A "libertarian manifesto" regarding 9-11?

[ibaghdadi]

First of all, this is not a 9-11 truther/denier/conspiracy theorist thread.

Its purpose is to find out where we stand and if we can formulate a position that is coherent, acceptable to the public, cannot be ridiculed by the MSM but maintains classic RP integrity and libertarian spirit.

Following the Beck/Medina fiasco I thought it may be worthwhile to actually examine which beliefs regarding 9-11 are acceptable and which aren't. I'm stating my position and I invite you to state yours.

The point isn't to argue these positions, but to identify some "common denominator" that we can agree upon. The intention is to be able to respond if someone asks, Beck-style, if you "believe the official story regarding 9-11".

IMHO:

Yes, the attacks were perpetrated by Al-Qaeda. In all probability they planned and acted alone
It's quite possible that someone knew about it and allowed it to happen, for political or economic/financial gain
It's also quite possible that some people had some forewarning
UA flight 93 was shot down by the US airforce over PA (it didn't fall on its own)
Finally, if you don't believe the official story regarding 9-11, it does NOT mean you blame the attack on the government. It simply means you don't trust the official account.
And yes, the US government's "ruling elite" are evil, and have no qualms about killing innocent Americans if it furthers their political or financial aspirations.


What's your position?


Iyad

[muzzled dogg]

so many questions

[t0rnado]

Libertarianism emphasizes the individual not the collective, so libertarians should make their own personal decisions in regards to 9/11 and not allow Ron Paul, Glenn Beck, Alex Jones, Obama, or anyone else to make the decisions for them.

The only "common denominator" I see libertarians reaching is that questions must always be asked.

[sratiug]

The explosives for the first trade center bombing in 1993 were supplied by the FBI working with the terrorists and did kill Americans.

The 911 Commission Chief Counsel did say all the military information passed to them was lies.

Saudis including members of Bin Laden's family were flown out of the US while Americans were grounded.

Hundreds of Isaeli spies were arrested by the FBI after 911.

[Stary Hickory]

Please don't try to speak for all libertarians. The plane was not shot down. I really get tired of this crazy nonsense? I mean how in the world can you rationalize this? They let one plane hit the pentagon to make it look authentic? This nutty stuff really looks bad.

This is painful to see. I think this will hurt the movement. Why in the world dream this stuff up? I get it you really really hate government. I do to. But they are not as smart as you think they are. They are a collection of unprincipled bumbling morons. There is no huge conspiracy. There is no evidence to support any of what you posted.

This kind of stuff is marginalizing RP and anything associated with him. And we get like 20 posts a day on it. This is really bad guys. Condense the threads or something, just a little.

[CapitalistRadical]

This is not really a libertarian issue. Libertarianism has to do with natural rights. Libertarians question government, and are aware of the ability of this and any government to act with great treachery, but the question of the culpability for 9/11 is beyond the realm of natural rights discussions.

I think the common denominator is that we are outraged at the loss of life, and would like to see the guilty parties brought to justice

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

nt

[sratiug]

Please don't try to speak for all libertarians. The plane was not shot down. I really get tired of this crazy nonsense? I mean how in the world can you rationalize this? They let one plane hit the pentagon to make it look authentic? This nutty stuff really looks bad.

This is painful to see. I think this will hurt the movement. Why in the world dream this stuff up? I get it you really really hate government. I do to. But they are not as smart as you think they are. They are a collection of unprincipled bumbling morons. There is no huge conspiracy. There is no evidence to support any of what you posted.

This kind of stuff is marginalizing RP and anything associated with him. And we get like 20 posts a day on it. This is really bad guys. Condense the threads or something, just a little.

I don't think you know the plane wasn't shot down.

[Justinjj1]

The official story of 9/11 is the biggest nonsense that I have ever heard. Anybody who is not a completely gullible tool can see through the massive holes in it. I'm not saying that I have the answers, nor do I know anybody who does. All I know is that the official story reeks of bull shit, and we should be loudly questioning it. The fact that it is a taboo subject that can get you banned on a "libertarian" website such as this just goes to show you how the powers that be have completely controlled the spectrum of discourse in this nation.

[t0rnado]

The official story of 9/11 is the biggest nonsense that I have ever heard. Anybody who is not a completely gullible tool can see through the massive holes in it. I'm not saying that I have the answers, nor do I know anybody who does. All I know is that the official story reeks of bull shit, and we should be loudly questioning it. The fact that it is a taboo subject that can you banned on a "libertarian" website such as this just goes to show you how the powers that be have completely controlled the spectrum of discourse in this nation.

It's not a taboo subject here. Some of us just do not feel that libertarians or anyone else should have the exact same views on something unrelated to libertarianism. As far as I see it, the official story is a complete joke.

[cpike]

First of all I'm not a truther. I do think Bin Laden attacked us to provoke us into war in Afghanistan. I would not be surprised if there are small isolated individuals who assisted with the attacks. I don't see it as a Government conspiracy, but that government employees may have helped, just as perhaps an airline employee helped. I could buy Flight 93 being shot down, not to kill Americans, but to save them and then hid by the government to help the people feel better. That's about as far as I would go.

[Che]

couldn't agree more

[Vessol]

I respect everyones differing views of 9/11, and I believe that it is good to question everything. Especially something as big as 9/11.

[ibaghdadi]

Libertarianism emphasizes the individual not the collective, so libertarians should make their own personal decisions...

This is not really a libertarian issue.

OK, I fudged up the title and the terminology - sorry. I understand, of course, that libertarian theory has nothing to do with this.

What I was saying is that we should have a position so we don't get "ambushed", and I wanted to explore what the average libertarian person, the average RP supporter, thinks about 9-11.


Please don't try to speak for all libertarians. The plane was not shot down. I really get tired of this crazy nonsense? I mean how in the world can you rationalize this? They let one plane hit the pentagon to make it look authentic? This nutty stuff really looks bad. There is no huge conspiracy.

First of all, I'm talking only for myself (that's what IMHO means).

Second, you seem to be doing the same thing Beck did. Just because I don't swallow the entire government story regarding 9-11 does not mean that I say it's some big conspiracy.

In fact it's item #1 on my list if you cared to read it:


Yes, the attacks were perpetrated by Al-Qaeda. In all probability they planned and acted alone

Do you see "conspiracy" written anywhere in my OP? You're just assuming, and you need to ask yourself why.


This kind of stuff is marginalizing RP and anything associated with him. And we get like 20 posts a day on it. This is really bad guys. Condense the threads or something, just a little.

And this is precisely what I posted this thread. This is not a 9-11 denier thread. Its purpose is to find out where we stand and if we can formulate a position that is coherent, acceptable to the public, cannot be ridiculed by the MSM but maintains classic RP integrity and libertarian spirit.

Anyway, thanks for the input guys. I'm a little under the weather and I guess it's affecting my concentration. Sorry for any confusion.

Iyad

[TinCanToNA]

This is painful to see. I think this will hurt the movement. Why in the world dream this stuff up? I get it you really really hate government. I do to. But they are not as smart as you think they are. They are a collection of unprincipled bumbling morons. There is no huge conspiracy. There is no evidence to support any of what you posted.
This.

Some people think the government is so corrupt and inept, except when it is absolutely brilliant when it comes to grandiose evil schemes. The government can't keep very many secrets, and I am beyond certain that none of the "evil intent" that the nutjobs claim is there is actually there.

Skepticism of government is vital, as our Founders believed, but paranoia is a mental disorder. You need to walk the fine line, lest you descend into madness (i.e. the "controlled demolition" proponents).

[Vessol]

Considering it's been on the table before in the 1960's, I don't have such an optimistic view of the government to think it has been taken off the table. Also most who believe in 9/11 Truth or w/e don't think the actual government was responsible, mainly the upper upper echelons of unelected officers(military, beurocratic positions, etc)

The government is far from inept in many things.

[paulitics]

This.

Some people think the government is so corrupt and inept, except when it is absolutely brilliant when it comes to grandiose evil schemes. The government can't keep very many secrets, and I am beyond certain that none of the "evil intent" that the nutjobs claim is there is actually there.

Skepticism of government is vital, as our Founders believed, but paranoia is a mental disorder. You need to walk the fine line, lest you descend into madness (i.e. the "controlled demolition" proponents).

no-one takes you seriously when you say "nutjobs" because you think the government can be evil. Give it up.

[revolutionisnow]

This link says it better than I ever could.

http://www.takeourworldback.com/itwasntmuslims.htm

"It wasn't Muslims in an Afghan cave who had access to highly energetic nano-thermites; it was the US military and government scientists such as those connected with NIST.

It wasn't Muslims who ran a construction company that was awarded a $124 million contract for construction of the Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) headquarters in Washington, DC, which oversees the Indian Head Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC-IH), which was described during the 1990s as the "National Center for Energetics", the military's term for "explosives work", and as of 1999-2000 the "only reliable source of aluminum nanopowders in the United States"; it was Tom Leppert who was CEO of Turner Construction as of 9/11/01, and who even writes parts of Presidential speeches.

It wasn't Muslims who ran a construction company that had supervised the 2000 demolition of the Seattle Kingdome, participated in the post 9/11 collection and disposal of the steel wreckage of the WTC towers, and carried out extensive renovations throughout the World Trade Center complex right up to the morning of 9/11 including fireproofing upgrades on the floors that were struck by planes and subsequently "failed", when the steel had already been certified to ASTM E119 by Universal Laboratories, and, in tests sponsored by NIST on corresponding floor assemblies subjected to greater heat exposure and protected with less fireproofing than was the case at the WTC, the test specimens "were able to sustain the maximum design load" without collapsing for as long as the tests were run (2 to 3 1/2 hours); it was Tom Leppert who was CEO of Turner Construction as of 9/11/01 and received a Torch of Conscience award from the American Jewish Congress.

It wasn't Muslims who trained their cameras on the World Trade Center Towers prior to the first aircraft impact, who danced and celebrated with high fives prior to the second impact as most onlookers still believed it had been a terrible accident rather than terrorism, and who were caught with foreign passports, $4,700 in cash hidden in a sock, maps highlighting certain places in the city, and a van that tested positive for traces of explosives; it was Israelis Sivan Kurzberg, Paul Kurzberg, Yaron Shmuel, Oded Ellner, and Omer Marmari, several of whom have been confirmed as Mossad agents, as part of their job in "documenting the event".

It wasn't Muslims who were caught on 9/11/01 operating in teams with vans full of explosives, including one team who attempted to blow up the George Washington Bridge with a truck packed with tons of explosives, and another who blew up a van between 6th and 7th on King Street with a mural painted of a remote controlled airplane diving into New York and blowing up; it was Israelis, which is why the authorities did their best to ignore and bury these reports which included a suspected van bomb driven into the WTC basement and exploded to weaken the structure."

[TastyWheat]

First of all, this is not a 9-11 truther/denier/conspiracy theorist thread.

Its purpose is to find out where we stand and if we can formulate a position that is coherent, acceptable to the public, cannot be ridiculed by the MSM but maintains classic RP integrity and libertarian spirit.

So many incompatible requirements there...

[TinCanToNA]

no-one takes you seriously when you say "nutjobs" because you think the government can be evil. Give it up.

The government can certainly be evil. Of that, there is no doubt. However, in this instance, it is simply not even likely. Besides, Hanlon's Razor applies.

Furthermore, I have heard people screaming about bombs in towers 1 & 2, melting point of steel, and so forth. They are "nutjubs" and there is no more accurate a term. Now, if you believe there are questionable circumstances regarding 9/11, you have a grasp of the obvious. But generating a theory and then finding evidence to fill it in will almost inevitably lead you astray from the truth.

[Peace&Freedom]

Revolutionisnow's post above is a super summation of the truth. Read that url!:

http://www.takeourworldback.com/itwasntmuslims.htm

And let's not forget that running list of over 250 9-11 issues:

http://killtown.911review.org/911smokingguns.html

This is profoundly a libertarian issue. Libertarians are supposed to be against the initiation of force or fraud to solve problems. The state frequently uses false flag operations (fraud) to provide a pretext for military aggression abroad and for expanding its power at home (force). What will the anti-truther Libertarians here do once the state false flags us into attacking Iran, or the next war after that? If the issue of government fraud and cover-up is never faced, Libertarian rhetoric will remain utterly ineffective to stop or slow down their next inside job.

[TinCanToNA]

Revolutionisnow's post above is a super summation of the truth. Read that url!:

http://www.takeourworldback.com/itwasntmuslims.htmYeah, except for the whole structural analysis part of it, and the greater than 50% of it which is unrelated bullshit like "Jewish Lightning." Now, as for Matthys Levy's testimony regarding the strength of steel at 400 degrees F, I do not have the resources to do the analysis myself. However, that is 30% of the steel's melting temperature, which means that the steel would be recrystallizing. Given enough time, that absolutely would substantially reduce its strength (although again I do not have the resources to specify by which amount). Given the thermal conductivity of steel, that means a substantial part of the frame and very likely the steel inside the reinforced concrete (which was probably partially exposed after a giant plane impacted it) meant an enormous volume of the load-bearing structure was exposed to substantially reduced strength. This is simply an analysis of the effect on the low estimate of the temperature, and ignores the damage done by the impact itself, which would distort and deform a lot of the load-bearing parts of the building.

What I find confusing is that one's distrust of government and absolute faith in rampant false flag tactics requires them to construct theories where not only did a giant airline impacting the towers and the resultant fire not be the final cause of collapse, but that there were bombs placed there somewhere which survived the plane impact and finally brought the structure down...

[jkr]

dude, you do realize that you litteraly dont know shit? none of us do.
but we gather information so we can TRY to understand what happened because the RESULT is awfull.

and as for " nutjob":
you werent there

you werent involved

you arent an "engineer"

all your information comes from where?

and YOU are calling people names?

a lot of witnesses WITNESSED a lot of stuff that day, they were not thinking of the rest of the story. they just reported what they saw and heard.

how are you any different?

[Peace&Freedom]

What I find confusing is that one's distrust of government and absolute faith in rampant false flag tactics requires them to construct theories where not only did a giant airline impacting the towers and the resultant fire not be the final cause of collapse, but that there were bombs placed there somewhere which survived the plane impact and finally brought the structure down...

You have it backwards, several of the explosives on the lower floors were detonated just before the plane impact and their damage was noticed separate from the plane impact, according to the witnesses (one of whom is my own sister, who was in WTC 1 that morning). The plane crashes were done to provide cover for the explosive rigging (evidenced by the nano thermite, and WTC 7, not hit by a plane) that actually weakened the steel and brought the structures down. The impact of a plane was hardly even or severe enough to cause diffuse, symmetrical damage to WTC 1 and 2 (such that both buildings could collapse into their own footprint). Only controlled demolition accounts for that.

[TinCanToNA]

dude, you do realize that you litteraly dont know shit? none of us do.

you arent an "engineer"

Well, you've got me there. I'm an engineering student, not yet an engineer. Yet you discount the word of structural engineers, tribologists, and etc. in regards to this matter for what purpose?


You have it backwards, several of the explosives on the lower floors were detonated just before the plane impact and their damage was noticed separate from the plane impact, according to the witnesses (one of whom is my own sister, who was in WTC 1 that morning). The plane crashes were done to provide cover for the explosive rigging (evidenced by the nano thermite, and WTC 7, not hit by a plane) that actually weakened the steel and brought the structures down. The impact of a plane was hardly even or severe enough to cause diffuse, symmetrical damage to WTC 1 and 2 (such that both buildings could collapse into their own footprint). Only controlled demolition accounts for that.
*Sigh...* you're right. You're absolutely right. Even though there is irrefutable evidence of the top part of each tower collapsing onto the lower part, pancaking all the way down which has nothing whatsoever to do with the lower floors where the "thermite bombs" supposedly went off. You're also correct in stating that the kinetic energy of the plane impact simply disappeared, and had no effect on the load-bearing structure of the tower. The Law of the Conservation of Energy was invented by Zionists to confuse people, after all.

[Peace&Freedom]

*Sigh...* you're right. You're absolutely right. Even though there is irrefutable evidence of the top part of each tower collapsing onto the lower part, pancaking all the way down which has nothing whatsoever to do with the lower floors where the "thermite bombs" supposedly went off. You're also correct in stating that the kinetic energy of the plane impact simply disappeared, and had no effect on the load-bearing structure of the tower. The Law of the Conservation of Energy was invented by Zionists to confuse people, after all.

*Triple sigh...* NIST have themselves backed away from the pancaking theory, get the memo. WHAT I SAID about the plane impact (versus your misdescription) was that its impact and damage had to be symmetrical and even in order to result in a symmetrical collapse of the towers (into their own footprint). The collapse of building 7 into its own footprint without a plane is consistent with a controlled demolition symmetrical rigging of all three towers, not with the planes causing the collapse.

The thermite was applied throughout the building, but are theorized (by Jim Hoffman) to have been rigged with both an arming trigger and a detonation trigger (as in some other thermite demolitions) to account for the timing of the explosions accompanying the collapse. The molten metal witnessed at the lower levels is also consistent with nano thermite demolition.

[TinCanToNA]

*Triple sigh...* NIST have themselves backed away from the pancaking theory, get the memo. WHAT I SAID about the plane impact (versus your misdescription) was that its impact and damage had to be symmetrical and even in order to result in a symmetrical collapse of the towers (into their own footprint). The collapse of building 7 into its own footprint without a plane is consistent with a controlled demolition symmetrical rigging of all three towers, not with the planes causing the collapse.
The collapse was not symmetrical at all. Review the video of the collapse, especially of the first collapse. Yet even though it was not symmetric, it still fell roughly into its own footprint.

Also, study some intermediate engineering--materials, statics, and dynamics especially. If there were bombs planted, they were complete unnecessary. The damage and subsequent fire of the plane crash caused the collapse.

[Wineman77]

My take on a "libertarian manifesto" on 9/11 is that my opinion about what did or didn't happen on 9/11 is irrelevant to the cause. If I want to discuss my beliefs on the matter, I will do that on a forum dedicated to that subject matter. I refuse to give our enemies ammunition against the liberty movement. Ron Paul forums is a public forum that can be seen by anyone. Even the protection of member only sections like "hot topics" is not enough to keep us safe from those who would use such subject matter against us.

We saw first hand this week what blending of the "truth" and "liberty" movements can do to our candidates. How hard is it to be part of both camps, but keep rhetoric separate. Truth signage had no place at Ron Paul rallies. I saw it at almost every rally and sign waving meetup I attended, and i firmly believe it greatly hindered the campaign.

[Peace&Freedom]

The collapse was not symmetrical at all. Review the video of the collapse, especially of the first collapse. Yet even though it was not symmetric, it still fell roughly into its own footprint.

Also, study some intermediate engineering--materials, statics, and dynamics especially. If there were bombs planted, they were complete unnecessary. The damage and subsequent fire of the plane crash caused the collapse.

Word games galore. The videos do not show assymetrical damage leading to collapse, period. 1000 enginneers and architects at A&E for 911 truth concur, so drop it playing the expertise card. It is the plane impact collapse theory that is unnecessary, without historic precedent, and remains unproven. The damage had to be even to create a near simultaneous drop of entire floors---thats what 'falling into its own footprint' means, and what demolition teams rig for. There is an absence of evidence supporting your interpretation (including your misinterpretation of the WTC videos), while there is a presence of evidence (nano-thermite, molten metal below, eyewitness accounts, etc) pointing to demolition rigging creating the needed energy for the collapse.

[TinCanToNA]

Word games galore. The videos do not show assymetrical damage leading to collapse, period. 1000 enginneers and architects at A&E for 911 truth concur, so drop it playing the expertise card. It is the plane impact collapse theory that is unnecessary, without historic precedent, and remains unproven.

Remains unproven, except that it happened in real time on live TV. It is unprecedented, and fortunately unrepeated for something as large as a 767 to impact a skyscraper. By "absence of evidence" you must mean the irrefutable video proof clearly showing the top sections of the towers collapsing onto the impacted area, and the well-understood engineering physical principles behind the material characteristics of steel, reinforced concrete, and so forth. The plane impact and subsequent fire is absolutely enough cause for collapse after the period of time we're talking about.

I'll bet that, given a large enough event and a broad enough signing statement, I could get a thousand professionals to sign something too. Keep in mind that the signatories want an independent investigation to fully explore alternative theories including demolition, and do not necessarily believe in any specific theory. Hell, if I had my degree, I would sign it too to specifically investigate (and likely subsequently disprove) the possible use of explosive demolition.

[ibaghdadi]

OK, I have to say, I'm tired of this thread. I hope everyone ignores it long enough for it to die a natural death, or someone steps in to kill it. I'm a little ashamed that it was me who started it.

In my IP, I said:


First of all, this is not a 9-11 truther/denier/conspiracy theorist thread.

Yet this is exactly what it became.

Also:


Its purpose is to find out where we stand and if we can formulate a position that is coherent, acceptable to the public, cannot be ridiculed by the MSM but maintains classic RP integrity and libertarian spirit.

And obviously that didn't happen. I'm starting to doubt that it's possible. I still think it's very, very important, though.

A good chunk of it is my fault for not formulating the IP clearly enough, but I hope everyone understands at least this: I want to find a way in which, when we talk about 9-11, we don't have to lie, and yet don't get ridiculed.

Now I hope I'm not stepping out of line, but I hope a moderator comes along, takes this thread outside, and shoots it.

Or better yet, people start contributing something worthwhile.


Iyad

[jmdrake]

First of all, this is not a 9-11 truther/denier/conspiracy theorist thread.

First of all, nobody can even agree on the definition of "9/11 truther". That's problem number 1. Technically if you think you've been lied to about 9/11 by the government in any form or fashion you are someone who "seeks the truth".



Its purpose is to find out where we stand and if we can formulate a position that is coherent, acceptable to the public, cannot be ridiculed by the MSM but maintains classic RP integrity and libertarian spirit.


Impossible on two counts. 1) Trying to "formulate a position" on this is like trying to herd cats. 2) You will get ridiculed by the MSM no matter what you say, unless you say "9/11 happened exactly as the government said. We should stay in Afghanistan indefinitely. And confession extracted from torture should be used in military tribunals". Unfortunately at least one candidate has said all of that and he's not getting ridiculed. But what price? :(



Following the Beck/Medina fiasco I thought it may be worthwhile to actually examine which beliefs regarding 9-11 are acceptable and which aren't. I'm stating my position and I invite you to state yours.

The point isn't to argue these positions, but to identify some "common denominator" that we can agree upon. The intention is to be able to respond if someone asks, Beck-style, if you "believe the official story regarding 9-11".

IMHO:
* Yes, the attacks were perpetrated by Al-Qaeda. In all probability they planned and acted alone


That's simply not true. At least the "acting alone" part. 9/11 commissioner Bob Graham said information about foreign sponsorship (http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/congress/july-dec02/intelligence_12-11.html) of 9/11 was censored from the report. The FBI admitted that the money trail of 9/11 led back to our allies in Pakistan (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/India-helped-FBI-trace-ISI-terrorist-links/articleshow/1454238160.cms). And even Sarah Palin doesn't think AQ acted alone. But she has bought into the ridiculous idea that Saddam had something to do with it (http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/01/10/palin_thought_saddam_was_behind_911.html).



* It's quite possible that someone knew about it and allowed it to happen, for political or economic/financial gain


If you believe that you are a LIHOP 9/11 truther. (Let it happen on purpose). That will still get you the same level of ridicule from the likes of Glenn Beck.



* It's also quite possible that some people had some forewarning
* UA flight 93 was shot down by the US airforce over PA (it didn't fall on its own)


Sure. There's evidence to support that theory. But is it any stronger than say, WTC 7? Why are you willing to go with this cover up and not with the other?



* Finally, if you don't believe the official story regarding 9-11, it does NOT mean you blame the attack on the government. It simply means you don't trust the official account.


Yeah that's true. But what's wrong with blaming the government? Even if 9/11 was just one big screwup, the government is still to blame. For instance Colleen Rowley had the evidence needed to completely stop 9/11, but justice department lawyers blocked her FISA request. Note that this is DIFFERENT from a judge turning the request down. Bureaucracy stopped the request from getting through in the first place! Or go back to 1993 where an FBI agent asked if he could use "dummy explosives" and was told by his handlers to use real explosives. Six people died because of that! Sure it's "small" by comparison to 9/11, but still unexcusible.



* And yes, the US government's "ruling elite" are evil, and have no qualms about killing innocent Americans if it furthers their political or financial aspirations.

What's your position?

Iyad

That it's impossible to formulate a position and everyone should review all of the evidence.