuse to believe our eyes in order to believe the official account. While this does not establish anything with certainty (because there are some instances in which sensory data is unreliable), it does more to raise questions about the official story than any other aspect of the 9/11 evidence.

Even FEMA and NIST (the technical sources of the official account) understand this, as they assign their own theories about the collapse of WTC 7 only "a low probability of occurrence." If the best non-conspiracy explanation of WTC 7 government experts can come up with has only "a low probability of occurrence" by their own admission, what does that imply about the probability of alternative explanations?

There is nothing in the 9/11 skepticism movement that quite constitutes a "smoking gun" - but if there were, building 7 would have to be it. On its own, it is sufficient to raise interesting questions, which can lead to other interesting question as well as huge masses of nonsense. As always, it is the task of the critical thinker to sift the wheat from the chaff.

[Elizabeth Isabelle]

And sometimes we must consider the psychological component. All we knew that day was that we were under attack. We didn't know exactly who, exactly how many, exactly how deeply they got into things... WTC 7 was a pretty high level security building. There had to be a lot of things in there that we could not let slip into enemy hands. Police and other personnel were tied up with issues related to the towers. It was New York City - there had to be looting and more chaos than usual. WTC 7 was evacuated before it went down, and the physics of the "collapse" look fishy - no one can deny that. I do believe that WTC 7 was demolished for reasons of national security. Much worse things could have happened if the enemy had gotten control of that building, possibly bad enough that collapsing the twin towers could have been a distraction just so someone could get into WTC 7 as the primary target. We didn't know everything then, and we don't know everything now. It was a really big crisis, and people made the best decisions they could under that much stress and that little information.
.

[Unidian]

This is actually a typical response from people who face the reality of the WTC 7 visual evidence - they admit it appears to have been demolished, but offer various possible "inoffensive" motives for the demolition. While your scenario is not entirely implausible, it's worth nothing that WTC 7 also contained several offices which one might want to dispose of for more nefarious reasons.

Building 7 occupied a block to the north of the World Trade Center Plaza. Its 23rd floor held Mayor Giuliani's Emergency Command Center. This floor had bullet- and bomb-resistant windows, an independent air and water supply, and an unobstructed view of the north faces of both towers. 1 2

The other government agencies with offices in the building were the IRS, the EEOC, the US Secret Service, the SEC, and the CIA.

The private tenants were Salomon Smith Barney, American Express Bank International, Standard Chartered Bank, Provident Financial Management, ITT Hartford Insurance Group, First State Management Group, Inc., Federal Home Loan Bank, and NAIC Securities.

Large numbers of case files for ongoing investigations by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) were reportedly destroyed in the collapse. The Los Angeles Times reported that "substantial files were destroyed" for 3000 to 4000 of the SEC's cases. The EEOC reported that documents for 45 active cases were destroyed. 3 Before the attack, SEC investigations of corporate fraud by companies such as Enron and Worldcom were the subject of many news reports -- reports that virtually vanished in the wake of the attack.

9/11 Review: Building 7

This doesn't prove anything, but it's interesting to me. All 7 of "Lucky Larry's" obsolete and heavily-insured buildings were totally destroyed (to his enormous enrichment), while several closer buildings survived. Also kind of convenient to get rid of a "command center," in the event that it was being used for a certain type of command operation...

But all kinds of points could be raised, and it can go on forever. I've done huge threads on this in the past. I'm just glad we agree that building 7 appears to have been demolished. The fact that the government will not admit this should raise huge questions, if nothing else.

[Elizabeth Isabelle]

Well, that does make it look more like private sector insurance fraud. A lot of that went on, too - including a lot of people who filed for life insurance benefits, claiming to have died in the WTC collapse, but were found to be alive and just trying to collect.
.

[Unidian]

Hehehe... "Dear sirs, this is to inform you that I recently died and would like to recieve payment as per my policy with your company."

[Elizabeth Isabelle]

I went to look up links on that, and found this really interesting video about building 7:

link

I'd read other stuff referring to Lucky Larry's "pull it" comment, saying that he meant to pull the rescue teams out before the building collapsed, but this video including the original broadcast of him saying "pull it" doesn't sound like he was talking about the rescue teams to me.
.

[Katy]

Well, the interesting thing about people who are willing to acknowledge Bldg 7 being a possible demolition for innocent reasons is they fail to explain why it was possible. Demolitions takes more time than they had between the attacks and the collapse of bldg7... why should that be possible?

Anyway, the fat bin Ladin guy is fairly convincing, as well.

[Richard]

I do believe that WTC 7 was demolished for reasons of national security.

Until you learn that it takes weeks to plan and rig a building of that size for controlled demolition.

WTC7 fell seven hours after the twin towers. There were fires on several floors. To have rigged the building that afternoon would have been, quite literally, impossible.


One could argue that explosives were installed years before to deal with an unforeseeable threat to national security, but to have such an important building - and its many thousands of workers - a button-push away from annihilation would in itself constitute something of a threat to national security.

Cognitive dissonance compelled me to abandon the official conspiracy theory at this point, and to make the paradigm shift to reality. Others have a higher tolerance.

See 9/11 Mysteries for a lengthy (1hr 30min) analysis of the collapses of the Twin Towers. For a briefer overview (20min), see The Third Stage. (There is a fair bit of misinformation in there though.)

[Unidian]

Katy and Richard make a strong point I should have remembered to make myself. The idea of "demolition for innocent reasons" is made extremely problematic by the fact that a near-flawless demolition such as WTC 7 appears to be requires considerable setup time, and certainly more than a single afternoon. Deciding to "pull it" and doing so from scratch in the space of a few hours is essentially inconceivable, even with a professional demolition company on the scene (which was presumably not the case).

[Unidian]

The facts as I see them, greatly compressed, are as follows:

1. WTC 7 appears to have almost certainly been a case of controlled demolition. No official report is able to dispute this convincingly, all official accounts are forced by the laws of physics to give collapse by fire only a "low probability of occurrence," and even many critics of 9/11 conspiracy theories admit that it appears to be a demolition when pressed on the issue. No steel-frame skyscraper in the world has undergone total collapse due to fire before or since. There were not even any plans in place to deal with such an occurrence, as it was previously considered structurally impossible. WTC 7 was not hit by any airliner, nor is there any significant evidence that it was severely damaged by falling debris, despite various assertions to the contrary.

The WTC 7 Collapse:



2. Controlled demolition in any phase of the 9/11 events, in any building, establishes insider foreknowledge of the attacks with a great deal of certainty.

3. Foreknowledge indicates complicity on the part of at least some official agencies.

4. If this doesn't at least raise serious questions, one is probably either a highly indoctrinated individual, or a rather thoughtless one.

[Elizabeth Isabelle]

Nat, once I understood how long it takes to rig a controlled definition, I saw that, but the part I have the biggest problem with is that the Mayor's alternate command center was set up down the block the night before - on September 10th.
.