9/11 Truthers Poison 8-Year Anniversary of National Tragedy with Conspiracy Garbage
Charlie Sheen, 9/11 Truther Nutjob and washed-up actor
Â
The last few days left many of us at a loss of words as we recalled the horrors of September 11th, 2001.  But while people share stories of tragic loss and hope, pictures and afterthoughts, we still have the 9/11 “truthersâ€Â who like to tell us our fellow Americans died at the hands of our own government.
Last night’s Red Eye discussed Charlie Sheen, the latest celebrity truther idiot to shoot off his mouth. He recently released a YouTube video demanding both a meeting with the president and a reinvestigation of 9/11:
Sheen’s main message:
“We want our country back, Mr. President. Therefore, I’m not just calling on you and your team. I’m calling on each and every American citizen to wake up, stand up, and demand the truth.â€
Red Eye host Greg Gutfeld responds:
Now, never mind how repulsive this is to anyone personally affected by the terror attacks, Sheen is just awesome for revealing what makes a conspiracy theorist so pathetic.
Being years removed from 9/11, some may begin to forget the magnitude of what occurred that day. As each year goes by, it will become easier for people to jump onto stupid conspiracy bandwagons without spending ten seconds thinking about how ridiculous they may be.
Gutfeld continues:
When it comes to truther obsession, the questioning will always be – as Sheen confesses – ”bottomless.” That’s the joy of conspiracy – it’s like an endless bag of Doritos, except instead of chips you get comebacks like “that’s what they want you to think,” and “open your eyes, dude.” It would be funny if it wasn’t so sad.
It is sad, but the funny part is why people choose to believe conspiracy theories in the first place. These truthers seem to have a desire for a narrative that they feel is better than the real one. For them, the truth does not suffice. They like to pretend they are above the “lie†and are smart enough to know they are being lied to.
I recently wrote about Sheen and truthers for Parcbench:
“I have a theory of my own. Both actor Mark Wahlberg and Family Guy creator Seth MacFarlane had tickets for the flights that crashed on 9/11 but either missed them or made other plans. My guess is that Sheen [and other truthers] thinks they were probably in on it as well.â€
It’s safe to assume truthers will believe anything that isn’t the real story. They just won’t give in to the truth, and instead demand another story. When you hear truthers talk, they have the same indoctrinated tone that you hear from students on college campuses these days.
Conspiracy theorists in general only have one tactic, and that is to demand the truth. When it comes time for them to offer their own theory, they get stuck. Their only strategy is to assert that what we know isn’t true.
Creators of the Loose Change documentary continue to release new versions of their hack film about why the official 9/11 story is a farce. They famously debated writers of Popular Mechanics and got whooped. If anything makes the truthers look crazy, this is it. The guys from Mechanics sound rational and measured, while the Loose Change guys laugh and respond in fast, desperate rants. The truthers are banking on amateur eyewitness testimony, and the Mechanics writers are relying on facts and science.
Below are videos of this debate, hosted by Marxist journalist Amy Goodman on Democracy Now!. The last two parts show a truther’s true craziness while the Mechanics writers walk all over them.
Part One:
Part Two:
Part Three:
Part Four:
Part Five:
(And remember, these are the same kinds of cranks whose petition former Green Jobs czar Van Jones signed.)
A new documentary from National Geographic took popular truthers and showed them several large-scale tests that were done to prove the accuracy of the claims made by the 9/11 Commission Report. The truthers’ only comeback was to say that the tests were irrelevant or that they didn’t address the right issue.
“In the world of paranoid conspiracy theories there are no coincidences.â€
-Popular Mechanics
Truthers are just plain nuts!
He was on about this 3 years ago too. Maybe he positioning himself to be a Czar?
http://italicsminecom.blogspot.com/2006/07/new-colloquialism-announced.html
Area 51. . .calling Area 51. . .
Damn! They never return my calls.
I thought he moved out of the country after Bush won last time.
He and Van Jones together add up to one whole wit.
Wow, another ad hominem attack against truthers, using straw men and insults to prove a point of which I have seen none. Popular mechanics dealt with a hand full of claims about 9-11. Some of these claims were already shot down by truthers. The same truthers who already knew that loose change is not factual in all their claims. This is the straw man part, claiming that truthers are blind sheep who all agree on the same facts. This is a tactic used to silence truthers instead of taking them on their individual claims. Or that Maybe they just hate Bush or want to have some secret truth, etc etc, . I started out liking Bush, and not wanting to believe the 9-11 truther stuff , but I can’t stick my head in the sand. I am also a birther, who cannot stand Obama. I am a conservative also. Some people may have ulterior motives like being against Bush. I just want the truth, and the truth doesn’t look so pretty. Insults and ad hominems do not make truthers wrong. Same trick used to silence birthers. It gets old after a while. No seriousness.
The “Truthers” could use a reality check! http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=1
Truthers = Commies or “useful idiots”
Pity you didn’t deal with any of the 911 issues.
47 story WTC7 dropped at free fall speed onto its footprint at 5-20pm, 911. ‘Onto its footprint’ means that there was catastrophic failure of every column in the building at the same moment which allowed the building to collapse without deviation from the vertical. Free fall speed means the ‘catastrophic failure’ was of such a magnitude that the building’s steel frame structure offered no resistance to the fall.
The twin towers collapsed explosively (pulverising all concrete) at just over free fall speed which means the massive steel framework of the building offer no resistance whatsoever to the fall.
These collapses were clearly not random events but have fingerprints all over them – and not Islamic ones.
Name calling and abusing people without addressing any of their claims, is not the highest form of argument. I am not an American. I am not a leftist in any shape or form. I would far rather believe the official conspiracy theory – it would make the world a simpler place for me. And 911 would be a straightforward jihadist attack which I could use in my opposition to Islam and its increasingly successful worldwide takeover bid. But I don’t believe it because the buildings collapses clearly were not random events resulting from the planes going into them. (Of course, no plane went into WTC 7.)
I think Mr. Sheen has just put himself in the same boat with Jane Fonda. From this day forward people will remember him as a traitor. He’s a marked man in the eye’s of many. Bad career move!
Dawn, “The “Truthers†could use a reality check! http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=1”
Here is a reality check to that reality check.
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pm/
According to ‘ Popular Mechanics’ James Meigs on the O’Reilly Factor , Meigs contradicts himself completely in claiming that, “No one had ever seen a one hundred plus story building collapse to the ground before,” and yet less than two minutes later agrees with O’Reilly’s comment that nothing unexpected about the impact of the planes or the collapses surprised analysts. Yeah, ok.
Steven Jones, a BYU physics professor, conducted an analysis and discovered traces of thermite in steel samples taken from the World Trade Center. “Using advanced techniques we’re finding out what’s in these samples – we’re finding iron, sulphur, potassium and manganese – these are characteristic of a variation of thermite which is used to cut through steel very rapidly, it’s called thermate,” said Professor Jones.
Frank DeMartini the WTC construction manager statedbefore 9-11, that the buildings were designed to take multiple airliner impacts and not collapse.
You also have pools of molten yellow metal found underneath both towers and Building 7 subsequent to the collapses.
Before 9-11 no other buildings had ever collasped from fire damage. Infact in February 2005, The Windsor building in Madrid burned for over 24 hours as shooting flames engulfed almost the entire structure and yet the building did not collapse. The core of the WTC was exponentially more robust than the Windsor building. So we have one building that burned incessantly for over 24 hours and did not fall, compared to two buildings which were structurally far superior, burned briefly from limited fires, and yet both collapsed within an average time of 79 minutes .
Not to mention the countless statements of people at the scene that bombs went off or explosions went off.
MEMORANDUM
TO: 9/11 attack Truthers
FROM: Pearl Harbor Attack Truthers
DATE: Sept. 13, 2009
CC: American Citizens
Learn from our mistake(s). In digging for what we believed to be the truth – that our Government not only knew about the horrible attack on Pearl Harbor but was in on it, our distraction was put to good use by our political enemies. It has been well over half a century since that fated December day and yet we’ve been unable to unearth credible & indisputable evidence that any government agency, employee or elected official truly new anything about it.
But while we were engaged in our “truther” follies, we lost our country. The central government has usurped state, local and personal control; mandated personal responsibilities beyond constitutional powers entrusted to them and made the place a horrible mess.
Learn from our mistake and get over yourself and get to work undoing what our “greatest generation” overlooked by being so distracted.
Like Mr. Sheen has any credibility. He’s out of favor with the public so he needs the free publicity. He shows himself to be an even bigger JOKE now than ever before. Hey maybe Barnum and Bailey could hire him as a clown.
I thought the only citizens who “die at the hands of their government” are people from marxist or other revolutionary type run countries. What nitwits like Charlie don’t understand is they NOW really are living under such a regime and they support the big comrade… Obama. Are liberals really that incapable of understanding what is going on?
As a service to Truthers, I present this:
Abraham Lincoln was elected to Congress in 1846.
John F. Kennedy was elected to Congress in 1946.
Abraham Lincoln was elected President in 1860.
John F. Kennedy was elected President in 1960.
Both were particularly concerned with civil rights.
Both wives lost their children while living in the White House.
Both Presidents were shot on a Friday.
Both Presidents were shot in the head
Now it gets really weird.
Lincoln ’s secretary was named Kennedy.
Kennedy’s Secretary was named Lincoln .
Both were assassinated by Southerners.
Both were succeeded by Southerners named Johnson.
Andrew Johnson, who succeeded Lincoln, was born in 1808.
Lyndon Johnson, who succeeded Kennedy, was born in 1908.
John Wilkes Booth, who assassinated Lincoln, was born in 1839.
Lee Harvey Oswald, who assassinated Kennedy, was born in 1939.
Both assassins were known by their three names.
Both names are composed of fifteen letters.
Now hang on to your seat.
Lincoln was shot at the theater named ‘Ford’.
Kennedy was shot in a car called ‘ Lincoln ‘ made by ‘Ford’.
Lincoln was shot in a theater and his assassin ran and hid in a warehouse.
Kennedy was shot from a warehouse and his assassin ran and hid in a theater.
Booth and Oswald were assassinated before their trials.
A week before Lincoln was shot, he was in Monroe , Maryland
A week before Kennedy was shot, he was with Marilyn Monroe.
I say Charlie should be allowed his beer summit with Obamy. They can discuss strategy on getting Acorn to track down the 50,000 or so 9/11 co-conspirators using the 2010 census as their cover. (Oh wait, that plan won’t work now.)
Well, how about if Charlie offers a $10 million reward for any whistleblower willing to come forward. (He can afford it, everybody. He works on the hit CBS series “Two and a Half Men.”) There’s just got to be ONE remorseful member of the World Trade Center demolition crew who wants the real story out!
AS FOR THE LOOSE BRAIN(LOOSE CHANGE ) IDIOTS THE DVD SALES OF THERE B/S VERSION OF THE TRUTH HAVE MADE THESE NEVER DO WELLS RICH COULD THAT BE THE REAL REASON THAT THEY KEEP INSULTING ALL OF US WITH THERE BIGLIE ABOUT 9/11
If 9-11 had happened in 2000, do you think there would be any of this ” truthers ” bilge..?
I think this is more of a politically motivated movement than a grass roots objection to the truth…Mark DE has commented that it is not the truth they want to hear…thus, claiming they are smarter than the rest of us believers, when the fact is they are wearing blinders of their own making…
They suffer the illusion that being different somehow makes them superior, when in fact it simply makes them different ( and wrong )…
That 911 was other than what the official conspiracy theory says is not want I wanted to hear, in fact I didn’t even hear of it for about four years after the event. After watching on the day the events occur, I just took it for grant the planes took the buildings out, that what I was seeing was what I was being told I was seeing – a jihadist terrorist attack. I never heard of WTC7 nor any suggestion that 911 was other than what the official story told.
Then I got sent a link to a WTC7 collapse video. There was no argument given in favour of another view. It was simply given as an illustration of the concept of ‘the elephant in the room’, with no indication of what I would see. It took the 6.5 second collapse of WTC7 to change my mind. I have spent my life interested in recognising the effects of ‘intelligent design’ and despite what an earlier poster said in justification of WTC7 being a random event, this collapse has fingerprints all over it. If that is the case, 911 was an insider job, whether I like the thought of that or not. In fact I do not like the thought of it and as I said would far prefer to accept the official story. However bad our western governments are, and some of them are terrible, it is hard to accept that they, or major elements of them, are in fact our enemies.
RE the US, it appears to me that it is not really Democrats verses Republicans but an A team and a B team which both pursue the same goal/agenda of expanding Government and shrinking freedoms. Though I don’t profess to know for sure the motivations behind 911, they certainly appear to have furthered these ends.
But you don’t need to know what the motivation was, nor even most of how it was actually carried out. That the collapses were not random is sufficient to tell anyone that the official conspiracy theory does not hold water.
There are heaps of videos at 911research.org – shots from every angle, frame by frame. Spend a few hours watching and thinking about them without reference to any view of the bigger picture. If these building could not have collapsed they way they did simply as the result of planes going into them, then you have an insider job.
PS: The core of the towers was made of 47 massive vertical columns that went from bedrock to the top. There is simply no way this core would collapse as it a result of a plane going in into it (the plane on WTC2 missed the core and no plane hit WTC7), or as a result of collapse of the top section of the building. Look at construction photos and see what had to be destroyed to get the buildings down.
PPS: And why did all the concrete in the towers turn to dust? Why did it not just come down in sheets and pile up on the ground?
PPS: And why have samples of 911 dust tested shown unexploded, and remnants of exploded, thermite?
I actually saw video tape with a police officer and fire fighter of the day of 911 telling people to clear the building, because there is a bomb in it.
Police Officers and fire fighters would not have a reason to lie about something like that.
Our goverment lied and said all the buildings collapsed becaused of planes hitting them, but then how do you explain building 7 which colapsed with out any plane hitting it..?
People forget our goverment are capable of killing people. They do it everyday in war.Only 25% of the people killed in Iraq Where actually terrorist, and our goverment legitimized it. Allso people seem to forget that when ever there is a war, the bankers or elites make profit off of it. This information can easily be researched.
George Bush lied about weapons of mass destruction, and people foolishly believed it without any proof. That means they’re capable of lying to us and we’re capable of believing it.
Who exactly *funded* the creation (and distribution) of this documentary, “Loose Change”? Maybe we should do an expose on THAT…hmmmm.
GOOD GRIEF, can someone help us and the lunatics that surround us. I was there. I saw the jet fly into Tower 1. I was too busy running in the opposite direction to see the jet hit tower 2.My dad was a structural engineer that said the fires in the building core were an architects worst nightmare. Failure of even a few floors, would cause a collapse of the central structure bearing the weight of the top floors. Rather like a house of cards. The sheer weight of the “liquidated” structure is enormous falling into the central shaft of the building. When people look at a building they see strength, enormity and underestimate the fragility of our “wonders”. If you don’t understand metal fatigue, just take a strip of metal and bend it repeatedly. It will fracture and then break. The heat caused from the jet fuel was enormous,literally setting fire to everything it touched.I am not an engineer. I do believe that a great American humorist had it right when he said that it is better to be silent and be thought and fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.I do believe that the lack of a strong education in the areas of math, science, reading , political science and world history foment this alternate universe mentality. No amount of logic and science could resolve the 9/11 Truther’s need for intrigue, mysteries, and rationalizing the warped since of self-importance that they enbrace.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/11818067/the_low_post_the_hopeless_stupidity_of_911_conspiracies
Go to this web post, page 2. Read all about the diabolical plot hatched by Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld!
Attention all “truthers”
I trained as a structural engineer, years ago, although I don’t practice now.
There is nothing, repeat nothing, unusual or mysterious about how the towers or WTC7 or any of the other nearby buildings collapsed on 9/11.
The phenomenon called “pancaking,” a type of building collapse, is well-known in the construction industry, and there are examples of it actually happening around the world.
The size and weight of a high-rise building, compared to the size of it’s structural members, is immense and it will collapse into it’s own footprint in a catastrophic failure. These kind of failures can be and are modeled and predicted during the design phase of a project, with the objective being to create a structure that will resist sudden collapse, giving the occupants time to get to safety.
The collapse of the towers was caused not just by the impact of the jets and the burning of their fuel, but also by the heat of the burning contents of the buildings themselves. This is why WTC7 also collapsed: because of the heat of the fires which broke out in the building. The structural steel in these buildings loses strength when heated, with more strength lost the longer the fire lasts. That is why the buildings did not collapse immediately after the crashes!
You can’t make judgements about how and why the buildings fell just from watching the video and making up stories. It requires detailed analysis of the actual design of the building.
For a readable summary of what happened, prepared by the American Society of Civil Engineers (the guys who actually do this stuff for a living) go here:
http://www.asce.org
If you are a hollywood actor, or musician, or high-school graduate, or college graduate in the humanities, please accept the fact that there are things you are not qualified to opine about.
OMG, two perfect examples of parents who didn’t do their job with young boys who probably played wwwwaaaayyyyyyy too many hours of first shooter video games in the basement. Lets hope they don’t find women that are their genetic match and procreate, we know how that turns out….
“Take Your Stinkin’ Paws Off Me You Damn Dirty Ape!”
Get a life
With all due respect Judy, being there on the day does not give you superior insight as to what was occurring. Nor am I an engineer but I am a builder with some understanding of structures.
Contra to both you and Joe, no high rise building before or after 911 has collapsed as a result of fire, no matter how intense the fire or of what duration. Further, jet fuel does not burn hot enough to seriously compromise the strength of structural steel, and in the case of the second tower hit, burnt up mostly outside the building anyway. Firemen who had reached the crash zone said the fires could be easily dealt with. None of the fires were of great intensity. In terms of WTC7 they were minimal.
The top 30 floors of the South Tower, rotated 30 degrees off vertical before beginning to fall vertically as a unit. Why didn’t it just continue to fall away as a unit, or fall through, or be deflected off the lower structure and crash onto surrounding buildings? Instead it simply dissolved away as all the rest of the structures did.
Why did the low rise WTC buildings not collapse even after having thousands of tons of rubble from the towers fall on them?
It strikes me the major reason planned demolition is discounted by most, is not because of anything to do with the collapses, but because the horrendous implications of what planned demolition points to – an insider job – can any Government of a Western country conceivably be involved in such a thing?
This is why I would far prefer to believe the official story, because at least it is then an ‘us the good guys, them the bad guys’ scenario.
I would like to hear a comprehensive case put for how the buildings could collapse as they did by random. I have yet to hear such a case. All cases defending the official story appear to start with the presupposition the official story is correct and to be motivated by avoiding at all costs the idea that it could possibly be an insider job. Why not be dispassionate and look at all options, no matter what the implications of them?
I used to go to Bible Prophecy conferences when they came to town with my wife.
We learned that the OKC bombing was an inside job by a guy who had been in the FBI, etc. He had great proof.
We learned that certain signs along railroad tracks we actually areas for “landing strips” for helicopters so that people could be loaded onto trains and transferred to holding facilities.
We learned the makeup of the symbols on our money, it’s meanings and why.
We learned that Arrafat is/was the anti-christ.
The interesting thing about all of this, is THEY all had “proof”.
Actually, I went just so I could see for myself, and always came away shaking my head in wonderment on what some people would / will believe.
In closing, I have 500 people who saw Charlie Sheen in building 7 just before it went down…just so he knows…
Hamish, thanks for your comments. You are correct that no other high-rise building has ever collapsed due to fire alone (as WTC7). However, just because something is unique doesn’t mean it’s impossible!
The frightening thing about WTC7 is that it collapsed without any impact. Why did the fireproofing fail? That is the topic of much discussion and research in the engineering community. It is a matter of great concern.
You are incorrect in your assertion about the “rotation” of the south tower. A 30-degree inclination would mean that the tower was pointing to the one o’clock position prior to falling down. In any case, is it your contention that the building was somehow re-inforced so that it would fall down in a straight line? I don’t understand how that would prove/disprove anything.
Why did the smaller surrounding buildings not collapse from the rubble falling on them? Two reasons: they were not on fire, and again, the towers fell into their own footprints. The smaller buildings did not have 80+ stories of materials falling on them.
Finally, the buildings did not “collapse by random [chance].” They followed the laws of physics and mechanics. As I said above, it’s not a simple thing to explain. If you really want a comprehensive explanation, here’s a link to a study done in Japan:
http://www.kz.tsukuba.ac.jp/~isobe/198.pdf
Cheers!
Thanks Joe,
The fact is high rise steel framed buildings do not collapse as a result of fire. Earlier this year, a 34 story steel framed high rise – part of the China CTV centre – was engulfed in a colossal fire – (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beijing_Television_Cultural_Center_fire ) as the result of a fire works display gone wrong. It will be cleaned up and used as intended. It did not collapse.
See photos of some other high rise fires here:
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/compare/fires.html
and here:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/fire-consumes-wtc-7-size-skyscraper-building-does-not-collapse.html
The latter link has photos comparing fires with the WTC fires. No comparison.
Re the rotation of the top 30 floors of the South Tower see:
http://www.911research.com/wtc/evidence/photos/collapses.html
Page down to see them. The rotation can also be seen in vidoes on the same site. What I was saying re this rotation and collapse was that these 30 floors began falling to the side before any collapse of the rest of the building occurred, pivoting around one corner. Once that rotational movement had begun, why did it stop and not simply continue rotating? Ok, if the pivot point went at the some point so it began falling straight down, why when meeting the existing remaining lower structure of the building did it not get pushed out to the side by that resistance? Why did it dissolve into a cloud of dust and shredded steel and not stay more or less intact? It had the structural integrity to stay more or less intact, as any part of any building would have. Why not this part of this building?
The towers did not fall onto their footprints as WTC7 did. WTC7 exploded inwards. The towers exploded outwards and a good part of 80 stories of rubble did shower onto the surrounding buildings. Yet these building were able to more or less withstand thousands of tons of rubble landing on them. At least they did not totally collapse and nor did the concrete in them get turned to dust.
When I referred to the collapses being random, I did not mean at all they they violated any laws of physics etc. I was meaning that the official story has them collapsing simply according to the laws of physics etc, rather than their collapse being due to planning and design which utilised the laws of physics. Planned demolition carefully designs a collapse to occur in a controlled manner, whereas an unplanned collapse is uncontrolled/random.
RE your comment that because the WTC7 collapse was unique, didn’t make it impossible. According to the official story, what happened on 911 was that not just one high rise but three high rise buildings all collapsed IN TOTO due to fire. This had never happened before and has not happened since. Effectively nothing was left standing, of any of the massive structures of the towers or any of WTC7. RE the latter, the outer walls collapsed down on to the rubble pile. It went straight down between other buildings without damaging them.
These were no ordinary collapses. They have finger prints all over them.
And then of course now the dust has been analysed we find that every sample contains thermite residues and unexploded thermite. Isn’t that a tad unusual for a collapse due to fire? See links on home page to articles re this at :
http://www.911research.com/index.html
George Bush’s mother was the architect of Hurricane Katrina and govt. photos prove beyond a doubt that she, her husband, her two sons, and Dick Cheney also were instrumental in nailing Christ to the cross.
And Walt Disney was the Zodiac Killer.
theoldadam:
Your comments really advance the pursuit of knowledge and truth – not. If this is the highest the discussion re 911 rises on the official side…
Unfortunately the commentary that kicked off the discussion doesn’t get any higher, which regrettably, tarnishes David H’s reputation.
Conspiracy theories that would involve many, many people, all willing and capable of keeping their mouth’s shut for years on end, when they were witnesses to murder on a grand scale, are absolutely the height of absurdity. No less than my absurd remarks which, unfortunately, because of the sad state of our education system, would actually be believed by a certain percentage of our society.
theoldadam:
You’ve voiced a leading objection. Yep, its serious, but not as untenable as it seems. Check out for some scenarios/answers:
http://www.911research.com/faq/conspiracy.html
There were a host of anomolies which occurred on 911, which many people appear not to know about. Check out:
http://www.911research.com/sept11/analysis/anomalies.html
Three anomalies were:
- apparent foreknowledge of the ‘attacks’ as indicated by share movements on the stock exchange of the two airlines involved.
- total failure of air defense to intercept any of the hi-jacked aircraft.
- war games that were being conducted on 911.
You really have to suspend your disbelief to give any credence to these conspiracy theories. All conspiracy theories have one thing in common and that is selective use of facts that fit a pre-concieved theory. Real investigation does not have a theory to begin with. The NTSB has to investigate aircraft crashes and they train and train thier investigaters to not make any theories while investigating as it will blind you to the evidence right in front of you. This is the problem that these film makers have. They latch onto a few discrepencies or anomalies and do not look at the totality of the event. In any structrual failure new things are learned on how to build something better the next time.
I admit I am intrigued at the Pentagon Crash but you have to remember most plane crashes are not deliberate as this one was. We have really entered new territory when we investigate these events. What has not changed is physics. A cruise missle does not have enough energy to do the damge that was done to the Pentagon a fully loaded aircraft travelling 500 miles an hour does.
As far as WTC 7 failure it was not the fire alone or even falling debris but also the weakening of the substructure by the tremendous vibrations as the two towers fell. What is really amazing is that more buildings in the area around the WTC did not fail as well. It is really a testiment to the incredible work done in the design and construction of those buildings.
All you people who actually give any of these conspiracy theories need to understand one simple fact it would have taken weeks of hard work and the cutting of several of the steel support structures to even do a controlled demolition. There is no way that it would even been possible using thousands of workers to prepare a building for demolition and not have thousands of people notice before hand.
Below find link to just one possible scenario of how the attack was carried out with a small number of personnel involved. It is not claimed this is the only possible scenario. Many of the things in the scenario actually happened. The scenario puts the real life events into a hypothetical/possible overall scheme:
http://www.911research.com/sept11/analysis/scenario404.html
How many thousands, if not tens of thousands , would have to be involved if this were true? And not one ‘insider’ confesses? In this world of self adoration and false heroes how is that possible? It’s not. Fools and the weak share one thing in common. An overwhelming need to find some justification for the insignificance of their lives. And those that follow deserve ridicule and should be shunned. I fully appreciate ‘Freedom of speech’, but that duel edged sword demands that the intentional ignorant should be taken to task. I think that the truthers have had their say and expressed enough stupidity to fill the requirement of free speech, so how about we end this post now and let them wallow in their filth.
Unfortunately, “Troooooothers” take what was once good, healthy, respectable skepticism to an insane, implausible level. Wouldn’t it be nice if they applied their insatiable appetite for conspiracy to their own peculiar motives–turn that lens around guys! (Sidenote: I’m sorry, I can’t even disgrace the word *truth* by applying it to these folks who obviously have an enormous axe to grind.)
Name calling, ridicule and attributing questionable motives are not particularly compelling arguments.
I find it interesting/ironic that many commenting on a ‘conservative’ blog such as this (presumably conservatives of some sort), who would not have much sympathy for B Hussain Obama, and would think that he is destroying America and the constitution etc etc etc, perhaps have even joined ‘tea parties’ and events like the recent march in Washington, perhaps even question BHO’s eligibility to be President, perhaps even call themselves Patriots, are among the most strident in defense of Government and the official conspiracy theory re 911…
Here’s my last comment on the subject:
Hamish, you are flat-out wrong when you assert that “. . .high rise steel framed buildings do not collapse as a result of fire.”
Any steel building will collapse when subjected to enough heat for enough time.
Or do you think that steel can’t soften or melt?
Have you ever seen a picture of a steel mill? What do you think that bright orange stuff is that is being shaped into columns and beams?
As far as the Chinese TVCC fire is concerned there is one major difference from the fire that destroyed WTC7–quoting from the wikipedia entry you thoughtfully provided, “Construction was started in 2004 and was expected to be completed in May 2009.” [emphasis added]
At the time of the fire, in February 2009, the building was incomplete and unoccuppied. There were no contents, or carpeting, or probably even paint on the walls, all of which would contribute to the heat of a fire. Remember, heat and time are both part of the equation for determining the effect of a fire.
As for the building being cleaned up and used as intended, I’m not qualified to comment on Chinese building or fire codes, but no American city would allow that to happen without extensive structural inspection and repair. The American Institute of Steel Construction considers steel frame buildings exposed to fire to have lost half of their structural strength, unless testing can prove otherwise. Such a building would have to be either re-inforced with new members or torn down and rebuilt.
Your other “anomalies” really don’t amount to much. Collapsing buildings don’t “explode” inward or outward, so it would pretty hard to tell just from looking at them whether they were being imploded or just falling down. The kind of concrete used for structures is much stronger and denser than the kind used for flooring in a steel-frame building, so the latter falling on the former would not be expected to do much damage.
Another huge factor in the strength of a structure is the quality of the connections–the bolts, rivets, and welds which tie the beams and columns together. They have a huge influence on the behavior of the building–more so than the beams themselves! The flexibility or lack of same in the joints greatly affects the structure.
I wish I could reassure you about what happened that day. It took me several years of study and dozens of textbooks to understand what this stuff means–it is not something you will figure out from reading a few posts on the internet.
"Any steel building will collapse when subjected to enough heat for enough time. "
Does your stove melt if you cook on it? even all day, or all week?
no because you are off by 800 degrees or so. You cannot even get the iron red and that's cheap iron..the towers were built using top quality construction grade steel.
Your statement has nothing to do with 9/11 then does it, because the towers exploded into dust after 56 & 102 minutes.
We had high grade kerosene (jet fuel) burning office contents. This is called an 'uncontrolled hydrocarbon fire' what exactly do you think was burning in the cores of those towers that melted all that hard cold steel? Have you seen the cores? (47 massive box columns, the large ones were almost 53" of solid steel at the base, all in a massive web of cross beams that ran all the way up to the roofs..and were designed to take the tremendous lateral forces of hurricane force winds) People walked down from above the crash zones and thousands went down the stairs..The stairs were in the cores..you think the heat was so hot it melted the steel but did nothing to the people in the same space?
There are numerous strands of factual evidence that reveal the use of explosives.
see: http://www.911research.wtc7.net (spend am onth studying, then comment)
or just see a short clip: Its unmistakable: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtx_GcFCs6c
share: http://www.911research.wtc7.net/materials/wtc/Hof...
The north tower was hit 10-15 floors from the roof! so the lightest part of the building, through gravity alone, crushed all the cold hard steel below at almost free-fall speed? and turned it to dust!!?
As unlikely as it may seem to us that anyone could have done such a thing as placing explosives in WTC 1,2 & 7, remember that 'personal incredulity' is on the list of logical fallacies because despite how unlikely a thing may seem to us personally, we must use the evidence at hand to decide. And the evidence is overwhelming (to say the least) in this case. Just look at the facts and you will see this is inescapable.
OK. One last slap at the truthers and then I’m done with their shilling. Please explain to me the Feb. 1993 attack on the towers. According to your logic, truthers, the Clintons must have been part of that too, no?
Or how about Mubai?
Or how about Madrid?
Or how about London?
Are bush and Chenny responsible for those countries 911’s?
Your frauds. And shills for Osama.
Oldwolves,
Sure.
Bush and Cheney and Barbara Bush (she’s pure evil) were responsible.
The “truthers” hate this country. Therefore they are easily duped into believeing this nonsense.
I actually believe they are sick and I pity them.
But I still believe they are wackos, as well.
I’ve been away and missed a lot of the later discussion – which has clearly ceased. However for the record, I’d just like to point to a page regarding the designed strength of the towers. They were design to withstand impacts from planes of the size of those which hit them, and any subsequent fires that ensued.
See:
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/design.html
The 911research.wtc7.net website is stuff full of objective analysis of the events of 911…
911 was an inside job bc thats what the evidence shows dammit.
No one's even nearly satisfactorily explained how a fire and gravity collapse evaporated over 1100 people leaving no genetic trace of them to be found despite 2 years of looking for pieces of bone and flesh.. (only 70 of 343 firefighters recovered) how WTC 1 &2 exploded from the points of the plane impacts into large clouds of dust that turned 180k tons of concrete and wtc tower contents into fine powder, and blasted the contents of the towers into an 800 foot radial pattern.. and buried huge steel beams in buildings 100s of feet away. WTC 7's Implosion, in what is obviously a controlled demolition.
The speed and symmetry and heat mean explosives, Its is that simple.
We also have masive increases in 'put' and 'call options' before the attacks, showing foreknowledge, molten metal, explosions, My Jennings damning testimony, 99 days fires that refused to die, even under water, intense residual heat, squibs. When some idiot tells youthat u;r not an engineer remind him/her our criminal justice system is based on informed lay people deciding between competing experts and that there is no statute of limitations on mass murder and treason.
Now we have the results of a 2 year study done at Copenhagen University revealing high tech explosives ! even without this study it was plainfully obvious, now, its just rock solid proof. (see Active Thermitic Material Discovered in the Dust of the World Trade Center Catastrophe' *This was 8 scientist from 5 university's conducting standard chemical and elemental analysis tests.
here is a good overview in a pdf to share with your friends!
*PLEASE DO!!
http://www.911research.wtc7.net/materials/wtc/Hoffman2_1...
and this video is among the more revealing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtx_GcFCs6c
***who could see this and not see explosives at work? DO TELL?
fire = gradual and irregular deformations//
Explosives are rapid and highly energetic. NIST didn't even test for explosives despite a prodeural mandate to do so.
(its just ludicrous – because thisis just the icing on the cake of this horrible case, and these f'rs need to hang.) I wish you deniers were right, I really do. but how can we kid ourselves when the evidence is more than overwhelming? Its time for 9/11 truth & justice – For the victims and the future of our great nation.
Except your facts are simply wrong. It did not, could not fall “just over” freefall speeds without some force actually propelling it down faster than gravity itself can. Did you see any upside down rockets strapped to the building? Uh-huh. Didn’t think so…
As for falling in it’s footprint, when the supports in one critical area give way, the remaining are incapable of supporting the entire weight and the whole thing comes — straight down. The trusses and support beams of a building aren’t like the legs of a chair where each one can independently carry the full weight, causing the building to “tip over” should one be lost.
As for the speed it fell (near free-fall), that’s entirely normal as well. A building, once it’s in motion and no matter how slight that motion may be, has incredible amounts of stored “potential energy” now released as kinetic energy. Two entirely different animals. Drop something hard on your head from only an inch away, and you’ll get the picture (well…maybe not ). The building need only fall a few inches and *none* of the buildings support structure, even if all perfectly intact and DOUBLED UP!…would be capable of bringing the building back to a stop. Once it goes, it’s gone. Period. WTC7 was uniquely built in that it’s bottom “floors” were actually hollowed out into a large chamber, placing the top floor’s weight onto trusses stretching from below street level up to the 6th (?) floor.
Did it ever occur to you that discrepancies — even lies in the official government report — doesn’t necessarily mean they did the whole thing, but maybe that they used influence to hide their own incompetence in areas which resulted in not catching the attack before it happened? The number of people who would have to be in on a covert action of this magnitude numbers in the hundreds at a minumum. Bush was too worried about getting caught to hide a few WMDs anywhere in the whole of the Iraqi desert. So installing the many tons of explosives “just so” in midtown Manhattan without anyone knowing and subsequently using to bring their political enemies down, having a change of heart once seeing the devastating result, or simply being found out by someone in the FBI, CIA, NSA, etc. is simply impossible to have happen in the real world.
Btw. I *AM* a left-liberal who’s really responding because I want to talk with the rest of ya’s . “Hey, Don’t saddle us with these guys… We don’t want ‘em either!!”
So, exactly when did the demolition team enter the building with the massive number of explosive charges needed to take it down? Did they sneak in while all that chaos was going on? Gee, I wonder how much time it would take to strategically set explosives in such a building? Oh yeah, they must have done it months or years before in secret at night, that’s it. Oh, I see. Then they waited for just the right time. Because, of course, no one would question WTC7 coming down from massive damage from the catastrophic collapse of the adjacent buildings. It’s the perfect crime! Blast those thousands of Americans involved in the whole 9/11 plot! I’ll bet they all had to be paid off using billions of taxpayer dollars and that’s what caused the recession which lead to the passing of Obama’s Stimulus. The conspiracies never end!
Oh please,…
The point is, no amount of truth would ever convince a troofer, because it just doesn’t fit the image you like. No amount of data by real experts, (not the I’m an expert cause I got an Aplle and use photoshop kind), no testimony by people who were there that dispute every claim. Redeye was right,
it’s a bottomless pit of parania,
because some folks just HAVE to convince themselves… they’re just too gosh darn smart to believe those old fairy tales by engineers on the centuries old knowledge of metalurgy. Truth often isn’t pretty,..
so why not accept this truth then?
You do not get to opt out of the real truth and create an alternate one, just becuse it feels good to think you’re smarter than everybody else. Like a jailbird philospher, certain they have ALL the answers to lifes quandries, that mere mortals can’t accept.
while never quite explaining how being a loser makes them privy to that knowledge.
conspiraicists are the true deniers, unable to see what any 3rd grader could, and thinking that makes them smarter, when it shows that they just refuse to see.
ain’t buying it,
I’m conservative too, and birthers are just as bad.
The definition of a troofer, is they wouldn’t accept the truth for real if Jesus descended from on high and slapped you in the face with it written on stone tablets.,.. it’s not the truth you WANT to hear.
Have you noticed that since almost every person in the civilized world now carries video recorders in their camera phones, that UFO sightings have actually gone down? Yet there are “countless statements of people at these scenes”.
Mr Nelson…. Who owns you? Who are you representing for? I refuse to believe that someone with your obvious intelligence can possibly believe these lies. Either you have serious issues or you are working for some left leaning American hating organization that wishes to subvert the American people by bits and pieces.
I WAS THERE! I saw those planes hit. I saw the bodies striking the floor! I saw the Towers fall!
Go away Mr. Nelson. You and the Truthers are a poison. An infection. America is beset by you and others of your sort.
One question about the Madrid fire. Did it also have massive structural damage from a high speed airliner plowing into it with a full load of fuel? I didn’t read that anywhere.
The very fact that you…. and virtually EVERY other person who makes this “no steel-framed building has ever fallen..” argument in favor of explosives….always fail to mention the not inconsequential detail about the building having also been impacted by massive commercial airliner, still brim-full of fuel in anticipation of a cross-Atlantic journey, shows you to be either dishonest with others when trying to make the point OR suffering from severely compartmentalized thought processing.
What I mean by that is that some people have a cognitive “style” that compels them to, for whatever reason*, avoid integrating separate details of events into a single whole. We must do this so each can be weighed in the presence of the others to see….at least in this situation… if they physically cancel out or perhaps aggravate one another in a way that causes a level of destruction that each variable alone would not be capable of causing. (synergistic IOW) .
Now, the jets struck 1 & 2 causing damage so severe that it made passing through these floors impossible for a great many people who were very determined to do just that. The damage therefore was surely very extensive. As well, the fuel itself burned at temperatures well above regular office fires for a substantial period of time. Both these factors are extremely important and each one alone negates the whole basis upon which that circumstantial “evidence” rests. They certainly aren’t so inconsequential that you an just leave them out because it complicates your argument in a direction you’d rather not deal with. That’s being dishonest with yourself at the very least.
*although usually it’s the subconscious mind’s way of protecting the person from a negative realization about something they’ve long believed true and good which is important to their own identity.
OH my God! That must mean only one thing! It was Bush! And Chenny ! And Rove! They did it! It’s true. Charlie Sheen said so!
I have proof Kennedy was shot from the grassy knoll from behind a “BUSH”!
Lincoln liked to “ROVE” around the country giving speeches!
And both men had second cousins named “CHENNY” who told them that they were going to die! (Allright …I made that last one up but it might be true!)
“I do believe that a great American humorist had it right when he said that it is better to be silent and be thought and fool, than to speak and remove all doubt”
OMG, my Mom used to tell us that!
Love it!!!
Another one relating to matters of “faith”: For those who believe in God, a higher power or something larger than themselves, no explanation is necessary; for those who don’t … no explanation will suffice.
Good job, and thanks for tip! Put that in your pipe & smoke it, “Trooothers”.
Hmmm, sounds like what happens in the criminal justice world…if there’s no credible evidence; no witnesses or “squeakers” then the investigators move on to more pressing work…
Sound like the SMART thing to do
Hamish…I guess you overlooked Joe’s link to a Japanese study which fully explains the phenomena which you are so unwilling to accept….Your argument is from ignorance not knowledge, from passion, not clarity, and finally, your argument is self-serving and egoist, not rational or intellectually honest…Larry
I’m not finding your ” arguments ” particularly compelling either…Your rants against conservatives expressing their 1st amendment rights seem to upset you, and cause you to bloviate with gusto…Argument from ignorance is boring and you are really getting boring with your Johnny-one-note ” conspiracy ” vindications…
I guess you haven’t read the link Joe left for you re the unprejudiced study by Japanese scientists that explain in detail the sequence of events that caused such catastrophic destruction at WTC…Larry
Hamish, I’m not name calling. I think questioning motives is what “troooothers” do best, right? Isn’t it fair to put the shoe on the other foot?
I’ve always wondered why Charlie Sheen’s character on “Two and a Half Men” is also named…… Charlie. Is there a reason? (ha ha) Or is it……….COINCIDENCE?
According to a PhD metallurgist & chemical engineer I used to be married to, steel will actually *burn* at certain temperatures…. Did I hear him correctly?
And yet there are others in the field (still practicing) questioning the collapse of the twin towers and WTC 7.
(See: Architects and Engineers for 9/11 truth – http://www.ae911truth.org/aboutus.php )
We are a non-partisan association of architects, engineers, and affiliates, who are dedicated to exposing the falsehoods and to revealing truths about the destruction of all three WTC high-rises on 9/11/2001.
We call upon Congress for a truly independent investigation with subpoena power. We believe that there is sufficient evidence to conclude that the World Trade Center buildings #1 (North Tower), #2 (South Tower), and #7 (the 47 story high-rise across Vesey St.) were destroyed not by jet impact and fires but by controlled demolition with explosives.
We believe that our website, our DVD “9/11: Blueprint for Truthâ€, and the other referenced material on our sites, contain the information necessary to demonstrate to all with an open mind that this is the case, and that such an investigation is warranted and overdue. We believe that the available relevant evidence invalidates the government’s official conspiracy theory.
All architects, engineers, and others with competence as writers and speakers, whether they choose to sign our petition or not, are encouraged to take an active role by reporting the results of our research on 9/11 by means of lectures, articles, and other modes of responsible public education.
Richard Gage, AIA, is a San Francisco Bay Area architect and a member of the American Institute of Architects. He is the founding member of AE911Truth. He has been a practicing architect for over 20 years and has worked on most types of building construction, including numerous fire-proofed steel-framed buildings. Most recently he worked on the construction documents for a $400M mixed-use urban project with 1.2 million square feet of retail, parking structure, and 320,000 square feet of mid-rise office space—altogether about with 1,200 tons of steel framing.
Mr. Gage became interested in researching the destruction of the WTC high-rises after hearing the startling conclusions of a reluctant 9/11 researcher, David Ray Griffin, on the radio in 2006, which launched his own unyielding quest for the truth about 9/11.
While I’m aware of certain events back then that would have proven extremely embarrassing to powerful interests resulting in the construction of a public chronology of events that is missing some important context, the notion of a single, coherent entity in charge of mankind is one that fails to take into account some realities of the political and industrial world.
But what I really take issue with is this concept about tyrannical government being what leftists want and conservatives dread. That’s not what is gong on.
What we, as leftists want, is for you to realize that there is also a business elite who can be every bit as ruthless as any dictator should we – God forbid! – let them take hold of the reigns of power! You seem hell-bent on getting rid of of the ability of those whom we elect to find out and stop business elites from doing whatever they want to our wages, benefits, our health, our kids…..or telling us anything they want so we react in ways that are not in our own best interest.
Because it looks to us like there’s some kind of a belief — almost a faith! — that the desires and passions of the extremely wealthy must always be GOOD. This while saying that anybody we elect who tries to warn us that Corps. A, B and C may have been conspiring to keep prices inflated, wages low, or have been paying lobbyists to corrupt politicians and/or contribute heavily to the campaigns of the ones who have privately told the wealth elites that they’ll block any attempt to break up their monopoly. What we fear is your unquestioning trust in them and belief that limiting the rest of ours ability to regulate bad business practices- or apportion blame or punishment on those that do – you are trading the ability of government to rule in our name — a government that we at least have the possibility of impeaching — for the rule of a non-elected business elite to assume conrol of everything. And these are people we have no way of knowing who most even are nevertheless what they are planning, who they have payed off, which elements of the military, police, or which foreign powers they may be acting in collusion with. That scares us more than Obama and yes, even Bush (lol)
You see…. We don’t trust government any more than you do. We just don’t trust that the extremely wealthy, extremely powerful, an extremely private corporate heads and owners will do the right thing either without first making sure there’s someone with power who is making sure that they don’t collude against us! Or the free-market(and they will, have, are) .
We just think we have a better chance of keeping all the people who seem driven to dominate and seek power in check by keeping the system set up in a way where they answer to each others power, and neither truly dominate the other in an excessive way. We want to keep the power of BOTH private business and public government set up in a way that keeps them busy watching over each other and /competing/if you will….to keep us, the little people, happy.
What’s so bad about that? How… where…. What’s with the “fascist, commie, pinko” bit?
About the lack of UFO sightings…..Good catch! Yes, that’s very true. And it says a heck of alot about the true source of so much of that shhheeit. Yeah. Good one. I’m gonna use that sucker! LOL
“PS: The core of the towers was made of 47 massive vertical columns that went from bedrock to the top. There is simply no way this core would collapse as it a result of a plane going in into it (the plane on WTC2 missed the core and no plane hit WTC7), or as a result of collapse of the top section of the building. Look at construction photos and see what had to be destroyed to get the buildings down.”
Check again. Think physics. These cores are not nearly so solid as you portray. That’s because solid rock, steel, certainly concrete, cannot support it’s own weight above a given height for each. My point being that WTC 1, 2 center supports were not solid, but rather had beams and trusses both pulling and pressing all along the way. This to shift weight away from the center (or it would collapse of its own weight) and out onto the outside “shell”, which was btw, a technique unique to these towers alone. It was thought necessary due the mass/height(potential energy) ratio I keep harping about. This caused the outside shell to pull the inner core apart, in a series, all the way down due the shell no oonger having the inner floors frames it had been bolted onto. Simple. Obvious.
This unique way of distributing weight btw, makes the argument about no building ever collapsing due fire or insult, moot. What applies to other buildings simply doesn’t apply to a building with a unique construction….any different construction. Simple, common sense IF you’d been told of it. But instead you were told that they were typically constructed using tried and true methods now seen in buildings everywhere. Only partially true. But these were used to the extent that they could be used. Then they got fancy due the special properties of their height. And it’s those little details that will get you every time. Them and you.
As for the powder, again think. For enough explosive to have been used to turn the place into dust, the blast would have also leveled half of Manhattan. It would have at least been noticeable in a way that would make your “squibs” look like hiccups. Think! Big explosions send chunks of whatever flying. Not so here. How? “controlled” explosions? Hey. You just claimed complete pulverization, not strategic, isolated fracturing. You can’t have it both ways, guy.
So what force could pulverize cement? It’s obvious. Crushing pressure.
The thermite thing is pure bogosity. The building had aluminum framing with iron bolted to it everywhere. Look up the ingredients to thermite…somewhere else than that truther site. Try a university metallurgy course online, or any of a million other things. Wild huh? Not the secret sorcerer stuff you probably thought it was before…AS DID I! As for the various other chemicals..come on. The place WAS pulverized remember? And the number of really bizarre compounds floating around would be sufficient to launch a thousand more conspiracy theories if anybody thought to check for them. Besides, ow do you know that the people who were tasked to clean p the site didn’t use thermite to cut the girders out in safe little chunks? Seems reasonable to me.
But as I said before…the whole concept of a secret team planting explosives in a fashion that would make for the most elaborate, complex blasting job yet done anywhere, ever! Done by the same guy who whose failure to be able to plant A SINGLE WMD anywhere in the vast, lonely and deserted Iraqi desert, a failure that led to the recall of GOP incumbents across the nation, losing the house, Senate, and eventually the party’s credibility, the presidency, and their may be repercussions still to come that would certainly compel him to order such a simple covert p as that. Yet he didn’t. And you know why? Because the government, the ranks of the military, CIA, FBI, NSA, etc. are simply not that loyal and trustworthy that a person of high rank or power can hope to get away with something of such mind-boggling complexity and planning. Even so small a deceit as “dropping” a WMD out in the desert to be “found” by US forces is apparently too high a risk for his being betrayed by a turncoat, whistleblower, or to any of the other tricks they ALL use in their pursuit of *personal* power.
Gary Williams,
Thank you for your response, I believe it was thoughtful and I especially appreciate that you identify yourself by name; for me anyway, it’s very difficult to have a serious conversation with a nickname/non-identifier.
I can’t possibly respond to everything you said, but I would offer the following.
Would you agree that once legislation is written, passed, & signed and then appropriated to the proper government agency for implementation/enforcement there is little or no hope of every getting rid of it i.e. the Federal Department of Education for example? {my point isn’t to get rid of the DOE, although I’d like to…my point is once it’s there, it’s grasp becomes ever more and takes on a life of it’s own, increasingly intrusive and “depended upon” that cutting any or all of it becomes impossible}
The same cannot be said about the business elites you refer to. One need only look at the very recent history to see how fragile businesses really are and how easily and quickly they can be brought down when bad business practice and/or greed gets in the way. What I was shocked to learn was how much involvement the Fed Gov was in selecting which companies would survive and which ones wouldn’t…and the ones “they” selected would have their businesses so closely monitored/controlled by the government…they might as well be government run – that is quite unnerving because I don’t see that as an oddity of practice/policy, I see that as a goal of a powerful central government.
We as the people can easily undo a business, we can’t undo a powerful central government…and I see that model of government control much more oppressive than any business/employer/private enterprise I have ever chosen or had to deal with.
I’m currently reading Mark Levin’s book and I lifted a quote he had at the end of the 2nd chapter (Prudence and Progress) by C.S. Lewis:
“Of all the tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under rober barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may a some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
I couldn’t have described the business vs government intrusion better.
Julie
Just quick note and I’ll get to moe later. (My main PCs hard drive died so I’m left accessing my mail ec. through the slow PC upstairs. So I’m breezing through things before I lose my mind with this thing ).
I like the CS Lewis quote and I agree with it’s observation. However I see it much differently than you in that the self-righteous moralizers are not government at all, but rather the people who constantly invoke their interpretation of the Constitution ONLY, an act that usually treats the Bill Of Rights as if it was no more important than toilet paper, or the righteously indignant whose “lock ‘em all up” recommendation for any non-traditional or non-conforming (tho non-violent!) action. This is based on their own moral outrage over someone daring to smoke a weed not mentioned in the Bible (like alcohol is ) ….etc. etc.
If Lewis meant government, all he had to do was mention it. But he didn’t . Clearly he had the righteous moralizer who wants to impose their own value system on others using the force of law to do it.
Gary Williams,
You said: “Clearly he had the righteous moralizer who wants to impose their own value system on others using the force of law to do it.”
Voila, we are getting closer to agreement. This is exactly how I see the Left/neo-communists I can’t tell jokes, I can’t use certain words, I can’t throw plastic in the garbage, I can’t inflate my tires at the pressure I want to, I can’t say what I do and don’t want my kids to hear in school, I can’t buy the lightbulbs I want, I can’t leave my car running to warm up when it’s 10 degrees below zero and many many many more things I can’t do all because of the righteous moralizer – the Marxist leftist who wants to impose their own value system on me using the force of law and THEN making me pay for it. UGH!
At least when it is the business elitist lightbulb salesman that sells me a rotten product that doesn’t work, it’s a one time deal – I don’t have to go back.
But when it’s the force of law, I have to buy it and pay for someone else’s lightbulb too.
Julie
Hamish Said: “They were design to withstand impacts from planes of the size of those which hit them, and any subsequent fires that ensued.”
Julie says: DESIGN FLAW