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.

Sincerely,

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 source...as [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 rest...it[‘]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 petition..it[‘]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.

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?

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

The "Amerithrax" killer has been found.

This comes with barely a squeak from 911truth.org, 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.

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 deny...so 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.

An orgy of woo-woo

"Woo-woo" is a term used frequenly by the famous Skeptics' Guide to the Universe podcasters to describe belief in the paranormal or in conspiracy theories of any stripe. See, for example, the following paragraph, a one-shot put up at 911truth.org over the weekend that manages to make 9/11 deniers sound like utter morons on at least a half-dozen different levels:

This article is being posted at 911truth.org as a "service" to our readers, though not 9/11-specific, because many of us activists are connected almost exclusively through a variety of wireless devices. We need to be healthy and clear-thinking to do the grueling work we do, and the scientific and medical literature--especially from outside the US--is becoming more definitive in sounding alarms about dangers of EMF waves from all kinds of wireless devices. European countries are looking at bans on wireless modems in schools, for instance, and this link between cell phones and cancer is really quite undeniable now. Just last night I bought a replacement for my lost cell-phone earbud for about $6 (no, NOT at Walmart!). And really, while slightly less convenient than a wireless connection, the cost to run a cable from you router to your computer is equally negligible. I'll try to refrain from sounding like your mother here when it comes to the deadly effects of vaccinations and aspartame (PLEASE read about these anyway), but I do hope that each of us will look at what we need to do to take better care of ourselves so that we can continue to fight the good fight! We've still got an awful lot of work ahead of us. Janice
– Ed.

Underlined links provided by us to show why each one of these pop pseudoscientific phenomena are complete garbage. The second-to-last link is to Quackwatch.com, which is something of a one-stop shop for anyone interested in finding out about the latest health craze or "alternative-medicine" scams. Highly recommended site!

Lest any of us forget, we are not dealing with serious people. These aren't people who really care about "truth," or have genuine concerns of any kind that they can profess to believe on a fundamental level. They're die-hard, gullible dupes for any latest craze with a vaguely "anti-establishment" feel to it - the less science and the fewer facts, the better. They vacillate between being simply soft in the brain and willing to deliberately lie to push an agenda that they feel they have to believe as a matter of political necessity. And it's all complete garbage.

So bad, even 911truth is embarrassed of it!

Now that a museum guard has come forward six years after the fact to announce that he definitely saw Mohammed Atta at the Oklahoma City Bombing Memorial five days before 9/11, we can say rest assured that the official story has been laid to rest.

By the way, this "revelation" - by a "guard" who is anonymous, as are all of the other "sources" in this circus of the bizarre that has an Oklahoma City Bombing conspiracy theorist stumbling upon DA TROOF OF 911 through a network of bizarre claims, nonsensical evidence, and open contradictions of reality that makes most of us want to either laugh or cry.

Here's what they say happened. Mohammed Atta and four guys walk into a bar and start a fight in Oklahoma - at the same time as all of the evidence puts them halfway across the country: for example, the trail of video and credit receipts that has him buying a utility knife from Wal-Mart on August 30th. The investigator decides these five guys starting a brawl (per the recollection of a couple of regular barflys, "released" almost a decade later) are Mohammed Atta and four of the other hijackers.

Then a couple of days after 9/11, of course, the investigator decides that these same people come back to a bar in Oklahoma later - because after being pawns in what would be the most elaborate conspiracy ever, of course, the best way to keep things under wraps is to go start another fight in a bar you had just previously visited. Also, of course, these same guys were all positively identified in the wreckage of 9/11.

So, no guys, you're wrong. Sorry. Two guys who may not even exist wait seven years to tell an investigator who for all intents and purposes has done absolutely no investigating of any kind that seven years ago they saw five tan guys in a bar that may or may not exist (the author calls it one "frequented by cops and spooks," because apparently Oklahoma is the espionage capitol of the world) who they think are the guys who had died two days prior to that event they recalled seven years later...

Or not.

Here's what happens next on 911truth.org: right after this piece is written, three complete puff pieces - one hollow pep talk, one glorified trackback from another Blog, and one block quote from an interview with Dennis Kucinich that they'd already covered a week earlier. Clearly, these guys are embarrassed of this piece. Clearly, they just wanted to get it out of the way. Here's to the enduring hilarity, incompetence, and general shooting-oneself-in-the-foot-iveness of the 9/11 truth movement and its fading capitol, 911truth.org.

911Truth.org now relying on "vague recollections" for survival

Check out the latest absolutely absurd post over at 911truth.org:

We are putting out a request for any of you who may know more about the following hearing to please contact us. It's quite important.

On approximately March 11-12, 2003 a hearing was held for which we're trying to find video or a transcript. The info is a little sketchy, but here's what we have that's pretty solid: It was at one point broadcast on CSpan (no, I can't find it in their archives now); was chaired/participated in by Senator Max Baucus; Michael Chertoff was present; apparently the Army spokesperson at the hearing represented that 17 soldiers verified Mohammed Atta was never present in the United States prior to 9/11; at one point during the two-day hearing, this frustrated Senator (Baucus?) said, essentially, "I know what the other 17 soldiers have said. Where's the 18th soldier who was supposed to testify? I want to hear what he has to report. Why can't he be found?" in reference to a military intelligence unit, possibly led by Stephen Reed.

What we don't have is: What committee chaired the hearings, the specific focus or title of the hearings, location of a video or transcript, role Michael Chertoff played in the hearing. If any of you recall seeing that on CSpan, or have any other info about it that could help us find it, please email janice (at) 911truth.org. Even details of your "vague recollection" would be helpful. Thanks so much.

Have you ever tried to have a debate but all your opponent says is, “well, I don’t have the information in front of me… but trust me it totally proves you wrong so you could just believe me?” Perfect example right here.

First of all, regular soldiers are not going to be privy to information about the whereabouts of the hijackers prior to 9/11, basically as a point of fact. Second of all, asking your cohorts (who are notoriously incapable of being honest about anything) to rely on their “vague memories” of a public information channel that clearly none of them watch is just begging to be lied to, frankly. They are begging for someone to come along, someone so desperate to defend the crumbling farce that is the 9/11 denier movement that they will either deliberately lie or willfully open their memories to complete flights of fancy for this “cause,” that they’ll just secrete some fanciful story to confirm this already clearly made-up instance.

Akin to putting “allegedly” before any outlandish claim to let it go into print without worry, they’re going to put “this is just my memory, but…” Of course, these are the same people who believe that everyone in “the government” has a perfect memory, never has a slip of the tongue or can’t properly recall the minutia of some fleeting memo or meeting – so we’re going to be watching and waiting. Every claim that comes up, we’re going to cross-check and double-check against every available source on the record. So if – and when – the 9/11 deniers respond to this absurd demand for fraudulent information, and we prove them either outlandishly wrong or wildly inaccurate, they’re going to have to explain how the existence of faulty, false, or obfuscated memories is consistent with their belief that everyone (else) in the world can remember everything with perfect accuracy. Oops, guys, you just issued the wrong call!