Wednesday, August 27, 2008

Firefighters for 9/11 Truth: Not For Firefighters, Not For Truth

After sending out a message about our upcoming debate in Toronto I got the following “petition” in my inbox.

Please sign this and send it out to as many as you can k[sic]!

::Very Important Petition from Firefighters::

To: US Congress

Please Take Notice That:

On Behalf of the People of the United States of America, the undersigned Firefighters for 9-11 Truth and affiliates are deeply troubled with the “official” story concerning 9/11 and the way the rescue workers from Ground Zero are being “forgotten.”

We believe there is overwhelming evidence of obstruction of justice, and destruction of evidence voiced even by numerous 9/11 Commissioners themselves […even though there was only one “Commissioner”]. Senator Cleland resigned from the Commission stating, “This investigation is now compromised.”

NFPA (National Fire Protection Association) 921, which is the National Standard for Fire and Explosion Investigations, very clearly indicates in numerous sections that the possibility of explosives should have been thoroughly investigated. Specifically in NFPA 921 18.3.2 "High Order Damage"- "High-order damage is characterized by shattering of the structure, producing small, pulverized debris. Walls, roofs, and structural members are splintered or shattered, with the building completely demolished. Debris is thrown great distances, possibly hundreds of feet. High-order damage is the result of rapid rates of pressure rise." World Trade Center’s 1, 2, and 7 all clearly met this definition; therefore they should have been thoroughly investigated and analyzed for explosives. Specifically, the use of "exotic accelerants" should have been investigated. In NFPA 921 19.2.4 -“Exotic Accelerants,” three indicators were clearly met that should have led to a thorough investigation in to the possible use of “exotic accelerants,” specifically as stated in the guideline, “Thermite [sic] mixtures.”

So, why was the possibility of explosives, controlled demolition, or the use of "exotic accelerants" not thoroughly investigated, or even mentioned in the 9-11 Commission Report? [Because it was mentioned in the NIST report, probably]

We, the undersigned, demand the following:

1) A truly independent investigation with Subpoena and Contempt Powers to uncover the complete truth of the events related to 9/11/2001 – specifically the collapse of WTC Tower 7 and the possibility of explosive demolition.
2) The investigation to follow the National Standards so clearly outlined in the National Fire Protection Association guidelines, specifically, NFPA 921 to include thorough analysis of the steel for the presence of "exotic accelerants."
3) Congress to honor the promises made to the rescue workers of 9/11 by passing the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act of 2008.
4) Prosecution of all individuals willfully involved in the planning, and execution of the murders committed on September 11, 2001.
5) Prosecution of all individuals willfully involved in the Obstruction of Justice and Destruction of Evidence surrounding the events of September 11, 2001.


The Undersigned

I responded to the person who sent me this message with the following:

I'm not sure how you could be of the belief that the 9/11 Commission wasn't "independent" - the vast majority of the people who assembled that report and the NIST reports were independently employed professionals from the public, private, and academic sectors. Several thousand people on the ground who had no incentive to lie on behalf of various figures in "the government" compiled the reports in question.

236 pieces of steel were all analyzed and tested for those same "exotic accelerants" you're talking about. It's difficult to see the sense in arguing for the passage of the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act of 2008 when there hasn't even been debate on it in the House yet. It's also somewhat presumptive of you to pass around a pledge implying that Congress is not going to pass it.

For the people being "punished" for perpetrating the 9/11 attacks, I would recommend picking up a newspaper. Oh, also, I'm not a firefighter, so don't ask me to sign a pledge for "Firefighters for 9-11 Truth." Please refrain from this sort of dishonesty in the future; thanks.

To which she intelligently replied (get ready for headache):

LOL[,] you speak of something you no [sic] nothing about. [Y]our words are from a true nieve [sic] person. First of all..[.]you dont [sic] have to be a firefighter to sign this pledge...second, i didn’t [sic] send this directly to you [yes, she did]...third, the problem with the world today is they believe too much of what the newspaper says...[I] go right to the [I] can tell, you dont [sic] by the way you speak.

Have a good day.

Of course, I never cited a “newspaper” to “believe” in the first place, but that’s beside the point. I didn’t really debate with her further except to let her know she was embarrassing herself, to which she eventually ended up saying:

LOL buddy..[.]give it a[‘]s so typical from people like you to twist words around. either way..[.]you contacted me first [untrue, though I did invite all the members of our awesome Facebook group to the debate]. and second..[I] never said it had nothing to do with firefighters...[I] said anyone can sign this[‘]s not just for firefighters.

Just to be clear, the petition she sent me read, “the undersigned Firefighters for 9-11 Truth and affiliates.”. Now, clearly I am not a firefighter, and I’m CLEARLY not a Truther, and as I don’t work for a support or advocacy organization that operates on behalf of firefighters (or the Truther ones, anyway) it would be disingenuous and, indeed, false, for me to claim that I am in any meaningful sense an “affiliate” of them – and I’m absolutely not an “affiliate” of “Firefighters for 9-11 Truth.” It also said that the petition is “from Firefighters,” which is also a lie – the person who sent this to me is a young woman who looks like she hasn’t done a day of hard work in her life. Of course, she has blocked my Facebook profile following her final statement, so I can't confirm that.

This person says that even if you aren’t who the pledge indicates you should be in order to sign this petition, you can sign it anyway. It’s from Firefighters For 9-11 Truth. If you aren’t into being lied to, and if you think committing fraud in the name of firefighters who you neither speak for nor represent, do us a favor and let them know.

Saturday, August 16, 2008

9/11 Truthers abandon 2008 ballot initiative

9/11 deniers have given up on their ballot initiative and are now waiting to try again next year with the same signatures.

This is actually quite surprising to us. It would seem like anything that the 9/11 deniers could fraudulently frame as “honoring the 9/11 victims” or anything along those lines would draw signatures by the tens of thousands. By some epic feat of incompetence, they failed to cull from millions of people a meager thirty thousand to sign onto their ridiculous pledge.

Let’s take a moment to consider the hysterically poor job 9/11 deniers did on this one. New York City itself is home to eight million people , and forty million people if you count the metropolitan area. They were required to get 30,000, but got only 27,000. This means that, by percentage, they could not get any more than zero point three seven five percent of the population to agree with them.

0.375%, and a large enough population to generalize about the nation at large. Where is your 84% now?

Friday, August 8, 2008

That about wraps it up for the "false-flag" theorists

The "Amerithrax" killer has been found.

This comes with barely a squeak from, which simply posted someone else’s Blog entry about what happened and rehashed the same old silly questions about the White House distributing Cipro to its staffers on 9/11 – 9/11 deniers claim Cipro’s sole purpose is to fight anthrax, while it’s actually a regular antibiotic, and so on.

Bruce Ivins was a complicated and disturbed person who had both an obsessive personality and staunch conservative political views (many domestic terror incidents, from the OKC bombing to the biggest abortion clinic bombings, were spawned from a similarly toxic mix of obsession and ideology). Frankly, people looking for an anomaly in the pattern of violent behavior will not find one in Bruce Ivins – his personality fits the mold of about 90% of American domestic terrorists. Like the 9/11 hijackers themselves, he was highly intelligent, well-educated, but socially-inept, prone to spontaneous and alarming behavior, and one-track-minded. Much of the evidence in this case is forthcoming this weekend; the best coverage seems to be from MSNBC and NPR.

So far there has been a deafening silence from the false flag crowd. They’re the ones who tend to jump the gun about just about everything they can, but in this case their silence is speaking volumes. The belief was that “the government,” having orchestrated the attacks, would never seriously search for a guilty party. Of course, the investigation survived an overhaul and a changing of the guard at the FBI, so both directorates would’ve had to be “in on it,” and…oh, why even bother pointing out how stupid the conspiracies are at this point?

The writing is on the wall. This is a serious blow to a conspiracy movement that cannot tolerate any more serious blows. A goodly 20-25% of the traffic of argumentation on our awesome Facebook group at least peripherally involved this case. There is a mountain of evidence that all their bleeting was completely in vain. At the risk of stating the obvious, the 9/11 deniers have been proven completely wrong.

Sunday, August 3, 2008

This group has about 385 people too many for my comfort...

Thanks to Daniel for finding this group, which is quite simply put unbelievable.

Not all of our readers are on Facebook, so, just to give some quick background, on Facebook people can create "groups" which are their own independent discussions forums generally dedicated more or less to one specific topic. The following is the introductory "description" of a group called (and this is serious) "The NWO/illuminati is Planning a Staged Alien Invasion(Project Bluebeam):"

The bloodline families of the illuminati are planning a Staged Alien Invasion, and it nears, rapidly. The evidence is overwhelming and can no longer be denied. With the recent announcement from the Vatican informing it's followers worldwide that it's now ok to believe in aliens, the stage has been set. Everyday we are being bombarded with Staged Alien Invasion programming from the illuminati controlled media and entertainment industry.

The aliens will be the new terrorists, the war on the aliens will be the new war on terrorism, the 'war on the aliens' will be used to enslave the people of the planet and usher in the New World Order.

The Roswell UFO incident was staged, and was used to bring the idea of aliens and UFO's into the mass consciousness of people worldwide. That is one example of Staged Alien Invasion programming. A current example is the Vatican with it's recent announcement. This page will be used to document the most pressing issue on the planet almost no one knows about, the coming Staged Alien Invasion.

Try to wrap your head around that. The Illuminati secretly controls all the media and all the governments of the earth. And they stage "false-flag" alien invasions in order to enslave humanity under the New World Order.

You don't say.

Well at least the tinfoil-hatters are finally acknowledging that UFOs aren't real, right?

And of course, their description closes with the usual "caveat:"

"I'm not interested in debunkers and NO threatening, racist, or dirty comments[.]"

Compare with the second sentence of the description:

The evidence is overwhelming and can no longer be denied.

The evidence is overwhelming and impossible to don't try to argue with it. Never before has the major glaring difference between skeptics and woo-woos been more apparent: we create groups to debate, they create groups to prevent debate. Anyone wanting to know "well, what's wrong with having faith in an off-beat belief or two?" Well, here you have it. I can't imagine any of these people can have their conviction changed by the evidence: they're simply that far gone. Anyone who didn't read this group description and laugh needs to seriously reconsider how they view the world and what they think of empirical evidence. Quite simply, this group is unbelievable.