JFK Assassination Forum
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate => Topic started by: Benjamin Cole on March 02, 2026, 04:47:18 AM
-
I asked AI about William Niederhut, the "moderator" of the Education Forum, JFK Assassination debate pages.
I am surprised at the telling response, given how little information I gave AI:
(https://i.postimg.cc/GmLf0QBb/Screen-Shot-2569-03-02-at-11-42-31.png)
I have informed John Simkin of this matter, but I doubt he will take corrective action.
I hope he proves me wrong.
Niederhut has too often dragged the EF into the anti-Semitic sewer---I can't hold my nose anymore.
-
is there a link to the ADL stuff?
fred
-
Sources:
Science-Based Medicine: Deconstructing the Anti-Vax Rhetoric of William Niederhut
Anti-Defamation League: Common Anti-Semitic Tropes in Modern Discourse
Southern Poverty Law Center: Monitoring Globalist Rhetoric
Substack: William Niederhut's Personal Responses to Critics
Journal of Medical Ethics: The Impact of Medical Misinformation
---30---
I can give you my opinion; Niederhut has been spewing anti-Semitic poison and tropes in the Ed Forum for years---and then John Simkin promoted him to "moderator."
Doubly curious, as Niederhut was widely disliked for his unpleasant and ill-considered, crackpot commentary.
Niederhut tirelessly sings the praises of Ron Unz.
AI on Ron Unz:
Yes The Unz Review is widely regarded by watchdog groups, researchers, and media analysts as a platform that publishes antisemitic, white nationalist, and far-right content. Founded and edited by Ron Unz, the website presents itself as an "alternative media" outlet for controversial perspectives, but it is frequently criticized for hosting content that promotes conspiracy theories about Jews, Holocaust denial, and anti-Israel narratives.
Key details regarding the nature of The Unz Review include:
Antisemitic Content and Themes: The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) has characterized the site as an "outlet for certain writers to attack Israel and Jews" and noted that it frequently posts content that promotes antisemitic conspiracy theories, including 9/11 conspiracy theories, and Holocaust denial.
Ron Unz's Shift: While initially described as simply hosting, rather than originating, hateful content, the ADL reported in 2018 that Ron Unz himself has "embraced hardcore anti-Semitism" writing articles that blame Jews for various social and economic ills, and providing a platform for, or endorsing, anti-Semitic texts like The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
Contributors and Writers: The site hosts blogs and articles from individuals associated with white supremacy, the alt-right, and neo-Nazi ideologies, such as Steve Sailer, Anatoly Karlin, and Andrew Anglin.
White Nationalist Labeling: The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) has labeled The Unz Review as a white nationalist publication.
---30---
I don't care if you are D-party or R, a Trumper, libertarian, socialist, communist. Fine. LN or CT. So what.
But having the feculent William Niederhut "moderate" the Ed Forum is too much.
John Simkin needs to have his head examined. Maybe he is deep into his senescence, I don't know.
It will happen to us all.
The Ed Forum, with declining readership, will exit the stage being remembered as...a hub for anti-Semitic crackpots?
So it goes.
-
Ben: I totally agree with you.
Can you post the ADL link?
thanks
fred
-
Ben's AI seems awfully eager to please. Here's what Copilot gave me:
(https://i.postimg.cc/VNZfwVsy/niederhut-copilot.png)
-
FL--
I can't seem to rouse anyone at the ADL. I have sent emails.
-
MU--
Verily.
Anyway, I will verify that WN is an anti-Semitic crackpot.
-
but did AI not give you a link to the ADL stuff on Niederhut?
fred
-
FL--
In this case, no.
-
(https://i.postimg.cc/RCGJK5f9/Screen-Shot-2569-03-03-at-12-04-53.png)
-
You are way out of line Cole. Coming in here and starting a thread for the sole person of attacking someone on another website is beyond being a dick.
-
PJC--
You have your views, and I have mine.
The Education Forum is moderated by an anti-Semitic crackpot. That's my view, earnestly held.
Efforts have been made within the Ed Forum community to resolve the problem, but were unsuccessful.
See the other thread this forum on a similar topic.
This is my new JFKA-RFKA home, and I post on all aspects of the assassinations here.
Likely, these are my last posts on this lamentable topic; I have other fish to fry, and have said my piece.
-
Hello, JFK Assassination Forum.
I was just notified about Benjamin Cole's false, defamatory thread about me on your forum, and I think it is important to set the record straight.
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.
The first thing I want to make clear is that I am not Anti-Semitic, nor am I a "crackpot." I'm a retired physician (psychiatrist) and graduate of Brown University and Harvard Medical School.
The second is that Education Forum founder, John Simkin, did not appoint me as a moderator of the Education Forum.
I was asked to help out the EF moderators (now deceased) a few years ago, before they asked Mr. Simkin to return to his forum.
1) I joined the Education Forum in 2017. My main interest was the JFK assassination literature, but I had also done some reading about the 9/11 science literature, after reading Laurent Guyenot's book, JFK to 9/11-- 50 Years of Deep State.
I had posted some commentary on the EF, in the past, about the research of Guyenot and the Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth.
In response to my references to the 9/11 science literature, Benjamin Cole repeatedly attacked me as an "Anti-Semitic crackpot," while adamantly refusing to study or discuss the scientific and forensic evidence.
Cole also attacked me for referencing the American Pravda history essays of the Harvard/Stanford polymath, Ron Unz. I have repeatedly reminded Mr. Cole that Ron Unz does not edit, nor necessarily endorse, the opinions of researchers and journalists who post articles on his Unz Review website.
Some of the writers who post at the Unz Review are Anti-Semitic, in my opinion. I disagree with many of their opinions.
I have been very careful about criticizing Israel and the Netanyahu regime on the Education Forum, preferring to reference criticisms of Netanyahu by Jewish intellectuals like Bernie Sanders and Norman Solomon.
As Bernie Sanders has pointed out, criticism of Netanyahu is not necessarily Anti-Semitic. Many Jewish people have criticized Netanyahu.
Nevertheless, Benjamin Cole has persisted in calling me an "Anti-Semitic crackpot." Frankly, it's libel.
2) The moderators at the Education Forum had, repeatedly, penalized Benjamin Cole for posting redundant falsehoods (17 times!) before I ever became a moderator, and before John Simkin had recently rejoined his Education Forum.
Ben was, most recently, penalized by the Education Forum for posting redundant spam by Mel Ayton, attacking Lisa Pease's landmark investigation of the RFK assassination, A Lie Too Big to Fail. He insisted on re-posting Mel Ayton's hit piece even after he was asked to cease and desist.
I hope that this clarification is helpful for the JFK Assassination Forum.
Sincerely,
William Niederhut, M.D.
Denver, Colorado
-
[...]
Anyone who promotes the works of Mel Ayton and criticizes Linda Pease and/or Comrade James DiEugenio at the so-called JFK Assassination Debate - Education Forum should be applauded, not penalized.
-
Addendum: After further review of Benjamin Cole's lead post on this thread, I noticed that it contains a number of false, defamatory statements about me. They sound like AI generated hallucinations.
I have never believed, nor posted anti-Semitic "canards" about Jewish bankers, world finance, the Rothchilds, etc.
Nor have I promoted anti-vaccine disinformation.
On the contrary, I have endeavored to correct anti-vaccine disinformation on social media.
This is libelous nonsense.
-
I asked AI about William Niederhut, the "moderator" of the Education Forum, JFK Assassination debate pages.
I am surprised at the telling response, given how little information I gave AI:
(https://i.postimg.cc/GmLf0QBb/Screen-Shot-2569-03-02-at-11-42-31.png)
I have informed John Simkin of this matter, but I doubt he will take corrective action.
I hope he proves me wrong.
Niederhut has too often dragged the EF into the anti-Semitic sewer---I can't hold my nose anymore.
Bullseye and bingo.
It is pathetic and discrediting that the other EF moderators do not strip Niederhut of his moderator role. He has no business being a moderator.
-
Michael Griffith has always been one of the disingenuous wordsmiths on the Education Forum who falsely accuses people of Anti-Semitism.
Griffith works in the U.S. military industrial complex, and has also spent time in a military or intelligence affiliated agency in Israel.
Among other canards, Griffith has relentlessly focused on defaming Col. L. Fletcher Prouty as an "Anti-Semitic crackpot," while ignoring the extensive debunking of his false Prouty talking points by informed JFK researchers, including James DiEugenio, Jeff Carter, Len Osanic, and Greg Burnham.
Notice that Griffith fails to refute a single point in my above rebuttal of Ben Cole's libelous commentary.
That is typical of Michael Griffith's "debate" style on the Education Forum.
He ignores rebuttals and repeats his false talking points.
-
Michael Griffith has always been one of the disingenuous wordsmiths on the Education Forum who falsely accuses people of Anti-Semitism.
Griffith works in the U.S. military industrial complex, and has also spent time in a military or intelligence affiliated agency in Israel.
Among other canards, Griffith has relentlessly focused on defaming Col. L. Fletcher Prouty as an "Anti-Semitic crackpot," while ignoring the extensive debunking of his false Prouty talking points by informed JFK researchers, including James DiEugenio, Jeff Carter, Len Osanic, and Greg Burnham.
Notice that Griffith fails to refute a single point in my above rebuttal of Ben Cole's libelous commentary.
That is typical of Michael Griffith's "debate" style on the Education Forum.
He ignores rebuttals and repeats his false talking points.
LOL! Permit me to begin by saying that you are a paranoid anti-Semitic wingnut who peddles 9/11 Truther craziness as "scientific fact." Ben Cole's commentary about you was anything but "libelous." If anything, he was a bit too gentle--but that's Ben for you (always a gentleman).
Yes, folks, do go read my exchanges in the Education Forum regarding the crackpot Fletcher Prouty and see how I shredded the pitiful, embarrassing defenses of Prouty offered by his handful of defenders. Far from "ignoring" their alleged "debunking" of my attacks on Prouty, I showed that my attacks are entirely valid, totally justified, and unanswerable.
And, folks, if you read my posts in the Education Forum, you'll see that I only accused a very small number of people of peddling anti-Semitic arguments, and that I had very good reasons for doing so.
I have to just giggle at this paranoia:
Griffith works in the U.S. military industrial complex, and has also spent time in a military or intelligence affiliated agency in Israel.
Thanks for putting your wingnut paranoia on full display.
BTW, I went to Israel for two months to attend an advanced Hebrew program at Haifa University. My wife came over for a week while I was there so we could visit the holy sites in Jerusalem and Haifa. This is what you describe as "spent time in a military or intelligence affiliated agency in Israel." The last time I checked, Haifa University was not affiliated with any U.S. intelligence agency. I had no contact with any U.S. agency while in Israel, not even the American Embassy. I was there purely as a student at Haifa University.
Incidentally, I'm still upset at you for blowing my cover as a CIA disinformation agent within the JFK research community. I had such a good gig going! Plus, I got extra Operation Mockingbird pay for pointing out what a nut Prouty was.
But the blow of exposure was erased when my CIA handler informed me that Prouty was also a Mockingbird plant whose job was to pose as an intel community whistleblower and then to make bizarre claims that would discredit the case for conspiracy in the JFK shooting. My handler said he did a great job, especially in getting so many bogus claims into Oliver Stone's 1991 movie JFK, and that my critiques of Prouty's nutty statements were all part of the plan.
-
What an absolute joke.
The truth is that Michael Griffith has never studied, nor understood, the science research of the Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth-- a group of engineering and science professionals who have documented the visible (and audible) explosive, free fall demolitions of WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7 on 9/11.
Griffith is not a scientist. He's a professional propagandist.
His modus operandi is to simply repeat false government talking points.
He has, repeatedly, used this propaganda technique to defame Fletcher Prouty, and to promoted the false narrative that JFK did not intend in 1963 to withdraw from Vietnam. (NSAM 263)
Griffith's standard propaganda talking points about Prouty and Vietnam have been thoroughly debunked on the Education Forum by James DiEugenio and Prouty documentarian, Jeff Carter.
Incidentally, aren't these false, libelous posts by Benjamin Cole and Michael Griffith in violation of this forum's rules?
There are people who consider them to be, frankly, illegal.
-
What an absolute joke.
The truth is that Michael Griffith has never studied, nor understood, the science research of the Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth-- a group of engineering and science professionals who have documented the visible (and audible) explosive, free fall demolitions of WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7 on 9/11.
Griffith is not a scientist. He's a professional propagandist.
His modus operandi is to simply repeat false government talking points.
He has, repeatedly, used this propaganda technique to defame Fletcher Prouty, and to promoted the false narrative that JFK did not intend in 1963 to withdraw from Vietnam. (NSAM 263)
Griffith's standard propaganda talking points about Prouty and Vietnam have been thoroughly debunked on the Education Forum by James DiEugenio and Prouty documentarian, Jeff Carter.
Incidentally, aren't these false, libelous posts by Benjamin Cole and Michael Griffith in violation of this forum's rules?
There are people who consider them to be, frankly, illegal.
LOL!
I love it when two CIA-hating tinfoil-hat JFKA conspiracy theorists like you and Griffith go at it.
-
Tin foil hat JFKA conspiracists?
That CIA trope went out of style with disco platform shoes, didn't it?
Meanwhile, the sentiment at the Education Forum is that Ben Cole and those endorsing his "Anti- Semitic" slander-- including Fred Litwin and Michael Griffith-- should be permanently banned.from the EF. It's under administrative review.
-
The plain fact of the matter is that Fletcher Prouty was an antisemite:
https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/was-fletcher-prouty-an-antisemite (https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/was-fletcher-prouty-an-antisemite)
https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/was-fletcher-prouty-an-antisemite-part-two (https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/was-fletcher-prouty-an-antisemite-part-two)
https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/was-fletcher-prouty-an-antisemite-part-three (https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/was-fletcher-prouty-an-antisemite-part-three)
-
The sentiment at the Education Forum is that Ben Cole and those endorsing his "Anti-Semitic" slander-- including Fred Litwin and Michael Griffith -- should be permanently banned from the EF. It's under administrative review.
BFD.
Pardon my German.
-
W. Niederhut should just be pre-emptively banned from posting here, especially if the sole purpose is to chase down members of an entirely different forum. Buzz off, man!
-
W. Niederhut should just be pre-emptively banned from posting here, especially if the sole purpose is to chase down members of an entirely different forum. Buzz off, man!
Niederhut should be allowed to post here, if for no other reason than he should have every right to respond to something posted about him on this forum. So far, It doesn't look like he's broken any rules here.
-
Niederhut should be allowed to post here, if for no other reason than he should have every right to respond to something posted about him on this forum. So far, It doesn't look like he's broken any rules here.
I agree.
-
:'(We have discussed John McAdam's defamation of Fletcher Prouty as an "Anti-Semitic crackpot" in fairly exhaustive detail on the Education Forum.
Most of those discussions have occurred in response to Michael Griffith's repetitive propaganda posts attacking Prouty.
My opinion is that it is government-funded character assassination of the former Joint Chiefs Liaison to the CIA in 1963.
The defamation of Prouty began in earnest after Oliver Stone's movie JFK came out in 1992.
Donald Sutherland played "Mr. X" in the film-- a JFKA whistleblower based mainly on Fletcher Prouty.
-
We have discussed John McAdam's defamation of
He defamed ??? I'm trying to remember that but keep drawing a blank.
-
This Niederhut guy is something else, eh? Apparently believes all the World Trade Center buildings were leveled by "controlled demolition" ? He should hash out his issues with members of his own forum over there, not here.
-
For any newcomers or for those who don't know much about L. Fletcher Prouty (whom Niederhut ardently defends), here is a short list of some of the nutty claims and statements Prouty made:
-- He would not be surprised to learn that Princess Diana was murdered by the "Secret Team."
-- Stalin's theory that FDR was poisoned by agents sent by Winston Churchill deserved serious consideration.
-- The goals of the Holocaust-denying IHR were "important" (the full quote: "I never knew a time when its primary goals were more important than right now.")
-- Holocaust denier and Liberty Lobby founder Willis Carto was a man of "vision" and "courage," and Prouty even testified as a character witness for him at the Liberty Lobby libel trial.
-- Prouty appeared 10 times in four years on Liberty Lobby's nutcase radio program, which routinely peddled white supremacy, Holocaust denial, and anti-Semitism.
-- Prouty recommended Liberty Lobby's anti-Semitic rag The Spotlight.
-- Prouty actually spoke at a Liberty Lobby convention and at an IHR conference. At the Liberty Lobby convention, he blamed Israel for high gas prices. As usual, the IHR conference included speakers who denied the Holocaust.
-- When asked if the Holocaust happened, Prouty replied, "I'm no authority in that area."
-- We should be concerned about Jewish sergeants manning our weapons systems.
-- The Joint Chiefs of Staff were involved in the Jonestown Massacre.
-- Chiang Kai-shek attended the Tehran Conference, and Prouty himself flew Chiang's delegation to Tehran for the conference.
-- L. Ron Hubbard, the fraud who founded the scam known as the Church of Scientology, worked in U.S. Navy intelligence and was an upright, reliable person. Prouty testified in Hubbard's defense in Hubbard's fraud trial.
I document all these and other claims/statements in my article
Exposing the Bogus, Nutty Claims of L. Fletcher Prouty on the JFK Assassination, the Vietnam War, and Other Historical Issues
https://drive.google.com/file/d/18I0XTK6tsfrHAtFnNxNzAEBgD1Uz_dlv/view
Niederhut should be allowed to post here, if for no other reason than he should have every right to respond to something posted about him on this forum. So far, It doesn't look like he's broken any rules here.
Gee, why am I not surprised that you would spring to the defense of Niederhut's "right" to post here so he can defend himself, never mind that he won't afford that same right to people whom he attacks or disagrees with on the Education Forum. Do you believe 9/11 was an inside job carried out by U.S. intelligence agents, that the Twin Towers were brought down by controlled demolitions planted by U.S. intel operatives, that Israel purposely attacked the USS Liberty in 1967 and that powerful Zionists helped cover it up, that Hamas is the victim and Israel the aggressor, that the Israeli government played a role in JFK's death, and that Fletcher Prouty was a credible source? Niederhut believes all of these things.
-
Gee, why am I not surprised that you would spring to the defense of Niederhut's "right" to post here so he can defend himself, never mind that he won't afford that same right to people whom he attacks or disagrees with on the Education Forum.
My position is neither an endorsement nor condemnation Niederhut's behavior at the EF. Nor is it an endorsement or condemnation of anything Ben C has said at the EF or here. I simply noted that Niederhut should be allowed to respond here to something that Ben has posted here about him. It is a position born of simple human decency. Nor has WN violated any of the rules here. Why then should he be banned for posting here?
Do you believe 9/11 was an inside job carried out by U.S. intelligence agents, that the Twin Towers were brought down by controlled demolitions planted by U.S. intel operatives, that Israel purposely attacked the USS Liberty in 1967 and that powerful Zionists helped cover it up, that Hamas is the victim and Israel the aggressor, that the Israeli government played a role in JFK's death, and that Fletcher Prouty was a credible source? Niederhut believes all of these things.
Why would you think that I believed in any of these ideas?
-
My position is neither an endorsement nor condemnation of Niederhut's behavior at the EF. Nor is it an endorsement or condemnation of anything Ben C has said at the EF or here. I simply noted that Niederhut should be allowed to respond here to something that Ben has posted here about him. It is a position born of simple human decency. Nor has WN violated any of the rules here. Why then should he be banned for posting here? Why would you [Griffith] think that I believed in any of these ideas [i.e., that "9/11 was an inside job carried out by U.S. intelligence agents, that the Twin Towers were brought down by controlled demolitions planted by U.S. intel operatives, that Israel purposely attacked the USS Liberty in 1967 and that powerful Zionists helped cover it up, that Hamas is the victim and Israel the aggressor, that the Israeli government played a role in JFK's death, and that Fletcher Prouty was a credible source"]?
Those things are just as loony as Griffith's KGB-encouraged belief that the evil, evil Deep State killed JFK.
-
Same old bogus Michael Griffith propaganda tropes about Prouty. These have been debunked in detail by Prouty archivist Len Osanic, and Prouty historian Jeff Carter. As for Griffith's official status as a WCR critic, is it a limited hangout?
-
The scientific research of the Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth-- a group of engineering and science professionals -- has documented the visible (and audible) explosive, free fall demolitions of WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7 on 9/11.
ME: What evidence is there that 9/11 was "an inside job"?
GROK: There is no credible evidence that the September 11, 2001 attacks were an "inside job" orchestrated or deliberately allowed by the U.S. government or other internal actors. Multiple exhaustive official investigations, independent scientific analyses, and engineering studies have concluded that the attacks were planned and executed by al-Qaeda terrorists under Osama bin Laden. The 9/11 Commission Report attributed the attacks to 19 hijackers from al-Qaeda, citing intelligence failures, bureaucratic issues, and a "failure of imagination" as reasons they were not prevented—not complicity. Government investigations (including by the FBI, FEMA, and NIST), the civil engineering community, and fact-checking outlets like Popular Mechanics (in reports updated as recently as 2025) have consistently rejected inside-job claims after examining debris, videos, seismic data, eyewitness accounts, DNA, black boxes, and simulations.
Proponents (including groups like Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, which claims over 3,000 signatories but represents a fringe view criticized by mainstream professional bodies) point to alleged "anomalies" as proof of controlled demolition, missiles, foreknowledge, or staging. These claims have been repeatedly tested and debunked as misinterpretations, selective data, or inconsistencies explainable by physics, chaos of the day, and forensics. No peer-reviewed evidence supports explosives, stand-down orders, or government orchestration; legal challenges alleging inside involvement (e.g., suits against Cheney or Rumsfeld) have been dismissed as baseless. (emphasis added)
Here are the main categories of alleged evidence cited by "truthers," along with the factual rebuttals:
1. Controlled Demolition of the Twin Towers and WTC 7
Claimed evidence: Buildings fell at "free-fall speed" symmetrically (like demolitions); molten steel in rubble; "thermite" chips in dust; puffs of smoke/debris ("squibs"); seismic spikes before collapse; fires from jet fuel couldn't melt/weaken steel beams.
Rebuttal: NIST's multi-year investigations (2005 for towers, 2008 for WTC 7) concluded plane impacts stripped fireproofing, and fires (fueled by jet fuel plus office contents, reaching up to ~1,000°C) caused steel to lose 50–90% of its strength without melting. This led to progressive "pancake" collapses. WTC 7 collapsed after ~7 hours of uncontrolled fires (ignited by debris from the North Tower), causing thermal expansion that disconnected a key girder from Column 79, triggering progressive failure—not explosives.
The North Tower facade fell in 5.4 seconds (not pure free fall of ~3.9 seconds); it had stages of resistance, matching NIST models. "Puffs" were compressed air and pulverized concrete from collapsing floors. No explosive residues or blast sounds (which would have been deafening) were found in debris, air samples, or videos. "Molten metal" was likely aluminum from the planes or other materials; thermite claims rely on unverified samples inconsistent with observed fires. Seismic data showed gradual waves from collapse, not bomb spikes. Popular Mechanics and structural experts confirmed this via simulations and eyewitness accounts.
2. Pentagon Attack (Not a Plane)
Claimed evidence: Entry hole "too small" for a Boeing 757; minimal wreckage visible; intact windows; "missile" trajectory.
Rebuttal: American Airlines Flight 77 (a 757) struck the building. The ~75-foot initial damage zone matches the plane's fuselage and sheared wings (one wing hit the ground); interior damage and a 12-foot hole in Ring C came from the landing gear. Eyewitnesses (dozens), jet fuel smells, plane debris (including marked parts, black box, and tail section), DNA from all victims/crew, and flight data confirm it. Blast-resistant windows survived due to design. The "small hole" photos ignore progressive collapse of the facade. No missile evidence exists.
3. Foreknowledge, Stock Trades, or Stand-Down
Claimed evidence: Unusual airline stock "put options" days prior; ignored intelligence warnings; NORAD "stand-down"; Israeli "dancing" agents or warnings to Jews.
Rebuttal: The SEC and FBI investigated trades—most were by institutional investors or unrelated; no insider profits linked to al-Qaeda or U.S. officials. Warnings were vague and not actionable due to pre-9/11 intelligence silos (detailed in the 9/11 Commission). NORAD delays stemmed from outdated protocols and confusion, not orders. Early hijacker identity mix-ups were reporting errors in chaos; all 19 were confirmed dead. Claims of Israeli involvement or Jewish warnings are antisemitic tropes with no evidence; the "dancing Israelis" were detained and cleared.
4. Other Claims (Flight 93, No Planes, etc.)
Claimed evidence: Debris field for Flight 93 too wide (shot down); plane footage looks fake; hijackers "still alive."
Rebuttal: Flight 93 crashed after passenger revolt (per cockpit recordings and calls); scattered lightweight debris was wind-blown at high speed. Black boxes, wreckage, and DNA confirm all crashes. No credible "hologram" or remote-control evidence; thousands of witnesses, videos, and radar tracked the planes. Hijacker "survivors" were name confusions (common Arabic names).
Conspiracy theories require thousands of participants (pilots, engineers, investigators, media) to maintain perfect secrecy for decades while leaving "obvious" clues—logically implausible and unsupported by any whistleblower or document. Some variants tie into antisemitic tropes (e.g., Mossad or "Jewish owners"), which lack evidence and have been discredited.
In summary, the "evidence" for an inside job consists of debunked anomalies and selective interpretations that ignore the mountain of forensic, eyewitness, and intelligence data pointing to al-Qaeda. Official reports, peer-reviewed science, and ongoing analyses (with no credible new revelations as of 2026) uphold the terrorist attack explanation. Believing otherwise typically stems from distrust or misinformation rather than verifiable proof. For primary sources, read the NIST WTC reports or the full 9/11 Commission Report.
-
The truth is that Michael Griffith has never studied, nor understood, the science research of the Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth-- a group of engineering and science professionals who have documented the visible (and audible) explosive, free fall demolitions of WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7 on 9/11.
Dear DR. William Niederhut,
The "Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth"?
Is that anything like the crackpot organization that calls itself "Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity"?
You know, the folks who said those nice people in the KGB* and/or the GRU didn't steal the DNC's emails in 2016, and that it must have been "an inside job" by the evil, evil Deep State?
*Today's SVR and FSB
-- Tom
-
Same old bogus Michael Griffith propaganda tropes about Prouty. These have been debunked in detail by Prouty archivist Len Osanic, and Prouty historian Jeff Carter. As for Griffith's official status as a WCR critic, is it a limited hangout?
Are you accusing Michael Griffith of being paid to post on this board? Can't you just go back to your own forum and leave everybody here alone?
-
Well, so much for Grok's "intelligence."
The fraudulent NIST report never explained the abrupt free fall demolition of WTC7.
Nor did they explain the visible explosive pulverization of the Twin Towers and liquefied steel.
Grok gets an "F" in 9/11 Science 101.
As for Michael Griffith, where does he work?
-
why was Wilkinson's string deleted at the education forum?
-
Where does Michael Griffith work?
Dear Bill,
It's amazing just how devious those sons of guns at the KGB I mean the CIA are!
-- Tom
PS My bad. As I'm sure you would agree, the KGB* is a world-class humanitarian organization compared to the evil, evil CIA!
*Today's SVR and FSB
-
Hi, Fred.
John Simkin has asked us to not discuss 9/11 on the JFKA board.
Wilkinson raised the subject in the context of the false accusations that I am an Anti-Semite.
I did go to the trouble today of starting a new thread on our 9/11 board for people-- including Wilkinson, Ben Cole, and Michael Griffith-- who still don't understand the 9/11 science data.
https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/32001-911-science-101-for-beginners/
I should point out that these Anti-Truthers (above) have not studied physics or chemistry at a collegiate or post-graduate level.
In Griffith's case, disinformation is a job.
As for Grok-- it's merely regurgitating the ubiquitous government disinformation on the internet.
It's a GIGO model. Garbage-In-Garbage-Out.
Cheers.
-
Hi, Fred.
John Simkin has asked us to not discuss 9/11 on the JFKA board.
Wilkinson raised the subject in the context of the false accusations that I am an Anti-Semite.
I did go to the trouble today of starting a new thread on our 9/11 board for people-- including Wilkinson, Ben Cole, and Michael Griffith-- who still don't understand the 9/11 science data.
https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/32001-911-science-101-for-beginners/
I should point out that these Anti-Truthers (above) have not studied physics or chemistry at a collegiate or post-graduate level.
In Griffith's case, disinformation is a job.
As for Grok-- it's merely regurgitating the ubiquitous government disinformation on the internet.
It's a GIGO model. Garbage-In-Garbage-Out.
Cheers.
Dear Dr. William Niederhut,
You're full of high-fructose beans.
-- Tom
-
Hi, Fred.
John Simkin has asked us to not discuss 9/11 on the JFKA board.
Wilkinson raised the subject in the context of the false accusations that I am an Anti-Semite.
I did go to the trouble today of starting a new thread on our 9/11 board for people-- including Wilkinson, Ben Cole, and Michael Griffith-- who still don't understand the 9/11 science data.
https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/32001-911-science-101-for-beginners/
I should point out that these Anti-Truthers (above) have not studied physics or chemistry at a collegiate or post-graduate level.
In Griffith's case, disinformation is a job.
As for Grok-- it's merely regurgitating the ubiquitous government disinformation on the internet.
It's a GIGO model. Garbage-In-Garbage-Out.
Cheers.
Oh I get it.. everybody is wrong besides you, the master intellectual Dr. Niederhut.. yet you come over here and imply that people on another forum post "disinformation" as part of a "job." Nobody believes your 9/11 controlled demolition spiel anyway. Buzz off.
-
Why did you delete the thread rather than move it?
fred
-
but did AI not give you a link to the ADL stuff on Niederhut?
fred
Fred,
The thread in question had gone off the rails, with false, defamatory accusations about Anti-Semitism and Holocaust Denial.
And I see that Ben Cole is still repeating this libelous nonsense here.
Calling someone, like Prouty, an "Anti-Semitic crackpot" is an effective way to smear them, eh?
Do Ben Cole, Michael Griffith, James Wilkinson, et.al., also consider Bernie Sanders to be an "Anti-Semitic crackpot," for criticizing Netanyahu?
I have been a Bernie Sanders supporter for the past decade.
-
Dear Dr. William Niederhut,
You're full of high-fructose beans.
-- Tom
Tom,
Beans are not a significant source of fructose. Did you hear that one from Grok?
-
So censorship is the answer. You think the discussion has gone off the rails, and so the only answer is to delete it?
fred
-
This is rich, and pathetic: I just received a notice from the Education Forum that Niederhut has suspended me for eight months for "disrespecting" him, even though I haven't replied to him in the EF in a very long time. Obviously, he did this in retaliation for my replies in this thread.
-
Man I dunno how things work over at that other forum but any place with a moderator who suspends people for eight months (!!) because they disagree with his 9/11 controlled demolition baloney is not a place worth visiting, IMO. I'm all for banning Niederhut from posting here.
-
Man I dunno how things work over at that other forum but any place with a moderator who suspends people for eight months (!!) because they disagree with his 9/11 controlled demolition baloney is not a place worth visiting, IMO. I'm all for banning Niederhut from posting here.
Normally I would never support banning someone from posting here, but given Niederhut's conduct in the EF, I agree that he should be banned here.
He has banned me not just because I reject his 9/11 Truther insanity but because I expose Fletcher Prouty for the nutcase fraud and extremist that he was.
-
Tom,
Beans are not a significant source of fructose.
Bill,
You must have eaten some genetically modified ones, then.
Whoo-whee!
-- Tom
-
Scurrilous, defamatory lies about forum staff members are not protected speech on our forum.
As for the Bob Marley avatar guy here, what sort of Marley fan defends the lying military-industrial complex?
I've performed some Bob Marley songs, myself, over the years.
"Is there a place for the hopeless sinner who has hurt all mankind just to save his own?" 8)
-
Ben's AI seems awfully eager to please. Here's what Copilot gave me:
(https://i.postimg.cc/VNZfwVsy/niederhut-copilot.png)
Thanks, Mark.
I appreciate your posting of the Copilot second opinion.
We have had some interesting analyses of AI history posts on the Education Forum.
The consensus is that some of these AI programs have a lot to learn-- especially about military and intelligence black ops.
-
As for the Bob Marley avatar guy here, what sort of Marley fan defends the lying military-industrial complex?
Vladimir Putin cherishes you, Dr. Bill!
-
Scurrilous, defamatory lies about forum staff members are not protected speech on our forum.
As for the Bob Marley avatar guy here, what sort of Marley fan defends the lying military-industrial complex?
I've performed some Bob Marley songs, myself, over the years.
"Is there a place for the hopeless sinner who has hurt all mankind just to save his own?" 8)
I'm not playing your stupid games. Nobody here is interested in your 9/11 demolition baloney or your personal vendettas against members of a different forum. You wanna take action against someone for "defamation" or whatever you called it? Great. Go hire an attorney and leave the rest of us alone.
-
Thanks, Mark.
I appreciate your posting of the Copilot second opinion.
We have had some interesting analyses of AI history posts on the Education Forum.
The consensus is that some of these AI programs have a lot to learn-- especially about military and intelligence black ops.
AI is good at "augmenting" human analysis, but it will be interesting to see what else it might be able to bring to the table regarding the JFKA.
Btw and Fwiw, my little Copilot friend is a better man than most of us who post here. It finds it counterproductive to call other people "crackpots" and prefers to say that they tend to gravitate toward unconventional claims and become more committed when those claims are questioned.
-
AI is good at "augmenting" human analysis, but it will be interesting to see what else it might be able to bring to the table regarding the JFKA.
Btw and Fwiw, my little Copilot friend is a better man than most of us who post here. It finds it counterproductive to call other people "crackpots" and prefers to say that they tend to gravitate toward unconventional claims and become more committed when those claims are questioned.
Mark,
This is, precisely, why I have tried to focus on science in discussions of controversial topics like the JFKA and 9/11.
I trust the scientific method as epistemology.
And, in my experience, the people who think the 9/11 science researchers are "Anti-Semitic crackpots" are not knowledgeable about science.
They think that the 100+ floor steel girders in the Twin Towers were abruptly liquefied by Magic Jet Fuel and burning office furniture.
It's scientifically absurd.
-
Mark,
This is, precisely, why I have tried to focus on science in discussions of controversial topics like the JFKA and 9/11.
I trust the scientific method as epistemology.
And, in my experience, the people who think the 9/11 science researchers are "Anti-Semitic crackpots" are not knowledgeable about science.
They think that the 100+ floor steel girders in the Twin Towers were abruptly liquefied by Magic Jet Fuel and burning office furniture.
It's scientifically absurd.
I know I shouldn't be feeding the troll here, but how do you account for fact that the overwhelming majority of scientists who have studied 9/11 reject your baloney about controlled demolition? They're all wrong? They all believe in "scientifically absurd" conclusions? BTW, people said you were an "Anti-Semitic crackpot" because you promote the work of a known anti-Semite who doesn't believe six million Jews died in the Holocaust. It has nothing to do with "9/11 science."
-
I know I shouldn't be feeding the troll here, but how do you account for fact that the overwhelming majority of scientists who have studied 9/11 reject your baloney about controlled demolition? They're all wrong? They all believe in "scientifically absurd" conclusions? BTW, people said you were an "Anti-Semitic crackpot" because you promote the work of a known anti-Semite who doesn't believe six million Jews died in the Holocaust. It has nothing to do with "9/11 science."
Newsflash, fella. You ARE the troll here.
You, obviously, don't understand the 9/11 science data.
Study my tutorial at the Education Forum link I posted (above) yesterday.
-
Newsflash, fella. You ARE the troll here.
You, obviously, don't understand the 9/11 science data.
Study my tutorial at the Education Forum link I posted (above) yesterday.
Not going to spend one second "studying" any of your work. I'd just like to know how you can explain the fact that the vast and overwhelming majority of scientific experts reject your controlled demolition stuff. So please enlighten us.. is every single one of them wrong, and you are correct?
-
Not going to spend one second "studying" any of your work. I'd just like to know how you can explain the fact that the vast and overwhelming majority of scientific experts reject your controlled demolition stuff. So please enlighten us. Is every single one of them wrong, and you are correct?
I'd like to know if Dr. Bill believes two commercial airliners were flown into the Twin Trade Towers, or if that was a hoax perpetuated on us through a combination of induced mass hallucination and forged videos?
If it was two planes, why did the Deep State bad guys feel it necessary to bring down the much shorter (and strangely built) Building 7 by planted explosives, as well?
Does Dr. Bill believe the Deep State bad guys planted explosives in the Twin Towers, too, and that the planes were just "patsies"?
Regardless, wasn't that a bit of overkill (pardon the pun)?
-
I'd like to know if Dr. Bill believes two commercial airliners were flown into the Twin Trade Towers, or if that was a hoax perpetuated on us through a combination of induced mass hallucination and forged videos?
If it was two planes, why did the Deep State bad guys feel it necessary to bring down the much shorter Building 7, through planted explosives, as well?
Wasn't that a bit of overkill (pardon the pun)?
He'd be in good company if he believes that.. JFK loonies like Jack White and James Fetzer tried, and failed, to convince people that no planes hit the towers and that they were instead destroyed by some kind of laser from space? Or a secret weapon nobody had ever seen before? Gimme a friggin break.
-
He'd be in good company if he believes that.. JFK loonies like Jack White and James Fetzer tried, and failed, to convince people that no planes hit the towers and that they were instead destroyed by some kind of laser from space? Or a secret weapon nobody had ever seen before? Gimme a friggin break.
Here's my edited OP:
I'd like to know if Dr. Bill believes two commercial airliners were flown into the Twin Trade Towers, or if that was a hoax perpetuated on us through a combination of induced mass hallucination and forged videos?
If it was two planes, why did the Deep State bad guys also feel it necessary to bring down the much shorter (and strangely built) Building 7 by planted explosives?
Does Dr. Bill believe the Deep State bad guys planted explosives in the Twin Towers, too, and that the planes were just "patsies"?
Regardless, wasn't Building 7 a bit of overkill (pardon the pun)?
-
Yes, Boeings were flown into the targets, by Raytheon's GPS guided remote-piloting technology.
It was successfully tested in Boeings by August of 2001.
Blaming the op on Muslim patsies was PNAC's plan for launching the multi-trillion dollar "War on Terror."
Two questions for beginners.
1) Who blamed Osama Bin Laden and "All Qaeda" for 9/11?
2) What evidence supported the allegation?
-
Yes, Boeings were flown into the targets, by Raytheon's GPS guided remote-piloting technology.
It was successfully tested in Boeings by August of 2001.
That’s one of the dumbest things I’ve ever heard. Can you please go away now and return to your own forum? Your presence here is not being enjoyed by anybody.
-
That’s one of the dumbest things I’ve ever heard. Can you please go away now and return to your own forum? Your presence here is not being enjoyed by anybody.
And you know this how, exactly?
Do some research. And get a more appropriate avatar.
Bob Marley wouldn't approve of you using his image and likeness.
The Raytheon testing was done in Marana, Arizona in August of 2001.
The Boeings could take off, maneuver precisely, and land without pilots.
-
And you know this how, exactly?
Do some research. And get a more appropriate avatar.
Bob Marley wouldn't approve of you using his image and likeness.
The Raytheon testing was done in Marana, Arizona in August of 2001.
The Boeings could take off, maneuver precisely, and land without pilots.
I could care less what you think of my avatar, or Bob Marley for that matter. But I have to know: are you actually claiming that there were no human pilots in the planes that hit the WTC??
-
I could care less what you think of my avatar, or Bob Marley for that matter. But I have to know: are you actually claiming that there were no human pilots in the planes that hit the WTC??
It's difficult to know what happened, because the black box data is missing.
There were a number of anomalies with the flights, emergency signaling, etc.
The alleged Barbara Olson phone calls from AA77 to Bush's Solicitor General Ted Olson never happened.
They were foundational for the Bush/Cheney narrative about "Muslims with boxcutters."
We know, for certain, that the Boeings could have been precisely piloted without pilots.
We also know, from Phillip Marshall, and the Pilots for 9/11 Truth, that Hamzi Homshur could not have successfully flown AA77 into the Pentagon. Even a highly skilled pilot would have had difficulty executing that 270 turn to ground level.
-
Hamzi Homshur [sic] could not have successfully flown AA77 into the Pentagon. Even a highly skilled pilot would have had difficulty executing that 270 turn to ground level.
Me: Is it true that it would have been nearly impossible for Hamzi Homshur (sic) to have flown the plane through 270-degree turn to near ground level before it struck the Pentagon?
Searching the web
30 results
GROK: No, it is not true that it would have been nearly impossible for the pilot of American Airlines Flight 77 (correcting the name: the hijacker-pilot was Hani Hanjour, not "Hamzi Homshur") to execute the maneuver described—a roughly 330-degree (often approximated as 270-degree) descending spiral turn to align with and strike the Pentagon at low level.
The question appears to refer to a common claim in some 9/11 discussions or conspiracy theories suggesting the final approach to the Pentagon required superhuman skill that Hanjour supposedly lacked.
Key Facts About the Maneuver
Flight path details (from official sources like the 9/11 Commission Report, NTSB flight path study, and radar data): After hijacking, the plane turned back toward Washington, D.C. About 5 miles west-southwest of the Pentagon, it performed a clockwise descending turn of approximately 330 degrees (a full circle plus some extra arc, often rounded to "270 degrees" in shorthand).
During this turn, the Boeing 757 descended roughly 2,200 feet while maneuvering, ending up aligned with the Pentagon's west face.
The plane then dove at high speed (around 530 mph at impact), clipping light poles and a generator before striking the building low to the ground.
Air traffic controllers noted the aggressive maneuvering (high speed, rapid descent, tight turn), initially mistaking it for a military jet due to its performance.
Hanjour's Background and Skill Level
Hanjour held a commercial pilot certificate from the FAA (earned in 1999 after training in the U.S., including on small aircraft).
He trained on simulators, including Boeing 737 models (relevant to handling a 757, which shares similarities).
Flight instructors described him as a weak or below-average student in some contexts—he struggled with English proficiency and precision in small planes, and some refused to rent him aircraft unsupervised.
However, he had hundreds of hours of flight experience and specific preparation for the attack, including refresher training in 2001.
Why the Maneuver Was Challenging but Not "Nearly Impossible"
The turn was descending and banking sharply, but it did not require fighter-pilot precision or exotic aerobatics. It was a high-speed, descending spiral—aggressive and sloppy by commercial standards (e.g., high bank angles, rapid altitude loss), but achievable with basic manual control inputs on a large jet.
A commercial jet like the 757 is stable and responsive; once the autopilot was disengaged, manual control allowed for such turns without advanced skill.
The target (the Pentagon) is a very large building (over 5 million square feet, multiple stories high), not a tiny or precise point. The low-level final approach was dangerous (risking ground collision), but the plane only needed to be roughly aligned and pointed at the facade—not surgically accurate.
Simulations and analyses (including by pilots recreating elements in simulators) have shown that inexperienced or moderately skilled pilots can replicate similar descending turns in large jets, especially without concern for safety, passenger comfort, or regulations.
Eyewitnesses and radar data confirm the turn was executed smoothly enough (no signs of wild instability or loss of control), consistent with someone at the controls intentionally guiding the plane.
Claims of "impossibility" often stem from exaggeration—comparing it to professional test-pilot standards or ignoring that the goal was destruction, not a safe landing. Official investigations (9/11 Commission, NTSB, DoD reports) concluded Hanjour piloted the plane in this maneuver, supported by flight data, radar, and witness accounts.
In short, while Hanjour was not an elite aviator, the maneuver aligned with his documented training and the capabilities of the aircraft under manual control. It was difficult and reckless, but far from "nearly impossible."
30 web pages
ME: Why is Hanjour's 330-degree turn described by some as a 270-degree turn?
Searching the web
31 results
GROK: The 330-degree turn is the more precise and officially documented measurement of the final descending spiral maneuver performed by American Airlines Flight 77 (piloted by Hani Hanjour) before impacting the Pentagon on September 11, 2001.
According to the 9/11 Commission Report, the NTSB Flight Path Study (February 2002), radar data reconstructions, and Wikipedia summaries based on those primary sources: The aircraft was positioned about 5 miles (8 km) west-southwest of the Pentagon.
It then executed a clockwise 330-degree spiral turn while descending roughly 2,200 feet (from around 7,000 feet down toward low altitude).
At the end of this turn, it was aligned (pointed) toward the Pentagon's west face and downtown Washington, D.C., at about 2,000 feet altitude and 4 miles southwest, before accelerating into the final dive.
This 330-degree figure accounts for the full arc of the path as traced by primary flight data recorder (FDR) analysis, radar tracks, and official investigations. The turn was not a perfect circle but a descending spiral that overshot the direct line to the target slightly, requiring the plane to loop around more than a full 360 degrees minus a bit (hence 330° rather than exactly 360° or a simple 180° reversal).
Why "270 degrees" is Commonly Used Instead
The 270-degree description appears frequently in media reports, early news accounts, conspiracy discussions, and some secondary sources because:
It is a rough approximation or shorthand for a large, looping turn that is three-quarters of a full circle (270° = ¾ of 360°). Early eyewitness or controller descriptions (e.g., some air traffic control observations or initial media like a 2001 Cape Cod Times article) referred to the plane "circling 270 degrees to the right" as it realigned from an overshoot.
In the chaotic early reporting right after 9/11, precise radar reconstructions weren't yet public. Some outlets rounded or simplified the maneuver to "270 degrees" based on visual impressions or partial data, describing it as a tight, banking right turn that felt like three-quarters of a loop.
In 9/11 skeptic or alternative-theory communities, the "270-degree" figure is often repeated (sometimes exaggerated as "impossibly tight" or "military precision") because it originated in those early imprecise accounts and has persisted in forums, videos, and older articles. For example, some 2001–2002 reports contrasted it with the more detailed 330° from later NTSB/Commission analysis.
In reality, the two numbers describe the same event—just with different levels of precision:330° = the accurate, data-derived total angular change in heading during the spiral (slightly less than a full circle plus adjustment for the approach angle).
270° = a rounded or approximate version that stuck in popular memory and some narratives.
The difference is minor in practical terms (both indicate a large descending loop to lose altitude and realign), but official sources consistently use 330 degrees for accuracy.
31 Web pages
-
Government disinformation about 9/11 is ubiquitous in the U.S. media.
I
People will not learn the facts from the mainstream media, Wikipedia, Google, and Grok.
Nor will they learn the facts from Zelikow or the NIST fraudsters.
Pilot Phillip Mafshall, and others, have written about this subject in detail (before Marshall was murdered.)
-
Why did you have to delete that string with Wilkinson on the Education Forum. You could have moved the string, but you decided the best course of action was to delete it.
fred
-
Fred,
The thread in question had gone off the rails, with false, defamatory accusations about Anti-Semitism and Holocaust Denial.
And I see that Ben Cole is still repeating this libelous nonsense here.
Calling someone, like Prouty, an "Anti-Semitic crackpot" is an effective way to smear them, eh?
Do Ben Cole, Michael Griffith, James Wilkinson, et.al., also consider Bernie Sanders to be an "Anti-Semitic crackpot," for criticizing Netanyahu?
I have been a Bernie Sanders supporter for the past decade.
Reposting this for Fred, the salesman who was a teenage JFK conspiracy freak, before he saw the light and believed the Magic Bullet Theory.
-
Government disinformation about 9/11 is ubiquitous in the U.S. media.
People will not learn the facts from the mainstream media, Wikipedia, Google, and Grok.
Nor will they learn the facts from Zelikow or the NIST fraudsters.
Pilot Phillip Mafshall, and others, have written about this subject in detail (before Marshall was murdered.)
"Former" KGB counterintelligence officer Vladimir Putin cherishes you, Dr. Bill.
He's probably saying, "Keep up the good work, Billy Boy! We need people like you to dumb-down and make paranoiac and apathetic the American body politic so we can continue to install nation-rending "anti-Deep State" idiots like Donald Trump as your president!"
-
"Former" KGB counterintelligence officer Vladimir Putin cherishes you, Dr. Bill.
He's probably saying, "Keep up the good work, Billy Boy! We need people like you to dumb-down and make paranoiac and apathetic the American body politic so we can continue to install nation-rending "anti-Deep State" idiots like Donald Trump as your president!"
Trust me, Mr. GIGO. You know nothing about my opinions of Putin and Trump.
-
Trust me, Mr. GIGO. You know nothing about my opinions of Putin and Trump.
It doesn't matter what your opinions of Putin and/or Trump are, Dr. Bill.
What matters is the fact that you unwittingly(?) push KGB-approved, nation-rending tinfoil-hat conspiracy theories, e.g., "the JFK assassination and 9/11 were committed by the evil, evil Deep State!!!"
Which makes you a classic "useful idiot," IMHO.
(It's an old KGB expression.)
-
It's difficult to know what happened, because the black box data is missing.
There were a number of anomalies with the flights, emergency signaling, etc.
The alleged Barbara Olson phone calls from AA77 to Bush's Solicitor General Ted Olson never happened.
They were foundational for the Bush/Cheney narrative about "Muslims with boxcutters."
We know, for certain, that the Boeings could have been precisely piloted without pilots.
We also know, from Phillip Marshall, and the Pilots for 9/11 Truth, that Hamzi Homshur could not have successfully flown AA77 into the Pentagon. Even a highly skilled pilot would have had difficulty executing that 270 turn to ground level.
Here you go, folks! His nuttiness is on full display. I'm glad he's repeating this nutcase material again, so that people don't have to take my word about his crazy claims.
-
Here you go, folks! His nuttiness is on full display. I'm glad he's repeating this nutcase material again, so that people don't have to take my word about his crazy claims.
This guy is a doctor of some kind? I wonder what his patients would think if they found out how he behaves outside of the office.. and that he believes the WTC attacks were undertaken through remote control planes... or something??
-
Let me know when you geniuses figure out what liquefied the steel and rapidly demolished 100+ floors of steel girders in the Twin Towers on 9/11.
Jet fuel cannot liquefy steel. That's Chemistry 101 stuff that Michael Griffith never studied during his "education" as a military propagandist.
Nor does jet fuel explosively pulverize tons of concrete, furniture, and human bodies into pyroclastic ash flumes.
-
Dr. Niederhut: Why did you delete the string on the education forum with Mr. Wilkinson? You can have put it elsewhere, but you deleted it. Why?
-
Dr. Niederhut: Why did you delete the string on the education forum with Mr. Wilkinson? You can have put it elsewhere, but you deleted it. Why?
Dear Fred,
Who, pray tell, is "Mr. Wilkinson"?
-- Tom
-
Let me know when you geniuses figure out what liquefied the steel and rapidly demolished 100+ floors of steel girders in the Twin Towers on 9/11.
Jet fuel cannot liquefy steel. That's Chemistry 101 stuff that Michael Griffith never studied during his "education" as a military propagandist.
Nor does jet fuel explosively pulverize tons of concrete, furniture, and human bodies into pyroclastic ash flumes.
The steel did not liquefy the heat weakened it causing the very cheaply built and very unsafe towers to fall. Take a look at the photo below of one tower illuminated by the sunshine through it. The towers were basically hollow except for the core, and that was turned into a massive furnace flue.
(https://cdn.viewing.nyc/assets/media/661e5e6aa1ceeb2cc850e4b5242383a1/elements/c25d899f50a6b56b35fc8b6f2e896932/ed6e9116-4f77-440c-ad0e-aba3066c5b61.jpg)
Compare to the new One World Trade Tower
(https://cdnph.upi.com/pv/upi/591bd17cb0c78ed1a7f15da2f3e85e9a/MANHATTAN-SUNRISE.jpg)
-
I already answered this question TWICE above.
Please read my answer.
As for the nonsense claiming that Twin Tower steel girders were not liquefied, please refrain from repeating the disinformation.
There is clear documentation of the liquified steel on film.
Study my reference (above) on 9/11 Science 101.
-
I already answered this question TWICE above.
please refrain from repeating the disinformation.
You're apparently the disinfo specialist, doc. I'll stick with the clear consensus of the scientific community that the towers collapsed because the damage from the plane impacts. No ridiculous controlled demolitions or remote controlled planes or whatever other gibberish you're peddlin.
-
You're apparently the disinfo specialist, doc. I'll stick with the clear consensus of the scientific community that the towers collapsed because the damage from the plane impacts. No ridiculous controlled demolitions or remote controlled planes or whatever other gibberish you're peddlin.
Consensus?
The shills pushing the false Bush/Cheney/Zelikow narrative about 9/11 are, essentially, telling the sheeple to ignore the evidence of their eyes and ears.
Ignore the visible and audible explosions that pulverized the Twin Towers, and ignore the cascades of molten steel that were "flowing like a foundry" at Ground Zero, in the recorded testimony of NYFD firemen.
Ignorance is bliss, eh, fellas?
-
You're apparently the disinfo specialist, doc. I'll stick with the clear consensus of the scientific community that the towers collapsed because the damage from the plane impacts. No ridiculous controlled demolitions or remote-controlled planes or whatever other gibberish you're peddlin.
Tommy,
You don't seem to realize that oodles and gobs of "Deep State" bad guys planted oodles and gobs of charges and faked the footage of the Saudi dudes' boarding the planes and the recorded flight paths, etc., etc., etc.
Heck -- almost as many "Deep State" bad guys as those who carried out (and continue to cover up!) the JFK assassination!!!
What's wrong with you, Tommy?
You sound like a CIA disinfo agent to me!!!
-- Tom
-
Newsflash, Tom.
There is no footage of the alleged hijackers boarding the planes that struck the WTC and Pentagon on 9/11.
None.
As for the explosives, who controlled security at the WTC during the weeks prior to 9/11?
Also, when Silverstein "Told them to pull" WTC7 on 9/11, to whom was he referring?
-
Newsflash, Tom.
There is no footage of the alleged hijackers boarding the planes that struck the WTC and Pentagon on 9/11.
None.
As for the explosives, who controlled security at the WTC during the weeks prior to 9/11?
Also, when Silverstein "Told them to pull" WTC7 on 9/11, to whom was he referring?
Also, when Silverstein "Told them to pull" WTC7 on 9/11, to whom was he referring?
For a start, when Silverstein made the comment he was on the record and being interviewed for television, how stupid would he have to be and admit to what amounts to insurance fraud and jeopardize his almost a billion dollar pay-out, do you CT's ever think through your absurd theories??
Secondly, within context of the above quote, Silverstein says he received a call from the Fire Department Commander and was concerned about the loss of life, so why on Earth would Silverstein give the go ahead for a controlled demolition to the Fire Department Commander or does it make more logical sense that the "pull it" quote meant the evacuation of the fire department's firemen??
And as for WTC7's "controlled demolition", it's obvious you don't have any formal training in Mechanical Engineering, Chemical Engineering, Physics, Demolition or even Architecture and you clearly get all your "science" training from Kook websites and the back of a cornflakes packet!
1. The start of the WTC7 collapse happened many seconds before the oft quoted "free fall" collapse when the penthouse collapsed into the building when the supporting structural internal beams gave way.
Pay close attention to the penthouse @0:03 seconds.
For a more in depth analysis.
A real controlled demolition is preceded by deafening explosions as hundreds of kilograms of explosives are set off to weaken the buildings support structure and then compare it to the relatively silent WTC7 collapse! Case closed!
WTC7 collapsing from 27 different angles.
And as for the south tower collapse, again in any footage we don't hear any preceding Earth shattering explosives being detonated, all we hear is collapsing floors.
At the moment of collapse we see the outer walls bow inwards because the catastrophic failure of the floor supports give way which subsequentially causes the upper floors to crash down.
(https://i.postimg.cc/524whdW2/wtc-collapse-buckle.gif)
Besides the Towers looking nothing like any "controlled demolition" ever, the collapse atypically comes from the top down.
(https://i.postimg.cc/dVs8bPcK/wtc-collapse.gif)
(https://i.postimg.cc/5tYyQnMW/Verinage-Pres-st-jean.gif)
(https://i.postimg.cc/bvDrS3fK/Pres-Saint-Jean-vs-wtc.gif)
And finally, what extra value was caused by the towers collapse? Seriously?
• If the reason was to start a War on Terror, the imagery of the planes striking the buildings easily accomplished that.
• The unacceptable risk of planting hundreds/thousands of kilograms of explosives and hoping beyond hope that the massive fires wouldn't set off these explosives!
• Having the standing towers on fire and smoking for days or weeks is a lot more visually powerful than a pile of rubble.
• The damage created by the impact, the fires and the fact that the towers were giant tombs of thousands of bodies would make the case for an actual controlled demolition a no-brainer. And I understand that the removal of the asbestos(for a safe CD) would have been costly but the cost for the CT's "controlled demolition" had to come from somewhere? But regardless, under the circumstances and the eventual trillions for the war on terror, this cost would be negligible.
(https://i.postimg.cc/rFmV3QYq/intrepid-NYC-46st-hudson-river-11-813910002-Version-23120112011-08-011969-12-31.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/mkJz5J47/wtc-after-strike.jpg)
JohnM
-
JohnM
-
Nothing left for John Mytton to do other than just drop the mic and walk away.
-
There's too much John Mytton disinformation here to fix. Read my 9/11 Science 101 posts.
1) Yes, Larry Silverstein slipped up when he admitted that he "told them to pull" WTC7 before it collapsed in a perfectly managed explosive demolition.
2) Yes, international demolitions expert, Danny Jowenko, confirmed that WTC7 collapsed in an expert explosive demolition. Any idiot can see that.
It collapsed abruptly to the ground in a symmetrical free fall. No panicking of floors.
Even Dan Rather called that no brainer on 9/11.
Mytton doesn't realize that the NIST "pancake" commentary about WTC7 doesn't explain the free fall collapse to the ground. The distance between upper floors remains constant during the collapse!
-
Congratulations Niederhut for posting the largest surrender flag seen in ages.
-
Congratulations Niederhut for posting the largest surrender flag seen in ages.
I suspect Dr. Bill just repeats what Vladimir Putin tells him to say.
-
Congratulations Niederhut for posting the largest surrender flag seen in ages.
Huh?
Do you understand plain English?
This govenment disinformation claiming that steel wasn't liquefied during the demolitions of the Twin Towers is debunked by visual and witness evidence evidence, as I discussed (and documented) in my 9/11 Science 101 link (above.)
Secondly, there were explosions throughout the Twin Tower demolitions.
They are clearly visible and audible on recordings, and were reported by numerous witnesses.
Mytton falsely claimed that I denied the plane crashes. He didn't read or understand my analysis.
-
Over on the Ed Forum, Niederhut called me a "fan of Greg Doudna" (who believes Larry Crafard killed Tippit) and stated that I looked like one of the Road Warriors from the Mad Max movie.
I simply responded with one sentence, saying that he was confused. I said nothing more, nothing less.
Even though he started it, he suspended me from posting over there for 4 months LOL The Mods are over there are clowns. All of them. W. Niederhut is a tinfoil hat wearing KOOK and it is clear and obvious.
-
Over on the Ed Forum, Niederhut called me a "fan of Greg Doudna" (who believes Larry Crafard killed Tippit) and stated that I looked like one of the Road Warriors from the Mad Max movie.
I simply responded with one sentence, saying that he was confused. I said nothing more, nothing less.
Even though he started it, he suspended me from posting over there for 4 months LOL The Mods are over there are clowns. All of them. W. Niederhut is a tinfoil hat wearing KOOK and it is clear and obvious.
Hey Bill,
I hope you are well!
There's no doubt that Niederhut is a paranoid screwball which is not uncommon in the CT community but the problem here is that in the Real World Neiderhut was at one time(according to him) a man of some importance and now he is a useless nobody so when he gets a little power by becoming a "moderator" he becomes delusional with power, and rules with a self serving Iron Fist. Sad!
I see that he also banned Griffith for 8 months, WOW!, I have debated and strongly disagreed with Griffith over hundreds of posts over the years and he is hardly a Government stooge and regarding the JFK assassination holds 99% of the exact same views as Neiderhut but since Griffith has an opposing view of Prouty, suddenly Griffith is the arch enemy? You can't make this Ooops, I'm a naughty Boy up
BTW, I hope that Neiderhut sticks around long enough to see how a real moderator(Duncan) runs a Forum, Duncan endorses free speech and allows opposing points of view and very, very rarely will ban anyone and even then the suspensions last not much more than a week or two.
JohnM
-
There's too much John Mytton disinformation here to fix. Read my 9/11 Science 101 posts.
1) Yes, Larry Silverstein slipped up when he admitted that he "told them to pull" WTC7 before it collapsed in a perfectly managed explosive demolition.
2) Yes, international demolitions expert, Danny Jowenko, confirmed that WTC7 collapsed in an expert explosive demolition. Any idiot can see that.
It collapsed abruptly to the ground in a symmetrical free fall. No panicking of floors.
Even Dan Rather called that no brainer on 9/11.
Mytton doesn't realize that the NIST "pancake" commentary about WTC7 doesn't explain the free fall collapse to the ground. The distance between upper floors remains constant during the collapse!
1) Yes, Larry Silverstein slipped up when he admitted that he "told them to pull" WTC7 before it collapsed in a perfectly managed explosive demolition.
That's what you're going with? A slip up? Really?
So on national TV, an interview that Silverstein has spent much time preparing let's "slip" that he is guilty of insurance fraud, wired his building with explosives, and in conversation with the Fire Department Commander talks about avoiding loss of life and incredibly lets the Fire Chief make the decision to "pull it" which "obviously" doesn't refer to keeping firemen alive but for some unknown reason, known only to you, is an authorization for the Fire Department to demolish WTC7 with silent explosives?!
2) Yes, international demolitions expert, Danny Jowenko, confirmed that WTC7 collapsed in an expert explosive demolition.
Okay, let's examine what Jowenko an effective outlier in this case, was aware of;
Jowenko wasn't aware of the construction of WTC7, not off to a good start, are we!
(https://i.postimg.cc/JtwCS7Hm/Danny-Jowenko-don-t-know-construction-of-wtc7.jpg)
And again.
(https://i.postimg.cc/kGRdjRG7/Danny-Jowenko-don-t-know-the-building-wtc7.jpg)
What did Jowenko have to make his analysis, a couple of top down plans......
(https://i.postimg.cc/Rqrx2CJz/Danny-Jowenko-plan-wtc7.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/sxGRnGxj/Danny-Jowenko-plan-wtc7-b.jpg)
....which didn't show the unique arrangements and weak points of the supporting structure.
(https://i.postimg.cc/nr9td9rH/transfer-trusses-failed-wtc7.jpg)
Jowenko has trouble getting his head around exactly how the "controlled demolition" was carried out, he assumes that the fires were put out and then the explosives were inserted but when the interviewer tells him that there were raging fires within WTC7, Jowenko has difficulty understanding what happened because presumably it's clear to him that these fires would have a dramatic consequence for pre-planted wiring and explosives.
(https://i.postimg.cc/C5nVvn1W/Danny-Jowenko-fire-not-extinguished-puzzled.jpg)
And finally Jowenko admits to guessing of certain aspects. Oops!
(https://i.postimg.cc/8cfVyfcN/Danny-Jowenko-guessing-for-me.jpg)
As can be seen in ALL the videos, the very heavy newly added penthouse collapses first due to multiple supports giving way because of the raging fires, then....
(https://i.postimg.cc/fW7LQ6TP/WTC7-penthouse-collapse.gif)
(https://i.postimg.cc/0Ndk1S9b/WTC7-V-shaped-collapse.jpg)
.....several seconds later the unique specially designed transfer trusses under increased strain give way causing the building to collapse.
(https://i.postimg.cc/FzS0hGzx/WTC7-bowingnorthface2.gif)
(https://i.postimg.cc/G3scb63n/transfer-trusses-failed-wtc7-b.jpg)
JohnM
-
Hey Bill,
I hope you are well!
There's no doubt that Niederhut is a paranoid screwball which is not uncommon in the CT community but the problem here is that in the Real World Neiderhut was at one time(according to him) a man of some importance and now he is a useless nobody so when he gets a little power by becoming a "moderator" he becomes delusional with power, and rules with a self serving Iron Fist. Sad!
I see that he also banned Griffith for 8 months, WOW!, I have debated and strongly disagreed with Griffith over hundreds of posts over the years and he is hardly a Government stooge and regarding the JFK assassination holds 99% of the exact same views as Neiderhut but since Griffith has an opposing view of Prouty, suddenly Griffith is the arch enemy? You can't make this Ooops, I'm a naughty Boy up
BTW, I hope that Neiderhut sticks around long enough to see how a real moderator(Duncan) runs a Forum, Duncan endorses free speech and allows opposing points of view and very, very rarely will ban anyone and even then the suspensions last not much more than a week or two.
JohnM
Thanks John. I'm doing great. I hope things are going well for you down under.
As for Niederhut's dumb ass, "paranoid screwball" sums it up. He may never post here again after you've completely embarrassed him.
On the other hand, some are too ignorant to know they should be embarrassed.
Nice work.
-
BB-
Though we have different views on parts of the JFKA, I have always liked your work, and respected your views.
Different people come to different conclusions...so what?
Evidently the anti-Semitic crackpot William Niederhut has banned you from the dis-Education Forum, and who knows how many others, for having different views.
Ironically, Niederhut posts his mendacious-hyperbole theories here, and is allowed to do so by the moderators. That is OK, censorship is bad.
Niederhut, even when shown by example...cannot see past his own thick and wide blinders.
I hope you post here often. Maybe I disagree with you. Big deal. I like to see all viewpoints.
Add on: It is inexplicable that John Simkin has allowed WN to run-ruin the dis-Education Forum. I assume Simkin is deep into his senescence. It will happen to us all.
Or maybe 60+ years in the JFKA snipe hunt has addled Simkin.
-
BB-
Though we different views on parts of the JFKA, I have always liked your work and respected your views.
Different people come to different conclusions...so what?
Evidently the anti-Semitic crackpot William Niederhut has banned you from the dis-Education Forum, and who knows how many others, for having different views.
Ironically, Niederhut posts his mendacious-hyperbole theories here, and is allowed to do so by the moderators. That is OK, censorship is bad.
Niederhut, even when shown by example...cannot see past his own thick and wide blinders.
I hope you post here often. Maybe I disagree with you. Big deal. I like to see all viewpoints.
Add on: It is inexplicable that John Simkin has allowed WN to run-ruin the dis-Education Forum. I assume Simkin is deep into his senescence. It will happen to us all.
Or maybe 60+ years in the JFKA snipe hunt has addled Simkin.
You're so nice.
Btw, you have a typo of omission in your first sentence.
-
TG
The eagle eye of Tom Graves sees 20/20.
Thanks for the fix
-
The Ku Keffiyeh Klan (KKK) has been planting Tehran-friendly narratives that Mossad waxed JFK (through an acquiescent CIA-Angleton) and also placed timed-explosives in the WTC to expertly bring down the Twin Towers (after crashing airplanes into them). No evidence needed, only IDS (Israel Derangement Syndrome).
Mossad rules the world!
Monika Wiesak, who previously authored a book on Michael Jackson, the pedophile celebrity singer, recently authored a couple total-dud books on the JFKA. For sure, the Israelis are suspects, affirms Wiesak.
But back to Michael Jackson. Put on a gas mask and read the book blurb that Wiesak wrote for her Jackson hagiography:
Michael Jackson was globally famous yet misunderstood by many. He was loved by his fans and demonized by the corporate press. He became famous at a young age and soared to superstardom as a young adult. As he matured, so did his music. He sang of unity, peace, and harmony, and against war and injustice. He created his beloved Neverland Ranch to serve as a healing escape for others. As the years went on, the press attacks grew more vicious. Then, the molestation allegations began. The media spoke of the accusations as if copious evidence backed them up. However, a closer look reveals that they fall apart under scrutiny.
This book details the story of Michael Jackson, from his youth through long past his death. It explores the false rumors spread over the years and sheds light on who the man truly was. It also offers a revealing look at the world of power, media, and entertainment.
Wiesak is the type of "researcher" populating the JFKA community lately.
Crackpots---or for hire? By who?
-
Ben Cole was notorious on the Education Forum for insisting that Donald Trump's January 6th mob attack
on Congress was, in reality, a Deep State plot against Donald Trump. So much for Ben's acumen.
And Ben never studied, or understood, the scientific data about 9/11, or the 21st century history of PNAC.
Ben is not a scientist.
Here is one, simple question for Ben Cole, Bill Brown, Mytton, Graves, et.al. here.
Answer the question, please.
What liquefied the steel that was "flowing like a foundry" at Ground Zero?
The molten steel cascades are visible on film, and were documented by NYFD firefighters.
.
.
-
Obsessively jibber-jabbering about Mossad and the 9.11 bombing is Dr. Bill's strong suit. Nutterhut, aka "The Quack," can go on for years, and then decades, and has, with his peevish dementia. The (dis)Education Forum became a Dr. Bill platform for his crackpot 9.11 narratives, much to the dismay of the few remaining sane participants.
And the feculent, flatulent Dr. Bill will compulsively pollute this forum too. So it goes. I promise you, he will repeat his screwball narratives on 9.11 ad infinitum.
Dr Bill, aka The Quack, Moderator of the (dis)Education Forum:
(https://i.postimg.cc/CLr6z0jG/Screen-Shot-2569-03-25-at-08-06-01.png)
Caveat emptor, and draw your own conclusions.
-
Ben Cole was notorious on the Education Forum for insisting that Donald Trump's January 6th mob attack
on Congress was, in reality, a Deep State plot against Donald Trump. So much for Ben's acumen.
And Ben never studied, or understood, the scientific data about 9/11, or the 21st century history of PNAC.
Ben is not a scientist.
Here is one, simple question for Ben Cole, Bill Brown, Mytton, Graves, et.al. here.
Answer the question, please.
What liquefied the steel that was "flowing like a foundry" at Ground Zero?
The molten steel cascades are visible on film, and were documented by NYFD firefighters.
.
.
And Ben never studied, or understood, the scientific data about 9/11....
And what scientific understanding have you demonstrated, besides (some unknown unproven "molten steel=bad")? You're clearly bluffing your way through this and let's be honest, you couldn't "science" your way out of a wet paper bag!
The molten steel cascades are visible on film
This old chestnut, there is burning debris seen cascading from WTC7 close to ten minutes before the collapse, this debris could be anything and being so long before the actual collapse adds much more credibility that this burning debris was totally unrelated to any pre-planted explosives.
(https://www.ejumpcut.org/archive/jc50.2008/9-11Sharrett/911jcstills/cs14.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/Dwwqt4DM/Texas-Power-Line-Fire.jpg)
And wisely you still haven't told us what you believe caused your "molten steel" because if it is indeed "thermite" then that opens a whole can of worms. Previously you have claimed that the visible high velocity expulsions that we see as the building collapses is a common sight seen in "controlled demolitions" which you imply can only be caused by explosives, or perhaps you simply don't understand that the collapsing floors violently caused the remaining air to be forced from the building!
But anyway it's obvious that you are just throwing crap at a wall and hoping something sticks, was it quickly detonating high explosives or relatively slow burning "thermite" which doesn't explode with anywhere near the intensity of explosives but merely melts through various metals.
Explosions or merely escaping air!
(https://i.postimg.cc/zXysr7Qt/WTC-air-expulsions.jpg)
And inquiring minds would like to know how do you apply "thermite" to vertical beams, because after the reaction starts the remaining reactants are controlled by gravity??
"Thermite" is only practical being applied to a horizontal steel surface and I don't believe that "thermite" has ever been used in a controlled demolition, because precise pinpoint explosions are required and not the unpredictable timing of "thermite"
(https://hackaday.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/thermite-welcing-cropped.jpg)
What liquefied the steel that was "flowing like a foundry" at Ground Zero?
The molten steel cascades are visible on film, and were documented by NYFD firefighters.
I would sure like to see some photographic evidence of steel "flowing like a foundry" at Ground Zero or the resulting pools of molten steel or even the cooled off slabs of melted steel? Exactly what was this documentation, are we to rely on non specialist witnesses who didn't chemically analyse this "steel" or even photograph this other worldly phenomenon?
Where was this molten material flowing, from where to where, was new molten material being produced supposedly weeks or even months after the brief "thermite" reactions on 9/11
After an extensive search, there isn't much visual evidence, the following images seem to be the only "proof" of molten steel but did they even come from Ground Zero and how do you pick up molten steel with a grappler? And as seen above in the telegraph post fire there is many possibilities before assuming "molten steel"
(https://www.metabunk.org/metamirror_cache/algoxy.com_psych_images2_moltensteelenclose5mt.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/2yvgnKmt/investigate911-org-Fires-burned-and-molten-steel-flowed-in-the-pile-of-ruins-still-settling-beneath.jpg)
Embers from hot debris can look a lot like the unanalysed substances seen at Ground Zero.
(https://i.postimg.cc/npxZ8GRM/contrailscience-com-skitch-embers-Google-Search-20130122-155140.jpg)
And finally, as I previously stated, there was NO need to demolish the buildings, the planes
attacking and crashing into the two most symbolic buildings of wealth and power in America was objective completed, and these building on fire and smoking for weeks after would have been much more visually terrifying than a pile of rubble. The risk of being caught planting and detonating tonnes of explosives was incredibly high and added zero extra value, demolishing the massively damaged buildings in which thousands of people lost their lives would have no pushback.
It's like the JFK assassination, CT's with too much time on their hands invent ridiculous scenarios to further their insane accusations and the prime example is why would conspirators risk everything by having a frontal shooter when your "lone" patsy was high and behind? Ridiculous!
(https://i.postimg.cc/rFmV3QYq/intrepid-NYC-46st-hudson-river-11-813910002-Version-23120112011-08-011969-12-31.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/mkJz5J47/wtc-after-strike.jpg)
JohnM
-
Finding 9/11 photos of the molten steel from Ground Zero has so far proven to be worthless, on some 9/11 truth site I found the following photo of an extraction of some type of heated up metal which is still far from being molten. And as seen in the bottom photo, achieving a similar look to this heated up metal has been accomplished over a fire, a situation replicated within the fiery WTC rubble, and let's not forget that hundreds of years before 9/11 this technique to shape metal was utilized without "thermite".
(https://i.postimg.cc/rzXf1195/hot-steel-from-wtc-rubble.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/QVGfQQqt/hot-steel-from-fir.jpg)
JohnM
-
Ben Cole was notorious on the Education Forum for insisting that Donald Trump's January 6th mob attack on Congress was, in reality, a Deep State plot against Donald Trump.
Dear Dr. Bill,
If true, then Ben's just as wrong as you and the other "useful idiots" at the so-called JFK Assassination Debate - Education Forum who preach that a different kind "Deep State" (the evil, evil "Military Industrial Intelligence-Community Complex") killed JFK.
-- Tom
PS "Useful idiots" -- it's an old KGB expression.
-
So far Ben Cole, John Mytton, et.al., get an "F" in 9/11 Science 101.
I'll ask again.
What liquefied the steel girders of the Twin Towers?
-
Dr Bill "The Quack" Niederhut:
This is not a serious conversation.
See:
Based on investigations, a glowing liquid was seen pouring from the South Tower (WTC 2) before its collapse, but the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) concluded it was molten aluminum from the plane, not steel. NIST found no evidence that steel melted in the jet-fuel fires prior to the towers' collapse.
National Institute of Standards and Technology (.gov)
National Institute of Standards and Technology (.gov)
+2
Glowing Liquid Flow: A bright, glowing liquid was observed pouring from a window on the 80th floor of WTC 2 around 9:52 a.m. for about four seconds.
Molten Aluminum Theory: NIST identified this substance as molten aluminum from the aircraft's components (which melts at a much lower temperature).
No Evidence of Molten Steel: Investigations by NIST, the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), and the Structural Engineers Association of New York (SEONY) found no evidence of molten steel in the debris before the collapse.
Steel Weakening: While the fire did not melt the steel, it was hot enough to severely weaken it, losing about 50% of its strength at, contributing to the structural failure.
National Institute of Standards and Technology (.gov)
National Institute of Standards and Technology (.gov)
[/i]
Mossad had nothing to do with the Islamo-fascist attack on the WTC, which started inside Saudi Arabia and in the bin Laden family. The bin Ladens were friends with President George W. Bush, and a number of prominent GOP'ers (none Jewish, AFAICT), and Osama appears to have acted independently. That bin Laden-GOP connection was somewhat obscured in the official report.
Only the demented Israel Derangement Syndrome (IDS) believes the nut-ball stuff you peddle.
Try to book a spot on Tucker Carlson, or maybe Romper Room.
-
So far Ben Cole, John Mytton, et.al., get an "F" in 9/11 Science 101.
I'll ask again.
What liquefied the steel girders of the Twin Towers?
Hey hold on cowboy, aren't you jumping the gun and coming to an unprovable self serving conclusion?
• You haven't provided any visual proof of liquefied steel girders?
• You haven't even proven that any potential molten metal was from the steel girders?
• There is a massive photo record of the steel girders of the WTC towers, yet there is no proof of any being even partially liquefied?
• You haven't indicated where the extra energy to keep molten steel girders flowing for weeks came from?
• As 9/11 truthers constantly and rightfully remind us that jet fuel or office fires isn't enough to melt steel, sure it will weaken but not melt, but when it comes to weeks of liquified steel caused by some impossible energy source you guys have no problem making unscientific accusations! You truthers are unbelievable and the worst types of hypocrites!
• Thermite burns and consumes it's total volume withing minutes, so that isn't going to keep molten steel flowing weeks after the event.
• a possibility is there was over 45 tonnes of aluminium contained in each plane and the melting point of aluminium is low enough to be in a liquid state in the intense conditions of the rubble. Also worth considering is that a small amount of the plane passed through the building and counting what was ejected at least 40 tonnes must have remained, and also of importance is that the plane wasn't pure aluminium but an alloy which would slightly impact the melting point.
(https://i.postimg.cc/7LdjD3qb/Melting-Points-of-Metals.jpg)
Out of the tons and tons and tons of recovered steel girders, there is no reported evidence or visual indication of any signs of partial melting.
(https://www.911memorial.org/sites/default/files/blog/images/Steel-3.jpg)
(https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/newshour/app/uploads/2016/09/1030-1024x680.jpg)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/da/Steel_from_Collapsed_WTC_Towers_%285941047922%29.jpg)
JohnM
-
Dr Bill "The Quack" Niederhut:
This is not a serious conversation.
See:
Based on investigations, a glowing liquid was seen pouring from the South Tower (WTC 2) before its collapse, but the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) concluded it was molten aluminum from the plane, not steel. NIST found no evidence that steel melted in the jet-fuel fires prior to the towers' collapse.
National Institute of Standards and Technology (.gov)
National Institute of Standards and Technology (.gov)
+2
Glowing Liquid Flow: A bright, glowing liquid was observed pouring from a window on the 80th floor of WTC 2 around 9:52 a.m. for about four seconds.
Molten Aluminum Theory: NIST identified this substance as molten aluminum from the aircraft's components (which melts at a much lower temperature).
No Evidence of Molten Steel: Investigations by NIST, the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), and the Structural Engineers Association of New York (SEONY) found no evidence of molten steel in the debris before the collapse.
Steel Weakening: While the fire did not melt the steel, it was hot enough to severely weaken it, losing about 50% of its strength at, contributing to the structural failure.
National Institute of Standards and Technology (.gov)
National Institute of Standards and Technology (.gov)
[/i]
Mossad had nothing to do with the Islamo-fascist attack on the WTC, which started inside Saudi Arabia and in the bin Laden family. The bin Ladens were friends with President George W. Bush, and a number of prominent GOP'ers (none Jewish, AFAICT), and Osama appears to have acted independently. That bin Laden-GOP connection was somewhat obscured in the official report.
Only the demented Israel Derangement Syndrome (IDS) believes the nut-ball stuff you peddle.
Try to book a spot on Tucker Carlson, or maybe Romper Room.
It doesn't matter how much peer reviewed scientific evidence is presented, troothers like the clueless Niederhut will always default to illogical biased junk science that supports their political agenda. It's really pathetic.
Glowing Liquid Flow: A bright, glowing liquid was observed pouring from a window on the 80th floor of WTC 2 around 9:52 a.m. for about four seconds.
Molten Aluminum Theory: NIST identified this substance as molten aluminum from the aircraft's components (which melts at a much lower temperature).
NIST was funded by the Government and therefore the bogeyman, and even though their published findings have been analysed and approved by the accredited scientific community, troothers like our newly acquired local looney will fight these findings and rely on a handful of uneducated trooth seekers.
33. Why does NIST state that a yellow stream of molten metal seen in some photographs pouring down the side of WTC2 was aluminium from the crashed plane, even though aluminium burns with a white glow?
NIST reported (NIST NCSTAR 1-5A) that just before 9:52 a.m., a bright spot appeared at the top of a window on the 80th floor of WTC 2, four windows removed from the east edge on the north face, followed by the flow of a glowing liquid. This flow lasted approximately four seconds before subsiding. Many such liquid flows were observed from near this location in the seven minutes leading up to the collapse of this tower. There is no evidence of similar molten liquid pouring out from another location in WTC 2 or from anywhere within WTC 1.
Photographs, as well as NIST simulations of the aircraft impact, show large piles of debris in the 80th and 81st floors of WTC 2 near the site where the glowing liquid eventually appeared. Much of this debris came from the aircraft itself and from the office furnishings that the aircraft pushed forward as it tunneled to this far end of the building. Large fires developed on these piles shortly after the aircraft impact and continued to burn in the area until the tower collapsed.
NIST concluded that the source of the molten material was aluminum alloys from the aircraft, since these are known to melt between 475 degrees Celsius (900 degrees Fahrenheit) and 640 degrees Celsius (1,200 degrees Fahrenheit)—depending on the particular alloy—well below the expected temperatures (about 1,000 degrees Celsius or 1,800 degrees Fahrenheit) in the vicinity of the fires. Aluminum is not expected to ignite at normal fire temperatures and there is no visual indication that the material flowing from the tower was burning.
Pure liquid aluminum would be expected to appear silvery. However, the molten metal was very likely mixed with large amounts of hot, partially burned, solid organic materials (e.g., furniture, carpets, partitions and computers) which can display an orange glow, much like logs burning in a fireplace. The apparent color also would have been affected by slag formation on the surface.
https://www.nist.gov/world-trade-center-investigation/study-faqs/wtc-towers-investigation
For instance Steven Jones, King of the 9/11 Trooth movement disagreed with the previous NIST conclusion and did the experiment of melting some aluminium with partially burnt organic matter but how much and what percentage of organic matter he doesn't say, so in other words he deliberately sabotaged the experiment so as to arrive at his predetermined conclusion and thus is the antithesis of valid scientific methodology.
“NIST states the hypothesis that flowing aluminium with partially burned organic materials mixed in, “can display an orange glow.” But will it really do this? I decided to do an experiment to find out.... Of course, we saw a few burning embers, but this did not alter the silvery appearance of the flowing, falling aluminium....
“In the videos of the molten metal falling from WTC 2 just prior to its collapse, the falling liquid appears consistently orange, not just orange in spots and certainly not silvery. We conclude from all of these studies that the falling metal which poured out of WTC 2 is NOT aluminium.”
https://www.ae911truth.org/evidence/high-temperature-thermitic-reactions
JohnM
-
JM--
The ideology determines the agenda, and the agenda determines the narrative, and the narrative determines the truth---in crackpot-land.
For some (demented souls), the Mossad has emerged as the top suspect in the 60+year JFKA perp snipe hunt.
I plan a post on the kook Monika Weisak's narrative, as soon as I can find a gas mask to wear while reviewing her work. Which is about on par with the polemic lightweight Lisa Pease.
-
This W. Niederhut guy is a total joke and his forum seems to be an even bigger one. Can you please ban him, Duncan?
-
Newsflash. I posted the incontrovertible evidence of the liquefied steel at Ground Zero on my 9/11 Science 101 thread, referenced above.
Here's the truth about MAGA Ben Cole and non-scientists on this thread.
"When the blind lead the blind, they both fall into the ditch."
-
Newsflash. I posted the incontrovertible evidence of the liquefied steel at Ground Zero on my 9/11 Science 101 thread, referenced above.
You've proved squat, doctor, and you're getting schooled left and right on this thread by people who actually understand and respect science. Now please go away forever? As you can see, nobody is interested in your 9/11 baloney here.
-
TS:
Ask Dr Bill, aka The Quack...if there was molten steel pouring out from the WTC, then that indicates temperatures above 2,500 degrees F inside the towers
In other words, the towers were ruined.
So then, according to the Dr. Quack, having flown two jets into the towers and turned the tower steel skeletons frameworks molten, then...yes. only then...Mossad set off thousands of exquisitely timed charges and bombs attached to load-bearing steel construction beams to create the pancake job on the WTC. (BTW, exactly like the tower that collapsed in Bangkok recently, due to an earthquake, and no Mossad-alleged involvement).
So...why did not the Mossad-charges go off when temps reached 2,500 F? How did radio-controlled charges survive 2,500 F?
How did Mossad plants thousands of charges with nobody noticing? Oh, that.
Why assume it was Mossad, and not Saudi Arabians, who planted the charges? The vast majority of the 9.11 skyjackers were Saudis. 9/11 was a Saudi plot.
In other words, Dr Bill The Quack has worked backwards, due to Israel Derangement Syndrome (IDS), or his deep anti-Semitic hysteria. He starts every conspiretard thoery with "Mossad" and works backwards.
But as for banning Dr Bill...well it is deeply ironic that The Quack has banned any number of people from the disEducation Forum, but is left unmolested here. The Quack is a small-minded martinet.
I believe a "forum" should invite various viewpoints and is richer, and if not that, then funnier, with the full range of views.
Dr Bill provides comedic relief. He defecates on himself in public, and thinks he has won a debate.
Well, it is also sad. But then, that is real life.
-
Pay careful attention, Anti-Truthers. Listen and learn.
This will be my final post here.
The mainstream U.S. media and internet have been inundated with pseudo-scientific falsehoods about 9/11 for 25 years.
Here's the incontrovertible evidence of liquefied steel at Ground Zero.
The Twin Towers were not demolished by Magic Jet Fuel.
Jet fuel does not burn hot enough to liquefy steel.
Nor could it explosively pulverize hundreds of thousands of tons of concrete, furniture, and human bodies into pyroclastic ash flows.
-
Bye bye, Doctor. Don't let the door hit you too hard on the way outta here.
-
Hey hold on cowboy, aren't you jumping the gun and coming to an unprovable self serving conclusion?
• You haven't provided any visual proof of liquefied steel girders?
• You haven't even proven that any potential molten metal was from the steel girders?
• There is a massive photo record of the steel girders of the WTC towers, yet there is no proof of any being even partially liquefied?
• You haven't indicated where the extra energy to keep molten steel girders flowing for weeks came from?
• As 9/11 truthers constantly and rightfully remind us that jet fuel or office fires isn't enough to melt steel, sure it will weaken but not melt, but when it comes to weeks of liquified steel caused by some impossible energy source you guys have no problem making unscientific accusations! You truthers are unbelievable and the worst types of hypocrites!
• Thermite burns and consumes it's total volume withing minutes, so that isn't going to keep molten steel flowing weeks after the event.
• a possibility is there was over 45 tonnes of aluminium contained in each plane and the melting point of aluminium is low enough to be in a liquid state in the intense conditions of the rubble. Also worth considering is that a small amount of the plane passed through the building and counting what was ejected at least 40 tonnes must have remained, and also of importance is that the plane wasn't pure aluminium but an alloy which would slightly impact the melting point.
(https://i.postimg.cc/7LdjD3qb/Melting-Points-of-Metals.jpg)
Out of the tons and tons and tons of recovered steel girders, there is no reported evidence or visual indication of any signs of partial melting.
(https://www.911memorial.org/sites/default/files/blog/images/Steel-3.jpg)
(https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/newshour/app/uploads/2016/09/1030-1024x680.jpg)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/da/Steel_from_Collapsed_WTC_Towers_%285941047922%29.jpg)
JohnM
Good presentation JohnM. No sign that I can see of liquified pools of steel which cooled and thus should have remained in their remolded state after cooling. All I see is a lot indications of steel girders and steel truss deformations that indicate the steel members may have lost 50% of their original load bearing strength which is entirely possible if the temperatures had reached 1000 degrees Fahrenheit ( according to Bing AI) .
So the ? Is if lots of the members simultaneously start to lose up to 50% of their original load bearing capacity in the volume of the building where the plane filled with 23k gallons of jet fuel (HUGE BOMB) exploded , could that part of the structure collapse so suddenly and symmetrically that the upper undamaged portion of the building would collapse straight down?
If it can, then how probable that the subsequent impact of the total mass of the upper 1/4th of building dropping at the rate of gravitational acceleration would cause the crushing failure of the inner core incrementally floor by floor and peel away the outer perimeter skin without much resistance?
It’s up to Dr. N to counter JohnM. argument by posting some photos of some steel elements which after collecting on the ground , cooled and remained in a remolded form indicative of having been previously in a liquified state.
Also what measurement analysis of the building collapse proves beyond reasonable doubt that the buildings fell uniformly at the rate of free fall? JohnM posted sources seem to indicate that the rate of descent was slightly less than free fall (gravitational ) acceleration.
-
ZM:
Ask the anti-Semitic krackpot Dr Bill Quack how Mossad (unnoticed) planted thousands of bombs in the WTC towers, to set off exquisitely timed explosions, to being down the towers pancake style. The Quack actually believes this stuff.
Dr Bill, in the disEducation Forum, has valorized the works of Ron Unz and Laurent Guyénot, both full-on nutcases.
Dr Quack has promised to leave. Oh, how will we ever survive! The irony of The Quack banning people from the disEducation Forum, and being allowed to post here...
Good-bye Dr. Quack. The US never landed on a man on the Fake Moon from the Flat Earth. We agree!
-
Pay careful attention, Anti-Truthers. Listen and learn.
This will be my final post here.
The mainstream U.S. media and internet have been inundated with pseudo-scientific falsehoods about 9/11 for 25 years.
Here's the incontrovertible evidence of liquefied steel at Ground Zero.
The Twin Towers were not demolished by Magic Jet Fuel.
Jet fuel does not burn hot enough to liquefy steel.
Nor could it explosively pulverize hundreds of thousands of tons of concrete, furniture, and human bodies into pyroclastic ash flows.
Pay careful attention, Anti-Truthers.
Hahahahaha!
Everything posted here by myself and others is founded in Science and common sense.
You desperately want to find a conspiracy and are about the most gullible person I've known.
Listen and learn.
Oh, this should be interesting.
......and internet have been inundated with pseudo-scientific falsehoods about 9/11 for 25 years.
This is the pot calling the kettle black, the "internet" is where paranoid pseudo-experts such as yourself are given free reign to perpetuate the most unscientific garbage.
Here's the incontrovertible evidence of liquefied steel at Ground Zero.
You haven't come close to providing even a sliver of evidence because a few firemen who allegedly told the truth and even then have no way of knowing what they saw "flowing like molten steel??", and some film of falling debris proves nothing. When you can show cooled off pools of tested molten steel or even partially melted structural steel, then you may have something but till then, dream on!
BTW can you give a logical narrative for why some structural steel was seen dribbling out from a tiny section of the WTC close to ten minutes before the collapse?
The Twin Towers were not demolished by Magic Jet Fuel.
Jet fuel does not burn hot enough to liquefy steel.
Here we go again, thousands of litres of jet fuel started the fires but soon after, the combustible office equipment, carpets, furnishings and etc were being consumed and in the blast furnace type conditions of the WTC, was enough to weaken the steel girders and cause catastrophic failure.
An observation which appears to confirm the above is that at first the smoke from the jet fuel fires were the characteristic black.
(https://www.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01522/twin_1522415c.jpg?imwidth=680)
But as the jet fuel fires were being replaced by the internal contents of the WTC the smoke turned a much lighter shade.
(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/480/cpsprodpb/458e/live/d39357e0-8d59-11f0-89c5-f9c523ebae74.jpg.webp)
Nor could it explosively pulverize hundreds of thousands of tons of concrete, furniture, and human bodies into pyroclastic ash flows.
LOL, now what are you suggesting? Even granting your belief that the buildings were brought down by a "controlled demolition", that would require about 10-20 tonnes of explosives or thermite or whatever, but you seem to be venturing into sci-fi with death rays from outer space of perhaps some sort of atomic bomb?
But seriously, the amount of kinetic energy released by each tower was approximately 1,830,000,000,000 joules which was more that enough to pulverise the tons of concrete.
JohnM
-
JM-
I enjoy your posts.
-
JM-
I enjoy your posts.
How nice!
-
BB-
Though we have different views on parts of the JFKA, I have always liked your work, and respected your views.
Different people come to different conclusions...so what?
Evidently the anti-Semitic crackpot William Niederhut has banned you from the dis-Education Forum, and who knows how many others, for having different views.
Ironically, Niederhut posts his mendacious-hyperbole theories here, and is allowed to do so by the moderators. That is OK, censorship is bad.
Niederhut, even when shown by example...cannot see past his own thick and wide blinders.
I hope you post here often. Maybe I disagree with you. Big deal. I like to see all viewpoints.
Add on: It is inexplicable that John Simkin has allowed WN to run-ruin the dis-Education Forum. I assume Simkin is deep into his senescence. It will happen to us all.
Or maybe 60+ years in the JFKA snipe hunt has addled Simkin.
Thanks Ben. I appreciate your kind words, buddy.
As for Niederhut, he's a clown and isn't worth discussing.
-
William Niederhut has frequently platformed the Education Forum and JFKA to valorize Ron Unz...yes Ron Unz, the crackpot.
Some tidbits on Ron Unz:
American Writer Ron Unz On Iranian TV: Former Israeli PM Ariel Sharon Orchestrated 9/11 So The U.S. Will Attack Israel's Enemies; The Mossad Was Probably Behind The Kennedy Assassinations, Planned To Assassinate President George H.W. Bush
And the source for this?
Iranian TV. https://www.memri.org/tv/american-writer-ron-unz-iran-israeli-pm-ariel-sharon-behind-nine-eleven-mossad-jfk-assassination
State Iranian TV applauded Unz for his perspectives.
You suppose Unz collects much money from Tehran? Or does Unz spread these crackpot theories for free?
Is this where Jeff Morley gets his perspectives?
It remains true: There are foreign actors monkeying with the JFKA and RFKA narratives. Oliver Stone's relationship with Putin is well-known. To be sure, the US government has tried to prevail with a narrative as well.
Caveat emptor, and draw your own conclusions.
-
More of the typical crackpot fare in the (dis) Education Forum It is a bottomless pit of fecal matter.
(https://i.postimg.cc/RC6YJ1Nf/Screen-Shot-2569-04-09-at-08-21-01.png)
-
More of the typical crackpot fare in the (dis) Education Forum It is a bottomless pit of fecal matter.
Just did some Googlin' and Douglas Caddy apparently believes JFK was murdered because he was about to announce the "truth" about alien presence on earth? Man oh man!! Hilarity.
-
By (dis)Education Forum standards, Caddy's posts are standard fare, but more benign than many posts. Probably I should do a separate thread on the "aliens perped the JFKA crowd" inside the Dis-EF.
-
Just did some Googlin' and Douglas Caddy apparently believes JFK was murdered because he was about to announce the "truth" about alien presence on earth? Man oh man!! Hilarity.
Caddy, who was E. H. Hunt's original Watergate attorney, introduced Harley Schlanger of the pro-Russia Lyndon LaRouche organization to Roger Stone at Schlanger's request in early 2016, shortly after he had returned from Moscow where he and some other LaRouche officials had attended the infamous 15 December 2015 RT dinner (during which General Mike Flynn -- who was paid a lot of money to give a speech there -- was photographed sitting next to Putin). Stone and Schlanger met at a restaurant in Austin, Texas (iirc), in February 2026 and "hit it off." Afterwards, Stone sent Caddy an email thanking him for connecting him with Schlanger, and said, in so many words, "We are of like mind, and we are fighting the Globalists together."
Caddy notified James Comey and Robert Mueller of this but never heard back from them.
-
Stone and Schlanger met at a restaurant in Austin, Texas (iirc), in February 2026 and "hit it off." --TG
Huh? 2026?
-
I see you're still butt hurt on getting banned? Hey Ben, share with everyone how many times you were warned or penalized over the years by all moderators? Can't let it go because rules don't apply to you. Thanks for your upcoming collegial response.
-
PJC
Not that it matters, but I was banned from the (dis) Education Forum for posting that Sirhan fired live rounds at RFK and was not hypnotized. If you care, consult Kirk Gallaway.
True, I was warned or suspended once (I no longer remember which) by the deceased Ron B. for public worrying that the JFKA was "nothing more than a 60+ year snipe hunt."
I am justified in that statement. We still don't know who helped LHO, the actual boots on the ground, if anyone. So...what do we know? We have Jeff Morley dog-whistling "Mossad." Others say Mafia. Ed Landsale-Madame Nhu? CIA? KGB? G2?
Without knowing the boots on the ground on 11.22...we are in a snipe hunt.
I stand by my statement that Willian Niederhut is an anti-Semitic crackpot, suffering from Israel Derangement Syndrome, which he drags into the EF, and tried to drag into this forum as well, but was more or less laughed out of the house.
Neiderhut actually believes that Mossad planted thousands of explosives in the WTC towers, then set up exquisitely timed explosions, to bring the towers down pancake style. Mossad did this in cooperation with the building's owner (who was Jewish) and dozens or hundreds of participants in the Bush Administration who were...of course, doing Israel's work.
If you wish to have a substantive, civil conversation, this is my e-mail: 7continents7@gmail.com
Ten years or so back, the EF was OK, though ideologically left-wing. That is fine, libertarian, left, right, socialist, I don't care.
Something else has seeped in the EF-JFKA now. The bulk of EF posts concern modern politics, invariably always left-side (or not worse). Really, how much anti-Trump juvenalia can you read? (No, I am not a Trump fan. But I can read anti-Trump stuff anywhere. I want to read about the JFKA and related topics).
LN'ers are no longer much tolerated even in substantive threads.
I hope the EF can find its way forward. It seems in permanent decline.
-
PJC
Not that it matters, but I was banned from the (dis) Education Forum for posting that Sirhan fired live rounds at RFK and was not hypnotized. If you care, consult Kirk Gallaway.
True, I was warned or suspended once (I no longer remember which) by the deceased Ron B. for public worrying that the JFKA was "nothing more than a 60+ year snipe hunt."
I am justified in that statement. We still don't know who helped LHO, the actual boots on the ground, if anyone. So...what do we know? We have Jeff Morley dog-whistling "Mossad." Others say Mafia. Ed Landsale-Madame Nhu? CIA? KGB? G2?
Without knowing the boots on the ground on 11.22...we are in a snipe hunt.
I stand by my statement that Willian Niederhut is an anti-Semitic crackpot, suffering from Israel Derangement Syndrome, which he drags into the EF, and tried to drag into this forum as well, but was more or less laughed out of the house.
Neiderhut actually believes that Mossad planted thousands of explosives in the WTC towers, then set up exquisitely timed explosions, to bring the towers down pancake style. Mossad did this in cooperation with the building's owner (who was Jewish) and dozens or hundreds of participants in the Bush Administration who were...of course, doing Israel's work.
If you wish to have a substantive, civil conversation, this is my e-mail: 7continents7@gmail.com
Ten years or so back, the EF was OK, though ideologically left-wing. That is fine, libertarian, left, right, socialist, I don't care.
Something else has seeped in the EF-JFKA now. The bulk of EF posts concern modern politics, invariably always left-side (or not worse). Really, how much anti-Trump juvenalia can you read? (No, I am not a Trump fan. But I can read anti-Trump stuff anywhere. I want to read about the JFKA and related topics).
LN'ers are no longer much tolerated even in substantive threads.
I hope the EF can find its way forward. It seems in permanent decline.
Anyone who is a JFKA conspiracy theorist (other than, possibly, "the KGB encouraged and/or programmed Oswald in the USSR") is, at the very least, a "useful idiot."
Anyone who supports Donald Trump is, at the very least, a "useful idiot."
-
TG-
I should have added that there are Tehran- and Putin-inspired, and likely financed, activists promoting JFKA narratives.
Oliver Stone's links to Putin are smellier than an industrial-scale pig farm.