• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Tony Szamboti vs. tfk Debate

ENCOURAGING BIG SUPPORT FOR THE DEBATE; MY FIRST POST HERE

Hi All,
This is my first post here at ISF; thanx for having me.

ENCOURAGING PARTICIPATION IN THE "tfk-Tony Sz" DEBATE
I'm just adding my voice in favor of the idea of this tfk-Tony Sz debate about to start over at "the911Forum"; and encouraging everybody else's attention & especially "participation". I've been a member over there since 2011 (but with only some 60 posts). My sparcity of posts is due to both being very busy elsewhere and because I am not a primary researcher nor do I have much technical expertise - so I've mostly read-along to learn. I think of myself as a political organizer, analyst, writer and "synthesizer" of the work of others. So the majority of my few posts have been to try to aid the flow of the discussion.

THE member there that I respect the most is OWE, the mod. I don't always agree with his politics, but, having attempted to lead others myself for many years, I think he has excellent mod skills; particularly in regards to handling procedural matters (keeping a discussion on track & reasonably-civil) and having the relevant technical expertise. He also tends to ask excellent questions - which help focus the discussion and/or clarify the points.

MY POLITICAL HISTORY & "CREDS" (credentials):
My "creds": I've been a heavy-duty peace-justice activist & organizer for 50+ years , starting with Student Rights & the Anti-War (In Vietnam/Indochina) Movement (in which I spent 40 hours a week, 50 weeks a year, 10 full years =20,000+ total hours of volunteer work); and continuing on thru today.

THE THREE THINGS THAT GOT MY POLITICAL ACTIVISM STARTED
What got me "started" was three things:

JFK: MARK LANE'S BOOK, "RUSH TO JUDGMENT"
1) I ran into Mark Lane's "Rush To Judgment" relatively soon after it came out. From then on I've been a skeptic.

"SEXILY CLAD WOMEN ARE 'GUILTY' FOR BEING RAPED"
2) Soon after that, it was the teacher/administrator-priests at my high school seminary (training to be a priest in the Carmelite Order (with the brown-colored clothes/gowns) of the Catholic Church). They all claimed, "If a girl/woman dresses sexy, then she deserves it if she gets raped!" I didn't know very much at all about the opposite sex back then; but I could not accept that the victim was guilty of the crime. This solidified/expanded my skepticism.

THE CATHOLIC CHURCH'S REFORMS & THE VIETNAM WAR
3) Around that time, Pope John Paul (the "first" of that name, iirc) initiated many reforms in Catholic Church procedures, including switching from Latin to English AND involving the congregation in the celebration of the Mass. We students now led the middle-of-the-Mass prayers; and this always started: "For the Pope In Rome, we pray to the Lord" Then everybody else would immediately respond, "Lord, hear our prayer!" Then we'd pray for the local Archbishop & lesser church officials, for our parents, etc. and it always ended with this: "For OUR men fighting and dying in Vietnam, we pray to the Lord" ... When it was my turn, I said, "For ALL the people fighting and dying in Vietnam ..." I was almost expelled on the spot for that. "We don't pray for the other side; we don't pray for those godless communists!"

(btw, as a school-child, I grew up with the daily drills of hiding under our school desks to "protect" ourselves from the Soviet nuclear weapons that we were told to expect to rain down on us at any moment.)

I thought, "What? God takes sides in human wars?" This contradiction caused my skepticism to become "universal" - questioning most if not all of the things I had been raised to believe and/or were commonly-held in (US) society.

MY EARLY POLITICAL ACTIVISM: STUDENTS' RIGHTS & ANTI-WAR
Upon entering college, I became both a "peace-love hippie" and a students' rights activist.
I also started going to anti-war demonstrations (back then in San Diego, where my family had moved, we'd average the same 8-9 people month after month; while in L.A. they had 10s of thousands & in San Fran. 100s of thousands). It was thru trying to do the right thing, vis-à-vis the War, that I learned a whole series of important lessons about society, the rules of the game, and about myself (especially about my strengths and weaknesses).

DESPITE PERSONALLY RESISTING IT, I ROSE IN THE LEADERSHIP RANKS
The more & longer I participated in peace-justice activism, the more I "rose" in leadership positions because of both the quantity of time I dedicated and because of the quality of my work - it turned out I was good at organizing things & especially people. This steady rise happened despite my resisting it due to being very concerned that it might go to my head. In my experience and opinion, there's NOTHING better for learning important lessons than trying to mobilize & lead others.

EVENTUALLY I BECAME A TOP SAN DIEGO ANTI-WAR MOVEMENT LEADER
Within a few years, I was one of the top anti-war leaders in San Diego; and was regularly traveling around California and across the US to participate in & speak at: Demonstrations, Marches, Conferences, etc. I authored more and more political articles (about the War & politics in general) which had an ever-increasing influence on popular consciousness & activity.

Despite our incredibly late & small start, eventually we became so strong that we "forced" the Republican National Presidential-Nominating Convention out of San Diego AT THE LAST MINUTE. (Right afterwards I thought, "We were too effective; it would have been better if they had stayed here because, relative to the people of Miami Beach, we're WAY better prepared to expose the war-mongers." I should note that we opposed the Democratic Party's war-mongers just as much.

OTHER POLITICAL MOVEMENTS I PARTICIPATED IN AND LED
I also participated in labor/union organizing and, due to that, got fired from more than one job; and, because I was effective enough, one time I was very seriously injured by my employer in an attempt on my life. (In the process, amongst a high percentage of Mexican and Mexican-American workers, I became fluent in Spanish; and have taught ESL ever since.)

I also got seriously involved in movements for: Women's Rights; Chicano Rights, (Cesar Chavez &) the Farmworkers Union & Cross-Border Issues; Black Rights & Against Apartheid In South Africa / Azania; Gay Rights; Support For The Struggle In Central America; the Rainbow Coalition, and others.

9/11
I became a 9/11 Truther ON 9/11 itself; due to the endless repetition of a public tragic scene - something that almost never was allowed. It shouted out to me: "Propaganda" and reminded me of the major propaganda campaigns waged decades earlier vis-à-vis: "Red Scare"; JFK/Lee Harvey Oswald; Vietnam & the Anti-War Movement ... perhaps averaging once a decade. I'm still a 911 Truther.

So, given the mix here of Truthers / Debunkers, my high-esteem for OWE (at "the911Forum") and his mod skills (despite some BIG differences we have on important questions) will probably cause strong reactions both positive & negative.

Debunkers here may tend to discredit my opinions due to me being a Truther; but this may be tempered by my "support" of OWE. Truthers here may tend to agree with my opinions; and thus think "we should give OWE & "the911Forum" a chance. This is my basic point in this post: Let's give the "tfk-Tony Sz Debate" over at "the911Forum" its best chance to succeed!

btw, I have previously read ALL of the posts at that Forum by tfk & by Tony Sz.

OVERALL, I BELIEVE IN & FIGHT HARD FOR U-N-I-T-Y, FIRST, LAST & ALWAYS
In a nutshell, what I stand for is UNITY (based on some minimum of good-moral principles). In everything I do, I try my best to help people unite for a better world.

THIS IS MY FIRST POST HERE. (I hope I’ve stayed within ISF’s guidelines AND not offended anybody.)

Thanx for having me,
Pablo

P.S. I realize that most of this post is a self-introduction; but I feel I owe it to the reader to explain where I’m coming from so as to better understand my position on the debate.

If it is allowed here, should I just go ahead and copy this post to the self-introduction thread? (You won't have to worry about me trying to build a big post-count.)
 
Greetings from the minority

A warm welcome to you pablonovi.

I hope your skin is as thick as your impressive resume.
 
Hi All,
This is my first post here at ISF; thanx for having me.

.......

Thanx for having me,
Pablo

P.S. I realize that most of this post is a self-introduction; but I feel I owe it to the reader to explain where I’m coming from so as to better understand my position on the debate.

If it is allowed here, should I just go ahead and copy this post to the self-introduction thread? (You won't have to worry about me trying to build a big post-count.)


Really.... who cares? Why are you writing your bio and political leanings in this thread?

It's excellent that you are trying to inform yourself about things which are outside your technical abilities.

The "engineering" of the 9/11 events is not all that sophisticated and can be understood with basic level of understanding of physics, engineering principles, material science, good observational skills and most important, good critical thinking skills and understanding of logic.
 
Hi All,
This is my first post here at ISF; thanx for having me.


9/11
I became a 9/11 Truther ON 9/11 itself; due to the endless repetition of a public tragic scene - something that almost never was allowed. It shouted out to me: "Propaganda" and reminded me of the major propaganda campaigns waged decades earlier vis-à-vis: "Red Scare"; JFK/Lee Harvey Oswald; Vietnam & the Anti-War Movement ... perhaps averaging once a decade. I'm still a 911 Truther.

So, given the mix here of Truthers / Debunkers, my high-esteem for OWE (at "the911Forum") and his mod skills (despite some BIG differences we have on important questions) will probably cause strong reactions both positive & negative.

Debunkers here may tend to discredit my opinions due to me being a Truther; but this may be tempered by my "support" of OWE. Truthers here may tend to agree with my opinions; and thus think "we should give OWE & "the911Forum" a chance. This is my basic point in this post: Let's give the "tfk-Tony Sz Debate" over at "the911Forum" its best chance to succeed!


Nothing of the sort will happen, that I can guarantee.

The opinions of truthers here are discredited primarily due to them all being physically impossible to have happened given the circumstances of the day. CD, no planes, that sort of thing.

If you want to go on some discussions on LIHOP, that's plausible. But Controlled Demolition at any of the sites has no business being legitimized by "debate".
 
9/11

Debunkers here may tend to discredit my opinions due to me being a Truther; but this may be tempered by my "support" of OWE. Truthers here may tend to agree with my opinions; and thus think "we should give OWE & "the911Forum" a chance. This is my basic point in this post: Let's give the "tfk-Tony Sz Debate" over at "the911Forum" its best chance to succeed! ...
Opinions? Who cares if you are a truther? If 911 truthers believe in the fantasy of CD after 14 years, they are not truthers, they are more like cult members. Believing in fantasy and CTs does not make your opinions good or bad, or discredited. Using opinions to forum some BS CT about 9/11 is not going to prove a position. As we move on to the silent explosives or super thermite with no products left at the crime scene debate, Tony will use opinions, make up numbers, and fail to converge on reality. Tony is the readcddeal, nothing has changed. With Tony's revelation the aircraft used on 9/11 were a ruse, his CD fantasy had gained a new level of paranoia and fantasy. Don't forget, you are now in a forum Tony says we are paid to point out his CD claims are failed fantasy based on zero evidence.

Another CD fantasy believer. Believing in delusional fantasy of CD, or some inside job because you watched too much TV coverage of 9/11 by CNN/FOX/ET AL...

It is interesting to see a "debate" on the CD fantasy. But your opinions are not valid for defending 9/11 truth's CD fantasy, you need evidence. Opinions are good for what color should Joe's shoes be, is white cool?

Sad to see a noble cause, anti-war, mixed with 9/11 truth delusional fantasy. 9/11 truth silly BS and evidence denial ruins the anti-war movement.

Have you taken your evidence for your 9/11 truth claims to the FBI yet to expose the big fantasy inside job you believe in?

It is hard to discredit an opinion unless the opinions is thought to be evidence for some far out fantasy about 9/11. Too bad Tony only has opinions and has no evidence to support the silent explosives used for the CD fantasy on 9/11. Has Tony fleshed out the "aircraft are a ruse" BS? Do you believe the aircraft were a ruse to cover up the silent explosives CD fantasy?

Who did 9/11 in your CT world of being a truther?

The 9/11 Forum, Where Intelligent and evidence-based discussion of 9/11 issues reign...
http://the911forum.freeforums.org/duplicitous-blowhard-tfk-at-it-again-t726-135.html
Perfect place to debate the fantasy of CD and aircraft ruse of 9/11. Ironically CD and aircraft ruse have no evidence.

14 years of 9/11 truth lies, and people claim to be truthers; irony? 9/11 truth always smack of some 1984 like/NAZI like fake name, spewing lies claiming truth. Good luck, but leave the opinions about 9/11 in the fantasy-land of 9/11 truth, bring evidence... oops, 9/11 truth has no evidence. Guess you will not be taking your claims to the FBI.

Why is 9/11 truth spreading lies and void of evidence? 14 years is more than enough time to see 9/11 truth is a fraud.
 
Last edited:
A warm welcome to you pablonovi.

I hope your skin is as thick as your impressive resume.

Thanx Criteria, a warm welcome is always appreciated.

About the thick skin: I KNOW I had one for 50 years; whether I still do is to be determined; I've gotten old and a lot of old people are easier to rattle.
 
... Controlled Demolition at any of the sites has no business being legitimized by "debate".
There could be a debate; why people are gullible to fall for the evidence free CD by 9/11 truth. After 14 years it takes overwhelming ignorance to jump on the CD fantasy train of woo. Is it overwhelming ignorance, paranoia or massive gullibility.
 
Really.... who cares? Why are you writing your bio and political leanings in this thread?

It's excellent that you are trying to inform yourself about things which are outside your technical abilities.

The "engineering" of the 9/11 events is not all that sophisticated and can be understood with basic level of understanding of physics, engineering principles, material science, good observational skills and most important, good critical thinking skills and understanding of logic.

1) Who cares? Sure seems like YOU do; why else mention it? Why did I give my "bio" in this thread? Because virtually none of you know anything about me & I'm coming in here, in my first post, and proposing something. I assumed that at least most of you would want to have some background on me - it MIGHT influence your decision.

2) About my skills and lack of others:
I started off by saying I do NOT have technical skills, nor much ability to analyze fotos/videos - I used to have great eyesight but its been years .

I'm sure I have good enough critical thinking skills and understanding of logic. As a pre-freshmen in college, after a week in a logic class; I was made the Teacher's only assistant and in charge of tutoring the Seniors. In the SATs, where 800 was THE top score: I got 760 in English and 800 in Math (and I did it in a third the allotted time - just to see how fast I could do it). I've been studying politics, economics and culture non-stop ever since then.

Basically you attempt to ridicule me (you've done that repeatedly over at "the911Forum"; so no surprise.)

In any event, I've recently, after 2,500 intense hours of study & analysis, devised an ESL (English for Spanish Language speakers) system that might just be better than any other on the planet. A student started off by receiving 4% on their high school English grad exam. (She got 90% in ALL her other classes). 2 months or about 50 hours of classes with me and she got 60% (exactly the minimum passing grade) AND she pronounced English better than her teachers. (Not bad considering she skipped the 3rd month of classes so she must have forgotten a good deal of what she had just learned with me.)

I'd say that might be an indication of both: sharp analytical tools and of quality skill with logic too. Ridicule this too, all you want.

I do not have the habit of bragging on myself - but you raised these points so I'm just responding precisely with the facts.

Again, I only spelled out my "bio" out of respect for this Forum and its members; so you-all would, right from the get-go have some idea of who you were dealing with. My apologies to any and all who find that offensive.
 
With the exception of SanderO (see below) the rest of if/when you spoke of the US Gov at all, you were NOT super-critical (and you had every chance and reason to do so - if that were REALLY your political stance). Instead, in virtually EVERY INSTANCE, you took EXACTLY THE SAME STANCE as the US Gov was taking. Hmmmm Perhaps I might have a CONCRETE point,vis-a-vis point "B:" above? "
"B: a lot of the posters here are 100% sure that the USG is always a force for only good and never does false flags, etc."

Are you assuming that those questioning the truther canards are politically motivated?

What about the truth itself? This technique of trying to paint everyone who disagrees with 9/11 truth, as some form of government muppet is erroneous and fatuous, and it got old years ago.

I have rarely seen a truther 'have a point' as their stories are ridiculous (from Judy Woods through to Gage), and the only time I might find common ground is over the CIA's reluctance to share info with the FBI.
 
Tony, you can tell OWE that I AM able to sign on to the post.
Thanks for his efforts.
 
So Pablanovi,

You say you became a Truther on 9/11. At the time did you think the Government blew up the buildings, or did you think they flew the planes or did you think they did both. What flavor of truther are you know and how did you get here.
 
So Pablanovi,

You say you became a Truther on 9/11. At the time did you think the Government blew up the buildings, or did you think they flew the planes or did you think they did both. What flavor of truther are you know and how did you get here.

Anyone who became a "truther" on 9/11 did so driven by their politics of distrust of the government and the media.

Of course in the confusion there would be errors and mistaken reports by reporters who are not technical experts looking for anyone with an opinion to report.

Over time because of the politics and anger there was a rush to respond and rescue or recover and not the sort of careful forensic analysis which would have, could have laid to rest any of the strange politically driven theories and dispelled the reporting mistakes.

So we have this insane debate driven by politics and not rational engineering.
 
Tony has given his opening statement. I have to say my jaw dropped a bit when I read this excerpt:

Tony said:
I had initially accepted the notion put forth by a civil engineering professor in September 2001 that the collapses of WTC 1 and 2 were due to dynamic impact loads, after the top sections of the buildings fell onto the lower sections at the aircraft impact points. The dynamic loads would be much greater than the static load and would overcome the reserve strength of the structure below.

<snip>

Also in 2008, measurements of the descent of the North Tower (WTC 1) showed it never decelerated and thus could not have produced the powerful jolt that the civil engineering professor had conjectured in his 2001 paper.

Here I was thinking everyone pretty much had a handle on the collapse dynamics. It's hard to believe Tony still think Bazant had the mechanism right in 2001 (or even said he did).
:boggled:
 
To relieve any anticipation, I'll be posting about 7 pm tonight.
 
Tony has given his opening statement. I have to say my jaw dropped a bit when I read this excerpt:



Here I was thinking everyone pretty much had a handle on the collapse dynamics. It's hard to believe Tony still think Bazant had the mechanism right in 2001 (or even said he did).
:boggled:

Explains a lot, Tony is a second generation truther, after the first two revision of Jone's paper.
If he had read the first paper, he might have laughed it off.
 
To relieve any anticipation, I'll be posting about 7 pm tonight.

That's great will love to read the reply, Tony doesn't realize the History of Jones, You would probably love to know more of what is known before the debate but that would not be fair play.
 
That's great will love to read the reply, Tony doesn't realize the History of Jones, You would probably love to know more of what is known before the debate but that would not be fair play.
I don't think it will be a reply (and it shouldn't be). TFK will be making his own opening statement.
 
I don't think it will be a reply (and it shouldn't be). TFK will be making his own opening statement.

Understood, I ment opening statement forgot the debate (14 years late,) is just beginning, jumped the gun a little.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom