In my defense

by **rothbardian** » Wed Apr 12, 2006 2:10 am

I may be misunderstanding something here, but it seems like a mistake to first 'demonize' someone and then subsequently declare their website and the sum total of all it's content forever taboo/off-limits and summarily discredited. I think it's more complicated than that. I've gleaned factual information from websites purporting to have discovered alien offspring from Elvis Presley on the planet Nebulon (if for no other reason than that they had a link over to a legit site). Anyway...when Reynolds asks how it is that thin aluminum tubes can slice cartoon shapes of airplane wings through solid steel, he does make an interesting point in that regard, which I do not see his opponents taking on directly (or maybe I missed it). Having said that, there may be some principles of physics I am not knowledgeable on, when I've watched, for example, karate experts put their relatively frail, thin-boned hands straight through ten layers of bricks. One other thing that maybe goes in Reynolds favor (and maybe not) but...of the thirty-thousand people in the buildings, I would've thought I could have read dozens of testimonies from people who claimed: "Yes, I was sitting at my desk, and I looked up and there was this gigantic airliner headed straight for us, on my side of the building. It hit nine floors up from me [or ten or eleven or whatever]..." I haven't been able to find a SINGLE testimony like that. I'd love it if somebody could link me to testimony of people IN the building who saw the plane coming. I really don't know how it would relate to Reynolds 'holograph' stuff...I just know I've yet to see that testimony.

by **robertdreed** » Wed Apr 12, 2006 2:36 am

"can you tell me where they differ except for the planes stuff?" LOL "except for the planes stuff"...it is too funny... Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=robertdreed>robertdreed</A> at: 4/12/06 1:18 am

by **pugzleyca3** » Wed Apr 12, 2006 2:39 am

I'm sorry but I thought that sentence in itself was very funny. No matter what context it was in. It was funny! "Oh, I forgot. It's all a waste of time to you, since you know everything." You talkin' ta me? I didn't mean to say that I don't believe ANYTHING that Reynold's has on his website. I agree with some of what he says, but I cannot link him to where I go because they would rip it to pieces and wouldn't listen to anything I have to say about 9/11. I don't care personally what my "fellow bloggers" as you call them think, they are not my fellow anything, they are crawling up my ass just like some of the people here are crawling up yours. And this happens every single time I even BRING UP 9/11 in ANY context, because they don't want to hear or believe ANYTHING that goes against the official story. No, I am not smug. I just have sense enough not to rush in half cocked in the middle of a bunch of rabid political talk and start saying things like there were no planes that hit the buildings. My goal is not to alienate them, it's to convince them that there is something wrong with 9/11 and to start looking at it themselves. And you know as well as I do what that kind of thing does in a situation like that. Or maybe you don't. If not, you should learn. I didn't say I didn't believe in CD, as a matter of fact I do believe the buildings were brought down by CD. The MOST I can hope for and the best thing I can do is use whatever information it takes to get them to look. And if that means keeping quiet about what I know I will be attacked for on those boards, yet planting a small seed that sprouts into their ability to doubt the official story and at least do some research, then I've at least made a small dent in the credibility of the bad guys. The thing that works best when dealing with with people like them is the NORAD stand down on 9/11. Something they can really sink their teeth into. And I have been called a "wild eyed conspiracy theorist" just for that. So I know how it feels when no one wants to see or can see what you are trying to tell them. And I know what it's like when they refuse to look at what I consider to be evidence. For the record, I don't know what went down at the Pentagon. For now, I have to say it was a plane, because I don't have anything else to go on. But that hole IS damn suspicious looking. I've been around the bend with all the theories that are out there and doubt there are many sites I have not perused regarding 9/11. I'll never be able to PROVE anything, but I can discern what I believe to be truth. That's as good as it gets. Until somebody comes out with all the details of that day. In the meantime, suffice it to say, the official version is nothing short of ridiculous in many, many areas. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=pugzleyca3>pugzleyca3</A> at: 4/12/06 1:09 am

by **thoughtographer** » Wed Apr 12, 2006 3:23 am

Reynolds, Reynolds Wrap, Aluminum, Alcoa... Something's fishy -- like delicious fresh fish baked in little aluminum foil packets. "A crooked stick will cast a crooked shadow."

by **StarmanSkye** » Wed Apr 12, 2006 4:58 am

<img src="http://images.usatoday.com/graphics/news/gra/gtowers2.gif" style="border:0;"/> http://images.usatoday.com/graphics/news/gra/gtowers2.gifDiagram of Flight 175 crashing into the crowded South Tower's 78th floor skylobby, plotting positions people were in when the impact occurred as reconstructed by USA Today --compiled for their feature special articles: Life and Death on the 78th Floor http://www.usatoday.com/graphics/news/gra/wtc2002/flash.htm Rothbardian: "It's more complicated than that." Damn-straight; "Anyway...when Reynolds asks how it is that thin aluminum tubes can slice cartoon shapes of airplane wings through solid steel, he does make an interesting point in that regard, which I do not see his opponents taking on directly (or maybe I missed it)." Yeah, it is a good question -- He makes a coupla good points, especially raising the issue of ground-effect which DBD posted about, making it physically impossible (he claims) to fly a plane at 500 mph about 6 ft above the ground -- I don't know what the deal there is. I was ready to accept a Boesing 757 at the Pentagon and then -- Bam! Upside the head. The issue with aluminum cutting through steel -- it's more like the wings ripped, pounded and tore through the 1/4 inch box-columns and aluminum facing. A lot of the perimeter box-girders bolted-connections and flanges sheared under the imapct, and their weld-joints to the spandrel plates were broken and failed. The Boeing's wings weren't exactly 'thin' --they WERE designed to support up to 200 tons, 400,000 pounds. The wings' curved-shape and annealing and internal-frame reinforcements and gussets giave them enormous designed rigidity, enhanced by their internal fuel-tanks which were at least half-full. Plus, they had TREMENDOUS kinetic-energy of the mass-momentum of the plane's 80 tons flying into the south tower at over 500 mph. What gets me about Reynold's method is his jumping to unwarranted conclusions, selectively choosing or denying facts to fit his needs, and his implication that anyone who thinks 911 was a conspiracy has to go all the way and accept CD. Apparantly, that what some folks buy into -- that unless you accept the gov. used CD on the towers you buy the whole official story hook-line and sinker. Following-- compelling account by South Tower office worker who watched flight 175 hit his building. http://www.mishalov.com/wtc_northtower.htmlhttp://www.mishalov.com/wtc_southto ... -excerpt-- 81ST FLOOR, South Tower Stanley Praimnath, survivor Fuji Bank Mr. Praimnath was on the 81th floor, at his desk, when the plane hit the south tower. These are excerpts from an interview with Mr. Praimnath, who credits Brian Clark, a man he did not know but who worked on the 84th floor, with saving his life. Mr. Clark and Mr. Praimnath are two of 18 people known to have escaped from at or above the impact zone in the South Tower. I'm seeing fireballs coming down from the sky. [The adjacent north tower has been hit, it is 8:46 a.m.] And I'm like, oh, man, what's going on? So I pick up the phone and I'm dialing my boss who works on the 59th floor of 1 World Trade. I'm getting no response. I hung up the phone, I said, Delise, (a temporary employee in his office) ``Let's get out of here.'' We ran down the corridor, back to the elevator, took the local elevators, went back to the 78th floor. While we waited there, me and Delise, 18 other people from my company were waiting there: the president, the C.E.O., the head of human resources, the head of general affairs, all these big guys are there. We took the elevator and went downstairs to the lobby. We're about to exit through the turnstile, and the security guard says, ``Where you guy's going?'' We said, ``Well, we saw fireballs coming down.'' ``No, all is well, go back to your office,'' the man said. The building is secured. Sent us back up. For no apparent reason, I turned to Delise and said Delise, why don't we take the rest of the day off. She was happy. I don't know why I told her, probably the wisest decision I made in my life. But these people were standing up there, they're looking at me rather funny like I made a wrong judgment call. And I mean, these are the ... bosses, and they're looking at me strange, I'm standing up there, waiting for the elevator with these guys, one of the guys, Jack, he's making a joke of me. ``Stan, the man, you're not scared to come in the elevator.'' So , I'm telling one of the guys, Brian, the head of human resources, I said, Brian, ``It's a good time to take a look at relocation.'' Brian was looking at me and he said ``You've got that right." So the elevator came, we jump in, we're gone. We get back to the 78th floor. Once we reached there we took the local elevators - some went to the 79th, some went to the 80th, I got off at the 81st, and some went to the 82nd. I walked back into my office. The phone is ringing again. This time there's a young lady from Chicago, a business associate. "Stan, are you watching the monitor, are you watching the news to see what is going on?" she asks. "Yes, I'm fine." And for no apparent reason in mid-sentence I just raised my head and looked to the Statue of Liberty and what I see is a big plane coming towards me. This plane is coming, eye level towards me. Eye contact. I'm seeing a big gray plane, with a red stripe, and I can still see it in my eyes now. I dropped the phone, screamed, dove under my desk and I don't know why I said what I tell you now. "Lord, you take over. I can't do this." "And I don't know, I do not know, as God be my witness, and I'm a deacon in my Sunday school and church and I'm a Sunday school superintendent, I would not tell you a lie here. I don't know why I said it, but I screamed." The plane impacts. I try to get up and then I realize that I'm covered up to my shoulder in debris. And when I'm digging through under all this rubble, I can see the bottom wing starting to burn, and that wing is wedged 20 feet in my office doorway. So I'm pushing stuff out and I'm crawling and I'm crawling and I'm screaming, ``Help me, help me. I'm trapped. Don't leave me here." Then I see this flashlight. I can't believe it. So I crawl toward it, the length of one floor, which is like a short city block. And I crawled through the loan department into the lounge, into the computer room, into the communication room and I realize I can't go farther. There's a Sheetrock wall. And I can't breathe. And I'm saying "I'm here, I'm here. Don't leave me." And I can hear a person saying, "Knock on the wall, knock on the wall and I'll know where you are." And once I got closer, I'm knocking on the wall. But even before he was there I was pounding, pounding. I'm hitting everything possible. Making my way forward. So he is hearing this banging from wherever he is. The man said his name was Brain Clark, I think he's a vice president for Euro Brokers. I've never seen this man in my life. And I've worked 13 years in this building. He said when he heard me screaming. He stopped to rescue me. Bottom line is, I said ``Lord, just this one time give me strength.'' And I'm punching, punching, punching, punching. And then he said, "I feel a head." I said well, when you see my head, yank my body through. This wall would have been a drywall. It was not a strong wall. A regular partition wall. Part of it's broken and part of it's intact and is standing up. And the man just pulled with all his might and I fell on top of him. (Mr. Clark says that he told Mr. Praimnath to jump.) The next thing I know, I'm telling this man, I give him a big kiss and a hug, my guardian angel. And this man is looking at me as if I'm a nut. Anyway we made our way down. While we're going, we stopped at a floor. We saw a man. This man was crying like a baby. I think his back was broken. And he's crying ``Tell my loved ones that I care for them; I love them.'' We're hobbling down, hobbling down. We got to the bottom, the ground floor. My hand looked like a balloon. My leg, my left leg, behind, the muscle behind there, the calf, it was opened up because I had like a long leg wound. I was cut, bloody, bruised all over. And I was sore. Black and blue. Interview by Eric Lipton --unquote-- Starman

by **rothbardian** » Wed Apr 12, 2006 6:26 am

Starman-- Hey thanks for that report "Life and Death on the 78th Floor". That's the first one I've read where someone inside the building saw the plane coming. It seems like it's hard to find a lot of eyewitness accounts of that nature. There's got to be a good book or some links, you would think. As to the steel girders, I thought Reynolds (or somebody) had described those as being extremely strong and thick. (I'll have to look that up again. It has been so obvious to me that it was CD, I've never been greatly interested in the whole cruise-missile/holograph/airliner debate.) And yes, again...I've never fully understood the whole saint-or-sinner/black-or-white categorization of various Internet writers. At the end of the day, NONE of them are perfect...so no matter who they are, I need to carefully sort out what they are saying.

by **darkbeforedawn** » Wed Apr 12, 2006 9:50 am

Pugzley--Thanks for replying and clarifying your position. Sorry to have been a little ascerbic. I agree with what you say regarding care as to what angles you bring up trying to get a toehold in with 9-ll official believers. I had imagined the people at this board to be a little more cognizant about physical evidence. I overshot and I apologize for creating this sturm and drang. And you are right about another angle--as individual lay people we will never prove ANYTHING. Michael Ruppert stated that at the very onset of all this research. But now I, personally, am very encouraged by the caliber of people now taking on this challenge. Perhaps I am too niave, but most don't seem like disinfo agents to me. In regards to Starmen, I could also post long involved eyewitness accounts that say the opposite of what you have posted. The hallways and stairways were clear, a missile was fired from a nearby building, the wrong plane seen hitting the side etc etc. But eyewitness accounts are notoriously WRONG. I am looking at hard physical facts. For example if you enlarge the entry holes photos of the towers, the siding AND the damage to the steel girders CAN be seen as pointing OU NOT IN to the building. That gives one cause to doubt the impact of the plane was what caused the cartoon cut out of the plane wing. To see steel pointing inward go here and scroll most of the way down: <a href="http://covertoperations.blogspot.com/2006_02_01_covertoperations_archive.html">covertoperations.blogspot...chive.html</a> In fact this blogsites entire month of Feb. contains very informative stuff and pictures about the faked videos in which planes "melt" into the side of the south tower--very disturbing.

by **darkbeforedawn** » Wed Apr 12, 2006 9:55 am

I meant to say the steel can be seen "pointing out not in" in the above paragraph. Steel pointing out would show the impact from planes entering the building did not cause the damage--an explosion from inside did.

by **Sarutama** » Wed Apr 12, 2006 11:01 am

darkbeforedawn, I'm a little confused by your assertion that the planes crashed into the buildings without slowing down. I mean, they would have had to slow down at some point or they would have come out the other side.

by **PeterofLoneTree** » Wed Apr 12, 2006 1:23 pm

"Great! Now I know what happens when a B-25 crashes into the Empire State Building." -- thoughtographer "Or is there something about a small propellor plane slamming into a brick building at low speed that can enlighten us about the (no) planeson 9/11?" -- nomo In researching the B-25 crash, I came across information that one of its engine was propelled through the building and out the other side, with the other falling into an elevator shaft. In researching the WTC incidents, I came across information that plane parts and engine debris were propelled through the building and out the other side, landing some blocks away. The following website has some interesting photographs. "WTC plane parts and engine debris" <a href="http://911review.org/brad.com/wtc_plane_debris.html">911review.org/brad.com/wt...ebris.html</a>

by **FourthBase** » Wed Apr 12, 2006 3:11 pm

This review of drills and exercises (and more) has some intriguing stuff: <a href="http://911review.org/inn.globalfreepress/lost_terror_drills_11a.html">911review.org/inn.globalf...s_11a.html</a> <a href="http://911review.org/inn.globalfreepress/lost_terror_drills_11b.html">911review.org/inn.globalf...s_11b.html</a> There needs to be a page with a concise summary of all the drills and war games.

by **pugzleyca3** » Wed Apr 12, 2006 3:32 pm

No apology necessary. I had just come from a butt kicking on a political board and I wasn't being very clear on my position in my first post. I had cottonball head as a result of arguing with a particularly acid mouthed group of naysayers. I apologize for my murkiness. Yes, when you come to a place like RI you tend to expect a little more leeway when it comes to the more unconventional theories about what happened on 9/11. By that, I mean the holograms, etc. It's hard enough just to get people on the street to look at the stand down and other more conventional problems with 9/11. But the people who come here are not the regular people on the street. I say conventional and unconventional for lack of a better term. I am very happy to see some people with physics backgrounds, etc. coming out and questioning this publicly, too. If they are disinfo, they are certainly doing a good job of convincing even more people that the official story is a lie. Now, why in the world would anyone want to put a disinfo agent out there which would cause the government even more problems than they already have with the 9/11 Commission's pack of lies and omissions? It can't be that they are suddenly going to come out with some big revelation and suddenly everyone is going to know the government was telling the truth about all of it since the get go. The generalized disbelief in their official story runs wide and deep in what I believe is now a very large segment of the population. This would be some very risky business for them, don't you think? The only realistic scenario I can forsee regarding pulling a revelation out of their hat through disinfo agents that might make some sort of impact in the government's favor is the Pentagon plane/missile issue. However, most people are not as familiar with that issue as they are the theory of a government stand down via NORAD and the controlled demo of Bldg. 7 and the two towers. The Pentagon was one of the last theories I happened to run across, but maybe that was just me and the path of my particular research. It would be highly possible for them to pull out the tapes of the Pentagon crash and destroy the no plane theory to smithereens. Even if they faked a video and put it on the news. I am afraid something like this might happen as soon as the Moussaui (sp?) trial is over. Isn't that the excuse they used for not releasing those tapes, that it would could compromise this trial? Would this particular revelation be enough to shatter the 9/11 truth movement altogether? I wish I knew the answer to that. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=pugzleyca3>pugzleyca3</A> at: 4/12/06 1:46 pm

by **nomo** » Wed Apr 12, 2006 4:00 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Would this particular revelation be enough to shatter the 9/11 truth movement altogether? I wish I knew the answer to that.<hr></blockquote> If your movement depends that much on the no-plane-at-the-Pentagon thesis then maybe it deserves to be shattered. That's the problem exactly with most of the more outlandish theories: they were set up for easy debunking.

by **robertdreed** » Wed Apr 12, 2006 4:03 pm

ba da bing Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=robertdreed>robertdreed</A> at: 4/12/06 2:03 pm

by **nomo** » Wed Apr 12, 2006 4:09 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>I meant to say the steel can be seen "pointing out not in" in the above paragraph. Steel pointing out would show the impact from planes entering the building did not cause the damage--an explosion from inside did.<hr></blockquote> An explosion from inside? Uh, like, for example, the plane that just flew into it? Sheesh. No wonder people think 9/11 truthers are mostly completely off their rocker. Please. You're giving the rest of us a bad name. (Of course, that's exactly the plan -- not yours per se, but being misinformed and gullible sure helps.)

In my defense

Reynolds

Re: Reynolds

Re: This is too damn funny

Wait a minute:

Re: Reynolds

Re: Reynolds

Pugzley and eyewitness

correction

Re: correction

Re: correction

Re: correction

Re: Pugzley and eyewitness

Re: Pugzley and eyewitness

the more outlandish 9-11 theories

Re: correction

Who is online