Next Level BS #2: 9/11 Conspiracy Theories, From a Journalist's Point of View

originally posted by: LA1IMPALA
I just think that it looked so perfect the way both buildings came down.

Can you speculate on how many dozens of people would have been required to plant sufficient explosives into the three massive office buildings while:

1) after thirteen years, none of those dozens of people with specialty skills have come forward

2) after thirteen years, no one who worked in the buildings reported odd goings on by strange work crews

He said the towers were designed to wistand a commercial aircraft impact and the fire afterwards.

Designed, yes. Constructed, no.

The New York Times ran several exposés (1971) on the rampant corruption related to the construction of the buildings -- mob-run construction companies cutting costs with sub-standard materials and city building inspectors getting paid off. There were no prosecutions except for a few low-level inspectors.

Can you speculate on how many dozens of people would have been required to plant sufficient explosives into the three massive office buildings while: 1) after thirteen years, none of those dozens of people with specialty skills have come forward 2) after thirteen years, no one who worked in the buildings reported odd goings on by strange work crews

First... you should watch the 18 minute 1983 documentary "Building the World Trade Center" which is available in three Quicktime parts: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3. Since 9/11 there have been many slickly produced but brief overviews of the towers' construction, this is important -- it's comprised entirely of film footage and paced slowly enough for you to see how they were built, like visual blueprints. I loved those towers, seeing this brought tears to my eyes.

Then, check out the Evidenced Based Research website.

Once you see from the documentary that the core columns and perimeter columns were built from three-story sections, the core columns bolted and spot-welded together, it becomes possible to see that a few conventional explosives could accomplish this task. Core columns need not be cut or melted -- they merely need to be subject to displacement to break bolts and weld junctions. All core columns were easily accessible from within the elevator shafts, and a small crew riding on top of a car could place them in a reasonable time. Add to this a series of timed charges around specific perimeter columns to disconnect horizontals (at spandrel plate junctions) and the upper building cap is certain to fall, all at once. Aside from degree of tilt, both building caps were seen to exhibit similar collapse behavior despite the great difference in angle of plane impact and fuel unload, the South Tower plane ejecting most fuel out the rear and shearing but a few core columns. Is this another coincidence?

Clear a couple weekends and work your way through the Oral Histories of the NY first responders. It is as horrifying and riveting as the best thriller you ever read. I believe that hidden within these testimonies are vital clues to the buildings' demise.

Another resource when considering demolition is a thread from Loose Change, The Basement Explosions where NK-44 and others attempt to reconcile events in the basements with the official story of jet fuel down elevator shafts. There are problems with the extent and location of these events -- and the basement explosion is more consistent with secondary devices planted there set off at impact -- an attempt to disable building infrastructure.

I have also considered the events at 22FLNT (22nd floor North Tower) where the main command center was located. Despite their location 22 floors above the basement, well away from the blast sinks, there seems to have been an explosive event there at the moment of airplane impact. Aside from the basement and lobby no floor experienced the explosive effect, enough to punch out an elevator shaft wall, as the 22nd floor of North Tower. This is very suspicious, beyond coincidence even, and indicates explosive devices placed in the building to disable infrastructure. Among other things, the 22nd floor could release the electric locks for doors to the roof. See this and this (skip past the thermobaric and volcano stuff).

In investigative circles I am a pariah of sorts because I have completely shrugged off Building 7 from the beginning. I consider the sudden onset of WTC7-fixation to the exclusion oi the Towers to be suspicious, even. This is because I have gone over blueprints and the testimony. The Trade Center was built within a concrete 'bathtub' with Building Seven at its edge. Seven was not symmetrically constructed as are classic buildings, it was built over a pre-existing Con Edison transformer farm with asymmetric cantilevered trusses. Not only would a slight displacement of the bathtub structure destabilize the building... such destabilization was actually observed by Deputy Chief Peter Hayden after the towers' collapses as he sighted the corner of Building Seven with a transit. It was bulging. Ironically, Building Seven therefore is the only building (in my opinion) that would not have needed explosives to fall.

As to WHO... well... if they be sociopath foreign nationals acting on behalf of a State that is carefully watching them to this day, then the usual "someone would have experienced a crisis of conscience and come forward by now" rules do not apply.

a reply to: HocusLocus

I've been through all that, several times. It's not convincing to me… requiring too many people with too many touch points based on random successes to pull it off.

Man an entire video on a journalism's perspective on 911 conspiracies with 4 pages of responses and only 1 mention of Dr. Judy Wood and Dr. Morgan Reynolds research. Here is a link to the research www.drjudywood.com...

I'm not sure what a journalist is, if they 'haven't studied the subject much', apart from being just another member of the public. The problem is, they get put on tv and radio and are put forward as experts to the rest of us, even though their total knowledge of any given subject may be minimal. Even worse, perhaps they've been given copy to read, and they're really just parrots for... who knows?

If you want to know how the buildings were REALLY taken down, without a shadow of a doubt, interview this guy:

Jeff Prager FB

Read the fascinating material below first to get conversant with it, and beware the Jeff has a mind like a steel trap. For anyone who was present in NYC during 9-11, this material is especially important. You've been poisoned by more than you know.

Jeff Prager NUKED #1

Jeff Prager NUKED #2

I find it funny that people decry jounralists like George Knapp but then put forward someone no one had ever heard of before 9/11 - who happens to have a pet theory about the day - forward as "evidence" and "proof".

With controlled opposition you'll find the majority of information is accurate (the hook). Joe, obviously reading from script the entire time, refers to George as a respected broadcast journalist and goes on to list his accomplishments which on the surface to the uniformed sound impressive. George Knapp uses as a major premise 9/11 was not necessary to invade Iraq/it had already been planned/I agree. 9/11 was not about invading Iraq it was about the patriot act. Yet are we actually to believe George doesn't make the connection as to what 9/11 was really intended to produce? He gives a lame explanation that we overreacted and in that process gave up many of our rights? I have ocean front property for sale in Arizona btw.

The exchange was totally scripted/Joe played his part. He's either deluded or intentioned/you pick.

Controlled opposition/the culture flourishes. And lets not forget propaganda (intentionally misleading the public) is legal so George or Joe have no worries/whew eh?

Next level BS Joe, George...

a reply to: theNLBS

Great show!

An interesting info I'd like to share!

William Rodríguez was a janitor at the North Tower of the World Trade Center during the September 11, 2001 attacks and was in the basement of the North Tower when American Airlines Flight 11 crashed into the building. After the attacks he received several awards for heroism for helping in the evacuation of many survivors.

en.wikipedia.org...

Despite This, He Has Been Censored by the Mainstream Media, He Says An Explosion First Came from Below Before Any Plane Even Hit And Had Several Other Witnesses With Him Who Would Testify The Same.

The 9/11 Commission Completely Ignored Their Statements.

More info:

1. www.nogw.com...
2. www.intrepidreport.com...
3. sites.google.com...

Kenny Johannemann worked as a part-time janitor in the World Trade Center when it was attacked and destroyed on September 11, 2001. He was in the North Tower waiting for an elevator when the first explosion occurred. The blast created a fireball that engulfed the elevator shaft. Johannemann responded by saving the life of a man that was badly burned in the event. He was in a similar position as William Rodriguez, who was also a janitor in the WTC North Tower, and who became internationally recognized for his heroic efforts on September 11. Rodriguez was the last person to leave the collapsing North Tower alive.

Following the events of September 11, 2001, Kenneth Johannemann and William Rodriguez provided a detailed account of their experience. One aspect of their stories is similar, but contradicts the official report presented by the 9/11 commission. Both men reported that they heard loud explosions in the basement of the North Tower immediately before and after the plane impacted. Kenneth Johannemann was adamant about the fact that he heard explosions not associated with the crash. William Rodriguez also claimed to have heard a massive rumble in the basement of the North Tower, seconds before the plane hit.

On August 31, 2008, Kenneth Johannemann committed suicide by way of a gunshot wound to the head. Mr Johannemann’s suicide note stated that he was depressed after being evicted from his residence. The testimony given by Kenneth Johannemann and William Rodriguez are identical in the fact that they describe large explosions in the WTC towers. Before his death, Johannemann regularly told his story to public crowds. His death was a surprise to everyone and instantly raised suspicion amongst 9/11 researchers.

listverse.com...

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

1. they closed whole floors periodically over 2 weeks prior to 9/11
and removed bomb sniffing dogs from security too

2. lots of people said there were strange workers their going up and down service lifts it was all very hush hush.

2.1.. no one talked because they were in on it ....

a reply to: aightism2

prolly just Israeli dance students~

9/11 Cui Bono: Who Benefits?

“When one with honeyed words but an evil mind persuades the mob, great woes befall the state.” ―Euripides

i don't post much on this site, but i do read/watch quite a lot on here. and i have to say, NLBS started out pretty good and has only become better since then, and at a rapid rate at that. Joe (pretty sure that's the name?) has improved his speaking skills significantly and came off really well and professional in this one.

in regards to the actual topic of this episode: good job getting Knapp for an interview, and great job on the questions. he gave some very interesting and smart responses. i think what the interview part of this episode did more than anything else was set the show and ATS itself clearly apart in its stance from completely outlandish conspiracy theories for the sake of grabbing attention, making money or pushing your own agenda and establish it moreso as a platform of critical thinkers and skeptics.

the montage of 9/11 footage was intense and felt surreal like these always do for me.

a reply to: seasoul


Thank you for these excellent links...I was not fully aware of the trail to billions in profit.

a reply to: theNLBSThere is a conspiracy but they want you guys arguing as to what it could be while the true people involved get to live on unscathed.

originally posted by: mekhanics
a reply to: theNLBS

Great show!

An interesting info I'd like to share!

William Rodríguez was a janitor at the North Tower of the World Trade Center during the September 11, 2001 attacks and was in the basement of the North Tower when American Airlines Flight 11 crashed into the building. After the attacks he received several awards for heroism for helping in the evacuation of many survivors.

en.wikipedia.org...

Despite This, He Has Been Censored by the Mainstream Media, He Says An Explosion First Came from Below Before Any Plane Even Hit And Had Several Other Witnesses With Him Who Would Testify The Same.

The 9/11 Commission Completely Ignored Their Statements.

More info:

1. www.nogw.com...
2. www.intrepidreport.com...
3. sites.google.com...

Kenny Johannemann worked as a part-time janitor in the World Trade Center when it was attacked and destroyed on September 11, 2001. He was in the North Tower waiting for an elevator when the first explosion occurred. The blast created a fireball that engulfed the elevator shaft. Johannemann responded by saving the life of a man that was badly burned in the event. He was in a similar position as William Rodriguez, who was also a janitor in the WTC North Tower, and who became internationally recognized for his heroic efforts on September 11. Rodriguez was the last person to leave the collapsing North Tower alive.

Following the events of September 11, 2001, Kenneth Johannemann and William Rodriguez provided a detailed account of their experience. One aspect of their stories is similar, but contradicts the official report presented by the 9/11 commission. Both men reported that they heard loud explosions in the basement of the North Tower immediately before and after the plane impacted. Kenneth Johannemann was adamant about the fact that he heard explosions not associated with the crash. William Rodriguez also claimed to have heard a massive rumble in the basement of the North Tower, seconds before the plane hit.

On August 31, 2008, Kenneth Johannemann committed suicide by way of a gunshot wound to the head. Mr Johannemann’s suicide note stated that he was depressed after being evicted from his residence. The testimony given by Kenneth Johannemann and William Rodriguez are identical in the fact that they describe large explosions in the WTC towers. Before his death, Johannemann regularly told his story to public crowds. His death was a surprise to everyone and instantly raised suspicion amongst 9/11 researchers.

listverse.com...

i would give you 100 stars for that post if i could

originally posted by: neformore
I find it funny that people decry jounralists like George Knapp but then put forward someone no one had ever heard of before 9/11 - who happens to have a pet theory about the day - forward as "evidence" and "proof".

I'm going to presume you were talking to me.

Feel free to READ THE LINKS I posted, and then get back to me. It will take several hours, if you can spare it.

What the hell does 'someone no one has ever heard of before 9/11' got to do with 9-11 research?? Any more than someone we've heard about BEFORE 9-11 has to do with 9-11 research? The two have nothing to do with each other. Knapp is a reporter and a journalist, meaning he's basically a writer and on air personality. His curiosity on this topic and research skills seem limited, or he'd know more about 9-11 but at least he admits he hasn't looked into it.

And there's 'pet theories' and then there's actual, y'know, DATA with voluminous explanations thereof, and there's people who like their own particular 'pet theories' based on BS garnered from wherever... and then there's 'journalists' who don't have the curiosity to actually research a topic over 13 years' time...

Some people seem to have a bias against actual research, preferring instead to decide on the basis of their own personal bias'; while that's an interesting human tendency, it has little to do with the facts of any given situation.

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

1) after thirteen years, none of those dozens of people with specialty skills have come forward

Agents usually don't/if they do they doa. These agents in particular are religious zealots which can be extremely tight lipped to say the least.

2) after thirteen years, no one who worked in the buildings reported odd goings on by strange work crews

Simply not true/numerous reports of such.

I'm still believing that through the discipline of verification, it'll be hard to prove any of these theories, but they're still worth checking.

originally posted by: BornAgainAlien

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord
a reply to: Bilk22

There's only so much that can be done with limited time. And as George Knapp said, he's not expert on many of the various theories -- but is an expert on how/if a journalist might approach them.

He`s contradicting himself.

He says he`s not an expert on it, but seems to know the evidence is flimsy and thinks to know 9/11 isn`t a conspiracy. So he bases his opinion on limit research and knowledge.

It would be better if next time you guys ask someone who has enough knowledge about the subject.

We got no more from this as, we have someone who has looked into it somewhat and decided to ignore the many anomalies in this matter, and just go with was presented by him by the government.

He also tries to downplay the 9/11 conspiracy as being harmful, by making the suggestion it`s harmful for other conspiracies. That`s trying to influence people on the subject.

I got the feeling he was working by an agenda to downplay it all.

My thoughts exactly. If you admit you don't know enough to make a judgement on the evidence, how can you say the evidence is flimsy? I't like saying "I haven't read that case file, but I'm sure it's a suicide." No, there are simply too many moving parts to make broad knowledge claims without actually evaluating the evidence. Do your book report AFTER you read the book.

And why are people still bringing up Judy Wood as if she had anything relevant to add to this conversation? The only thing we EVER have is evidence. Forensic evidence. If the explanation doesn't fit the forensic evidence, then the explanation is in need of fixing, not what gets counted as evidence.

One more point: Why doesn't Sibel Edwards count as a whistle blower? Does she not fit the criteria he outlined? Insufferable bullsht, indeed.

originally posted by: arosebyanyothername
With controlled opposition you'll find the majority of information is accurate (the hook). Joe, obviously reading from script the entire time, refers to George as a respected broadcast journalist and goes on to list his accomplishments which on the surface to the uniformed sound impressive. George Knapp uses as a major premise 9/11 was not necessary to invade Iraq/it had already been planned/I agree. 9/11 was not about invading Iraq it was about the patriot act. Yet are we actually to believe George doesn't make the connection as to what 9/11 was really intended to produce? He gives a lame explanation that we overreacted and in that process gave up many of our rights? I have ocean front property for sale in Arizona btw.

The exchange was totally scripted/Joe played his part. He's either deluded or intentioned/you pick.

Controlled opposition/the culture flourishes. And lets not forget propaganda (intentionally misleading the public) is legal so George or Joe have no worries/whew eh?

Next level BS Joe, George...

That tripe about Iraq being "already planned" was true, but as you point out, (and Knapp seems to disregard altogether), the public had zero appetite for a war in the ME at the time. Hell, we all wanted to remove our military from the remaining conflicts under Clinton. So, I couldn't agree more that Knapp either isn't paying attention or has hard blinders on to the policy dynamic.

However, the interviewer did the best he could do given "access" considerations. I mean, the reason people rarely hold their interview subjects' feet to the fire is that if they do, they will have a hard time getting an interview with anyone else. So, as much as I would've liked harder questions, I can understand the delicate line a budding journalist must walk in order to get the next interview.

It's the high-level, established career journalists who either don't do their homework or are clearly under corporate pressure to maintain the status quo that piss me off. Like Knapp.