Prisoners of ego

Perhaps the most difficult aspect of recent postings here is an attitude that I regard a “studied ignorance.” Mindsets are like prisons, and the bricks and bars are held in place by egos. The cell is a secure environment.

There is a Catch 22 involved here too: When told of the massive scam that has been perpetrated on the American people (the rest of the world is far less fooled), the automatic response is “no one could keep a secret like that.” But people on the inside looking out can and do keep secrets, as they and their loved ones’ lives are at stake. As was made very clear to people who immediately knew what was up, via the anthrax scare, the game is real and deadly, the people behind it cold-blooded murderers.

But the mass of easily uncovered evidence of that day was bound to make its way public. Most of it is hidden in plain sight. Supposed hijackers were still alive, flight manifestos for the two flights that actually took off had no Arab names. The video of two hijackers allegedly making their way to Boston was not date and time-stamped. There was no identifiable wreckage anywhere to be found. Aluminum wings that cut through steel in New York bent backwards and were sucked into the round hole in the Pentagon. One of the alleged hijackers packed his last will and testament in his luggage that he intended to take with him on a doomed flight. The “plane” that hit the Pentagon evaporated, but corpses survived. Not one toilet, computer screen, printer or telephone survived the Ground Zero inferno, but a hijacker’s photo passport did.

This is all insane, of course. What sort of person believes all of this nonsense? Only prisoners sealed tight in their egos.

But the Catch 22 is this: All of the above and much, much more evidence has come out, and yet the prisoners will not go near it. The reason? It’s a “conspiracy theory.” This is perhaps the most fascinating aspect of the American indoctrinary system that I have encountered. The word “conspiracy” has been sheepdipped, and all real world intrigue surrounding it removed. What is left is only fantasy. If it is a conspiracy theory, it is false.

Simple fact: Powerful people, even regular people, engage in secret activity. In an oligarchy where politicians receive private bribes to stay in office it is more the norm than exception. By definition money carries with it a hidden agenda, so that most business and affairs of governments are done in secret. How then to protect information that inevitably becomes public knowledge? Merely scare people away. The weapon that frightens the prisoners is ridicule. For the journalist (or any public person) it spells end of career. For anyone else, it is mere disdain of peers.

It is indeed fascinating to watch as Sir Isaac Newton is set aside, easily seen video forgeries are accepted as real, and a plot so farcical as to be part of the movie Airplane is treated with utter stone-faced seriousness.

If you are a prisoner, if I speak from the outside looking in, the most important key to this whole puzzle of the human psyche: Your cell is not even locked. You are free to go. It’s a big scary world out there, and nothing comes easily, especially “truth” or even information. Insecurity is the norm. We never know who to trust out here. It’s a damned hard row to hoe. It takes chops to live outside that cell. The question is, do you have it in you? Do ya, punks?

About Mark Tokarski

Mostly retired CPA living the life here in Colorado. Formerly Montana, 59 years, which is why so much of this blog is devoted to Montana issues.
This entry was posted in American wilderness. Bookmark the permalink.

48 Responses to Prisoners of ego

  1. steve kelly says:

    The other word Americans have relegated to the taboo category: corruption. It’s everywhere. We see it clearly in Afghanistan, Iraq or in Mexico. Not here, not now.

    • There are very few institutions in this country that are not corrupt. I agree. We cannot trust our election results, even if we had decent candidates. The Catholic Church is up to its eyebrows. The news media is useless, labor union remnants blindly following Democrats, and the few honorable office holders almost held hostage, liable to be cashiered ala Anthony Weiner and Elliot Spitzer. Is it true that the darkest hour is just before dawn?

    • Steve W says:

      This is correct. As Daniel Hopsicker accurately points out, there are no American drug lords. Just South American ones or Mexican ones. No Utah or Delaware drug lords. No domestic drug lords or cartels.

      How does that work?

  2. Steve T. says:

    As soon as you read the NIST report and the 9/11 commission report – which were the only seriously funded and peer-reviewed studies of the events of that day – you might have a leg to stand on. But I’m not betting on you believing any version of the official story even after that. And you are certainly welcome to your opinion. And I’ll only accuse you of being a nutty conspiracy theorist to the extent that you tell me I’m thought-controlled and egoistic. In other words, all freakin’ day, you nutty conspiracy theorist.

    What you’re NOT welcome to is to assume that just because people have come to a different conclusion that they haven’t looked at the evidence. You are completely, 100% full of shit on that front. NIST spent $16 million looking at the evidence, the 9/11 Commission spent $3 million. And they came to a different conclusion than you. Now you’re welcome to your opinion that they’re not to be trusted because they were “in on it.” But I’ll call bullshit on that too, because you actually don’t have any evidence other than the same kind of guilt-by-association nonsense that people use to tie Barack Obama to Jeremiah Wright.

    If you’d read these reports, you’d realize that almost all of the claims you make about the official story (no wreckage, etc), have no basis in reality. You are debunking elements of the official story that aren’t even part of the official story. You’ve let your trusted sources build that strawman for you so that you could knock it down. Enjoy that.

    • NST investigated the events at Ground Zero right up to the time of initiation of collapse, and no further. Dr. wood sued them in federal court for science fraud. The judged asked her in private “Do you have a death wish?”

      The 9/11 Commission started with the official story, assumed it was true, and buttressed it with evidence to that effect, ignoring all else. And remember, the Bush Administration opposed even investigating this crime! On what planet?

      Example: Short trading on American Airlines and JP Morgan stock: 9/11 investgated, found no evidence of any Arab money, and said “case closed.”

      I suppose that’s enough for you. Right?

      • Steve T. says:

        You didn’t even read the reports. You’re just relying on what people you trust have told you. Are you sure your thoughts aren’t being controlled?

        Pot. Kettle. Black.

        • I have read far more than you on this subject by a landslide, enough to pull all of the various facets of the crime into a comprehensible package. Better than that I’ve gone down blind alleys and garden paths, people like Jones, Fetzer Gage who are there to obfuscate. It takes a lot of reading to be so thoroughly familiar with a subject that I know who to listen to, who to discard, and to have a box of evidence that all ties into itself and is consistent throughout. Ask me anything.

          You seem to think that it’s a matter of this or that bit of evidence or faith. It’s not. I never doubted from the beginning that our own people did this. How they did it was years in coming and many scientific and problem-solving type people to clear things up. But to imagine that the culprits are going to investigate themselves is ludicrous. I leave reading that report to scriveners, as it is as unimportant as can be. just as with the Warren Commission Report, it was written for other purposes having nothng to do with the crime.

          I just watched a recent interview of Dr. Wood with Richard Hall, another source that has earned my trust. She is quite interesting, talking mostly aout cold fusion and Stephen Jones’s role in burying Pons Fleischman. She thinks that they made a huge mistake in using a new energy technology to bring down those buildings, as the cat is now out of the bag. Now it’s just a matter of helping people see what happened that day. It’s right before our eyes.

          By the way, she also says that the position you are in, not wanting to let go of official truth, is not dissimilar to believing in Santa Claus. Did I forget to tell you something?

          • Steve T. says:

            Your first paragraph is an appeal to authority, your second paragraph is responding to arguments that I’ve never made, and your third paragraph is another appeal to authority.

            But yeah, you’re totally “outside the box” here. Way different than me.

            • Argument from authority is not necessarily an fallacy. I stated the facts concerning my behavior and decisons. That does not mean that you have to believe my sources just because I have decided to trust them. That would be your call.

              You have repeatedly accused me of merely placing faith in different authority figures than you. I explained what a long and tenuous path it is, as there are ops and agents provocateur scattered about and a person has to decide who is trustworthy. I made my decisions, stand by them and will defend them.

              You, on the other hand, merely believe your government, and in the face of all unexamined evidence believe that source implicitly, even discarding Isaac Newton.

              I feel pretty good about it all. But I will read the Warren, excuse me, Zelikov report once you’ve made even a scintilla of effort to examine some evidence.

              PS: I should say here that I have the luxury of time to read all of this stuff and watch all of the videos and lectures. Back when you guys were all at home I rarely read anything but a work of fiction here and there. If I had to be at work each morning I would not be doing this, in fact, I didn’t even start until 1986, when I became self-employed. Within three years, my world view had changed, and it was only because I had time to read.

              • Steve T. says:

                “That would be your call” is probably the closest thing you’ve had to a rational position regarding my opinion since this argument started.

                Again, you are making the claim that I haven’t examined the evidence. And the ONLY reason you keep saying that is because I have come to a different conclusion than you. That’s it. That’s all. You are of the silly presumption that no one could possibly be looking at the same things as you and come to a different conclusion. And the only way that you can justify that absurdity is by saying that everyone who has looked at the evidence, like the NIST or the 9/11 commission, are “in on it” or having their thoughts controlled. That’s the definition of religious fervor.

                And all the while you refuse to look at the evidence of the other side. Pot. Kettle. Black.

                • Steve W says:

                  Steve T, People resigned from the 9/11 Commission because they claimed it was “Compromised.” Most famously US Senator Max Cleland did that. So he publicly and vocally refused to ‘be in on it.’ Both 9/11 Commission Co-Chairmen claim in their book that the Navy, Air Force and FAA lied to them.

                  I haven’t Mark accuse anyone of anything. It’s the Co-Chairmen of the 9/11 Commission Report who are accusing people of lying, Steve T.

                • I can tell by reading your words that you have not looked at the evidence. Example: Please, without going to a debunking site, please explain to me what skeptics of the official story mean when they say something was “switched live”? What are they referring to? What is interferometry and why does it play a role? What is the “Billiard Ball Example”? What are “jumpers”? What are Cheetos and tortilla chips?

                  You’ve seen the evidence and rejected it. You should have no problem with any of that. Where were the six fighter jets and 115 personnel normally stationed at Langley AFB at on 9/11? What does the expression “Angel is Next” mean? What do Vigilant Guardian, Northern Vigilance, Red Flag, Amalgam Virgo, Red Ex, Able Danger, Door Hop Galley, and Tripod II have in common?

                  9/11 Commission: In the beginning, the Bush Administration, amazingly, did not even want an investigation. It was only due to pressure from victims’ families that they gave in. Originally it was to be chaired by Henry Kissinger, mass murderer of SE Asia fame, but he would have to reveal his client list, and so backed out. Of the cast of characters chosen, I regarded Max Cleland as credible. He quickly resigned in disgust. Bush was called to testify, but insisted that Cheney be present, they not be put under oath, and no record be published of the testimony.

                  On what f****** planet does stuff like that fly? Anyway, that’s your 9/11 Commission, the chief of staff, Zelikow, now famous for apparent graduate study he did on the importance of public mythology. No kidding.

                  NIST – I am not qualified to study their report. here is Dr Wood’s bio:

                  Dr. Judy Wood earned a Ph.D. Degree from Virginia Tech and is a former professor of mechanical engineering. She has research expertise in experimental stress analysis, structural mechanics, deformation analysis, materials characterization and materials engineering science. Her research has involved testing materials, including complex-material systems, in the area of photomechanics, or the use of optical and image-analysis methods to determine physical properties of materials and measure how materials respond to forces placed on them. Her area of expertise involves interferometry in forensic science. She taught graduate and undergraduate engineering classes and has authored or co-authored over 60 peer-reviewed papers and journal publications in her areas of expertise.

                  She sued NIST for science fraud.

                  • Steve T. says:

                    Oh sure, I’ll get right on that. Would you like me to do jumping jacks while I recite the answers to your quiz? Or pushups? your choice, of course.

                    And did you seriously just tell me that you trusted your favorite person to read the report for you, because you were unqualified to do so? That is, put simply, stunning. And that’s the last example I’ll need that you are a hypocrite, thank you very much.

                    We get our information in the same way. Period. But only one of us has resorted to religious zealotry to get their point across.

                    I’ll start my jumping jacks momentarily.

                    • Too funny. You who says he has critically reviewed available evidence and decided that the government is telling him the truth did not even recognize a shopping list of evidence uncovered in the last eleven years. Just one example, the billiard balls, is a thought experiment where 106 ball’s fall in sequence, each triggering the one below, or pancake collapse. It takes about 110 seconds. Ten floors at a time gets it down to maybe a minute. No way is pancake collapse a credible explanation for what we saw that day.

                      You were right that I should have read the 9/11 report, even as I knew it to be Warren redux. But worse than Warren, this group did not, by its own standards, set out to solve the crime, but rather to affirm the government’s case. We’ve traveled far on the path of imperial truth since 1963 – at least at that time they feigned objectivity.

                      But I’ve ordered a copy of the report. It costs $7 these days, and worth every penny I’m sure.

                      Now tell me what good it does a non-engineer to read an engineering study, especially one sponsored by the people whom I suspect committed the crime under study? If the crime originated within the hidden power behind the facade of government, then there are cold-blooded killers overseeing the process, and NIST had to pretzel itself into submission to that power. Most of that kind of mindset is a process that takes years, as you evidence, but NIST had to toss out science and make what happened seem scientific. That’s why Wood sued their asses, and why the judge said to her in private “Do you have a death wish?”

                      For that I have to turn to a person with expertise in the field. And in this game, trust needs to be spent wisely – I’m down to three, perhaps four that seem both honest and credible. The cover-up was well-planned, as was the crime.

                      It’s not different than human-caused climate change in this regard – what possible value is my opinion as a non-scientist? I have to look at scientific evidence, and while it might seem convincing, my non-immersion in the field by definition leaves me susceptible to error just by sheer volume of ignorance. So I have to make a conscious who-do-you-trust decision, leaving it open for change at any turn of events.

                      That’s all I have done with 9/11 evidence. And I, unlike you, am exposed to it. Now tell me, which debunking site did you go to to get your fill of NIST? Or if you read their reports (there are two – it took them additional years to produce the Building Seven report), what is your scientific opinion of alternative credible explanations?

      • Steve W says:

        According to the 2 Co-Chairs of the 9/11 Commission, they were lied to repeatedly by The Navy, The Air Force and the FAA. The only reason Steve T has confidence in the report is because he thinks the Co- Chairs are either lying or telling the truth. It’s one or the other.

  3. Big Swede says:

    “No one could keep a secret like that”. I’m with ya Mark.

    Quote: “On Wednesday, Dr. Orly Taitz, who represents the birther cause, posted the following on her website:

    The case . . . provides a mountain of evidence of Barack Obama using a last name not legally his, forged Selective Service application, forged long form and short form birth certificate and a Connecticut Social Security number 042-68-4425 which was never assigned to him according to E-Verify and SSNVS. Additionally, this case provides evidence of around one and a half million invalid voter registrations in the state of California alone.”

    • Party politics again, right?

      • Big Swede says:

        Constitution politics.

        • Well I thought it was important that Bush, in my view, stole the elections in 2000 and 04, but then realized later on that we’re pretty much a fake republic anyway, and got over it. You might try the same remedy. No matter who he is or where he came from, he’s our titular head until 2016, at which time he’ll be replaced by some other puppet.

          Since JFK got popped, Reagan as well, presidents know to keep their heads down. Real power lies elsewhere. 9/11 was a takeover of government by various power centers, military, corporate, financial. That is where, in my mind, we should focus our attention, on real power.

          But I know your frustration, that people won’t even look at your evidence. For me, who happens to be president could not be less important.

          • Big Swede says:

            Tell that to the 48 million on food stamps.

            • Your world view is to me, incomprehensible. I could care less if all of us are on food stamps. You’ve put everything that flows into some kind of box. People eat. We have more food than we can sell based on prevailing wages. It’s mostly processed food, so corporate food manufacturers are happy. Who the f*** cares?

            • Steve W says:

              Swede, people who voted Romney complaining about the public dole sounds a little bit silly.

              We can use the energy they used to molecularly dissolve the Twin Towers. Your oil stocks won’t be worth a thing. Anti gravity cars will be cool.

  4. Ed Kemmick says:

    OK, so I was wrong that Steve W. was a mole, trying to mess with Mark’s sanity, and I know from years of reading the Montana blogs that Swede is all too real. But still, if he didn’t exist, Mark could do no better than invent an avatar exactly like him. Just when I am completely fed up with Mark’s Olympian arrogance, his insistence that he is only interested in the truth — even though “I never doubted from the beginning that our own people did this” — along comes Swede, saying something so pathetically dumb, so blindly partisan and so completely pointless, that my sympathies tilt back toward Mark. People think this spectating is a breeze, but it’s hard work.

    • Big Swede says:

      I do this for my entertainment. I could no longer change Mark’s opinions nor yours.

      To my fishing comment I’d say this. For many years I’d fish the upper Bighorn River. In all those years I seldom saw Native Americans actually fishing.

    • If Steve W is trying to “mess with my sanity,” and you already think me insane, then is Steve W trying to get me back on even keel?

      I did actually doubt that our guys had done this, now that I recall, and I might have even posted this on City Lights. I thought, like everyone in those early days, that planes had actually hit buildings, and thought it was low-tech enough that non-state actors could have pulled it off. I wondered who might have a large enough grudge to do something like that, and came up with three blowback possibilities: Serbians, as revenge for Clinton’s 1999 aggression; Iraqis for a thousand crimes, the worst the starving of half a million kids; but the most likely source, Chileans, as 9/11 was the date that the US had overthrown their democratic government and installed the war criminal Pinochet. But I learned that it isn’t done in that manner, that purposeless terrorism is very rare, and to do such a thing as 9/11 was to invite massive retribution, so that anyone with military training would avoid such provocation. It had a purpose: it was the provocation needed for military aggression, and the only sensible military source for such an operation was … the US.

      Also, I had a problem with the cell phone calls, later changed to Airphone, but never, to my knowledge, verified by the simple method of checking credit card and telecom records where the phone calls would be billed to passengers. Anyway, prior to then I had tried making calls from up there, and never had any luck. That was a hole in the dike. For many, it was finding a hijacker’s passport in the rubble. Did you buy that, Ed? Did you?

  5. Steve W says:

    Good job, Ed. Where would writers be without readers? As you well know.

    As I said before, I had given up on what happened to the towers, like I was supposed to, until I had the opportunity to hear Dr Wood give a presentation.

    But I never gave up learning about events surrounding 9/11/01. What i noticed was that any aspect of 9/11 that I dug into appeared to be hinkey. It’s a geographical mystery. How come the entire 9/11 map is full of half explained excuses and unanswered questions?

    What the military and Air Force were up to on 9/11 AM (training simulations of hijackers ramming buildings with planes) ) for instance appear a little too convenient. Plus their top dogs lied to the 9/11 commission repeatedly.

    Then leave our military and go back to Venice Beach, Florida where Mohammed Atta and his friends were attending flight school and behaving far more like spook connected drug mules than like Muslim Fanatics. What’s with that? (See Welcome To Terrorland; Mohamed Atta and the 9/11 Hijackers in Venice Beach, Florida.)

    Then go to the FBI office in MN where agent Harry Samit testified that his superiors blocked all his efforts of his to get a warrant to search Zacarias Moussaoui’s computer. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/21/national/nationalspecial3/21moussaoui.html?_r=0

    Moussaoui was protected from further scrutiny until after the 9/11/01 attacks took place.

    Meanwhile, out in Arizona at the Flight School attended by alleged Pentagon attack plane pilot Hani Hanjour, his flight school teachers were complaining in official complaints a total of 5 different times about Hanjour’s unsuitability to be studying Commercial Airline Aviation. Instructors complained that Hanjour’s lack of English and his lack of flight skills made Hanjour ineligible to be attending the federally certified flight program. The FAA stepped in and protected Hanjour and caused him to remain a student at the school.

    Then there were the 2 alleged hijackers who roomed with an FBI informant in South Cali. .

    It’s pretty hinkey. Across the board. Where ever you care to look. Those alledged hijackers had friends in high places.

    Fans of the official report would do well to remember that in the official report commission members said it was impossible to determine where the drug dealing, gun running, and terror began and ended. Those were all elements of the Iran-Contra shadow government debacle also, as you may recall.

    So i think Dr Wood has done a spectacular job in her crystal clear focus on just the aspects of her area of expertise. Where Did The Towers go? I found the analysis refreshing and compelling since it easily and organically accounted for a wide range of anomalous evidence connected to the disappearance of the Towers.

    Before Dr Wood, the Towers seemed hinkey. After Dr Wood I have an idea of just how hinkey the Twin Towers were.

    • My personal favorite at this time is that there was no visible debris at Shanksville because the plane had crashed in a reclaimed coal mine, and sunk underground. But I am sure there are other fables I’ve not yet heard about.

      • Steve T. says:

        That is not part of the official story. You are reciting Truther legend at this point. It’s right up there with Lord of the Rings.

        • It is exactly the official story! The flight recorder was supposedly found 25 feet underground. It took weeks to recover 600 pounds of human organic debris, they say, sifting through buried wreckage. All passengers were identified, we are told, in the ensuing months via DNA analysis, and Including Todd Beamer, Mr. “Let’s Roll!”, whose name never appeared on the SSDR, and who most likely never existed.

          As with everything that day, there is official truth, leads and false leads. Minetta apparently was charged with giving some credibility to there even being a plane approaching DC by asserting that he saw Cheney refusing to belay an apparent shoot down order. There has been considerable private inquiry regarding two reported landings in Cleveland, a UL1989 supposedly having a bomb on board, and another, Flight X, which could have been flight 93. Passengers (unlike other flights, apparently real people) would have been deboarded, taken to a NASA facility at the airport complex and murdered in some fashion, organic tissue later supplied to coroners.

          It is just not enough evidence to support any story except one thing I am fairly certain of: The people need their heroes, and the mythical “Todd Beamer” was invented for that purpose.

          • Steve W says:

            So who is this guy, then Mark?
            http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2011/09/09/father-of-flight-93-hero-todd-beamer-reflects-on-son-storming-cockpit-shouting-%E2%80%98let%E2%80%99s-roll%E2%80%99/

            He apparently has someone who appears on TV as his “father.”

            The story says that Todd Beamer left behind a wife and kids. Si are these people just actors? Or do they really not exist as actors nor as people but just as a story? Or are they real pepple who think that their husband and father and son was Todd Beamer and that he was taking a flight on 9/11/01 and that since he didn’t return he must be the same person as the mythical Todd Beamer but he isn’t?

            Where are you getting your information from as to the non-existance of a Todd Beamer?

            • We’re did he live? Who are his wife and children? There were many paid actors appearing on that day and after. There is no Todd Beamer on the Social Security death index. There is no marriage license on record for him and his wife Lisa. There was no application for 9/11 Victim’s Benefits.

              I cannot prove he did not exist, so you must prove that he did. Have fun.

              • Steve W says:

                How do you know that Todd Beamer doesn’t appear on the Social Security death index? Where can I verify this? How many people who have actually existed and then died don’t appear on the SS death index?

                How do you know there is no marriage license on record for Todd and Lisa Beamer? How many other married couples have no license on record?

                How do you know that there is no application for 9/11 benefits? How many people who could have applied for 9/11 benefits didn’t apply?

                To be quite honest with you, i think it should be pretty easy to ascertain whether someone named Todd Beamer lived, had a family and then was gone in connection with 9/11/01

                According to this news article:
                ” As an adolescent, Todd Beamer defined himself by athletics. He excelled at Wheaton, Ill., Christian High School in baseball, basketball and soccer. And when his family moved to California before his senior year, Beamer used sports to make new friends. He also made the honor society. He attended Fresno State University to play baseball, with an eye toward a professional career, but he soon realized that was not in his future. He returned home to Illinois to attend Wheaton College, a coed Christian school just northwest of Chicago. It was there, during a senior seminar class, that he first met his future wife.

                Lisa Beamer knew who Todd was — a jock. But, she told her roommate, “sometimes people aren’t what you think they are.”

                Their first date was Nov. 2, 1991; they had planned to mark the 10th anniversary of that date this year.

                After he earned a master’s in business administration from DePaul University in Chicago, the couple married in 1994 and moved to Princeton, N.J., where Beamer began his career with Oracle Corp. selling systems applications and database software.

                The couple taught the senior high school Sunday school class at Princeton Alliance Church for six years, and Beamer was a stalwart on the church softball team. He did not shy away from bowling over another player if it meant winning.

                Last year, the couple moved to Cranbury, N.J., 15 miles from Trenton, and Beamer made sure the game room was a shrine to his beloved Chicago Cubs, Bulls and Bears. The furnishings included a Cubs pinball game.

                Their two sons, ages 4 and 2, competed with each other to meet their dad first when he came home from work. Beamer often pulled into the driveway and let the boys climb inside with him to “drive” into the garage.

                Beamer’s work forced him to travel up to four times a month, sometimes for as long as a week. He was good at his job, and was on his cell phone constantly. This year, he earned a five-day trip to Italy with his wife for being a top sales performer.

                They returned home on Monday, Sept. 10, at 5 p.m. While Beamer could have left that night for a Tuesday business meeting in California, he wanted to spend time with his sons and his wife, who is due in January with their third child.

                He left home at 6:15 a.m. the next morning, planning to return on a red-eye flight that night.”
                http://old.post-gazette.com/headlines/20011028flt93beamerbiop8.asp

                Most of this stuff is easily check able. If the only anomalies are 1. can’t find a SS Death Index record, 2. can’t find a marriage license, and 3. can’t find an application for 9/11 benefits, then I’d say you wouldn’t have a preponderance of evidence that Todd Beamer never existed. I still don’t know why you say this stuff is missing. How do you know? Have you made a credible effort to locate those documents? Or do you know someone who has?

                • Everything you put up there, except the birth of the two children is not checkable. It’s easily invented. regarding all of flight 93, there was no one in SF waiting to greet the plane that day, and no airline arrangements for assisting grieving parties, as is the norm.

                  SSDI is public record, easily accessible. I’ve been to it looking at my own ancestry. The more recent the death, the more likely you’ll find it. My grandfather, for instance, died around the time of the initiation of Social Security, probably never had a number, and is not there. My Dad and an older brother died in ’06, and neither are there. That creates problems when looking at current deaths, as I have evidence of oversights, two in one family. My other two older brothers both died in ’11, and are there.

                  There is a “Todd Beamer” there, but he died in 1997. That’s it. I trust no official record regarding 9/11, and the whole “Let’s roll” myth is too Hollywood for my liking, probably created in advance.

                  I have not checked the other two offical records, but both are public record. I suggest that you give it a go. If one or the other is missing, given say a 2% probability of not being on the SSDI, multiplying that with say 2% probability of not being on one of the other lists as well, then there is a 1/2500 likelihood that TB is real. Those are grab bag numbers, but many, many 9/11 deaths are not n SSDI. And that is how probability works – you multiply denominators.

              • Your next mission, should you decide to accept it, is to identify the aliases the purported hijackers used to board, and then after to find these people on the Social Security Death Index. SS is charged with making public record of all deaths of people with Social Security numbers, publishing those numbers. It is the law.

                Would also help if you could ascertain the legitimacy of the passenger manifesto. Everything from that day needs close scrutiny.

  6. Steve W says:

    Where can I get a copy of the manifest? How will I know that it hasn’t been altered? How does one ascertain the legitimacy of a passenger manifest?

  7. Bereits seit mehreren Jahren gilt Viagra als eines der bekanntesten Orgasmusmittel fֳ¼r Herren sowie
    das aus gutem Grund, denn das Orgasmusprodukt Viagra ist absolut wirksam.
    Authentic Cialis rezeptfrei

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s