');
The Unz Review •ï¿½An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library •ï¿½B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply -


�Remember My InformationWhy?
�Email Replies to my Comment
$
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Commenters to FollowHide Excerpts
By Authors Filter?
Alastair Crooke Ambrose Kane Anatoly Karlin Andrew Anglin Andrew Joyce Audacious Epigone Boyd D. Cathey C.J. Hopkins E. Michael Jones Eric Margolis Eric Striker Fred Reed Gilad Atzmon Godfree Roberts Gregory Hood Guillaume Durocher Ilana Mercer Israel Shamir James Kirkpatrick James Thompson Jared Taylor John Derbyshire Jonathan Cook Jung-Freud Karlin Community Kevin Barrett Kevin MacDonald Lance Welton Larry Romanoff Laurent Guyénot Linh Dinh Michael Hudson Mike Whitney Pat Buchanan Patrick Cockburn Paul Craig Roberts Paul Kersey Pepe Escobar Peter Frost Philip Giraldi Razib Khan Ron Unz Steve Sailer The Saker Tobias Langdon A. Graham A. J. Smuskiewicz A Southerner Academic Research Group UK Staff Adam Hochschild Aedon Cassiel Agha Hussain Ahmad Al Khaled Ahmet Öncü Alain De Benoist Alan Macleod Albemarle Man Alex Graham Alexander Cockburn Alexander Hart Alexander Jacob Alexander Wolfheze Alfred McCoy Alison Weir Allan Wall Allegra Harpootlian Amalric De Droevig Amr Abozeid Anand Gopal Anastasia Katz Andre Damon Andre Vltchek Andreas Canetti Andrei Martyanov Andrew Cockburn Andrew Fraser Andrew Hamilton Andrew J. Bacevich Andrew Napolitano Andrew S. Fischer Andy Kroll Angie Saxon Ann Jones Anna Tolstoyevskaya Anne Wilson Smith Anonymous Anonymous American Anonymous Attorney Anonymous Occidental Anthony Boehm Anthony Bryan Anthony DiMaggio Tony Hall Antiwar Staff Antonius Aquinas Antony C. Black Ariel Dorfman Arlie Russell Hochschild Arno Develay Arnold Isaacs Artem Zagorodnov Astra Taylor AudaciousEpigone Augustin Goland Austen Layard Ava Muhammad Aviva Chomsky Ayman Fadel Barbara Ehrenreich Barbara Garson Barbara Myers Barry Kissin Barry Lando Barton Cockey Beau Albrecht Belle Chesler Ben Fountain Ben Freeman Ben Sullivan Benjamin Villaroel Bernard M. Smith Beverly Gologorsky Bill Black Bill Moyers Blake Archer Williams Bob Dreyfuss Bonnie Faulkner Book Brad Griffin Bradley Moore Brenton Sanderson Brett Redmayne-Titley Brett Wilkins Brian Dew Brian McGlinchey Brian R. Wright Brittany Smith C.D. Corax Cara Marianna Carl Boggs Carl Horowitz Carolyn Yeager Cat McGuire Catherine Crump César Keller Chalmers Johnson Chanda Chisala Charles Bausman Charles Goodhart Charles Wood Charlie O'Neill Charlottesville Survivor Chase Madar Chauke Stephan Filho Chris Hedges Chris Roberts Chris Woltermann Christian Appy Christophe Dolbeau Christopher DeGroot Christopher Donovan Christopher Ketcham Chuck Spinney Civus Non Nequissimus CODOH Editors Coleen Rowley Colin Liddell Cooper Sterling Craig Murray Cynthia Chung D.F. Mulder Dahr Jamail Dakota Witness Dan E. Phillips Dan Sanchez Daniel Barge Daniel McAdams Daniel Moscardi Daniel Vinyard Danny Sjursen Dave Chambers Dave Kranzler Dave Lindorff David Barsamian David Boyajian David Bromwich David Chibo David Chu David Gordon David Haggith David Irving David L. McNaron David Lorimer David Martin David North David Stockman David Vine David Walsh David William Pear David Yorkshire Dean Baker Declan Hayes Dennis Dale Dennis Saffran Diana Johnstone Diego Ramos Dilip Hiro Dirk Bezemer Dmitriy Kalyagin Donald Thoresen Alan Sabrosky Dr. Ejaz Akram Dr. Ridgely Abdul Mu’min Muhammad Dries Van Langenhove E. Frederick Stevens Eamonn Fingleton Ed Warner Edmund Connelly Eduardo Galeano Edward Curtin Edward Dutton Egbert Dijkstra Egor Kholmogorov Ehud Shapiro Ekaterina Blinova Ellen Brown Ellen Packer Ellison Lodge Emil Kirkegaard Emilio García Gómez Emma Goldman Enzo Porter Eric Draitser Eric Paulson Eric Peters Eric Rasmusen Eric Zuesse Erik Edstrom Erika Eichelberger Erin L. Thompson Eugene Gant Eugene Girin Eugene Kusmiak Eve Mykytyn F. Roger Devlin Fadi Abu Shammalah Fantine Gardinier Federale Fenster Fergus Hodgson Finian Cunningham The First Millennium Revisionist Fordham T. Smith Former Agent Forum Francis Goumain Frank Tipler Franklin Lamb Franklin Stahl Frida Berrigan Friedrich Zauner Gabriel Black Gary Corseri Gary Heavin Gary North Gary Younge Gene Tuttle George Albert George Bogdanich George Galloway George Koo George Mackenzie George Szamuely Georgianne Nienaber Gilbert Cavanaugh Gilbert Doctorow Giles Corey Glen K. Allen Glenn Greenwald A. Beaujean Agnostic Alex B. Amnestic Arcane Asher Bb Bbartlog Ben G Birch Barlow Canton ChairmanK Chrisg Coffee Mug Darth Quixote David David B David Boxenhorn DavidB Diana Dkane DMI Dobeln Duende Dylan Ericlien Fly Gcochran Godless Grady Herrick Jake & Kara Jason Collins Jason Malloy Jason�s Jeet Jemima Joel John Emerson John Quiggin JP Kele Kjmtchl Mark Martin Matoko Kusanagi Matt Matt McIntosh Michael Vassar Miko Ml Ole P-ter Piccolino Rosko Schizmatic Scorpius Suman TangoMan The Theresa Thorfinn Thrasymachus Wintz Gonzalo Lira Graham Seibert Grant M. Dahl Greg Grandin Greg Johnson Greg Klein Gregg Stanley Gregoire Chamayou Gregory Conte Gregory Wilpert Guest Admin Gunnar Alfredsson Gustavo Arellano Hank Johnson Hannah Appel Hans-Hermann Hoppe Hans Vogel Harri Honkanen Heiner Rindermann Henry Cockburn Hewitt E. Moore Hina Shamsi Howard Zinn Howe Abbot-Hiss Hua Bin Hubert Collins Hugh Kennedy Hugh McInnish Hugh Moriarty Hugo Dionísio Hunter DeRensis Hunter Wallace Huntley Haverstock Ian Fantom Ian Proud Igor Shafarevich Ira Chernus Ivan Kesić J. Alfred Powell J.B. Clark J.D. Gore J. Ricardo Martins Jacek Szela Jack Antonio Jack Dalton Jack Kerwick Jack Krak Jack Rasmus Jack Ravenwood Jack Sen Jake Bowyer James Bovard James Carroll James Carson Harrington James Chang James Dunphy James Durso James Edwards James Fulford James Gillespie James Hanna James J. O'Meara James K. Galbraith James Karlsson James Lawrence James Petras Jane Lazarre Jane Weir Janice Kortkamp Jared S. Baumeister Jason C. Ditz Jason Cannon Jason Kessler Jay Stanley Jayant Bhandari JayMan Jean Bricmont Jean Marois Jean Ranc Jef Costello Jeff J. Brown Jeffrey Blankfort Jeffrey D. Sachs Jeffrey St. Clair Jen Marlowe Jeremiah Goulka Jeremy Cooper Jesse Mossman JHR Writers Jim Daniel Jim Fetzer Jim Goad Jim Kavanagh Jim Smith JoAnn Wypijewski Joe Dackman Joe Lauria Joel S. Hirschhorn Johannes Wahlstrom John W. Dower John Feffer John Fund John Gorman John Harrison Sims John Helmer John Hill John Huss John J. Mearsheimer John Jackson John Kiriakou John Macdonald John Morgan John Patterson John Leonard John Pilger John Q. Publius John Rand John Reid John Ryan John Scales Avery John Siman John Stauber John T. Kelly John Taylor John Titus John Tremain John V. Walsh John Wear John Williams Jon Else Jon Entine Jonathan Alan King Jonathan Anomaly Jonathan Revusky Jonathan Rooper Jonathan Sawyer Jonathan Schell Jordan Henderson Jordan Steiner Jose Alberto Nino Joseph Kay Joseph Kishore Joseph Sobran Josephus Tiberius Josh Neal Jeshurun Tsarfat Juan Cole Judith Coburn Julian Bradford Julian Macfarlane K.J. Noh Kacey Gunther Karel Van Wolferen Karen Greenberg Karl Haemers Karl Nemmersdorf Karl Thorburn Kees Van Der Pijl Keith Woods Kelley Vlahos Kenn Gividen Kenneth Vinther Kerry Bolton Kersasp D. Shekhdar Kevin Folta Kevin Michael Grace Kevin Rothrock Kevin Sullivan Kevin Zeese Kit Klarenberg Kshama Sawant Larry C. Johnson Laura Gottesdiener Laura Poitras Lawrence Erickson Lawrence G. Proulx Leo Hohmann Leonard C. Goodman Leonard R. Jaffee Liam Cosgrove Lidia Misnik Lilith Powell Linda Preston Lipton Matthews Liv Heide Logical Meme Lorraine Barlett Louis Farrakhan Lydia Brimelow M.G. Miles Mac Deford Maciej Pieczyński Maidhc O Cathail Malcolm Unwell Marco De Wit Marcus Alethia Marcus Apostate Marcus Cicero Marcus Devonshire Margaret Flowers Margot Metroland Marian Evans Mark Allen Mark Bratchikov-Pogrebisskiy Mark Crispin Miller Mark Danner Mark Engler Mark Gullick Mark H. Gaffney Mark Lu Mark Perry Mark Weber Marshall Yeats Martin Jay Martin K. O'Toole Martin Lichtmesz Martin Webster Martin Witkerk Mary Phagan-Kean Matt Cockerill Matt Parrott Mattea Kramer Matthew Caldwell Matthew Ehret Matthew Harwood Matthew Richer Matthew Stevenson Max Blumenthal Max Denken Max Jones Max North Max Parry Max West Maya Schenwar Merlin Miller Metallicman Michael A. Roberts Michael Averko Michael Gould-Wartofsky Michael Hoffman Michael Masterson Michael Quinn Michael Schwartz Michael T. Klare Michelle Malkin Miko Peled Mnar Muhawesh Moon Landing Skeptic Morgan Jones Morris V. De Camp Mr. Anti-Humbug Muhammed Abu Murray Polner N. Joseph Potts Nan Levinson Naomi Oreskes Nate Terani Nathan Cofnas Nathan Doyle Ned Stark Neil Kumar Nelson Rosit Niall McCrae Nicholas R. Jeelvy Nicholas Stix Nick Griffin Nick Kollerstrom Nick Turse Nicolás Palacios Navarro Nils Van Der Vegte Noam Chomsky NOI Research Group Nomi Prins Norman Finkelstein Norman Solomon OldMicrobiologist Oliver Boyd-Barrett Oliver Williams Oscar Grau P.J. Collins Pádraic O'Bannon Patrice Greanville Patrick Armstrong Patrick Cleburne Patrick Cloutier Patrick Lawrence Patrick Martin Patrick McDermott Patrick Whittle Paul Bennett Paul Cochrane Paul De Rooij Paul Edwards Paul Engler Paul Gottfried Paul Larudee Paul Mitchell Paul Nachman Paul Nehlen Paul Souvestre Paul Tripp Pedro De Alvarado Peter Baggins Ph.D. Peter Bradley Peter Brimelow Peter Gemma Peter Lee Peter Van Buren Philip Kraske Philip Weiss Pierre M. Sprey Pierre Simon Povl H. Riis-Knudsen Pratap Chatterjee Publius Decius Mus Qasem Soleimani Rachel Marsden Raches Radhika Desai Rajan Menon Ralph Nader Ralph Raico Ramin Mazaheri Ramziya Zaripova Ramzy Baroud Randy Shields Raul Diego Ray McGovern Rebecca Gordon Rebecca Solnit Reginald De Chantillon Rémi Tremblay Rev. Matthew Littlefield Ricardo Duchesne Richard Cook Richard Falk Richard Foley Richard Galustian Richard Houck Richard Hugus Richard Knight Richard Krushnic Richard McCulloch Richard Parker Richard Silverstein Richard Solomon Rick Shenkman Rick Sterling Rita Rozhkova Robert Baxter Robert Bonomo Robert Debrus Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Robert Fisk Robert Hampton Robert Henderson Robert Inlakesh Robert LaFlamme Robert Lindsay Robert Lipsyte Robert Parry Robert Roth Robert S. Griffin Robert Scheer Robert Stark Robert Stevens Robert Trivers Robert Wallace Robert Weissberg Robin Eastman Abaya Roger Dooghy Rolo Slavskiy Romana Rubeo Romanized Visigoth Ron Paul Ronald N. Neff Rory Fanning RT Staff Ruuben Kaalep Ryan Andrews Ryan Dawson Sabri Öncü Salim Mansur Sam Dickson Sam Francis Sam Husseini Samuel Sequeira Sayed Hasan Scot Olmstead Scott Howard Scott Locklin Scott Ritter Servando Gonzalez Sharmine Narwani Sharmini Peries Sheldon Richman Sidney James Sietze Bosman Sigurd Kristensen Sinclair Jenkins Southfront Editor Spencer Davenport Spencer J. Quinn Stefan Karganovic Steffen A. Woll Stephanie Savell Stephen F. Cohen Stephen J. Rossi Stephen J. Sniegoski Stephen Paul Foster Sterling Anderson Steve Fraser Steve Keen Steve Penfield Steven Farron Steven Yates Subhankar Banerjee Susan Southard Sydney Schanberg Talia Mullin Tanya Golash-Boza Taxi Taylor McClain Taylor Young Ted O'Keefe Ted Rall The Crew The Zman Theodore A. Postol Thierry Meyssan Thomas A. Fudge Thomas Anderson Thomas Hales Thomas Dalton Thomas Ertl Thomas Frank Thomas Hales Thomas Jackson Thomas O. Meehan Thomas Steuben Thomas Zaja Thorsten J. Pattberg Tim Shorrock Tim Weiner Timothy Vorgenss Timur Fomenko Tingba Muhammad Todd E. Pierce Todd Gitlin Todd Miller Tom Engelhardt Tom Mysiewicz Tom Piatak Tom Suarez Tom Sunic Torin Murphy Tracy Rosenberg Travis LeBlanc Trevor Lynch Vernon Thorpe Virginia Dare Vito Klein Vladimir Brovkin Vladimir Putin Vladislav Krasnov Vox Day W. Patrick Lang Walt King Walter E. Block Warren Balogh Washington Watcher Washington Watcher II Wayne Allensworth Wei Ling Chua Wesley Muhammad White Man Faculty Whitney Webb Wilhelm Kriessmann Wilhem Ivorsson Will Jones Will Offensicht William Binney William DeBuys William Hartung William J. Astore Winslow T. Wheeler Wyatt Peterson Ximena Ortiz Yan Shen Yaroslav Podvolotskiy Yvonne Lorenzo Zhores Medvedev
Nothing found
By Topics/Categories Filter?
2020 Election Academia American Media American Military American Pravda Anti-Semitism Benjamin Netanyahu Black Crime Black Lives Matter Blacks Britain Censorship China China/America Conspiracy Theories Covid Culture/Society Donald Trump Economics Foreign Policy Gaza Genocide Hamas History Holocaust Ideology Immigration IQ Iran Israel Israel Lobby Israel/Palestine Jews Joe Biden NATO Nazi Germany Neocons Open Thread Political Correctness Race/Ethnicity Russia Science Ukraine Vladimir Putin World War II 汪精衛 100% Jussie-free Content 1984 2008 Election 2012 Election 2016 Election 2018 Election 2022 Election 2024 Election 23andMe 9/11 Abortion Abraham Lincoln Abu Mehdi Muhandas Achievement Gap ACLU Acting White Adam Schiff Addiction ADL Admin Administration Admixture Adolf Hitler Advertising AfD Affective Empathy Affirmative Action Affordable Family Formation Afghanistan Africa African Americans African Genetics Africans Afrikaner Afrocentricism Age Age Of Malthusian Industrialism Agriculture AI AIPAC Air Force Aircraft Carriers Airlines Airports Al Jazeera Al Qaeda Al-Shifa Alain Soral Alan Clemmons Alan Dershowitz Albania Albert Einstein Albion's Seed Alcoholism Alejandro Mayorkas Alex Jones Alexander Dugin Alexander Vindman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Alexei Navalny Algeria Ali Dawabsheh Alien And Sedition Acts Alison Nathan Alt Right Altruism Amazon Amazon.com America America First American Civil War American Dream American History American Indians American Israel Public Affairs Committee American Jews American Left American Nations American Presidents American Prisons American Renaissance Amerindians Amish Amnesty Amnesty International Amos Hochstein Amy Klobuchar Amygdala Anarchism Ancient DNA Ancient Genetics Ancient Greece Ancient Rome Andrei Nekrasov Andrew Bacevich Andrew Sullivan Andrew Yang Anglo-America Anglo-imperialism Anglo-Saxons Anglos Anglosphere Angola Animal IQ Animal Rights Wackos Animals Ann Coulter Anne Frank Anthony Blinken Anthony Fauci Anthrax Anthropology Anti-Defamation League Anti-Gentilism Anti-Semites Anti-Vaccination Anti-Vaxx Anti-white Animus Antifa Antifeminism Antiracism Antisemitism Antisemitism Awareness Act Antisocial Behavior Antizionism Antony Blinken Apartheid Apartheid Israel Apollo's Ascent Appalachia Apple Arab Christianity Arab Spring Arabs Archaeogenetics Archaeology Archaic DNA Architecture Arctic Arctic Sea Ice Melting Argentina Ariel Sharon Armageddon War Armenia Armenian Genocide Army Arnold Schwarzenegger Arnon Milchan Art Arthur Jensen Arthur Lichte Artificial Intelligence Arts/Letters Aryan Invasion Theory Aryans Aryeh Lightstone Ash Carter Ashkenazi Intelligence Asia Asian Americans Asian Quotas Asians Assassination Assassinations Assimilation Atheism Atlanta AUMF Auschwitz Australia Australian Aboriginals Autism Automation Avril Haines Ayn Rand Azerbaijan Azov Brigade Babes And Hunks Baby Gap Balfour Declaration Balkans Balochistan Baltics Baltimore Riots Banjamin Netanyahu Banking Industry Banking System Banks #BanTheADL Barack Obama Baseball Statistics Bashar Al-Assad Basketball #BasketOfDeplorables BBC BDS BDS Movement Beauty Beethoven Behavior Genetics Behavioral Genetics Bela Belarus Belgium Belgrade Embassy Bombing Ben Cardin Ben Rhodes Ben Shapiro Ben Stiller Benny Gantz Bernard Henri-Levy Bernie Sanders Betsy DeVos Betty McCollum Bezalel Smotrich Bezalel Yoel Smotrich Biden BigPost Bilateral Relations Bilingual Education Bill Clinton Bill De Blasio Bill Gates Bill Kristol Bill Maher Bill Of Rights Billionaires Billy Graham Bioethics Biology Bioweapons Birmingham Birth Rate Bitcoin Black Community Black History Month Black Muslims Black Panthers Black People Black Slavery BlackLivesMatter BlackRock Blake Masters Blank Slatism BLM Blog Blogging Blogosphere Blond Hair Blood Libel Blue Eyes Boasian Anthropology Boeing Boers Bolshevik Revolution Bolshevik Russia Books Boomers Border Wall Boris Johnson Bosnia Boycott Divest And Sanction Brain Drain Brain Scans Brain Size Brain Structure Brazil Bret Stephens Brett McGurk Bretton Woods Brexit Brezhnev Bri Brian Mast BRICs Brighter Brains British Empire British Labour Party British Politics Buddhism Build The Wall Bulldog Bush Business Byzantine Caitlin Johnstone California Californication Camp Of The Saints Canada Cancer Candace Owens Capitalism Carlos Slim Caroline Glick Carroll Quigley Cars Carthaginians Catalonia Catholic Church Catholicism Catholics Cats Caucasus CCP CDC Ceasefire Cecil Rhodes Census Central Asia Central Intelligence Agency Chanda Chisala Chaos And Order Charles De Gaulle Charles Lindbergh Charles Manson Charles Murray Charles Schumer Charlie Hebdo Charlottesville ChatGPT Checheniest Chechen Of Them All Chechens Chechnya Chernobyl Chetty Chicago Chicagoization Chicken Hut Child Abuse Children Chile China Vietnam Chinese Chinese Communist Party Chinese Evolution Chinese IQ Chinese Language Christian Zionists Christianity Christmas Christopher Steele Christopher Wray Chuck Schumer CIA Civil Liberties Civil Rights Civil Rights Movement Civil War Civilization Clannishness Clash Of Civilizations Class Classical Antiquity Classical History Classical Music Clayton County Climate Climate Change Clint Eastwood Clintons Coal Coalition Of The Fringes Coen Brothers Cognitive Elitism Cognitive Science Cold Cold War Colin Kaepernick Colin Powell Colin Woodard College Admission College Football Colonialism Color Revolution Columbia University Columbus Comic Books Communism Computers Confederacy Confederate Flag Congress Conquistador-American Conservatism Conservative Movement Conservatives Conspiracy Theory Constantinople Constitution Constitutional Theory Consumerism Controversial Book Convergence Core Article Corona Corporatism Corruption COTW Counterpunch Country Music Cousin Marriage Cover Story COVID-19 Craig Murray Creationism Crime Crimea Crispr Critical Race Theory Cruise Missiles Crusades Crying Among The Farmland Cryptocurrency Ctrl-Left Cuba Cuban Missile Crisis Cuckery Cuckservatism Cuckservative CUFI Cuisine Cultural Marxism Culture Culture War Curfew Czars Czech Republic DACA Daily Data Dump Dallas Shooting Damnatio Memoriae Dan Bilzarian Danny Danon Daren Acemoglu Darwinism Darya Dugina Data Data Analysis Dave Chappelle David Bazelon David Brog David Friedman David Frum David Irving David Lynch David Petraeus Davide Piffer Davos Death Of The West Debbie Wasserman-Schultz Deborah Lipstadt Debt Debt Jubilee Decadence Deep State DeepSeek Deficits Degeneracy Democracy Democratic Party Demograhics Demographic Transition Demographics Demography Denmark Dennis Ross Department Of Education Department Of Homeland Security Deplatforming Derek Chauvin Detroit Development Dick Cheney Diet Digital Yuan Dinesh D'Souza Discrimination Disease Disinformation Disney Disparate Impact Disraeli Dissent Dissidence Diversity Diversity Before Diversity Diversity Pokemon Points Divorce DNA Dogs Dollar Domestic Surveillance Domestic Terrorism Doomsday Clock Dostoevsky Doug Emhoff Doug Feith Dresden Drone War Drones Drug Laws Drugs Duterte Dysgenic Dystopia E. Michael Jones E. O. Wilson East Asia East Asian Exception East Asians East Turkestan Eastern Europe Ebrahim Raisi Economic Development Economic History Economic Sanctions Economy Ecuador Edmund Burke Edmund Burke Foundation Education Edward Snowden Effective Altruism Effortpost Efraim Zurofff Egor Kholmogorov Egypt El Salvador Election 2016 Election 2018 Election 2020 Election Fraud Elections Electric Cars Eli Rosenbaum Elie Wiesel Eliot Cohen Eliot Engel Elise Stefanik Elites Elizabeth Holmes Elizabeth Warren Elliot Abrams Elliott Abrams Elon Musk Emigration Emmanuel Macron Emmett Till Employment Energy England Entertainment Environment Environmentalism Epidemiology Equality Erdogan Eretz Israel Eric Zemmour Ernest Hemingway Espionage Espionage Act Estonia Ethics Ethics And Morals Ethiopia Ethnic Cleansing Ethnic Nepotism Ethnicity Ethnocentricty EU Eugene Debs Eugenics Eurabia Eurasia Euro Europe European Genetics European Right European Union Europeans Eurozone Evolution Evolutionary Biology Evolutionary Genetics Evolutionary Psychology Existential Risks Eye Color Face Shape Facebook Faces Fake News False Flag Attack Family Fantasy FARA Farmers Fascism Fast Food FBI FDA FDD Federal Reserve Feminism Ferguson Ferguson Shooting Fermi Paradox Fertility Fertility Fertility Rates Film Finance Financial Bailout Financial Bubbles Financial Debt Finland Finn Baiting First Amendment FISA Fitness Flash Mobs Flight From White Floyd Riots 2020 Fluctuarius Argenteus Flynn Effect Food Football For Fun Forecasts Foreign Agents Registration Act Foreign Aid Foreign Policy Fourth Amendment Fox News France Francesca Albanese Frank Salter Frankfurt School Franklin D. Roosevelt Franz Boas Fraud Freakonomics Fred Kagan Free Market Free Speech Free Trade Freedom Of Speech Freedom French Revolution Friedrich Karl Berger Friends Of The Israel Defense Forces Frivolty Frontlash Furkan Dogan Future Futurism G20 Gambling Game Game Of Thrones Gavin McInnes Gavin Newsom Gay Germ Gay Marriage Gays/Lesbians GDP Gen Z Gender Gender And Sexuality Gender Equality Gender Reassignment Gene-Culture Coevolution Genealogy General Intelligence General Motors Generation Z Generational Gap Genes Genetic Diversity Genetic Engineering Genetic Load Genetic Pacification Genetics Genghis Khan Genocide Convention Genomics Gentrification Geography Geopolitics George Floyd George Galloway George Patton George Soros George Tenet George W. Bush Georgia Germans Germany Ghislaine Maxwell Gilad Atzmon Gina Peddy Giorgia Meloni Gladwell Glenn Greenwald Global Warming Globalism Globalization Globo-Homo God Gold Golf Gonzalo Lira Google Government Government Debt Government Overreach Government Spending Government Surveillance Government Waste Goyim Grant Smith Graphs Great Bifurcation Great Depression Great Leap Forward Great Powers Great Replacement #GreatWhiteDefendantPrivilege Greece Greeks Greenland Greg Cochran Gregory Clark Gregory Cochran Greta Thunberg Grooming Group Selection GSS Guardian Guest Guilt Culture Gun Control Guns GWAS Gypsies H.R. McMaster H1-B Visas Haim Saban Hair Color Haiti Hajnal Line Halloween HammerHate Hannibal Procedure Happening Happiness Harvard Harvard University Harvey Weinstein Hassan Nasrallah Hate Crimes Fraud Hoax Hate Hoaxes Hate Speech Hbd Hbd Chick Health Health And Medicine Health Care Healthcare Hegira Height Henry Harpending Henry Kissinger Heredity Heritability Hezbollah High Speed Rail Hillary Clinton Hindu Caste System Hindus Hiroshima Hispanic Crime Hispanics Historical Genetics History Of Science Hitler HIV/AIDS Hoax Holland Hollywood Holocaust Denial Holocaust Deniers Holy Roman Empire Homelessness Homicide Homicide Rate Hominin Homomania Homosexuality Hong Kong Houellebecq Housing Houthis Howard Kohr Huawei Hubbert's Peak Huddled Masses Huey Newton Hug Thug Human Achievement Human Biodiversity Human Evolution Human Evolutionary Genetics Human Evolutionary Genomics Human Genetics Human Genomics Human Rights Human Rights Watch Humor Hungary Hunt For The Great White Defendant Hunter Biden Hunter-Gatherers I.F. Stone I.Q. I.Q. Genomics #IBelieveInHavenMonahan ICC Icj Ideas Identity Ideology And Worldview IDF Idiocracy Igbo Ilan Pappe Ilhan Omar Illegal Immigration Ilyushin IMF Impeachment Imperialism Imran Awan Inbreeding Income India Indian Indian IQ Indians Individualism Indo-Europeans Indonesia Inequality Inflation Intelligence Intelligence Agencies Intelligent Design International International Affairs International Comparisons International Court Of Justice International Criminal Court International Relations Internet Interracial Marriage Interracism Intersectionality Intifada Intra-Racism Intraracism Invade Invite In Hock Invade The World Invite The World Iosef Stalin Iosif Stalin Iq And Wealth Iran Nuclear Agreement Iran Nuclear Program Iranian Nuclear Program Iraq Iraq War Ireland Irish Is Love Colorblind Isaac Herzog ISIS Islam Islamic Jihad Islamic State Islamism Islamophobia Isolationism Israel Bonds Israel Defense Force Israel Defense Forces Israel Separation Wall Israeli Occupation IT Italy Itamar Ben-Gvir It's Okay To Be White Ivanka Ivy League J Street Jacky Rosen Jair Bolsonaro Jake Sullivan Jake Tapper Jamal Khashoggi James Angleton James Clapper James Comey James Forrestal James Jeffrey James Mattis James Watson James Zogby Janet Yellen Janice Yellen Japan Jared Diamond Jared Kushner Jared Taylor Jason Greenblatt JASTA JCPOA JD Vance Jeb Bush Jeffrey Epstein Jeffrey Goldberg Jeffrey Sachs Jen Psaki Jennifer Rubin Jens Stoltenberg Jeremy Corbyn Jerry Seinfeld Jerusalem Jerusalem Post Jesuits Jesus Jesus Christ Jewish Genetics Jewish History Jewish Intellectuals Jewish Power Jewish Power Party Jewish Supremacism JFK Assassination JFK Jr. Jihadis Jill Stein Jimmy Carter Jingoism JINSA Joe Lieberman Joe Rogan John Bolton John Brennan John Derbyshire John F. Kennedy John Hagee John Kirby John Kiriakou John McCain John McLaughlin John Mearsheimer Joker Jonathan Freedland Jonathan Greenblatt Jonathan Pollard Jordan Peterson Joseph McCarthy Josh Gottheimer Josh Paul Journalism Judaism Judea Judge George Daniels Judicial System Julian Assange Jussie Smollett Justice Justin Trudeau Kaboom Kahanists Kaiser Wilhelm Kamala Harris Kamala On Her Knees Kanye West Karabakh War 2020 Karen Kwiatkowski Karine Jean-Pierre Kash Patel Kashmir Kata'ib Hezbollah Kay Bailey Hutchison Kazakhstan Keir Starmer Kenneth Marcus Kevin MacDonald Kevin McCarthy Kevin Williamson Khazars Kids Kim Jong Un Kinship Kkk KKKrazy Glue Of The Coalition Of The Fringes Knesset Kompromat Korea Korean War Kosovo Kris Kobach Kristi Noem Ku Klux Klan Kubrick Kurds Kushner Foundation Kyle Rittenhouse Kyrie Irving Language Laos Larry C. Johnson Late Obama Age Collapse Latin America Latinos Laura Loomer Law Lawfare LDNR Lead Poisoning Leahy Amendments Leahy Law Lebanon Lee Kuan Yew Leftism Lenin Leo Frank Leo Strauss Let's Talk About My Hair LGBT LGBTI Liberal Opposition Liberal Whites Liberalism Liberals Libertarianism Libya Lindsey Graham Linguistics Literacy Literature Lithuania Litvinenko Living Standards Liz Cheney Liz Truss Lloyd Austin Localism long-range-missile-defense Longevity Looting Lord Of The Rings Lorde Los Angeles Loudoun County Louis Farrakhan Love And Marriage Low-fat Lukashenko Lula Lyndon B Johnson Lyndon Johnson Madeleine Albright Mafia MAGA Magnitsky Act Malaysia Malaysian Airlines MH17 Manosphere Manufacturing Mao Zedong Map Marco Rubio Maria Butina Marijuana Marine Le Pen Marjorie Taylor Greene Mark Milley Mark Steyn Mark Warner Marriage Martin Luther King Martin Scorsese Marvel Marx Marxism Masculinity Mass Shootings Mate Choice Mathematics Matt Gaetz Max Boot Max Weber Maxine Waters Mayans McCain McCain/POW McDonald's Meat Media Media Bias Medicine Medieval Christianity Medieval Russia Mediterranean Diet Medvedev Megan McCain Meghan Markle Mein Obama MEK Mel Gibson Men With Gold Chains Meng Wanzhou Mental Health Mental Illness Mental Traits Meritocracy Merkel Merkel Youth Merkel's Boner Merrick Garland Mexico MH 17 MI-6 Michael Bloomberg Michael Collins PIper Michael Flynn Michael Hudson Michael Jackson Michael Lind Michael McFaul Michael Moore Michael Morell Michael Pompeo Michelle Goldberg Michelle Ma Belle Michelle Obama Microaggressions Middle Ages Middle East Migration Mike Huckabee Mike Johnson Mike Pence Mike Pompeo Mike Signer Mike Waltz Mikhael Gorbachev Miles Mathis Militarized Police Military Military Analysis Military Budget Military History Military Spending Military Technology Millennials Milner Group Minimum Wage Minneapolis Minorities Miriam Adelson Miscegenation Miscellaneous Misdreavus Mishima Missile Defense Mitch McConnell Mitt Romney Mixed-Race MK-Ultra Mohammed Bin Salman Monarchy Mondoweiss Money Mongolia Mongols Monkeypox Monogamy Moon Landing Hoax Moon Landings Moore's Law Morality Mormonism Mormons Mortality Mortgage Moscow Mossad Movies Muhammad Multiculturalism Music Muslim Ban Muslims Mussolini NAEP Naftali Bennett Nakba NAMs Nancy Pelos Nancy Pelosi Narendra Modi NASA Nation Of Hate Nation Of Islam National Assessment Of Educational Progress National Debt National Endowment For Democracy National Review National Security Strategy National Socialism National Wealth Nationalism Native Americans Natural Gas Nature Vs. Nurture Navalny Affair Navy Standards Nazis Nazism Neandertals Neanderthals Near Abroad Negrolatry Nehru Neo-Nazis Neoconservatism Neoconservatives Neoliberalism Neolibs Neolithic Neoreaction Netherlands Never Again Education Act New Cold War New Dark Age New Horizon Foundation New Orleans New Silk Road New Tes New World Order New York New York City New York Times New Zealand New Zealand Shooting NFL Nicholas II Nicholas Wade Nick Eberstadt Nick Fuentes Nicolas Maduro Niger Nigeria Nike Nikki Haley NIMBY Nina Jankowicz No Fly Zone Noam Chomsky Nobel Prize Nord Stream Nord Stream Pipelines Nordics Norman Braman Norman Finkelstein North Africa North Korea Northern Ireland Northwest Europe Norway Novorossiya NSA NSO Group Nuclear Power Nuclear Proliferation Nuclear War Nuclear Weapons Nuremberg Nutrition NYPD Obama Obama Presidency Obamacare Obesity Obituary Obscured American Occam's Razor Occupy Wall Street October Surprise Oedipus Complex OFAC Oil Oil Industry Olav Scholz Old Testament Oliver Stone Olympics Open Borders OpenThread Opinion Poll Opioids Orban Organized Crime Orlando Shooting Orthodoxy Orwell Osama Bin Laden OTFI Ottoman Empire Our Soldiers Speak Out Of Africa Model Paganism Pakistan Pakistani Paleoanthropology Palestine Palestinians Palin Pam Bondi Panhandling Papacy Paper Review Parasite Burden Parenting Parenting Paris Attacks Partly Inbred Extended Family Pat Buchanan Pathogens Patriot Act Patriotism Paul Findley Paul Ryan Paul Singer Paul Wolfowitz Pavel Durov Pavel Grudinin Paypal Peak Oil Pearl Harbor Pedophilia Pentagon Personal Genomics Personality Pete Buttgieg Pete Hegseth Peter Frost Peter Thiel Peter Turchin Petro Poroshenko Pew Phil Rushton Philadelphia Philippines Philosophy Phoenicians Phyllis Randall Physiognomy Piers Morgan Pigmentation Pigs Piracy PISA Pizzagate POC Ascendancy Podcast Poland Police Police State Polio Political Correctness Makes You Stupid Political Dissolution Political Economy Politicians Politics Polling Pollution Polygamy Polygyny Pope Francis Population Population Genetics Population Growth Population Replacement Populism Porn Pornography Portland Portugal Portuguese Post-Apocalypse Poverty Power Pramila Jayapal PRC Prediction Prescription Drugs President Joe Biden Presidential Race '08 Presidential Race '12 Presidential Race '16 Presidential Race '20 Prince Andrew Prince Harry Princeton University Priti Patel Privacy Privatization Progressives Propaganda Prostitution protest Protestantism Protocols Of The Elders Of Zion Proud Boys Psychology Psychometrics Psychopathy Public Health Public Schools Puerto Rico Puritans Putin Putin Derangement Syndrome QAnon Qassem Soleimani Qatar Quantitative Genetics Quebec Quiet Skies Quincy Institute R2P Race Race And Crime Race And Genomics Race And Iq Race And Religion Race/Crime Race Denialism Race/IQ Race Riots Rachel Corrie Racial Purism Racial Reality Racialism Racism Rafah Raj Shah Rand Paul Randy Fine Rap Music Rape Rashida Tlaib Rationality Ray McGovern Raymond Chandler Razib Khan Real Estate RealWorld Recep Tayyip Erdogan Red Sea Refugee Crisis #refugeeswelcome Religion Religion And Philosophy Rentier Reparations Reprint Republican Party Republicans Review Revisionism Rex Tillerson RFK Assassination Ricci Richard Dawkins Richard Goldberg Richard Grenell Richard Haas Richard Haass Richard Lewontin Richard Lynn Richard Nixon Rightwing Cinema Riots R/k Theory RMAX Robert A. Heinlein Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Robert Ford Robert Kagan Robert Kraft Robert Maxwell Robert McNamara Robert Mueller Robert O'Brien Robert Reich Robots Rock Music Roe Vs. Wade Roger Waters Rolling Stone Roman Empire Romania Romanticism Rome Ron DeSantis Ron Paul Ron Unz Ronald Reagan Rotherham Rothschilds RT International Rudy Giuliani Rush Limbaugh Russiagate Russian Demography Russian Elections 2018 Russian History Russian Media Russian Military Russian Nationalism Russian Occupation Government Russian Orthodox Church Russian Reaction Russians Russophobes Russophobia Russotriumph Ruth Bader Ginsburg Rwanda Sabrina Rubin Erdely Sacha Baron Cohen Sacklers Sailer Strategy Sailer's First Law Of Female Journalism Saint Peter Tear Down This Gate! Saint-Petersburg Salman Rushie Salt Sam Altman Sam Bankman-Fried Sam Francis Samantha Power Samson Option San Bernadino Massacre Sandra Beleza Sandy Hook Sapir-Whorf SAT Satanic Age Satanism Saudi Arabia Scandal Science Denialism Science Fiction Scooter Libby Scotland Scott Ritter Scrabble Sean Hannity Seattle Secession Self Determination Self Indulgence Semites Serbia Sergei Lavrov Sergei Skripal Sergey Glazyev Seth Rich Sex Sex Differences Sexism Sexual Harassment Sexual Selection Sexuality Seymour Hersh Shai Masot Shakespeare Shame Culture Shanghai Cooperation Organisation Sheldon Adelson Shias And Sunnis Shimon Arad Shireen Abu Akleh Shmuley Boteach Shoah Shorts And Funnies Shoshana Bryen Shulamit Aloni Shurat HaDin Sigal Mandelker Sigar Pearl Mandelker Sigmund Freud Silicon Valley Singapore Single Men Single Women Sinotriumph Six Day War Sixties SJWs Skin Color Slavery Slavery Reparations Slavoj Zizek Slavs Smart Fraction Social Justice Warriors Social Media Social Science Socialism Society Sociobiology Sociology Sodium Solzhenitsyn Somalia Sotomayor South Africa South Asia South China Sea South Korea Southeast Asia Soviet History Soviet Union Sovok Space Space Exploration Space Program Spain Spanish Spanish River High School SPLC Sport Sports Srebrenica St Petersburg International Economic Forum Stabby Somali Staffan Stage Stalinism Standardized Tests Star Trek Star Wars Starbucks Starvation Comparisons State Department Statistics Statue Of Liberty Steny Hoyer Stephen Cohen Stephen Harper Stephen Jay Gould Stereotypes Steroids Steve Bannon Steve Sailer Steve Witkoff Steven Pinker Strait Of Hormuz Strategic Ambiguity Stuart Levey Stuart Seldowitz Student Debt Stuff White People Like Sub-Saharan Africa Sub-Saharan Africans Subhas Chandra Bose Subprime Mortgage Crisis Suburb Suella Braverman Sugar Suicide Superintelligence Supreme Court Surveillance Susan Glasser Svidomy Sweden Switzerland Symington Amendment Syria Syrian Civil War Ta-Nehisi Coates Taiwan Take Action Taliban Talmud Tariff Tatars Taxation Taxes Tea Party Technical Considerations Technology Ted Cruz Telegram Television Terrorism Terrorists Terry McAuliffe Tesla Testing Testosterone Tests Texas THAAD Thailand The 10/7 Project The AK The American Conservative The Bell Curve The Bible The Black Autumn The Cathedral The Confederacy The Constitution The Eight Banditos The Family The Free World The Great Awokening The Left The Middle East The New York Times The South The States The Zeroth Amendment To The Constitution Theranos Theresa May Third World Thomas Jefferson Thomas Moorer Thought Crimes Tiananmen Massacre Tibet Tiger Mom TikTok TIMSS Tom Cotton Tom Massie Tom Wolfe Tony Blair Tony Blinken Tony Kleinfeld Too Many White People Torture Trade Trains Trans Fat Trans Fats Transgender Transgenderism Transhumanism Translation Translations Transportation Travel Trayvon Martin Trolling True Redneck Stereotypes Trump Trump Derangement Syndrome Trust Tsarist Russia Tucker Carlson Tulsa Tulsi Gabbard Turkey Turks TWA 800 Twins Twitter Ucla UFOs UK Ukrainian Crisis UN Security Council Unbearable Whiteness Unemployment Unions United Kingdom United Nations United Nations General Assembly United Nations Security Council United States Universal Basic Income UNRWA Urbanization Ursula Von Der Leyen Uruguay US Blacks US Capitol Storming 2021 US Civil War II US Constitution US Elections 2016 US Elections 2020 US Regionalism USA USAID USS Liberty USSR Uyghurs Uzbekistan Vaccination Vaccines Valdimir Putin Valerie Plame Vdare Venezuela Vibrancy Victoria Nuland Victorian England Video Video Games Vietnam Vietnam War Vietnamese Vikings Viktor Orban Viktor Yanukovych Violence Vioxx Virginia Virginia Israel Advisory Board Vitamin D Vivek Ramaswamy Vladimir Zelensky Volodymur Zelenskyy Volodymyr Zelensky Vote Fraud Voter Fraud Voting Rights Voting Rights Act Vulcan Society Wall Street Walmart Wang Ching Wei Wang Jingwei War War Crimes War Guilt War In Donbass War On Christmas War On Terror War Powers War Powers Act Warhammer Washington DC WASPs Watergate Wealth Wealth Inequality Wealthy Web Traffic Weight WEIRDO Welfare Wendy Sherman West Bank Western Decline Western European Marriage Pattern Western Hypocrisy Western Media Western Religion Western Revival Westerns White America White Americans White Death White Flight White Guilt White Helmets White Liberals White Man's Burden White Nakba White Nationalism White Nationalists White People White Privilege White Slavery White Supremacy White Teachers Whiterpeople Whites Who Whom Whoopi Goldberg Wikileaks Wikipedia Wildfires William Browder William F. Buckley William Kristol William Latson William McGonagle William McRaven WINEP Winston Churchill Woke Capital Women Woodrow Wilson Workers Working Class World Bank World Economic Forum World Health Organization World Population World Values Survey World War G World War H World War Hair World War I World War III World War R World War T World War Weed WTF WVS WWII Xi Jinping Xinjiang Yahya Sinwar Yair Lapid Yemen Yevgeny Prigozhin Yoav Gallant Yogi Berra's Restaurant Yoram Hazony YouTube Yugoslavia Yuval Noah Harari Zbigniew Brzezinski Zimbabwe Zionism Zionists Zvika Fogel
Nothing found
All Commenters •ï¿½My
Comments
•ï¿½Followed
Commenters
�⇅All / On "UFOs"
    Decades ago I became fully convinced that UFOs were real. I even accepted that past visits to our planet of such space aliens had been the basis for many of the religious myths of different societies all around the world, just as Erich von Däniken had argued in his massive 1971 bestseller Chariots of the...
  • Dear Ron Unz: Thanks for being so evidence-based and so scientific. I have lost faith in the UFO community and even in Richard Dolan who is one of the most sensible, rational writers and activists in the UFO and disclosure community. But i don’t know, since i am very evidence-based person, i just don’t believe in many of the arguments of the UFO community activists. Richard Dolan talks about underwater bases in this video. But i am kind of skeptical about the existence of extraterrestrial bases in the ocean


    Video Link

  • OMG, Skully was so hot. She actually looked great in the reboot as well. These FBI people have spent decades setting the stage for a fake alien invasion. It’s not even going to work if they try it. They would be better to just do another virus hoax. The FBI’s alien hoax department is a...
  • @Beyond the pale and fedup
    @Dr. Rock

    Ever see the TV series Dark Skies, late 90s, alien invasion , small squid aliens living inside hosts.
    Quite an entertaining series.

    Replies: @Dr. Rock

    Yeah, that was pretty good stuff back then, but I haven’t gone back to check it out since. Perhaps I should, just to see how it looks now.

  • I’m so sick of the supid alien hoax. By that logic the US should just declare war on Russia and China now since they have secret flying saucers that can shoot down every nuclear missile, unless they have them too but just haven’t bothered using them in Ukraine or whatever lmao. And ultimately I’ve learned government is just way too bureaucratic to keep such a high-level secret. Reality is just kinda boring unfortunately.

  • Anglin’s instinct is right-on here, but he isn’t aware of the details.

    Harry Reid, Senate majority leader, was friends with a rich whack-a-doodle in Vegas who was big in to aliens. Reid then earmarked funding in the Pentagon to investigate UFOs. Staffers were duly sourced from the whack-a-doodle community. In due course, Pentagon staffers (the same whack-a-doodles) leaked their findings to worldwide interest.

    Tucker is a sucker for Ayyy Lmao aliens and for marriage “Just go for it, men!”

    But he gets perfect marks overall. Who else will link Dallas and Dimona – as he did just last week on his YT channel.
    https://www.youtube.com/shorts/HyRh0VX0r0M

  • Looger says:

    Every X-Files episode, ACCIDENTALLY shows us “the way” to de-nut and whittle the FBI down to nothing.

    Each time a murder victim / creature evidence / inbred hillbilly family incident brings in the FBI, the first thing they do is MEET WITH THE SHERIFF.

    The sheriff is the ultimate authority in every county in the USA and each sheriff department is BOUGHT BY THE FEDS for sometimes as little as $150,000 per year, or basically a couple of squad cars.

    That’s how broke the sheriffs in shitsville USA are and they are exploited by fed cash.

    Each and every voting populace in the USA could simply vote only for sheriffs who refuse to sell that authority to the feds.

    If this were an important enough issue, the FBI would be basically without grounds and authority to send its agents anywhere. They would in many cases be restricted to cooperating with the state police, the city police, etc. instead of walzing around like in the movies “we’re the FBI and we’re taking over” (die hard etc.).

    It’d be great if the FBI were destroyed by the federal government, however plenty of pressure could be exerted from below as well.

  • @AxeGryndr
    @Anonymous

    They were trying to arm the IRS if I remember correctly.

    Replies: @Colin Wright

    ‘They were trying to arm the IRS if I remember correctly.’

    It’s my impression that the IRS has had armed agents for at least forty years — and I would assume longer.

  • USAID more like WETAKE

  • @EliteCommInc.
    @Anonymous

    Actually, HG wells, got that spot on. Cold and flu virus' mutate and adapt. And humans have certain peoples or populations that not are effected by certain virus's while others are not.

    Good story.

    Replies: @don't care

    No way. Creatures that have been doing space travel and technology for literally a million years never learned germs exist and they should wear suits or at least install some of those super advanced alien air filters in their tripods? Implausible to say the least, and frankly dumb as shit. Lazy writing to salvage a story which in reality would have meant human extinction.

  • @AxeGryndr
    @Johnny LeBlanc

    Oh.....so these aren't really aliens?
    https://youtu.be/nxa09aZ6ZN8

    Replies: @Johnny LeBlanc

    Well, two of them are from New Jersey, and the others are from Georgia. I’d grant the former are probably a little weird, but aliens? I doubt it.

  • Jewish romance has a special charm and innocence all its own.

  • @Johnny LeBlanc
    The UFO and alien hysteria is one of the biggest scams in the history of the country, and people just lap it up.

    Replies: @Kba56, @AxeGryndr

    Oh…..so these aren’t really aliens?

    Video Link

    •ï¿½Replies: @Johnny LeBlanc
    @AxeGryndr

    Well, two of them are from New Jersey, and the others are from Georgia. I'd grant the former are probably a little weird, but aliens? I doubt it.
  • @Dr. Rock

    The only person in America who believes it is Tucker Carlson, and he probably only believes it because he subconsciously feels that by not believing it he would be betraying Dana and Fox.
    �
    That one gave me a hearty laugh!

    Replies: @Beyond the pale and fedup

    Ever see the TV series Dark Skies, late 90s, alien invasion , small squid aliens living inside hosts.
    Quite an entertaining series.

    •ï¿½Replies: @Dr. Rock
    @Beyond the pale and fedup

    Yeah, that was pretty good stuff back then, but I haven't gone back to check it out since. Perhaps I should, just to see how it looks now.
  • @Rich
    There is nothing in the Constitution that allows for a national police force. The FBI should be abolished.

    Replies: @AxeGryndr

    Amen to that. They should abolish all the agencies with national power(maybe keep the Park Police?) before those synchronized dancing robots I’ve been seeing lately get handed a gun and an agenda.

  • @Anonymous

    Frankly, if Trump was serious about fixing these problems, he would just abolish the FBI. The only valid federal law enforcement agency is the US Marshalls, which are basically powerless and irrelevant at this point.
    �
    It’s U.S. Marshals with one ‘l’.

    I agree about shutting down the FBI. In fact, I think there should only be two federal law enforcement agencies. The U.S. Marshals Service, which was established in 1789, and the U.S. Secret Service, which was established in 1865 for presidential security. All federal law enforcement agencies* created post-19th century need to be disbanded.

    And the U.S. Marshals are not powerless and irrelevant. Quite the opposite. They just keep a low profile and don’t seek attention even when Hollywood tries to on their behalf.

    *Btw, the U.S. government has armed special agents in the Department of Transportation, the Food and Drug Administration, the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, et al.

    Replies: @Antiwar7, @AxeGryndr

    They were trying to arm the IRS if I remember correctly.

    •ï¿½Replies: @Colin Wright
    @AxeGryndr


    'They were trying to arm the IRS if I remember correctly.'
    �
    It's my impression that the IRS has had armed agents for at least forty years -- and I would assume longer.
  • The only person in America who believes it is Tucker Carlson, and he probably only believes it because he subconsciously feels that by not believing it he would be betraying Dana and Fox.

    That one gave me a hearty laugh!

    •ï¿½Replies: @Beyond the pale and fedup
    @Dr. Rock

    Ever see the TV series Dark Skies, late 90s, alien invasion , small squid aliens living inside hosts.
    Quite an entertaining series.

    Replies: @Dr. Rock
  • @Anonymous

    Frankly, if Trump was serious about fixing these problems, he would just abolish the FBI. The only valid federal law enforcement agency is the US Marshalls, which are basically powerless and irrelevant at this point.
    �
    It’s U.S. Marshals with one ‘l’.

    I agree about shutting down the FBI. In fact, I think there should only be two federal law enforcement agencies. The U.S. Marshals Service, which was established in 1789, and the U.S. Secret Service, which was established in 1865 for presidential security. All federal law enforcement agencies* created post-19th century need to be disbanded.

    And the U.S. Marshals are not powerless and irrelevant. Quite the opposite. They just keep a low profile and don’t seek attention even when Hollywood tries to on their behalf.

    *Btw, the U.S. government has armed special agents in the Department of Transportation, the Food and Drug Administration, the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, et al.

    Replies: @Antiwar7, @AxeGryndr

    No, the Secret was not set up to protect the US president. It was set up to stop counterfeiting after the Civil War:

    It was commissioned in Washington, D.C. as the “Secret Service Division” of the Department of the Treasury with the mission of suppressing counterfeiting.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Secret_Service#History

  • “They used to be awesome with great mustaches and hats.”

    – Forsooth, awesome picture.

    Is that Mini-Nietzsche sitting in the middle there?

  • @Anonymous
    If only actual aliens would invade and kill all the humans, like the 2005 war of the worlds flick but without some retarded plot twist about the aliens didn't know microbes exist so they get sick and die. That would be awesome.

    Replies: @EliteCommInc.

    Actually, HG wells, got that spot on. Cold and flu virus’ mutate and adapt. And humans have certain peoples or populations that not are effected by certain virus’s while others are not.

    Good story.

    •ï¿½Replies: @don't care
    @EliteCommInc.

    No way. Creatures that have been doing space travel and technology for literally a million years never learned germs exist and they should wear suits or at least install some of those super advanced alien air filters in their tripods? Implausible to say the least, and frankly dumb as shit. Lazy writing to salvage a story which in reality would have meant human extinction.
  • @Armageddon
    Yeah, I agree. They couldn't pull it off even if they tried. Just as they couldn't pull off a NATO war against Russia, which they have been losing since they started trying. Just as they couldn't pull off multiple attempts at insurrection and insurgency in Hong Kong and mainland China since the 1989 incident. Just as they haven't been able to obliterate Iran since the 1979 Revolution and 1980-1988 imposed war and countless US/NATO/"Israel"-sponsored acts of terrorism against the Iranian people.

    "Aliens" are definitely a hoax (and are about as credible as the F-35.) So is the idea of the US even being able to wage a war against Iran, Russia, or China, let alone the ability to even win one or all of those hypothetical wars. Its settler-colony military garrison masquerading as a nation-state calling itself "Israel" couldn't even exterminate Hamas and the entire Palestinian population of Gaza after 15 months of waging an overtly genocidal war.

    So, the idea of the US and "Israel" waging a war and/or being able to win one is also a hoax. No one likes hoaxes. Stop shilling them.

    Replies: @george 1

    You mean to tell me it’s all fake and gay?

    Damn. I hate it when that happens.

  • @Johnny LeBlanc
    The UFO and alien hysteria is one of the biggest scams in the history of the country, and people just lap it up.

    Replies: @Kba56, @AxeGryndr

    So now they’re changing the narrative it’s ‘interdimensional beings’ because there’s no proof of Aliens
    Cell phones killed the hoax – now’s it’s something else

  • Yeah, I agree. They couldn’t pull it off even if they tried. Just as they couldn’t pull off a NATO war against Russia, which they have been losing since they started trying. Just as they couldn’t pull off multiple attempts at insurrection and insurgency in Hong Kong and mainland China since the 1989 incident. Just as they haven’t been able to obliterate Iran since the 1979 Revolution and 1980-1988 imposed war and countless US/NATO/”Israel”-sponsored acts of terrorism against the Iranian people.

    “Aliens” are definitely a hoax (and are about as credible as the F-35.) So is the idea of the US even being able to wage a war against Iran, Russia, or China, let alone the ability to even win one or all of those hypothetical wars. Its settler-colony military garrison masquerading as a nation-state calling itself “Israel” couldn’t even exterminate Hamas and the entire Palestinian population of Gaza after 15 months of waging an overtly genocidal war.

    So, the idea of the US and “Israel” waging a war and/or being able to win one is also a hoax. No one likes hoaxes. Stop shilling them.

    •ï¿½Replies: @george 1
    @Armageddon

    You mean to tell me it's all fake and gay?

    Damn. I hate it when that happens.
  • The UFO and alien hysteria is one of the biggest scams in the history of the country, and people just lap it up.

    •ï¿½Agree: Beyond the pale and fedup
    •ï¿½Replies: @Kba56
    @Johnny LeBlanc

    So now they’re changing the narrative it’s ‘interdimensional beings’ because there’s no proof of Aliens
    Cell phones killed the hoax - now’s it’s something else
    , @AxeGryndr
    @Johnny LeBlanc

    Oh.....so these aren't really aliens?
    https://youtu.be/nxa09aZ6ZN8

    Replies: @Johnny LeBlanc
  • I used to run into an old guy from the first Bush Admin when I would go to visit my grandfather. Both he and my grandfather were knocking 100 years and still pretty sharp. They’re both gone now but I remember in 2017 the old guy telling me the government was doomed because it no longer had any talent just shills. All the talent was now making money and didn’t care one way or the other. I am starting to see where he was coming from.

  • So, they wore those huge mustaches because out on the trail, the sun would burn blisters into their bottom lips.

  • There is nothing in the Constitution that allows for a national police force. The FBI should be abolished.

    •ï¿½Replies: @AxeGryndr
    @Rich

    Amen to that. They should abolish all the agencies with national power(maybe keep the Park Police?) before those synchronized dancing robots I've been seeing lately get handed a gun and an agenda.
  • Anonymous[677] •ï¿½Disclaimer says:

    Frankly, if Trump was serious about fixing these problems, he would just abolish the FBI. The only valid federal law enforcement agency is the US Marshalls, which are basically powerless and irrelevant at this point.

    It’s U.S. Marshals with one ‘l’.

    I agree about shutting down the FBI. In fact, I think there should only be two federal law enforcement agencies. The U.S. Marshals Service, which was established in 1789, and the U.S. Secret Service, which was established in 1865 for presidential security. All federal law enforcement agencies* created post-19th century need to be disbanded.

    And the U.S. Marshals are not powerless and irrelevant. Quite the opposite. They just keep a low profile and don’t seek attention even when Hollywood tries to on their behalf.

    *Btw, the U.S. government has armed special agents in the Department of Transportation, the Food and Drug Administration, the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, et al.

    •ï¿½Thanks: Emslander
    •ï¿½Replies: @Antiwar7
    @Anonymous

    No, the Secret was not set up to protect the US president. It was set up to stop counterfeiting after the Civil War:

    It was commissioned in Washington, D.C. as the "Secret Service Division" of the Department of the Treasury with the mission of suppressing counterfeiting.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Secret_Service#History
    , @AxeGryndr
    @Anonymous

    They were trying to arm the IRS if I remember correctly.

    Replies: @Colin Wright
  • Anonymous[350] •ï¿½Disclaimer says:

    If only actual aliens would invade and kill all the humans, like the 2005 war of the worlds flick but without some retarded plot twist about the aliens didn’t know microbes exist so they get sick and die. That would be awesome.

    •ï¿½Replies: @EliteCommInc.
    @Anonymous

    Actually, HG wells, got that spot on. Cold and flu virus' mutate and adapt. And humans have certain peoples or populations that not are effected by certain virus's while others are not.

    Good story.

    Replies: @don't care
  • On Tuesday, during the inaugural press briefing, White House Press Secretary, Karoline Leavitt, announced that the “drones†witnessed by many over the New Jersey skies and other places on the East Coast were just hobbyists and drone enthusiasts flying their drones: “After research and study, the drones that were flying over New Jersey in large...
  • Allright… thank you for your elaborate answer!

    I looked at some of the “lights in the sky†video, including of the orbs. She seems like a sincere, open-minded and professional individual.

    I am convinced that there is a spiritual dimension to life, but it would not be my first guess here. Before that, I’d guess the orbs were the product of some undisclosed technology (plasma created by crossed/interfering beams of some kind?). And the big drones – well… that the government says that they don’t know what they are; that is not something that convinces me either way. I don’t think the Belleville mayor would be in on the loop, though.

    Curious, either way. Thanks again!

  • @Thomas Faber
    @Ambrose Kane

    Does she mention holograms?

    A lot of the stuff could possibly be explained by that. Even publicly, the technology is very advanced, and can be used to create lifelike 3-dimensional projections. You can even buy simple consumer-grade projectors for less than 100 USD.

    Check this out, for example (30 seconds)

    https://youtube.com/shorts/Iit19XMYUus?si=0agbDRnvlKgXp-VD

    Replies: @Thomas Faber, @Ambrose Kane

    No, the ‘drones’ seen throughout the East Coast are not holograms, CGI or anything like that. There is no person or group traveling about the U.S., Britain, Germany, and other nations that is projecting drone holograms onto the skies. What people are mostly seeing are genuine objects or crafts, although there are a lot of ‘orbs’ (blazing energy of lights or plasma) associated with them. The ‘Lights in the Sky’ documentary mostly deals with the ‘orbs,’ how they shape-shift, and travel about.

    No one, including the federal government, is arguing that the many ‘drones’ people are witnessing are anything other than real flying objects. Yes, they appear to shift their shape at times, and they do things that most conventional drones are unable to do, but I don’t know of anyone who is seriously arguing that the drones are nothing more than holograms being projected onto the night skies. There is nothing in all of this to suggest some kind of aeronautical theatre that’s using lights, various colors, and imagery to project something that’s not really there. The federal government, the FAA, the Air Force, including other governments impacted by the drone incursions all believe it’s real.

    Here’s Michael Melham, the mayor of Belleville in New Jersey, complaining that the drones are still flying around in the skies above his city, and he’s not happy about it.

    https://youtube.com/shorts/UU9AEJWAbcI?si=Nz1OAAUQ1cvSQQcp

  • @Thomas Faber
    @Ambrose Kane

    Does she mention holograms?

    A lot of the stuff could possibly be explained by that. Even publicly, the technology is very advanced, and can be used to create lifelike 3-dimensional projections. You can even buy simple consumer-grade projectors for less than 100 USD.

    Check this out, for example (30 seconds)

    https://youtube.com/shorts/Iit19XMYUus?si=0agbDRnvlKgXp-VD

    Replies: @Thomas Faber, @Ambrose Kane

    On second thought, that particular video might be CGI. But try searching youtube for “holographic projection†or “hologramsâ€. Some of it is quite impressive.

    Also see these (although they may not technically be holograms)

    https://youtube.com/shorts/zQsALt38y4A?si=A1IPlNF1bQ5dApV9

    https://youtube.com/shorts/s_FBjmR9JsQ?si=jM4lciBBo41z8PZa

  • Decades ago I became fully convinced that UFOs were real. I even accepted that past visits to our planet of such space aliens had been the basis for many of the religious myths of different societies all around the world, just as Erich von Däniken had argued in his massive 1971 bestseller Chariots of the...
  • Anonymous[237] •ï¿½Disclaimer says:
    @acementhead
    @orchardist

    There is no naturally occurring element 115(Muscovium) so it could not have been discovered in the "tunnels of area 12", or anywhere else.

    "If Element 115 was discovered by 1965 ..."
    �
    Element 115 is not, and never will be, useful for anything(except creating employment for physicists).

    Replies: @Anonymous

    Lazar was a low level repair tech or something similar at the area. He got wind of test times, probably not by being told, but by deducing they usually occur at regular times for certain scheduling reasons. He brought chicks there to look cool and get laid. This made him subject to forever in prison because of his NDA, or peddle disinfo to stay out of prison. There were articles in the paper about this time speculating about element 115. Lazar or some AFOSI CoIntel wanker, or someone similar, used the whole e115 BS as a PSYOP to protect the actual technology. One wonders if some of these posts are stooge AI? If building a craft requires an element that doesn’t exist, why bother trying? Versus trying with mundane Earth technology which would do the job just fine. People are quite gullible.

  • On Tuesday, during the inaugural press briefing, White House Press Secretary, Karoline Leavitt, announced that the “drones†witnessed by many over the New Jersey skies and other places on the East Coast were just hobbyists and drone enthusiasts flying their drones: “After research and study, the drones that were flying over New Jersey in large...
  • @Ambrose Kane
    LOL, yes, I would agree. I had only recently come across this fascinating documentary on YouTube that carefully and rationally investigates these 'drones.' It's titled 'Lights in the Sky' by a former U.S. Army broadcast journalist and combat-veteran, Krista Alexander. She reaches very similar conclusions as myself but explains things much better than I could as she takes a deep dive into several video recordings of these strange lights.

    https://youtu.be/FJtcl25G0ic?si=J1hy_SY_K1ATrfpQ

    Replies: @Thomas Faber

    Does she mention holograms?

    A lot of the stuff could possibly be explained by that. Even publicly, the technology is very advanced, and can be used to create lifelike 3-dimensional projections. You can even buy simple consumer-grade projectors for less than 100 USD.

    Check this out, for example (30 seconds)

    https://youtube.com/shorts/Iit19XMYUus?si=0agbDRnvlKgXp-VD

    •ï¿½Replies: @Thomas Faber
    @Thomas Faber

    On second thought, that particular video might be CGI. But try searching youtube for “holographic projection†or “hologramsâ€. Some of it is quite impressive.

    Also see these (although they may not technically be holograms)

    https://youtube.com/shorts/zQsALt38y4A?si=A1IPlNF1bQ5dApV9

    https://youtube.com/shorts/s_FBjmR9JsQ?si=jM4lciBBo41z8PZa
    , @Ambrose Kane
    @Thomas Faber

    No, the 'drones' seen throughout the East Coast are not holograms, CGI or anything like that. There is no person or group traveling about the U.S., Britain, Germany, and other nations that is projecting drone holograms onto the skies. What people are mostly seeing are genuine objects or crafts, although there are a lot of 'orbs' (blazing energy of lights or plasma) associated with them. The 'Lights in the Sky' documentary mostly deals with the 'orbs,' how they shape-shift, and travel about.

    No one, including the federal government, is arguing that the many 'drones' people are witnessing are anything other than real flying objects. Yes, they appear to shift their shape at times, and they do things that most conventional drones are unable to do, but I don't know of anyone who is seriously arguing that the drones are nothing more than holograms being projected onto the night skies. There is nothing in all of this to suggest some kind of aeronautical theatre that's using lights, various colors, and imagery to project something that's not really there. The federal government, the FAA, the Air Force, including other governments impacted by the drone incursions all believe it's real.

    Here's Michael Melham, the mayor of Belleville in New Jersey, complaining that the drones are still flying around in the skies above his city, and he's not happy about it.

    https://youtube.com/shorts/UU9AEJWAbcI?si=Nz1OAAUQ1cvSQQcp
  • Decades ago I became fully convinced that UFOs were real. I even accepted that past visits to our planet of such space aliens had been the basis for many of the religious myths of different societies all around the world, just as Erich von Däniken had argued in his massive 1971 bestseller Chariots of the...
  • Dear friends, check out this CIA link about a person who used a time traveling technique or some other technology to travel to Mars and explore that Planet. This is very strange but interesting:

    https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/cia-rdp96-00788r001900760001-9.pdf

  • On Tuesday, during the inaugural press briefing, White House Press Secretary, Karoline Leavitt, announced that the “drones†witnessed by many over the New Jersey skies and other places on the East Coast were just hobbyists and drone enthusiasts flying their drones: “After research and study, the drones that were flying over New Jersey in large...
  • LOL, yes, I would agree. I had only recently come across this fascinating documentary on YouTube that carefully and rationally investigates these ‘drones.’ It’s titled ‘Lights in the Sky’ by a former U.S. Army broadcast journalist and combat-veteran, Krista Alexander. She reaches very similar conclusions as myself but explains things much better than I could as she takes a deep dive into several video recordings of these strange lights.

    •ï¿½Replies: @Thomas Faber
    @Ambrose Kane

    Does she mention holograms?

    A lot of the stuff could possibly be explained by that. Even publicly, the technology is very advanced, and can be used to create lifelike 3-dimensional projections. You can even buy simple consumer-grade projectors for less than 100 USD.

    Check this out, for example (30 seconds)

    https://youtube.com/shorts/Iit19XMYUus?si=0agbDRnvlKgXp-VD

    Replies: @Thomas Faber, @Ambrose Kane
  • @Ambrose Kane
    This reply is to Thomas Faber #7:

    "Extraterrestrials are visiting America, and almost exclusively America, and have been doing so for the last 70 years" - Thank you, and I appreciate your willingness to think logically about this subject. You very well could be correct in your assessment. "Occam's Razor" is a good starting point, but it only works when all the information is brought into the equation.

    Unfortunately, there's so much missing information from your comments. The so-called 'drones' are not visiting America exclusively or even "almost exclusively." Yes, they are frequently being seen throughout much of the U.S., but they are also being seen by large numbers of people in Europe, India, South America, Russia and China. There are many videos of them on the various platforms of social media, and this phenomenon is not limited to the U.S. The videos dominate our media because they're occurring in our national backyard, but it's much broader than our borders.

    "Some secretive human group, somehow connected to the American government at a high level, has advanced technology, and is keeping silent/lying about it" - This is certainly possible, and I wouldn't rule it out either. But this idea too has some problems associated with it. Why would they be flying the drones in the pathway of civilian airplanes? The drone incursions have occurred so often at our international airports that they have had to close the airports on several occasions. Why would the "secretive human group" take such risks with the lives of passengers knowing full well that if a collision were to occur there would be a national uproar to investigate these 'drones' thus potentially exposing those behind this "secretive human group"? How would taking such risks benefit this "secretive human group," assuming this is the source of the drones? And why would this new technology be flown around our most sensitive military installments, thus drawing attention to what we have which could be easily witnessed by our enemies?

    Also, the government and media may call them 'drones,' but upon closer inspection and analysis, these things are not really conventional drones in the way we imagine. Too many people are witnessing them shape into other forms, they are often accompanied by 'orbs,' their abilities to maneuver are unlike anything we possess in terms of aeronautics, and the list goes on.

    More than any of that, the drones are nothing new. There is a long history of these sorts of objects repeatedly appearing over our nuclear sites, silos, military bases, and over large cities, including Washington D.C itself in 1952! The same has occurred among other countries on the planet.

    Some people are inclined the think the drones are some recent government plot or psyop only because they know little about the history of this phenomenon. Once they realize that this is nothing new in our history, they may not be so quick to theorize that it's just some new technology that the government is testing.

    The federal government, it seems to me, has been caught off guard by the drones. They are somewhat embarrassed because it has become obvious that they can't do anything about them zipping around our most sensitive military sites. This is why every attempt to calm the fears of the public is so painfully awkward.

    Yes, the government knows what they are, but they can't declare it because of the unsettling societal implications of it all. This is why they provide only the most insufficient and lamest of answers. If they tell even a portion of the truth, it will only lead to further questions and dig our government officials even deeper into the mire.

    Replies: @Thomas Faber

    Thank you – good points. Beats me what they are. Perhaps more than one phenomenon.

    I will say this, though: if they genuinely embarass the various governments, then they can’t be all bad, hehe. Keeps them on their toes!

  • This reply is to Thomas Faber #7:

    “Extraterrestrials are visiting America, and almost exclusively America, and have been doing so for the last 70 years” – Thank you, and I appreciate your willingness to think logically about this subject. You very well could be correct in your assessment. “Occam’s Razor” is a good starting point, but it only works when all the information is brought into the equation.

    Unfortunately, there’s so much missing information from your comments. The so-called ‘drones’ are not visiting America exclusively or even “almost exclusively.” Yes, they are frequently being seen throughout much of the U.S., but they are also being seen by large numbers of people in Europe, India, South America, Russia and China. There are many videos of them on the various platforms of social media, and this phenomenon is not limited to the U.S. The videos dominate our media because they’re occurring in our national backyard, but it’s much broader than our borders.

    “Some secretive human group, somehow connected to the American government at a high level, has advanced technology, and is keeping silent/lying about it” – This is certainly possible, and I wouldn’t rule it out either. But this idea too has some problems associated with it. Why would they be flying the drones in the pathway of civilian airplanes? The drone incursions have occurred so often at our international airports that they have had to close the airports on several occasions. Why would the “secretive human group” take such risks with the lives of passengers knowing full well that if a collision were to occur there would be a national uproar to investigate these ‘drones’ thus potentially exposing those behind this “secretive human group”? How would taking such risks benefit this “secretive human group,” assuming this is the source of the drones? And why would this new technology be flown around our most sensitive military installments, thus drawing attention to what we have which could be easily witnessed by our enemies?

    Also, the government and media may call them ‘drones,’ but upon closer inspection and analysis, these things are not really conventional drones in the way we imagine. Too many people are witnessing them shape into other forms, they are often accompanied by ‘orbs,’ their abilities to maneuver are unlike anything we possess in terms of aeronautics, and the list goes on.

    More than any of that, the drones are nothing new. There is a long history of these sorts of objects repeatedly appearing over our nuclear sites, silos, military bases, and over large cities, including Washington D.C itself in 1952! The same has occurred among other countries on the planet.

    Some people are inclined the think the drones are some recent government plot or psyop only because they know little about the history of this phenomenon. Once they realize that this is nothing new in our history, they may not be so quick to theorize that it’s just some new technology that the government is testing.

    The federal government, it seems to me, has been caught off guard by the drones. They are somewhat embarrassed because it has become obvious that they can’t do anything about them zipping around our most sensitive military sites. This is why every attempt to calm the fears of the public is so painfully awkward.

    Yes, the government knows what they are, but they can’t declare it because of the unsettling societal implications of it all. This is why they provide only the most insufficient and lamest of answers. If they tell even a portion of the truth, it will only lead to further questions and dig our government officials even deeper into the mire.

    •ï¿½Replies: @Thomas Faber
    @Ambrose Kane

    Thank you - good points. Beats me what they are. Perhaps more than one phenomenon.

    I will say this, though: if they genuinely embarass the various governments, then they can’t be all bad, hehe. Keeps them on their toes!
  • What is most likely?

    Some secretive human group, somehow connected to the American government at a high level, has advanced technology, and is keeping silent/lying about it – and is trying to study reactions of the populace to these objects, and perhaps sell some story to them down the line. Middle-managers such as governors, mayors, and journalists are not in on the loop.

    Or;

    Extraterrestrials are visiting America, and almost exclusively America, and have been doing so for the last 70 years.

    Since we can say that the technology needed for these objects must exist either way,
    Occam’s Razor is quite clear on this one.

  • Anonymous[497] •ï¿½Disclaimer says:
    @Pat Kittle
    I hate it when the government hides the truth.

    But in this case, it's more important to avoid widespread panic.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    I am tired of the lies.

    I would prefer the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth–and panic.

  • There are maybe a cannibalistic species of ALIENS hidden in the Oceans, which regularly meet with their most reliable producer of human flesh.
    That should explain so much.

    Maybe the new cannibal in charge have get complaints about though flesh from Ukraine, and because of that should start a export of more tender aged to Sinai ?

  • The Shlumpstein admin’s ‘FAA research drones’ explanation is seriously lame, but you can’t expect them to say that the extraterrestrials are out and about tonight. It’s sad but expected. Since they already know what they are, no need for official inquiries or anything like that.

  • Let’s catch one! Get some nets up there, like with insects. When one flies in between the nets, close the jaws like a Venus flytrap!

  • I hate it when the government hides the truth.

    But in this case, it’s more important to avoid widespread panic.

    •ï¿½Replies: @Anonymous
    @Pat Kittle

    I am tired of the lies.

    I would prefer the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth--and panic.
  • Whatever the truth might be, the US government is lying again.

    •ï¿½Agree: 1951
  • Since about mid-November of 2024, an incursion of aerial ‘drones’ on the East Coast (primarily in New Jersey and New York) has been spotted by hundreds if not thousands of witnesses. They are seen mostly at night and have been repeatedly observed in the airspace above sensitive military bases and installments, such as the Picatinny...
  • Well, with Trump in office the mystery drones situation did not get any clearer.

    Some BS explanation about the FAA doing “research” from his press secretary.

    I still think it was a psyop by the Biden admin that got dropped once Trump took office, and now they can’t just come out and say “Yeah, it was a psyop by the US government” and they gave us this ridiculous “research” explanation instead.

  • Decades ago I became fully convinced that UFOs were real. I even accepted that past visits to our planet of such space aliens had been the basis for many of the religious myths of different societies all around the world, just as Erich von Däniken had argued in his massive 1971 bestseller Chariots of the...
  • @orchardist
    The understanding of the AI subject has to begin with the closure of the Nuclear Research and Development Station (NRDS) between 1968 and 1972.

    The NRDS was going strong, full and active, testing Nuclear Rocket Engines until one day the entire operation was summarily shut down – with no advance warning; from alive and viable and important to non-existent – all in less than six weeks.

    I posit that something ‘better’ took the place of nuclear energy to power rockets so the NRDS was no longer needed.

    I also posit that Element 115 had been discovered in the tunnels in Area 12 by at least 1965; and that a stable, synthetic form of Element 115 was created there by 1968. If Element 115 was found to be suitable for UFO-powered flight, then the Nuclear portion of the NRDS would have no further purpose in being alive.

    If we take the statements of Ben Rich made between 1988 and 1992 when he passed, it seems obvious that one event overshadowed the other and that the new discovery of Element 115 in its synthetic, stable form was the key.

    Area 51 could have been a Mars or Venus 20 level deep underground launch pad since easily 1965.
    [This implies “dual concurrent space programsâ€: one secret, military and space oriented; the other known, public, and Moon Faked.]

    Being many stories underground would provide sight-access security and secrecy; an underground space launch facility at Area 51 coupled with a similar facility at Vandenburg AFB would allow for the launching of numerous rockets to unknown destinations with little or no fanfare.

    If Element 115 was discovered by 1965, that would also have provided sufficient impetus to develop the codes necessary to drive, or fly the vehicles. Thus the CIA at Area 51 could have developed AI 30-60 years in advance of what it being touted now as “AIâ€.

    And neither the CIA nor the USAF would have any reason to tell you and me about any of this. Nor would it be published in any public domain scientific journals.

    But folks like you and me CAN look at various historical events and try to make some sense of them.

    The sudden closure of the NRDS and its relation to Element 115 is one of those events that needs to be looked at in a new, fresh and different way.

    Replies: @acementhead

    There is no naturally occurring element 115(Muscovium) so it could not have been discovered in the “tunnels of area 12”, or anywhere else.

    “If Element 115 was discovered by 1965 …”

    Element 115 is not, and never will be, useful for anything(except creating employment for physicists).

    •ï¿½Replies: @Anonymous
    @acementhead

    Lazar was a low level repair tech or something similar at the area. He got wind of test times, probably not by being told, but by deducing they usually occur at regular times for certain scheduling reasons. He brought chicks there to look cool and get laid. This made him subject to forever in prison because of his NDA, or peddle disinfo to stay out of prison. There were articles in the paper about this time speculating about element 115. Lazar or some AFOSI CoIntel wanker, or someone similar, used the whole e115 BS as a PSYOP to protect the actual technology. One wonders if some of these posts are stooge AI? If building a craft requires an element that doesn't exist, why bother trying? Versus trying with mundane Earth technology which would do the job just fine. People are quite gullible.
  • Looger says:

    In “X-COM UFO Defense” I actually end up selling most of my E-115 on the open market.

    I found the key to that game was to NOT have so many expensive troop carriers, maybe two squads each covering half the earth. You need some E-115 to build and fuel the last stage transports which do use reverse-engineered UFO technology.

    What does help is to have lots of small airbases, stack them full of the old interceptors which can be upgraded with better weapons almost right till the infamous “Mars Mission.” When one interceptor finds a UFO, it’s basically frozen in place by the game until the other ones join up.

    A note on base design for all those hangars you need for these interceptors: Have only one room next to each hangar, that way when the aliens attack you can bottle them up. Once my squaddies make sergeant (especially the low psychic ability ones) I move them to base defense. Two sergeants plus a rocket tank / laser tank combo usually does the trick (tanks are just RC tripwires). If they have decent armor and heavy plasmas as well as rockets and laser rifles for backup it’ll be enough to hold your bases.

    A note on weapons: almost all of them are worthless! Keep heavy plasma only, don’t even research the other ones, rifles and pistols. Also switch your clips before they run out and they magically replenish next mission (love that E-115). Early on use rifles, rockets, and when you get them laser pistols and laser rifles (rocket troops get a laser pistol for backup). Some creatures like Mutons can survive laser fire so just blast them with rockets.

    Important: Early on you want to research and reproduce the UFO stun bombs. When you go to a terror attack event, just stun-bomb every civilian you see and the aliens ignore them. Cuts down on the deaths.

    Rocket the shit out of those terror cities – for some reason the enemy hovers around gas stations (kablooey).

    Early on is really the most fun, just ignore all the heavy weapons and outfit every trooper with a rifle, and a grenade with the pin pulled. Space everyone out and don’t get too attached. Go slow and leave everyone ‘reaction time’ and in the kneeling position, behind cover if possible. THe survivors will shoot straight, the ones who die when the enemy blindsides them will take them with them when that grenade goes off after their corpse drops it.

    There’s probably more to it but ignore most of the tech trees, sell off everything you don’t need, and remember – more bases with mroe radars is better than huge vulnerable bases with death trap hangars (two or more rooms beside them)

    •ï¿½LOL: littlereddot
  • The understanding of the AI subject has to begin with the closure of the Nuclear Research and Development Station (NRDS) between 1968 and 1972.

    The NRDS was going strong, full and active, testing Nuclear Rocket Engines until one day the entire operation was summarily shut down – with no advance warning; from alive and viable and important to non-existent – all in less than six weeks.

    I posit that something ‘better’ took the place of nuclear energy to power rockets so the NRDS was no longer needed.

    I also posit that Element 115 had been discovered in the tunnels in Area 12 by at least 1965; and that a stable, synthetic form of Element 115 was created there by 1968. If Element 115 was found to be suitable for UFO-powered flight, then the Nuclear portion of the NRDS would have no further purpose in being alive.

    If we take the statements of Ben Rich made between 1988 and 1992 when he passed, it seems obvious that one event overshadowed the other and that the new discovery of Element 115 in its synthetic, stable form was the key.

    Area 51 could have been a Mars or Venus 20 level deep underground launch pad since easily 1965.
    [This implies “dual concurrent space programsâ€: one secret, military and space oriented; the other known, public, and Moon Faked.]

    Being many stories underground would provide sight-access security and secrecy; an underground space launch facility at Area 51 coupled with a similar facility at Vandenburg AFB would allow for the launching of numerous rockets to unknown destinations with little or no fanfare.

    If Element 115 was discovered by 1965, that would also have provided sufficient impetus to develop the codes necessary to drive, or fly the vehicles. Thus the CIA at Area 51 could have developed AI 30-60 years in advance of what it being touted now as “AIâ€.

    And neither the CIA nor the USAF would have any reason to tell you and me about any of this. Nor would it be published in any public domain scientific journals.

    But folks like you and me CAN look at various historical events and try to make some sense of them.

    The sudden closure of the NRDS and its relation to Element 115 is one of those events that needs to be looked at in a new, fresh and different way.

    •ï¿½Replies: @acementhead
    @orchardist

    There is no naturally occurring element 115(Muscovium) so it could not have been discovered in the "tunnels of area 12", or anywhere else.

    "If Element 115 was discovered by 1965 ..."
    �
    Element 115 is not, and never will be, useful for anything(except creating employment for physicists).

    Replies: @Anonymous
  • @anno nimus
    there maybe a method behind the conspiracy madness. the rulers are intent in perpetuating their global Empire, surprise! the Empire is carried on the backs of ordinary folk who have to keep the machine running smoothly by providing their sweat and blood. however, if the people come to the Ultimate Truth they may start to wonder why? or what for? so, to keep them from searching and finding the Ultimate Truth, the people have to be kept constantly distracted by rumors, fables of ufo sightings, porno, drugs, punk rock, death metal, violence depicting 'entertainment' etc etc. the rulers have sold their souls in exchange for earthly power and gain, and they want to make sure as many souls as possible will join them in perdition. they call their Empire "democracy" and all of the above nonsense "freedom". the worst are full of passion but the best lack conviction.

    St. John 3
    18 “He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
    �

    Replies: @Brad Anbro, @Low-carb Political Movement

    You are right about the music of the masses, and they don’t even listen to revolutionary philosophical smart music bands like The Doors, Rush, Tool, Rage Against The Machine, Chuck Mangioni, Public Enemy, Pink Floyd, Sex Pistols, that would lead to a global anarchist revolution, music which would increase the warrior revolutionary instincts in people

  • The good thing about this website of Ron Unz, is that it is an alternative news site with a comment section that exercises a libertarian democratic freedom of ideas. Other websites that i am also a member of and who hate oppressive governments, exercise an oppressive censorship of ideas. Like The World Socialist Website http://www.wsws.org

    I still participate in The World Socialist Website, they are trotskists anti-stalin, but since i am an ultra-skeptic scientific evidence-based anti-dogma person, i also have my suspicion against Trotskists and Leon Trotsky. That website even though it is great and full of great articles, it is too authoritarian, too anti-democratic, too anti freedom of speech, I bet that people like Andrew Anglin won’t be able to write comments there, because the moderators of that site only let comments from a pure trotskist point of view. So really I wouldn’t want a government ruled by them.

    That’s why i have evolved from a capitalist-reformist, toward a socialist and lately toward anarchist anti-state libertarian, as the best political system for people who love total freedom and no lies.

    And i prefer this website a lot more than World Socialist Website, because even though it includes articles and ideas from the right-wing, center, and left-wing it is nevertheless a website that defends the little guy, the lower classes, the oppressed of the whole world, inluding palestinians, africans white poor people, etc. and best of all it exercises democratic freedom of ideas

    And even though i love the UFO extraterrestrial phenomenon so much and even though i am a believer in life in the universe, I think that Richard Dolan’s new book posted here from Amazon in this article “UFO’s for the 21st Century Mind” is just too damn expensive. I know that the US dollar itself has less buying power and it has experienced a devaluation and making books must be expensive. But still I think that 30 dollars for a UFO book is just too much https://www.amazon.com/UFOs-21st-Century-Mind-Definitive/dp/B0CG7FSTQK/

    So even though i still support many of the Dr. Richard Dolan’s claims in his new book, I still have my suspicions about the real objectives of Richard Dolan, if it he is really interested in finding the truth abbout extraterrestrial or wether he is just aiming to increase his personal wealth

  • @Chebyshev
    The Apollo Moon Landing Hoax is textbook cognitive infiltration.

    One small reason people might doubt the moon landing happened is that Apollo astronaut Neil Armstrong's line "one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind" is so iconic that it could've been part of a movie script.

    I'd highly recommend this episode of the podcast The Great Debates, in which the hosts debate whether faking the moon landing would've been harder than actually landing on the moon:

    https://greatdebates69.podbean.com/e/34-it-would-have-been-harder-to-fake-the-moon-landing-than-to-actually-go-to-the-moon/

    Replies: @notanonymousHere

    There might be spots where you have to do a bit of relativistic correctioning but going to the moon is AP high school physics. Tsiolkovsky did a lot of the heavy lifting and Von Braun knew a thing or two about rockets. Ground control to Major Tom.

  • Did advanced space aliens create humans? Do humans live in a computer simulation created by advanced space aliens? See

  • The Apollo Moon Landing Hoax is textbook cognitive infiltration.

    One small reason people might doubt the moon landing happened is that Apollo astronaut Neil Armstrong’s line “one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind” is so iconic that it could’ve been part of a movie script.

    I’d highly recommend this episode of the podcast The Great Debates, in which the hosts debate whether faking the moon landing would’ve been harder than actually landing on the moon:

    https://greatdebates69.podbean.com/e/34-it-would-have-been-harder-to-fake-the-moon-landing-than-to-actually-go-to-the-moon/

    •ï¿½Replies: @notanonymousHere
    @Chebyshev

    There might be spots where you have to do a bit of relativistic correctioning but going to the moon is AP high school physics. Tsiolkovsky did a lot of the heavy lifting and Von Braun knew a thing or two about rockets. Ground control to Major Tom.
  • To think “WHO,WHY” is more important than to think only “HOW”.
    Only “HOW” is a distraction from the substance.

  • @Been_there_done_that
    @Mr. Anon

    Your comments do not withstand logical scrutiny:

    The video clearly shows a dust cloud from pulverized concrete and drywall hanging in the air...
    �
    The gravitational effect upon the structural elements.could not have pulverized the concrete at the core and the floors into the fine dust-like granularity that was evident within a huge circumference beyond the building.

    The amount of drywall in the building was relatively trivial relative to the volume of dust that is evident in the image. Many floors had open offices (for instance financial trading floors) or cubicles to enhance the feeling of spaciousness and provide additional lighting from outside and views from the inside.

    Much of what is seen in the image of the north tower collapse, above, consists of condensing water vapor that had previously been bound within the concrete during mixing, before it was poured into shape on location during construction. The separation could not have been induced by gravity and must have occurred due to the extreme heat from within the building.

    The dust was not merely "hanging in the air", as you described it, but was flowing outward in a parabolic trajectory that includes an upward component on the right hand side in the first image, momentarily defying gravity.

    It looks exactly as I would expect it to look.
    �
    Your purported expectation cannot be derived from any empirical observations because what is documented in the images had never occurred before. Based on the physics, observers of the initial collapse of the south building could not have expected to see the top tilted portion of the building to have suddenly ended its rotation and then disintegrate into debris instead. We could have expected any initial pancake collapse near the top to have been absorbed by the remaining structural integrity beneath, and decelerate to a halt.

    Those jets out of the side of the building happened at the floors where the express elevators terminated.
    �
    The second image shows horizontal debris ejections in perpendicular directions within two or three floors of each other. The express elevators did not terminate within this difference in altitude, nor were the bottom portions of the shafts directly connected to the windows from which the jets exited. The volume of air on any particular floor could have absorbed any additional pressure coming from the shaft.

    if these jets were explosive charges, then why doesn’t the building start to fail just where and when those jets are seen?
    �
    No explosive charges placed on any floor could have in itself been sufficiently powerful to trigger a structural failure. There were reports of multiple explosions near the bottom of the buildings prior to the actual collapses. Even those shaped charges, which weakened the structure, did not induce a collapse.

    ...resorting to outlandish scenarios and bogus arguments informed by a glaring ignorance of basic physics and engineering.
    �
    From an engineering perspective it is not at all "outlandish" to engage in careful prior contingency planning and thorough physical preparation, including redundancies, if one wants to ensure that both towers are to be brought down, motivated by the desire to avoid tedious disassembly due to asbestos liabilities, a perceived need to create a public spectacle for promoting a war agenda, while blaming imaginary Arab hijackers, and then ultimately collect double payments from premiums by the German insurer. If merely flying drone aircraft into the side of each building by remote control (Plan A) were not sufficient, then one could additionally weaken the base structure and other crucial supports with explosives (Plan B); if that doesn't induce the desired collapse either, then there would remainsthe nuclear option (Plan C), based on small devices placed at the bottoms of the single freight elevator shafts in each of the twin buildings going all the way to the top. See the link in comment #933 above for the measured radiation evidence for this event having occurred. Plenty of other credible evidence has been reported in past threads here.

    The premise for wanting to collapse the towers is not in doubt. There was a failed attempt on February 26, 1993 to bring down the tower with a truck bomb in the garage. People had been hinting at this possibility during the months leading up to the event. The concept was featured in a television episode, in a video game: even Alex Jones announced the possibility weeks before, in what could be described as a comprehensive predictive programing effort, which also included the three hour movie Pearl Harbor, shown during the summer of 2001. Presumably some people in New York wanted to destroy the towers from the very beginning. See my previous quote (September 12, 2023 at 8:09 am GMT • 1.4 years ago) from Wikipedia:

    Construction of the World Trade Center (Wikipedia)

    Yamasaki, who had previously designed Saudi Arabia’s Dhahran International Airport with the Saudi Binladin Group, incorporated features of Arabic architecture into the design of the World Trade Center. The plaza was modelled after Mecca, incorporating features such as a vast delineated square, a fountain, and a radial circular pattern. Yamasaki described the plaza as “a mecca, a great relief from the narrow streets and sidewalks of the Wall Street area.†He also incorporated other features of Arabic architecture into the building design, including pointed arches, interweaving tracery of prefabricated concrete, a minaret like flight tower, and arabesque patterns.
    �
    Let's see if Donald Trump's new Justice Department has the guts to pursue the perpetrators.

    Replies: @skrik, @Mr. Anon

    Your comments do not withstand logical scrutiny:

    The gravitational effect upon the structural elements.could not have pulverized the concrete……………

    The amount of drywall in the building was relatively trivial…………….

    You’ve offered no logical scrutiny, merely a compendium of baseless assertions.

    For one thing there was plenty of gypsum in the WTC towers. Asbestos too. All of which is friable and easily turned to dust.

    https://www.fireengineering.com/fire-safety/the-world-trade-center-construction-and-collapse-part-2/

    Much of what is seen in the image of the north tower collapse, above, consists of condensing water vapor that had previously been bound within the concrete during mixing,…………..

    Nonsense. From thirty year-old concrete? And what would cause it to condense?

    The dust was not merely “hanging in the air“, as you described it, but was flowing outward in a parabolic trajectory that includes an upward component on the right hand side in the first image, momentarily defying gravity.

    A parabola? Really? You fit a curve to it? The dust was doing what dust does – hanging, floating, flowing.

    We could have expected any initial pancake collapse near the top to have been absorbed by the remaining structural integrity beneath, and decelerate to a halt.

    Utterly ridiculous.

    The volume of air on any particular floor could have absorbed any additional pressure coming from the shaft………..

    Another baseless assertion.

    if these jets were explosive charges, then why doesn’t the building start to fail just where and when those jets are seen?

    No explosive charges placed on any floor could have in itself been sufficiently powerful to trigger a structural failure………

    If merely flying drone aircraft into the side of each building by remote control (Plan A).

    There were no drone aircraft and they weren’t flown by remote control.

    I find it impossible to have an intelligent conversation with people who look at a video and see things that aren’t there.

  • OmK says:

    It is weird that there are several factions.

    Masterminds are clever.
    To cause confusion was in their plan
    from the beginning.

    They planned to use all kinds of weapons(thermite, usual bombs, Nuclear bombs, Directed Energy Weapons,…), to cause confusions and controversies.
    They are adepts of PsyOp(Deception).

    Why are people arguing about the types of weapons ?

    The purpose of using all kinds of weapons was to let people argue.

  • skrik says:
    @Been_there_done_that
    @Mr. Anon

    Your comments do not withstand logical scrutiny:

    The video clearly shows a dust cloud from pulverized concrete and drywall hanging in the air...
    �
    The gravitational effect upon the structural elements.could not have pulverized the concrete at the core and the floors into the fine dust-like granularity that was evident within a huge circumference beyond the building.

    The amount of drywall in the building was relatively trivial relative to the volume of dust that is evident in the image. Many floors had open offices (for instance financial trading floors) or cubicles to enhance the feeling of spaciousness and provide additional lighting from outside and views from the inside.

    Much of what is seen in the image of the north tower collapse, above, consists of condensing water vapor that had previously been bound within the concrete during mixing, before it was poured into shape on location during construction. The separation could not have been induced by gravity and must have occurred due to the extreme heat from within the building.

    The dust was not merely "hanging in the air", as you described it, but was flowing outward in a parabolic trajectory that includes an upward component on the right hand side in the first image, momentarily defying gravity.

    It looks exactly as I would expect it to look.
    �
    Your purported expectation cannot be derived from any empirical observations because what is documented in the images had never occurred before. Based on the physics, observers of the initial collapse of the south building could not have expected to see the top tilted portion of the building to have suddenly ended its rotation and then disintegrate into debris instead. We could have expected any initial pancake collapse near the top to have been absorbed by the remaining structural integrity beneath, and decelerate to a halt.

    Those jets out of the side of the building happened at the floors where the express elevators terminated.
    �
    The second image shows horizontal debris ejections in perpendicular directions within two or three floors of each other. The express elevators did not terminate within this difference in altitude, nor were the bottom portions of the shafts directly connected to the windows from which the jets exited. The volume of air on any particular floor could have absorbed any additional pressure coming from the shaft.

    if these jets were explosive charges, then why doesn’t the building start to fail just where and when those jets are seen?
    �
    No explosive charges placed on any floor could have in itself been sufficiently powerful to trigger a structural failure. There were reports of multiple explosions near the bottom of the buildings prior to the actual collapses. Even those shaped charges, which weakened the structure, did not induce a collapse.

    ...resorting to outlandish scenarios and bogus arguments informed by a glaring ignorance of basic physics and engineering.
    �
    From an engineering perspective it is not at all "outlandish" to engage in careful prior contingency planning and thorough physical preparation, including redundancies, if one wants to ensure that both towers are to be brought down, motivated by the desire to avoid tedious disassembly due to asbestos liabilities, a perceived need to create a public spectacle for promoting a war agenda, while blaming imaginary Arab hijackers, and then ultimately collect double payments from premiums by the German insurer. If merely flying drone aircraft into the side of each building by remote control (Plan A) were not sufficient, then one could additionally weaken the base structure and other crucial supports with explosives (Plan B); if that doesn't induce the desired collapse either, then there would remainsthe nuclear option (Plan C), based on small devices placed at the bottoms of the single freight elevator shafts in each of the twin buildings going all the way to the top. See the link in comment #933 above for the measured radiation evidence for this event having occurred. Plenty of other credible evidence has been reported in past threads here.

    The premise for wanting to collapse the towers is not in doubt. There was a failed attempt on February 26, 1993 to bring down the tower with a truck bomb in the garage. People had been hinting at this possibility during the months leading up to the event. The concept was featured in a television episode, in a video game: even Alex Jones announced the possibility weeks before, in what could be described as a comprehensive predictive programing effort, which also included the three hour movie Pearl Harbor, shown during the summer of 2001. Presumably some people in New York wanted to destroy the towers from the very beginning. See my previous quote (September 12, 2023 at 8:09 am GMT • 1.4 years ago) from Wikipedia:

    Construction of the World Trade Center (Wikipedia)

    Yamasaki, who had previously designed Saudi Arabia’s Dhahran International Airport with the Saudi Binladin Group, incorporated features of Arabic architecture into the design of the World Trade Center. The plaza was modelled after Mecca, incorporating features such as a vast delineated square, a fountain, and a radial circular pattern. Yamasaki described the plaza as “a mecca, a great relief from the narrow streets and sidewalks of the Wall Street area.†He also incorporated other features of Arabic architecture into the building design, including pointed arches, interweaving tracery of prefabricated concrete, a minaret like flight tower, and arabesque patterns.
    �
    Let's see if Donald Trump's new Justice Department has the guts to pursue the perpetrators.

    Replies: @skrik, @Mr. Anon

    if that doesn’t induce the desired collapse either, then there would remainsthe nuclear option (Plan C), based on small devices placed at the bottoms of the single freight elevator shafts in each of the twin buildings going all the way to the top

    Bullshit

    “The internet exists to destroy bad information. Posting bullshit does not work anymore, …”
    ~Kratoklastes

    Here you were close

    Based on the physics, observers of the initial collapse of the south building could not have expected to see the top tilted portion of the building to have suddenly ended its rotation and then disintegrate into debris instead

    WTCs 1 & 2 were progressively, level by level, both downwards and upwards explosively disassembled, using conventional, most likely military-issue highest performance explosives. This fully explains the tilting upper section *not* appearing as a semi-intact remnant in/near the rubble pile. You are correct with the billowing pyroclastic clouds of powdered concrete plus dry-wall and other small particles, like human bone fragments and iron-rich micro spheres.

    Basta! We’ve been through it all before. No nukes, only ‘conventional’ explosives and those in massive quantities [hence the ‘hot-spots’ under 3 towers], *not* wishing to leave anything to chance since there could have been very little in the way of preliminary proving-trials. Nukes go BANG! [and debris goes everywhere from that point-source] – there were no such bangs, see Chandler’s North Tower vid [and listen to it – closely!]

    Now; I would like to pose this Q: Cui bono? Who benefits and how, for a few nutters to be ‘pushing’ ridiculous assertions 23+yrs down the track to challenge the AE911Truth consensus = ‘conventional’ explosives ‘controlled’ demolition?

    It’s astounding
    Time is fleeting
    Madness takes its toll
    But listen closely
    Not for very much longer

    No DEW, no dustify, no nukes [no planes optional]

    No further augment will come from me; the ‘sanity-incapable’ can go to hell forthwith.

  • @Mr. Anon
    @Been_there_done_that


    It appears as if though a huge volume of water is gushing outward like a fountain from inside the building.
    �
    In a still frame, out of context. The video clearly shows a dust cloud from pulverized concrete and drywall hanging in the air as the solid debris of the building falls through it. It looks exactly as I would expect it to look.

    Here is an image of particles being ejected sideways.
    �
    Those jets out of the side of the building happened at the floors where the express elevators terminated. It's the result of air that was compressed in the elevator shafts by the falling floors above them blowing out the doors and through the windows. Tell me, if these jets were explosive charges, then why doesn't the building start to fail just where and when those jets are seen? But it didn't. It started to fail exactly where the airplanes hit.

    None of these things are hard to explain and do not require resorting to outlandish scenarios and bogus arguments informed by a glaring ignorance of basic physics and engineering. Evidently most people, at least most people who have commented on these images in echo chambers like this one, have no idea how to interpret what they're looking at.

    Replies: @Been_there_done_that

    Your comments do not withstand logical scrutiny:

    The video clearly shows a dust cloud from pulverized concrete and drywall hanging in the air…

    The gravitational effect upon the structural elements.could not have pulverized the concrete at the core and the floors into the fine dust-like granularity that was evident within a huge circumference beyond the building.

    The amount of drywall in the building was relatively trivial relative to the volume of dust that is evident in the image. Many floors had open offices (for instance financial trading floors) or cubicles to enhance the feeling of spaciousness and provide additional lighting from outside and views from the inside.

    Much of what is seen in the image of the north tower collapse, above, consists of condensing water vapor that had previously been bound within the concrete during mixing, before it was poured into shape on location during construction. The separation could not have been induced by gravity and must have occurred due to the extreme heat from within the building.

    The dust was not merely “hanging in the air“, as you described it, but was flowing outward in a parabolic trajectory that includes an upward component on the right hand side in the first image, momentarily defying gravity.

    It looks exactly as I would expect it to look.

    Your purported expectation cannot be derived from any empirical observations because what is documented in the images had never occurred before. Based on the physics, observers of the initial collapse of the south building could not have expected to see the top tilted portion of the building to have suddenly ended its rotation and then disintegrate into debris instead. We could have expected any initial pancake collapse near the top to have been absorbed by the remaining structural integrity beneath, and decelerate to a halt.

    Those jets out of the side of the building happened at the floors where the express elevators terminated.

    The second image shows horizontal debris ejections in perpendicular directions within two or three floors of each other. The express elevators did not terminate within this difference in altitude, nor were the bottom portions of the shafts directly connected to the windows from which the jets exited. The volume of air on any particular floor could have absorbed any additional pressure coming from the shaft.

    if these jets were explosive charges, then why doesn’t the building start to fail just where and when those jets are seen?

    No explosive charges placed on any floor could have in itself been sufficiently powerful to trigger a structural failure. There were reports of multiple explosions near the bottom of the buildings prior to the actual collapses. Even those shaped charges, which weakened the structure, did not induce a collapse.

    …resorting to outlandish scenarios and bogus arguments informed by a glaring ignorance of basic physics and engineering.

    From an engineering perspective it is not at all “outlandish” to engage in careful prior contingency planning and thorough physical preparation, including redundancies, if one wants to ensure that both towers are to be brought down, motivated by the desire to avoid tedious disassembly due to asbestos liabilities, a perceived need to create a public spectacle for promoting a war agenda, while blaming imaginary Arab hijackers, and then ultimately collect double payments from premiums by the German insurer. If merely flying drone aircraft into the side of each building by remote control (Plan A) were not sufficient, then one could additionally weaken the base structure and other crucial supports with explosives (Plan B); if that doesn’t induce the desired collapse either, then there would remainsthe nuclear option (Plan C), based on small devices placed at the bottoms of the single freight elevator shafts in each of the twin buildings going all the way to the top. See the link in comment #933 above for the measured radiation evidence for this event having occurred. Plenty of other credible evidence has been reported in past threads here.

    The premise for wanting to collapse the towers is not in doubt. There was a failed attempt on February 26, 1993 to bring down the tower with a truck bomb in the garage. People had been hinting at this possibility during the months leading up to the event. The concept was featured in a television episode, in a video game: even Alex Jones announced the possibility weeks before, in what could be described as a comprehensive predictive programing effort, which also included the three hour movie Pearl Harbor, shown during the summer of 2001. Presumably some people in New York wanted to destroy the towers from the very beginning. See my previous quote (September 12, 2023 at 8:09 am GMT • 1.4 years ago) from Wikipedia:

    Construction of the World Trade Center (Wikipedia)

    Yamasaki, who had previously designed Saudi Arabia’s Dhahran International Airport with the Saudi Binladin Group, incorporated features of Arabic architecture into the design of the World Trade Center. The plaza was modelled after Mecca, incorporating features such as a vast delineated square, a fountain, and a radial circular pattern. Yamasaki described the plaza as “a mecca, a great relief from the narrow streets and sidewalks of the Wall Street area.†He also incorporated other features of Arabic architecture into the building design, including pointed arches, interweaving tracery of prefabricated concrete, a minaret like flight tower, and arabesque patterns.

    Let’s see if Donald Trump’s new Justice Department has the guts to pursue the perpetrators.

    •ï¿½Replies: @skrik
    @Been_there_done_that


    if that doesn’t induce the desired collapse either, then there would remainsthe nuclear option (Plan C), based on small devices placed at the bottoms of the single freight elevator shafts in each of the twin buildings going all the way to the top
    �
    Bullshit

    "The internet exists to destroy bad information. Posting bullshit does not work anymore, ..."
    ~Kratoklastes
    �
    Here you were close

    Based on the physics, observers of the initial collapse of the south building could not have expected to see the top tilted portion of the building to have suddenly ended its rotation and then disintegrate into debris instead
    �
    WTCs 1 & 2 were progressively, level by level, both downwards and upwards explosively disassembled, using conventional, most likely military-issue highest performance explosives. This fully explains the tilting upper section *not* appearing as a semi-intact remnant in/near the rubble pile. You are correct with the billowing pyroclastic clouds of powdered concrete plus dry-wall and other small particles, like human bone fragments and iron-rich micro spheres.

    Basta! We've been through it all before. No nukes, only 'conventional' explosives and those in massive quantities [hence the ‘hot-spots’ under 3 towers], *not* wishing to leave anything to chance since there could have been very little in the way of preliminary proving-trials. Nukes go BANG! [and debris goes everywhere from that point-source] - there were no such bangs, see Chandler's North Tower vid [and listen to it - closely!]

    Now; I would like to pose this Q: Cui bono? Who benefits and how, for a few nutters to be ‘pushing’ ridiculous assertions 23+yrs down the track to challenge the AE911Truth consensus = 'conventional' explosives 'controlled' demolition?

    It's astounding
    Time is fleeting
    Madness takes its toll
    But listen closely
    Not for very much longer
    �
    No DEW, no dustify, no nukes [no planes optional]

    No further augment will come from me; the 'sanity-incapable' can go to hell forthwith.
    , @Mr. Anon
    @Been_there_done_that


    Your comments do not withstand logical scrutiny:
    �

    The gravitational effect upon the structural elements.could not have pulverized the concrete...............
    �

    The amount of drywall in the building was relatively trivial................
    �
    You've offered no logical scrutiny, merely a compendium of baseless assertions.

    For one thing there was plenty of gypsum in the WTC towers. Asbestos too. All of which is friable and easily turned to dust.

    https://www.fireengineering.com/fire-safety/the-world-trade-center-construction-and-collapse-part-2/

    Much of what is seen in the image of the north tower collapse, above, consists of condensing water vapor that had previously been bound within the concrete during mixing,..............
    �
    Nonsense. From thirty year-old concrete? And what would cause it to condense?

    The dust was not merely “hanging in the air“, as you described it, but was flowing outward in a parabolic trajectory that includes an upward component on the right hand side in the first image, momentarily defying gravity.
    �
    A parabola? Really? You fit a curve to it? The dust was doing what dust does - hanging, floating, flowing.

    We could have expected any initial pancake collapse near the top to have been absorbed by the remaining structural integrity beneath, and decelerate to a halt.
    �
    Utterly ridiculous.

    The volume of air on any particular floor could have absorbed any additional pressure coming from the shaft...........
    �
    Another baseless assertion.

    if these jets were explosive charges, then why doesn’t the building start to fail just where and when those jets are seen?

    No explosive charges placed on any floor could have in itself been sufficiently powerful to trigger a structural failure.........

    If merely flying drone aircraft into the side of each building by remote control (Plan A).
    �
    There were no drone aircraft and they weren't flown by remote control.

    I find it impossible to have an intelligent conversation with people who look at a video and see things that aren't there.
  • @Been_there_done_that
    @Mr. Anon


    None of the ones I’ve seen show anything flying upwards.
    �
    It appears as if though a huge volume of water is gushing outward like a fountain from inside the building.

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GhafpiPXsAAP_SZ.jpg

    Here is an image of particles being ejected sideways.

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F0SkHvuWIAI-9ia.jpg

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

    It appears as if though a huge volume of water is gushing outward like a fountain from inside the building.

    In a still frame, out of context. The video clearly shows a dust cloud from pulverized concrete and drywall hanging in the air as the solid debris of the building falls through it. It looks exactly as I would expect it to look.

    Here is an image of particles being ejected sideways.

    Those jets out of the side of the building happened at the floors where the express elevators terminated. It’s the result of air that was compressed in the elevator shafts by the falling floors above them blowing out the doors and through the windows. Tell me, if these jets were explosive charges, then why doesn’t the building start to fail just where and when those jets are seen? But it didn’t. It started to fail exactly where the airplanes hit.

    None of these things are hard to explain and do not require resorting to outlandish scenarios and bogus arguments informed by a glaring ignorance of basic physics and engineering. Evidently most people, at least most people who have commented on these images in echo chambers like this one, have no idea how to interpret what they’re looking at.

    •ï¿½Replies: @Been_there_done_that
    @Mr. Anon

    Your comments do not withstand logical scrutiny:

    The video clearly shows a dust cloud from pulverized concrete and drywall hanging in the air...
    �
    The gravitational effect upon the structural elements.could not have pulverized the concrete at the core and the floors into the fine dust-like granularity that was evident within a huge circumference beyond the building.

    The amount of drywall in the building was relatively trivial relative to the volume of dust that is evident in the image. Many floors had open offices (for instance financial trading floors) or cubicles to enhance the feeling of spaciousness and provide additional lighting from outside and views from the inside.

    Much of what is seen in the image of the north tower collapse, above, consists of condensing water vapor that had previously been bound within the concrete during mixing, before it was poured into shape on location during construction. The separation could not have been induced by gravity and must have occurred due to the extreme heat from within the building.

    The dust was not merely "hanging in the air", as you described it, but was flowing outward in a parabolic trajectory that includes an upward component on the right hand side in the first image, momentarily defying gravity.

    It looks exactly as I would expect it to look.
    �
    Your purported expectation cannot be derived from any empirical observations because what is documented in the images had never occurred before. Based on the physics, observers of the initial collapse of the south building could not have expected to see the top tilted portion of the building to have suddenly ended its rotation and then disintegrate into debris instead. We could have expected any initial pancake collapse near the top to have been absorbed by the remaining structural integrity beneath, and decelerate to a halt.

    Those jets out of the side of the building happened at the floors where the express elevators terminated.
    �
    The second image shows horizontal debris ejections in perpendicular directions within two or three floors of each other. The express elevators did not terminate within this difference in altitude, nor were the bottom portions of the shafts directly connected to the windows from which the jets exited. The volume of air on any particular floor could have absorbed any additional pressure coming from the shaft.

    if these jets were explosive charges, then why doesn’t the building start to fail just where and when those jets are seen?
    �
    No explosive charges placed on any floor could have in itself been sufficiently powerful to trigger a structural failure. There were reports of multiple explosions near the bottom of the buildings prior to the actual collapses. Even those shaped charges, which weakened the structure, did not induce a collapse.

    ...resorting to outlandish scenarios and bogus arguments informed by a glaring ignorance of basic physics and engineering.
    �
    From an engineering perspective it is not at all "outlandish" to engage in careful prior contingency planning and thorough physical preparation, including redundancies, if one wants to ensure that both towers are to be brought down, motivated by the desire to avoid tedious disassembly due to asbestos liabilities, a perceived need to create a public spectacle for promoting a war agenda, while blaming imaginary Arab hijackers, and then ultimately collect double payments from premiums by the German insurer. If merely flying drone aircraft into the side of each building by remote control (Plan A) were not sufficient, then one could additionally weaken the base structure and other crucial supports with explosives (Plan B); if that doesn't induce the desired collapse either, then there would remainsthe nuclear option (Plan C), based on small devices placed at the bottoms of the single freight elevator shafts in each of the twin buildings going all the way to the top. See the link in comment #933 above for the measured radiation evidence for this event having occurred. Plenty of other credible evidence has been reported in past threads here.

    The premise for wanting to collapse the towers is not in doubt. There was a failed attempt on February 26, 1993 to bring down the tower with a truck bomb in the garage. People had been hinting at this possibility during the months leading up to the event. The concept was featured in a television episode, in a video game: even Alex Jones announced the possibility weeks before, in what could be described as a comprehensive predictive programing effort, which also included the three hour movie Pearl Harbor, shown during the summer of 2001. Presumably some people in New York wanted to destroy the towers from the very beginning. See my previous quote (September 12, 2023 at 8:09 am GMT • 1.4 years ago) from Wikipedia:

    Construction of the World Trade Center (Wikipedia)

    Yamasaki, who had previously designed Saudi Arabia’s Dhahran International Airport with the Saudi Binladin Group, incorporated features of Arabic architecture into the design of the World Trade Center. The plaza was modelled after Mecca, incorporating features such as a vast delineated square, a fountain, and a radial circular pattern. Yamasaki described the plaza as “a mecca, a great relief from the narrow streets and sidewalks of the Wall Street area.†He also incorporated other features of Arabic architecture into the building design, including pointed arches, interweaving tracery of prefabricated concrete, a minaret like flight tower, and arabesque patterns.
    �
    Let's see if Donald Trump's new Justice Department has the guts to pursue the perpetrators.

    Replies: @skrik, @Mr. Anon
  • @Mr. Anon
    @Been_there_done_that


    However, the initially outward and even upward ejection of some heavy debris from the twin buildings at high velocity in all directions – then necessarily falling along a parabolic path – during their spectacular collapses at nearly the rate of free fall, clearly entails additional sources of energy, which you conspicuously ignore or deny.
    �
    Nothing flew upwards. I don't know what video you've seen. None of the ones I've seen show anything flying upwards. The collapse of WTCs 1 and 2 were completely consistent with the scenario laid out by NIST.

    Replies: @Been_there_done_that

    None of the ones I’ve seen show anything flying upwards.

    It appears as if though a huge volume of water is gushing outward like a fountain from inside the building.

    Here is an image of particles being ejected sideways.

    •ï¿½Replies: @Mr. Anon
    @Been_there_done_that


    It appears as if though a huge volume of water is gushing outward like a fountain from inside the building.
    �
    In a still frame, out of context. The video clearly shows a dust cloud from pulverized concrete and drywall hanging in the air as the solid debris of the building falls through it. It looks exactly as I would expect it to look.

    Here is an image of particles being ejected sideways.
    �
    Those jets out of the side of the building happened at the floors where the express elevators terminated. It's the result of air that was compressed in the elevator shafts by the falling floors above them blowing out the doors and through the windows. Tell me, if these jets were explosive charges, then why doesn't the building start to fail just where and when those jets are seen? But it didn't. It started to fail exactly where the airplanes hit.

    None of these things are hard to explain and do not require resorting to outlandish scenarios and bogus arguments informed by a glaring ignorance of basic physics and engineering. Evidently most people, at least most people who have commented on these images in echo chambers like this one, have no idea how to interpret what they're looking at.

    Replies: @Been_there_done_that
  • @skrik
    @littlereddot


    While I can tolerate kooky characters or the less informed
    �

    Something you guys never grasp is that buildings fall straight down
    �
    I do hope you two enjoy your state of malevolent ignorance.

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

    The only ignorance I see in this little discussion is yours.

  • @Been_there_done_that
    @Mr. Anon


    Every building that collapses falls due to gravity.
    �
    Nobody disagrees with the gravitational effect, so this law of physics merely expresses the least common denominator of consent. However, the initially outward and even upward ejection of some heavy debris from the twin buildings at high velocity in all directions – then necessarily falling along a parabolic path – during their spectacular collapses at nearly the rate of free fall, clearly entails additional sources of energy, which you conspicuously ignore or deny.

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

    However, the initially outward and even upward ejection of some heavy debris from the twin buildings at high velocity in all directions – then necessarily falling along a parabolic path – during their spectacular collapses at nearly the rate of free fall, clearly entails additional sources of energy, which you conspicuously ignore or deny.

    Nothing flew upwards. I don’t know what video you’ve seen. None of the ones I’ve seen show anything flying upwards. The collapse of WTCs 1 and 2 were completely consistent with the scenario laid out by NIST.

    •ï¿½Replies: @Been_there_done_that
    @Mr. Anon


    None of the ones I’ve seen show anything flying upwards.
    �
    It appears as if though a huge volume of water is gushing outward like a fountain from inside the building.

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GhafpiPXsAAP_SZ.jpg

    Here is an image of particles being ejected sideways.

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F0SkHvuWIAI-9ia.jpg

    Replies: @Mr. Anon
  • @Looger
    @Alden


    But Europe the Muslims and Africans don’t stay home and they don’t work. Just roam around in packs all day like 9 AM to 1AM shoplifting bullying intimidating and assault and battering bullying native born citizen men up rioting and sex assaulting everything from rubbing on a bus grabbing to full penetration and serious injury rape. As well as assaulting women and very young girls they attack men and boys too. Always 5 or more to 1
    �
    THIS.

    This is what's going on in Calgary now. Whole apartment blocks taken over (and subsequently infested with cockroaches and bed bugs) by Africans, Arabs etc. on the dole, hanging around, harassing women, intimidating men. They have no jobs, no where to go, they just exist downtown and take as much free money as they can.

    There will come a point when the leftards will not be able to keep all the tax cattle on the reservation, once there are so many of their pets that we can't afford them anymore.

    People think of this as an invasion but really the low-IQ implants are just the dumb army of the left. They're not going to conquer anything but a welfare check and a fucking food bank.

    No wonder we're going to be invaded by space aliens - anything that keeps us from realizing what's going on right in front of us.

    Replies: @Low-carb Political Movement, @notanonymousHere

    The ratio of “intimidating men” to “killing foreigners” is out of kilter.

  • OmK says:

    1. CIA agent’s confession :

    ã€CIA Agent Confesses On Deathbed : ‘We Blew Up WTC 7 On 9/11】

    (posted on Sep.16,2022)

    | Principia Scientific International

    🔶 https://principia-scientific.com/cia-agent-confesses-on-deathbed-we-blew-up-wtc-7-on-9-11/

    2.ã€Sao Paolo Skyscraper Collapse and its Strange Relation to 911】

    🔶 https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?102651-Sao-Paolo-Skyscraper-Collapse-and-its-Strange-Relation-to-911/

    See this one’s 5th article
    written by indigopete.
    This indigopete writes like
    “Looked like a controlled demo to me”.

  • @Mr. Anon
    @skrik

    AE911 Truth is the name of the organization. Despite it's name, many of it's members are neither engineers nor architects. As Ryan Dawson pointed out, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth couldn't even be bothered to look at the architectural drawings of the Pentagon, and did not know how it's architecture was laid out.

    WTC7 was clearly a ‘ controlled demolition,’ and Chandler’s North Tower vid clearly illustrates ditto for WTCs 1 & 2 [identical vertical collapse].
    �
    WTC 7 does look like a controlled demolition, at least from the videos available, all of which are at some distance and obscured by other buildings. The collapse of WTC 1 and 2 don't look like any controlled demolition I've ever seen. Still, WTC 7 could have fallen of it's own just from the structural and fire damage it sustained. Something you guys never grasp is that buildings fall straight down because that's the way that gravity points. Every building that collapses falls due to gravity. It's just a question of what weakens it enough that it does so.

    Replies: @littlereddot, @Been_there_done_that

    Every building that collapses falls due to gravity.

    Nobody disagrees with the gravitational effect, so this law of physics merely expresses the least common denominator of consent. However, the initially outward and even upward ejection of some heavy debris from the twin buildings at high velocity in all directions – then necessarily falling along a parabolic path – during their spectacular collapses at nearly the rate of free fall, clearly entails additional sources of energy, which you conspicuously ignore or deny.

    •ï¿½Replies: @Mr. Anon
    @Been_there_done_that


    However, the initially outward and even upward ejection of some heavy debris from the twin buildings at high velocity in all directions – then necessarily falling along a parabolic path – during their spectacular collapses at nearly the rate of free fall, clearly entails additional sources of energy, which you conspicuously ignore or deny.
    �
    Nothing flew upwards. I don't know what video you've seen. None of the ones I've seen show anything flying upwards. The collapse of WTCs 1 and 2 were completely consistent with the scenario laid out by NIST.

    Replies: @Been_there_done_that
  • @littlereddot
    @Mr. Anon

    Thank you. You views are very reasonable.

    There are so many unknowns or unconfirmable aspects, that it is hard to be 100% sure what happened. I take it as a mark of intelligence if someone can hold off judgement till enough facts are sufficiently available.

    However when someone like Skrik comes along and professes total confidence in this theory or that, we know that he is a bit of a nut. Or at least not very bright.

    While I can tolerate kooky characters or the less informed, I am unfortunately less sanguine about his rudeness.

    Replies: @skrik

    While I can tolerate kooky characters or the less informed

    Something you guys never grasp is that buildings fall straight down

    I do hope you two enjoy your state of malevolent ignorance.

    •ï¿½Replies: @Mr. Anon
    @skrik

    The only ignorance I see in this little discussion is yours.
  • @Mr. Anon
    @skrik

    AE911 Truth is the name of the organization. Despite it's name, many of it's members are neither engineers nor architects. As Ryan Dawson pointed out, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth couldn't even be bothered to look at the architectural drawings of the Pentagon, and did not know how it's architecture was laid out.

    WTC7 was clearly a ‘ controlled demolition,’ and Chandler’s North Tower vid clearly illustrates ditto for WTCs 1 & 2 [identical vertical collapse].
    �
    WTC 7 does look like a controlled demolition, at least from the videos available, all of which are at some distance and obscured by other buildings. The collapse of WTC 1 and 2 don't look like any controlled demolition I've ever seen. Still, WTC 7 could have fallen of it's own just from the structural and fire damage it sustained. Something you guys never grasp is that buildings fall straight down because that's the way that gravity points. Every building that collapses falls due to gravity. It's just a question of what weakens it enough that it does so.

    Replies: @littlereddot, @Been_there_done_that

    Thank you. You views are very reasonable.

    There are so many unknowns or unconfirmable aspects, that it is hard to be 100% sure what happened. I take it as a mark of intelligence if someone can hold off judgement till enough facts are sufficiently available.

    However when someone like Skrik comes along and professes total confidence in this theory or that, we know that he is a bit of a nut. Or at least not very bright.

    While I can tolerate kooky characters or the less informed, I am unfortunately less sanguine about his rudeness.

    •ï¿½Replies: @skrik
    @littlereddot


    While I can tolerate kooky characters or the less informed
    �

    Something you guys never grasp is that buildings fall straight down
    �
    I do hope you two enjoy your state of malevolent ignorance.

    Replies: @Mr. Anon
  • @skrik
    @Mr. Anon


    with the destruction of the towers and Pentagon happening essentially exactly as the NIST studies concluded
    �
    No. From the headline article:

    9/11 Truthers endlessly refer to the thousands of architects and engineers who have publicly signed the 9/11 Truth Statement, saying the official story of the WTC attacks is physically impossible
    �
    9/11 Truthers are far more than a

    little mystery cult
    �
    and anyone can join; research two convincing bits of evidence:

    1. The collapse of WTC7. [DIY = you do the research work*].

    2. Try searching for this:
    “North Tower Exploding by David Chandler†AE911Truth site:youtube.com

    WTC7 was clearly a ' controlled demolition,' and Chandler's North Tower vid clearly illustrates ditto for WTCs 1 & 2 [identical vertical collapse].

    Q: Where have you been hiding [= ignoring proven reality] for the last 23+ years? One could theorise that you put coffee-beans into your ears while saying “la la la†as you ignored the available evidence out of [erring!] ideological grounds.

    *[for any too lazy to research, try searching for this:
    "WTC7 in Freefall: No Longer Controversial" DavidChandler911]

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

    AE911 Truth is the name of the organization. Despite it’s name, many of it’s members are neither engineers nor architects. As Ryan Dawson pointed out, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth couldn’t even be bothered to look at the architectural drawings of the Pentagon, and did not know how it’s architecture was laid out.

    WTC7 was clearly a ‘ controlled demolition,’ and Chandler’s North Tower vid clearly illustrates ditto for WTCs 1 & 2 [identical vertical collapse].

    WTC 7 does look like a controlled demolition, at least from the videos available, all of which are at some distance and obscured by other buildings. The collapse of WTC 1 and 2 don’t look like any controlled demolition I’ve ever seen. Still, WTC 7 could have fallen of it’s own just from the structural and fire damage it sustained. Something you guys never grasp is that buildings fall straight down because that’s the way that gravity points. Every building that collapses falls due to gravity. It’s just a question of what weakens it enough that it does so.

    •ï¿½Replies: @littlereddot
    @Mr. Anon

    Thank you. You views are very reasonable.

    There are so many unknowns or unconfirmable aspects, that it is hard to be 100% sure what happened. I take it as a mark of intelligence if someone can hold off judgement till enough facts are sufficiently available.

    However when someone like Skrik comes along and professes total confidence in this theory or that, we know that he is a bit of a nut. Or at least not very bright.

    While I can tolerate kooky characters or the less informed, I am unfortunately less sanguine about his rudeness.

    Replies: @skrik
    , @Been_there_done_that
    @Mr. Anon


    Every building that collapses falls due to gravity.
    �
    Nobody disagrees with the gravitational effect, so this law of physics merely expresses the least common denominator of consent. However, the initially outward and even upward ejection of some heavy debris from the twin buildings at high velocity in all directions – then necessarily falling along a parabolic path – during their spectacular collapses at nearly the rate of free fall, clearly entails additional sources of energy, which you conspicuously ignore or deny.

    Replies: @Mr. Anon
  • @skrik
    @Sparkon


    but you refuse to understand that Friedman’s description of the core columns he saw being in “too-good condition†pretty much rules out your shaped charges
    �
    No; I refuse nothing that seems reasonable; I don't see any evidence contradicting my theses. You have some other idea(s)? Fine. Research then publish; I'm 'all ears'.

    BUT: I do think that we agree that WTCs 1, 2 & 7 were explosively control-demolished AND I think that we know by what combination of rogue-regimes.

    It's *who/there* where justice-implementation must start. rgds

    Replies: @Sparkon

    No; I refuse nothing that seems reasonable;

    There is nothing at all unreasonable about Friedman’s observations, nor is it unreasonable for me to note that you’ve been dodging them.

    I do think Friedman’s report of columns in “too-good condition” is offering us a valuable clue, but so far nobody here has picked up on it.

    Any theory must account for all of the evidence.

  • @John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt
    Witnessing is something. Whether what I experienced has a manmade origin or not does not matter in the least. I'll always be curious.

    Event 1: tail end 1970's, red, green, blue lights over Lake Michigan forming moving triangles. Our young family had watched a film on TV and spooned together. As heading toward bedrooms, dad announces "wuz this?" while retrieving window fan. We wiggle into the window bay to see silent lights form rotating contracting or expanding triangles. Lights disappeared, went to bed. Light show, lasers, whadevah. Explainable.

    Event 3: early 2000's, a skydiver laying in the open door of a Twin Otter at take off. As climbing, I glance at Farmer McNasty's huge oak and the comic book flying saucer "hiding" from our hangar behind the tree. Classic bronze-colored saucer with a bubble atop. Large, very beautiful jewel-like red, green, blue and white bright lights. Rotating and wobbling like a drunk. Hilarious, and then my view changed so I didn't see my flying saucer anymore. Hoax, prank, cumulative hypoxia, whadevah. Explainable.

    Event 2: mid-1990's, bringing a 70 ft racing yacht back from Chicago to Mackinac Race along with ten sailors, one girlfriend and a famous, no-nonsense CEO owner/CEO. Sailors are all electrical engineers, mostly IBM. We are running with the wind under full spinnaker and having a somewhat intoxicated blast surfing until we notice an enormous object cruising in the opposite direction against the wind at 1,000 agl. Crisp lines, perfect tetrahedron, white/off-white and casting a crisp shadow below. Size of a small town. Self-propelled with no disernible means of propulsion. No way manmade was consensus at the time. I hold a computer engineering PhD from a top five program and enjoy a good professional reputation. I am an experienced pilot with many ratings and an outdoorsman. The object witnessed sent a chill down our spines for years afterwards. Open to explanation, but strong belief the object was constructed by non-human entities. No way the means for building the object could be concealed from prying eyes during lengthy construction period. Open.

    If you co-witnessed Event 2, Ron, perhaps your skepticism would be tempered as mine is.

    Replies: @OmK

    There is already a technology which can make space (high quality) images.
    It is by laser or by something else. But the technology has not yet been released. Because it was developed for the purpose of general public’s mind-control.
    I also experienced such thing in 2012 or 3.

  • Correction :
    FEMALE’s ⇒ FEMA’s

  • Urgent

    It was FEMA :

    ã€UNBELIEVABLE !
    FEMALE’s Role in the California Fires :
    Leaked Documents Prove Weather Manipulation, Land Grabs, and
    Heat-Mapping Technologies Used
    to Ignite Fires ! (Jan.13,2025)】

    ï¼ Gazetteller . com

    🔶 https://gazetteller.com/unbelievable-femas-role-in-the-california-fires-leaked-documents-prove-weather-manipulation-land-grabs-and-heat-mapping-technologies-used-to-ignite-fires/

    Administrator of FEMA (now) :
    Deanne Crisbad(Cris”well”)

    Trump nominee
    for (new) director of FEMA :
    Kevin Guthrie

  • skrik says:
    @Mr. Anon
    @skrik


    I don’t make stuff up.
    �
    No, you just peddle stuff you've read that somebody else made up.

    I do not give a FF about 600C warmed up steel, because any such had *zero* effect on the pre-loaded explosives in WTCs 1, 2 & 7.
    �
    There were no pre-loaded explosives. There is no evidence of such. And if fire can't bring down a steel-framed building, why do they bother to fireproof the steel?

    That quote was possibly before the general consensus = inside-job = explosive disassembly meaning it’s possibly now merely truther-history.
    �
    General consensus? Among whom? A dozen or so people on this thread? A few thousand people around the World who have yammered on about this for the last quarter century. There is no "general consensus" other than the official story - and a lot of that is down to people like you who have poisoned the well for any serious investigation of the reality of 9/11.

    And, in any event, an "inside job" does not require explosive disassembly. This is just a fetish of Truthers. It's part of their catecism. It is perfectly possible for there to have been a wider conspiracy behind 9/11, including the involvement of state actors - i.e. an "inside job", with the destruction of the towers and Pentagon happening essentially exactly as the NIST studies concluded. But you guys have blinded yourself to anything but your own little mystery cult. It's why you are inneffectual nobodies who have had no influence.

    Replies: @skrik

    with the destruction of the towers and Pentagon happening essentially exactly as the NIST studies concluded

    No. From the headline article:

    9/11 Truthers endlessly refer to the thousands of architects and engineers who have publicly signed the 9/11 Truth Statement, saying the official story of the WTC attacks is physically impossible

    9/11 Truthers are far more than a

    little mystery cult

    and anyone can join; research two convincing bits of evidence:

    1. The collapse of WTC7. [DIY = you do the research work*].

    2. Try searching for this:
    “North Tower Exploding by David Chandler†AE911Truth site:youtube.com

    WTC7 was clearly a ‘ controlled demolition,’ and Chandler’s North Tower vid clearly illustrates ditto for WTCs 1 & 2 [identical vertical collapse].

    Q: Where have you been hiding [= ignoring proven reality] for the last 23+ years? One could theorise that you put coffee-beans into your ears while saying “la la la†as you ignored the available evidence out of [erring!] ideological grounds.

    *[for any too lazy to research, try searching for this:
    “WTC7 in Freefall: No Longer Controversial” DavidChandler911]

    •ï¿½Replies: @Mr. Anon
    @skrik

    AE911 Truth is the name of the organization. Despite it's name, many of it's members are neither engineers nor architects. As Ryan Dawson pointed out, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth couldn't even be bothered to look at the architectural drawings of the Pentagon, and did not know how it's architecture was laid out.

    WTC7 was clearly a ‘ controlled demolition,’ and Chandler’s North Tower vid clearly illustrates ditto for WTCs 1 & 2 [identical vertical collapse].
    �
    WTC 7 does look like a controlled demolition, at least from the videos available, all of which are at some distance and obscured by other buildings. The collapse of WTC 1 and 2 don't look like any controlled demolition I've ever seen. Still, WTC 7 could have fallen of it's own just from the structural and fire damage it sustained. Something you guys never grasp is that buildings fall straight down because that's the way that gravity points. Every building that collapses falls due to gravity. It's just a question of what weakens it enough that it does so.

    Replies: @littlereddot, @Been_there_done_that
  • Witnessing is something. Whether what I experienced has a manmade origin or not does not matter in the least. I’ll always be curious.

    Event 1: tail end 1970’s, red, green, blue lights over Lake Michigan forming moving triangles. Our young family had watched a film on TV and spooned together. As heading toward bedrooms, dad announces “wuz this?” while retrieving window fan. We wiggle into the window bay to see silent lights form rotating contracting or expanding triangles. Lights disappeared, went to bed. Light show, lasers, whadevah. Explainable.

    Event 3: early 2000’s, a skydiver laying in the open door of a Twin Otter at take off. As climbing, I glance at Farmer McNasty’s huge oak and the comic book flying saucer “hiding” from our hangar behind the tree. Classic bronze-colored saucer with a bubble atop. Large, very beautiful jewel-like red, green, blue and white bright lights. Rotating and wobbling like a drunk. Hilarious, and then my view changed so I didn’t see my flying saucer anymore. Hoax, prank, cumulative hypoxia, whadevah. Explainable.

    Event 2: mid-1990’s, bringing a 70 ft racing yacht back from Chicago to Mackinac Race along with ten sailors, one girlfriend and a famous, no-nonsense CEO owner/CEO. Sailors are all electrical engineers, mostly IBM. We are running with the wind under full spinnaker and having a somewhat intoxicated blast surfing until we notice an enormous object cruising in the opposite direction against the wind at 1,000 agl. Crisp lines, perfect tetrahedron, white/off-white and casting a crisp shadow below. Size of a small town. Self-propelled with no disernible means of propulsion. No way manmade was consensus at the time. I hold a computer engineering PhD from a top five program and enjoy a good professional reputation. I am an experienced pilot with many ratings and an outdoorsman. The object witnessed sent a chill down our spines for years afterwards. Open to explanation, but strong belief the object was constructed by non-human entities. No way the means for building the object could be concealed from prying eyes during lengthy construction period. Open.

    If you co-witnessed Event 2, Ron, perhaps your skepticism would be tempered as mine is.

    •ï¿½Replies: @OmK
    @John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt

    There is already a technology which can make space (high quality) images.
    It is by laser or by something else. But the technology has not yet been released. Because it was developed for the purpose of general public's mind-control.
    I also experienced such thing in 2012 or 3.
  • @Anonymous
    Hello Ron,
    I am a frequent reader of The Unz Review, and strongly supportive of your work. I have learned a lot from reading articles in TUR. I would like to make a comment concerning the alleged "moon landings", which is the ONLY issue where I disagree with your own assessment.

    I think that in this case you are placing the burden of proof on the wrong shoulders. It is the people who make extraordinary claims who should be pressed the hardest to provide proofs (examples: the claim that aliens from outer space are regularly visiting the Earth, or the claim that 6 million jews were put to death in gas chambers during WW2), not the people who take a sceptical attitude and doubt these claims. Clearly, the claim that a handful of people visited the moon in the years 1969-72 is extraordinary, given the level of technological knowledge in the 1960s, the poor track record (many failed launches) of the US space programme before the "moon landings", the lack of protection of the astronauts against the high levels of radioactivity in the Van Allen belts, and the fact that in the last 54 years, no human being has been further away from the Earth than the ISS (400 kilometres).

    In truth, the proof that has been offered for the "moon landings" is almost as scant as for the other two examples mentioned above. The TV footage is far too blurry for anyone to be able to tell where it was shot (it is claimed to be a copy of an original which has mysteriously vanished). The still pictures are ridden with anomalies (for example, in some of them two sources of light are visible, where there should have been only one, the sun). Also, while it would be possible with today's technology to use unmanned satellites to take detailed pictures of the alleged landing sites on the moon, showing the Lunar Modules if they are actually there, the US goverment has shown absolutely no interest in doing so, or even in allowing others to do so at their own expense.

    Furthermore, since the PR and goodwill generated by the alleged "moon landings" is enormous, it is clear that the US government had a very strong motive for faking them (in particular during a time period when the US received a lot of "bad will" from the Vietnam war, political murders, and civil unrest).

    I suggest that (when you have some time at your disposal, I understand that you are a busy man) you read some books that go through the alleged proofs of the "moon landings" in more detail. I suggest "One small step?" by Gerhard Wisniewski. You may also want to watch the movie "A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Moon" by journalist and filmmaker Bart Sibrel, and as a companion to that, the "memoir" of Bart Sibrel entitled "Moon Man". Perhaps you will find that the "moon landings" is well deserving of a place in your "American Pravda" series.

    Replies: @littlereddot, @Mr. Anon

    Clearly, the claim that a handful of people visited the moon in the years 1969-72 is extraordinary, given the level of technological knowledge in the 1960s, the poor track record (many failed launches) of the US space programme before the “moon landingsâ€, the lack of protection of the astronauts against the high levels of radioactivity in the Van Allen belts, and the fact that in the last 54 years, no human being has been further away from the Earth than the ISS (400 kilometres).

    None of that is true. The level of technological knowledge – and more importantly, ability – as pertains to rocketry was about the same in the late 1960s, as it was in the early 2000’s. The reason we didn’t do anything more ambitious in the 2000’s than in the 1960s was because the technology had not advanced much. And we didn’t bother to do the same thing is because……why? Why replicate a stunt, the value of which lies primarily in being the first to do it. As I mentioned upthread, the deepest manned ocean descent – into the challenger deep of the Marianas Trench was only done in the early 1960s. And then was not done again for about another fifty years, in 2012. Does that mean that it never happened at all? Or that there just isn’t much intrinsic reason to do it.

    There is no radioactivity in the Van Allen belts. There are energentic charged particles trapped on magnetic field lines. You get a dose going through them. You get a bigger dose lingering in them (which nobody wants to do). The faster you go through them, the less of a dose you get. And they didn’t go through the densest parf of the Van Allen belts, owing to the relative orientation of the geomagnetic equator and the plane of the Moon’s orbit.

    The TV footage is far too blurry for anyone to be able to tell where it was shot (it is claimed to be a copy of an original which has mysteriously vanished).

    So, the original wouldn’t have been much clearer, it was low-resolution video that was data-rate limited. And anyway, even if the original video-tape still existed, it might be well nigh unreadable just from age. You probably can’t find the original of Euclid’s Geometry in Ancient Greek. Does that mean that Geometry is false? And the movies and still pictures were quite clear and had very good resolution.

    The still pictures are ridden with anomalies (for example, in some of them two sources of light are visible, where there should have been only one, the sun).

    No, that isn’t true. Some pictures have shadows that have been interpreted as being from more than one light source. And there was more than one light source on the Moon’s surface: the Sun, and Sunlight reflected off of other surfaces (the spacecraft, lunar surface).

    Also, while it would be possible with today’s technology to use unmanned satellites to take detailed pictures of the alleged landing sites on the moon, showing the Lunar Modules if they are actually there, the US goverment has shown absolutely no interest in doing so, or even in allowing others to do so at their own expense.

    This was done, by the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, and you lot just said it was faked. Why should NASA or any one else bother to take more pictures? Moon hoax believers would simply say that it was faked, no matter how good the imagery was. You’re an audience that would never be placated? So why bother placating you? In any event, you’re an audience that is irrelevant: nobody cares what you think.

  • @skrik
    @littlereddot

    https://www.ae911truth.org/evidence/faqs/649-faq-3-has-there-ever-been-a-total-collapse-of-a-steel-frame-fire-protected-high-rise-besides-world-trade-center-buildings-1-2-and-7

    FAQ #3: Has there ever been a total collapse of a steel-frame, fire-protected high-rise besides World Trade Center Buildings 1, 2, and 7?
    No. There has never been a total collapse of a steel-frame, fire-protected high-rise building other than the three World Trade Center high-rises on 9/11.
    There have, however, been partial collapses of steel-frame, fire-protected high-rise buildings around the world and a total collapse of a steel-frame high-rise building without fire protection in Iran — although AE911Truth has documented overwhelming evidence that the collapse of this building was caused by controlled demolition.
    There have also been partial and total collapses of hybrid steel/reinforced concrete-frame high-rise buildings without fire protection as well as partial and total collapses of reinforced concrete-frame buildings, which typically don’t have fire insulation. There has also been a total collapse of a concrete-frame building without steel reinforcement.
    Therefore, the Twin Towers and Building 7 stand alone as the only steel-frame, fire-protected high-rise buildings to experience total collapse ostensibly due to fire
    �
    I don't make stuff up.

    That quote was possibly before the general consensus = inside-job = explosive disassembly meaning it's possibly now merely truther-history.

    I do not give a FF about 600C warmed up steel, because any such had *zero* effect on the pre-loaded explosives in WTCs 1, 2 & 7.

    Have you asked your medical advisors about OCPD?

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

    I don’t make stuff up.

    No, you just peddle stuff you’ve read that somebody else made up.

    I do not give a FF about 600C warmed up steel, because any such had *zero* effect on the pre-loaded explosives in WTCs 1, 2 & 7.

    There were no pre-loaded explosives. There is no evidence of such. And if fire can’t bring down a steel-framed building, why do they bother to fireproof the steel?

    That quote was possibly before the general consensus = inside-job = explosive disassembly meaning it’s possibly now merely truther-history.

    General consensus? Among whom? A dozen or so people on this thread? A few thousand people around the World who have yammered on about this for the last quarter century. There is no “general consensus” other than the official story – and a lot of that is down to people like you who have poisoned the well for any serious investigation of the reality of 9/11.

    And, in any event, an “inside job” does not require explosive disassembly. This is just a fetish of Truthers. It’s part of their catecism. It is perfectly possible for there to have been a wider conspiracy behind 9/11, including the involvement of state actors – i.e. an “inside job”, with the destruction of the towers and Pentagon happening essentially exactly as the NIST studies concluded. But you guys have blinded yourself to anything but your own little mystery cult. It’s why you are inneffectual nobodies who have had no influence.

    •ï¿½Replies: @skrik
    @Mr. Anon


    with the destruction of the towers and Pentagon happening essentially exactly as the NIST studies concluded
    �
    No. From the headline article:

    9/11 Truthers endlessly refer to the thousands of architects and engineers who have publicly signed the 9/11 Truth Statement, saying the official story of the WTC attacks is physically impossible
    �
    9/11 Truthers are far more than a

    little mystery cult
    �
    and anyone can join; research two convincing bits of evidence:

    1. The collapse of WTC7. [DIY = you do the research work*].

    2. Try searching for this:
    “North Tower Exploding by David Chandler†AE911Truth site:youtube.com

    WTC7 was clearly a ' controlled demolition,' and Chandler's North Tower vid clearly illustrates ditto for WTCs 1 & 2 [identical vertical collapse].

    Q: Where have you been hiding [= ignoring proven reality] for the last 23+ years? One could theorise that you put coffee-beans into your ears while saying “la la la†as you ignored the available evidence out of [erring!] ideological grounds.

    *[for any too lazy to research, try searching for this:
    "WTC7 in Freefall: No Longer Controversial" DavidChandler911]

    Replies: @Mr. Anon
  • OmK says:

    Donald John Trump doubts official 9.11 narrative. See the next one :

    ã€Mini nukes were used on 9.11】
    ï¼ Presstv. ir’s telephone interview to Jim Fetzer (2017)

    🔶 https://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2017/09/11/534825/Mini-nukes-were-used-to-blow-apart-Twin-Towers-on-911

    So, Donald J. Trump may release CIA documents and FBI documents.
    For it, it is important that who are Trump’s nominees for director of CIA, director of FBI,and DNI.

    Trump’s nominees :

    ・Director of CIA : John Ratcliffe

    ・Director of FBI : Kash Patel
    (Kashyap Pramod Vinod Patel)

    ・DNI
    (Director of National Intelligence):
    Tulsi Gabbard

  • @skrik
    @OmK


    You are a true genuine Idiot
    �
    s/he/it said, admiring him/her/itself in the mirror.

    Now; read my lips: *NO NUKES*!

    Replies: @OmK

    No one wants to read your crap article.
    Time is very precious.
    To read your crap ones is only waste of precious time.

  • @Anonymous
    Hello Ron,
    I am a frequent reader of The Unz Review, and strongly supportive of your work. I have learned a lot from reading articles in TUR. I would like to make a comment concerning the alleged "moon landings", which is the ONLY issue where I disagree with your own assessment.

    I think that in this case you are placing the burden of proof on the wrong shoulders. It is the people who make extraordinary claims who should be pressed the hardest to provide proofs (examples: the claim that aliens from outer space are regularly visiting the Earth, or the claim that 6 million jews were put to death in gas chambers during WW2), not the people who take a sceptical attitude and doubt these claims. Clearly, the claim that a handful of people visited the moon in the years 1969-72 is extraordinary, given the level of technological knowledge in the 1960s, the poor track record (many failed launches) of the US space programme before the "moon landings", the lack of protection of the astronauts against the high levels of radioactivity in the Van Allen belts, and the fact that in the last 54 years, no human being has been further away from the Earth than the ISS (400 kilometres).

    In truth, the proof that has been offered for the "moon landings" is almost as scant as for the other two examples mentioned above. The TV footage is far too blurry for anyone to be able to tell where it was shot (it is claimed to be a copy of an original which has mysteriously vanished). The still pictures are ridden with anomalies (for example, in some of them two sources of light are visible, where there should have been only one, the sun). Also, while it would be possible with today's technology to use unmanned satellites to take detailed pictures of the alleged landing sites on the moon, showing the Lunar Modules if they are actually there, the US goverment has shown absolutely no interest in doing so, or even in allowing others to do so at their own expense.

    Furthermore, since the PR and goodwill generated by the alleged "moon landings" is enormous, it is clear that the US government had a very strong motive for faking them (in particular during a time period when the US received a lot of "bad will" from the Vietnam war, political murders, and civil unrest).

    I suggest that (when you have some time at your disposal, I understand that you are a busy man) you read some books that go through the alleged proofs of the "moon landings" in more detail. I suggest "One small step?" by Gerhard Wisniewski. You may also want to watch the movie "A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Moon" by journalist and filmmaker Bart Sibrel, and as a companion to that, the "memoir" of Bart Sibrel entitled "Moon Man". Perhaps you will find that the "moon landings" is well deserving of a place in your "American Pravda" series.

    Replies: @littlereddot, @Mr. Anon

    Unlike the Auschwitz Holocaust accusations, which I tested and found that the official narrative is rather wonky,

    I admit I have not tested out the issue of the moon landings so maintain an agnosticism whether it is true or not.

    But two (relatively) recent things raise my suspicions.

    1. After China announced that they were interested in visiting the moon, NASA suddenly scrambled to get their own Artemis moon mission. Maybe this was just to show “We still as strong and vibrant as we ever were”. But maybe not.

    2. The recent announcement by a certain “international” organisation to preserve the symbolic historical importance of the first moon landing site, which would be at risk due to space tourism. This one smells fishy to me.
    https://www.rt.com/news/611028-moon-endangered-sites-list/

    Both these items may suggest that NASA wants to conceal something about the circa 1969 moon landing sites.

    In 1, place new equipment and footprints at the site to give plausible deniability “oh you can’t find any evidence of the 1969 landing because we walked all over it already”.

    In 2, keep away anyone who can verify that the 1969 landings did not take place “oh, we need to preserve this site, so you stay over there. The 1969 landings are real…trust me.”.

    Again I stress I am no expert. But these recent incidents make me more suspicious.

  • @OmK
    @skrik

    You are a true genuine Idiot.
    Have you read the one in 933 above :
    ã€Mystery Solved ・・・】?
    Anyone who read that one realizes that some nukes were undoubtedly used in 9.11 inside job. ((other ones (usual bombs, thermite) were also used))

    Replies: @skrik

    You are a true genuine Idiot

    s/he/it said, admiring him/her/itself in the mirror.

    Now; read my lips: *NO NUKES*!

    •ï¿½Replies: @OmK
    @skrik

    No one wants to read your crap article.
    Time is very precious.
    To read your crap ones is only waste of precious time.
  • @littlereddot

    I don’t make stuff up.
    �
    No. You just regurgitate stuff that you have not digested.

    Did you see the video I attached about the debunking? They specifically said that when this report was written there have been no cases. But since then there have. And I showed you explicit videos of examples.

    I do not give a FF about 600C warmed up steel, because any such had *zero* effect on the pre-loaded explosives in WTCs 1, 2 & 7.
    �
    For the UMPTEENTH time, our discussion is not about explosives. I have already told you that I believe that explosives were used to ENSURE the collapse of WTC.

    But that is not the issue at hand. The issue at hand is your insistence that steel framed buildings cannot fall due to fire.

    Have you asked your medical advisors about OCPD?
    �
    I have no idea what that is. Obviously I was never recommended to take one.

    Again, you display your quick resort to childish insults rather than to stick to the point of the argument. Because you have no argument except "what somebody else said" = "I don't make stuff up".

    Replies: @skrik

    You clearly have a concentration/comprehension problem:

    but I’m not playing so gets his/her/its nickers in a twist

    •ï¿½LOL: littlereddot
  • @skrik
    @OmK


    the-wtc-was-nuked-on-911
    �
    No; nukes were considered long and hard; here is one of my contributions:

    https://www.unz.com/article/did-the-plowshares-program-set-the-stage-for-nuclear-terrorism-on-september-11/?showcomments#comment-6185195

    My 9/11 mantra: No DEW, no dustify, no nukes [no planes optional]

    Replies: @OmK

    You are a true genuine Idiot.
    Have you read the one in 933 above :
    ã€Mystery Solved ・・・】?
    Anyone who read that one realizes that some nukes were undoubtedly used in 9.11 inside job. ((other ones (usual bombs, thermite) were also used))

    •ï¿½Replies: @skrik
    @OmK


    You are a true genuine Idiot
    �
    s/he/it said, admiring him/her/itself in the mirror.

    Now; read my lips: *NO NUKES*!

    Replies: @OmK
  • Anonymous[171] •ï¿½Disclaimer says:

    Hello Ron,
    I am a frequent reader of The Unz Review, and strongly supportive of your work. I have learned a lot from reading articles in TUR. I would like to make a comment concerning the alleged “moon landings”, which is the ONLY issue where I disagree with your own assessment.

    I think that in this case you are placing the burden of proof on the wrong shoulders. It is the people who make extraordinary claims who should be pressed the hardest to provide proofs (examples: the claim that aliens from outer space are regularly visiting the Earth, or the claim that 6 million jews were put to death in gas chambers during WW2), not the people who take a sceptical attitude and doubt these claims. Clearly, the claim that a handful of people visited the moon in the years 1969-72 is extraordinary, given the level of technological knowledge in the 1960s, the poor track record (many failed launches) of the US space programme before the “moon landings”, the lack of protection of the astronauts against the high levels of radioactivity in the Van Allen belts, and the fact that in the last 54 years, no human being has been further away from the Earth than the ISS (400 kilometres).

    In truth, the proof that has been offered for the “moon landings” is almost as scant as for the other two examples mentioned above. The TV footage is far too blurry for anyone to be able to tell where it was shot (it is claimed to be a copy of an original which has mysteriously vanished). The still pictures are ridden with anomalies (for example, in some of them two sources of light are visible, where there should have been only one, the sun). Also, while it would be possible with today’s technology to use unmanned satellites to take detailed pictures of the alleged landing sites on the moon, showing the Lunar Modules if they are actually there, the US goverment has shown absolutely no interest in doing so, or even in allowing others to do so at their own expense.

    Furthermore, since the PR and goodwill generated by the alleged “moon landings” is enormous, it is clear that the US government had a very strong motive for faking them (in particular during a time period when the US received a lot of “bad will” from the Vietnam war, political murders, and civil unrest).

    I suggest that (when you have some time at your disposal, I understand that you are a busy man) you read some books that go through the alleged proofs of the “moon landings” in more detail. I suggest “One small step?” by Gerhard Wisniewski. You may also want to watch the movie “A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Moon” by journalist and filmmaker Bart Sibrel, and as a companion to that, the “memoir” of Bart Sibrel entitled “Moon Man”. Perhaps you will find that the “moon landings” is well deserving of a place in your “American Pravda” series.

    •ï¿½Replies: @littlereddot
    @Anonymous

    Unlike the Auschwitz Holocaust accusations, which I tested and found that the official narrative is rather wonky,

    I admit I have not tested out the issue of the moon landings so maintain an agnosticism whether it is true or not.

    But two (relatively) recent things raise my suspicions.

    1. After China announced that they were interested in visiting the moon, NASA suddenly scrambled to get their own Artemis moon mission. Maybe this was just to show "We still as strong and vibrant as we ever were". But maybe not.

    2. The recent announcement by a certain "international" organisation to preserve the symbolic historical importance of the first moon landing site, which would be at risk due to space tourism. This one smells fishy to me.
    https://www.rt.com/news/611028-moon-endangered-sites-list/

    Both these items may suggest that NASA wants to conceal something about the circa 1969 moon landing sites.

    In 1, place new equipment and footprints at the site to give plausible deniability "oh you can't find any evidence of the 1969 landing because we walked all over it already".

    In 2, keep away anyone who can verify that the 1969 landings did not take place "oh, we need to preserve this site, so you stay over there. The 1969 landings are real...trust me.".

    Again I stress I am no expert. But these recent incidents make me more suspicious.
    , @Mr. Anon
    @Anonymous


    Clearly, the claim that a handful of people visited the moon in the years 1969-72 is extraordinary, given the level of technological knowledge in the 1960s, the poor track record (many failed launches) of the US space programme before the “moon landingsâ€, the lack of protection of the astronauts against the high levels of radioactivity in the Van Allen belts, and the fact that in the last 54 years, no human being has been further away from the Earth than the ISS (400 kilometres).
    �
    None of that is true. The level of technological knowledge - and more importantly, ability - as pertains to rocketry was about the same in the late 1960s, as it was in the early 2000's. The reason we didn't do anything more ambitious in the 2000's than in the 1960s was because the technology had not advanced much. And we didn't bother to do the same thing is because......why? Why replicate a stunt, the value of which lies primarily in being the first to do it. As I mentioned upthread, the deepest manned ocean descent - into the challenger deep of the Marianas Trench was only done in the early 1960s. And then was not done again for about another fifty years, in 2012. Does that mean that it never happened at all? Or that there just isn't much intrinsic reason to do it.

    There is no radioactivity in the Van Allen belts. There are energentic charged particles trapped on magnetic field lines. You get a dose going through them. You get a bigger dose lingering in them (which nobody wants to do). The faster you go through them, the less of a dose you get. And they didn't go through the densest parf of the Van Allen belts, owing to the relative orientation of the geomagnetic equator and the plane of the Moon's orbit.

    The TV footage is far too blurry for anyone to be able to tell where it was shot (it is claimed to be a copy of an original which has mysteriously vanished).
    �
    So, the original wouldn't have been much clearer, it was low-resolution video that was data-rate limited. And anyway, even if the original video-tape still existed, it might be well nigh unreadable just from age. You probably can't find the original of Euclid's Geometry in Ancient Greek. Does that mean that Geometry is false? And the movies and still pictures were quite clear and had very good resolution.

    The still pictures are ridden with anomalies (for example, in some of them two sources of light are visible, where there should have been only one, the sun).
    �
    No, that isn't true. Some pictures have shadows that have been interpreted as being from more than one light source. And there was more than one light source on the Moon's surface: the Sun, and Sunlight reflected off of other surfaces (the spacecraft, lunar surface).

    Also, while it would be possible with today’s technology to use unmanned satellites to take detailed pictures of the alleged landing sites on the moon, showing the Lunar Modules if they are actually there, the US goverment has shown absolutely no interest in doing so, or even in allowing others to do so at their own expense.
    �
    This was done, by the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, and you lot just said it was faked. Why should NASA or any one else bother to take more pictures? Moon hoax believers would simply say that it was faked, no matter how good the imagery was. You're an audience that would never be placated? So why bother placating you? In any event, you're an audience that is irrelevant: nobody cares what you think.
  • I don’t make stuff up.

    No. You just regurgitate stuff that you have not digested.

    Did you see the video I attached about the debunking? They specifically said that when this report was written there have been no cases. But since then there have. And I showed you explicit videos of examples.

    I do not give a FF about 600C warmed up steel, because any such had *zero* effect on the pre-loaded explosives in WTCs 1, 2 & 7.

    For the UMPTEENTH time, our discussion is not about explosives. I have already told you that I believe that explosives were used to ENSURE the collapse of WTC.

    But that is not the issue at hand. The issue at hand is your insistence that steel framed buildings cannot fall due to fire.

    Have you asked your medical advisors about OCPD?

    I have no idea what that is. Obviously I was never recommended to take one.

    Again, you display your quick resort to childish insults rather than to stick to the point of the argument. Because you have no argument except “what somebody else said” = “I don’t make stuff up”.

    •ï¿½Replies: @skrik
    @littlereddot

    You clearly have a concentration/comprehension problem:

    but I’m not playing so @littlereddot gets his/her/its nickers in a twist
    �
  • skrik says:
    @littlereddot
    @skrik


    No. @littlereddot is pushing some agenda which does not impact the 9/11 ‘debate’
    �
    Huh? Discussing whether steel framed buildings CAN collapse vertically like WTC does not impact the debate?

    If you have any intelligence/wisdom at all, you would use what I have explained to you to REFINE your arguments.

    When you confidently spout silly statements like "steel framed buildings CANNOT collapse vertically in a fire" it only gives ammunition to Joe Public to laugh at us and dismiss us as conspiracy kooks.

    Do you have the courage and strength of character to say "thank you for your explanation", then Refine your arguments for future discussions? No, you stick to your guns and argue on ad nauseam because of butthurt.

    Thanks to people like you, no wonder Joe Public laughs at us.

    Replies: @skrik

    https://www.ae911truth.org/evidence/faqs/649-faq-3-has-there-ever-been-a-total-collapse-of-a-steel-frame-fire-protected-high-rise-besides-world-trade-center-buildings-1-2-and-7

    FAQ #3: Has there ever been a total collapse of a steel-frame, fire-protected high-rise besides World Trade Center Buildings 1, 2, and 7?
    No. There has never been a total collapse of a steel-frame, fire-protected high-rise building other than the three World Trade Center high-rises on 9/11.
    There have, however, been partial collapses of steel-frame, fire-protected high-rise buildings around the world and a total collapse of a steel-frame high-rise building without fire protection in Iran — although AE911Truth has documented overwhelming evidence that the collapse of this building was caused by controlled demolition.
    There have also been partial and total collapses of hybrid steel/reinforced concrete-frame high-rise buildings without fire protection as well as partial and total collapses of reinforced concrete-frame buildings, which typically don’t have fire insulation. There has also been a total collapse of a concrete-frame building without steel reinforcement.
    Therefore, the Twin Towers and Building 7 stand alone as the only steel-frame, fire-protected high-rise buildings to experience total collapse ostensibly due to fire

    I don’t make stuff up.

    That quote was possibly before the general consensus = inside-job = explosive disassembly meaning it’s possibly now merely truther-history.

    I do not give a FF about 600C warmed up steel, because any such had *zero* effect on the pre-loaded explosives in WTCs 1, 2 & 7.

    Have you asked your medical advisors about OCPD?

    •ï¿½Replies: @Mr. Anon
    @skrik


    I don’t make stuff up.
    �
    No, you just peddle stuff you've read that somebody else made up.

    I do not give a FF about 600C warmed up steel, because any such had *zero* effect on the pre-loaded explosives in WTCs 1, 2 & 7.
    �
    There were no pre-loaded explosives. There is no evidence of such. And if fire can't bring down a steel-framed building, why do they bother to fireproof the steel?

    That quote was possibly before the general consensus = inside-job = explosive disassembly meaning it’s possibly now merely truther-history.
    �
    General consensus? Among whom? A dozen or so people on this thread? A few thousand people around the World who have yammered on about this for the last quarter century. There is no "general consensus" other than the official story - and a lot of that is down to people like you who have poisoned the well for any serious investigation of the reality of 9/11.

    And, in any event, an "inside job" does not require explosive disassembly. This is just a fetish of Truthers. It's part of their catecism. It is perfectly possible for there to have been a wider conspiracy behind 9/11, including the involvement of state actors - i.e. an "inside job", with the destruction of the towers and Pentagon happening essentially exactly as the NIST studies concluded. But you guys have blinded yourself to anything but your own little mystery cult. It's why you are inneffectual nobodies who have had no influence.

    Replies: @skrik
  • @skrik
    @Mr. Anon


    You’re raining all over their little gnostic mystery cult
    �
    No. @littlereddot is pushing some agenda which does not impact the 9/11 'debate' - which not so BTW has long been closed with the conclusion 'inside job'.

    With respect for this rational debate space, there's only so far one should go with OT topics, and IMHO @littlereddot has crossed an OT-red line - but I’m not playing so @littlereddot gets his/her/its nickers in a twist.

    Speaking of dishonest ‘activist/trolls’ it seems to me that this once proud rational debate space has been invaded by - ta ra! Dishonest ‘activist/trolls’ whose only function seems to be attempting to destroy rational debate. Bad trolls! Shame! - Ah, but dishonest ‘activist/trolls’ have no shame, which would most likely expose them as Kol Nidre types, eh?

    Replies: @littlereddot

    No. is pushing some agenda which does not impact the 9/11 ‘debate’

    Huh? Discussing whether steel framed buildings CAN collapse vertically like WTC does not impact the debate?

    If you have any intelligence/wisdom at all, you would use what I have explained to you to REFINE your arguments.

    When you confidently spout silly statements like “steel framed buildings CANNOT collapse vertically in a fire” it only gives ammunition to Joe Public to laugh at us and dismiss us as conspiracy kooks.

    Do you have the courage and strength of character to say “thank you for your explanation”, then Refine your arguments for future discussions? No, you stick to your guns and argue on ad nauseam because of butthurt.

    Thanks to people like you, no wonder Joe Public laughs at us.

    •ï¿½Replies: @skrik
    @littlereddot

    https://www.ae911truth.org/evidence/faqs/649-faq-3-has-there-ever-been-a-total-collapse-of-a-steel-frame-fire-protected-high-rise-besides-world-trade-center-buildings-1-2-and-7

    FAQ #3: Has there ever been a total collapse of a steel-frame, fire-protected high-rise besides World Trade Center Buildings 1, 2, and 7?
    No. There has never been a total collapse of a steel-frame, fire-protected high-rise building other than the three World Trade Center high-rises on 9/11.
    There have, however, been partial collapses of steel-frame, fire-protected high-rise buildings around the world and a total collapse of a steel-frame high-rise building without fire protection in Iran — although AE911Truth has documented overwhelming evidence that the collapse of this building was caused by controlled demolition.
    There have also been partial and total collapses of hybrid steel/reinforced concrete-frame high-rise buildings without fire protection as well as partial and total collapses of reinforced concrete-frame buildings, which typically don’t have fire insulation. There has also been a total collapse of a concrete-frame building without steel reinforcement.
    Therefore, the Twin Towers and Building 7 stand alone as the only steel-frame, fire-protected high-rise buildings to experience total collapse ostensibly due to fire
    �
    I don't make stuff up.

    That quote was possibly before the general consensus = inside-job = explosive disassembly meaning it's possibly now merely truther-history.

    I do not give a FF about 600C warmed up steel, because any such had *zero* effect on the pre-loaded explosives in WTCs 1, 2 & 7.

    Have you asked your medical advisors about OCPD?

    Replies: @Mr. Anon
  • @OmK
    It seems that the following one is most important on 9.11 incident :

    ã€Mystery Solved :
    The WTC was Nuked on 9/11】
    ï¼ Alternative

    🔶 https://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2013/05/mystery-solved-the-wtc-was-nuked-on-911-2635484.html

    It seems that in this comments section no one has not yet mentioned on this matter.

    Neutron bomb might have been set at basement.

    And also other bombs and Thermite would have been used at upper floors.

    9.11 incident was meticulously planned one. Computer simulation was perhaps done taking into consideration of the strength of each part of the buildings.

    Upper floor explosion was nesesary.
    Because it was under supposition of aircraft crash, when it never happened.

    If lower floors are blown away, building will free fall by its own weight and be destroyed.

    Replies: @skrik

    the-wtc-was-nuked-on-911

    No; nukes were considered long and hard; here is one of my contributions:

    https://www.unz.com/article/did-the-plowshares-program-set-the-stage-for-nuclear-terrorism-on-september-11/?showcomments#comment-6185195

    My 9/11 mantra: No DEW, no dustify, no nukes [no planes optional]

    •ï¿½Replies: @OmK
    @skrik

    You are a true genuine Idiot.
    Have you read the one in 933 above :
    ã€Mystery Solved ・・・】?
    Anyone who read that one realizes that some nukes were undoubtedly used in 9.11 inside job. ((other ones (usual bombs, thermite) were also used))

    Replies: @skrik
  • @notanonymousHere
    @notbe mk 2

    It cute that you think there's a fallout shelter at a test site. Los Alamos contradicts you on get-togethers.

    Replies: @notbe mk 2

    fallout shelter…bunker…whatever…if you want to be technical about it: basically some sort of an architectural edifice where brainiacs and the top brass could peer out of a concrete slit and gawk at a test of a runaway atomic chain reaction using welder goggles. If you bomb that you’ll set back any country’s a-bomb program for a generation or so.

    Yeah whatever, they had big get-togethers at Los Alamos whoopeedoo-but even so the scientists there were guarded by a huge force of soldiers precisely to prevent assassinations or kidnappings with the commies in their respective atom bomb programs even more paranoid about this threat.

  • skrik says:
    @Mr. Anon
    @littlereddot

    You bring up actual facts and make points informed by some actual knowledge of engineering, and commenter "skrik" can only reply:

    Debunkers are the reverse of the truthers’ coin; more often than not dishonest ‘activist/trolls’ [often hiding behind a [lying?] ‘respectful’ assertion, say] whilst attempting to disturb honest truth-seeking.
    �
    You disagree with him and are informed, and therefore must be a dishonest troll. It's like that with all these guys. You're raining all over their little gnostic mystery cult and it makes them angry.

    Replies: @littlereddot, @skrik

    You’re raining all over their little gnostic mystery cult

    No. @littlereddot is pushing some agenda which does not impact the 9/11 ‘debate’ – which not so BTW has long been closed with the conclusion ‘inside job’.

    With respect for this rational debate space, there’s only so far one should go with OT topics, and IMHO @littlereddot has crossed an OT-red line – but I’m not playing so @littlereddot gets his/her/its nickers in a twist.

    Speaking of dishonest ‘activist/trolls’ it seems to me that this once proud rational debate space has been invaded by – ta ra! Dishonest ‘activist/trolls’ whose only function seems to be attempting to destroy rational debate. Bad trolls! Shame! – Ah, but dishonest ‘activist/trolls’ have no shame, which would most likely expose them as Kol Nidre types, eh?

    •ï¿½Replies: @littlereddot
    @skrik


    No. @littlereddot is pushing some agenda which does not impact the 9/11 ‘debate’
    �
    Huh? Discussing whether steel framed buildings CAN collapse vertically like WTC does not impact the debate?

    If you have any intelligence/wisdom at all, you would use what I have explained to you to REFINE your arguments.

    When you confidently spout silly statements like "steel framed buildings CANNOT collapse vertically in a fire" it only gives ammunition to Joe Public to laugh at us and dismiss us as conspiracy kooks.

    Do you have the courage and strength of character to say "thank you for your explanation", then Refine your arguments for future discussions? No, you stick to your guns and argue on ad nauseam because of butthurt.

    Thanks to people like you, no wonder Joe Public laughs at us.

    Replies: @skrik
  • @Mr. Anon
    @littlereddot

    You bring up actual facts and make points informed by some actual knowledge of engineering, and commenter "skrik" can only reply:

    Debunkers are the reverse of the truthers’ coin; more often than not dishonest ‘activist/trolls’ [often hiding behind a [lying?] ‘respectful’ assertion, say] whilst attempting to disturb honest truth-seeking.
    �
    You disagree with him and are informed, and therefore must be a dishonest troll. It's like that with all these guys. You're raining all over their little gnostic mystery cult and it makes them angry.

    Replies: @littlereddot, @skrik

    LOL thanks.

    You’re raining all over their little gnostic mystery cult

    But comparing Skrik to the Gnostics would be insulting the Gnostics way too much. I kinda like their Gospel of Thomas 🙂

    Skrik, on the other hand, is just a puffed up know-it-all.

  • @littlereddot
    @skrik

    You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Just look at the excerpt from your own quote:

    is significant in that fire-related collapse of structures is rare, with collapse of reinforced concrete structures even more so.†Steel-reinforced concrete buildings are even MORE resistant to fire than steel framed buildings, but buildings can collapse in fires, regardless of materials
    �
    Steel Reinforced (RC) buildings are MORE RESISTANT than steel framed buildings. Yet it can collapse due to fire as per the Delft building.

    The WTC was Steel Framed, NOT Steel Reinforced (RC)....and was more liable to fail under fire conditions. Same goes for the Sao Paolo building.

    I suggest you speak to a real structural engineer or architect, before you make more of a fool of yourself.

    And no, quoting all sorts of other stuff to obfuscate does not win you the argument.

    We are talking about whether or not a steel building can fail under fire conditions. Not whether a bomb was used or not.

    Please try to focus.

    IMHO you are a trouble-maker looking for a fight;
    �
    You were the one who started with the derision and insults.

    If you dish it out, you better be able to take it.

    Don't go wimping out on me now. We have only just begun.

    Replies: @skrik, @Mr. Anon

    You bring up actual facts and make points informed by some actual knowledge of engineering, and commenter “skrik” can only reply:

    Debunkers are the reverse of the truthers’ coin; more often than not dishonest ‘activist/trolls’ [often hiding behind a [lying?] ‘respectful’ assertion, say] whilst attempting to disturb honest truth-seeking.

    You disagree with him and are informed, and therefore must be a dishonest troll. It’s like that with all these guys. You’re raining all over their little gnostic mystery cult and it makes them angry.

    •ï¿½Replies: @littlereddot
    @Mr. Anon

    LOL thanks.

    You’re raining all over their little gnostic mystery cult
    �
    But comparing Skrik to the Gnostics would be insulting the Gnostics way too much. I kinda like their Gospel of Thomas :)

    Skrik, on the other hand, is just a puffed up know-it-all.
    , @skrik
    @Mr. Anon


    You’re raining all over their little gnostic mystery cult
    �
    No. @littlereddot is pushing some agenda which does not impact the 9/11 'debate' - which not so BTW has long been closed with the conclusion 'inside job'.

    With respect for this rational debate space, there's only so far one should go with OT topics, and IMHO @littlereddot has crossed an OT-red line - but I’m not playing so @littlereddot gets his/her/its nickers in a twist.

    Speaking of dishonest ‘activist/trolls’ it seems to me that this once proud rational debate space has been invaded by - ta ra! Dishonest ‘activist/trolls’ whose only function seems to be attempting to destroy rational debate. Bad trolls! Shame! - Ah, but dishonest ‘activist/trolls’ have no shame, which would most likely expose them as Kol Nidre types, eh?

    Replies: @littlereddot
  • Correction :
    no one has not yet mentioned
    ⇒
    no one has yet mentioned

  • OmK says:

    It seems that the following one is most important on 9.11 incident :

    ã€Mystery Solved :
    The WTC was Nuked on 9/11】
    ï¼ Alternative

    🔶 https://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2013/05/mystery-solved-the-wtc-was-nuked-on-911-2635484.html

    It seems that in this comments section no one has not yet mentioned on this matter.

    Neutron bomb might have been set at basement.

    And also other bombs and Thermite would have been used at upper floors.

    9.11 incident was meticulously planned one. Computer simulation was perhaps done taking into consideration of the strength of each part of the buildings.

    Upper floor explosion was nesesary.
    Because it was under supposition of aircraft crash, when it never happened.

    If lower floors are blown away, building will free fall by its own weight and be destroyed.

    •ï¿½Replies: @skrik
    @OmK


    the-wtc-was-nuked-on-911
    �
    No; nukes were considered long and hard; here is one of my contributions:

    https://www.unz.com/article/did-the-plowshares-program-set-the-stage-for-nuclear-terrorism-on-september-11/?showcomments#comment-6185195

    My 9/11 mantra: No DEW, no dustify, no nukes [no planes optional]

    Replies: @OmK
  • @skrik
    @littlereddot

    What you are trying to assert has little to no relevance to WTCs 1, 2 & 7.

    Who could care IF a steel building can fail under fire? THEN what?

    WTCs 1, 2 & 7 did *not* collapse due to fire, finito.

    Tell it to your grandmother [she might trust you].

    Try getting lost; you've worn out your welcome - with silliness to boot.

    Replies: @littlereddot

    What you are trying to assert has little to no relevance to WTCs 1, 2 & 7.

    Why bother to talk about these other buildings if we have not even established that
    Steel buildings CAN collapse vertically in fire?

    You are like trying to do calculus before you are able to add 2 and 2 together.

    This is why you are confused.

    So go on, tell me if steel framed buildings can collapse vertically under fire.
    Maybe after that, we can discuss whatever else you wish.

  • @skrik
    @OmK

    You neglected to say that you think that Einstein = god. haw

    Not only that, but you seem to have ignored my input, namely that when Einstein mentioned ether in 1920, he was not being exactly '100% honest'; he was [reportedly] only speaking 'loosely':

    he was using the term metaphorically
    �
    Check my quote.

    Further, I gave you a link to 'zero-point energy':

    These fluctuating zero-point fields lead to a kind of reintroduction of an aether in physics
    �
    It's not nice to ignore inputs but I suspect that you are acting a bit like a cocker-spaniel on the search for a turtle: Head down and charge ahead, regardless of externals - like my inputs, say.

    Tip: Help us out a bit; kindly specify *exactly* what you are ‘pushing’ and why; how are you trying to ‘change the world’?

    Einstein and Feynman are sleeping easily, their legacies secure.

    Replies: @OmK

    Idiot.
    You are a master of distraction.

    Do you oppose einstein’s
    1920 assertion of that
    “Aether’s existence is inevitable ”
    ?
    Are you an ex lawyer ?
    You are merely a silver-tongued.

  • skrik says:
    @Sparkon
    @skrik


    Perhaps you have not fully comprehended what I wrote
    �
    No, I understand what you're saying, which is what you've been saying here for some time already, but you refuse to understand that Friedman's description of the core columns he saw being in "too-good condition" pretty much rules out your shaped charges, detcord and all other explosives. Surely Friedman would have noticed and remarked on any such obvious marks on the columns as would have been left by explosives.

    Indeed, the whole purpose of Friedman's remarks was to register his amazement that the columns had failed the way they did with the steel welds between them being ripped out.


    “All lies and jest,
    Still, a man hears what he wants to hear,
    And disregards the rest.â€

    -- Paul Simon - "The Boxer"
    �

    �

    Replies: @skrik

    but you refuse to understand that Friedman’s description of the core columns he saw being in “too-good condition†pretty much rules out your shaped charges

    No; I refuse nothing that seems reasonable; I don’t see any evidence contradicting my theses. You have some other idea(s)? Fine. Research then publish; I’m ‘all ears’.

    BUT: I do think that we agree that WTCs 1, 2 & 7 were explosively control-demolished AND I think that we know by what combination of rogue-regimes.

    It’s *who/there* where justice-implementation must start. rgds

    •ï¿½Replies: @Sparkon
    @skrik




    No; I refuse nothing that seems reasonable;
    �
    There is nothing at all unreasonable about Friedman's observations, nor is it unreasonable for me to note that you've been dodging them.

    I do think Friedman's report of columns in "too-good condition" is offering us a valuable clue, but so far nobody here has picked up on it.

    Any theory must account for all of the evidence.
  • @skrik
    @Sparkon


    I don’t deny that explosives were used in the demolition, but we need an explanation for those core columns in “too-good condition†that all failed by having their welds ripped out. I’m sorry, but detcord didn’t do that
    �
    Perhaps you have not fully comprehended what I wrote, so a quick re-hash [my opinions of course, but thoroughly grounded by observation & truther + other articles + deduction]:

    1. Shaped charges top & bottom of each vertical core-column unit, on opposite faces so that when they detonate, the column-unit is flipped towards the horizontal. This is 'handy' as the column-units are flipped, a lot of 'empty space' is made free for the falling components to stack in an efficient way into the rubble-pile. You quoted from metabunk; in that article you can see column-unit/ends [relatively unscathed, some with weld-rips], some with concave depressions in them = shaped charges damage.

    2. The det-cord was threaded into electrical conduits in the floor-slab post-poured concrete. Two different disassembly methods, with more shaped charges to disassemble the wall panel-units, blowing some/most them outwards to kingdom come.

    3. Back to the actual demolition sequence, working both downwards and upwards level by level from the alleged collision levels, accounts for all the construction units either into the footprint [core-units] or scattered around [perimeter-units], with the floor-slab/truss components turned to billowing pyroclastic clouds.

    Upper section with TV-tower tilting:

    before just disappearing into thin air, like a bad special effect
    �
    No; the progressive disassembly was obscured by smoke/dust billowing around.

    No shit, Sherlock; proof = no large upper-section trace in the rubble-piles = the upper sections were both disassembled as in my description. rgds

    Replies: @Sparkon

    Perhaps you have not fully comprehended what I wrote

    No, I understand what you’re saying, which is what you’ve been saying here for some time already, but you refuse to understand that Friedman’s description of the core columns he saw being in “too-good condition” pretty much rules out your shaped charges, detcord and all other explosives. Surely Friedman would have noticed and remarked on any such obvious marks on the columns as would have been left by explosives.

    Indeed, the whole purpose of Friedman’s remarks was to register his amazement that the columns had failed the way they did with the steel welds between them being ripped out.

    “All lies and jest,
    Still, a man hears what he wants to hear,
    And disregards the rest.â€

    — Paul Simon – “The Boxer”

    •ï¿½Replies: @skrik
    @Sparkon


    but you refuse to understand that Friedman’s description of the core columns he saw being in “too-good condition†pretty much rules out your shaped charges
    �
    No; I refuse nothing that seems reasonable; I don't see any evidence contradicting my theses. You have some other idea(s)? Fine. Research then publish; I'm 'all ears'.

    BUT: I do think that we agree that WTCs 1, 2 & 7 were explosively control-demolished AND I think that we know by what combination of rogue-regimes.

    It's *who/there* where justice-implementation must start. rgds

    Replies: @Sparkon
  • skrik says:
    @OmK
    @skrik

    So what?
    Do you oppose einstein's assertion ?

    Replies: @skrik

    You neglected to say that you think that Einstein = god. haw

    Not only that, but you seem to have ignored my input, namely that when Einstein mentioned ether in 1920, he was not being exactly ‘100% honest’; he was [reportedly] only speaking ‘loosely’:

    he was using the term metaphorically

    Check my quote.

    Further, I gave you a link to ‘zero-point energy’:

    These fluctuating zero-point fields lead to a kind of reintroduction of an aether in physics

    It’s not nice to ignore inputs but I suspect that you are acting a bit like a cocker-spaniel on the search for a turtle: Head down and charge ahead, regardless of externals – like my inputs, say.

    Tip: Help us out a bit; kindly specify *exactly* what you are ‘pushing’ and why; how are you trying to ‘change the world’?

    Einstein and Feynman are sleeping easily, their legacies secure.

    •ï¿½Replies: @OmK
    @skrik

    Idiot.
    You are a master of distraction.

    Do you oppose einstein's
    1920 assertion of that
    "Aether's existence is inevitable "
    ?
    Are you an ex lawyer ?
    You are merely a silver-tongued.
  • skrik says:
    @littlereddot
    @skrik

    You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Just look at the excerpt from your own quote:

    is significant in that fire-related collapse of structures is rare, with collapse of reinforced concrete structures even more so.†Steel-reinforced concrete buildings are even MORE resistant to fire than steel framed buildings, but buildings can collapse in fires, regardless of materials
    �
    Steel Reinforced (RC) buildings are MORE RESISTANT than steel framed buildings. Yet it can collapse due to fire as per the Delft building.

    The WTC was Steel Framed, NOT Steel Reinforced (RC)....and was more liable to fail under fire conditions. Same goes for the Sao Paolo building.

    I suggest you speak to a real structural engineer or architect, before you make more of a fool of yourself.

    And no, quoting all sorts of other stuff to obfuscate does not win you the argument.

    We are talking about whether or not a steel building can fail under fire conditions. Not whether a bomb was used or not.

    Please try to focus.

    IMHO you are a trouble-maker looking for a fight;
    �
    You were the one who started with the derision and insults.

    If you dish it out, you better be able to take it.

    Don't go wimping out on me now. We have only just begun.

    Replies: @skrik, @Mr. Anon

    What you are trying to assert has little to no relevance to WTCs 1, 2 & 7.

    Who could care IF a steel building can fail under fire? THEN what?

    WTCs 1, 2 & 7 did *not* collapse due to fire, finito.

    Tell it to your grandmother [she might trust you].

    Try getting lost; you’ve worn out your welcome – with silliness to boot.

    •ï¿½Replies: @littlereddot
    @skrik


    What you are trying to assert has little to no relevance to WTCs 1, 2 & 7.
    �
    Why bother to talk about these other buildings if we have not even established that
    Steel buildings CAN collapse vertically in fire?

    You are like trying to do calculus before you are able to add 2 and 2 together.

    This is why you are confused.

    So go on, tell me if steel framed buildings can collapse vertically under fire.
    Maybe after that, we can discuss whatever else you wish.
  • skrik says:
    @Sparkon
    @skrik


    Recall the construction, which resembled a soda-can with a massive core column
    �
    Well, I think you've got it backwards. The jetliners are like aluminum soda pop cans, but the Twin Towers resembled a steel cage on the outside, composed of tapering steel box columns, which were also tied to the central core with the hat trusses, in addition to the floor trusses, and at least two floors had horizontal steel I-beams to support the weight of heavy equipment on those floors.

    On the 41st and 42nd floors, both towers will house mechanical equipment. To accommodate the heavy loads, the floors are designed as structural steel frame slabs. All other floors from the ninth to the top (except for 75 and 76, which will also carry mechanical equipment) have typical truss floor joists and steel decking.
    �
    https://www.911research.wtc7.net/~nin11evi/911research/wtc/arch/hattruss.html

    Thought experiments with inaccurate models are not likely to yield useful results. So please...

    I don't deny that explosives were used in the demolition, but we need an explanation for those core columns in "too-good condition" that all failed by having their welds ripped out. I'm sorry, but detcord didn't do that.

    Can’t see any use of CGI in that. rgds
    �
    http://dickatlee.com/issues/911/cgf/fig5_wtc2_angle.jpg

    Graphic: Dick Atlee

    Well, then you've got to explain how the entire top of WTC 2 detached itself from the rest of the structure, rotated itself, and appeared to fall off the rump of WTC 2 before just disappearing into thin air, like a bad special effect.


    When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.

    -- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
    �

    No Feces Fosdick!
    No Crap Columbo!

    You know the rest.

    Replies: @skrik

    I don’t deny that explosives were used in the demolition, but we need an explanation for those core columns in “too-good condition†that all failed by having their welds ripped out. I’m sorry, but detcord didn’t do that

    Perhaps you have not fully comprehended what I wrote, so a quick re-hash [my opinions of course, but thoroughly grounded by observation & truther + other articles + deduction]:

    1. Shaped charges top & bottom of each vertical core-column unit, on opposite faces so that when they detonate, the column-unit is flipped towards the horizontal. This is ‘handy’ as the column-units are flipped, a lot of ’empty space’ is made free for the falling components to stack in an efficient way into the rubble-pile. You quoted from metabunk; in that article you can see column-unit/ends [relatively unscathed, some with weld-rips], some with concave depressions in them = shaped charges damage.

    2. The det-cord was threaded into electrical conduits in the floor-slab post-poured concrete. Two different disassembly methods, with more shaped charges to disassemble the wall panel-units, blowing some/most them outwards to kingdom come.

    3. Back to the actual demolition sequence, working both downwards and upwards level by level from the alleged collision levels, accounts for all the construction units either into the footprint [core-units] or scattered around [perimeter-units], with the floor-slab/truss components turned to billowing pyroclastic clouds.

    Upper section with TV-tower tilting:

    before just disappearing into thin air, like a bad special effect

    No; the progressive disassembly was obscured by smoke/dust billowing around.

    No shit, Sherlock; proof = no large upper-section trace in the rubble-piles = the upper sections were both disassembled as in my description. rgds

    •ï¿½Replies: @Sparkon
    @skrik


    Perhaps you have not fully comprehended what I wrote
    �
    No, I understand what you're saying, which is what you've been saying here for some time already, but you refuse to understand that Friedman's description of the core columns he saw being in "too-good condition" pretty much rules out your shaped charges, detcord and all other explosives. Surely Friedman would have noticed and remarked on any such obvious marks on the columns as would have been left by explosives.

    Indeed, the whole purpose of Friedman's remarks was to register his amazement that the columns had failed the way they did with the steel welds between them being ripped out.


    “All lies and jest,
    Still, a man hears what he wants to hear,
    And disregards the rest.â€

    -- Paul Simon - "The Boxer"
    �

    �

    Replies: @skrik
  • @skrik
    @OmK


    Do you oppose your God’s assertion?
    �
    Errr; "your God" does not compute; I personally do not relate to any such, let alone ‘possess’, but any particular god? Any particular assertion? Any credible, certified authority?

    Replies: @OmK

    So what?
    Do you oppose einstein’s assertion ?

    •ï¿½Replies: @skrik
    @OmK

    You neglected to say that you think that Einstein = god. haw

    Not only that, but you seem to have ignored my input, namely that when Einstein mentioned ether in 1920, he was not being exactly '100% honest'; he was [reportedly] only speaking 'loosely':

    he was using the term metaphorically
    �
    Check my quote.

    Further, I gave you a link to 'zero-point energy':

    These fluctuating zero-point fields lead to a kind of reintroduction of an aether in physics
    �
    It's not nice to ignore inputs but I suspect that you are acting a bit like a cocker-spaniel on the search for a turtle: Head down and charge ahead, regardless of externals - like my inputs, say.

    Tip: Help us out a bit; kindly specify *exactly* what you are ‘pushing’ and why; how are you trying to ‘change the world’?

    Einstein and Feynman are sleeping easily, their legacies secure.

    Replies: @OmK