9/11 Truthers Foiled by 12/25 Attack
Hey 9/11 Truthers, CNN is reporting that al Qaeda just took credit for the Northwest Airlines terrorist attack:
“Be prepared to suffer because the killing is coming and we prepared you men who love death just as you love life and by God’s permission, we will come to you with more things that you have never seen before. Because, as you kill, you will be killed and tomorrow is coming soon. The martyrdom brother was able to reach his objective with the grace of God but due to a technical fault, the full explosion did not take place.”
—al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula
Still think that al Qaeda did not orchestrate 9/11? Still think this is all an “inside job” by the Bush administration? Just who do you think Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab worked for? George Bush? Abdulmutallab’s own father ratted him out after he was radicalized by Muslim extremists—was that all part of the “inside job” as well? What was that sewn up in his underwear, the same superthermite that Bush operatives used to bring down the World Trade Center buildings with planted explosive devices?
Will someone from the 9/11 Truth camp please wake up and accept the fact that when al Qaeda takes credit for 9/11, says that they would do it again, and then tries, we should take them at their word.
Post Your Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment
T/S Members
Log in with your True/Slant account.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Daniel Florien, Michael Shermer. Michael Shermer said: 9/11 Truthers Foiled by 12/25 (my blog commentary): http://trueslant.com/michaelshermer/2009/12/28/911-truthers-foiled-by-1225-attack/ [...]
Yeah, yeah. You are part of the conspiracy too. In fact, as I don’t believe a word of it, so am I. I’m off into my WWIII bunker to declare war on myself. Signed the New World Ronsonberg Group.
Seems like the only one happier about the Richard Reid reduex than Bam Bam is you. You can’t blame the Prez though- he’s been taking it on the chin from virtually everyone and the chance to play “protector of the innocent,” has to be a more than welcome distraction.
But I see your point- a five year operation on two continents directly under the nose of the Bureau, CIA and the NSA (Colleen Rowley anyone?) and a mentally ill Nigerian man who apparently tried to set his diaper on fire. Yeah, pretty much the same MO
Let me ask you this- why wouldn’t Al Qaeda take credit for it whether they sowed the pop rocks into the panties or not? Are the evil doers worried about bad P.R.?
Oh wait, I just saw to the right you’re a Pepperdine man. Never mind. If you see Ken Starr, kick him in the nuts for me.
“9/11 Truthers Foiled by 12/25 Attack.” Did you write that? It’s a stunner.
? What afe you ranting about? You seem ill. I think I’m going to go back an re-read your post for the 3rd time……Am I missing something? Or, are you just a kook?
In response to another comment. See in context »According to today’s news, AQ is saying the 12/25 attempt was retaliation for an attack that killed two imams on 12/17… but the bomber had bought his ticket before then, and had been in Yeman for months.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/12/obama-administration-calls-bs-on-al-qaeda-claim.html
I’m going to blame Chopra.
You can wipe the smile off your smug gob right now Michael Shermer.
Whatever may have happened on Xmas day still doesn’t change the fact that two of the highest buildings in the world could not have fallen in free fall time through the line of most resistance through gravity alone as NIST suggests.
Gravity only gives you the power to fall in free fall time if you are falling freely. Therefore without any argument about it at all in order to pulverise all those floors at around 7 floors a second on the way down other forces must have been in play.
Bwahahahaha! Thanks for the visual reminder of my grandmother, who was from Ireland and she was always telling us to wipe the smile off our gobs (especially at Mass)!!! What is it with you 9/11 truthers? You may want to watch someone other than Glen Beck and Sean Hannity….(such a digrace to the Irish race, that one is) I’d like to punch him in his gob!
In response to another comment. See in context »Your glee about this retarded patsy trying to light his underwear on fire shows your bias. You so want the mainstream media conspiracy theory to be true that you can almost taste it.
This story reminds me of the “Let’s Roll” story and the Jessica Lynch story and the Pat Tillman story and the WMD stories and the official 911 conspiracy theory about a bunch of guys with box cutters defeating the most sophisticated air defense system in the world, hitting 3 of their 4 targets, including the most defended building in the world.
Explain WTC 7 to me Mr. Shermer. It is still the 47 story elephant in the living room.
This guy was let through on purpose. He was a known terror risk. He was handed to the CIA on a plate by his own father ! Remember all those Cheney / neocon warnings ? They desperately want to blot Obamas copybook. Obama still has nests of neocon vipers in the CIA/Blackwater nexus and the justice department that for some unexplained reason he has been unable to eradicate.
As with the 911 horror the Al Qaeda operators were tracked all the way.
They were compromised and coordinated by black ops agents working on behalf of the PNAC conspirators.
As a sceptic Mr Shermer should be less prepared to swallow the guff dished up to him by the neocon operators.
I have a design for a perpetual motion machine for you Michael. It runs on neocon bull shit as marketed by the Richard Cheney corp.
Response to this article by World911Truth:
http://world911truth.org/response-to-michael-shermer/
I’ve no complaint about your approach. each to his own as they say. But me I like to stick to the gravity facts. That way the bastards have no wriggle room.
In response to another comment. See in context »NIST says 9 secs the south 11 secs the north tower. Same as free fall from impact zone.
So if you took facsimiles of the tops and dropped them from a crane from the same height and they fell through empty air under gravity alone as well they would apparently take the same time as the real tops did falling through all those floors.
Can’t of course be done, and it wasn’t done which is why people who believe the official story are stupid and why we are where we are today.
Getting stupider by the month.
10 questions that don’t address anything Dr Shermer wrote about… How is that a response?
In response to another comment. See in context »That’s a very weak response, sorry. When you’re in the 9/11 debunking business, you can’t simply ignore the most important questions the 9/11 truth movement is asking. Moreover, our first question related to the Sibel Edmonds’ case is absolutely relevant. And if you go down the list of questions, you will find that all have one thing is common: they destroy the plausibility that Al qaeda was behind the 9/11 attacks. Unless they had access to Building 7, the Twin Towers, NORAD…
In response to another comment. See in context »I agree that it is not proven AQ orchestrated these attacks — I posted something to that effect earlier — but I think Dr Shermer’s point is that if the Bush-Cheney administration was behind the attacks — or a cover-up of the attacks — and they are no longer in power, why are the attacks — or the covering-up of the attacks — continuing?
In response to another comment. See in context »You are very naive if you believe that the Bush family and Cheney do not have influence and contacts right to the heart of CIA black operations.
In response to another comment. See in context »Being in or out of office makes no difference to them.
You are very naive if you don’t believe the same thing that I do. Good argument.
In response to another comment. See in context »Hey Shermer,
i win any argument you including your latest nonsense. I also have a bigger name than any of these Orwellian Truther Truthlings together.
bring it on or censor me ;
http://nicohistory.webnode.com/
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3426316/
http://ff.im/dn1mU
The correction of typo:
i win any argument ‘against’ you. Why don’t you organize a live tv show or stream for me, coward? ;
9/11 Truthers? You mean these guys?
Mr. Shermer
You definitely give “skeptic” a bad name. Usually a “skeptic” is someone who is “skeptical” of the party line but all you are is a shrill for the government theory of what happened on 911 instead of being a TRUE skeptic and really looking at the “official” story and investigating IT as a true skeptic would.
Let’s look at this objectively. Here we have a “terrorist” from Al-Queda attempting to blow up an airliner with a bomb in his briefs which fizzles into nothing while the same terrorist organization claiming responsibility was able to hijack 4 planes, cause NORAD to stand down, hit three of their four targets and destroy three massive structure, one of which was not even being hit by a plane, all in the same day…all from a cave in Afghanistan? All I can say is what my 16 year old would say…whatever!!!
Al Qaeda did attack us on 9-11 directed by the Taliban to do so.
Why? Look for the original French version of a book called “Forbidden Truth: Secret US-Taliban Oil diplomacy and the failed hunt for Bin Laden” written by John Charles Brisard and Guilliaume Dasquie. One a former French Intelligence agant and the other a journalist.
Bush had negotiated with the Taliban from the day he TOOK office until mid uly 2001 to get permission to build oil and gas pipelines across Afghanistan so that oil companies such as UNOCAL who Hamid Karzai worked for, could profit off the new oil source from the former Soviet Republics north of Aghanistan to flow down to the middle east.
Bush had agressively negotiated with the Taliban to get this project running. The Taliban did not want any part of it. Finally in July 2001 retired diplomats met with the Pakistanis in Germany and told them that if the Taliban would not go along with allowing the US to build these oil and gas pipelines accross Afghanistan, then the US would invade and carpet Afghanistan with bombs until they installed their puppet Hamid Karzai. These US retired diplomats sent by Bush to Germany had told the Pakistanis to tell this to the Taliban who should have shown up for this meeting but did not show up this time.
The Pakistanis eventually told the Taliban what the Bush diplomats had told them. The Taliban did not wait for the impending invasion and got Al Qaeda, their guests to attack us FIRST.
Yes 9-11 happened over OIL and appeared a preemptive strike by the Taliban/Al Qaeda of Afghanistan.
Bu$h provoked the 9-11 attacks and 3,000 people died for oil and gas profits. That appears the Forbidden Truth.
No the Bush administration had no direct plan to destroy the towers but he did provoke the Afghanis to strike us first over a failed oil and gas deal that the Taliban did not want.
Thanks Republicans!!
We agree that the Bushies were in “negotiations” with the Taliban. That is a proven fact by released information and documents from the USG. The issues are how did the Taliban which you believe attacked us which BTW doesn’t follow the original theory that it was Al-Queda (the base)were able to commandeer four airliners in one day with no weapons (the “box cutters” issue has been denied now by the FBI)and fly them around the eastern US without any interference or interception which was unheard of until that day; being able to basically fly these huge aircraft with enough precision to impact three of the four targets; be able to DESTROY three building where they actually fall straight down literally into their own footprint, one building not even being hit by tan aircraft; allow all the “evidence” of their crime to be quickly gathered up and shipped off without a very thorough forensic investigation. Of course 911 was allowed or caused to happen for oil and other political reasons but we can’t just ignore these blatant contradictions to what we’ve been told by our government what really happened that day. Another link is the statement in the PNAC document about a “new Pearl Harbor event” to push their agenda forward.
In response to another comment. See in context »Building 7 fell eventually from the overwhelming force from the blasts and collapse of both towers .
Some blasts appear so strong that windows get shattered for hundreds of feet. Well since building 7 appeared so close the force not only shattered windows bu destroyed the frame of building 7.
As for the 12-25 attack, noone consciously allowed this terrorist to get through. Most of the blame lies with the Dutrch where this person boarded the plane from. The terrorist had stayed in Amsterdam and boarded the plane. He did not board a plane in the US.
IF anyone consciously allowed this person to get on the plane I suspect a conservative Republican held over in the diplomatic corps or in the CIA let him go so then people like Jim Demint could blame Obama. Notice I said IF someone consciously allowed this man to get through. I doubt that anyone conscously new about this man in Amsterdam.
I will tell you one fact. 9-11 happened under the Republicans watch. There appears no blame shifting that the Republicans can do to shift away responsibility of the Republican party for failing to defend America on 9-11-2001.
The Republicans demonstrated their weakness on terrorism, national security and national defense on 9-11.
The MYTH of Republican strength on national security and defense EXPLODED on the plane that hit the towers on 9-11.
8 yers later the Republicans still restate their myth over and over again for political gain. Noone’s buying it Republicans. You failed on 9-11. You own it.
wwwxdemocratzxorg
Would you care to explain how a blast from a gravity driven collapse of WTT 1&2 could be strong enough to destroy the steel frame of WT7?
In response to another comment. See in context »Bear in mind that for WT7 to fall as it did pretty well strait down at almost free fall speed, its steel frame would have had to have been destroyed simultaneously all round. Even on the three sides not facing the twin towers.
That did not appear just a gravity driven collapse of towers 1 and 2, An aircraft explosion combined with gravity caused the collapse of bulding 7.
As I said depending on the force of an explosion windows can get broken for hundreds of feet and to an extent buldings nearby can get the energy of the explosion such that the metal structure gets destoyed and comes down.
The force of the explosion appeared enough to pulverize people into dust!
Look at what happened in world war II. A nuclear explosion destroyed many buildings even though it exploded in one specific area and the force spread out from that specific area and friend people and melted people’s bodies and many buildings go tdestroyed. Yes this did not appear a nuclear explosion but the force appeared enough to destroy a building nearby such as building 7.
In response to another comment. See in context »I am sorry to rain on your parade here but you are proposing something that is physically impossible. NIST actually took seven years to try to explain the collapse of WTC7 and what they finally determined was there was an “extraordinary event” that caused the building to collapse. They said one critical supporting column was “weakened” by fire, not by any damage from impact from the destruction of the other towers which has NEVER happened like that before until that day. If your theory of impact is true, why did the building continue to stand for up to 5 hours after the other towers fell? You need to do some real research into this issue before you start spouting these ridiculous ideas. The truth will rock your tidy little world. BTW Dr. Chandler et al questioned the NIST assumption that WTC7 didn’t fall at free-fall and made them ADMIT that the building fell at free-fall speed for 2.3 seconds which means 8 floors of the building had to be REMOVED entirely to allow this to happen. How an impact from debris from the other towers remove 8 total floors to allow the building to fall free-fall for 2.3 seconds? The ONLY way is by the use of EXPLOSIVES!!! That is the elephant in the room that all you who support the original theory just keep ignoring.
In response to another comment. See in context »ROTFLMAO – The building fell at near free fall – are you serious? First of all, it didn’t. You can see objects in the video falling faster than the building. Second of all, even if they put explosives in the middle of the building, why would the top half of the building not meet any resistance from the bottom half as it fell? Even in planned implosions, the building doesn’t fall at free fall speeds. That’s got to be the stupidest argument you truthers could come up with.
In response to another comment. See in context »Catch up bluskool, even NIST admit free fall:
NIST, Re: WTC1&2: “Since the stories below the level of collapse initiation provided little resistance to the tremendous energy released by the falling building mass, the building section above came down essentially in free fall, as seen in videos.”
NIST, Re; WTC7: “Stage 2 (1.75 to 4.0 seconds): gravitational acceleration (free fall)”
In response to another comment. See in context »Good night America.
Really? I think the passengers on that flight including Kurt Haskell & his wife may have to disagree with you!!! They saw someone filming the whole thing….boy are the FBI in a hurry to find that guy!!! Why? They have the culprit. Maybe because the CIA agent getting him on the flight was caught on film? Maybe because the CIA agent was picked out of a line by bomb sniffing dogs? This was witbessed by all passengers on the flight. He was interrogated and led away in handcuffs……..never to be seen or heard from again. Hmmm??? I guess that proves the CIA has no hand in any of this huh? As Jim Gaffigan might say…”Hmm, I just don’t follow your logic!”
[...] Michael Shermer 9/11 Truthers Foiled by 12/25 Attack: “Hey 9/11 Truthers, CNN is reporting that al Qaeda just took credit for the Northwest [...]
I guess I don’t understand the logic of saying that an unsuccessful underwear bomber who failed to blow up anything proves that 19 terrorists, who despite their training on U.S. military bases could still not fly Cessnas much less passenger jets could successfully get the most powerful air defense system in the world to stand down while they circled around and flew into precise targets. Perhaps I am just not “skeptical” (which apparently means believing that people in power never, ever lie) enough.
Ah, Dr. S., did you know what you were to unleash with such a story and headline?
There are cults of religion, cults of personality, and now cults of conspiracy. They will not let go of a belief, whether there is lack of evidence to support their claims or there is evidence to refute the claims. You can always make another assertion to point the argument your your way.
Here’s what I’ll give you on 9/11: there may have been some explosions planted in the WTC towers, but we’ll never know at this point. Bush and Co. showed willingness to give up lives, but not money. This alone would keep me from believing they were behind the attacks; having a cousin at ground zero in D.C. trumps the $ concept, however.
Sometimes you have to realize you may never know everything. To purport BS when there are way bigger fish to fry is a waste of time – and in the case of Truthers (and probably Birthers), resources.
Let go of this fool’s errand and get on with life.
[...] the attacks on that fateful day in September, they just pop back up. In response to my blog here, 9/11 Truthers Foiled by 12/25 Attack, the “truthers” have fired back with a series of questions for me, not about Al Qaeda and bin [...]
[...] Response to Michael Shermer | World for 9/11 Truth | W9T.org This is our response to Michael Shremer’s article 9/11 Truthers Foiled by 12/25 Attack [...]
I went to Shermer’s site and I refuted his article of 9/11 Truthers Foiled, all I got was immediate attack by his ‘eskeptic” forces, they included all the regular refuting techniques, called me ‘crazy’ etc., however, my words are there for anyone who goes there to see the argument, and I am glad I did it. I will not let them ’shame’ me into silence. Bring it on Shermer, let’s get this party started.