Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.

Dismiss

REFRESHER QUIZ ABOUT 911 CONSPRACY

0 views

Skip to first unread message

Intrepid

unread,

Sep 5, 2010, 10:06:17 AM9/5/10

<
http://www.solcomhouse.com/images/New_York_Times_9-11.jpg
<
http://www.travisredding.com/bush-911-jetfuel-wtc-laff.jpg
<
===========
<
NEWLY RELEASED UNEDITED VIDEO REVEALS
EXPLOSION PRECEDED COLLAPSE OF WTC 7
<
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrnmbUDeHus&feature=player_embedded#!
<
======================
<
FAKE 911 CRASH FOOTAGE FROM 'COPTER
<
Plane Appears Out of Nowhere, Then
Nose Goes Right Through South Tower
<
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cvWwIxMbmE
<
FOREKNOWLEDGE
http://www.911foreknowledge.com/bravenewworld.htm
<
================
<
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7E3oIbO0AWE
<
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-0Ms7mId34
<
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x5dls_911-conspiracy_news
<
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8253755118698983122#
<
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8253755118698983122#docid=-1882365905982811133
<
======================
<
Well, I see we'll be observing another anniversary of 911.
<
The TV networks and newspapers will be reminding us about that
infamous day -- Sept. 11, 2001 -- and once again they'll reiterate the
totally fictitious story of how Muslim terrorists transformed THREE
WTC skyscrapers into dust and sent more than 3,000 people to their
graves.
<
Not to mention the dire consequences of putting us at war in
Afghanistan and Iraq, sending more than a million poor souls to their
death -- nearly 7,000 American military personnel and untold women and
children -- and costing American taxpayers trillions of dollars.
<
Their story line is obviously Yellow Journalism -- the major media
fearful of reporting the truth -- since the overwhelming physical
vidence indicates that 911 was a Cheney-Bush government conspiracy.
<
It was a charade of the highest diabolical order.
<
But today's question is not WHO DONE IT? but, instead, how what we
remember as 911 even got its name.
<
It is my opinion that the the attack on America on Sept. 11 -- and the
911 horror story that will forever will live in infamy -- certainly
was NO COINCIDENCE.
<
I firmly believe that. once the plot was hatched within the confines
of the White House, the only loose end was figuring out the most
opportune day it should take place.
<
While a few of the conspirators were licking their chops with
overconfidence,a few might've been studying the September
calendar.
<
"HOLY SHIT!" shouted one, probably Karl Rove. "Sept. 11 is, as you all
know, 911 -- the emergency response number. "
<
The vote was taken, the ayes had it and the final piece of the
grotesque puzzle was put in place.
<
It was done on 9/11 to add more salt to our wounds.
<
===========
<
MEET THE REAL 911 TERRORISTS
http://groups.google.im/group/alt.obituaries/msg/1b51051602ef759c
<
=========
<
FREEDOM MAN <libe...@once.net> responded to the above by posting the
following message to alt.politics.bush, alt.politics, alt.tv.keith-
olbermann, rec.arts.tv and alt.conspiracy . . .
<
(Who said all really courageous Americans have gone the way of the
dinosaur?)
<
=====================
<
< By FREEDOM MAN
<
There was a time, the time of America's Founding Fathers, when most
citizens would be up in arms -- literally -- to get justice against
the evil mass-murdering warmongers behind the 9/11 false-flag attack
conspiracy.
<
Today? - all the stupid, brainwashed Seeple care about is sitting in
front of the boob tube drinking beer and watching football.
<
These fools got what they asked for on 9/11, and are still blind,
deaf, and dumb -- especially dumb! The tragedy is that so many
innocent people suffered, died, and continue to suffer and die for
their ignorance and apathy.
<
SIMPLE PHYSICS EXPOSES THE BIG 9/11 LIE --
GOVERNMENT BUILDING COLLAPSE
EXPLANATION FAILS REALITY CHECK
<
On September 11, 2001, the world watched in horror as the World Trade
Center (WTC) Twin Towers collapsed, killing thousands of
innocent people.
<
Videos of the collapses were replayed ad nauseam on TV for days. About
5 hours after the towers fell, WTC building 7 also collapsed suddenly,
completely, and straight down at near free-fall speed.
<
This steel-framed building was not touched by the planes that struck
the towers, and had sustained relatively minor debris damage and
small fires. Nearby buildings far more heavily damaged remained
standing.
<
In June 2005, in an apparent response to an article by Morgan
Reynolds, former CIA Director and current Secretary of Defense Robert
Gates stated, "The American people know what they saw with their own
eyes on September 11, 2001. To suggest any kind of government
conspiracy in the events of that day goes beyond the pale."
<
We will prove here, with scientific rigor, that it's the government's
tale that's "beyond the pale"!
<
Did most of the American people really understand the unprecedented
phenomena they had witnessed? Could a lack of knowledge of physics,
and the emotional shock of this mass-murderous "terrorist attack" have
stymied objective thinking and led to the blind acceptance of
authoritarian assertions?
<
The government and the media TOLD US what we saw. The government told
us that we had witnessed a "gravitational" collapse; what is now
referred to as a "pancake collapse". <
<
According to the government claims, the plane crashes and subsequent
kerosene (like lamp oil - jet fuel is NOT exotic) fires
heated the UL-certified structural steel to the point where it was
significantly weakened, which is very difficult to believe, never mind
repeat in an experiment.
<
Even with massive fires that incinerate everything else, the steel
frames of such buildings generally remain standing.
<
According to the "pancake theory", this purported (all physical
evidence was quickly and illegally destroyed) weakening supposedly
caused part of the tower to collapse downward onto the rest of the
tower, which, we've been repeatedly told, somehow resulted in a chain
reaction of the lower floors sequentially, one at a time, yielding to
the weight falling from above.

There are some problems with that theory -- it does not fit the
observed facts:
<
*It cannot account for the total failure of the immense vertical steel
core columns -- as if they were there one moment and gone the next.
<
* The collapse times were near free-fall, far too rapid to be due to
gravity alone. This article focuses on the latter of these two
discrepancies.
<
Those that concocted the "pancake theory" made a fatal error - they
didn't check their story against the inviolate laws of physics! This
is easy to do, even without any physical evidence to examine. We can
test that incredible pancake tale using basic high-school physics.
<
Let's do that - use a simple, unassailable, incontrovertible
conservation-of-energy analysis to perform a reality check that
establishes once and for all that the government, and such government
story backers as PBS, Popular Mechanics, and Scientific American have
falsified the true nature of the 9/11 disaster.
<
HOW GRAVITY ACTS:
<
Sir Isaac Newton noticed that apples fell from trees. Others had also
noticed this, but none had ever devised a theory of gravity from the
observation.
<
Over the years, mankind has learned that the force of gravity at and
near Earth's surface produces an acceleration of known constant
magnitude. That doesn't mean we know HOW it works, or WHY, but we
have
become able to predict its effects with a high degree of precision and
certainty -- gravity has always had the same, predictable, effect.
<
Galileo Galilei used the leaning tower of Pisa to demonstrate that a
large ball and a small one (of lesser mass) fell (accelerated
downward) at the same rate.
<
Prior to Galileo, people had just assumed that heavier objects fall
faster, much the way they had assumed the Earth was flat.
<
So while an object of greater mass will exert more force (its weight)
upon anything supporting it against gravity's pull, it does not
experience any greater acceleration when gravity's pull is not opposed
when it is falling. Earth's gravity at and near the surface of the
planet can only accelerate objects downward at one known, constant
rate: 32 feet per second for each second of free fall.
<
As Galileo demonstrated centuries ago, heavier objects are not
accelerated any quicker than are lighter objects.
<
So Earth's gravity produces a downward acceleration of 32 feet per
second. This means that an object, after falling one second, will be
falling at a speed of 32 ft/sec. After the 2nd second, it will be
falling at
64 ft/sec. After the 3rd second, it will be falling at 96 ft/sec., and
so on.
<
Further, since gravity's acceleration is constant, and an object is
falling at 32 ft/sec after one second has elapsed, we know that it has
averaged 16 ft/sec for the entire distance. Thus after one second, the
object has fallen 16 feet.
<
Scientists have derived simple free-fall equations that can be used to
harness this knowledge mathematically. These equations can be found in
any high-school physics book:
<
* Falling velocity = acceleration of gravity x time. (V = G x T)
< And
* Distance fallen = 1/2 x acceleration of gravity x time squared. (D
= 1/2 x G x T x T)
<
So if we want to know how far an object has free-fallen after 3
seconds:
<
Distance = 1/2 x 32 x 9 = 144 feet.
<
So after 3 seconds in Earth's gravity, an object will have fallen 144
feet and will be falling at 96 ft/sec.
<
CHECKING OUR WORK:
<
We've just solved a simple physics problem. Now let's check our work,
using conservation of energy.
<
We know that energy can neither be created nor destroyed -- it merely
changes form. If we take the potential (in this case chemical,
molecular) energy in a barrel of oil and burn it, it changes to heat
energy.
<
When we burn gasoline in our car's engine, we get kinetic (motional)
energy, plus some heat, as an engine is not 100% efficient. When we
use our car's brakes to bleed off some of that kinetic energy (slow
down), that energy is converted into heat (the brakes get hot).
<
Explosives convert potential energy [molecular or atomic] to kinetic
energy
(explosive force) quickly enough to shatter or even pulverize
concrete.
<
In the case of the free-falling object, the two kinds of energy we are
concerned with are kinetic energy and potential energy.
<
Examples of potential (gravitational) energy are the energy available
from water stored
up high in a water tower, or a boulder perched atop a hill.
<
If whatever is holding it up there is removed, it will fall under the
influence of gravity's pull. As it accelerates downward, the
potential
energy is converted to the kinetic energy of the object's motion.
<
So, as an object falls, it changes its potential energy into kinetic
energy.
<
The equation for potential energy is:
<
* Potential Energy = Mass (or weight) x Gravity x Height. (PE = M x G
x H)
<
The equation for kinetic energy is:
* Kinetic Energy = 1/2 x Mass x Velocity squared. (KE = 1/2 x M x V x
V)
<
So let's just say, for the sake of simplicity, that our falling object
has a mass of 1. (Remember, the object's mass will affect its energy,
and its momentum, but not its rate of free-fall.)
<
The potential energy given up by falling 3 seconds (144 ft) is: 1 x 32
x 144 = 4608
<
The kinetic energy gained after falling 3 secs is 1/2 x 1 x 96 squared
= 1/2 x 9216 = 4608
<
So, the available potential energy was converted into kinetic energy.
Seeing that energy was, in fact, conserved is how we know that the
answer in the simple case above was correct.
<
We've checked our work, using an independent analysis, based upon the
sound physical principle of conservation of energy. Now, and only now,
we can be certain that our answer was correct.
<
One Little Complication -- the effect of air resistance:
<
The free-fall equations above reflect a perfect, frictionless world.
They perfectly predict the behavior of falling bodies in a vacuum. In
fact, you may have seen a science class demonstration in which the
air is pumped out of a tube and then a feather will fall, in that
vacuum, just as fast as will a solid metal ball.
<
That's how parachutes work: much of the falling object's potential
energy gets expended doing the work of pushing a lot of air out of the
way in order for the object to fall. As a result, not all of the
gravitational potential energy can go towards accelerating the object
downward at gravity's rate of
32 ft/sec/sec.
<
In other words, only when there is zero frictional resistance can any
falling object's potential energy be completely converted into kinetic
energy.
<
Anything that resists a falling object's downward velocity reduces its
acceleration from the maximum gravitational acceleration of 32 feet
per second per second, as some of gravity's potential energy is
consumed in
overcoming frictional resistance.
<
This explains the phenomena of "terminal velocity". The free-fall
equations predict that a falling object's velocity will continue to
increase without limit. But in air, once a falling object reaches a
certain speed, its
propensity to fall will be matched by the air's resistance to the
fall.
<
At that point the object will continue to fall, but its speed will no
longer increase over time.
<
Another way of looking at it is this: gravity's
incessant force produces a downward acceleration, but friction with
the air creates an upward force and thus an upward acceleration.
<
When falling at terminal velocity, the acceleration downward equals
the acceleration upward, they cancel each other out, and a constant
downward velocity is maintained. Thus the parachute, with its high air
friction resistance, allows the person attached to it to float to
earth unharmed.
<
A QUICK RECAP:
<
Earth's gravity causes objects to fall, and they fall according to
precise physical equations. The equations assume no air or other
resistance. Any resistance at all will cause the object to fall less
rapidly than it would without that resistance.
<
If a falling object is affected by air resistance it falls slower than
it would if free-falling, and it will take longer to fall a given
distance.
<
Free-fall From WTC Building Heights:
<
The towers were 1350 and 1360 feet tall; average = 1355 feet. Let's
start by using our free-fall equation to see how long it should take
an object to free-fall from the towers' height.
<
Distance = 1/2 x Gravity x Time squared. (D = 1/2 x G x T x T)
<
With a little basic algebra, we solve the equation for the fall time,
T: 2 x Distance = Gravity x Time(squared) (2 x D = G x T x T)
<
Time squared = (2 x Distance) / Gravity (T x T = 2 x D / G)
<
Time squared = 2 x 1355 / 32 = 84.7 (T = square root of (2 x D /
G))
<
Time = 9.2
<
So our equation tells us that it takes 9.2 seconds to free-fall to the
ground from the height of the WTC towers.
<
Using our simpler equation, V = G x T, we can see that at 9.2 seconds,
the free-falling object's velocity must be about 295 ft/sec, which is
just over 200 mph.
<
But that can only occur IN A VACUUM.
<
Since the WTC was in Earth's atmosphere at sea level, you might be
able to imagine how much air resistance that represents. Think about
putting your arm out the window of a car moving even half that fast!
Most free-falling objects reach their terminal velocity long before
they reach 200 mph.
<
For example, the terminal velocity of a free-falling human body is
around 120 mph. The terminal velocity of a free-falling cat is around
60 mph.
<
Therefore, it is clear that air resistance alone will make it take
longer than 9.2 seconds for anything falling from the towers' height
to
reach the ground.
<
OBSERVATIONS FROM 9/11:
<
On page 305 of the 9/11 Commission Report, we are told, in the
government's "complete and final report" on 9/11, that the South Tower
collapsed in 10 seconds. Here is the exact quote:
<
"At 9:58:59, the South Tower collapsed in ten seconds". That's the
government's official number. With all the videos that show it, they
could not lie about this.
<

But as we've determined above, the FREE-FALL TIME IN A VACUUM is 9.2
seconds, and 10 seconds is an exceptionally short fall time through
the air.
<
This "collapse" was not without far more physical resistance than from
the air alone. It proceeded through all the lower stories of the
tower. Those undamaged floors below the plane impact zone offered
resistance
thousands of times greater than that of air.
<
Those lower stories, and the central steel
core columns, had successfully supported the mass of the tower for 30
years despite hurricane-force winds and tremors. Air cannot do that.
<
Can anyone possibly imagine undamaged lower floors getting out of the
way of
the upper floors as gracefully and relatively frictionlessly as air
would?
<
Can anyone possibly imagine the lower stories slowing the fall of the
upper
floors less than would, say, a parachute?
<
It is beyond the scope of the simple but uncontested physics here to
tell you how long such a collapse should have taken. Would it have
taken a minute? Ten minutes? Hard to say, but certainly it would take
far
more than 10 seconds!.
<
What is certain, beyond any shadow of a doubt, is that the towers
could not have collapsed gravitationally, through their intact lower
stories, as rapidly as was observed on 9/11. Not even close. This is
shown above to be physically impossible!
<

Not only was tremendous energy expended in causing the observed
massive high-speed sideways debris ejections, but virtually all the
concrete and glass of the tower was pulverized -- actually dissociated
is a better
word.
<
Never mind what happened to all the supporting steel core columns! The
energy requirements to do anything like that, alone, rival the total
amount of potential energy that the entire tower had to give.
<
Gravity alone is sufficient to cause some things to fall that far,
even through
air, in close to the observed 10 second collapse time. But that is
without the huge
expenditure of energy necessary to pulverize all of that concrete and
glass, eject debris, plus cause the steel core columns to effectively
disappear. The gravitational potential energy present was certainly
not enough to have done all these things at once.
<
Energy can neither be created nor destroyed; it only changes form. So
WHERE DID ALL THAT ADDITIONAL DESTRUCTIVE ENERGY COME FROM?
<
CONCLUSIONS:
<
In order for the towers to have collapsed "gravitationally" in the
observed
duration, as we've been told over and over again, one or more of the
following zany-sounding conditions must have been met:
<
* The undamaged structure below the impact zone offered zero
resistance to the collapse.
<
* The glass and concrete spontaneously disintegrated without any
expenditure of energy.
<
* The massive vertical steel core columns simply vanished, as if by
magic.
<
* On 9/11 alone, in that location alone, gravity was much stronger
than gravity.
<
* On 9/11 alone, in that location alone, energy was not conserved.
<
None of these laws-of-physics-violating, and thus impossible,
conditions can be accounted for by the official government theory of
9/11, nor by any of the subsequent analyses and arguments designed to
prop up this official myth of 9/11.
<
THE BOTTOM LINE:
<
The government explanations for the WTC collapses fail the most basic
conservation-of-energy reality check.
<
Therefore the government theory is FALSE; it does not fit the observed
facts, and the notion of a "pancake collapse" cannot account for what
happened. The "pancake collapse" explanation is impossible, and thus
absurd. It is A LIE.
<
It is utterly impossible for a gravitational collapse to proceed so
destructively through a path of such great resistance in anywhere
near free-fall time.
<
This fact debunks the preposterous contention that the WTC collapses
can be blamed solely upon damage resulting from the plane impacts.
<
The unnaturally short durations of the top-down collapses reveal that
the towers did not disintegrate because they were coming down, but
rather they came down because something else was causing them to
disintegrate.
<
So, to the extent that people accept the ridiculous "pancake collapse"
story, former CIA Director and current Secretary of Defense Gates'
other premise, that people know what they saw, is also false. It is
left to you to decide if his conclusion, which was based upon clearly
incorrect presumptions, is also flawed.
<
The collapse of WTC building 7, which was NOT hit by any plane, and
which also collapsed within a second of free-fall time later that same
day, similarly fails the conservation-of-energy analysis. The 9/11
Commission made no attempt to explain it.
<
Just how and why so many highly-accredited and credentialed people all
so miserably failed to check the "pancake collapse" theory, by giving
it this basic physics reality check, is beyond the scope of this
analysis.
<
==================
<
FURTHER IRREFUTABLE PROOF
BY PHYSICS OF THE 9/11 INSIDE JOB:
<
http://vehme.blogspot.com/2007/12/glaring-proof-of-something-hotter-than.html
<
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck's_law_of_black_body_radiation
<
==============
<
Humbly submitted by
Ed Conrad
http://www.edconrad.com
<
================
<
100 LARGEST U.S. NEWSPAPERS
Rank Circulation
1. USA Today (Arlington, Va.) 2,154,539
2. Wall Street Journal (NY N.Y.) 2,091,062
3. Times (New York, N.Y.) 1,118,565
4. Times (Los Angeles) 914,584
5. Post (Washington, DC) 732,872
6. Daily News (New York, N.Y.) 729,124
7. Tribune (Chicago) 680,879
8. Post (New York, N.Y.) 652,426
9. Newsday (Long Island, N.Y.) 580,069
10. Chronicle (Houston) 553,018
11. Chronicle (San Francisco) 512,640
12. Morning News (Dallas) 510,133
13. Sun-Times (Chicago) 481,798
14 Globe (Boston) 450,538
15. Arizona Republic (Phoenix) 432,284
16. Star-Ledger (Newark, N.J.) 408,672
17. Star Tribune (Minneapolis) 380,354
18. Inquirer (Philadelphia) 376,493
19. Journal-Constitution (Atlanta) 371,853
20. Plain Dealer (Cleveland) 365,288
21. Free Press (Detroit) 352,714
22. Oregonian (Portland) 342,789
23. Times (St. Petersburg, Fla.) 334,742
24. Union-Tribune (San Diego) 328,531
25. Herald (Miami) 315,850
26. Register Orange County CA 302,864
27. Sun (Baltimore) 301,186
28. Bee (Sacramento, Calif.) 289,905
29. Post (Denver) 288,937
30. Rocky Mtn. News Denver 288,889
31. Post-Dispatch (St. Louis) 285,869
32. Mercury News San Jose CA 271,997
33. Star (Kansas City, Mo.) 267,273
34. Sentinel (Orlando, Fla.) 257,222
35. Times-Picayune N Orleans 253,610
36. Dispatch (Columbus, Ohio) 252,564
37. Star (Indianapolis) 249,891
38. Journal Sentinel Milwaukee 244,288
39. Post-Gazette Pittsburgh Pa 242,546
40. Herald (Boston) 241,457
41. Sun-Sentinel (Ft L'dale, Fla ) 233,634
42. Times (Seattle) 231,505
43. News (Detroit) 227,392
44. Observer (Charlotte, N.C.) 226,849
45. Tribune (Tampa, Fla.) 224,220
46. Express-News S Antonio Tx 222,536
47. Investor's Business Daily LA 215,788
48. Star-Telegram Ft Worth, TX) 215,452
49. Courier-Journal L'ville Ky 213,176
50. News (Buffalo, N.Y.) 207,989
51. Daily Oklahoman Okla City 207,538
52. Virginian-Pilot (Norfolk, Va.) 201,141
53. World-Herald Omaha Neb. 192,075
54. Pioneer Press(St Pau, Minn 190,392
55. Times-Dispatch Richmond 188,540
56. Courant (Hartford, Conn.) 185,570
57. Press-Enterprise R'side CA 183,974
58. Democrat-Gazette (L'l Rock 183,343
59. American-Statesman Austin 183,312
60. Contra Costa Times (Calif.) 182,541
61. Enquirer (Cincinnati) 182,176
62. Record (Bergen County, N.J.) 179,270
63. Daily News (Los Angeles) 178,360
64. Democrat (Rochester, N.Y.) 173,900
65. Tennessean (Nashville) 172,149
66. Post (W. Palm Beach, Fla.) 168,147
67. Times-Union(Jacksonville Fla 167,851
68. Journal (Providence, R.I.) 167,609
69. Asbury Park Press (N.J.) 167,284
70. News & Observer Raleigh NC 163,769
71. Review-Journal (Las Vegas) 160,391
72. Bee (Fresno, Calif.) 158,651
73. Commercial Appeal Memphis 157,820
74. Register (Des Moines, Iowa) 150,851
75. Post-Intelligencer (Seattle) 150,851
76. Daily Herald (Chicago) 150,364
77. News (Birmingham, Ala.) 148,938
78. Daily News (Philadelphia) 143,631
79. Journal News Westchester NY) 142,873
80. Advertiser (Honolulu) 142,025
81. Blade (Toledo, Ohio) 139,520
82. World (Tulsa, Okla.) 139,383
83. Press (Grand Rapids, Mich.) 138,620
84. Tribune (Salt Lake City) 134,985
85. Beacon Journal (Akron, Ohio 128,511
86. News Tribune Tacoma Wash .128,511
87. Daily News (Dayton, Ohio) 126,642
88. La Opinion Los Angeles Calif 124,692
89. Post-Standard Syracuse, N.Y. 120,701
90. Tribune-Review Greensburg Pa 119,646
91. News Journal (Wilmington, Del. 116,398
92. News-Sentinel (Knoxville, Tenn) 114,593
93. State (Columbia, S.C.) 114,442
94. Morning Call (Allentown, Pa.) 111,594
95. Journal (Albuquerque) 109,693
96. Herald-Leader (Lexington, Ky.) 106,941
97. Herald-Tribune (Sarasota, Fla.) 105,636
98. News-Journal (Daytona Fla.) 104,654
99. Telegram (Worcester MA) 102,592
100. Times (Washington, DC) 102,255
<
WORLD'S LARGEST NEWSPAPERS
Rank Country Circulation
1. Yomiuri Shimbun (Japan) 14,532,694
2. Asahi Shimbun (Japan) 12,601,375
3. Sichuan Ribao (China) 8,000,000
4. Mainichi Shimbun (Japan) 5,845,857
5. Bild (Germany) 5,674,400
6. Chunichi Shimbun (Japan) 4,323,144
7. Sun (England) 3,718,354
8. Renmin Ribao (China) 3,000,000
9. Sankei Shimbun (Japan) 2,890,835
10. Nihon Keizai Shimbun Japan 2,705,877
11. Gongren Ribao (China) 2,500,000
12. Daily Mail (England) 2,387,867
13. Daily Mirror (England) 2,339,001
14. Chosun Ilbo (South Korea) 2,225,000
15. Dong-A Ilbo (South Korea) 2,150,000
16. Hokkaido Shimbun (Japan) 1,962,666
17. Eleftherotypia (Greece) 1,858,316
18. Xin Min Wan Bao (China) 1,750,000
19. Wall Street Journal (U.S.) 1,740,450
20. Yangcheng Wanbao China 1,730,000
21. Kerala Kaumudi (India) 1,720,000
22. Wen Hui Bao Daily (China 1,700,000
23. USA Today (United States) 1,653,428
24. Joong-Ang Ilbo (S. Korea) 1,550,000
25. Economic Daily (China) 1,500,000
26. Rodong Sinmun (N. Korea) 1,500,000
27. Kyung-Hyang Daily News 1,478,537
28. Sports Nippon (Japan) 1,452,699
29. Shizuoka Shimbun (Japan)) 1,442,310
30. Sankei Sports (Japan) 1,367,734
31. Deutche Allgemeine Germ 1,313,400
32. United Daily News (Taiwan ) 1,300,000
33. China Times (Taiwan) 1,270,000
34. O Estado de Sao Paulo Brazil) 1,230,160
35. Jang Daily (Pakistan) 1,200,000
36. Jang Lahore (Pakistan) 1,200,000
37. Akhbar El Yom/Al Akhbar (Egypt) 1,159,339
38. Hankook Ilbo (South Korea) 1,156,000
39. Hochi Shimbun (Japan) 1,119,031
40. Daily Express (England) 1,118,981
41. Los Angeles Times (U.S.) 1,067,540
42. New York Times (U>S) 1,066,540
43. Tokyo Shimbun (Japan 1,062,080
44. Daily Telegraph (England) 1,047,861
45. Nishinippon Shimbun Japan 1,041,104
46. Jiefang Ribao (China) 1,000,000
47. Nanfang Ribao (China) 1,000,000
48. Nongmin Ribao (China) 1,000,000
49. Zhongguo Qingnian Ribao (China) 1,000,000
50. Nikkan Sports (Japan) 984,058
51. Al Akhbar (Egypt) 980,000
52. Guangming Ribao (China) 950,000
53. Al Ahram (Egypt) 900,000
54. Al Goumhouriya (Egypt) 900,000
55. Seoul Shinmun (S. Korea) 900,000
56. Xin Hua Ribao (China) 900,000
57. Verdens Gang (Norway) 870,267
58. Corriere della Sera (Italy) 868,266
59. Kyoto Shimbun (Japan) 839,499
60. Chugoku Shimbun (Japan) 820,000
61 Kobe Shimbun Japan 820,000
62. Times of India (India) 813,000
63. Kobe Shimbun (Japan) 810,353
64. Beijing Wanbao (China) 800,000
65. Hubei Ribao (China) 800,000
66. Jiefangjun Ribao (China) 800,000
67. Trybuna Slaska (Poland) 800,000
68. La Gazzetta dello Sport Italy 798,243
69. Ouest-France (France) 790,133
70. Holos Ukrainy (Ukraine) 768,000
71. The Times (England) 766,999
72. ABC (Spain) 765,668
73. Washington Post (U.SSS>) 759,122
74. La Repubblica (Italy) 754,930
75. De Telegraf (Netherlands) 751,400
76. Gazeta Wyborcza (Poland) 750,000
77. Zero Hora (Brazil) 727,188
78. Diario dos Campos (Brazil) 725,000
79. New York Daily News (U.S.) 723,143
80. Sabah (Turkey) 722,950
81. Jornal da Tarde (Brazil) 709,793
82. Beijing Ribao (China) 700,000
83. Chongqing Ribao (China) 700,000
84. Clarin (Argentina) 700,000
85. Thai Rath (Thailand 700,000
86. Zhejiang Ribao (China) 700,000
87. Diario Insular (Portugal) 684,143
88. Granma Internacional (Cuba) 675,000
89. Chicago Tribune (U.S>) 673,508
90. Daily Record (Scotland) 671,267
91. China Daily News (Taiwan) 670,000
92. The Daily Star (England) 650,406
93. Guangxi Ribao (China) 650,000
94. Malayala Manorama (India) 630,068
95. La Nacion (Argentina) 630,000
96. Hurriyet (Turkey) 615,579
97. Herald Sun (Australia) 600,000
98. Hurriyet (Pakistan) 600,000
99. Liaoning Ribao (China) 600,000
100. Oriental Daily News (Hong Kong) 600,000
<
WORLDWIDE NEWS AGENCIES
Associated Press AP
African Eye News Service
Agence France Presse
APTN
Bloomberg
Cable News Network
EFE News
Indo Asian News Service
Iran Press Service
Iranian Students News Agency (ISNA)
Iraq Press
IRIN News
Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA)
Inter Press Service
Itar-Tass -- Russia
Latin American Press
Middle East News Agency
Pravda -- Russian News and Analysis
Prima News Agency
Reuters
Television News Archive
United Nations News Wire Service
United Press International UPI
Xinhua News Agency -- China
==========
Agence France Press, AFP
Agencia EFE, EFE
Agencia Estado
Agencia Lusa
Agency Telegraphique Belge De Press, AGNECE BELGA
Agenzia Nazionale Stampa Associata, ANSA
Agenzia Giornalistica Italia, AGI
Algemeen Nederlands Persbureau, ANP
Albanian Telegraphic Agency, ATA
Alternativna Informativna Mreza, AIM
Anadolu News Agency
Armanian News Agency, NOYAN TAPAN
ArmenPress
Asbar News Agency
Associated Press, AP
Athens News Agency, APE
ATH news agency - Kharkov, Ukraine
Atlantic News Service
Austria Press-Agentur, APA
Australian Associated Press, AAP
Baltic News Service, BNS
Bolivia Web - News from the ERBOL News Agency
Bulgarian Telegraph Agency, BTA
Canadian Press, CP
Central News Agency, CNA
Ceskolovenska Tiskova Kancelat, CTK
China News Service
COMPASS Media, Inc.
Cubapress
Cyprus News Agency, CNA
Deutsche Presse - Agentur Gmbh , DPA
ELTA - Lithuanian news agency
Eesti Teadete Agentur, ETA
H.K China News Agency
Hrvatska Izvjestajna Novinska Agencija, HINA
Indonesian National News Agency, ANTARA
Interfax News Agency
Islamic Republic News Agency, IRNA
Jiji Press (Jiji Tsushin-Sha)
Korean Central News Agency, KCNA
Kyodo News Service
LETA News Agency
MIA - Macedonian Information Agency
Makfax - Macedonian News Agency
Reality Macedonia
Magyar Tavirati Iroda, MTI
Malaysian National News Agency - BERNAMA
Mediafax - Romanian News Agency
Mercopress News Agency
Montsame News Agency, SABA
New Zealand Press Association, NEPA
Official Jordania News Agency, PETRA
Oman News Agency
Pakistan Press International, PPI
Panafrican News Agency
Polska Agencja Prasowa, PAP
Prensa Latina
Press association
Prime-TASS Economic News Agency
Reuters
Russian Information Agency, Ria "Novosti"
Schweizerische Depeschen Agentur, SDA
Serbian Press Agency, SRNA
Slovene Press Agency, STA
SNARK News Agency
Suomen Tietotoimisto
Tanjug News Agency
Telegrafnoye Agnetstvo Sovietskogo Snyuza, TASS
Tidningranas Talegrambyra, TT
Tlacova agentura Slovenskej republiky, TASR
Vietnam News Agency
Yemen News Agency, SABA
Yonhap News Agency
Xinhua News Agency

Ron

unread,

Sep 5, 2010, 11:32:30 AM9/5/10

On Sep 5, 9:06 am, Intrepid <Intrepid...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> <http://www.solcomhouse.com/images/New_York_Times_9-11.jpg
> <http://www.travisredding.com/bush-911-jetfuel-wtc-laff.jpg
> <
> ===========
> <
> NEWLY RELEASED UNEDITED VIDEO REVEALS
> EXPLOSION PRECEDED COLLAPSE OF WTC 7
> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrnmbUDeHus&feature=player_embedded#!

(SNIPPED)
.
.
Here are some more videos showing controlled demolitions of tall
buildings. Notice that the buildings have been largely stripped of
structural essentials BEFORE the carefully SEQUENCED detonations
INSIDE the structures begin. And you want folks to believe that the
WTC was one of these? How did the placement and installation of those
imagined explosive charges take place without anyone noticing? How do
you detonate explosive charges in a planned and timed sequence without
fireproof wires? How do you manage to tie your own shoelaces?

I think you have been watching and believing too many Roadrunner
cartoons.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0S-vlpU1BE&NR=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRaNwPGcQcM&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8U4erFzhC-U&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20FKED_COhw&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZkr0A9633Q&feature=related

0 new messages