I must say: what drivel!

"We have entered the age of the faceless, agile enemy. From London to Madrid and Nigeria to Russia, stateless terrorist groups have emerged to score blow after blow against us."

Nigeria? What did they do to us except lay claim to their oil? Russia? What has Russia done to us -- except resist opening up their gas and oil to us on our terms?

London and Madrid? I'd rather start with 9-11. What did they do to us? Well, it wasn't necessarily they as has been recognized by, most recently, Charlie Sheen; for some time, Ed Asner; several officials from Bush and Reagan administrations (Paul Craig Roberts, Morgan Reynolds, Katherine Austin Fitts); several retired AF Lt Colonels (George Nelson, Robert Bowman, Karen Kwiatkowski); and many others. And once again, the case has been made by theologian David Ray Griffin in his two books: New Pearl Harbor and 9-11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions. And of course, Colin Campbell, in a chapter of his Oil Crisis, adds his voice. But Griffin is the Colin Campbell of 9-11, maybe even the Campbell, Deffeyes and Simmons.

The ones doing the dirty work around the globe right now are all too often major corporations and agencies of the US gov't. That's a reality that cannot be talked away.

There rest of the picture painted by Robb is totally bizarre. The idea that cities (and /or corporations) will somehow become self-reliant in face of societal collapse is -- well, I have no words. He somehow imagines that collapse means we'll transit to some kind of high-tech feudalism. He has no idea of the pre-requisites for our current social structure and way of life, nor any idea of the consequences of collapse. His is sort of a high-end type of  survivalism. He's not all that different from Mike Ruppert in some respects, except that Mike is more realistic about some of the things our gov't is up to -- but totally unrealistic in thinking they won't come and pull up our vegetables.

Thank you davebygolly for putting some reality into the discussion.  As for London and Bali - both of those incidents were false flag acts by western states to demonize Muslims.
Madrid was an odd one.  Madrid was a false flag operation by Spanish fascists to demonize Basques.  When the frame quickly failed, they went to plan B, murdered some Muslims and framed them posthumously.  This was similar to the notorious Bologna bombing,done by Italian fascists to frame the largely mythical red brigade.
The reality is that there has been very little terrorism that was not false flag and state sponsored.
Well, the only one I've really looked into besides 9-11 is The Oklhahoma City Bombing. David Hoffman's book of that name shows very clearly that the official story is completely wrong. First of all, the were lots of local media reports of more than one bomb. Second, Brig. Gen Benton Partin, an explosives expert, explained how the ammonia nitrates in the rental truck in front of the building could not possibly have brought down the building -- explosive force drops off with the inverse cube of distance. Explosives, powerful ones at that, must be place right next to the columns. Partin got back into line around 9-11. He's a right-winger, and may have been upset they were trying to hang this on McVeigh and Nichols.

There has been a subsequent attempt by Jayna Davis to retroactively implicate Muslims. They may have been intending to implicate Muslims from the get go -- there were Middle Easterners in the picture -- but things went awry and they had to hang it on somebody. But that's speculation on my part.

In both WTC and Oklahoma there were huge real estate components. Large-scale demolitions took place at public expense. Some 17 buildings came down in the wake of the Oklahoma bombing. Now I believe it's all rebuilt and very nice. Same thing in process at WTC.

It drives me crazy to see all the anti-Muslim stuff swallowed like lemonade. Yeah, like that's all they have to do is go around and give the US gov't pretexts to do what they were already planning to do: blow up Muslims, at least those sitting on oil. Do people not remember the German propaganda against the Jews? It ought to be played on TV every night in translation so that people could see exactly what's going on, see the parallels. And what are the chances of that happening?

I have seen one popularized analysis of the Oklahoma bombing that argued that the overpreassure from the truck bomb affected a very large facade and structure are and thus toppled the load bearing structure. Looked belivable at the time I saw it but it was only TV.

It still sounds much more reasonable then complex conspiracies. Ambitious rebuilding can be explained by a healthy societies ambition to not let criminals make permanent damage.

This reminds me about how fairly small explosions have brought down large parts of high rise buildings made out of concrete elements. A gas oven in a bottom flat leaks and the gas explodes. The roof and all the flats above it are lifted slightly by the overpreassure and the outer wall is unloaded. The wall then easily blows outwards when it no longer is held in place by the full weight of the overlying flats, then they come down...

Well, the Murrah building had a steel-frame structure that had to be disposed of. And Partin's testimony has to be disposed of. And the local reports of two or more explosions have to disposed of. And lastly, 9-11 has to be disposed of. Before 9-11, I accepted ALL these stories at face value. But 9-11 cannot be disposed of. Read Griffin.
This looks like "proof by contradiction", i.e. if one side can find something wrong with the opposing side, the arguing side must be true.

But with virtually everything touted as a government cover-up, there are multiple alternative explanations.  And most or all of them can point to evidence invalidating most or all of the others.

Therefore since all of the explanations of what happened on 9/11 can be shown to be wrong, can we conclude that nothing happened?