About the only doubt I had about 9/11 was the near free fall of WTC7. This has now been cleared up by a BBC documentary https://youtu.be/vZbMfTtHkYM . It pretty much completely debunks the theory that the building was brought down by explosives. The main towers were brought down by the evil Mohamed Atta and his men as anyone watching the sequence of events in those days, would agree.

Posted by: Ivan | Nov 30 2015 13:11 utc | 103

I said that I’d go back to reading, not posting, in one of my deleted replies. However, it’s frustrating that I can’t talk back to anyone who called me a troll, so I’ll try again. I hope I’ll be allowed to post. I’m really sorry if I’ve derailed this open thread into 9/11 talk (although like Laker, I’m shocked to discover that many here still believe the establishment narrative). I’m not a troll and I’m not trying to “undermine the blog’s purpose or mission”.
This site is great. I hope that “b” continues posting his analysis of world events forever. Most of the websites and blogs I read have a similar world view, such as Zerohedge, the Saker’s blog, Jim Willie (goldenjackass.com), etc. Like Penelope, I also read globalresearch.ca sometimes. I read many more websites + the world MSM (including RT), but that was a brief overview of the people who have done the most to shape my thinking.
The other world view that I brought up is held by a tiny minority of the sites I visit, and I’m not convinced that it’s correct. It’s been troubling me, so I was hoping for input from people smarter and more knowledgeable than I am. Please, don’t let me or anyone else bog you down in endless discussions about unsolvable riddles. What I do is store away the new perspective in the back of my mind, so that I can either expand upon it, or discard it, if/when more data becomes available.
I mentioned the blog by name because I preferred to give credit to the person who got me thinking about these things, rather present his ideas as my own. It’s in no way competition for this site, as the subject matter is at best complementary. There isn’t even a comments function for readers.
Just to be clear:
EVEN IF PUTIN TURNS OUT TO BE A GLOBALIST TOOL, NONE OF THE WORK DONE BY “B” OR ANYBODY ELSE WOULD BE INVALIDATED.
Maybe the idea is a load of horseshit, but if not, just like high school physics, it’s necessary to teach an incorrect paradigm to the first year students. You can’t skip over Newtonian physics unless you want a lot of blank staring faces. By the same token, you can’t skip over the first step of exposing the more mundane crimes of empire, or the lies of the mainstream media; Most people can’t even get that far, nevermind accept 9/11 as big lie, or worse still, conceive of a truly international conspiracy.
We are all on the same side here. It’s just that some people believe that the ladder towards perceiving a more accurate version of reality ends at rung number two (crimes of empire + MSM lies), and that’s fine. Personally, I hope that’s true.
For those who are throwing around the “conspiracy theory” slur: everything on this website is “conspiracy theory” to the average person, even in this relatively enlightened age of the internet.
P.S. Any 9/11 “truth movement” that has appeared many times in the MSN, including an uncritical reception on C-SPAN, is probably not a threat to the people who arranged the whole shebang. I don’t know exactly who did 9/11, or how/why it happened, and I think it would be intellectually dishonest for me to say anything else. I think the “conventional demolition” theory is clearly nonsense, as is the “jet fuel/office fires” theory. I think that there’s clear evidence of complicity on the part of the so-called deep state. That’s as far as I’m prepared to go, although again, I keep various theories on the back-burner.

Posted by: Victori-ana | Nov 30 2015 14:58 utc | 105

Hope I am not off topic. 🙂 Just reviewing who Obama fired.
US ex-intelligence chief on ISIS rise: It was ‘a willful Washington decision’
Published time: 10 Aug, 2015

The US didn’t interfere with the rise of anti-government jihadist groups in Syria that finally degenerated into Islamic State, claims the former head of America’s Defense Intelligence Agency, backing a secret 2012 memo predicting their rise.
Trends
Islamic State
An interview with retired Lieutenant General Michael Flynn, former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), given to Al Jazeera’s Mehdi Hasan, confirms earlier suspicions that Washington was monitoring jihadist groups emerging as opposition in Syria.
Flynn believes the US government didn’t listen to his agency on purpose. snip
The document recently declassified through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), analyses the situation in Syria in the summer of 2012 and predicts: “If the situation unravels, there is the possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist principality in eastern Syria… and this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime.”
The report warns of “dire consequences” of this scenario, because it would allow Al-Qaeda to regain its positions in Iraq and unify the jihadist Sunni forces in Iraq, Syria and the rest of the Sunnis in the Arab world against all other Muslim minorities they consider dissenters.
“ISI (the Islamic State of Iraq) could also declare an Islamic State through its union with other terrorist organizations in Iraq and Syria, which will create grave danger in regards of unifying Iraq and the protection of its territory,” the DIA report correctly predicted at the time.
Those groups eventually emerged as Islamic State (IS formerly ISIS/ISIL) and Al-Nusra Front, an Islamic group loyal to Al-Qaeda.snip
With the Al-Qaeda’s notorious founder killed in Pakistan in 2011, the former DIA head admitting the US sponsored Al-Qaeda-associated groups a year later in Syria should come as a shock to American media outlets, such as the Daily Beast, which criticized the DIA memo as unworthy.
https://www.rt.com/usa/312050-dia-flynn-islamic-state/

Instead we got James Clapper editing reports ala, Cheney.

Posted by: shadyl | Nov 30 2015 15:09 utc | 107

@harry law@87
To me, conspiracy theorists are so annoying, not that some may not be true, rather there is so much real hypocrisy and double dealing going on, which can be proved with irrefutable evidence that needs to be concentrated on. It is playing into the hands of the powers that be, when all they need to say to the general public is “Oh they are nutcases who espouse any lunatic theory, take no notice of them” to ordinary members of the general public that works.
The fundamental problem with conspiracy theories, they are a slippery slop. Once you start going that way, there is no end in sight. Debating conspiracy theories is a legit exercise, knowing where to stop is a good measure of sanity.
The other problem (for me), is the context. Nowadays, if people want to debate anything under heaven, the internet provides the fora for each and every possible subject. You name it, there is one. Those who are so attracted to conspiracy theories are welcomed to move on to those sites, in my understanding MoA wasn’t conceived with that purpose in mind.
Otherwise, we will end up debating UFOs, ETs., Sasquatch, et al, and whether Gorbachev had the mark of the beast on his forehead, and Putin is the Antichrist. MoA gets targeted by multiple trolls from different angles, some sophisticated, most plainly stupid and grotesque, e.g. WoW. However, the latest avalanche of conspiracy theorist concerns me, IMHO they carry an agenda (am I starting another conspiracy theory?), and that is to subtract attention from the main topic, and to sidetrack the thread toward truly stupid, irrelevant issues, such as whether the Russian plane bombed over Sinai left any marks on the desert, pretending to do sleuth/forensic work from internet pictures. Laughable and ridiculous.
At a point where humanity is facing a potential conflict of gigantic proportions, focusing on the variables and examining the trends that could lead to such conflagration is a matter of survival. For that reason, examining whether a terrorist operation was a false/black-flag is a legit exercise, but extrapolating that to a conspiracy theory, is a dangerous push into what could be a hidden agenda coming from obscure forces.
Nothing would the empire and its alphabet intel soup like more, than creating the perception MoA is a place for weirdos of all kind, leftists, anarchists, Marxists, socialists, and, (can you believe that?) conspiracy theorist. As DM@94 interjected,

“Good grief! Are you guys still debating 911? Seriously, you’d have to be thicker than two short planks of wood If you haven’t figured it out by this time.

the conspiracy theories debate, this late into the game, make no sense at all, but now the plot thickens, our in-house conspiracy theorist has found a pal, and it seems there will be no end in sight.

[…] Yes, Victori-ana, we are trying to resolve the same things, but we haven’t enough data– too much unknown […]
[…] I’ll take a look at redefininggod.com blog. I know Corbett Report has definitely decided that the Russian & Chinese oligarchs are in it, too. I’m undecided. In a way it doesn’t matter, as far as our actions are concerned; we still have to fight it, either way.
Mostly, I just continue to gather data; […]
[…] I still don’t know whether the ruling class in China & Russia are opposed to the global oligarchy. I know things aren’t even close to how we perceive them. All I can do is keep adding nuggets of truth to the puzzle.
If you feel like it, drop me a line at powellpenelope. I’m on yahoo. I seldom get to talk w anyone who is wrestling w this issue.

Yeah, too many unknown unknowns, better turn them into a conspiracy theory. I certainly hope they restrict their yahoo interaction to yahoo.com.

Posted by: Lone Wolf | Nov 30 2015 15:16 utc | 109

“…$18T with a T…”

Yeah, we would all be so much richer and better off if that number was smaller…or even zero. All dollars in existence would be private debt. What could go wrong?

Posted by: paulmeli | Nov 30 2015 15:19 utc | 111

b, whatever happened to the numbering? I quoted DM@94 and now he’s at 101. What gives?
———————————
Going back to serious issues.

11:02 GMT
Russian President Vladimir Putin will not be meeting his Turkish counterpart, Tayyip Erdogan, at the summit, according to Russian presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov.
The spokesman did, however, state that Putin is likely to talk to US President Barack Obama on the sidelines of the summit.

That’s all I needed to know about the Paris conference, the rest is circus.
Obama talks to Putin in Paris, expresses regret over downed Su-24 jet in Syria – Kremlin

Posted by: Lone Wolf | Nov 30 2015 16:52 utc | 113

Has any western politician denounced, the cutting off of electricity to Crimea by Ukraine terrorists? Andoheb at 21.
No. (afaik, very sure.) And it looks like Crimea won’t complain, it is part of Russia now and the official complainant would have to be Russia against Kiev Ukraine, or ‘terrorists’ in Urk. etc. Those who denounced would appear to be pro-Russia. This is just another sign that nobody will seriously, ever, contest the rejoining or ‘annexation’ of Crimea.
jfl at 24. I tend to agree, as the US president has tremendous powers, and he could potentially, according to ‘paper’, have implemented all you mention, which one would wish he had done or even at this late date start on. But what was his latitude for independent action?
Personally, I think it was possible, even if that would be a risk for him and might ‘blow up the system’. ( > First you make nice and smarmily kow-tow and agree and then when you have the power, boom. This can sometimes be managed by the courageous…) OB is a committee man (would have made an excellent secretary to the Dean) and in his first bid went as far as he could with declarations and subsequently steps that went in the direction of a ‘unity Gvmt’ – both sides of the aisle and so on, while treading carefully not to lose the Dem. vote. These positions guaranteed his election – he was not knocked down, away, vilified. The whole system is effed up, beyond the ridiculous OB figure.

Posted by: Noirette | Nov 30 2015 17:04 utc | 115

Thank you for allowing a previous post to appear 🙂
The thing that spurred me on to say something was reading Penelope’s theory about inter-factional strife within the Western elites. Of course, she’s not alone in suggesting that kind of thing, and not just relating to the Western side.
The Saker, who I’m guessing most people here would consider to be a well-respected analyst; he divides the Russian elites into “Eurasian sovereigntists” and “Atlantic integrationists”. When it comes down to it, he explains away any apparently self-defeating actions taken by the Russian side as being all down to the “bad Medvedev”, definitely not the “good Putin”.
Perhaps that’s true. I don’t know enough about Russia’s internal politics to draw solid conclusions of my own, so I’d prefer to trust the Saker. That scenario paints a rather different picture of the Russian power structure to the one I’d imagined: one in which Putin’s faction is not able to exert control over many areas of Russian policy.
I’m kind of repeating what Penelope already said about monetary sovereignty and a “fifth column” inside Russia. I just want to point out that if any of the people who are outright ridiculing these ideas consider the Saker to be a good source of information, you may have already accepted the concept of high level collusion between East and West. At least to the extent that you may believe in this Medvedev faction that apparently has enough power to stop Putin from nationalising the currency, but not enough power to stop him trying to destroy the unipolar world order, via his foreign policy decisions.
It could be that there’s a good explanation for all of the apparent inconsistencies that puzzle people like me. Maybe there’s a good reason why Putin doesn’t expose 9/11. I already mentioned a few possible reasons why. These things should be addressed though, because a given model of international relations clearly isn’t good enough, if certain inconsistencies have to be ignored in order to make it work.

Posted by: Victori-ana | Nov 30 2015 18:19 utc | 117

Vicori-ana:
I’m not a big fan of the 911 conspiracies, even if there is a lot to question. Whether the conspiracies are true or not, it is clear that the event was used to further an agenda. IMO 911 conspiracies are used to discredit those who oppose that agenda.
But, assuming that Putin has the same info that the 911 truth people claim, what benefit would Putin’s support bring to that effort? Putin’s supporting such claims might well be counterproductive to the 911 truth-ers as well as to Russia-US relations.
Also recall that, until around 2012, Putin was trying to forge better relations with US and the West. Obama was promising a ‘reset’ with Russia.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 30 2015 19:38 utc | 119

Thouht this might interest some of you guys. A newly released British film on 9/11 made by Tony Rooke who was prosecuted for not having a TV license. He was found not guilty after presenting his evidence of BBC collusion with propagandising terrorism and deceit. When he asked the judge at the end of his trial if he was now required to by a license the judge left the room without issuing an instruction.
https://youtu.be/y5UyynjxAyw

Posted by: Trog51 | Nov 30 2015 21:09 utc | 121

Nice, I’m being censored, my posts deleted. Real commitment to free-speech in here I see.
@99
Lack of debris? Complete nonsense. A huge amount of it was pulverized and turned into dust that blanketed Manhattan (millions of tons of building collapsing on itself generates tremendous forces, big surprise), the rest went underground when it collapsed into what had been the parking lot. Regardless, all of it was collected and moved to the Fresh Kills Landfill where it was sorted through over the course of a decade in the search for human remains for identification. I’m sure all the people who helped hauled 2 million tons of rubble off to Staten Island would be surprised to hear there was a lack of debris. Wonder what they were doing all that time then? As is so often the case, there’s an extensive visual record of this debris that supposedly doesn’t exist.
https://www.nysm.nysed.gov/wtc/recovery/freshkills.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/24/nyregion/24remains.html
http://www.nypress.com/the-remains-of-fresh-kills/
http://www.silive.com/news/index.ssf/2013/04/city_sifting_for_911_remains_a.html

Posted by: Plenue | Nov 30 2015 22:57 utc | 123

Grieved@91
I have had similar thoughts on the vulnerability of Turkey. I am remembering that Erdogan was at the opening of the new Mosque in Moscow (say that quickly without stumbling over your tongue). Also, that in Istanbul resides the Ecumenical Patriarch of the Orthodox Church – his status admittedly not to be envied, but nonetheless he is there. And the historic connection to Russia’s own Orthodox roots is not to be downplayed, any more than it is in Syria.
It will be very difficult for Putin to immediately mend fences with Erdogan, but that is the likely scenario over the long term. Given the tendency of the West to fragment nations willy nilly, I do not think Russia will up the ante. In fact, they are already calling Turkey a ‘partner’, signifying to me that channels are still open, though they be narrow ones.

Posted by: juliania | Dec 1 2015 0:07 utc | 125

Russian deserter found 10 years later.
http://news.yahoo.com/russian-deserter-found-hiding-forest-over-10-years-143436177.html
There was an interesting comment about the brutal hazing in Russian military.. also some mention of forced conscription of conscripts into the Donbass theater.. Any concrete information on this? I think its disgraceful if conscripts were thrown into battle, although it was a very dirty war from both sides

Posted by: bbbb | Dec 1 2015 2:11 utc | 127

“ISIS has a firm grip on a libyan town”
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/29/world/middleeast/isis-grip-on-libyan-city-gives-it-a-fallback-option.html

Posted by: Willy2 | Dec 1 2015 7:24 utc | 129

This is fun – Anne Applebaum is missing the USSR
Oh dear, the old enemy is gone …

Posted by: somebody | Dec 1 2015 8:47 utc | 131

Appelbaum the great expert on the Soviet Gulag, whitewashed all participation by in it by her co-ethnics. For her any assertion by native Russians of primacy in their own land, would of course be a throwback to the bad old days of the Romanovs and the White Russians. Everyone has to look at history through the Jewish eyes, otherwise they are fascists in the making.

Posted by: Ivan | Dec 1 2015 10:52 utc | 133

@ Lone Wolf | Nov 30, 2015 10:16:22 AM | 109
A lone voice of sanity you’ve got there; expresses my sentiments quite well. I’ve a sister who has never met a conspiracy theory she doesn’t like and tell the world about e.g. illuminati, NWO, and half dozen others too obscure to recall. After a while they all start sounding the same, likely because all germinate in the same fertile BS, seeded with the lack of knowledge, watered with the lack of education grown in the full sun of lack of sense. DoG must have loved the breed, so many varieties exist – likely for doG’s amusement in some odd idle eternity.

Posted by: Formerly T-Bear | Dec 1 2015 16:29 utc | 135

This is for Demian@107 on b’s Nov. 30 thread:
In connection with the ‘multipolarity’ theme, but offtopic for that discussion so I am posting it here. Last night I was reading some of the works of Father Alexander Men, who influenced many involved in Russia’s recent ‘liberal’ theological movement. An important essay of his is “Two Understandings of Christianity”, which I read for the first time last night. I will quote his conclusion, but the entire essay really puts forward the strengths of multipolarity in the sense in which classical Orthodoxy relates to the world of today. It can be found at
http://alexandermen.livejournal.com
“. . . And it seems to me that such pluralism, such interaction of different points of view, is an
important pre-condition for the vitality of Christianity. And perhaps it was providential
that Christianity was split into different tendencies, because without this it would
probably have been something uniform and forced. It is as if, knowing people’s tendency
to intolerance, God divided them so that each person in their place, in their own
garden could bring forth their own fruit.
And the time will come when all the different fruits will come together into one stream,
in which will be preserved all the best in the spiritual culture of humanity and
of each person who is made in the image and likeness of God.”

Posted by: juliania | Dec 1 2015 18:56 utc | 137

…cosy relationship… Freudian slip.

Posted by: Ivan | Dec 1 2015 19:19 utc | 139

To those who fool themselves into pretending to believe the “official story” of 9/11 and the 19 drunks with box cutters:
Deep down inside you know that the “official story” is insane. No one will snap you out of it because the implications are so corrosive to the worldview you have been marinated in over your whole lifetime.
(Yet I must at least make mention of the fact that “somebody” loaded the steel and dust criminal evidence onto cargo ships and sent it away (mostly to China) just as soon as it cooled down enough. A bit odd? Maybe the fun-loving government even planted “false shreds” of implausible evidence just to mess with investigator’s heads?)

Posted by: blues | Dec 1 2015 21:27 utc | 141

Yeah, Right @ 97,
No I don’t see the whole world as composed of smoke & mirrors. Some people see conspiracies in those who post here. I was profoundly shocked to find that Sandy Hook & the Boston Bombing were entirely hoaxes, so now I am awake to the possibility of govts & media conspiring w others to produce add’l hoaxes. After all, we have long experienced govt & media lying. My primary loyalty is to the truth. Whatever it is, I’m not afraid of knowing it. No amount of mockery or ad hominem insults by those who ARE afraid can change that.

Posted by: Penelope | Dec 1 2015 21:56 utc | 143

@ 144 Penelope
My you are quick, only 4 minutes and 17 seconds to write your second post; however are you able to give consideration for what you produce? Or is obfuscation through mass ramblings your goal?

Posted by: Formerly T-Bear | Dec 1 2015 22:12 utc | 145

Penelope at 146 — OK, but again, who is pressuring the Turks, to do exactly what? I think the only pressure on Erdogan is to craft a better provocation next time.
I would think a nice celebrity scandal would be sufficient distraction from COP21. But why, if it’s a non-solution to a non-problem; one would want to pump up the window dressing, not undercut it. I take the opposite view — a p.r. “solution” to the most urgent problem facing humanity.

Posted by: rufus magister | Dec 1 2015 23:38 utc | 147

Can I assume the following is propaganda?
http://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/Syrian-opposition-claims-IAF-struck-targets-in-country-on-Monday-435233
http://www.jns.org/news-briefs/2015/11/30/report-israel-hits-hezbollah-linked-facilities-in-syria-near-lebanon-border#.VlxTlXarTIU=

Posted by: alaric | Dec 2 2015 1:26 utc | 149

@141
“Yet I must at least make mention of the fact that “somebody” loaded the steel and dust criminal evidence onto cargo ships and sent it away (mostly to China) just as soon as it cooled down enough.”
…what? No, seriously, where the hell did you get this nonsense? It was all shipped to a reopened landfill on Staten Island where investigators spent years sifting through it for human remains. Now there’s a project to put a big park on the site. This is all information easily acquired, if you’d bother to put even a modicum of effort into actually learning facts.
It seems to me you’re the one who has a world view that hinges on the conspiracy being true. I’m perfectly open to the possibility that the Bush administration knew shortly after, or even before, about the Saudi funding of the attacks (the 28 redacted pages that two administrations now have fought to keep from public eye). But if the government was going to go to all the trouble of murdering 3,000 of its own citizens, why didn’t they engineer an attack that lead to the countries they wanted to invade? A question I have never gotten any answer, even a weak one, on from a conspiracy theorist.

Posted by: Plenue | Dec 2 2015 3:23 utc | 151

337 Dead Sei Whales Beached in Chile

Over 300 whale carcases have been found washed ashore on Chile’s southern coast in between the Gulf of Penas and Puerto Natales.
Scientists discovered 337 beached sei whales in a remote inlet of Patagonia in June 2015 but only released photos and information of the findings Tuesday.
“It was an apocalyptic sight. I’d never seen anything like it,” Haussermann said.
“There are still a lot of areas we haven’t managed to reach, so it’s likely there are more dead whales,” Ms Haussermann said.
Sei whales are internationally protected after being hunted nearly to extinction during the middle of the 20th century.

I think they ought to correlate whale deaths like these with US naval fleet movements.
I feel sure that this offhand whale genocide is viewed as collateral damage of some monstrous sonar/communications activity by the US Wehrmacht, responsible for most needless deaths of blameless creatures on this planet.

Posted by: jfl | Dec 2 2015 10:13 utc | 153

Guantanamo prisoner held for 13 years over mistaken identity: US

Oops. My bad.

I’m sure they’ve apologized, right?

Posted by: jfl | Dec 2 2015 10:25 utc | 155

@152
Yes yes, I know. You’re the poor persecuted holder of Truth. That you have no evidence or argument beyond “I, with my total lack of credentials or qualificactions, find this thing suspicious” has nothing whatsoever to do with you being a laughingstock. Like Creationists you attempt to poke holes in the opposition, but have no workable explanation of your own with supporting evidence.
If by “some dumptrucks” and “some debris” you mean millions of tons, the vast majority of the material in the WTC. The minority is in fact the amount of salvageble steel that was sold as scrap, which happens to disaster debris all the time and was a way for the owners of the buildings to make some money back. The idea, common among ‘Truthers’, that the remains of the WTC were secretly carted off away from public scrutiny is amazing, considering the bulk or it was literally just a few miles to the west and the investigation of it regularly reported on for years.

Posted by: Plenue | Dec 2 2015 12:42 utc | 157

124
“This is common in high speed crashes.” Oh, really, … like MH17?
Only for the Flight 93 fraud, another crash site with no debris, no bodies, no luggage. Maybe your Grey Aliens raptured them up to the Chosen land?
First, a fully loaded fully fueled commercial airplane cannot make a 270 degree diving spiral that exceeds altitude:density:speed. Have you ever piloted? I think not. The alleged pilots failed their flight test with a single engine plane. You would have to be a fighter pilot with multi-engine jet experience to pull the Pentagon 270 manuever without spinning out, that’s why countless civilian and military pilots cried BS to the Pentagon narrative.
Look at MH17 or the RU plane wreckage. That’s what a plane crash looks like, messy. Not a big hole in a 12-foot thick concrete wall designed for airplane impact, a hole with no flames, no plane, no passengers, no luggage. Those Grey Aliens, I guess.
The flight path defies the laws of physics, no yayhoo could fly a commercial airliner except on uninterruptible remote auto-pilot, and you cannot atomize an airplane into a smoking dirt crater.
To claim you can is either willful ignorance, or deliberate collaboration.

Posted by: Chipnik | Dec 2 2015 13:24 utc | 159

Israeli settlers once again storm al-Aqsa Mosque

Israeli settlers, protected by Israeli forces, have once again stormed the al-Aqsa Mosque in the occupied East al-Quds (Jerusalem).
According to reports on Wednesday, the settlers entered the holy site while escorted by a group of Israeli troops.
The development came after a large number of Israeli military forces arrested at least 23 Palestinians in the occupied West Bank during their overnight raid on a refugee camp.

The Israeli pogrom, the Final Solution to the Israelis’ Palestinian Problem, continues. Settler thugs under military protection. The world, the US and EU especially, asleep on the couch, waiting for the genocide to be complete so they can dial up the professional mouners, bury the corpse of the Palestinian nation, write the history books. Never again! We’ll all say this time … and really mean it!

Posted by: jfl | Dec 2 2015 13:59 utc | 161

rufus magister
1)i haven’t hectored anyone to shut up
2)back at what’s now 99 i offered 4 interesting points of departure for anyone actually interested in a debate, but all i got was some obfuscatory blather about dumptrucks
3)911 truth looks to me to be controlled opposition
4)Dr. Judy Wood has compiled over 500 pages of forensic evidence, also known as facts, from the scene of the crime
now if you or your pal Plenue want to further this discussion, first read the book and then get back to me with some kind of meaningful refutation of the evidence therein presented.

Posted by: john | Dec 2 2015 15:38 utc | 163

@158
My favorite thing about Alex Jones is that he’s now hawking a testosterone booster to combat the evil conspiracy to sap our virile male essence (and perhaps our precious bodily fluids as well?) The video is breathtaking. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPZbfwTU93A
@159
“Only for the Flight 93 fraud, another crash site with no debris, no bodies, no luggage.”
https://www.google.com/search?q=flight+93+debris&biw=1334&bih=659&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwij5ZydmL7JAhXHKB4KHWFABcwQ_AUIBigB#imgrc=hGWJoeW7apaD6M%3A
Funny, I can find plenty of pictures of the debris. And of similar crashes.
https://www.google.com/search?q=germanwings+flight+9525&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjh7_esmb7JAhUHlR4KHVUACXUQ_AUICCgC&biw=1334&bih=659
@162
@164
A handful of assholes is your evidence? Yes, I’m sure Mossad, having helped conduct this super-conspiracy, failed to keep some over exuberant agents in check. Makes total sense.
@165
Judy Wood is a joke even among a majority of ‘Truthers’. Her explanation is that the towers were disintegrated by a giant space laser, for there is zero evidence of even the existence of. The closest thing was the YAL-1 prototype (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_YAL-1), which was the dessicated husk of the Star Wars ICBM defense program, which was finally put out of its misery in 2011. Her ‘evidence’ consists of the claim that there wasn’t enough material left over from the towers (a lie) and that jumpers losing their clothes as they fell wasn’t due to wind shear, but because they were getting too hot from the space laser (laughable beyond belief).

Posted by: Plenue | Dec 2 2015 22:27 utc | 165

@169
Wood’s book is a textbook (so to speak) case of Gish Gallop: just drown the enemy in sheer volume of nonsense and gloat when they can’t disprove each and every point in a short amount of time/space. Although you don’t really have to appeal to experts to dismiss her position that it was basically a GDI Ion Cannon strike: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rheHLnQGusg. It’s self-evidently retarded.
@159
Good thing there was no 270 degree turn, it was a 330 degree one.

Posted by: Plenue | Dec 3 2015 3:57 utc | 167

169
‘taking someone to the woodshed’ like ‘dressing somebody down’ like ‘setting someone straight’ implies a verbal(free speech?) reprimand, not a ‘threat of corporal punishment’. but enough of your picayunish twerpishness…
…
And I had not heard of “Dr. Judy Death-Star,” she seems quite a character
clearly neither you or your sidekick Plenue have read Dr. Wood’s book. gratuitous dissing is far easier. and since i’m not trying to convince anyone of anything, i’ll leave it there. i have noticed that the Dr. Wood dissers luv that NSA fanboi, Greg Jenkins. so be it.
i’ve also noticed that since Dr. Wood released her findings in 2006 the tenor of her critics has abated considerably. i’m pretty sure that in another 5 or 10 years her evidence will be discussed with considerably more seriousness.
though it’ll probably be even longer before you two dimwits catch up.

Posted by: john | Dec 3 2015 11:08 utc | 169

173
I clearly stated I had not read the doctor’s fantasy fiction and had absolutely no intention of doing so
’cause you’re such a ‘thorough’ guy, right?
…
i’ll give the last word to another ‘crackpot’ dr.

Posted by: john | Dec 3 2015 14:04 utc | 171

Jonathan Marshall:
– There were multiple opportunities for the US to end the conflict with Syria.
– Assad tried to improve the relationship with the US from about 2005/2006 onwards.
– Israel (then under premier Ehud Olmert) & Syria were open to signing a peace deal but US vice president Cheney wasn’t interested and shot down the initiative.
– There was an uprising in Syria in 2011 (think: Arab Spring) and the “rebels” started to kill syrian police & soldiers. And that happened much earlier than a lot of people think.
Marshall confirms the US – Saudi deal. i.e. Saudi Arabia gave the US the green light for a deal with Iran and Saudi Arabia was given free reign in Syria & Yemen.
The links below contain A LOT OF details on the recent developments in Syria.
Sources:
http://scotthorton.org/interviews/2015/10/27/102715-jonathan-marshall/
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/07/20/the-us-hand-in-the-syrian-mess/
http://www.commondreams.org/views/2015/07/22/hidden-origins-syrias-civil-war
http://www.commondreams.org/views/2015/10/23/rebuffing-peace-chances-syria
http://www.commondreams.org/views/2015/10/25/rebuffing-peace-chances-syria

Posted by: Willy2 | Dec 3 2015 22:02 utc | 173

“isis-recruitment-thrives-in-brutal-prisons-run-by-u-s-backed-egypt”
https://theintercept.com/2015/11/24/isis-recruitment-thrives-in-brutal-prisons-run-by-u-s-backed-egypt/
You don’t say !!!

Posted by: Willy2 | Dec 3 2015 22:48 utc | 175

John at 171
So there are two Dr. Death-Stars? Judy and Joey “Giza” Death-Star? Crackpots or cranks? Tough call.
Proposed investment of valuable time required due diligence. Thorough review showed marginal, if any, return.
Plenue at 174
To judge by titles such as The Grid of the Gods: The Aftermath of the Cosmic War and the Physics of the Pyramid Peoples and Babylon’s Banksters: The Alchemy of Deep Physics, High Finance and Ancient Religion, Farrell doesn’t look too good at patristics, either.
in re 172-3
Well, since the latest fashions in tin-foil haberdashery are not really my bag, I had to look up this particular style, with which I was totally unfamiliar.
As you were kind enough to provide a link and a quote, it was the least I could to provide the same. I used what I did in large part ’cause they were wayh more refined than what I was thinking — “You gotta be freakin’ shittin’ me.”
Would you like another opinion? You’re a tendetious and scurrilous lout, a bully who mixes bad analysis with cheap potty-mouth. You seem to rely largely on the latter. Good call, since you’re far better at it. Which is not to say you’re very good at the potty moth, as you seem to repeat yourself.
Let’s look at your “analysis.” Here’s I believe the source of your English translation from Der Spiegel; your editing of it might have distorted it. But that little piece of work seems to have vanished. Kinda cagey it was, to give us the German original; gave it the air of “truthiness.”
The article makes clear that the Israelis wanted Washington to put them under surveillance. Mossad had no idea of their exact plan, but recommended they be watched on suspicion of plotting attacks in the States. Only 4 hijackers were on the list of 19 persons provided.
But instead DC deported the Israelis, Der Spiegel adding that “the U.S. intelligence community was not ready for cooperation, even when faced with a specific danger, and preferred to engage in infighting.” This underscores the thrust of the article, which stresses the “extensive… failures of the Central Intelligence Agency” in utilizing and distributing the information it possessed. That sort of stuff happens under “C” average Ivy League “legacy” presidents.
So yeah, sure, sounds like they were totally behind it alright…. No doubt along with The Surviving Elites of the Cosmic War and Their Hidden Agenda, to cite the subtitle of one of Farrell’s works.
By the way, Der Spiegel is in general against the conspiracy theory approach to September 11th; they debunk a number of them in Panolpy of the Absurd. Excellent title.

Posted by: rufus magister | Dec 4 2015 7:08 utc | 177

Followed by a more contemporary sitrep on Germany, German Media reaction to Russia, Syria and ISIS by C..

Posted by: jfl | Dec 4 2015 9:57 utc | 179

Thanks ‘b’
Was going to comment:
This post shows what happens when reason abandons the field to the irrational.

Posted by: Formerly T-Bear | Dec 4 2015 10:44 utc | 181

Why do you continue to demand I waste my time? I don’t have to step in shit to know it stinks.
My data set is a little larger than titles and covers. You might recall, I read Jenkins article, his interview with her, discovered her ill repute in the “truther” community, and my go-to source for combatting assorted varieties of woo, Rationalwiki gives her her vewy own Wiki. Scientists say their “science” is bullshit. Why it sells is a matter of psychology; as the old saw goes, “There’s a sucker born every minute.”
Here’s my difficulty — both terms express essential qualities about the work of our “Death Star Doctors” (wasn’t that briefly a cable-tv soap opera?). But since you’re pressing for a resolution, I’ll oblige.
A crank is “a person who has strange ideas or thinks too much about one thing” while a crackpot is “one given to eccentric or lunatic notions.” So I’ll go with “crank” for Dr. Judy, and “crackpot” for Dr. Joe. She’s single-issue crazy, he has a multi-product line.
I myself hold a masters in history and was a doctoral student in Soviet History at a major research university. That would make me curious dweeb; a proud history geek, bad science never really sparked my curiosity. I may or may not be a pygmy, but I sure am far taller than you. I would prefer “know-it-all smartass” over prig, but to each their own.

Posted by: rufus magister | Dec 4 2015 13:37 utc | 183

cameron
*syria, here we come* !
u just cant keep a good man down for long can u ?
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article37639.htm#idc-cover

Posted by: denk | Dec 4 2015 16:33 utc | 185

in re 184
Not the first, probably not the last to draft such a document. You’ve left quite the self portrait as well.

Posted by: rufus magister | Dec 5 2015 1:09 utc | 187

in the land of absurd,
anti war activist kathy kelly was jailed for protesting drones killing in afpak,
war criminal obama got a nobel piss prize !
http://sainthoward.blogspot.com/2014/12/putting-saints-in-jail.html
now its cheney’s turn to be honoured !
http://sainthoward.blogspot.com/2015/12/us-honors-its-torturers-and-war.html
why do mukkans revel in such obscenities ?
is this their way of showing their middle finger to the world ?
*we win, you lose, get over it*

Posted by: denk | Dec 5 2015 16:38 utc | 189

FTB at 188 —
Thanks for the cite, it looks to be a fabulous paper. It gives a good definition, “Bulls***, in contrast to mere nonsense, is something that implies but does not contain adequate meaning or truth.” And it easily sets the record for most uses of the term in an academic paper, at 200 even. What a great line in the team’s C.V.!
The psychology of this sort of belief is is an attempt for simplicity and control in a complex and uncontrollable world. Here’s my favorite link on the topic, from Scientific American, Insights into the Personalities of Conspiracy Theorists.

Despite their unfalsifiable nature, conspiracy theories attract significant followings. Not all theorists, it seems, hold their “truths” to the standards of conventional science.

I would argue they are mistaken on this one point — it is because of the unfalsifiablity these theories find believers.
This point is from a study on Earhart conspiracy believers, but seems applicable to the larger set of theorists. They “had lower self-esteem, were more likely to be cynical toward politics, were less agreeable and gave themselves lower ratings of intelligence.”
Of September 11th. “truthers” particularly, support is “associated with political cynicism and a general tendency toward believing in conspiracies. This latter finding supports what psychologists call a ‘monological belief system,’ in which any and all events can be explained by a web of interconnected conspiracies.”

Posted by: rufus magister | Dec 5 2015 17:00 utc | 191

@ Jackrabbit | Dec 5, 2015 12:30:37 PM | 192
Have great care about The Independent, The Guardian, BBC and most all British mainline news sources for bias and propaganda. The following story from the Independent:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/syrian-girl-five-among-civilians-killed-by-russian-air-strikes-on-rebel-held-areas-a6761056.html
has appeared in The Guardian and on BBC online with the completely unfounded accusation of the child’s alleged death by Russian bombing. The Independent cites an unspecified date in October; I will leave it to your memory as to the date Russia first began their legal campaign to assist a legitimate government. With all things British produced: Caveat Emptor without an identified source, but you knew that.
Yves Smith’s “Naked Capitalism” and bordello. Is that the one? Shall never leave a click at that site ever again; all ego, no substance.

Posted by: Formerly T-Bear | Dec 5 2015 18:05 utc | 193

@ rufus magister 190/191
The term “conspiracy theory” encompasses such a broad and diverse range of ideas that is essentially meaningless; it’s like the term “feminism”.
You know, it’s easily possible to cobble together a similar argument regarding the mindset of those who seek to undermine the authors of these so-called “conspiracy theories”, by making sweeping assumptions as to their psychological state. I could start with something similar to the “evolutionary argument against naturalism”, by suggesting that anti-conspiracists are incapable of perceiving the conspiracy because of evolved defence mechanisms, spawned by an environment in which conscious recognition of the conspiracy would hinder an organism’s ability to reproduce successfully. We could go round and round in circles, conjuring up new and inventive, but ultimately *unfalsifiable* arguments.
I might argue that it is “because of the unfalsifiability” that these anti-conspiracist theories find believers. You know, because we don’t have the ability to falsify theories of psychological states, which trace their heritage back to the theories of people like Freud and Jung, not grounded in neuroscience; a field which involves measurements of some sort.
Let’s examine this particular quote by rufus magister:
“This latter finding supports what psychologists call a “monological belief system”, in which any and all events can be explained by a web of interconnected conspiracies.”
Any and all events explained by a web of interconnections, eh? So… the “laws of physics”: a conspiracy theory! Yes? No?
How about we judge each theory by perceived merit, rather than lumping the views of many disparate individuals together under the “conspiracy theory” umbrella; despite the wide range of methodologies used by those individuals; despite the spectrum of evidence used to support the theories (ranging from no evidence to speak of, to a great deal of evidence – even if the theory in question may still be wrong).
And shall we take a look at this quote also?
“The psychology of this sort of belief is an attempt for simplicity and control in a complex and uncontrollable world.”
Nonsense! Intellectual laziness and broad strokes bullshit!
Take the 9/11 theories for instance: do you really believe that a belief in 9/11 being an “inside job” makes an adherent feel more in control? Making sense of the 9/11 event requires a conspiracy so large that a multi-generational effort is probably necessary if we are to counteract it. Personally, my belief in 9/11 as “inside job” has robbed me of a sense that I can influence the political process in any meaningful way, via the ballot box. I question whether my efforts to alert friends and family, by introducing them to the alternative media, helps or hinders any opposition to the conspiracy.
As I mentioned previously, the organised public face of 9/11 “truth” is almost certainly a front for the conspirators, although probably only at the top level. It makes no sense for the leaders of the so-called “truth movement” to be featured on C-SPAN, unless they are purposefully leading us in the wrong direction. Much of the alternative media is likely to be controlled opposition, at least on some level. None of these thoughts are pleasant and they certainly don’t give one the sense of being in control.
As for simplicity: I see little simplicity in an vast network of corporate entities, state institutions, the international banking network, think tanks, NGOs, intelligence agencies, secret societies and so on. If you think you can simplify what is often referred to as the “deep state”, then be my guest. If not, I think you’ll find that your theory has everything backwards, at least as far as the 9/11 theories are concerned; Belief in the theories tends to result in a person feeling less in control, and with a growing understanding of a world power structure that is so complex and intertwined, it becomes extremely difficult to visualise the whole, in one’s mind.
If you think that a given theory about 9/11 is wrong, then say so and explain why; Beyond doing that, there’s no sense in linking all 9/11 theories, to all UFO theories, to all Bigfoot theories, to all b’s theories at MoA (including let’s say, the “NATO ordered the Turkish shoot-down” theory).
I’m sure that those who seek to conceal the geopolitical forces behind the conflict in Syria would be very grateful to any useful idiots assisting in defaming so-called “conspiracy theorists” – and I’m sure they would be equally grateful to those who assist in the proliferation of purported psychological explanations for the individual beliefs of that same ill-defined, meaningless grouping of human beings, with their individual methodologies, and their individual levels of evidence put forth to support said beliefs!
*deep breath*
Sorry about the verbiage, but I simply cannot let this shit go unchallenged.

Posted by: Victori-ana | Dec 5 2015 19:24 utc | 195

FTB at 193 —
All sources have biases, to greater or lesser degrees. I saw no especial bias in this case.
Victoriana at 135 —
I believe any number of these theories incorrect, but will not clutter things up with a list. Defense mechanism? Really?
It is simpler to believe in “they” and “their” conspiracy then to make sense of a an increasingly complex world. Yes, the intelligence services have had, since the Cold War, an undue influence on the world. No, they cannot control it.
The shared background, assumptions, and commercial interests of the capitalists account for their similarity of purpose, and ergo, appearance of coordination. At times, they quarrel significantly amongst themselves, and then we proles get a say. One has to be conscious and organized in order to recognize and utilize these opportunities.
Could make a case, might make a case. But no case about us cold rationalists.
As my knowledge of this topic is a matter of intellectual self-defense and not interest per se, I’ll stick with broad strokes, if you please. Consider it lazy, if you wish, I think of it as efficient.
And to chime in on Naked Capitalism, their links are invaluable (on technology as well as economics and politics), and I like the snarky tone (suprise!). They are quite good on financial industry chicanery. And nice plant and animal photos, too; what’s not to like?

Posted by: rufus magister | Dec 6 2015 1:41 utc | 197

@198
Yep. You don’t actually read much NC. Or if you do, you have some sort of filter in your brain that means you only see what you want to see. They have consistently criticized Sanders, Strether being of the opinion that his chief function is to drag the Overton Window at least slightly to the left. As for Syriza, the issue wasn’t that they resisted, it was how they did it. All of NCs criticisms have turned out to be correct, and Greece is now in a worse position than had just accepted the Troikas initial plan. And yes, their capitulation is a setback for the European Left; they ended up looking like a bunch of inept clowns. This only serves to send more desperate people to the Right.

Posted by: Plenue | Dec 6 2015 22:17 utc | 199