Re: [Marxism] Re: WTC collapse

["bob" <bobo926@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Les

It's one thing to discuss an issue, it's quite another to simply make
off-the-cuff remarks meant to try to divert attention.

In your attempt to deligitimize the letter written by the UL investigator,
you wrote "first, i am very familiar with UL. i know what they do, what they
are capable of doing, and i know intimately the problems the Lab has. i've
worked on at least three large projects in the last five years that needed
UL approval."

And this proves exactly what? You imply that UL has some 'problems' that
mean that folks shouldn't believe what they wrote. You don't mention what
the problems are supposed to be or how they compare with whatever problems
that the NIST has as a government agency that the Bush administration would
simply not allow to contradict the official storyline. Instead, we're to
believe you because you worked on project that needed UL approval?

Likewise, it appears you think that you can gain access to inside
information regarding the writer of the UL letter who was subsequently fired
for whislteblowing. You wrote " i will ask around inside UL and see what i
can find out about Kevin Ryan" That remark makes me wonder what you'd be
looking for.

If you choose to believe a government agency that's part of the Bush
administration and as such clearly is part of the problem not part of
understanding the problem, that's clearly your choice. Perhaps you can see
that simply stating your agreement with the government is not particularly
convincing. Nor is your method of trying to put down all who disagree with
you with rather snide remarks of a personal nature.

Your overall take seems to be that you think that cutting corners on codes
is the most important aspect of 911 and that it somehow is very significant
in general. The simple fact is that thousands of skyscrapers have been
built. They don't fall down regardless of what your opinion is about the
builders cutting corners on codes. Fires happen in skyscrapers. They still
don't fall down, except for one day when 3 of them fell down. And perhaps
it's merely a coincidence that those 3 skyscrapers falling down are being
used to justify wars that have resulted in more than 150,000 deaths so far,
the enactment of repressive legislation, the roundup and indefinite
incarceration of thousands of people, torture, the deligitimization of
dissent, and cutbacks in social programs to fund the wild escalation in the
military budget, etc.

For me, such a coincidence is a little hard to believe.

Before 911, Bush was a buffoon who worked only a few hours a day, took
month-long vacations, while watching his daughters get arrested for
substance abuse, losing battles with Congress over social security
privatization, with abysmal approval ratings, etc. After the 911 miracle
story, he became a world class military leader responsible for killing,
maiming and torturing tens of thousands, defying the laws as well as 225
years of US history, and is now the 're-elected' president posed to do more
harm.

You maintain that you're not convinced by those who have criticized the
government's version of the 911 conspiracy. You're clearly entitled to your
opinion. On the other hand, thousands of others have considered the
government's story and concluded that it simply doesn't hold water. It is
too fantastic to believe. Too many facts contradict it. Too much cover-up
has already occurred. And too much is at stake to simply ignore the
contradictions in the government's story. People have taken a look at the
supposed breakdown of well-established procedures, seismic data, film
footage, firemen communicating from locations that were supposedly so hot
they were causing steel to soften, Bush's reaction caught on tape, a number
of supposed hijackers reported to be alive and well, the miraculous finding
of a supposed hijacker's passport at the base of the WTC, etc.

In addition, Bush seems to have put out an order prohibiting federal
employees from discussing the details
of what happened on 911. When the Air traffic controllers wanted to listen
to a tape recording they had made on 911, the tape mysteriously disappeared.
(I guess we've come pretty far from the 1970s. Then, Nixon just had Rosemary
Woods erase the incriminating 11 minutes. Now, the whole tape gets
'disappeared'.)

On every other day in the last 50 years, off-course planes have been
intercepted by the air force.  It's not unusual. It happens hundreds and
sometimes thousands of times each year. On 911, 4 off-course planes were not
intercepted. On every other day for the last 100 years, skyscrapers remained
standing. On 911, three did not. On every other day for the last 50 years
(at least) the laws of physics have remained the laws of physics. On 911
they didn't. On every other day for the last 50 years, jet planes were
difficult to fly. On 911, 19 amateurs with absolutely no experience flying
huge jet planes, supposedly (while distracted by physical struggles with
passengers and crew) aimed the planes at targets at exceedingly high speed
and relatively low altitudes and made perfect strikes. Sort of like a person
bowling a perfect game the first time they try their hand at bowling. The
whole thing would have been more believable if they had aimed at the WTC and
instead hit an office building on Wall St. or crashed into the East River.
(The Pentagon plane story is even harder to believe. In that case an amateur
with absolutely no experience flying an enormous jet plane was able to fly
an expert approach maneuver at somewhere between 300 and 500 miles per hour,
within inches of the ground that would have been good for a guy with 20
years experience flying those planes, and at the same time avoid being shot
down by any one of the defense systems in place in Washington DC to protect
the government bigwigs.)

And then we're to believe a Bush regime report that's contradicted by the
evidence, other official investigators and it seems even the previous drafts
of the report, because it blames the collapse of 3 buildings on inadequate
fireproofing? Like we're also to believe that the war on Iraq was due to
intelligence failures regarding the WMDs and a commission's 600-page report
that intelligence wasn't politicized and that no one from the White House or
Pentagon contributed to the mistaken intelligence."? With $50-100 billion
spent on intelligence systems each year?

NIST is an agency of the US government under the direct control of Bush.
It's hardly surprising that they would support their boss. As I said above
there's simply too much at stake.

bob




----- Original Message -----
From: "Les Schaffer" <schaffer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2005 10:52 PM
Subject: [Marxism] Re: WTC collapse


> bob wrote:
>
>
> > I understand that you choose to believe the NIST report. For others...


_______________________________________________
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism