Should we expect something of an untoward nature to occur tomorrow? I certainly hope that isn't the case, but I'm not taking it for granted.
I wish to focus upon two things in regards to the events of September 11th, 2001:
1. Let's take a bit about the heretofore unseen text message sent through Odigo to (since we aren't privy to the investigation, I can only speculate as to this) 4,000 Jews/Israelis/Zionists on the morning of September 11th, 2001 that warned them of the impending attack, which was reason for reports that only one person regarded as a Jew was reported dead.
Okay...so the report on what message was sent through Odigo, and who sent said message, has been classified, so we can't get any info in regards to that information. But...we can get info from the 3,999 Jews who DIDN'T PERISH on September 1tth, 2001, can't we?!?
2. On September 11th, 2001 (as well as the 7/7 bombing attacks in London, and the Estonia sinking in 1994), there were simulations running that purportedly obscured the attacks and made it hard for the operators to figure out whether the attacks were real or part of the simulation...well, considering that they were purportedly running the simulations to deal with a "real" attack - where were the protocols for dealing with these complications?!? You mean...they DIDN'T have any means of countering unforeseen complications in their simulations?
Here is the biggest load of hooey in regards to whether the operators were thrown off as to the nature of the attacks - IT SHOULDN'T HAVE MATTERED.
Real or imagined, what was the response that was mandated for the attack, and WHY WASN'T IT FOLLOWED?
Do you get it yet?
I stop you in the street, and I tell you that I'm going to prepare you to be mugged, and I'm going to teach you some Aikido moves that should help you defend yourself against any typical mugger; at that moment, a real mugger comes up to you, and MUGS YOU. I then do NOTHING.
Does that sound like a plan of action? Well, this is what you're accepting as reasonable from the Bush administration as the reason that the attack on the Pentagon was able to take place.
Ate your stupid pills lately?
Speaking of stupid pills, on CounterKnowledge, I received a communication from a fellow called Geekengineer; here is his posting:
Hey Hanover, I visited your lame blog, and I just couldn’t get past the screaming “Open-Air Fires CANNOT Melt Steel!” headline.
Blah blah blah… “BOMBS or similar methods”… blah blah blah… JEWS… blah blah blah…
You need to do some book learnin’.
The WTC columns did not have to melt to fail. Heat ‘em up, they weaken. It happened, get over yourself, move on into the night.
Oh, and I like the whole “… or similar methods”. So… what is YOUR theory? Hmmm? Don’t just wave your hands and mumble - explain clearly what sorts of “BOMBS” were used, where exactly they were placed, how they were controlled, in what sort of order they were detonated, how they were installed in the towers without a single soul knowing about it.
You know, show some actual evidence instead of the ramblings of a paranoid lunatic.
So...he's stating that the fire weakened all of the steel failed EVENLY and caused a collapse at freefall speed, into its own footprint.
Hey, pal - you wanna share some of that skunk weed yer smokin'?
Funny stuff at his page, though.
Hey, pal...I want you to read Christopher Bollyn's book, Solving 9/11, and tell me where you find issue with his facts. Maybe your discerning eye will pick up on something I've missed.
I await your comments.