MIHOP -femr2 and Major Tom's WTC1,2,7 Demolition Hypotheses

... The original thread suffered an unmentionable fate. Can we revive it here so you can "teach me a lesson"?
... "?
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=189754
Is the Satan like evildoer keeping 911 truth delusion promoters from finding Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology? Is Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology the garlic for 911 truth? http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=5

Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology elude your arguments, your claims. http://www.cesura17.net/~will/Ephemera/Sept11/MajorTom/
 
Last edited:
It will be less boring for me at this point since you left so many mistakes in your past posts that the process should be rather quick and relatively painless. I don't have much luck starting theads here, so can you be so kind as to do it for me, to "teach me that final lesson"?

I think the fact that after a full decade, you and other truthers are still debating this on relatively obscure internet forums instead of the Halls of Congress or the Supreme Court demonstrates your lack of relevance and goes a very long way toward "teaching you that final lesson"?

Don't you think?
 
...
So femr2 says it's MIHOP if the hijackers knew the towers would fall.
...

...(would fall) by natural failure (fires and creep).

But that is not what femr2 considered as captured by the term MIHOP in april 2010:
femr2 said:
Pavlovian Dogcatcher said:
do you share my opinion that the impact damage and fires alone story is physically impossible, or not?
Have I not made my opinion clear enough ? MIHOP.

However, IF the fires had burned for a couple of days, or IF there was irreversable CC creep, then it is logical to conclude that natural failure is physically possible.

That's not what I think happened, as there are plenty of other anomylous events to consider, but as the question is loaded, no, it's not physically impossible.

This, in context, clearly makes a distinction: MIHOP is not natural failure due to fires and/or creep. And we might add that this distinction does mot change with regard to the mental state of the hijackers.
 
The original thread suffered an unmentionable fate. Can we revive it here so you can "teach me a lesson"?


I would be too bored to keep little lists on posters like you do, but at this point I would takle a personal pleasure in reviewing your posts and logic in a thread for all to see.

It will be less boring for me at this point since you left so many mistakes in your past posts that the process should be rather quick and relatively painless. I don't have much luck starting theads here, so can you be so kind as to do it for me, to "teach me that final lesson"?
It's in the Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology subforum: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=213989

You're welcome.
 
The ambiguous statements and blatant dishonesty are continuing to catch up to him. If he wouldn't play these games all the time, his threads might have a little less noise.

This time when he tried to weasel out of it, it got completely laughable.

As I said to him before, sometimes its OK to admit your wrong. You'll be more respected for it.

Hopefully he'll learn from this.
 
Last edited:
Over and above quote mining are the blatant violations of rule 12 wich it would appear the moderators have no issue with (they are most definitely aware). Guess that means no more rule 12 eh :rolleyes:


Especially given that the OP is simply a cut and paste copy of this post with the seeming purpose of circumventing the rules against addressing the arguer by making addressing the arguer the topic of the thread :jaw-dropp How dumb is that ? :)

Quite how much more blatant it could be is beyond me (and yet the moderation team have not acted. go figure :rolleyes:)

What would be funny is if I get a warning for this post...sending the clear message...

Break the rules as much as you like (if you are perceived to be on one side of a non-existent fence) but don't criticise da'mgmt :) (in public ;) )


MIHOP stands for Made It Happen On Purpose. Nothing more, as you have also made clear.

It being necessary to state what *it* is. Which can also be subjective.

That the original post this thread is a cut and paste copy of what was a response to...

...shows how faulty folk are becoming.

How stupid do you have to be to TELL ME what I believe, when I have just stated my view on *inside job* explicitly.

femr2: I am wearing socks.
someone-on-the-other-side-of-the-planet: No, you're not !!1!1! eleventy.

:)



Yes it's safe to say they noticed. :D



femr2 has been suspended for 5 days for abuse of the report function.



So having failed to argue against his own words, femr2 fails to kill this thread also.

Class act that one. What a piece of . work.
 
Last edited:
It's in the Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology subforum: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=213989

You're welcome.

They are a compressed "sloppy joe". Who are you kidding other than yourself and your small group of followers?

You even lack the shame to see anything wrong with that.

You don't think the derivation of the earliest displacement vectors for the antenna are conspiracy-worthy?

Like I said about becoming a joke....
 
Last edited:
...
You don't think the derivation of the earliest displacement vectors for the antenna are conspiracy-worthy?
...

IIRC, you refused to state that anything at all about your work was conspiracy-worthy.

Since your thread is still open in SMMT, I suggest you try to explain there what makes the derivation of the earliest displacement vectors for the antenna worthy of which conspiracy theory!

Here, you might define for us the meaning and scope of the "MIHOP" you may be pursuing at present: What's the "It" in it, and who dunnit?
 
IIRC, you refused to state that anything at all about your work was conspiracy-worthy.
Since your thread is still open in SMMT, I suggest you try to explain there what makes the derivation of the earliest displacement vectors for the antenna worthy of which conspiracy theory!

Here, you might define for us the meaning and scope of the "MIHOP" you may be pursuing at present: What's the "It" in it, and who dunnit?

femr2 and Major Tom form a tag team. femr2 provides data, video and graphs. MT provides "observables and features" and uses femr2's work to bolster his CD hypothesis. They refuse to discuss who may have done it on purpose and the cause of the collapses if not by planes damage and fires.

We must wait as MT pretends he has been led by his list to a dispassionate CD conclusion. We must wait as femr2 pretends to dispassionately arrive at his MIHOP Final Post. It may be true that femr2 is not sure how this demolition took place, whether by CD or by automated planes striking engineer designed weak spots in the buildings, or some other means he has not disclosed.

In the meantime femr2 and MT have throttled discussion of their conspiracy/demolition ideas by claiming that this topic is OT on their threads.

The purpose of this thread is to discuss what they refuse to admit in theirs.
 
Last edited:
The ambiguous statements and blatant dishonesty are continuing to catch up to him. If he wouldn't play these games all the time, his threads might have a little less noise.

This time when he tried to weasel out of it, it got completely laughable.

As I said to him before, sometimes its OK to admit your wrong. You'll be more respected for it.

Hopefully he'll learn from this.

He's not here to learn he's here to teach.
 
They are a compressed "sloppy joe". Who are you kidding other than yourself and your small group of followers?

You even lack the shame to see anything wrong with that.

You don't think the derivation of the earliest displacement vectors for the antenna are conspiracy-worthy?

Like I said about becoming a joke....

Well, we're laughing.
 
Name This MIHOP

The following posts have been edited. See the originals for context. My underlining.

http://the911forum.freeforums.org/post5910.html#p5910
by femr2 » Thu Nov 12, 2009 12:52 pm
…..
Yes, 9/11 opened *the war on terror*. A war that can never ever end. Hundreds of thousands of people have died. The man they started the war to find is not on a table somewhere, everyone now knows that alCIAda is an artificial entity originally created by those who purport to hunt it down. The specifics are hugely important. Not interested in *the war on terror* ?
…..
Trippy.
But what has actually changed?
What ? Again, I could write for a month without pausing for breath. Start with the now absolutely worthless "Constitution".
Trippy
Terrorist threats have always been there.
Indeed, and the war on terror which results in me being filmed as soon as I step outside of my front door is supposedly there to protecte ME from THEM. In reality it's used to control ME by THEM. I am supposed to live in a world of fear. Personally, I don't, though I fully understand that 9/11 was the event which allowed it to become so.
…..
The stormtroopers are there to control the ordinary people, not terrorism and gang crime. The designs are intended to instill fear, not authority and respect. .....
http://the911forum.freeforums.org/post5904.html#p5904
…..

by femr2 » Thu Nov 12, 2009 12:28 am
……….
No evidence was forthcoming, and so the handover was refused. Clearly pre-planned invasion of Afghanistan then ensued, and is still in progress, though it would appear that focus has moved onto AlCIAda and all sorts of other goals, which I will not list out here.
…..
Have you never heard of the terms *Problem, Reaction, Solution* (Hegelian Dialectic principle), *NWO*, social conditioning, etc, etc...

I do not think this thread is the right place to go into the actual meaning of any of these phrases, which very much depend upon certain levels of understanding and point-of-view, however, what is clear is...

The effect of the 9/11 events was not primarily a justification for military actions overseas, but a total and complete social environment change for every man, woman and child living in the western world. (At least)

We all now live in a world within which the infinite and never-ending virtual threat from *terrorism* is applied to every facet of our daily lives. We live in a world driven by governments justifying the removal of our freedoms in the name of protecting us from nasty unseen *threat*. We live in a world where it is *for our own good* to be treated like cattle. We live in a world moving closer to real globalism in it's very ugliest sense. Without the *catalysing* event, none of these gradual changes would have been possible.

I could *opine* for months without pausing for breath, but are you *seriously* asking the question without having a full idea of the kind of answers you could receive ?
…..
http://the911forum.freeforums.org/post7900.html#p7900
by femr2 » Sun Jan 17, 2010 5:16 am
…..
Conspiracy+Theory is all growed up. It has matured. And it breeds.

Is there still a lot of rubbish out there ? Sure. *Prominent* 9/11 CT sites still peddle mountains of crap, but the point is that new events are investigated by millions of people in as much depth as is possible. If it doesn't stack up, the seed of doubt is spread far and wide.

A9/H1N1 (Swine Flu) jab anyone ?
Name this MIHOP

Who made it happen? Global Elite> New World Order> USG> CIA> al CIAda.
What happened? A catalyzing event calculated to create fear and steal our freedoms. Problem. Reaction. Solution.
How did it happen? al CIAda attacked the US in planes. The Towers' structural engineers designed "weak spots" in the buildings for easier controlled demolition in the future. To accurately hit these spots, the planes were remote controlled.
Why did it happen? For the Conspirators to falsely justify the removal of our freedoms in the name of protecting us from nasty unseen *threat* . The total and complete social environment change for every man, woman and child living in the western world. (At least).

Corollary:
Prominent 9/11 CT sites are either shills or dupes. As planned by the Conspirators, their patently ridiculous claims besmirch all “Conspiracy + Theories”, even the true ones.

David Icke
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Icke
Icke argues that humanity was created by a network of secret societies run by an ancient race of interbreeding bloodlines from the Middle and Near East, originally extraterrestrial. Icke calls them the "Babylonian Brotherhood." The Illuminati, Round Table, Council on Foreign Relations, Chatham House, the Trilateral Commission, the Bilderberg Group, the IMF, United Nations, the media, military, science, religion, and the Internet are all Brotherhood created and controlled.[35] The Brotherhood is mostly male. Their children are raised from an early age to understand the mission; those who don't are pushed aside. Key Brotherhood bloodlines are the British House of Windsor, the Rothschilds, the Rockefellers, European royalty and aristocracy, and the Eastern establishment families of the United States. At the apex of the Brotherhood stands the "Global Elite," identified throughout history as the Illuminati, and at the top of the Global Elite stand the "Prison Wardens." The goal of the Brotherhood—their "Great Work of Ages"—is world domination and a micro-chipped population.[36]

Image by Neil Hague from Icke's Infinite Love is the Only Truth (2005), showing the Brotherhood, or "Red Dresses."
In Tales From The Time Loop (2003), Icke argues that most organized religions, especially Judaism, Christianity and Islam, are Illuminati creations designed to divide and conquer the human race through endless conflicts, as are racial, ethnic, and sexual divisions. He cites the Oklahoma City bombing and 9/11 as examples of events organized by the Global Elite.[46] The incidents allow the Elite to respond in whatever way they intended to act in the first place, a concept Icke calls "order out of chaos," or "problem-reaction-solution". He writes that there are few, if any, public events that are not engineered, or at least used, by the Brotherhood:[15] "You want to introduce something you know the people won't like. ... So you first create a PROBLEM, a rising crime rate, more violence, a terrorist bomb ... You make sure someone else is blamed for this problem and not you, the real people behind it all. So you create a "patsy," as they call them in America, a Timothy McVeigh or a Lee Harvey Oswald. ... This brings us to stage two, the REACTION from the people—"This can't go on; what are THEY going to do about it?" ... This allows THEM to then openly offer the SOLUTION to the problems they have created ..."[47]
 
Last edited:
The following posts have been edited. See the originals for context. My underlining.

…..
Name this MIHOP
No MIHOP there at all, simply discussion of the effect of 9/11.

I note you decided to chop out this section of my first post you link to...
Pre-note: I'm not interested in pointing fingers.

Simplifying to *American Government* is just folly. *Allowing planes* is again a bit leading and given the *CD hypothesis* not an accurate picture as directed would be a pre-requisite. ....

The focus of the post is about those folk who believe direct link between invasion of Iraq and the events of 9/11.

Do you think security procedures applied to ordinary citizens have changed since 9/11 ? Do you think the events of 9/11 have been used for political gain and social structure change ? I certainly do, and that's what is being discussed in the posts you highlight.

Interesting insight into your quote mining intent though :rolleyes:

ETA: Thanks for highlighting a post back in 2009 in which I am making it quite clear that I've no interest in pointing fingers...aka "who". And that has not chnaged since.
 
Last edited:
Here, in chronological order:
What femr2 Believes – Theories and Opinions:

8/3/2009 All Tall Buildings Designed To Be Brought Down


8/21/2009 Aircraft Were Under Automated Control



9/2/2009 Must Focus On Showing Every Fault With NIST



10/15/2009 Unseen Charges Initiated Descent, Blow roof



10/31/2009 MIHOP Destroyed Core

1/8/2010 Noise Of Explosive Charges Not An Issue



1/8/2010 Explosions Weaken Base, Job Finished At Initiation. Towers Chopped At Three Mechanical Floors, Noise Not A Problem.



1/17/2010 Small Explosives Used High Up At Internal Structures.



1/17/2010 Supernanothermiate Used To Invoke Initiation, Manipulation Of Few Cores, Post Descent Core Cleaning.



1/23/2010 MIHOP. Large Numbers Of Explosives Demolition ! Deemphasized. Calls For Impartiality.



4/19/2010 Explosives Not Required All The Way Down. MIHOP = Deliberate And Intentional *Bring Down*


4/26/2010 I’m MIHOP.



6/20/2010 Some Truth Movement Claims Ridiculous, But Not MIHOP


11/12/2010 Prefers MIHOP To Controlled Demolition.


I'm not sure what this post or the entire thread is trying to do? Are you trying to say his (or their) views changed? I see little to no evidence of that. If they did (not putting words in their mouth this is hypothetical) so what? Those of us who are a little more open minded and don't follow the official dogma, can do that. If we're presented with new evidence, and if it is compelling we can change our mind. Those who follow the official dogma, are stuck with it. Which is why we see all the jumping through hoops, and ridiculousness trying to defend it.

In fact this thread is a perfect example of it. Let's go back two years find all their posts, make fun of it, try to find the stupidest and most meaningless discrepancies, and focus on that. Let's not actually focus on the evidence, God forbid we do that. Because this is to a large extent what you people are relegated to, stuff like arguing what MIHOP means. Who cares? Really you have someone who's presenting a lot of good evidence, and that's all your concerned about, what MIHOP means?
 
I'm not sure what this post or the entire thread is trying to do?....
The original thrust of the thread was an attack on two members who dare to stand against the prevailing wisdom.

The thread had languished - having spawned some equally "directed at the person" offshoot threads including the ridiculous attempt to redefine normal English language usages WRT the acronym "MIHOP".

BasqueArch has now resurrected the thread with another selection of quotemines. Despite the quotemining the bits quoted raise some interesting and legitimate issues for discussion. But BA does not address them.

...Those of us who are a little more open minded and don't follow the official dogma, can do that. If we're presented with new evidence, and if it is compelling we can change our mind. Those who follow the official dogma, are stuck with it. Which is why we see all the jumping through hoops, and ridiculousness trying to defend it....
Well said!
Really you have someone who's presenting a lot of good evidence, and that's all your concerned about, what MIHOP means?
Any side track is good enough if it gives you an excuse to avoid debate of substantial issues. :rolleyes:
 

Back
Top Bottom