9/11 skeptics-- what issue about 9/11 do you think is the best to pursue?

[spooked911]

9/11 skeptics only please-- what issue concerning the official 9/11 story do you think is the most important AND most clearly a lie?

Note, this issue may not be what is most convincing to you personally, but more of what you think would be the most convincing or suspicious for someone else.

The idea here is that if we chose one key aspect of 9/11 and banged on it hard enough (lobbying congress, educating the public), it might actually bear political fruit (hearings, prosecutions, impeachment?).

Thank you for participating!

[Dancing_Dave]

1. Everyone should pursue what they can pursue best!

All the ones you mention are worth looking into...people have varying areas of experience, expertise and communication skills, so everyone should do whatever they can do best! :)

[DulceDecorum]

2. Easy Penta-question to answer.

[Christophera]

3. READ Before You Vote! What We Know And A Uniform Issue

This is a great thread. Years late.

Yes, we should always use the knowledge they have. Peoples areas of expertise are going to be the areas they will be most successful in applying the knowledge. People should always examine what they understand, but to be effective the group must chose a unified front for demand. This shared issue must also accepted as central and be understood. This thread seeks to do that, a very functional thing.

However, the unity required to have an effect is the most illusive thing by far. Some feel it should have precedence. In other words issues that are solved by highly controversial explanations, should be avoided in order to get more people involved.

This makes sense on one hand. On the other it appears because of things like the stock puts, the building leases and the asbestos, oil, halliburton etc., religious war, etc. that the pandoras box of controversial issues has been opened wide. While ghastly things have been fluttering out of it for sometime now, one distinction has yet to be commonly made connecting the different issues. Or, .... how we might learn about what actually happened in one issue, an issue which is easily and completely validated by evidence. That issue should have the verified capacity to take itself further than explanatory speculation and well into a realm of certainty.

At this point we shall have to expect less than what historical corporate dumbing down, media dependency for information has delivered us in the form of "warm fuzzy" knowledge and certainty. We shall have to settle for something which many people simply can recognize and stand behind as proof of complicity, by deception, means and opportunity and do so uniformly. So what I've said here is that the issues of motive it seems are very important, but later is when they will be needed to be verified in detail. Now, they cannot be extended past the veracity they presently do have because no official cooperation can be presently be expected from any branch of government.

We must have a profound escalation of the movement to expect to gain the control to investigate motives or collusion's leading to the execution of 9-11.

What I've said here is that with the many issues, what we do control fully is a bunch of pictures and eyewitness accounts and most of the really dependable stuff is from the WTC. Also only 2 buildings were hit at the WTC but 3 fell.

These are the reasons I voted for;

The collapse of the WTC1 and WTC2 towers

WTC 7 is devoid of real information so, as radical as it is, we just have nothing but a video and a crude log of fires burning in the building besides the fact it wasn't hit by a plane.

WTC 7 is an odd one. Something like, "Oh, ....... and this other building fell too."

The pentagon has many conflicting witness reports and very little photographic evidence. There are a limited number of points that can be made that are very certain indicating complicity and it all leads immediately to a missile which REALLY makes the proposal controversial.

The below are issues I see as valid, but of a type where we cannot get good information to advance our understanding and certainty of the workings of the issue in the overall event. The acquisition of more information depends on accountable government and we do not have that.

Forewarnings of the 9/11 attacks/ pre-9/11 failures by the Bush administration
The Pakistan/ISI connection to Al Qaeda and 9/11
Anomalies with the flights and hijackings
Anomalies with the hijackers and their movements/CIA & military connections
The live-fly hijacking drill run on 9/11
Anomalies with the Pentagon hit & flight 77

My posts regarding the WTC towers demolition demonstrate how many heavily conflicting, inconsistent and totally outrageous points the WTC has generally.

Starting with exposing what appears as a mysterious lie is less controversial than many things. WHY would FEMA deceive us about the tower core construction? Can we can see that they did indeed lie about this become a potential point for unity?

I start with this issue of the concrete core at my site and it quickly gets more controversial but it doesn't need to be in our activism.

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html

[spooked911]

5. Thanks--- and I think you're probably right about the WTC.

That is where the most evidence and best documentation is.

The problem is physical evidence like the WTC tower collapses, the WTC7 collapse and the Pentagon hit tend to be more controversial in terms of interpretation. Certainly these have been where the big fights have been on this board.

It's tough obviously for us to crack open what we see as clearly a cover-up, when the government has so much to lose by telling the truth.

I really don't know what the answer is here, in terms of how to proceed on this most important of all the scandals out there.

I hope we can keep this conversation going and reach some real consensus.

Honestly, I have not contacted my representatives yet about 9/11 because I only wanted to contact them when I had a very clear, convincing and CONCISE case to make. Thus I want to have the most solid case possible to take to my representatives. Not that I expect it that it will do very much-- BUT I don't want to send some rambling screed on 9/11. I want something solid.

Right now we have about 10 different items that are highly suspicious about 9/11, but no smoking gun.

Anyone think we have a real smoking gun??

[spooked911]

4. Thanks again for your votes.

I know I'm reaching only a relatively small number of 9/11 "skeptics" here-- but I really think it is important for us to try to focus our efforts if we ever want to accomplish anything meaningful.

It's interesting that many people say we should focus on everything. I agree we should research all these topics. However, my thinking was that in terms of activism, we would be more effective by focusing on one key aspect of 9/11.

Unfortunately, clearly we do not agree on what this key aspect is. So I'm not sure this will go anywhere.

But really, we should try to think strategically about this if we ever want to break through the cover-up and get some sort of justice for 9/11.

[mikelewis]

6. Cynthia McKinney

I think it would help to get behind Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney and start hammering home the issues she raises. Her no-nonsense approach is very appealing and the questions she raises drive right to the heart of the matter. The problem is exposure, or the lack there of. The press shuts her out and I think with the issues she raises, she should be heard.

I also think we should focus on the LIHOP arguement like Paul Thompson and many of the others. I believe, as you know by now, that it was MIHOP but MIHOP is a very hard sell. LIHOP is equally difficult but more people seem willing to believe this especially with the Michael Moore movie still fresh in everyone's mind.

Also the questions that the victim's family have raised can induce an emotional reaction. If we helped them get thier message out, we may be more effective in our attempts at activism.

I put out a flyer that simply states,

The Family of the Victims of 9/11 needs your help.

They have many questions concerning the forknowledge our government had concerning 9/11 that are being completely ignored. The government blames 9/11 on an intelligence failure but it is very clear that our intelligence system was "blinking red". It is clear we knew well in advance that an attack was imminent. If it were a member of your family that was killed in this attack, wouldn't you seek answers? Thier questions are being stifled and ignored and we need your help to bring thier suffering to light. All they ask is that you don't foget the victims of that day. Please seek out the truth about 9/11. Log onto the internet and find out what is not being discussed. We don't want money, we are only asking that you take a second look at an issue that has transfered an umimaginable amount of power into the hands of a select few.
Always remember, "power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely".

This one seems to get the best response and I have been successful in getting a lot of people tuned into the issue.

[Christophera]

8. Nice Safe MIHOP

mikelewis wrote:

Cynthia McKinney
I think it would help to get behind Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney and start hammering home the issues she raises. Her no-nonsense approach is very appealing and the questions she raises drive right to the heart of the matter. The problem is exposure, or the lack there of. The press shuts her out and I think with the issues she raises, she should be heard.
I also think we should focus on the LIHOP arguement like Paul Thompson and many of the others. I believe, as you know by now, that it was MIHOP but MIHOP is a very hard sell. LIHOP is equally difficult but more people seem willing to believe this especially with the Michael Moore movie still fresh in everyone's mind.

Yes, Cynthia McKinney is an excellent person. She listened to me acutely at a September 11, 2,004 public meeting here in Santa Barbara as I asked questions of Robert Hall, demolition expert. (He remembered the concrete core but wouldn't state how much presure it took to make sand, gravel and dust from high strength concrete).

We might do better by not supporting her and strive to instead be substancial enough with our presentation for her to support us in a way congruent with what spooked911 suggests. She gets the wrong kind of exposure from us now, association with a confused mass of information, some of which is really illogical.

spooked911 wrote:

I really think it is important for us to try to focus our efforts if we ever want to accomplish anything meaningful.

I've confronted the LIHOP/MIHOP difficulties for some time and see that limiting the overall presentation to LIHOP, rules out the explanation that actually explains the event. It's self defeating although it's easier to sell.

I do see that part of 9-11 is LIHOP and another part is MIHOP. Meaning there are still a lot of good people in the military and the government but they aren't in charge. The wargames are "built in" excuse mechanisms supposedly adequate to justify no air defense in what can be seen as a LIHOP scenario, the same with the face of the intelligence failures and foreknowledge. This goes all the way back the the 1993 basement bombing and we know it!!!

The WTC was MIHOP as well as the pentagon, but left hand/right hand confusion/deception with autonomy over time might not connect directly to our government in any way we can ascertain from anything we know now.
I see a clear strategy; Focus on the WTC towers concrete cores first, proof of a MIHOP, a simple but BIG lie. (only one little MIHOP is needed!!!!!) Later it covers freefall and making sand and gravel from concrete on purpose, what the big lie is supposed to hide because steel does melt and bend with heat and there were fires. DUH!

Sorry, bit of rant there.

McKinney's issues are good issues and we should support them certainly. Refining our presentation so that she can refer to it more resonably in ways that her potential constiuents can assimilate easily is what I suggest. Let's give her a nice safe MIHOP to point at.

[Christophera]

9. Wargames, Foreknowledge, Stock Puts Deserve MIHOP

It's interesting that many people say we should focus on everything. I agree we should research all these topics. However, my thinking was that in terms of activism, we would be more effective by focusing on one key aspect of 9/11

In my last post I wanted to comment on focusing but got carried away with the, "Nice Safe MIHOP", which I think is a very powerful point and perhaps the very best focus. If we can gather the best WTC investigators together in some notable fashion to examine the concrete core issue and demonstrate their agreement, I feel McKinney will easily take notice. To a segment of the population that knows construction or engineering, it is very obvious once it is noticed.

In order to gain accountability I feel a MIHOP is better. The vast amount of motive, means and opportunity data deserves to be associated with an intentional act that is proven.

The core is concrete and we can prove it with images. It needs to be there to explain the sand and gravel anyway. We see those materials exploding in all the demo photos.

[spooked911]

10. I do think you are onto something BUT

the argument about the tower collapses needs to be simplified somehow. The concrete core issue, while important, may well glaze people's eyes over, IMO. Also, the C-4 part SOUNDS far-fetched.

The big question is: WHY would the government (or whomever) want to blow up the towers on 9/11? I think we need a simple answer to that question first.

My thinking is they will never buy that the towers were blown up unless there is a strong explanation for why someone would do it-- and EVEN THEN many people will not want to believe it.

But if they accept the idea that someone wanted the towers down, then when they ask how we know they were blown up, we can give them the mechanism.

Overall, people will tend to reject this whole idea of the towers being blown up as too weird and conspiracy-ish. So we need a very strong presentation. There is no doubt we have a long row to hoe to ever get traction on this.

Whatever happened to Jimmy Walter anyway? He put up a big reward for someone to prove the pancake collapse theory to him. Is he still offering it?

[Christophera]

12. What Happened?- 1st; Why It Happened- Later

spooked911 wrote:

the argument about the tower collapses needs to be simplified somehow. The concrete core issue, while important, may well glaze people's eyes over, IMO. Also, the C-4 part SOUNDS far-fetched.

From our present state of overinformation, I agree. Very much.

This is the perceptional "threshold issue" I'm trying to bring an understanding of.

Imagine this process:

We, 9-11 activists, (perhaps 15 or so) agree there was a concrete core. Create Declarations under penalty of perjury with descriptions of our evidence reasoning. We scan the Declarations and put them on a web page along with a description of the effort, then we submit this to the major non profits for 9-11 truth as well as others for; peace, freedom, liberty, justice and environment and ask them to ask their members or contacts if anyone saw the 1990 PBS documentary; if so ask them to contact us.

Ask that they make a Declaration stating that they saw the documentary, put those declarations on a web page. Present the issue to fringe media and interested authority. The fringe media stories ask the general public if any had seen the construction documentary and knew of the concrete core.

We have just proven FEMA lied about the structure of the towers.

Now another "why", then the demolition issue. We must insist on this order, which is logical and reasonable under conditions, or we are dead in the water as far as I can see.

spooked911 wrote:

The big question is: WHY would the government (or whomever) want to blow up the towers on 9/11? I think we need a simple answer to that question first.

I know how that reasoning goes and have seen it used against many arguments that trash the official story, generally it is the beginning of a disinformation campaign.

The only way to address that issue of "why?", is to put it in order. Give it a lower priority than "were they blown up?" To allow "why?" to rule the process is to validate the efforts of denial. When "why" is applied, they are looking for ways to marginalize the presentation and you will provide them with the basis as soon as you answer. Not that there aren't good answers to why, but be assured, those will be too much for them as well.

Laws and due process were violated, evidence destroyed and national defense failed. No American can say NO to another American that needs the truth about WHAT happened just because they don't want to believe "why". Later, justifiably, it becomes "why".

We really have to stand our ground with the above.

spooked911 wrote:

My thinking is they will never buy that the towers were blown up unless there is a strong explanation for why someone would do it-- and EVEN THEN many people will not want to believe it.

Curious, about 3 days ago I started to organize; Motive, Means & Opportunity, something I've tried perhaps 3 times before, and got lost in the dynamics. Here is the motive matrix I've developed.

Motive:

WTC; Airline Stock puts

WTC; asbestos, low tenancy, no profits

WTC; Insurance

GENERAL; Administration oil interests, Halliburton, weapons IND. Carlyle etc.

OIL; Afghani pipeline & Iraqi oil

EVASION OF LAW; SEC documents, S&L, BCCI & Enron documents. (WTC 7)

CONQUEST/REVENGE/RELIGIOUS WAR/REGIONAL DOMINANCE; Strike on WTC & military target (Pentagon), ++ excuse for war.


spooked911 wrote:

Overall, people will tend to reject this whole idea of the towers being blown up as too weird and conspiracy-ish. So we need a very strong presentation. There is no doubt we have a long row to hoe to ever get traction on this.

That has been the way that it has gone, I'd like to think the effects of flag abuse would dwindle by now but in reality it's gotten worse since the last selection. People are giving up on freedom via a lawful & rightful government. This is a main reason to approach other non profits with a iron clad case ON OUR TERMS, showing first that FEMA lied about the core.

spooked911 wrote:

Whatever happened to Jimmy Walter anyway? He put up a big reward for someone to prove the pancake collapse theory to him. Is he still offering it?

As far as I know the reward is still active.

[Christophera]

14. Why Is Unity Not Popular?

spooked911

It's interesting that many people say we should focus on everything. I agree we should research all these topics. However, my thinking was that in terms of activism, we would be more effective by focusing on one key aspect of 9/11.

Curious how no leadership can emerge to define priority, one key aspect. And why is there no primary discussion of a reasonable priority for all to focus upon?

Why is unity not popular and a sought after state? Why is the individual quest for uniqueness the dominanat mode?

Shades of media mind control, the hidden lessons of our shadowy dysfunctions perhaps.

[demodewd]

7. gravitational potential energy vs demolitions

Jim Hoffman's mathematical analysis of the Towers' collapses should be subjected to analytical scrutiny by a number of qualified mathematicians and physicists. I have a hunch that his analysis or something close to it would be proven to be valid. If that would be the case the next step would be to challenge the math and physics faculties at major American universities.Breaking the silence on the university level is tantamount to bringing the 911 sceptics cause to a much more universal exposure.

We can prove that the gravitational potential energy of the two towers cannot account for the massive clouds of pulverized materials moving at such rapid speed. This would be verifiable.

[spooked911]

11. Yes-- I agree. The more scientists involved the better.

Although having experts weigh in hasn't moved the 2004 election fraud issue one inch in the MSM. But all we can do is try.

[Christophera]

13. Courts, Electronic Voting, Fraud: Locked In

spooked911

Although having experts weigh in hasn't moved the 2004 election fraud issue one inch in the MSM. But all we can do is try

What is MSM?

This election fraud is all by design and started with the fist bush in office. Everybody knows it too.

All frontal attacks are doomed. Very well defended. I think lawsuits against media might be successful tho which could change the environment in our favor. I've put together a series of pages to define the concept.

http://algoxy.com/psych/optimize_for_peace.html

I apply it to the peace movement generally but it will work with any issue.

More recently I realize that America really has no culture and so to introduce the notion of a culture of activism as the only functional culture, is probably not too far from what needs to happen. People will recognize it.

[Christophera]

15. 9/11 skeptics-- what issue about 9/11 do you think is the best to pursue?

Uh, ............... perhaps they don't want to talk about it. Can't focus?????

Maybe they are process oriented to an extreme. (read between lines here)