The Physics of Flight 77's Trajectory

Our JREF Forum buddy, Ryan Mackey, a NASA physicist, checks in with a debunking of the latest nonsense from CIT nutbars Aldo and Craig.

The true vertical acceleration of the aircraft is equal to the second time derivative of the altitude y. However, we need to re-express the equation in terms of time. Since we have assumed a constant horizontal velocity, we can re-express x in terms of time:

(2): x = x0 - 781 t feet / second

No, I don't understand it all either, but this post is here as a pointer for those that do.

More Sacred List Nonsense

It never ends:

In fact, as many as nine 'hijackers' survived 911. Nevertheless, a pro-'official conspiracy' web site has posted what it calls "official manifest images" in which all alledged hijackers are listed in place on the flights in question. The very name of the page is misleading: 'official manifest images". The list provided in fancy graphics is represented as 'official' but it is most certainly not official. The names represented on the graphic do not and have never represented the 'official flight manifests' that were released to Dr. Ted Olmsted as a result of his FOIA request.

I honestly have to wonder at these people. Do they really believe that "nine" of the hijackers are alive? Does that make any sense at all? Wouldn't all of them be alive or none? Do they really believe that the evil gubbermint behind all this would be so stupid as to send out a passenger manifest without the hijackers included?

He goes on to the "autopsy" list at the Pentagon; no hijackers listed there. But there were bits of DNA found from five additional people; they could not be identified, but two of them were biological brothers (the al Hazmi brothers).

Another "B" List Celebrity Troofer--Margaret Cho

She's another nutbar who knew it all along:

Appearing on the nationally syndicated Alex Jones Show, Cho said her doubts about 9/11 were sparked by President Bush's non-reaction to the unfolding crisis.

"I got concerned right after 9/11 where the plane had hit the World Trade Center and he was in that classroom with all those children and they told him what was going on and he did nothing," said Cho.

Cho questioned the official story of what happened at the Pentagon, asking why so much footage of the twin towers being attacked was available in comparison with not even a clear picture of what occurred at the Pentagon - a far more sensitive and symbolic target.

"Why are they not focusing on that? What are they hiding?" asked Cho, "Of course it's going to be monitored from every angle at every second and yet we have no footage of it - it's very mysterious."

And they had anti-aircraft batteries on the roof!

WAC-Jobs Take on Zbig Again

I like the fact that he recognizes the people as LaRouche nutbars. "National sovereignty will prevail!" What a bunch of fruitloops.

Ode to Dave

I hate to pile on David Ray Griffin, and take the risk of sickening our audience with a weekend coming up, but since the troofers claim that we avoid mentioning David Ray Griffin at all costs, here is a video tribute to his latest book. Hey, the guy says it has a nice typeface, I am on my way to Barnes and Noble as we speak...

David Ray Griffin Once Again Shows Why He Is Not a Scientist

scientific method (a method of investigation involving observation and theory to test scientific hypotheses)

Once again David Ray Griffin shows why he is a theologian, not a scientist, as he is proud of the fact that he does not have to propose a hypothesis, or defend anything remotely resembling a coherent argument:

Do you have a personal theory of what really happened on Sept. 11?

No, and I made a big point of not developing such a theory, and even encouraging members of the movement not to do this. Because insofar as there are antagonisms and disputes within the movement, they’re related primarily to those things, where people say, well, here’s what hit the Pentagon, and others say that’s not true. I put my focus on the evidence that the official story is false, and the evidence is so abundant and overwhelming that to make the case you don’t have to prove what really happened and who did it and so on. It’s like if you had a murder trial, and Jones is accused of murder. The defense attorneys can prove that Jones didn’t do it without having a theory about who really did. All you have to do is have a good alibi and lack of evidence and so on. The critics say, you’ve got to have a theory. No, you don’t have to have a theory. When you develop a theory, that’s what the debunkers love. They want to say, “That’s nonsense,” and take attention away from all the evidence we have marshaled to show the official story is false.

You know, to most people the fact that you cannot agree on even the most basic facts would indicate a weakness in your argument and logic, but no, this idiot is content with simply saying, "Don't talk about that, ignore the problems!"

Medals Proposed for United 93 Passengers

As this blog strives to be non-partisan, I don't want to get into the political aspects of this, but I found it an interesting story regarding the controversy over how to recognize the passengers of United 93:

An effort to award the Gold Medal posthumously to the passengers and crew of Flight 93 began a few days after the attacks. On September 20, 2001, three bills were introduced in the House proposing that Congress give the Gold Medal to various people aboard the fated plane.

Rep. Marge Roukema's bill singled out just one passenger, Jeremy Glick, who hailed from her New Jersey district. Rep. Cliff Stearns's bill sought to honor everyone on the doomed flight. Finally, Rep. Tom Tancredo's bill proposed awarding the Gold Medal to:

Jeremy Glick, Todd Beamer, Thomas Burnett, Jr., and Mark Bingham; and other passengers or crew members on board United Airlines Flight 93 who are identified by the Attorney General as having aided in the effort to resist the hijackers on board the plane.

This last proposal ultimately garnered the most support, attracting 235 cosponsors--just 55 short of the required two-thirds. The wording of the bill nicely captured the spirit of Flight 93 and seemed most in line with the original conception of the Gold Medal, stating: "The leaders of the resistance aboard United Airlines Flight 93 demonstrated exceptional bravery, valor, and patriotism, and are worthy of the appreciation of the people of the United States."

So when are Avery, Jones, Gage, Gold et al going to start protesting the awarding of medals to people who they claim did nothing?

A and Not A

One of the things that is so irksome about the "Truthers" is that they are completely immune to common logic. Logically speaking, both A and Not A cannot be true. If I say, "I'm not in my house and I'm in my house," it is pretty freaking obvious that only one of those statements can be true.

But the "Truthers" appear to have adopted as their credo the White Queen's claim of believing six impossible things before breakfast.

Take, for example, the many supposed warnings the US government supposedly received about 9-11. Now, most of the "Truthers" we discuss around here believe 9-11 was an inside job, planned and executed by the US government. But if that's the case, exactly what were the foreign intelligence personnel passing on in their warnings? "Hey, we want to warn you guys that a rogue element in your government is planning on crashing planes into the World Trade Center." See the problem? If you believe 9-11 was an inside job, then you should, logically speaking, discount the notion that the US government received warnings.

For another example, consider the fuss that the Truthers are kicking up about a structural engineer blasting his professional association for covering up the design flaws in the construction of the World Trade Center.

Now when you first look at this, you can see it might sound like it's conducive to the crackpot claims of controlled demolition:

In the World Trade Center case, critics contend the engineering society wrongly concluded skyscrapers cannot withstand getting hit by airplanes.

But reading further should reveal the problem:

Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl, a structural engineer and forensics expert, contends his computer simulations disprove the society's findings that skyscrapers could not be designed to withstand the impact of a jetliner.

Astaneh-Asl, who received money from the National Science Foundation to investigate the collapse, insisted most New York skyscrapers built with traditional designs would survive such an impact and prevent the kind of fires that brought down the twin towers.

See the problem? It's that little phrase "with traditional designs". The World Trade Center was built with an untraditional design. But in the effort to prove that the buildings must have been demolished, the Troofers have routinely exaggerated the construction quality of the Towers. Uncle Fetzer used to talk about how "extremely robust" the buildings were. I don't recall Richard Gage's phrase offhand, but the 43 central steel columns get described in loving detail.

But with his ability to believe A and Not A, Gage has already pounced on Astaneh-Asl's statements:

Richard Gage AIA, the founder of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, and hundreds of other industry experts' call for a new investigation into the collapse of the WTC twin towers and Building 7 is gaining strength following revelations of falsification and cover-up in relation to the FEMA-funded inquiry into the destruction of the buildings on 9/11.

Richard, Astaneh-Asl is saying you're wrong. He's saying that normal skyscrapers might have survived 9-11, but NOT the WTC Towers, with their untraditional design.

9/11 Troof Hijacked

A 9/11 conspiracy nutbar blog takes on the WalMart video that we posted recently:

In my mind, this is immature behaviour which thoroughly discredits the honest, hard and very serious work that others have done / are doing (not just activists, but the scholars and academics, professional people and show business personalities, etc who are speaking out about 9/11) and feeds the MSM slander and derision machinery regarding 9/11 Truth. Moreover, it is likely annoying to the public and the innocent employees at the store, and likely to put people off to our message, not attract them or win their curiosity.

This latest "un-dynamic duo" takes Walmarting one step further however, in their (IMHO) moronic video. Did you see it? While driving in their car to the store, you will notice a hand grenade (or model of a grenade) hanging from the rear view mirror. This is exactly what we do not need when the US Gov't and their media hacks are trying to criminalize dissent and drafting legislation to brand us as terrorists.

While I agree that this is immature behavior, this is not a hijacking, this is your base. If you want a group of mature sober intellectuals, I suggest you take up a different cause.

Troofstock's Coming!

Remember Woodstock? Three days of music with bands like Santana, The Who, Jimi Hendrix, Crosby Stills & Nash, etc?

Well, Troofstock's coming. Three days of... well, one hour of music on one day, ten hours of 9-11 "Truth" movies (Terrorstorm, LCFC, Improbable Collapse and Zeitgeist, LCFC again) followed by two hours of presentations by Steven Jones and Richard Gage, followed by a panel discussion with those two, Dylan Avery, and Daniel Sunjata (celebrity Troofer). Followed four days later by yet another screening of Loose Change Final Cut.

I know, I know, you're wondering how much it's going to cost. Would you believe me if I told you it's going to cost $50? Of course you wouldn't because it's not going to run you $50, or even $40, or even $30, or even $20. It's FREE! Woooot! Unlike Woodstock, which was supposed to cost money until the hippies tore down the fences and swarmed in for nothing, this event is value-priced. And the venue seats 800 (!).

Update: Please lay off the coarse commentary regarding San Diego "Truther" Abby. I didn't appreciate it when Dylan and his cronies made similar comments regarding Abby Scott (the debunking Abby), and I don't appreciate it from "our" side. I am deleting several comments. Knock it off!

9-11 Blogger Surrenders!

Well, of course they aren't selling it that way, but they're branching out into being a one-stop shop for all your kooky needs now that their main focus, the 9-11 conspiracy theory, is starting to fizzle out:

The mandate of the site will remain a focus on 9/11 information that is not covered by the corporate press. The tag line up top says, "Paying Attention to 9/11 Related Alternative News", however, 9/11 was not an isolated event. I intend to broaden the mandate of the site, and connect serious researchers into recent, and not-so-recent events that bear the hallmarks of "covert operations". This includes the Oklahoma City Bombing, the 1993 World Trade Center Bombing, the assassinations of JFK, RFK, MLK, and other incidents rife with patsies, and obscured with disinformation.

Chemtrails? I wanna hear about chemtrails!

Canadian Slackers for 9/11 Truth

These guys are unintentionally hilarious, as they spread the troof in some remote Canadian WalMart. They remind me of Bob and Doug Mackenzie of Strange Brew fame. One of the commentors on 9/11 Blogger has this rare moment of self awareness:

The Walmart Intercom idea is not that bad, but all I see for the first 2 minutes in the video are a couple of punk kids.We'll never know if any of these intercom comments make any difference or not, but this video tells people that "9/11 Truthers" are bored youth, not that "9/11 Truthers" have a good message.

How Do You Get 80 People to Lie Down On the Sidewalk and Listen to Trutherism?

Tell them they're protesting the war:



Note: I don't mind the antiwar aspect of the demonstration; I disagree but this country allows disagreement. What I despise is the piggy-backing of Trooferism (wait for it) onto the antiwar movement.

Fear of Flailing

This is a bit old, but I had not seen it before. Add Erica Jong, most famous for a book she wrote about 30 years ago called Fear of Flying, to the list of "celebrity" nutbars:

Then came 9/11 -- which supposedly also "changed everything." On a gorgeous day of blue skies in New York and D.C., towers came tumbling down on their own footprints -- unlike any bombing ever seen.

Come on, Erica, if you're going to be a fruitcake, at least parrot the phrase correctly. "... came tumbling down into their own footprints at freefall speed."

So 9/11 came and went -- and whether it was an attack from abroad or a conspiracy of some sort -- is not the point of this essay. Perhaps it was a sort of Reichstag fire, perhaps not--the Bushevicks treated it as such and took the opportunity (long wished for and planned for) to pass all sorts of nasty laws restricting everyone's freedoms.

Perhaps Erica is a kook, perhaps not? Actually she is, she's just maintaining a bit of plausible deniability.

Hat tip: Commenter George at Althouse.

Crap, They're Onto Us!

David Ray Griffin? Never heard of him.

Henry62 Was Right!

Our Italian buddy Henry62, who is probably doing the best work today in active 9-11 debunking, has heard back from NIST on the UPS issue which we discussed several months ago. His suspicion was right; the UPS in question does not stand for United Parcel Service, but Uninterrupted Power Supply. This indicates that the material flowing from the 81st floor of the South Tower, often claimed to be molten steel by the crackpots, is most likely at least partially lead from the batteries. Given that this "evidence" was cited by Graeme McQueen just the other day per Professor Shallit (see post below this one); this is a significant bit of debunking.

Complicating matters is that United Parcel Service did apparently have an office on that floor in the early 1990s, but by 1999, when the most recent modifications were made, the floor was occupied by another tenant.

Terrific job as always by Henry62!

An Evening With the 9-11 Deniers

Jeffrey Shallit, who appears to be an Accounting Professor (Correction: Computer Science Professor), discusses his attendance at an event featuring the Canadian branch of the kooks:

Why didn't the Debate Society present someone on the other side? I was told they tried, but couldn't find anyone. But they are a "debate society", not a "one-sided presentation" society, and they had an obligation to find someone to respond to the falsehoods that were presented.

Professor Shallit has put together several excellent posts on the presentations he attended:

On AK Dewdney's claim that the cellphone calls could not have been made.

This gives some background to Dewdney's presentation on March 19. He started by stating that his expertise is in cell phone calls, and that he has learned a lot about them since he began his investigations. (Dewdney, it appears, has no formal training in cellular communication. The theme of people speaking beyond their trained expertise is one that would repeat itself during the evening.)

Indeed.

Part II of Dewdney:

He showed a picture of one of the towers with an arrow pointing to part of it, with a caption reading "Molton [sic] steel pours from side of WTC 1". The resolution of the picture didn't allow me to conclude that anything molten at all was pouring out, certainly not molten steel. If anything was pouring out, why couldn't it have been molten aluminum? Aluminum melts at 660° C, while steel melts at 1370-1550° C.

On Theologian Graeme McQueen's discussion:

This indeed, sounds very modest. But soon the veneer of reasonableness was stripped away, as he described the generally-accepted model of the Towers' collapse and then said, "A rather obvious fraud, in my view." This kind of behavior is typical of the "9/11 Truth" movement. Their claims are outlandish and unsupported; yet if you do not agree, you are in league with fraud. By using the word "fraud", MacQueen denigrates the dozens of structural engineers, fire engineers, and civil engineers who have looked into the buildings' collapse and have paintstakingly devised the generally-accepted theory. There is no legitimate reason to believe that all these researchers have engaged in fraudulent activity, and it is a gross calumny to say so.

Yep, the rather obvious fraud is being committed by the "Truthers".

During his presentation, MacQueen referred several times to the Journal of 9/11 Studies for support for his claims. The editors of this "journal" are Kevin Ryan, Frank Legge, and Steven Jones -- three men heavily involved in the "9/11 Truth" movement. No one taking issue with "9/11 Truth" claims is involved. This is not a scholarly journal in any sense of the word; it is a propaganda outfit for deniers.

Kaaaa-ching!

He also takes on the purported moderator of the debate, who of course was not moderate:

Lee claimed that "Serious scholarship will be presented to you tonight". In fact, what we heard were the standard falsehoods of the 9/11 Truth movement, and discussion of the fine points of building collapse by a man not even remotely qualified to discuss the issue. Lee claimed that he would present "a forum in an atmosphere of open-minded scholarly challenge". But there was no challenge, since no one from the opposing side was permitted to speak. The question period was extremely limited.

Kudos to Professor Shallit for putting up with an evening of this nonsense to bring us his account!

David Ray Griffin Reads a Book

Perennial 9/11 conspiracy author David Ray Griffin has apparently posted a review on Amazon.com of Philip Shenon's "The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation". He gave it three stars, although he spent much of the time talking about himself.

Because Shenon simply presupposed the truth of the official story as fully as did the Commission, his book is terrible as well as great. It is terrible because Shenon, in mentioning the contention that 9/11 was an inside job, assures his readers that this contention has been debunked, while showing no sign of having studied any of the books that provide evidence for this contention. In his bibliography, for example, he mentions two defenses of the official account: "Debunking 9/11 Myths," put out by Popular Mechanics, and "Without Precedent," coauthored by Kean and Hamilton. But he does not mention my "Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics and Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory," in which I responded at length to both of these books. Also, although one would expect his bibliography to include all major critiques of the 9/11 Commission, it does not include my book, "The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions," which has generally been considered the major critique of the Commission's report.

Interestingly enough, this is the only review he has on his account. I suppose this should not be surprising to someone who has seen his library.

Now I am just waiting for him to review the Pulitzer prize winning histories The Looming Tower, by Lawrence Wright, and Ghost Wars by Steve Coll. Not to mention the excellent debunking of him by Ryan Mackey. But I am sure we will get 2-3 rehashings of his books instead.

Dylan Updates

Looks like yesterday's post got his attention.

To Screw Loose Change, to Mark Roberts, to Maddox, to the creator of "Dylan Avery: Shut the Hell Up", to all those people who have sent me the most vicious, hateful language humanly possible ...

You don't know me, and you never will. Just because you've watched someone on Youtube does not mean you know them, their mindset, their environment or their intentions.

None of you worthless pricks have ever taken the chance to sit down and have a rational, mature conversation with me about who I am and why I do what I do. All you've done is spread hate and attack me in every imaginable way. Yeah, I said some stupid sh*t back in April, 2005, but I've also apologized for it and clarified what I meant several times. And I'm not about to apologize again to stroke your f*cking egos some more.

I don't need to know you to judge your work product. We've spent very little time here "attacking" you; most of our efforts have been directed at exposing the shoddy, dishonest nature of your film(s). According to several people I know who have met you, you're a reasonably nice guy. It's not about personalities.

As for me, I just finished shooting a music video for Dave Cahill. I plan on doing several more in the next few months. I'm moving from the East Coast to beautiful San Diego.

And I'm writing and directing my first feature film this year, thanks to interest and support from a major company that shall remain nameless at this point.

I know you'll have a hard time believing this, Dylan, but I wish you good luck.

More Ignorant Etho-Centric Troofers

Another bin Laden tape was released yesterday, and troofers, with their extensive experience in international affairs hanging out at the local IHOP, are protesting its validity:

Look who's back in time to celebrate easter and the 5th anniversary of the invasion of Iraq.

It seems strange and suspicious that Bin Laden would resurface to bing up the Danish cartoon issue of 2005 so long after the whole thing has been forgotten by the rest of the world.

Of course by "forgotten by the rest of the world" he means, "Neither me nor my pothead friend Joe have heard about this for months. The part of the world that bin Laden cares about, however, has certainly not forgotten this.

From Thailand, March 13th:

It was an excited but peaceful crowd that gathered in Lumphini Park, Bangkok, early yesterday morning to protest the reprinting of the Danish Muhammad drawings and what they call ‘a second insult’ of the Prophet Muhammad. More than 600 Muslims walked from Lumphini Park to the grounds of the Danish embassy to raise their voices in asking the Thai Muslim community to condemn the reprinting of the drawings and boycott all Danish products.

From Senegal, March 13th:

Meanwhile, arguments over the way Islam is portrayed in the West continue to cause controversy within the Muslim world. In recent weeks, the republication of controversial political cartoons depicting Prophet Muhammad by Danish newspapers sparked protests in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Jordan, Thailand, Iran and Sudan.

Iran, March 12th:

Hundreds of angry students have staged a protest in front of the Danish embassy in Tehran to condemn the reprinting of cartoons deemed insulting to the Prophet Muhammad in Danish newspapers.

Some 300 foreign and Iranian students from Qom seminary schools chanted "Death to Denmark" and "Death to America", warning the Danes "not to follow the American anti-Islamic policy" and asking Islamic countries to boycott Danish products.

But because they have not heard about it in their mom's basement, apparently nobody in the world cares about this issue. Don't hold your breath waiting for his fellow troofers to correct him.

Loose Change Without a Ripple Effect

We keep getting comments about how we're not debunking Loose Change Final Cut, as in the comments over at 9-11 Blogger:

The Nice Thing About Loose Change Final Cut....

That it puts the Screw Loose Change folks out of a job.

LCFC is a difficult to attack film.

It's also inconsequential. Look, the only reason James and I created this blog was because Loose Change I & II were extremely popular; the most downloaded film in history as Dylan likes to claim. I'm not sure that's true, but LC was certainly downloaded a lot.

But LCFC has not had the same effect. As I've noted, it missed the wave in terms of timing, and it backed off many of the more spectacular charges from the earlier versions in favor of a "LIHOP"-lite approach. There are plenty of indications that it has sunk without a trace. Consider:

Upcoming events:



The Loose Change Blog was last updated in late November. The current Loose Change Forum (their third) had a record 90 users on line in January of this year. The prior Loose Change Forum had a record 959 users online in June 2007. And the original Loose Change Forum had a record 1,225 users online on September 11, 2006. I don't suppose I have to graph that trendline?

According to Technorati, the last two blog posts mentioning "Loose Change Final Cut" came from us, and one of those was fifteen days ago.

We probably should change the logo up at the top; our focus hasn't been Loose Change specifically but the entire "Truther" movement for over a year now.

An Oldie but a Goodie

We don't hear much about Jim Fetzer anymore, in fact this video of him is from last September, but I kind of miss the crazy old bat and he is rather entertaining. Don't miss Justin Martell's fawning introduction of him towards the beginning, but for pure head-shaking bizarreness the part that stood out was 54 minutes in when he proclaimed the airlines were on the verge of exposing the plot.

If the airlines are forced into court, I submit to you they are going to speak the truth, they will confirm that none of those hijackers are on those planes, possibly that none of those flights even took place.

Yeah, because most corporations have no problem participating in the cover-up of the murder of thousands of people, including dozens of their own employees, and the destruction of hundreds of millions of dollars of their own property, not to mention the decimation of their industry, but don't hit them with a subpoena, because they will sing like a bird.

Update: The embed doesn't seem to be working, but here is the link.

This is What Stupidity Looks Like

I love the guy with the megaphone saying, "Members of Congress, and the Senate"; somebody needs to brush up on his civics lessons. And the gal with the glasses crying at the end. Impressive show of force by the Capitol police.

Why Photos and Film Don't Tell The Story

Farhad Manjoo uses Phil Jayhan's missile theory to illustrate a larger point about confirmation bias in general.

Which brings us back to 9/11-doubter Philip Jayhan. Jayhan has long harbored a deep distrust of the government and of the institutions that exert power on the world. Given his worldview, it's clear Jayhan really believes that he sees a missile shooting out from Flight 175.

Or, to put it more accurately, he really does see it. A billion things happened to a million people on 9/11, and if you watch all the videos and listen to all of the audio, there's a lot that you'll find significant, and there's a lot you'll overlook. Some of it you've really got to puzzle out. Jayhan puzzles it out according to his own thoughts about how things work in society. And as a consequence of his ideas about the world generally, he is naturally prone to seeing something in those pictures that I -- as a consequence of my own vastly different beliefs about the world -- do not.

I think that gets it right. One of the things that all 9-11 kooks have in common, whether they are liberals, libertarians, or (rarely) conservatives is that they have a deep distrust of the government. Libertarians, of course, are that way intrinsically; liberals are that way in reaction to the Bush Administration.

Delusions of the Paranoid

Meet the newest acronym in Trutherism, MITOP.

I want to elaborate somewhat on the idea of transparent conspiracy (see part 3), lest the idea seem too big to chew. It is chewable, but it takes a little work. Even though I have been chewing on it for some time, I am only now arriving at the conclusion, as I pointed out in part 4, that the theory is correct.

First of all, let's give it a name that will itself be more transpaent: MITOP. We are familiar with LIHOP (Let It Happen On Purpose) and MIHOP (Made It Happen On Purpose). Now we have "Made It Transparent On Purpose."

Yes, believe it or not, it's sooooooo obvious:

The simplest and most logical answer to this is that they were not that stupid. On the contrary, they wanted us to know. They have always wanted us--at least those of us who not yet fully lobotomized by the mainstream propaganda--to know that they can do whatever they fucking well want to with us, which includes not only 9/11 but also jamming a ridiculous and totally incredible fairy tale down our throats. They want us to know, very clearly but without having to come out and say it explicitly (this may come if martial law is imposed), as I have put it more bluntly earlier, that they've got us by the balls (short hairs for the politically correct).

Except, of course, that "they" don't do anything to the Troofers. Part of the advantage of having somebody by the nuts is that if you squeeze, they will do just about anything you ask in order to stop the pain.

It's just really the third level of paranoia. The first is that the government was behind it; the second is that "they" know that "we" know. The third is that they intended for "us" to know. Of course, you can continue this, like a dog chasing its tail; the next stage is that they know that we know that they made it transparent.

The Troofers Interpret Hannity and Colmes

In anyone ever needed an example of troofers vainly attempting to act intellectual it would be this. My favorite examples is Alan Colmes secret mind manipulation by waving at his left shoulder.

They Never Notice the Irony

Truthers for the most part are not blessed with self-awareness, but theologian David Ray Griffin takes this ignorance to new heights. I was amused to read this quote of his in an Amazon.com review of his new book, his 5th on the topic, all without the slightest bit of original and/or honest thought.

"Within the philosophy of science, there are two basic criteria for discriminating between good and bad theories. First, a theory should not be inconsistent with any of the relevant facts.... Second, it must be self-consistent, devoid of any internal contradictions. If a theory contains an internal contradiction, it is an unacceptable theory."

Of course it is Griffin, who proudly refuses to advance any sort of hypothesis whatsoever. This has several advantages, not the least of which is he is then free to ignore the hundreds of contradictions in their arguments. There was a plane at the Pentagon, there wasn't a plane, there were hijackers, there weren't hijackers, there were airfone calls, there weren't airfone calls, the WTC was blown up with super secret silent nano-thermite, all the floors were crushed to talcum powder with powerful explosives, ad infinitum.

So Much For the Rich and Powerful

The private equity fund, the Carlyle Group is often mentioned by conspiracy theorists as this shadowy all powerful group, in fact it is one of the people they accuse of being behind the 9/11 attacks. Apparently being omnipotent is not all it is cracked up to be though:

Yesterday, a publicly traded investment fund affiliated with Carlyle Group that had ballooned to $22.7 billion back in the era of easy borrowing all but collapsed as banks rushed to sell assets backing the mortgage fund. Shares of Carlyle Capital Corp., which trades in Europe, are down 97% for the year, closing yesterday at 35 cents.

Across Wall Street, banks that once lent freely and engaged in all sorts of complex transactions are now scrambling to protect their balance sheets. Some that once fought to lend to private-equity firms are now suing their erstwhile clients.

I Keep Meaning to Debunk Loose Change Final Cut... But

Unsecured Coins sums it up well.

White Men Can't Rap

Oh, my. Dylan looks as silly up there as I would.

The "Truthers" of the 1990s

The LA Times covers the collapse of the right-wing militia groups, who filled the anti-government role for the news media in the 1990s. Many of their leaders turn out to be "Truthers" today:

Norman "Dave" Somerville, tied to a militia in northern Michigan, armed himself at a small compound with machine guns and ammunition after the attacks. The former Special Forces veteran kept photos of President Bush and then-Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld with rifle-scope cross hairs on their faces.

In fall 2003, authorities arrested him on weapons charges. He is serving an 80-month sentence at a federal prison medical center in Kentucky and will be 55 by the time he gets out. His job is washing dishes. "Prison sucks," he lamented.

In an interview, he insisted his only crime was not registering his firearms, and he alleged that the government had used Sept. 11 to create public distrust of Americans who challenged authority. It is a common complaint among anti-government conspiracy theorists.

And see if this part strikes a chord:

Asked why the movement lost steam, she offered this: "I wonder if they just are mere wannabes. A lot of them are just young and trying to figure out life, you know."

Update: Along the same lines Troy discovers that a "screening" in Hackettstown NJ has been cancelled:



Hat Tip: Walter Ego for the video, NJSlim for the LA Times article, both at the JREF Forums.

Richard Gage, AIA

I continued listening to the radio interview with Richard "conservation of mass" Gage, and unbelievably he gets even dumber. Well, OK, that is arguable, but he is still pretty dumb. From 29 minutes in:

Ninety thousand tons of structural steel has been pulverized to a fine talcum powder through these intense explosions, including its metal decking, and the floor trusses that were supporting it, uhh completely gone and blown outside the perimeter. Everything is blown outside the perimeter of the two twin towers, 98% of the debris on all of the floors.

This 98% number is of course completely idiotic. I am also wondering what happened to this "fell completely within its own footprint" argument these idiots have been telling us for years.




















Update: My apologies, but I mistranscribed that first sentence. As I have discussed before it is rather difficult following him based on his complete inability to put a coherent sentence together. The first part should have read:

Ninety thousand tons of struct... of concrete has been pulverized to a fine talcum powder, though these uhh, intense explosions, including its metal decking and the floor trusses that were supporting, it, uhh completely gone and blown outside the perimeter.

Oz Troofers to Feature Mamdouh Habib

At a conference next week.

Who is Mamdouh Habib? He's a former Australian coffee shop owner, who claims to have been brutally tortured by the US after he was arrested in Pakistan shortly after 9-11. A number of US outlets picked up on story, including Bob Herbert of the NY Times. Of course, few of these outlets noted the most signal fact about Habib; that he had met the people behind both the 1993 and 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center.

Maha has told the Australian media that her husband did not support Sheikh Omar's actions, but simply wanted to try and raise money to buy him medication for diabetes.

"He was isolated and sick, you know - just for human rights. It was something to do with the human rights," she told ABC.

As I commented at the time, Habib's story of his torture kept changing with time:

He said that during one interrogation session, a woman wearing a skirt said to him, "You Muslim people don't like to see woman," he said. Then she reached under her skirt, Mr. Habib said, pulling out what he described as a bloody stick. "She threw the blood in my face," he said.

But in another account:

The Australian Mamdouh Habib, who was released last month, has said he was strapped down while a woman told him she was menstruating on his face.

Tim Blair, an Aussie blogger, covered Habib's claim of an "Electrified Treadmill of Tormentulation.

Mark Roberts used to point out that the Troofers represent the "Fair Play for Al Qaeda Committee". Their embrace of Habib just proves that they are terrorist enablers.

What if You Threw a Revolution and Nobody Came?

There is no way to adequately describe this, you have to watch it. H/T to Walter Ego on the JREF forum.

The Physics of Richard Gage

I was not a physics major in college, although I did take two quarters worth, but I still know enough to be amazed this guy actually works as an architect. From an interview last week on San Francisco radio, 25 minutes in:

Gage: In the case of the North Tower, the 15 story section above the point of jet plane impact, you see it decreasing by half before it ever begins to move down. In other words, half of that mass, which we're told was so great, is decreased, destroyed, disintegrated by these explosions, and then within two seconds the rest of it is completely gone such that you don't have this 15 story mass crushing the rest of the building and its 80,000 tons of structural steel designed to resist this load for the life of that building.

He apparently does not even understand the law of conservation of mass, or the difference between a dynamic and a static force. Someone pull his license before he gets somebody killed.

An Open Letter to Justin Martell and Michael Jackman

I am constantly amused as to how truthers seem to think that anyone outside of their incestuous little community actually gives a damn what they think. A typical example of this is this "open letter" by Justin Martell and Michael Jackman, founders and just about the only active members of the inaccurately titled "Student Scholars for 9/11 Truth" (well OK, they are students as far as I can tell, it is the rest of the title that is misleading).

An Open Letter to the Progressive Left

By Justin A. Martell and Michael Jackman

3/10/2008

During this primary season, many advocates for a new investigation into the events surrounding 9/11 have been greeted with a tremendous amount of hostility. The thing is, most of this hostility has not been from “right-wingers,” but mostly from members of the so called progressive left. As registered Democrats, we personally, have been told that we are an “embarrassment to the party,” and called names that we will not repeat. Why has the left shown so much hostility towards advocates of 9/11 truth and justice?

Uhh, sorry guys. You really are an embarrassment to the party. The reason they avoid you is the same reason the cool people avoided you in high school, you are no benefit to them, and you interfere with their goals by tainting them with idiocy. These are people who absolutely loath Bush and Cheney, and they don't want their legitimate political goals to be associated with bizarre space beam, cruise missile, remote controlled planes and thermite theories, even if you do pretend to hide it behind the "just asking questions" veil.

Swatting at Griffin's Softballs

David Ray Griffin is coming out with yet another book, this one called 9-11 Contradictions, subtitled A Shameless Attempt to Fleece Some More Money Out of the Goofballs. Errr, sorry, I made that last part up; it's actually subtitled An Open Letter to Congress And the Press.

Now look at the contradictions Griffin cites:

Part 1 Questions about Bush Administration and Pentagon Leaders

1. How Long Did George Bush Remain in the Classroom?
2. When Did Dick Cheney Enter the Underground Bunker?
3. Was Cheney Observed Confirming a Stand-Down Order?
4. Did Cheney Observe the Land-All-Planes Order?

Answers:
1. According to all accounts, Bush left the classroom about 6-9 minutes after hearing about the second plane hitting the South Tower.

Nearly every news account fails to mention when Bush left the classroom after being told America was under attack. Three mention 9:12 a.m. [New York Times, 9/16/01 (B), Telegraph, 12/16/01, Daily Mail, 9/8/02] Remaining in the classroom for approximately five to seven minutes is inexcusable, but the video of Bush in the classroom suggests he stayed longer than that. The video contains several edits and ends before Bush leaves the room, so it also doesn’t tell us exactly how long he stayed. One newspaper suggested he remained “for eight or nine minutes”—sometime between 9:13 and 9:16, since Card’s arrival is uncertain. [Tampa Tribune, 9/1/02]

2. 9:52 AM or shortly after. Source.

According to the 9/11 Commission, the Secret Service logs Lynne Cheney’s arrival at the White House at 9:52 a.m. She joins her husband, Vice President Dick Cheney, in the tunnel leading to the Presidential Emergency Operations Center (PEOC) bunker below the White House, and then enters the PEOC alongside him.

3. No, it was not a standdown order. It was a shootdown order that never ended up being implemented, almost certainly for Flight 93 had it still been flying.

4. ? I don't even get this one. What the hell is this fruitcake getting at? Cheney is not obligated to observe any "Land All Planes" order except at the direction of the President.

Well, you can probably see the problem already. Griffin's not presenting "contradictions", he's just dusting off the old questions one more time. Oh, I'm sure he'll work in Norm Mineta's mistaken timeline to "contradict" the 9-11 Commission's account of Cheney's entrance into the PEOC.

Griffin's "Open Letter" is not really written to the press and Congress, but to the kook brigade who can doubtless be counted on to buy enough copies to make the publication reasonably profitable. However, I do think that the gravy train is largely coming to an end. I will be very surprised if 9-11 "Truth" outlasts the Bush Administration.

More of the Inanity of Alex Jones

This guy is hilarious if you take him as a parody of himself. What is really bizarre is how the truthers post this stuff, somehow thinking it makes them look good. Even author Steve Alten goes on his show and praises him effusively.

My favorite part is when he goes off on Al Qaeda 2 minutes in, getting just about every fact wrong. This idiot still can't figure out how to pronounce Uzbekistan properly:

It is true that our government founded Al Qaeda. Zbigniew Brzezinski just wrote another best selling book where he brags in '79, six months before the Russians invaded, they created a code name "Al Qaeda" and that means "The Base" of CIA operations in Central Asia. And then they launched Operation Cyclone, this is all declassified now, to attack Uzbeakistan [sic], Turkmenistan and several other of the Russian satellites to get the Russians to invade and that whole thing was a large setup. I know they had a Tom Hanks movie that claims the CIA got involved in '85.

First of all, the idea that the Soviets invaded because Al Qaeda attacked "Uzbeakistan" is ridiculous, every serious historian in the world agrees that it was because of the instability of the pro-Soviet Afghan regime. Jones can't even get his geopolitical terms correct, these weren't "satellite" states they were part of the Soviet Union, Poland was a satellite state. Jones, like most truthers, can't even tell the difference between the native Afghans, who were supported by the United States, and the Arabs, who were involved later and were not supported by the US. For starters, why would the Afghans, who speak Pashtun and Dari, adopt an Arabic name in 1979?

And is it just me, or is he getting huge? He must be stocking up for the FEMA camps...

Air America Cruise Reveals Lots of Truthers

As I have pointed out repeatedly, 9-11 "Truthers" aren't all left-wingers, and more importantly, not all left-wingers are "Truthers". But it is certainly true that quite a number of them are, as this account makes plain:

I had dinner with Jim Hightower who seemed well-versed on 9/11 as an inside job, although I have never heard him mention it. Every table I was at had a majority who were 9/11 OCT doubters. Lots of people sought me out for questions or just to express themselves on the subject. One coordinator for Move-on.org said she planned to ask the national organization to involve themselves in the issue and refer them to the Pilots site.

To Build On Their Momentum...

They're taking a month off. The local Phoenix 9-11 Questions Group is going dark for the next month:

"The Phoenix 9/11 Truth Action Meetup Strategy Group has decided to take a 30 day break. We are excited with the results of our last 2 planned activities that included Richard Gage and David Ray Griffin speaker presentations. Many of you graciously contributed to their success and we thank-you. Our Truth Action Team is informing and educating others, and I have no doubts that we are making a difference in getting other's to ask questions."

Say what? Remember, Phoenix is nice in March; there are also lots of people to educate (snowbirds) who won't be around in another month or two. They've had (by their account) two very successful lectures with high-profile "leaders" of the 9-11 "Truth" Movement. And they're going to take a break?

Steve Alten Continues to Lie

Steve Alten is out promoting his book "The Shell Game", after it dropped like a rock despite his publisher spending a fortune promoting it. This of course necessitates him lying about the event of 9/11. Here he is in a radio interview.

Atlen[sic], "The World Trade Center, the World Trade Center represented a crime scene, a federal crime scene. All of the evidence from that federal crime scene was kept from FEMA, kept from police, kept from the FBI. Homeland Security came in, took it and shipped it to China and buried [that evidence]"

You would think in his years of research he would have come across a mention of the Fresh Kills landfill, where over 1,000 FBI agents worked for months pouring over evidence. But then again, honesty and truthers do not go along.

Least Effective Truther. Ever

This is actually sad; the guy's got nothing other than the "CFR Scum! National sovereignty will prevail"

Ron Paul Fights On

He beat back the effort to unseat him in the Texas primary, and now is free to continue his quixotic quest for the presidency, even though John McCain sealed up the Republican nomination last night. The LA Times blogger Andrew Malcolm, who's clearly drunk the Kool-Aid exults:

But just Paul's powerful presence, eloquence and outspoken defense of the Constitution has forced every other Republican party luminary out of the 2007-08 race, including Rudy Giuliani, who's now reduced to doing bit parts on "Saturday Night Live," Fred Thompson, Mitt Romney, Sam who's-its from Kansas and that grumpy guy from Virginia. Tuesday night, faced with the prospect of a hard-charging Paul on his tail, even former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee gave up, although he directed his concession speech at McCain to save face.

Of course, that's intended as parody, but the Ronulans really believe this narrative. The hard-charging Paul got 1/6th as many votes as Huckabee in Ohio, 1/3rd as many in Rhode Island, and most astoundingly only 1/7th as many in Texas, his home state. Yes, his supporters are committed, and they ought to be, but they're still stuck on the same 5-7% of the vote they've been getting since the beginning of the process.

Secret Prisons Are Too Good For Them

A commenter on Joe Scarborough suggests putting 9-11 Truthers in secret prisons in Eastern Europe. Too expensive and inefficient; I suggest that the Secret Service bring Chinese-made guillotines to every Clinton event. We'd see an end to all this nonsense in about ten seconds.

Yet More Bubba

Bill Clinton continues to school the Troofers:



If he were running for president again (of course, he can't) he'd have our endorsement five times already. Oh, and pay no attention to the Arkancide crap; that's trutherism for the right wing nutbars.

Yet another Troofer got himself busted at a (Bill) Clinton rally in Texas.



"Don't tase me, Bro!"

Has Bob Kerrey Gone Truther?

An Air America radio host claims so in this video:



Kerrey, a liberal Democrat, is a genuine American hero, a Navy SEAL and a Medal of Honor recipient. I doubt that he's really fruitcake enough to recommend a "permanent" 9-11 Commission. But he needs to be pressed on the issue.

Debunking Loose Change Final Cut: The Hijackers, Part I

This is a long chapter, and clearly not all of it concerns the hijackers, despite the title. I am cutting the chapter into three separate posts; Osama bin Laden (this post), the Hijackers (to come) and Able Danger (after that).

Dylan Avery “On September 13th, the United States Government declares that it has overwhelming evidence that Bin Laden is responsible for the attacks. The Taliban offers to hand over Osama Bin Laden if the United States can provide evidence.

Taliban interpreter: “Our position in this regard is that if America have (sic) evidence and proofs (sic), they should produce it and we are ready for the trial of Osama Bin Laden in the light of evidence.”

Reporter: “Are you willing to hand Osama Bin Laden to the United States or not?”

Taliban spokesman: No, no, no.

Taliban interpreter: “Without evidence, no.”

The video is backed up by this CBS news story, but it is important to note that Taliban spokesman on the right (speaking English) is actually an interpreter, and that the original response by the Taliban on the left was simply, "No, no, no."

The rejection came in a statement by Abdul Salam Zaeef, the Taliban ambassador to Pakistan. Asked whether the Taliban would hand over bin Laden, Zaeef said, "No." But his translator said, "No, not without evidence."

Now, note the part about "... we are ready for the trial of Osama Bin Laden." I suspect strongly that what was being suggested was that Osama be tried in Afghanistan, which of course is ridiculous and unsatisfactory. If an American is accused of a crime in Great Britain, we do not insist that he be tried first in the US to see if he's guilty; we simply have an extradition hearing.

Note also that bin Laden does not fit the supposed focus of the chapter as one of "The Hijackers". This continues with the next discussion:

Reporter: “But is there any plan to present public evidence, so that the average citizen, not just Americans but people all over the world can understand the case against bin Laden?”

Ari Fleischer: Secretary Powell said, there’s hope to do that, and uh, to do so in a timely fashion over some course of time… but the American people also understand that there are going to be times when that information cannot immediately be forthcoming and the American people seem to be accepting of that.”

Reporter: “It seems as though you’re asking everyone to trust you.”

I'm starting to see that Loose Change FC is every bit as duplicitous as the earlier versions, just a little more cunning about it. You see the ellipsis above? Dylan made it reasonably obvious that he was cutting out part of Fleischer's response by the blurring. What Ari actually said was:

Ari Fleischer: Well, I think, as Secretary Powell said, there's hope to do that and to do so in a timely fashion over some course of time. That's always important in a democracy. In a democracy, it's always important to provide the maximum amount of information possible.

But I think the American people also understand that there are going to be times when that information cannot immediately be forthcoming, and the American people seem to be accepting of that.

That's minor, but what we don't see is the lack of context for the next quote from a reporter:

But I really am talking even bigger. I mean, just you know, you're talking about actions in other parts of the world. And certainly, you want the support of as many people around the world as possible. You know, I guess, it seems as though you're asking everyone to trust you but without supply(ing) information to show why you should trust.

Dylan Avery: “This information has yet to be provided to the public. Instead of taking credit, bin Laden denies involvement in the attacks, three times.

And Pete Rose denied betting on baseball how many times before he finally admitted that he not only bet on baseball but bet on the team he was managing? Criminals almost always deny their guilt many times before admitting it.

December 13th: The Department of Defense releases a videotape allegedly discovered in a house in Jalalabad, Afghanistan. Osama bin Laden describes the attacks along with Khaled Al Harvey (sp?). American mainstream media and even President Bush, would portray this videotape as absolute proof of his guilt. International establishments question the authenticity of this tape” (Screen shows German website with one passage translated: ‘Bin Laden video: Fabrication as evidence?”

Dylan tries to glide over the fact that many of the reasons for claiming the Bin Laden video was fake have now been debunked. Remember fatty Bin Laden? Debunked by a Truther as a simple problem with foreign videotape standards and American.

Remember Osama's watch and rings? Debunked here in the early days; although that's my post I think James did an earlier post on it; I'm just linking that one because it was the one I found quickly by searching.

Dylan used to claim a lot of reasons for why Osama was fake; now he tells us that it was claimed to be fake by some German "establishment". He's clearly beating a hasty retreat on this point.

“December 26th, 2001. A Taliban official claims that he has attended the funeral of Osama bin Laden. The next day, a video believed to be recorded on November 19th is broadcast, in which bin Laden praises the attack, but takes no responsibility.

The next bin Laden video would not appear until October 29, 2004, days before the presidential election. The video is described as the clearest claim of responsibility for 9-11.

Well, yes, it is "described that way".

Fox News: Usama bin Laden made his first televised appearance in more than a year Friday in which he admitted for the first time ordering the Sept. 11 attacks and accused President Bush of "misleading" the American people.

China Daily: In what appeared to be conciliatory language, bin Laden said he wanted to explain why he ordered the suicide airline hijackings that hit the World Trade Center and the Pentagon so Americans would know how to act to prevent another attack.

"To the American people, my talk is to you about the best way to avoid another Manhattan," he said. "I tell you: Security is an important element of human life and free people do not give up their security."

But there have also been more recent videos, that Dylan conveniently ignores.

An Arab television station broadcast previously unseen footage Thursday of a smiling Osama bin Laden meeting with the top planners of the Sept. 11 attacks in an Afghan mountain camp and calling on followers to pray for the hijackers as they carry out the suicide mission.

Back to the film:

And when questioned why bin Laden’s Most Wanted poster does not indict him for 9-11, the chief of investigative publicity for the FBI, Rex Tomb, replies:

Ed Haas: “9-11 is not mentioned on the most wanted poster is cause the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Osama bin Laden to 9-11. Clearly, I couldn’t really believe what I just heard, so I repeated it, and he said, yes, that is correct. The FBI has no hard evidence connecting Osama bin Laden to 9-11.”

We have been over that one so many times. First, Osama has not been indicted on charges related to 9-11 because the government already has indictments against him for his involvement in the embassy bombings in 1998; there's no need to indict him again until he's captured.

And oh, yes, there was yet another video released in November of 2007:

Bin Laden said it was unjust for the United States to have invaded Afghanistan for sheltering him after the 9/11 attacks, saying he was the “only one responsible” for the deadly assaults on New York and Washington.

“The events of Manhattan were retaliation against the American-Israeli alliance’s aggression against our people in Palestine and Lebanon, and I am the only one responsible for it. The Afghan people and government knew nothing about it. America knows that,” the al-Qaida leader said.

As for the FBI having no hard evidence, check out this detail at the end of that story:

FBI analysts were reviewing the tape but were not immediately able to say how long it was or when it might have been recorded nor could they provide other details. Spokesman Richard Kolko said it was being examined "to determine if it is authentic and for any intelligence value."

"As the FBI has said since 9/11, bin Laden was responsible for the attack," Kolko said in a statement. "In this latest tape, he again acknowledged his responsibility. This should help to clarify for all the conspiracy theorists, again — the 9/11 attack was done by bin Laden and al-Qaida."

Another Astonishingly bad JONES Paper

Steven Jones publishes another ridiculously bad paper in his so-called journal, this time by a Swiss history professor Daniele Ganser, thereby proving that foreigners can be just as stupid as Americans. It only takes reading the first couple of paragraphs to find out how lame it is.:

Afghanistan serves as a conduit country for oil and gas pipelines from the Caspian Sea to the Indian Ocean as well as a military base, to surround the Middle East “under the pretense of fighting terrorism,” says Michael Ruppert, former police officer with the Los Angeles Police Department.

Of course working for the LAPD must make you an expert on (non-existent) Central Asian pipelines.

In what surely must be a first for an "academic" paper by a history professor, she quotes that world reknowned expert, Charlie Sheen:

“There is a problem with WTC 7,” explained the actor Charlie Sheen, known for his roles in Platoon and Wall Street. “And if there is a problem with WTC 7, then there is a problem with the entire 9/11 story,” Sheen said on the radio in March 2006. WTC 7 could not have been brought to a collapse by an airplane, as it was never in fact hit by an airplane. It could also not have been broken down by an earthquake or by the collapse of the twin towers, because almost seven hours passed between the collapse of the twin towers and WTC 7. Possible causes are said to be only fire or demolition.

In fact there was a small fire in WTC 7. But Sheen doubts that this fire caused the collapse of WTC 7. Anyone who believes that “needs psychiatric evaluation,” says Sheen. A demolition requires multiple days of preparation. It was hardly Osama bin Laden and his helpers, as they were never accused of it. Therefore only MIHOP remains.

Sheen's statements led to a fierce debate. “How can any rational person believe that our government attacked our own people?”, asked a CNN viewer via e-mail. Another opined: “This is a very important issue that must be discussed by the general public. It is our patriotic duty to find out why and how 9/11 could have occurred.”

Sheen, supported by Hollywood star Sharon Stone, stuck to his question: “I am simply an upstanding American citizen who pays taxes, loves his country, and who resists the propagation of such great nonsense over such obvious truths.”

Well who can argue with that? Both Sheen and Sharon Stone agree...

Troofer Oscar Winner?

Yawn.

But the actress faces a potential backlash in the US over comments she made in an interview in France. Footage which surfaced on the internet showed her questioning the New York terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and the 1969 moon landing.

"I think we’re lied to about a number of things," she said, singling out September 11.

Referring to the two passenger jets flown into the World Trade Centre, Miss Cotillard said: "We see other towers of the same kind being hit by planes, are they burned? There was a tower, I believe it was in Spain, which burned for 24 hours.

Okay, so she's a famed actress who's a nut besides. Sheesh, not like we've never had one of those. Shirley McLaine, anybody? She apparently buys into the notion that the property was a terrible investment:

Miss Cotillard suggested that the towers, planned in the early 1960s, were an outdated "money sucker" which would have cost so much to modernise that it was easier to destroy them.

Yes, it's lots cheaper to cause a trillion-dollar hit on the US economy than it is to tear down a couple buildings.

Is Jerry Corsi Backing Away from the Edge?

Hey, I slammed him when he indicated some solidarity with the Troofers a few weeks ago on the Alex Jones show, so I gotta give him some props for this post over at World Net Daily:

A video clip widely circulated on the Internet shows a test that pulverized an F-4 fighter on impact with a hardened target, providing evidence to answer 9/11 skeptics who question why so little identifiable airplane debris remained after the hijacked American Airlines Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon.

I wish he would not describe them as skeptics, but at least he's moving in the right direction.