Hal Bidlack a 9/11 Truther?

[Puppycow]

Colorado Democratic Party Platform Process 2010-12
Platform Committee Report -v.6 FINAL
May 12, 2010
Hal Bidlack, Chair, 2010 Platform Committee

Whereas many disturbing facts were consciously ignored by the 9/11 Commission; Be it resolved, therefore, that the CDP calls for the establishment of a truly independent Grand Jury and public investigation into these and other anomalies in order to find the truth of the September 11, 2001 attacks, so that we have a greater probability of preventing attacks of this nature in the future.

Colorado Democratic Party Calls for Grand Jury Investigation of 9-11

The quality of evidence contradicting the official 9-11 story is substantiated in part by the 2010 Platform Committee Chairman Hal Bidlack’s statement: “ ….this platform represents the consensus of the 2010 Platform Committee, guided by the results of county assemblies across our state. The folks who worked tirelessly on the Committee can rightly be proud of their efforts, and deserve our special thanks.” (Bidlack’s statement can be found on page one of the 2010 platform.)

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Absolutely not.

Killtown:

I was asked to post this here by the person whose signature appears on the bottom of the message. If anyone has doubts on that score, I will post the salutation from the message in this thread.

I open a new thread because the topic addressed (Pentagon) is not really part of the other threads and I do not wish to cause a derail to those discussions, so I determined to open a new one.

More of my comments to follow, but here is the message:

Killtown,
I am certainly aware of people like yourself who believe that those of us who suffered on 9/11 must be part of some giant plot, either as dupes or plotters. I was in the Pentagon when the plane hit, I held parts of that aircraft in my hands, covered with fuel and oil, and I helped with the triage area. I helped a guy with a headwound, aided ambulances coming in, and suffer to this day with ongoing nightmares on a very regular basis. When one has seen what I saw, and had to do what I had to do, the images, the smells, the sounds, resonate in your mind forever.

I do not object to your desire to dispute the facts of that day. While I feel you are hopelessly naive and silly, that is your right. But please know that your page on the Pentagon crash is deeply offensive to the survivors such as myself. Again, it's not that you argue. But your tone is one of mocking, of making light of the greatest suffering I ever saw in my 25 years of military service. Your fake "quotes," your quips, all mock the pain of those of us that were there, and served that day. I am very likely one of the people in some of your photographs, and I assure you our thoughts were not about the grass (a silly claim you make, by the way), but were deeply, intensely worried about the people hurt, the people left inside. I will never forget that day, and while I can forgive your foolishness in not understanding the facts, the science, the reality of that day, I find it much harder to forgive your willingness to laugh at those who were so terribly hurt that day. Such an attitude shows you to be a cruel and heartless person, in addition to silly one.

LT Col Hal Bidlack
USAF Retired

Hutch again. For the many new people who have joined the JREF Forums, Hal Bidlack is a good and great friend of Mr. Randi and a staunch supporter of both the United States and skeptical thought. He has, for reasons in the past, decided not to post directly on the JREF Forums, a decision I respect but wish he would change, as you can see he has both intelligence, style, and something worth saying.

I will say this: I have learned three things in my years posting around the web:

1. If you are arguing against Jay Utah in regards to the Moon Hoax, save yourself energy and surrender immediately.

2. Never try to match Limericks with Mercutio.

3. If Hal Bidlack is on your side, don't worry about your 180...you're covered.

Killtown, I doubt you will respect this post or this poster anymore than others here; but I would suggest that you read it very, very carefully. and maybe, just maybe, learn.

Press on.

 

[Ducky]

That's laughable. You've obviously never met the man. Hal Bidlack is no more a truther than I am a purveyor of Kevin Trudeau products.

ETA:

I skimmed that pdf. I see no mention of a call for 911 truth investigation. Can the OP please point me to that in that PDF not on a truther website claiming it?

 

[hcmom]

I've always thought Hal was truthful, yes.

 

[Alareth]

I am actually so angry at the very title of this thread I cannot continue with anything that would resemble a coherent post.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

I am actually so angry at the very title of this thread I cannot continue with anything that would resemble a coherent post.

From what I've read of Puppycows posts, he's a stand up guy. Don't be angry at him. The thread title is an accurate reflection of what the article by the sociopathic remorseless lying ass sons of @#$%&es at "World for 9-11 Truth" are trying to say with their quote-mining.

Be angry at them.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Col. Bidlack calls out another lying ass hat:

Terral,

I shall not comment on your brother, or the other remarkable "claims" made above. But I cannot let post such as yours pass without making this, for you, the intensely personal issue it is for me. Nearly every night, I get to relive that day in some manner.

I was in the Pentagon when the plane struck. Within a few minutes, I was outside the impact area, providing what tiny service I could. I held, in my hands, parts of that airliner. Me. Personally.

Therefore, for your claim to be true, you must personally and directly call me either a liar or a dupe. So please do so. Tell me I'm a liar, or a fool.

if this sounds personal, it is because it is. It's not arbitrary photos and FDR disputes for me, it is very real, very personal. Call me a liar, or stand down.

And again:

please do not call me a hero. I did nothing heroic that day. The only heroes were the ones who stayed inside. I appreciate the kind words, but I am no hero.

and to be clear, I did not see the impact. I did hold aircraft parts in my hand, covered in fuel. I saw aircraft debris scattered around. I saw fire, I saw pain, I saw hell that day. You can decide what kind of witness you wish to call me.

and finally, baring further outrage, this will be my last comment in this thread. Again, I have no objection to Lyte's passion for knowledge. It is his tone, his condescension, his trivializing of that day (e.g., comments about his own great patriotism) that I find so off-putting. He is, I am told, a young man, and has the great passion that can come from that age, untempered by experience. I suspect he is, in real life, a likable fellow. But here, on this subject, I find him to be cruel, foolish, and arrogant.

Lt Col Hal Bidlack, Ph.D.
USAF, Retired

And yet again:

How dare you? Your misguided rants have, and I hope will continue to be, tolerated in the name of free speech. But having been in that building on that terrible, terrible day, still experiencing the after shocks of what I had to see and do that day, how dare you have the audacity to suggest YOU know what this was all about? What it was about are the lost stories, the lives cut short, the pain felt then and now over the loss of those poor and precious people. I sincerely hope, sir, that you are a 15 year old kid, and do not really know how outrageous you are acting. How dare you? Shame is an emotion I suspect you are incapable of feeling, but one which would best suit your behavior.

 

[Puppycow]

That's laughable. You've obviously never met the man. Hal Bidlack is no more a truther than I am a purveyor of Kevin Trudeau products.

ETA:

I skimmed that pdf. I see no mention of a call for 911 truth investigation. Can the OP please point me to that in that PDF not on a truther website claiming it?

It's on page 31. You can also use the search function to search for "9/11 Commission".

 

[Puppycow]

Absolutely not.

OK, fine. He isn't personally.

But why is this in the party platform of the Democratic Party of Colorado?

It says that the 9/11 commission "consciously ignored" "many disturbing facts."

Who would say such a thing?

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

But why is this in the party platform of the Democratic Party of Colorado?

It says that the 9/11 commission "consciously ignored" "many disturbing facts."

Who would say such a thing?

Because, as the author Larry Niven once write; "there is no cause so noble that it will not attract fuggheads".

From the PDF the twoofers are harping over:

After collecting roughly 1450 resolutions from the 28 counties that submitted results from Democratic County Assemblies all across Colorado, the Platform Committee met twice in Denver, as well as conducting extensive on-line discussion and electronic straw polls. Each county resolution was considered by one of eighteen subcommittees charged with a particular area of public policy...While no document created by a committee, no matter how dedicated, will completely satisfy everyone, this platform represents the consensus of the 2010 Platform Committee, guided by the results of county assemblies across our state. The folks who worked tirelessly on the Committee can rightly be proud of their efforts, and deserve our special thanks.

- Hal Bidlack, Chair, 2010 Platform Committee​

Democracy is for everyone, including idiots. While one or more people in the Colorado democratic party may be an idiot, I don't believe Hal Bidlack is satisfied with their idiocy. Especially since it is likely that he does not have the authority to remove their idiocy from the party platform just because he doesn't like it.

I predict he will likely be PISSED when he hears the twoofers are trying to tie his name to this.

 

[Sam.I.Am]

OK, fine. He isn't personally.

But why is this in the party platform of the Democratic Party of Colorado?

It says that the 9/11 commission "consciously ignored" "many disturbing facts."

Who would say such a thing?

Maybe you should be asking the Democratic Party of Colorado that question, or more appropriately, asking them why they aren't asking the Democratic parties representatives on the 9/11 commission why they decided to "Consciously ignore" what they consider to be "Many disturbing facts"? Start off by asking what particular facts does the Democratic party of Colorado think were purposely ignored and if they were within the 9/11 commissions mandate. They were tasked with finding out the failures and actions of people so if they go off into engineering land then they are probably truthers of one sort or another. If they stick solely to politics and the like then they probably still feeling the after effects of severe BDS. That's ok seeing as they are hardcore Democrats (why else are they on the platform committee if they aren't?) so that's a fairly normal condition (I'd say the same thing about todays crop of Republicans and Obama so that's just an observation of human nature and not necessarily a pejorative on either side).

 

[Puppycow]

Democracy is for everyone, including idiots. While one or more people in the Colorado democratic party may be an idiot, I don't believe Hal Bidlack is satisfied with their idiocy. Especially since it is likely that he does not have the authority to remove their idiocy from the party platform just because he doesn't like it.

I predict he will likely be PISSED when he hears the twoofers are trying to tie his name to this.

Well, too bad the idiots were in the majority. FWIW, I looked up the definition of "consensus" and it is "An opinion or position reached by a group as a whole" or "general or widespread agreement." If there were only a handful of idiots, the sensible majority should have voted them down, right?

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Well, too bad the idiots were in the majority. FWIW, I looked up the definition of "consensus" and it is "An opinion or position reached by a group as a whole" or "general or widespread agreement." If there were only a handful of idiots, the sensible majority should have voted them down, right?

So he's probably already pissed.

As you can see from his posts above, while he tries to be diplomatic with them, he has little love for these people.

 

[MRC_Hans]

Oh, how I miss Hal Bidlack. OTOH, the posts quoted also show why he had to leave: His deep, sincere, and emotional involvement made him a very valuable contributor, but I can understand if the personal cost became too high in this and other cases.

There is a reason many of us maintain a certain detatched style, flippant as it may sometimes seem. We all need to be careful where we spend our emotional ressources, because they are not inexhaustible.

I don't think Hal Bidlack is a man who will satisfy himself at doing anything well. He will always strive to be superb. The idea that he should be a truther is beyond absurd.

Hans

 

[Ducky]

It's on page 31. You can also use the search function to search for "9/11 Commission".

You did notice the votes in the column next to that as to whether it should be included? Perhaps you should email Hal and ask which vote his was. The portion saying the investigations into 9/11 should be reopened had more nays than yays (13 yays/23 nays with 5 abstains) and the section quoted had 15 yays, 11 abstains and 6 nays.

I'd be willing to bet Hal's wasn't an affirmative vote.

Also, the last bit of the section quoted reads "so that we have a greater probability of preventing attacks of this nature in the future." This doesn't sound like asking about an inside job, it sounds like review of security and investigation techniques.

 

[bill smith]

So it sounds like the word of Hal is about equivalent to the word of God to debunkers.

Then I suppose it only depends on what he said. If he said that the 9/11 commission ducked it's responsibility then they are guilty of Treason.

How will debunkers deal with that ?

 

[Puppycow]

I don't think Hal Bidlack is a man who will satisfy himself at doing anything well. He will always strive to be superb. The idea that he should be a truther is beyond absurd.

Hans

Good grief. I do not know the man but I do know that human beings are fallible.
One might as well consider it "beyond absurd" that James Randi would make a statement such as "I strongly suspect that The Petition Project may be valid." But he did. Even though Hal is not a truther, it appears that he has lent his good name to a document containing a statement of truther propaganda.

 

[Alan]

On top of the text quotes above, you can hear Hal Bidlack talking about his experiences of the day in episode 79 of The Skeptics' Guide to the Universe at 45:40.
http://theskepticsguide.org/archive/podcastinfo.aspx?mid=1&pid=79

 

[MRC_Hans]

Good grief. I do not know the man but I do know that human beings are fallible.
One might as well consider it "beyond absurd" that James Randi would make a statement such as "I strongly suspect that The Petition Project may be valid." But he did. Even though Hal is not a truther, it appears that he has lent his good name to a document containing a statement of truther propaganda.

I did not imply that Hal is infallible, just that he would never take it lightly.

Hans

 

[MRC_Hans]

So it sounds like the word of Hal is about equivalent to the word of God to debunkers.

No. A good man. No god. A man of honor and integrety. You might want to look up those words.

Then I suppose it only depends on what he said. If he said that the 9/11 commission ducked it's responsibility then they are guilty of Treason.

Are you saying that every person who ducks his responsibility is quilty of treason?

The treason part might come in if they covered up an inside job, but merely ducking reponsibility does not imply that.

How will debunkers deal with that ?

I guess we'll bother about it when and if it happens.

Hans