9-11 box cutters 11 september utility knives

[Markekohut]

There is a wonderful essay, by a philosopher, a female I remember perhaps Elaine Scarry? Anyway, it ran in The Boston Review I believe and was collected in The Best Essays of the Year book in which she argued that what seemed to happen on the third plane was a direct action that could be seen as a self-formed militia (ala 2nd Amendment) which acted in concert to protect ( part of) the homeland, the US of A....

Must read it agin. 

Sent from my iPad

On Nov 19, 2013, at 7:33 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:

> I agree w Ryan. " Box cutter" showed how pre-9/11 hijacker scenario strategy used minimal counter resistance from airline staff (or passegers) not thinking hijackers were on suicide missions.  The passengers on the third plane learned the new equation quickly and valiantly.
> 
> On Tuesday, November 19, 2013, Matt Ryan wrote:
>> For what it's worth, I have worked various jobs involving regular use of these blades and the terms "box cutters" and "utility knives" were always used interchangeably. Maybe it's a regional thing, I dunno.  As far as the media glomming onto the term box cutters, I'm guessing it has to do with the narrative they were trying to shape, i.e. "something as mundane as this ubiquitous little tool was used to carry out this hugely significant attack, oh the irony, etc."
>> 
>> 
>> On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 5:21 PM, <malignd at aol.com> wrote:
>> I may be misremembering, but didn't Popular Science or Popular Mechanics fully explain the collapse of WTC 7?
>> 
>> The boxcutter was just an example of one small thing I thought about that 
>> troubled me and an attempt to clarify to myself and anyone interested why.  The 
>> Other issues are quite large and have in no way been adequately addressed. Why 
>> did building seven, unstruck  except by minor debris and the fire that started, 
>> collapse. There has never been a steel frame building that collapsed even from 
>> intense fires leaving twisted framework.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net>
>> To: P-list List <pynchon-l at waste.org>
>> Sent: Tue, Nov 19, 2013 12:59 am
>> Subject: Re: 9-11 box cutters 11 september utility knives
>> 
>> The boxcutter was just an example of one small thing I thought about that 
>> troubled me and an attempt to clarify to myself and anyone interested why.  The 
>> Other issues are quite large and have in no way been adequately addressed. Why 
>> did building seven, unstruck  except by minor debris and the fire that started, 
>> collapse. There has never been a steel frame building that collapsed even from 
>> intense fires leaving twisted framework.  Whatever hit the pentagon followed a 
>> path that no pilot could accomplish in a747. This is the fucking Pentagpn and 
>> there are no photos or film of a non scheduled flight entering their airspace 
>> which has a large perimeter warning system. The hole in the Pentagon is too 
>> small. The 2 engines never turned up.   Thermite. Explain some of this or point 
>> to a detailed explanation that is not a denial based on the idea that it 
>> couldn't be done covertly..  Which leaves us with the explanation that a covert 
>> plan by the most powerful secretive forces could not do this but 12 alcohol 
>> abusing foreigners who showed no aptitude for flight and some of whom were on 
>> FBI lists could.
>> 
>> I have a real hard time with that.  As for perfect narratives, that is not the 
>> question. Credible physics concerning what is known is the question.  Did Allah 
>> suspend the conservation of mass?
>> 
>> Slate magazine is a pathetic joke.
>> 
>> On Nov 18, 2013, at 11:38 AM, Monte Davis wrote:
>> 
>> > RR> Life measured in such a detailed way will always bring to the surface much 
>> that doesnt make sense
>> > 
>> > I vehemently agree. What makes people believe that it must be possible to 
>> reconstruct a 100% accurate, closed, consistent narrative of any but the 
>> simplest historical moment? (And in "historical" I include last week.) 
>> > 
>> > In practice, the effort to do so *always* requires the selective -- or 
>> tendentious -- exclusion of some dots that someone else will always insist 
>> *must* be connected. See, e.g., Fred Kaplan on JFK assassination theories: 
>> > 
>> > http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/history/2013/11/john_f_kennedy_conspiracy_theories_debunked_why_the_magic_bullet_and_grassy.html
>> >  
>> > 
>> >  
>> >    
>> > 
>> > 
>> > On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 9:22 AM, rich <richard.romeo at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > 9/11 in essence in my mind is a massive intelligence failure. conspiracies 
>> abound because people cant believe we didnt connect the dots or when we did we 
>> didnt share info or didn't deem it important enough. these bozos should have 
>> been caught but they weren't. 
>> > I dont understand this 'I question the official narrative'--what narrative? 
>> all those endless taps into each and every discrepancy or nuance of that day and 
>> the days leading up to it. Life measured in such a detailed way will always 
>> bring to the surface much that doesnt make sense or others imbued with a 
>> significance important to the observer. an horrific event heightens this to 
>> unimaginable levels.
>> > I also just have to laugh about talk of knives and cowards. sure it takes 
>> cour
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20131120/dc207ad5/attachment.html>