Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6
redhen

911 inside job - for what?

4,457 posts in this topic

And that is what you want us to believe, right?

Now, Richard Gage.

ARCHITECT Magazine

The Magzine of the American Institute of Architects

The boardroom at the Washington, D.C., headquarters of the American Institute of Architects is an impressive place: Beautiful concentric wooden desks, with microphones in front of every seat, encircle a small central dais, offering the impression that important discussions are had here. “It feels like the United Nations,” a guest recently commented.

This room recently served as a peculiar venue for the 23rd stop on the 30-city “world premiere tour” of AIA member Richard Gage’s new film 9/11: Explosive Evidence—Experts Speak Out: Final Edition. Since 2006, Gage has been traveling all over the world under the banner of his organization, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth—an organization that has no affiliation with the AIA, express or otherwise—to preach the theory that the Twin Towers and 7 World Trade Center were actually brought down by explosives on September 11, 2001, and not the impact of two hijacked jetliners and the resulting fires and debris.

“I had to be dragged kicking and screaming into believing that our government and the Israeli government, the Israeli Mossad, could be responsible for the Twin Towers demolition,” one member of the DC chapter of 911truth.org declared from the AIA-emblazoned podium.

The accusations of Gage’s organization are the typical hodgepodge of pseudo-scientific claims. Along with other esoteric and debunked technical arguments, he says that melted steel was visible at the Ground Zero site proving that the fires burned too hot to have been caused by jet fuel; that because the buildings collapsed at “near free fall speed” there must have been a controlled demolition; and that traces of athermitereaction found in the World Trade Center debris proves that explosives were used.

All of Gage’s so-called evidence has been rebutted in peer-reviewed papers, by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, by the National Institute for Standards and Technology, by the American Society of Civil Engineers, by the 9/11 Commission Report, and, perhaps most memorably, by the 110-year-old engineering journal Popular Mechanics.

What is more interesting than these bizarre and debunked conspiracy theories is the way that Gage places his AIA membership front and center in his presentations. He seems to be attempting to cloak his organization in the officialdom of the venerable 155-year-old professional institution, even as AIA wants nothing to do with his organization. At the start of his latest film, he explains that he is “a licensed architect of over 20 years and member of the American Institute of Architects.”

Gage often seems to wield his AIA status in promoting his conspiracy theories. In making his case, he also regularly cites that more than 100 AIA members and at least six AIA Fellows have signed his petition calling for a new investigation. In total, Gage says that more than 1,700 of the petition’s roughly 16,000 signatures are from architects and engineers.

During the screening, Gage was at the very least intimating that his organization had been invited to AIA officially. “I can’t tell you how grateful we were to have been accepted to be here in the boardroom at the national headquarters,” Gage said. “We hope this is the beginning of a very productive relationship.”

Aside from Gage, though, there was not a single other architect in the room, much less an official from AIA, or even another member. The 80-strong crowd was made up largely of members of the local 9/11 Truth movement and other political activists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regen

As has been mentioned here before, when the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser, the only choice left for the loser.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regen

As has been mentioned here before, when the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser, the only choice left for the loser.

Oh? Like your comments that the governments are known liars isn't an attempt at slander?

I'll save your quote next time you decide to post that same age old response.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regen

As has been mentioned here before, when the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser, the only choice left for the loser.

You have slandered the government into the ground time after time. I guess you overlooked that fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh? Like your comments that the governments are known liars isn't an attempt at slander?

I'll save your quote next time you decide to post that same age old response.

Sheesh, get your priorities right. Unlike Richard Gage and Steven Jones, Bush administration officials have been demonstrated to lie about 9/11 which resulted in hundreds of thousands dead. Just watch this sickening, all too late flip-flop by President Bush...

  • “…there are Al Qaida terrorists inside Iraq.”

  • “We know that Iraq and al Qaeda have had high-level contacts that go back a decade”

  • “… there is a connection between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein.”

  • “Iraq is a part on the war on terror.”

  • “… a true threat facing our country is that an Al Qaida-type network trained and armed by Saddam could attack America… ”

  • “… Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of al Qaeda.”

  • “Before September the 11th, many in the world believed that Saddam Hussein could be contained.”

  • “Iraq has sent bomb-making and document forgery experts to work with al Qaeda. Iraq has also provided al Qaeda with chemical and biological weapons training.”

  • “The regime has aided, trained and harbored terrorists, including operatives of al Qaeda. The danger is clear: using chemical, biological or, one day, nuclear weapons, obtained with the help of Iraq... ”

  • “The liberation of Iraq is a crucial advance in the campaign against terror. We've removed an ally of al Qaeda, and cut off a source of terrorist funding.”

  • “The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11, 2001… ”

Now here it comes...

  • First, just if I might correct a misperception, I don’t think we ever said — at least I know I didn’t say that there was a direct connection between September the 11th and Saddam Hussein.

You dirty liar Bush – impressing a 9/11-Iraq connection on the public mind was exactly your intention.

Cheney is just as much of a snake: -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_gm1zNURfo

In all, a U.S. House of Representatives report found that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell and Rice between them made, 61 statements that misrepresented Iraq’s ties to al Qaeda.

I think we should reserve most criticism for these politicians who led us to over a decade of unnecessary war and caused the death of hundreds of thousands of all nationalities, rather than hold a couple of independent investigators asking questions to equal account.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have slandered the government into the ground time after time. I guess you overlooked that fact.

I will respond to your additional points when I have the time to do so. Right now, I would just like to ask the following.

Are you critical towards your government regarding any subject?

What are your thoughts concerning the deceit in sending US soldiers to die under false pretences in the 2nd Iraq war?

The continuous underminement of the Constitution / Rights & Freedoms of the United States citizens?

The avid prosecution of whistleblowers?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will respond to your additional points when I have the time to do so. Right now, I would just like to ask the following.

Are you critical towards your government regarding any subject?

Yes! I have been critical of the government on a number of issues.

What are your thoughts concerning the deceit in sending US soldiers to die under false pretences in the 2nd Iraq war?

The second Iraq invasion was due to false information furnished by an exiled Iraqi group, but Saddam Hussein made things worst as he impeded UN inspectors and eventually ejected them out of Iraq, but it was no secret that many people in the Gulf region and in the United States wanted Saddam Hussein removed.

The continuous underminement of the Constitution / Rights & Freedoms of the United States citizens?

It is a sticky point because this is a new day and there are people out there who are determined to kill us, so how far is the government willing to go to protect its citizens? The recent Edward Snowden story has actually placed American lives at risk, but on another note, such surveillance techniques can also be taken to a higher and unlawful level. Such techniques have been used to stop terrorist attacks in their tracks, which saved many lives.

How many people are aware they are being watched everyday? You are under surveillance everywhere, but not just from the government. Whenever you walk into a bank, you are being watched. When you walk into a supermarket, you are being watched. When you walk into many stores, you are being watched. Simply walking on the sidewalk and driving on the streets, you can be expected to appear on camera. Many signal lights have cameras installed and many buildings have surveillance cameras watching you as well.

Not only is the government watching you, but non-government sources are watching you as well and as I have said, this is a new day, but I am against such methods being misused.

The avid prosecution of whistleblowers?

They should be protected, however, that can only go so far. For example, Edward Snowden has now placed American lives in danger now that terrorist know how they can avoid our surveillance techniques in order to carry out new attacks upon Americans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*snip*.

In other words, we can't hold Gage, Jones, Harritt, or the entire truth movement eaccountable to their own lies because they represent the other side of the coin from the government.

Gotcha....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sheesh, get your priorities right. Unlike Richard Gage and Steven Jones, Bush administration officials have been demonstrated to lie about 9/11 which resulted in hundreds of thousands dead. Just watch this sickening, all too late flip-flop by President Bush...

  • “…there are Al Qaida terrorists inside Iraq.”

  • “We know that Iraq and al Qaeda have had high-level contacts that go back a decade”

  • “… there is a connection between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein.”

  • “Iraq is a part on the war on terror.”

  • “… a true threat facing our country is that an Al Qaida-type network trained and armed by Saddam could attack America… ”

  • “… Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of al Qaeda.”

  • “Before September the 11th, many in the world believed that Saddam Hussein could be contained.”

  • “Iraq has sent bomb-making and document forgery experts to work with al Qaeda. Iraq has also provided al Qaeda with chemical and biological weapons training.”

  • “The regime has aided, trained and harbored terrorists, including operatives of al Qaeda. The danger is clear: using chemical, biological or, one day, nuclear weapons, obtained with the help of Iraq... ”

  • “The liberation of Iraq is a crucial advance in the campaign against terror. We've removed an ally of al Qaeda, and cut off a source of terrorist funding.”

  • “The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11, 2001… ”

An exiled Iraqi group was responsible for feeding the United States false information regarding Iraq's WMD that led to the second Iraqi invasion in 2003, and amazingly, the group even admitted on TV they were responsible and even provided documentation to backup their responsibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An exiled Iraqi group was responsible for feeding the United States false information regarding Iraq's WMD that led to the second Iraqi invasion in 2003, and amazingly, the group even admitted on TV they were responsible and even provided documentation to backup their responsibility.

Lesson to be learnt there really isn't there - don't start wars on single source intelligence. :/

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lesson to be learnt there really isn't there - don't start wars on single source intelligence. :/

Yes indeed. The Bush administration was mislead by false information and many people paid the price. That exiled Iraqi group got its wish and Saddam Hussein is now history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh? Like your comments that the governments are known liars isn't an attempt at slander?

I'll save your quote next time you decide to post that same age old response.

Good heavens man, that's not slander, that is an accurate statement of fact.

Are you claiming that government does not lie?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good heavens man, that's not slander, that is an accurate statement of fact.

Are you claiming that government does not lie?

I have proven that Gage intends to deceive his audience. Evidenced by showing videos of WTC 7's collapse sans the penthouses. He lied. Therefore it is not slander since I have proven that Gage lied. Is that how that works BR?

At no point did I state the government NEVER lies. That has been explained to you many times BR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In other words, we can't hold Gage, Jones, Harritt, or the entire truth movement eaccountable to their own lies because they represent the other side of the coin from the government.

Gotcha....

No, in other words, the demonstrated lies of politicians (which is not slander) that have led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands are of far greater significance than any lies you personally perceive of Gage et al (which is slander) that don’t hurt anyone. I don’t think criticism deserves to be equally proportioned as you suggested.

An exiled Iraqi group was responsible for feeding the United States false information regarding Iraq's WMD that led to the second Iraqi invasion in 2003, and amazingly, the group even admitted on TV they were responsible and even provided documentation to backup their responsibility.

Even more amazingly, the head of that exiled Iraqi group, Ahmed Chalabi, was a long term associate of Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle et al and their Neocon mentor Albert Wohlstetter – the whole lot studied at the University of Chicago together – how cosy. Perhaps then not so amazing that Chalabi’s political group in Iraq, which supplied the Bush administration with a large portion of the false WMD intelligence, was created in 1992 with assistance and funding from the CIA.

Ahmed Chalabi was then punished for supplying this false WMD intelligence by his U.S. appointment as oil minister of Iraq (you couldn't make it up), later the deputy prime minister of Iraq, interspersed with invites to the 2004 State of the Union Address and 2006 Bilderberg Conference. Here we see Chalabi (left) as Donald Rumsfeld (centre) gives him a stern telling-off: -

Ahmed_Chalabi_in_discussion_with_Paul_Bremer_and_Donald_Rumsfeld.jpg

“You naughty boy Ahmed!” [wink wink]

Anyone would need to be brain dead to fail to understand that the whole Iraq war pretext was fabricated and manipulated by Neocons who took power in the Bush administration.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Even more amazingly, the head of that exiled Iraqi group, Ahmed Chalabi, was a long term associate of Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle et al and their Neocon mentor Albert Wohlstetter – the whole lot studied at the University of Chicago together – how cosy. Perhaps then not so amazing that Chalabi’s political group in Iraq, which supplied the Bush administration with a large portion of the false WMD intelligence, was created in 1992 with assistance and funding from the CIA.

Ahmed Chalabi was then punished for supplying this false WMD intelligence by his U.S. appointment as oil minister of Iraq (you couldn't make it up), later the deputy prime minister of Iraq, interspersed with invites to the 2004 State of the Union Address and 2006 Bilderberg Conference. Here we see Chalabi (left) as Donald Rumsfeld (centre) gives him a stern telling-off: -

Ahmed_Chalabi_in_discussion_with_Paul_Bremer_and_Donald_Rumsfeld.jpg

“You naughty boy Ahmed!” [wink wink]

Anyone would need to be brain dead to fail to understand that the whole Iraq war pretext was fabricated and manipulated by Neocons who took power in the Bush administration.

Now, for the rest of the story. The Iraqi exiles were on TV recently revealing the details on how they mislead the United States on WMD in Iraq.

U.S. Intelligence and Iraq WMD

Iraqi Foreign Minister Naji Sabri, recruited as a CIA sourceand from Iraqi scientists clandestinely approached by the CIA under a covert program. Both these streams of information denied the existence of Iraqi WMD.

On the other side were data from Iraqi exile sources that claimed all sorts of WMD and a set of fabricated documents alleging an Iraqi deal to buy uranium ore in Niger. The only concrete “find” was of a shipment of aluminum tubes being imported into Iraq, but analysts were divided over whether these tubes had anything to do with WMD at all. U.S. intelligence largely discounted the (accurate) details from Sabri and the scientists and—despite the CIA’s expressed misgivings—made use of the exile data. This thin data conditioned the intelligence analysis.

This begs the question why, given distrust of the INC’s information at both the CIA and State Department, and an awareness of these doubts even within the DIA, the data was used at all, much less relied upon

Now, this.

Global Misinformation Campaign was Used to Build Case for War

WASHINGTON - The former Iraqi exile group that gave the Bush administration exaggerated and fabricated intelligence on Iraq also fed much of the same information to leading newspapers, news agencies and magazines in the United States, Britain and Australia. Other Iraqi groups made similar allegations about Iraq's links to terrorism and hidden weapons that also found their way into official administration statements and into news reports, including several by Knight Ridder.

The INC letter said that it fed ICP information to Arab and Western news media and to two officials in the offices of Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld, the leading invasion advocates.

Iraqi exile group admits WMD intelligence it gave Britain could be false

LONDON: An Iraqi exile group in London which claims to have supplied Britain with a key piece of intelligence on Iraqi weapons has admitted that the information might have been false, the Guardian newspaper reported Tuesday.

Theros said the Iraqi officer who claims to have been the original source of the intelligence passed on by the INA had in fact never seen purported chemical weapons crates upon which his 45-minute claim was based.

The United States took the bait and the rest is now history.

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now, for the rest of the story.

If that post was meant as some form of rebuttal then it was simply farcical.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have proven that Gage intends to deceive his audience. Evidenced by showing videos of WTC 7's collapse sans the penthouses. He lied. Therefore it is not slander since I have proven that Gage lied. Is that how that works BR?

At no point did I state the government NEVER lies. That has been explained to you many times BR.

Nonsense.

Now that you acknowledge that the government DOES lie, would you hazzard a guess as to the ratio of truthful government statements to false government statements?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If that post was meant as some form of rebuttal then it was simply farcical.

Reality is what it is!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nonsense.

Now that you acknowledge that the government DOES lie, would you hazzard a guess as to the ratio of truthful government statements to false government statements?

How about we do this. Let's list the flood of lies, disinformation, and misinformation flowing from those 911 conspiracy websites.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The internet as a whole contains a flood of lies, disinformation, and misinformation - that also goes for conspiracy sites, obviously.

How does that compare to a government lying to, and covertly acting against the public?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nonsense.

Now that you acknowledge that the government DOES lie, would you hazzard a guess as to the ratio of truthful government statements to false government statements?

What does a ratio of lies to truth matter?

Do you believe that the government has NEVER told the truth?

The point is...it does not matter if the government has lied before. That is why fact checking and research is needed to either prove or disprove assertions.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, in other words, the demonstrated lies of politicians (which is not slander) that have led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands are of far greater significance than any lies you personally perceive of Gage et al (which is slander) that don’t hurt anyone. I don’t think criticism deserves to be equally proportioned as you suggested.

So we rely to appeals to emotion as a reason why we cannot hold the truthers to the same standards as the government?

Duly noted on your bias tactics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The internet as a whole contains a flood of lies, disinformation, and misinformation - that also goes for conspiracy sites, obviously.

How does that compare to a government lying to, and covertly acting against the public?

A person has to be careful, but I have read so much disinformation, misinformation and in some cases, outright lies from 911 conspiracy websites, especially as they pertained to aviation.

Having made a career in aviation for over 40 years, I've noticed that much of what they posted was absolutely false. One of their arguments that raised my eyebrows involved a so-called pod beneath United 175. I looked at the photos and noticed that they were confusing aerodynamic fairings, which are standard on all B-767s, as a pod and in one case, a skeptic actually confused the paint scheme on the bottom forward fuselage of United 175 as a pod, so I posted a photo of the bottom fuselage of another United B-767 to prove to him that he was knocking on the wrong door, afterward, the argument ceased.

Much hype has been made over the lack of videos at the Pentagon, but why did they make that an issue? In many cases videos are not available during accident investigation yet determinations can be made despite the lack of videos. There are videos of American 11 and United 175 striking the WTC buildings yet there are skeptics who continue to claim that no aircraft struck those buildings despite video evidence. Another issue pertaining to the Pentagon involved the so-called "Hani maneuver." Skeptics claim that it took super-human strength to perform such a maneuver, but as a pilot of over 40 years, their comments had me scratching my head because I hve performed similar maneuvers as a student pilot with less than 30 flight hours during the 1960s. That maneuver was so boring that I could have gone into the kitchen and made a ham and cheese sandwich and returned to the living room before the terrorist pilot completed that very boring maneuver and the amazing thing about it all is that he didn't even complete a full circle.

To show you how boring that manevuer was, take a piece of chalk and draw a 10-foot circle on the pavement and then, draw an intersecting starting line at the top of that circle and draw another line at the 9 o'clock position of the circle. Begin walking clockwise on the circle from the 12 o'clock position and walk at a pace to where you will arrive at the 9 'o'clock position 3 1/2 minutes later. Just another example of many where those 911 conspiracy websites have tried to dupe people with false and misleading information and the list goes on and on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A person has to be careful, but I have read so much disinformation, misinformation and in some cases, outright lies from 911 conspiracy websites, especially as they pertained to aviation.

Having made a career in aviation for over 40 years, I've noticed that much of what they posted was absolutely false. One of their arguments that raised my eyebrows involved a so-called pod beneath United 175. I looked at the photos and noticed that they were confusing aerodynamic fairings, which are standard on all B-767s, as a pod and in one case, a skeptic actually confused the paint scheme on the bottom forward fuselage of United 175 as a pod, so I posted a photo of the bottom fuselage of another United B-767 to prove to him that he was knocking on the wrong door, afterward, the argument ceased.

Much hype has been made over the lack of videos at the Pentagon, but why did they make that an issue? In many cases videos are not available during accident investigation yet determinations can be made despite the lack of videos. There are videos of American 11 and United 175 striking the WTC buildings yet there are skeptics who continue to claim that no aircraft struck those buildings despite video evidence. Another issue pertaining to the Pentagon involved the so-called "Hani maneuver." Skeptics claim that it took super-human strength to perform such a maneuver, but as a pilot of over 40 years, their comments had me scratching my head because I hve performed similar maneuvers as a student pilot with less than 30 flight hours during the 1960s. That maneuver was so boring that I could have gone into the kitchen and made a ham and cheese sandwich and returned to the living room before the terrorist pilot completed that very boring maneuver and the amazing thing about it all is that he didn't even complete a full circle.

To show you how boring that manevuer was, take a piece of chalk and draw a 10-foot circle on the pavement and then, draw an intersecting starting line at the top of that circle and draw another line at the 9 o'clock position of the circle. Begin walking clockwise on the circle from the 12 o'clock position and walk at a pace to where you will arrive at the 9 'o'clock position 3 1/2 minutes later. Just another example of many where those 911 conspiracy websites have tried to dupe people with false and misleading information and the list goes on and on.

lol... you didnt answer the question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What does a ratio of lies to truth matter?

Do you believe that the government has NEVER told the truth?

The point is...it does not matter if the government has lied before. That is why fact checking and research is needed to either prove or disprove assertions.

............................................ okay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.