September 11

[peaceseeker]

Empirical Observation of 9-11
http://gumshoenews.com/2014/08/25/empir ... n-of-9-11/
August 25, 2014
by Dalia Mae

...Newton’s law of universal gravitation states that any two bodies in the universe attract each other with a force that is directly proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them. This is a general physical law derived from empirical observations and was formulated in Newton’s work Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica (“the Principia”), first published on 5 July 1687. ...

[peaceseeker]

Bankers, Spooks and 9/11
http://realecontv.com/bankers-spooks-and-911/
Jan 13, 2014 Posted by wordpress In The 9/11 Files



9/11 was nothing if not a multi-purpose job.

The fascists got to turn the US into a police state – and make a fortune in the process.

The weapons makers got a super bonus.

Dirt bag politicians who couldn’t get re-elected as dog catchers got to pose as statesmen.

Oil companies got to triple and more the price of a barrel of crude.

Israel got the US war machine unleashed on its enemies and was granted further leave to savagely abuse the Palestinians whose lands they stole.

Even the Twin Tower’s owners got a break. The Twin Towers were packed with asbestos that made the buildings technically in violation of the building code. Abatement would have been financially impossible. 9/11 solved that problem.

9/11 also solved another problem.

It made hundreds of employees of various brokerage houses who were privy to some massively dirty financial dealings disappear – permanently. The explosion at the Pentagon also eliminated some troublesome human resources problems: high level fraud investigators hot on the trail of a massive case.

If you want to trace the claims made in this video, you can do that here: References for Black 911

My apologies to non-Facebook users. There is a seven figure reason why we could not list these resource on our site.

[peaceseeker]

Zionist shill Bill Maher at work...



Forbidden Topics

As long as you don't question 9/11 you can question anything

- See more at: http://www.brasschecktv.com/videos/the- ... oGEoI.dpuf

Know-nothing media gatekeepers

Bill Maher - and many others - need to get off their high horses and address the most important question of our time.

We know that 3,000+ innocent people were murdered on 9-11-01 and we know that those murders were used to justify the invasion of two sovereign countries and the shredding of the US Constitution.

Yet we still don't have ANY level of meaningful detail about the who, what, when, where, why and how of 9/11 - thanks to know-nothing media gatekeepers like Bill Maher.

Rosie O'Donnell raised the issue and was removed from daytime TV. She was the lone voice on the subject .

[peaceseeker]

9/11: Disappearing explosions

Now you hear it, now you don't

[peaceseeker]

This "docu-thriller" from father-turned-filmmaker, David Hooper takes us on a journey of awakening that begins with an innocent question. Soon, his life is turned upside down as he grapples with the life-changing conclusions of his findings. The film was made to wake up his friends and family. Now, it's poised to wake everyone else.
http://911blogger.com/news/2014-09-16/d ... -deception

[peaceseeker]

Why Smart People Are Stupid
By Jonah Lehrer
http://www.newyorker.com/tech/frontal-c ... are-stupid

Here’s a simple arithmetic question: A bat and ball cost a dollar and ten cents. The bat costs a dollar more than the ball. How much does the ball cost?

The vast majority of people respond quickly and confidently, insisting the ball costs ten cents. This answer is both obvious and wrong. (The correct answer is five cents for the ball and a dollar and five cents for the bat.)

For more than five decades, Daniel Kahneman, a Nobel Laureate and professor of psychology at Princeton, has been asking questions like this and analyzing our answers. His disarmingly simple experiments have profoundly changed the way we think about thinking. While philosophers, economists, and social scientists had assumed for centuries that human beings are rational agents—reason was our Promethean gift—Kahneman, the late Amos Tversky, and others, including Shane Frederick (who developed the bat-and-ball question), demonstrated that we’re not nearly as rational as we like to believe.

When people face an uncertain situation, they don’t carefully evaluate the information or look up relevant statistics. Instead, their decisions depend on a long list of mental shortcuts, which often lead them to make foolish decisions. These shortcuts aren’t a faster way of doing the math; they’re a way of skipping the math altogether. Asked about the bat and the ball, we forget our arithmetic lessons and instead default to the answer that requires the least mental effort.

Although Kahneman is now widely recognized as one of the most influential psychologists of the twentieth century, his work was dismissed for years. Kahneman recounts how one eminent American philosopher, after hearing about his research, quickly turned away, saying, “I am not interested in the psychology of stupidity.”

The philosopher, it turns out, got it backward. A new study in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology led by Richard West at James Madison University and Keith Stanovich at the University of Toronto suggests that, in many instances, smarter people are more vulnerable to these thinking errors. Although we assume that intelligence is a buffer against bias—that’s why those with higher S.A.T. scores think they are less prone to these universal thinking mistakes—it can actually be a subtle curse.

West and his colleagues began by giving four hundred and eighty-two undergraduates a questionnaire featuring a variety of classic bias problems. Here’s a example:

In a lake, there is a patch of lily pads. Every day, the patch doubles in size. If it takes 48 days for the patch to cover the entire lake, how long would it take for the patch to cover half of the lake?

Your first response is probably to take a shortcut, and to divide the final answer by half. That leads you to twenty-four days. But that’s wrong. The correct solution is forty-seven days.

West also gave a puzzle that measured subjects’ vulnerability to something called “anchoring bias,” which Kahneman and Tversky had demonstrated in the nineteen-seventies. Subjects were first asked if the tallest redwood tree in the world was more than X feet, with X ranging from eighty-five to a thousand feet. Then the students were asked to estimate the height of the tallest redwood tree in the world. Students exposed to a small “anchor”—like eighty-five feet—guessed, on average, that the tallest tree in the world was only a hundred and eighteen feet. Given an anchor of a thousand feet, their estimates increased seven-fold.

But West and colleagues weren’t simply interested in reconfirming the known biases of the human mind. Rather, they wanted to understand how these biases correlated with human intelligence. As a result, they interspersed their tests of bias with various cognitive measurements, including the S.A.T. and the Need for Cognition Scale, which measures “the tendency for an individual to engage in and enjoy thinking.”

The results were quite disturbing. For one thing, self-awareness was not particularly useful: as the scientists note, “people who were aware of their own biases were not better able to overcome them.” This finding wouldn’t surprise Kahneman, who admits in “Thinking, Fast and Slow” that his decades of groundbreaking research have failed to significantly improve his own mental performance. “My intuitive thinking is just as prone to overconfidence, extreme predictions, and the planning fallacy”—a tendency to underestimate how long it will take to complete a task—“as it was before I made a study of these issues,” he writes.

Perhaps our most dangerous bias is that we naturally assume that everyone else is more susceptible to thinking errors, a tendency known as the “bias blind spot.” This “meta-bias” is rooted in our ability to spot systematic mistakes in the decisions of others—we excel at noticing the flaws of friends—and inability to spot those same mistakes in ourselves. Although the bias blind spot itself isn’t a new concept, West’s latest paper demonstrates that it applies to every single bias under consideration, from anchoring to so-called “framing effects.” In each instance, we readily forgive our own minds but look harshly upon the minds of other people.

And here’s the upsetting punch line: intelligence seems to make things worse. The scientists gave the students four measures of “cognitive sophistication.” As they report in the paper, all four of the measures showed positive correlations, “indicating that more cognitively sophisticated participants showed larger bias blind spots.” This trend held for many of the specific biases, indicating that smarter people (at least as measured by S.A.T. scores) and those more likely to engage in deliberation were slightly more vulnerable to common mental mistakes. Education also isn’t a savior; as Kahneman and Shane Frederick first noted many years ago, more than fifty per cent of students at Harvard, Princeton, and M.I.T. gave the incorrect answer to the bat-and-ball question.

What explains this result? One provocative hypothesis is that the bias blind spot arises because of a mismatch between how we evaluate others and how we evaluate ourselves. When considering the irrational choices of a stranger, for instance, we are forced to rely on behavioral information; we see their biases from the outside, which allows us to glimpse their systematic thinking errors. However, when assessing our own bad choices, we tend to engage in elaborate introspection. We scrutinize our motivations and search for relevant reasons; we lament our mistakes to therapists and ruminate on the beliefs that led us astray.

The problem with this introspective approach is that the driving forces behind biases—the root causes of our irrationality—are largely unconscious, which means they remain invisible to self-analysis and impermeable to intelligence. In fact, introspection can actually compound the error, blinding us to those primal processes responsible for many of our everyday failings. We spin eloquent stories, but these stories miss the point. The more we attempt to know ourselves, the less we actually understand.

Drawing by James Stevenson.

Note: This article has been modified to include mention of Shane Frederick.

[kompili]

[peaceseeker]

The End of the Road for NIST
http://www.ae911truth.org/en/news-secti ... ports.html
By Tony Szamboti

Editor's Note: In recent years, various members of the AE911Truth team have been working on a white paper titled “Areas of Specific Concern in the NIST WTC Reports.” Last month they finally completed the document. Its 25 concise points offer the most convincing proof that the reports produced by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) on the September 11, 2001, destruction of the three World Trade Center buildings were unscientific and fraudulent. The authors of "The 25 Points" designed the document to provide material that would compel the convening of a grand jury. Whether or not a grand jury is ever impaneled in any jurisdiction, though, readers of this white paper have the duty and privilege of acting as a virtual grand jury in all jurisdictions. After weighing the evidence meticulously laid out in "The 25 Points," readers can, by their resulting actions, help determine whether there will one day be a new, fully funded, truly independent, wholly transparent, and unimpeachably honest investigation of 9/11.


Areas of Specific Concern in the NIST WTC Reports
http://www.ae911truth.org/images/articl ... 9-14-3.pdf

Below is a series of twenty-five provable points which clearly demonstrate that the reports produced by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) on the destruction of the World Trade Center (WTC) were unscientific and fraudulent. Therefore NIST itself – including its lead authors, Shyam Sunder and John Gross - should be investigated.

continued...
http://www.ae911truth.org/images/articl ... 9-14-3.pdf

[GenesisGT]

World Trade Center opens for business

After 11 years businesses and people are moving back into the WTC.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/11/03/world-trade-center-reopens/18399467/

[maryjane48]

The tone was bittersweet Monday morning at One World Trade Center, where office employees for the first time arrived for work at the skyscraper that stands near where the Twin Towers fell in 2001.

“Considering what went on here 13 years ago, it was very tragic, but we are going forward and I think it’s wonderful to have this opportunity to work in the biggest building in the western hemisphere,” said Mary Ann Casey, a paralegal heading into the new building.

Ms. Casey is among 175 people who work for Condé Nast or its corporate affiliates and who have moved into the 104-story tower. Ultimately, some 3,400 employees of the media company will move into the new offices over the next several months.

http://online.wsj.com/articles/first-em ... 1415031316



looks like mr pullit is back in biz again

[Fancy]

Still, the towers are far from filled. One World Trade Center has leased 58 percent of its 3 million square feet of space. Douglas Durst, the developer who is a co-owner of 1 World Trade Center with the Port Authority, expects that Condé Nast will play the same transformational role downtown that it did 15 years ago when the company moved to his tower at Broadway and 42nd Street, 4 Times Square.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/03/nyreg ... .html?_r=0

[kompili]

WNBC saw a missile or small plane in Chopper4 video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UHhBcZxYqY#t=247

[Fancy]

WNBC saw a missile or small plane in Chopper4 video

Not according to the clip - clearly it was a plane.

[goatboy]

WNBC saw a missile or small plane in Chopper4 video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UHhBcZxYqY#t=247

Missile or bomb in the building like the picture you also posted?

[peaceseeker]

Within a month of 9/11, NYC fire commissioner Thomas Von Essen, a 30-year NYFD veteran, set up interviews with fire, port authority police and EMT first responders to record their initial impressions of what they experienced on Sept 11.
The stories of 503 men and women ran to 12,000 pages. Graeme MacQueen, a recently retired religious studies professor, read them all. In addition to the heartrending nature of many of the stories, the consistent theme was of hearing, feeling and seeing explosions, a controlled demolition. Failure to officially acknowledge this evidence is further proof of an inside job. MacQueen (McMaster University, Ontario, Canada) narrowed down the testimony of 118 first responders as especially court-worthy testimony. But he notes the entire testimony was excluded by the 9/11 Commission, as well as the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).