Did Journalist Christopher Bollyn Solve 9-11?

I can see from my searches for "Bollyn" that he is a controversial name in the 9-11 forum. However, if he were to have uncovered the truth about 9-11, isn't it likely he would be attacked from all sides from well-hidden trolls stationed in forums just to throw people off of the truth and question the veracity of the source?

In fact, it seems that most of his attackers have been those that deny "conspiracy theories" about 9-11. Then there's the 'he was fired for this' and 'he faked that' kind of accusations that get us nowhere closer to the truth.

So I don't want this post --or replies to it-- to be about the journalist Christopher Bollyn; I want it to be about the evidence he presents and the theories he constructs from that evidence. So please, no name calling. And for all those who equate Zionism with Semitism, and therefore anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism, I realize you're going to have a hard time ignoring the man, and just focusing on his evidence or theories. But again, I caution that "attacking the messenger" or source rather than the information produced by the source, will inevitably become a massive red herring preventing us from looking at the evidence presented with clear, unbiased minds.

To make this analysis easier to follow, and so that we do not end up comparing apples with oranges, I would like to suggest a modest structure in the way we present our opinions about the various bits of evidence and theories being discussed. Let us please state up front what piece of evidence or fact it is that we are addressing, or which theory we are assessing. For example:

HIS EVIDENCE: That the company Moving Systems that he cited as being an intelligence front company; where is his evidence of this? In fact, while he provides evidence for many of his assertions, other assertions have no evidence given to back them up.
AND
HIS THEORY: That because a country had advanced knowledge of the time and place of the 9-11 attacks is proof that they were somehow involved in the planning or execution of the attacks, seems a bit of a stretch.

Get the picture?

The Christopher Bollyn website has his book published there, available online:
Solving 9/11 - The Deception That Changed The World -- is a book composed of 15 chapters comprised of some 167 articles he had written on his 9-11 research: It is available here:

www.bollyn.com...

Okay. Now tell me what you think, of his information.

Originally posted by mr. toddly
Okay. Now tell me what you think, of his information.

His "proof" seems to rely heavily on the nonsense these damned fool conspiracy web sites are pushing out. For one thing, he uses the "thermitic material" report what's his name wrote, which noone else on the face of the planet has been able to corroborate, and for another, he uses gigantic amounts of innuendo I.E. Obama contracted some Israeli bureau or another when he was elected. Israel isn't a criminal organization like the Mafia- it's an established country that most of the world's countries have embassies in so it's suspicious activity only to him.. It seems to me this book is geared toward the people who want to believe these 9/11 conspiracies are true, rather than an attempt to convince a neutral audience by critical analysis.

He needs to do a LOT more to back his claims up that he "solved" 9/11.

The word PHYSICS is used in that book a total of FOUR times and twice it is in the name of a Journal.

I am certainly not going to read any of it. It is because of the PHYSICS that this nonsense should have been resolved in SIX MONTHS.

psik

reply to post by GoodOlDave


Can i just ask you a question, i see you denying all conspiricies regarding 9/11 in all threads i see created, what do you believe ? the Official story ?

Originally posted by Vanishr
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

Can i just ask you a question, i see you denying all conspiricies regarding 9/11 in all threads i see created, what do you believe ? the Official story ?

First of all, that's another bit of drivel those damned fool conspiracy web sites are pushing out; there's no such thing as a "official story". There wasn't any government bureau that decided to write up a story that people were forced to accept without question. the myriad investigations interviewed many, many, MANY people, from gov't personnel, people who worked in the towers, firefighters, foreign intelligence agents, people who personally knew Mohammed Atta, etc and most of it was televised and recorded. The NIST report on the WTC 7 collapse, for instance, was based heavily upon NYC firefighter's testimony on the condition of the building and the progress of the fire damage.

What you don't seem to realize is that when you criticise the 9/11 commission report, NIST, FEMA, etc, you're not calling some unnamed gov't bureau of being liars. You're calling all the eyewitnesses who were there of being liars. The conspiracy people are famous for quote mining people like William Rodriguez' testimony of explosions in the basement but they're infamous for taking a pair of scissors and deliberately snipping off his testimony of fireballs coming down the elevator shaft from the impact area and burning people in the elevator. I ask why I shouldn't believe, for example, Barbara Olson's husband when he said he talked to his wife from the plane and all you people can do is accuse him of being a secret agent.

So you tell me, who should I believe, a guy who was actually there at the WTC and rescued a horribly burned man out of the elevator before the building collapsed, or a bunch of dope smoking college kids who made an internet movie in their dorm room? I'm not even making up the "dope-smoking" part either; one of them was arrested for dealing drugs in upstate New York.

Now Dave you are trying to inject logic into whole thing.
And you know too well that the whole conspiracy thing rests in a bed of emotion. It’s like trying to convince your daughter not to marry that bum who was just released from prison.

Emotion trumps logic in humans.

Originally posted by samkent
Now Dave you are trying to inject logic into whole thing.
And you know too well that the whole conspiracy thing rests in a bed of emotion. It’s like trying to convince your daughter not to marry that bum who was just released from prison.

Emotion trumps logic in humans.

Yes, I've seen all too well that there's such a strong emotional attachment to these conspiracy claims that any criticism against them is seen as a personal attack on themselves, and they respond in kind. This fellow asked an honest question so I gave him an honest answer. What he does with the answer will be up to him.

The NIST report on the WTC 7 collapse, for instance, was based heavily upon NYC firefighter's testimony on the condition of the building and the progress of the fire damage.

Of course it was heavily based on testimony and not on inspecting and testing the physical evidence. You see, testimony can be easily skewed and manipulated, while physical evidence (when inspected by a credible independent source) does not lie. But of course, you know and I know that you know that.

So you tell me, who should I believe, a guy who was actually there at the WTC and rescued a horribly burned man out of the elevator before the building collapsed, or a bunch of dope smoking college kids who made an internet movie in their dorm room?

If you're referring to the building collapses, you should believe neither, since this is not their field of expertise.

Emotion trumps logic in humans.

I agree. This is why there are still a number of emotionally exploited individuals out there who still believe the official 9/11 fairy tale.

The official story is that airliners weighing less than 200 tons containing 10,000 gallons of kerosene could cause the TOTAL DESTRUCTION of two skyscrapers weighing more than 400,000 tons each in less than TWO HOURS.

ROFLMAO

And physicists have let this drag on for almost TEN YEARS.

Now that is PATHETIC.

We are supposed to listen to these people talk about Black Holes and the Big Bang?

psik

And physicists have let this drag on for almost TEN YEARS. Now that is PATHETIC.

Instead of demanding a solution to this '911 mystery' by the use of basic investigation techniques and science, people are more interested in being fed soap opera type stories about some alleged bad guys half way around the world. Such are the pitfalls of a massively uneducated, ill informed and easily manipulated populace.

And physicists have let this drag on for almost TEN YEARS.

So now all the worlds physicists are in on it as well? The number of people who the truthers claim to be in on it keeps growing.

It’s amazing how all the college professors and high school physics teachers from the entire world are willing to ‘keep the secret’. Not to mention their ‘anti establishment’ students un questioningly go along for the ride. Back when I was that age I would question the lack of perpetual motion for hours on end. But somehow students accept everything with blind faith today.

So if we add it up we must have millions of people “keeping the secret”.
99.9 percent of the worlds
Pilots
Firefighters
Professors
Teachers
Physicists
And all the US
FBI
CIA
NTSB
NYFD
NYPD

Millions and millions of people, and no one has talked.

But a handful of webbies in their basement have unraveled the truth.

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
Of course it was heavily based on testimony and not on inspecting and testing the physical evidence. You see, testimony can be easily skewed and manipulated, while physical evidence (when inspected by a credible independent source) does not lie. But of course, you know and I know that you know that.

The problem is that the only concrete evidence we have of skewing is at the hands of the conspiracy theorists. Case in point- Norm Mineta's "Orders still stand" testimony. He not only specifically said "do the orders still stand" in his testimony, the whole testimony was videotaped so we know full well he said "do the orders still stand", plus the testimony specifically shows the order in question was a shoot down order. Noentheless, the conspiracy people insist on skewing "do the order still stand" into "stand down order", where the video of the testimony shows no such thing anywhere.

There's no way "orders still stand" can be discombobulated into "stand down order" acccidentally. Someone on the conspiracy theorist side deliberately misrepresented this on purpose.

If you're referring to the building collapses, you should believe neither, since this is not their field of expertise.
.

Well that's an unrealistically cynical outlook to take. When NYC firefighters like Deputy Chief Peter Hayden testified the fires in the building were burning out of control and were causing three story tall bulges in the side of the structure, I'm not going to disregard his testimony simply because he's not a structural engineer. When NYC police helicopter pilots flying eye level to the impact areas of the WTC reported the fires were causing the columns to glow red and looked like they were about to collapse, I'm not going to disregard the police report simply because the pilot wasn't a metallurgist. These people's testimonies should be considered credible until shown otherwise. These testimonies obviously don't explain what caused the collapse by itself but they're still important clues that show what did.

Let's face it, you're not disregarding their testimony becuase they're not experts on what caused the buildings to collapse. You're disregarding their teestimony becuase you have an agenda to push these "controlled demolitions" claims and they're getting in your way. It's the whole reason why you conspiracy theorists are flaunting William Rodriguez' "explosions in the basement" testimony and at the same time disregarding his "fireballs came down the elevator shaft" testimony. Only to the conspiracy theorists does it make sense that an eyewitness is both credible and unbelievable at the same time.

I Invite you to show how a single thing I said is incorrect.

Originally posted by samkent

And physicists have let this drag on for almost TEN YEARS.

So now all the worlds physicists are in on it as well? The number of people who the truthers claim to be in on it keeps growing.

9/11 was a physics problem from DAY ONE!

Skyscrapers MUST DEAL WITH PHYSICS!

Number one is GRAVITY. The building must hold itself up 24 hours a day microsecond to microsecond.

That is why the DISTRIBUTION OF STEEL is important. The DISTRIBUTION OF CONCRETE had to affect how the steel was distributed. And that is why the physicists should have been demanding to know the distributions of steel and concrete within weeks of 9/11.

Number TWO is the wind. The shear force of the wind must be withstood my all skyscrapers.

The towers were designed with the use of wind tunnels. Possibly the first skyscrapers to have that done. We are told they were designed to withstand 150 mph winds and sway 3 feet at the top under those conditions.

But how long does the wind blow in a big storm? It can last for HOURS maybe days. So how does an impact from an airliner that is over in a couple for seconds and makes the building oscillate for FOUR MINUTES constitute such a great threat?

9/11 has become a psychological issue but the physicists made that possible by not getting on the case within a few months of 9/11.

911research.wtc7.net...

This does bring up the issue of the economics and politics of our engineering schools and how difficult Newtonian Physics really is to understand.

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

The Laws of Physics are incapable of giving a damn about conspiracies. It is nobodies fault but yours if you need AUTHORITY to tell you what to think and can't handle grade school physics.

Of course another problem is that the physicists will look pretty damn STUPID after ten years if they now admit that airliners could not do it and the distributions of steel and concrete were important to the analysis.

psik

Originally posted by samkent

And physicists have let this drag on for almost TEN YEARS.

So if we add it up we must have millions of people “keeping the secret”.
99.9 percent of the worlds

And what do you know about von Neumann machines?

I used to work for IBM. All of the machines I was trained on were von Neumann machines. I never saw the term in any documentation and I never heard anybody use it. I didn't learn it until after I quit. They also didn't talk about benchmarks.

But IBM hired John von Neumann as a consultant in 1952.

How often do you hear people say that double-entry accounting should be mandatory in our schools? But double-entry accounting is 700 years old and was invented in Italy. Why shouldn't everybody know it with all of these computers everywhere?

This is not just about 9/11 this is about a society where the majority of people hide important information from each other because that is part of the competition.

The physicists want to make themselves look smart so they make things look more difficult to understand than they really are. We can't have grade school kids comprehending Newtonian Physics now can we?

www.youtube.com...

You just want to keep the debate on the psychological level with the ridicule games.

Emotions are irrelevant to PHYSICS.

psik

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
Of course it was heavily based on testimony and not on inspecting and testing the physical evidence. You see, testimony can be easily skewed and manipulated, while physical evidence (when inspected by a credible independent source) does not lie. But of course, you know and I know that you know that.

The problem is that the only concrete evidence we have of skewing is at the hands of the conspiracy theorists.

So the non-Conspiracy Theorists can't figure out that the distributions of steel and concrete are important to skyscrapers regardless of whether or not they are hit by airliners?

So why don't you expect that information from the NIST?

Of course you could build this model and test it yourself.

www.youtube.com...

What kind of conspiracy could make it behave the same way in your house when I don't know who you are or where you are?

psik

reply to post by GoodOlDave

So you tell me, who should I believe, a guy who was actually there at the WTC and rescued a horribly burned man out of the elevator before the building collapsed, or a bunch of dope smoking college kids who made an internet movie in their dorm room? I'm not even making up the "dope-smoking" part either; one of them was arrested for dealing drugs in upstate New York.

How about these dope smoking collage kids then?





When the firemen there on the scene, experienced professionals, and true hero's say it was a controlled demolition I believe them, look closely at these guys who have just experienced the worst horror most of us can imagine, are they liars? Or should I believe people like you who do nothing but attack the integrity of anyone who questions the official line?

The facts that the collage kids who made the movie smoke dope makes no difference, Bill Gates smoked dope, still one of the most successful men in the world, but anyway it makes no difference, call these Firemen liars

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
So you tell me, who should I believe, a guy who was actually there at the WTC and rescued a horribly burned man out of the elevator before the building collapsed, or a bunch of dope smoking college kids who made an internet movie in their dorm room?

Don't BELIEVE anybody.

Put you brain in gear and deal with some PHYSICS!

How do you think the steel has to be distributed for a 1360 foot building to hold itself up?

So why don't you expect to be told about it if you are supposed to BELIEVE a 150 ton airliner with 34 tons of fuel could totally obliterate it in less than two hours?

psik

reply to post by SphinxMontreal

If you're referring to the building collapses, you should believe neither, since this is not their field of expertise.

So what is the field of expertise of FDNY?

Consider that I took a seminar in building collapse instructed by the some of same people in command on 9/11

FDNY has a special collapse unit housed with Rescue 3

Their job is to respond to either building collapses or structures in danger of collapse

One of the things taught was using a surveyor transit fixed on point to watch if the building is becoming
unstable or moving

Just like they did at WTC 7

FF are taught to watch for specific signs that building is unstable and should evacuate

Just because dont have a PHD in engineering doesn't mean cant or wont recognize signs of impending collapse
for simple reason

THEIR LIVES DEPEND ON IT!

reply to post by samkent


Sam and Dave singing the same old tune. Let's all watch and see how long it takes for them to wreck another potentially informative thread. Who's the one with an agenda?

I've watched many of the "conspiricy" videos and for sure there are many unanswered questions....One in particular I'd like to put to people who accept the "official story" is.......explain why 5 Mossad agents were sent to document the attack?

fast forward to 2mins 30secs.

www.youtube.com...