Confessions of khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Oklahoma City, PanAm 800 and American 587

[synchro1]

I slogged through two hours of it.  She engages in a LOT of circular argument.  She relies on the discredited Steven Jones nanothermite BS.  She fails basic math.  She alleges some thngs that are completely wrong such as that the wings of a 757 align to the bottom of the fuselage.  She relies very heavily on her personal speculations of things like evidence for thermite.  Her best evidence is the time disparity between 9:32 and 9:37, and the debris that fell into a woman's car.  She pounds away at her conclusions that explosions were bombs over and over again.  I was not impressed.

@MarkE,

The top picture shows the size of a 757 next to the Pentagon. The bottom one the hole it allegedly left. The pillar posts on ether side of the hole in the bottom picture are the same distance apart as the ones in the top picture. Here's leaked footage of a missile hitting the Pentagon 10 years after and more size comparisons:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRPWLqc5T20

[MarkE]

The picture on the bottom looks like one she presented of an opening that was in the C ring facing towards the center of the Pentagon.

Here's the deal:  If someone is going to make a claim, such as explosions were the result of planted bombs, then I want to see their evidence that: a) The explosions were from bombs, and b) evidence that those bombs were planted.  In three hours the best she did was replay a testimonial by witness who said they did not smell aircraft fuel.  I call that way insufficient.  Ditto things like her claims that outward blast forces meant that there were planted bombs.  Outward explosive force happens when a lot of material oxidizes in a hurry.  When it consumes oxygen in the process, there is a subsequent pressure drop that sucks back inward.  She simply declared that the signs of outward explosive force meant that there were bombs in the buildings.  She victimized herself with her own circular reasoning.

[synchro1]

The picture on the bottom looks like one she presented of an opening that was in the C ring facing towards the center of the Pentagon.

Here's the deal:  If someone is going to make a claim, such as explosions were the result of planted bombs, then I want to see their evidence that: a) The explosions were from bombs, and b) evidence that those bombs were planted.  In three hours the best she did was replay a testimonial by witness who said they did not smell aircraft fuel.  I call that way insufficient.  Ditto things like her claims that outward blast forces meant that there were planted bombs.  Outward explosive force happens when a lot of material oxidizes in a hurry.  When it consumes oxygen in the process, there is a subsequent pressure drop that sucks back inward.  She simply declared that the signs of outward explosive force meant that there were bombs in the buildings.  She victimized herself with her own circular reasoning.

@MarkE,

She makes a pretty solid case from video footage, that there were two nearly simultaneous explosive events. The first one was in the accounting offices behind the fire station and involved a commuter jet shot down by a helicopter followed by a bomb explosion. There was a black female eyewitness who survived that blast and described what she believed to be a bomb blast coming from inside the building. This is the area where Barbara believes the nano-thermite was used and the protruding wreckage observed. That was a different event from the one that caused the hole and the roof collapse further to the south.

The wreckage that fell through the "Sun Roof" of the car matched missile fabricated hull material. She never reported that, she just drive home with it and photographed it. The small amount of wreckage debris collected at the Pentagon, including the one jet engine came from the shot down commuter jet not a 757.

[MarkE]

@MarkE,

She makes a pretty solid case from video footage, that there were two nearly simultaneous explosive events. The first one was in the accounting offices behind the fire station and involved a commuter jet shot down by a helicopter followed by a bomb explosion. There was a black female eyewitness who survived that blast and described what she believed to be a bomb blast coming from inside the building. This is the area where Barbara believes the nano-thermite was used and the protruding wreckage observed. That was a different event from the one that caused the hole and the roof collapse further to the south.

The wreckage that fell through the "Sun Roof" of the car matched missile fabricated hull material. She never reported that, she just drive home with it and photographed it. The small amount of wreckage debris collected at the Pentagon, including the one jet engine came from the shot down commuter jet not a 757.

What she did was make a number of allegations.  That's fine, she has some ideas.  Then it is a matter of evaluating available evidence to see if the ideas hold water.  Mostly what she did was employ circular logic, emphasizing her conclusions and then framing what evidence she had in terms of her conclusions.  It is a tried and true debating technique.  It is not how to do science.  She is not a scientist, so I give her some allowance.  I did sit through all three hours.  I was not impressed.

I am not going to recount all three hours.  She alleges that a drone aircraft was badly dressed up to look like an airliner, was detonated by the helipad along with bombs in the building, and that FL 77 never impacted the building.  By the end of the presentation she went full on into an Israeli / neocon global oil domination conspiracy.  The neocon meglamania and the PNAC thousand year Reich idea called the NAC are real enough.  That the neocons siezed on 9/11 to advance their arm chair dominate the world ambitions is a matter of documented fact.   But when it came down to cases, 95% of what she presented was innuendo without much substance.  Some of the stuff at the end amounted to:  "The Jews did it!" which is a rather offensive thing to say without solid evidence.

I find it remarkable that people allege elaborate black ops on 9/11, a plan of great sophistication, but simulataneously make allegations that the perpetrators were bunglers who left these big clues for the conspiracy theorists to find out in the open.

There were evil people in our government and they did evil things.  There is good evidence that they intentionally left the proverbial door open.  But I have yet to see anyone come up with a smoking gun that shows that the Bush government executed 9/11.

[Red_Sunset]

.......................................
...................
...........  But I have yet to see anyone come up with a smoking gun that shows that the Bush government executed 9/11.

Sure, it is all speculation !
What is of interest to observe how the Bush government was well prepared to make the most out of the event.
And what reflects back to the probability of being a controlling participant was the apparent  'blindness' to the event about to take place by the CIA & FBI.  Not many people believe that Osama could have pulled this off unaided. It was a project of mutual interest and with only one to take the blame
Sure, its all speculation
We can only speculate on what events that occurred were within the plan and on what occurred outside the plan
But of one thing I am fairly sure, there was a plan.

When it comes to a flying plane into the WTC,  it played over and over again. 
What would be the resistance not to show the Pentagon surveillance video's, I heard several view angles exist but were confiscated.   At the same time it is no problem to show video footage of the military operation to capture Osama. 
They could have confiscated /forbidden all footage of the plane attack on the WTC,  What judgement would have been used to show or not to show the pentagon attack ?
Red