can you handle the truth?

Hi, Wu-vians! This used to be the offending post, until Alex closed it. I've removed the objectionable material, but retained the heading and re-opened the post. That way, anyone can still read the comments and add a comment here, in the appropriate place, if they wish to.

We're all about transparency at WU!
     Posted By: hickory_johnson - Mon Jun 01, 2009

If this is what we can come to expect from WU, I will stop coming. It's been a favorite of mine for a long time, and that is because it makes me FORGET about the politics and theories and government bruhaha.
Posted by Venus in Baton Rouge on 05/30/09 at 04:18 PM
well I am sorry that you feel that way..I am inclined to look at the scientific analysis of the ash as quite convincing..what makes this weird to me is that this stuff has been overlooked by the media until this video I saw actually showed multiple small explosions, very similar to when a building is being demolished
Posted by hickory_johnson on 05/30/09 at 04:38 PM
I am but a contributor here and my opinions aren't necesarily those of WU's, so judge me and not this site please.
Posted by hickory_johnson on 05/30/09 at 05:07 PM
This is stupid not weird.

please hickory dick, don't post anymore of this drivel.
Posted by bugguy on 05/30/09 at 05:24 PM
what they found in the ash was high concentrations of thermite
Posted by hickory_johnson on 05/30/09 at 05:37 PM
okay thanks for all the input! Ive looked at all three links here:
and will continue to read..if wrong I will certainly post a retraction. In the meantime, I thank you all for your interest and input.
Posted by hickory_johnson on 05/30/09 at 06:09 PM
not a problem Yossarian..perhaps I am caught in a Catch22..LOL..hey I will admit when I am wrong..and it would appear I may've been wrong here..I am not really a conspiracy theorist.. Perhaps I was listening and reading the wrong stuff without properly doing my homework to seek the opposing views..either way I am appreciative of the response and no hard feelings because people get a little back to my reading.. 😉
Posted by hickory_johnson on 05/30/09 at 06:26 PM
alright..I admit I went off half-cocked on this one..and I think Patty is quite correct in that I certainly didn't mean to create controversy or to assert an untruth..I should've been more thorough in researching the allegations put forth in this video.
Posted by hickory_johnson on 05/30/09 at 07:31 PM
I think the route the discussion took is why we're leery of things like this on here. I don't comment regularly, but I do read the posts daily. I've done that since long before the move here. I think this would have been met with more acceptance had you not taken a position of endorsing it, and had you posted an opposing video to accompany it. Putting it up in a balanced way that showed both views would have been interesting to me, but posting one side only with comments suggesting we need to open our eyes and close our minds to other possibilities is not. I don't think it would have been met with so much animosity had it been balanced and demonstrated more care to present an opposing side, as well.
Posted by Venus in Baton Rouge on 05/30/09 at 08:44 PM
I tried to watch the video and that guy was so boring I fell asleep. Literally. Would it kill him to wear some color, maybe a splashy tie?
Posted by Nethie on 05/30/09 at 09:08 PM
good point Venus..good point, I should've done that..I will be sure to be more Weird in the future and less about conspiracy ..pardon moi s'il vous plait..anyone else?? LOL
Posted by hickory_johnson on 05/30/09 at 09:44 PM
First off I really don't think this belongs here at WU.

Also I'm not going to argue any of the proposed facts here for or against the 9/11 "conspiracy" theories. I place the word "conspiracy" in quotes because honestly the term is thrown at anyone that asks a question that would appear to go against what we are told by the media or government. The term in this sense is derogatory. When you have a calamity of this scale don't pigeon hole people into one group. There are plenty of red, white and blue patriots that have asked the very same questions as the most ardent skeptics. There are firemen at the scene that believe it was a demolition, and there are some that believe it was exactly as reported. There are relatives of those lost in the towers that have spent countless hours and money to find answers that they feel the 9/11 commission answered improperly or not at all. And, there are relatives that fully supported the answers given by the report and defend its credibility. As links here have shown you have a professor at the University of Wisconsin who attempts to explain the collapse through science and you also have professors from Stanford and Princeton in direct opposition the official reports. Honestly I could provide enough links to opposing views withing a span of 30 minutes to fill this entire comments page and then some.

So where does that leave us? Well obviously there is need for further investigation. In my opinion there are far too many unanswered questions for a catastrophe on that scale with answers that would have a huge impact. And, when you have people that jeopardize their jobs and reputation to ask certain questions I think the least that can be done is to facilitate those questions and see that they are answered properly. And, in my opinion that is the best answer. Something the traitors and patriots can agree on would be a sound investigation of the previous investigation and a new investigation of the collapse of all three towers.

Hickory thanks for the post. The only reason I don't think that this belongs here is that it creates political discussions that quickly become divisive. I think to most readers this is a splash of reality that is completely unamusing whereas the story of the guy falling off a canyon in a porta-potty is. If it weren't for the political associations with that day and the tragedy then, yes, plenty of weird events transpired on that day. I mean even little downtown Athens, GA, where I worked, was completely evacuated because of a U-Haul truck that was left parked over night in front of the post office.

One more thing. The whole idea that the media and government are credible sources is a joke. At the same time the internet is likewise a joke. In all honesty until you get an unbiased team of investigators together then all you really have is a bunch of holes and theories. I trust the guy in Wisconsin as much as I trust the guy from Stanford.
Posted by Pablo on 05/30/09 at 10:25 PM
Travis, there's no refunds if you cancel your subscription.
Posted by Paul in Athens GA on 06/01/09 at 02:20 PM
HJ--we truly appreciate your efforts, along with those of other posters who have generously donated their time and creativity.

The RevJSH is still complaining because one of his comments on another thread seems to have been deleted, although as far as I know every other subsequent one of his remarks remains untouched.
Posted by Paul on 06/01/09 at 02:55 PM
Ok when I first read this post I went to comment and unlike most comments I leave here at WU I actually thought about the implications of what I was saying. So I carefully worded this nice little commentary about how neither side really wins until a thorough proper investigation were conducted. You can find architects, firemen, politicians, scientists and experts in anything pertaining to 9/11 that will say it was as the 9/11 commission reported. You can find architects, firemen, politicians, scientists and experts in anything pertaining to 9/11 that will say the events that occurred were not as the 9/11 commission reported.

The internet is not a valid source of documentation on 9/11.
Politicians are not a valid source of anything really.
The media is not a valid source of anything either.

So your links and quotes offer insight into what may or may have not happened. But they are not fact until proven to be factual.

What needs to happen is exactly what the architect in the interview calls for, a reinvestigation.

Also calling anyone that questions the events of 9/11 a conspiracy theorist isn't accurate and often used derogatorily. I personally believe most people have questions about the events but many simply choose to ignore them or right them off as "conspiracy" before even considering them.

And, the terms patriot, loyalist, and nationalist are being used by both sides of the argument. Might as well lay of the pigeon holing and focus on what is really important.

Anyways my original post was worthy of a pultizer but when I hit enter there was nothing. So what you got here is just a general idea probably encompassing a lot of what has already been said. Damn.
Posted by Pablo on 06/03/09 at 01:51 PM
Oh i just notice my post was on page 2. I just sat down to read all these comments and there it was. Oh well. At least it is worded differently.
Posted by Pablo on 06/03/09 at 04:24 PM
I was going to stay away from this post, but what the hell, everyone else is having fun.

I personally don't believe the US government was the sole perpetrator of the 9/11 disaster, but I do think that they could have stopped it or at least lessened the extent of damage. There was a definite lack of action on the part of the US and it wouldn't be the first time that a government has lied to it's people, even in our (America's) history.

When an airliner diverts from it's course and doesn't respond to it's radio, fighter jets are immediately scrambled to intercept said airliner. We have air bases all over the east coast and it should have been possible to at least get one of those airliners shot down. From what I remember hearing was that there was a training exercise going on and the NORAD was told to said down. I have no idea if that is true or not and I don't think I ever will.

I definitely don't think that we were told everything that happened on 9/11.

I'm not a conspiracy theorist nor do I trust the government. As Reagan said "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'"
Posted by mdb777 on 06/04/09 at 02:36 PM
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.