Comments on: Japanese Government Discusses 9/11 Truth

By: Steve Kinney

Steve Kinney — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 03:10:55 +0000

I only learned of the 9-11 matter surfacing in the Diet this evening. I am very pleased to see the right questions being asked, and doubly so that it appears a major Japanese political party thinks that providing water to the people of Afghanistan is more important than providing fuel to the United States military.

As a quality assurance professional, one of my strongest questions regards the NIST report on the collapse of the twin towers – the only engineering study ever conducted. Long story short, they failed to show that fire caused the collapse, and if anything, demonstrated that it did not. The details are hidden in the middle of a multi-thousand page report, and the executive summary at the start of the report directly contradicts the actual findings.

No engineering report has been made regarding the collapse of WTC building 7, and FEMA has stated that they do not know how or why the building fell. The nearly perfect free-fall collapse of building 7 – which destroyed the WTC maintenance records, access logs, personnel files, and security videos, plus the offices of the FBI and CIA in Manhattan – may be the most persuasive single piece of evidence indicating that something very different from what we have been told actually happened that day.

Before the end of that day, the Bush Administration, which swears (literally) that no one could have anticipated the attacks, ruled that Al Qaida was responsible. Condoleeza Rice stated later that the U.S. had concrete proof of this conclusion, and promised that it would be given to the public. This promise is long forgotten, and instead we are about to have Soviet style show trials based on evidence obtained under torture.

My advice to the people of Japan and the world in general is, press your government(s) for real answers. The hardest question of all is the least often asked: How do we justify addressing an international law enforcement problem, by waging wars that serve only to make law enforcement impossible while motivating armed responses against the United States and its allies?

By: For Record

For Record — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 11:57:46 +0000

“This law has already passed and will not be up for review until November.” “too little, too late”

The law passed on January 11.
The argument took place on January 10.

By: Keith

Keith — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 22:04:56 +0000

I really think everyone who has made a comment here should be applauded because while it is a sensitive subject, it seems to me that all the comments are reasonably balanced and not too personal.
Maybe we all could start our own inquest.
Good stuff everyone and extremely pleasing when I compare to rant and raves I have seen on other sites! Deas, sorry about all the exclamations and I do get carried away with those little lines with dots at the end sometimes haa haa haa!
Keith

By: Ken Y-N

Ken Y-N — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 13:53:19 +0000

Deas, about the only decent show at prime time that might fit your bill is Fridays 8pm on some channel or other. Bakusho Mondai’s Hikaru Ota “If I were Prime Minister”. He gathers a good panel of politicians, commentators, intelligent tarentos, and a couple of idiots to balance it all out, and they usually have a good old ding-dong about some topic or other. Last week they did US-Japan relations and how much Japan pays to support US bases, and issues surrounding that.

By: Chris B

Chris B — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 08:33:49 +0000

I borked the quote!! My post was aimed at Deas as I agree with most everything he said.

By: Chris B

Chris B — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 08:32:01 +0000

I agree with the whole of this post Deas except that there is no old U.S.A. other than pre 9/11 as far as I can see. I love my country but have serious doubts about my politicians (my father is a politician and I “saw behind the curtain”) If there is a conspiracy I think it is that, certain agencys were aware and did nothing.

By: Deas

Deas — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 08:03:27 +0000

Don’t get me started on square watermelons either! They don’t even taste that good. (Neither do the yellow “cream” ones, by the way.) Silly stuff, but gimmicks…they sell.

By: Nick Ramsay

Nick Ramsay — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 06:56:12 +0000

Don’t get me started on the square watermelons, Deas!

By: Deas

Deas — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 06:26:04 +0000

Willie – I’m not defending the start of the war, which I think most people would agree was started for the wrong reasons and poorly executed from the get-go. (I will defend the continuation of the war, however, since its origin is moot at this point, and I feel it would be madly irresponsible to pull our forces out of a place to which we brought so much havoc before it can stand on its own. But that’s neither here nor there.) You’re right in saying that many people who have doubts about 9/11 love America and merely see or fear that it has gone astray as a country. But in the same way that criticism of the continuing private investigations is slapped away by claiming that people say it is un-American or unpatriotic, I think that it’s not right to brand the still curious as patriotic for being dissidents. That’s a popular link these days, it seems, and equally off base. A doesn’t equal B, in the same way that A and B are not mutually exclusive. Anyway, I don’t feel that I’m wrong for loving “the old” America, and I hope I’m not wrong for believing that the government had nothing to do with the incident. Anyway, I feel that I’ve accidentally derailed the conversation from Japan. So allow me to nudge this boxcar back onto the track. I’ve only caught a handful of talent panel shows dealing with the United States, and frequently what I see is rehashed war for oil, evil capitalist, 9/11 controversy type stuff. I’m glad that I put little stock in those shows. They’re pretty inane even when they’re not discussing a hot topic. I’ll just continue to avoid them from here on out, I guess. There are plenty of documentaries about delicious exotic vegetables growing in remote corners of this country, anyway. (I’ll probably give those a miss too, though.)

By: Deas

Deas — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 06:12:39 +0000

Holy cow! The exclamations! I agree with you, Keith, about the term “truthers,” at least. I put it in quotes, both because I think it’s a classic pejorative and a misnomer. (It brashly implies truth on the part of those who do the questioning, and is used derogatorily against those who question the official explanations for the 9/11 tragedy.) I wish there was a better word. Anybody got anything? I’d like to strike it from my vocabulary.