WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
schoenf...@gmail.com
By Herman Schoenfeld
In this article we show that "top-down" controlled demolition
accurately accounts for the collapse times of the World Trade Center
towers. A top-down controlled demolition can be simply characterized
as a "pancake collapse" of a building missing its support columns.
This demolition profile requires that the support columns holding a
floor be destroyed just before that floor is collided with by the
upper falling masses. The net effect is a pancake-style collapse at
near free fall speed.
This model predicts a WTC 1 collapse time of 11.38 seconds, and a WTC
2 collapse time of 9.48 seconds. Those times accurately match the
seismographic data of those events.1 Refer to equations (1.9) and
(1.10) for details.
It should be noted that this model differs massively from the "natural
pancake collapse" in that the geometrical composition of the structure
is not considered (as it is physically destroyed). A natural pancake
collapse features a diminishing velocity rapidly approaching rest due
the resistance offered by the columns and surrounding "steel mesh".
DEMOLITION MODEL
A top-down controlled demolition of a building is considered as
follows
1. An initial block of j floors commences to free fall.
2. The floor below the collapsing block has its support structures
disabled just prior the collision with the block.
3. The collapsing block merges with the momentarily levitating floor,
increases in mass, decreases in velocity (but preserves momentum), and
continues to free fall.
4. If not at ground floor, goto step 2.
Let j be the number of floors in the initial set of collapsing floors.
Let N be the number of remaining floors to collapse.
Let h be the average floor height.
Let g be the gravitational field strength at ground-level.
Let T be the total collapse time.
Using the elementary motion equation
distance = (initial velocity) * time + 1/2 * acceleration * time^2
We solve for the time taken by the k'th floor to free fall the height
of one floor
[1.1] t_k=(-u_k+(u_k^2+2gh))/g
where u_k is the initial velocity of the k'th collapsing floor.
The total collapse time is the sum of the N individual free fall times
[1.2] T = sum(k=0)^N (-u_k+(u_k^2+2gh))/g
Now the mass of the k'th floor at the point of collapse is the mass of
itself (m) plus the mass of all the floors collapsed before it (k-1)m
plus the mass on the initial collapsing block jm.
[1.3] m_k=m+(k-1)m+jm =(j+k)m
If we let u_k denote the initial velocity of the k'th collapsing
floor, the final velocity reached by that floor prior to collision
with its below floor is
[1.4] v_k=SQRT(u_k^2+2gh)
which follows from the elementary equation of motion
(final velocity)^2 = (initial velocity)^2 + 2 * (acceleration) *
(distance)
Conservation of momentum demands that the initial momentum of the k'th
floor equal the final momemtum of the (k-1)'th floor.
[1.5] m_k u_k = m_(k-1) v_(k-1)
Substituting (1.3) and (1.4) into (1.5)
[1.6] (j + k)m u_k= (j + k - 1)m SQRT(u_(k-1)^2+ 2gh)
Solving for the initial velocity u_k
[1.7] u_k=(j + k - 1)/(j + k) SQRT(u_(k-1)^2+2gh)
Which is a recurrence equation with base value
[1.8] u_0=0
The WTC towers were 417 meters tall and had 110 floors. Tower 1 began
collapsing on the 93rd floor. Making substitutions N=93, j=17 , g=9.8
into (1.2) and (1.7) gives
[1.9] WTC 1 Collapse Time = sum(k=0)^93 (-u_k+(u_k^2+74.28))/9.8 =
11.38 sec
where
u_k=(16+ k)/(17+ k ) SQRT(u_(k-1)^2+74.28) ;/ u_0=0
Tower 2 began collapsing on the 77th floor. Making substitutions N=77,
j=33 , g=9.8 into (1.2) and (1.7) gives
[1.10] WTC 2 Collapse Time =sum(k=0)^77 (-u_k+(u_k^2+74.28))/9.8 =
9.48 sec
Where
u_k=(32+k)/(33+k) SQRT(u_(k-1)^2+74.28) ;/ u_0=0
REFERENCES
"Seismic Waves Generated By Aircraft Impacts and Building Collapses at
World Trade Center ", http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/LCSN/Eq/20010911_WTC/WTC_LDEO_KIM.pdf
APPENDIX A: HASKELL SIMULATION PROGRAM
This function returns the gravitational field strength in SI units.
> g :: Double
> g = 9.8
This function calculates the total time for a top-down demolition.
Parameters:
_H - the total height of building
_N - the number of floors in building
_J - the floor number which initiated the top-down cascade (the 0'th
floor being the ground floor)
> cascadeTime :: Double -> Double -> Double -> Double
> cascadeTime _H _N _J = sum [ (- (u k) + sqrt( (u k)^2 + 2*g*h))/g | k<-[0..n]]
> where
> j = _N - _J
> n = _N - j
> h = _H/_N
> u 0 = 0
> u k = (j + k - 1)/(j + k) * sqrt( (u (k-1))^2 + 2*g*h )
Simulates a top-down demolition of WTC 1 in SI units.
> wtc1 :: Double
> wtc1 = cascadeTime 417 110 93
Simulates a top-down demolition of WTC 2 in SI units.
> wtc2 :: Double
> wtc2 = cascadeTime 417 110 77
Robert Weldon
<schoenf...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:c52c1493-ab38-4f98...@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
> By Herman Schoenfeld
>
FOAD with this garbage.
TopPoster
vans is to jump up and down with glee when a American building is demolish
--
Socrates taught his students that the pursuit of truth can only begin once
they start to question and analyze every belief that they ever held dear. If
a certain belief passes the tests of evidence, deduction, and logic, it
should be kept. If it doesn't, the belief should not only be discarded, but
the thinker must also then question why he was led to believe the erroneous
"Robert Weldon" <rweldon....@jrpspamblock.ca> wrote in message
news:h0c8j.1315$_r2.1094@pd7urf1no...
Mr.Smartypants
<rweldon.spambl...@jrpspamblock.ca> wrote:
> <schoenfeld....@gmail.com> wrote in message
How about posting some MATH that refutes his argument?
Can't do it Joo-boy?
Then *YOU* FOAD!
Mr.Smartypants
> It was those nasty Arabs that did it, A favorite pastime of Jews in white
> vans is to jump up and down with glee when a American building is demolish
>
Yads is a ZIONIST Joo disguised as an East Indian retard.
> --
> Socrates taught his students that the pursuit of truth can only begin once
> they start to question and analyze every belief that they ever held dear. If
> a certain belief passes the tests of evidence, deduction, and logic, it
> should be kept. If it doesn't, the belief should not only be discarded, but
> the thinker must also then question why he was led to believe the erroneous
>
> "Robert Weldon" <rweldon.spambl...@jrpspamblock.ca> wrote in message
>
> news:h0c8j.1315$_r2.1094@pd7urf1no...
>
>
>
>
>
> > <schoenfeld....@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:c52c1493-ab38-4f98...@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> > > WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
> > > By Herman Schoenfeld
>
> > -crap snipped
>
> > FOAD with this garbage.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Aldo of Pignotti
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=5
Sorry for continuing a spam thread folks but these dirty lies piss me
off.
Mr.Smartypants
> The Seismic data has been completely twisted:
>
>
> Sorry for continuing a spam thread folks but these dirty lies piss me
> off.
LOL!!!
Popular Mechanics.
Too funny!;o)
Robert Weldon
"Mr.Smartypants" <shrub...@excite.com> wrote in message
news:1052ea5a-38ad-4960...@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
It has already been refuted, many times. When did I become Jewish?
P. Roehling
"Robert Weldon" <rweldon....@jrpspamblock.ca> wrote
>> Can't do it Joo-boy?
>>
>> Then *YOU* FOAD!
>
> It has already been refuted, many times. When did I become Jewish?
When you first acted as if you had more than three functioning neurons. That
sort of thing doesn't sit well with fruit-loops and bigots.
Besides: we all know you changed your name from the original "Weldstein"
anyway. ;-P
snowman
~snip~
Kabatoff? Is that you with this numerology crap? BS my friend,that's
all this is.
snowman
snowman
Why?
BrianNZ
...who used to go by the name Seinon?
laughing man
The math is completely wrong AND perverted to meet your own
predetermined conclusion as such the whole thing is invalid and more
bluntly put...................
A BALD FACED GAWD DAMNED MOTHER FUCKING LIE.
But more simple put you know nothing of controlled implosions either
on a theoretical level OR a practicle level. I've done the practicle
work...did it quiet well if I say so myself. Oh and sparky that means
I've blown things down, up and sideways on an even numbered tuesday.
laughing man
Well besides the fact I floated it by a structual engineer and he
called a perfect example of twisting the math and facts to tell a
LIE???? Oh and no I wont show his work or addy. Now religious
fruitcakes like you should just leave the planet on your mother ship.
Mr Frederick
news:e03e1622-c4c8-465a...@t1g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
Not to mention, the logistics aren't there. Wiring a building like the one
tower would take countless miles of cabling, which, by the time they reached
the main floor would probably be a wrap as big as an elevator shaft. Where
was all that hidden, and how did the hundreds of men it took to wire it stay
out of site. Charges would have have to have been implanted into each and
every one of the supports on each and every floor. How come nobody ever saw
any of that? Any electrician, plumber, telephone, cable, or heating
contractor would have spotted any charges, and the wiring, in a minute.
Just watch the tv shows highlighting the real downplosion experts, and see
how ridiculous it is to even think they could have snuck everything needed
into even one tower, and hidden all the cabling and controls necessary.
jellybean stonerfish
> Not to mention, the logistics aren't there. Wiring a building like the one
> tower would take countless miles of cabling, which, by the time they reached
> the main floor would probably be a wrap as big as an elevator shaft. Where
> was all that hidden, and how did the hundreds of men it took to wire it stay
> out of site. Charges would have have to have been implanted into each and
> every one of the supports on each and every floor. How come nobody ever saw
> any of that? Any electrician, plumber, telephone, cable, or heating
> contractor would have spotted any charges, and the wiring, in a minute.
> Just watch the tv shows highlighting the real downplosion experts, and see
> how ridiculous it is to even think they could have snuck everything needed
> into even one tower, and hidden all the cabling and controls necessary.
You must have never watched "Get Smart". The explosives were built into
the columns years ago.
stonerfish
Mr Frederick
news:5Po8j.70453$RX.2...@newssvr11.news.prodigy.net...
"Get Smart" wasn't real, didn't your mom tell you that?
jellybean stonerfish
Yes I know, but PNAC got the idea from the tv show.
Mr.Smartypants
You wouldn't be telling lies again would you?
Steve
<schoenf...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:c52c1493-ab38-4f98...@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
> By Herman Schoenfeld
tinfoil covered drivel that was debunked quite some time ago by any number
of reputable independent sources outside the Government
Davorin Vlahovic
That's right.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/december2007/120407_common_knowledge.htm
--
Ignorance has taken over
Yo, we gotta take the power back!
-- Rage Against The Machine, Take the power back
mommy...@gmail.com
> On 2007-12-14, Steve <nos...@nospam.c0m> wrote:
>
>
>
> >news:c52c1493-ab38-4f98...@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> >> WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
> >> By Herman Schoenfeld
>
> > tinfoil covered drivel that was debunked quite some time ago by any number
> > of reputable independent sources outside the Government
>
>
> --
> Ignorance has taken over
> Yo, we gotta take the power back!
> -- Rage Against The Machine, Take the power back
So we are to believe some one who "was forced to resign after
revealing the existence of, and his part in setting up, Operation
Gladio - a rogue intelligence network" as opposed to the observed
evidence that clearly points to a group of religious extremists. To
boot the text was posted on a website run by nutjobs like Alex Jones
and Art Bell. Your right ignorance has taken over.
Davorin Vlahovic
>> That's right.http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/december2007/120407_common_knowl...
>>
> So we are to believe some one who "was forced to resign after
> revealing the existence of, and his part in setting up, Operation
> Gladio - a rogue intelligence network" as opposed to the observed
> evidence that clearly points to a group of religious extremists.
Not only that, but the religious extremist whose God obviously works since
they've been found alive after ramming at least two planes into tall
buildings which were built to survive boeing 707 planes hitting them.
Guess their God is stronger than God Bush has been talking to, huh?
> To
> boot the text was posted on a website run by nutjobs like Alex Jones
> and Art Bell.
You can find the same text on a lot of other pages, too. I personally
read it originally on a european web site (and I looked it up after
seeing the news on TV), but at the time of writing previous post google
showed this one.
> Your right ignorance has taken over.
Yes, it has. Especially in a nation in which it's not only possible but
not uncommon for a student to finish a college without knowing how to
read, thinking that Earth is 6k yrs old, that a theory is a hypothesis,
that evolution has anything to do with how life started and that there's
nothing weird about building that falls into it's own footprint at free fall
speed.
Have a nice day.
Richard B. Gilbert
The only proper way to respond to a troll is to ignore him!
mommy...@gmail.com
> On 2007-12-16, mommycal...@gmail.com <mommycal...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> That's right.http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/december2007/120407_common_knowl...
>
> > So we are to believe some one who "was forced to resign after
> > revealing the existence of, and his part in setting up, Operation
> > Gladio - a rogue intelligence network" as opposed to the observed
> > evidence that clearly points to a group of religious extremists.
>
> Not only that, but the religious extremist whose God obviously works since
> they've been found alive after ramming at least two planes into tall
> buildings which were built to survive boeing 707 planes hitting them.
>
> Guess their God is stronger than God Bush has been talking to, huh?
>
> > To
> > boot the text was posted on a website run by nutjobs like Alex Jones
> > and Art Bell.
>
> You can find the same text on a lot of other pages, too. I personally
> read it originally on a european web site (and I looked it up after
> seeing the news on TV), but at the time of writing previous post google
> showed this one.
>
> > Your right ignorance has taken over.
>
> Yes, it has. Especially in a nation in which it's not only possible but
> not uncommon for a student to finish a college without knowing how to
> read, thinking that Earth is 6k yrs old, that a theory is a hypothesis,
> that evolution has anything to do with how life started and that there's
> nothing weird about building that falls into it's own footprint at free fall
> speed.
>
From the highly edited videos posted on the "truthers" (read liars_
websites you can see with your own eyes that the building didn't
pancake, took over 16 seconds to fall and didn't fall on to it's own
footprint. I believe you have eastern europe confused with the US as
the educated are fleeing europe for the US to get an education. Having
visited relatives who live in Slovakia and Lithunania and seeing the
how bad life is there no wonder why they are leaving in droves for the
US to get their children a decent education
Davorin Vlahovic
> websites you can see with your own eyes that the building didn't
> pancake, took over 16 seconds to fall and didn't fall on to it's own
> footprint.
Of course it didn't pancake. None of the three buildings and the
pentagon wall did.
> I believe you have eastern europe confused with the US as
> the educated are fleeing europe for the US to get an education.
No, educated "flee" from _east_ Europe because they get more money in
the U.S. for the same job, not to get education. Unless you're talking
about private universitys which is, well, a story for itself. Common
denominator there? Money! Not knowledge, sorry.
Most of your people will never see the high-tech universities, and even
today there are more people with a visa than there is U.S. people.
Your average citizen would be unemployable almost everywhere in the
Europe because of your lousy education system.
The U.S. is still a functioning nation because immigrants keep you
alive. You've got your regular Latinos to do dirty work and Asians,
Russians and Europeans to do your high-tech work. The rest are concerned
wether evolution is a theory while not knowing of Newton's (and later
Einstein's) theory of gravity.
It's sad really, going from a superpower which can build things like
Saturn boosters and SR-71 to people that try to equalize ID and
evolution. Oh, wait, that was von Braun and friends :) A-Bomb? Einstein
and Oppenheimer along with earlier works of Lisa Meitner.
Electricity? Nikola Tesla (Serb born in Croatia). Andy Grove (Intel) -
Magyar. I could go on, but what's the point?
Your nation is a big market with a lot of money and that's pretty much it.
You're just a honeypot for attracting genious people, but unfortunatly
you're creating none.
> Having
> visited relatives who live in Slovakia and Lithunania and seeing the
> how bad life is there no wonder why they are leaving in droves for the
> US to get their children a decent education
Dude, they were under Soviet Union's iron curtain. Their economy was
bled dry. And their kids could probably calculate Lagrange's points :)
Henry
> It has already been refuted, many times.
It's also been proven to be physically impossible
as well as contradict the evidence - many times. And
yet, some clueless kooks still desperately cling
to the lies and fantasies of the "official" magic
fire/Super Arab cartoon conspiracy theory.
It's easy to underestimate the extreme ignorance
and stupidity of the typical Bush following sheep.
Facts and reality take a back seat their comical,
paranoid, faith based kook fantasies.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/december2007/120407_common_knowledge.htm
Ex-Italian President: Intel Agencies Know 9/11 An Inside Job
Man who blew the whistle on Gladio tells Italy's largest newspaper
attacks were run by CIA, Mossad
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
Former Italian President and the man who revealed the existence of
Operation Gladio Francesco Cossiga has gone public on 9/11, telling
Italy's most respected newspaper that the attacks were run by the CIA
and Mossad and that this was common knowledge amongst global
intelligence agencies.
Cossiga was elected President of Italian Senate in July 1983 before
being winning a landslide 1985 election to become President of the
country in 1985.
Cossiga gained respect from opposition parties as one of a rare breed -
an honest politician - and led the country for seven years until April 1992.
Cossiga's tendency to be outspoken upset the Italian political
establishment and he was forced to resign after revealing the existence
of, and his part in setting up, Operation Gladio - a rogue intelligence
network under NATO auspices that carried out bombings across Europe in
the 60's, 70's and 80's.
(Article continues below)
Gladio's specialty was to carry out what they coined "false flag
operations," terror attacks that were blamed on their domestic and
geopolitical opposition.
Cossiga's revelations contributed to an Italian parliamentary
investigation of Gladio in 2000, during which evidence was unearthed
that the attacks were being overseen by the U.S. intelligence apparatus.
In March 2001, Gladio agent Vincenzo Vinciguerra stated, in sworn
testimony, "You had to attack civilians, the people, women, children,
innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The
reason was quite simple: to force ... the public to turn to the state to
ask for greater security."
Cossiga's new revelations appeared last week in Italy's oldest and most
widely read newspaper, Corriere della Sera. Below appears a rough
translation.
"[Bin Laden supposedly confessed] to the Qaeda September [attack]
to the two towers in New York [claiming to be] the author of the attack
of the 11, while all the [intelligence services] of America and Europe
... now know well that the disastrous attack has been planned and
realized from the CIA American and the Mossad with the aid of the
Zionist world in order to put under accusation the Arabic Countries and
in order to induce the western powers to take part ... in Iraq [and]
Afghanistan."
Cossiga first expressed his doubts about 9/11 in 2001, and is quoted in
Webster Tarpley's book as stating that "The mastermind of the attack
must have been a “sophisticated mind, provided with ample means not only
to recruit fanatic kamikazes, but also highly specialized personnel. I
add one thing: it could not be accomplished without infiltrations in the
radar and flight security personnel.”
Coming from a widely respected former head of state, Cossiga's assertion
that the 9/11 attacks were an inside job and that this is common
knowledge amongst global intelligence agencies is highly unlikely to be
mentioned by any establishment media outlets, because like the hundreds
of other sober ex-government, military, air force professionals, allied
to hundreds more professors and intellectuals - he can't be sidelined as
a crackpot conspiracy theorist.
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2006/11/overwhelming-majority-of-credible.html
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2007/05/structural-engineers-question-collapse.html
Structural Engineers Question Collapse of the World Trade Center
One of the arguments that government apologists have used in trying to
prop up the official story of why the World Trade Centers came down on
9/11 is that no structural engineers have questioned the government's
version of events. However, that is now changing.
The following structural engineers have now publicly challenged the
government's account of the destruction of the Trade Centers on 9/11:
Hugo Bachmann and Jörg Schneider, both emeritus professors in
structural engineering at a prestigious Swiss university (translation
here)
Doyle Winterton, structural engineer (retired)
Joseph M. Phelps, MS, PE. Structural Dynamicist (ret.), Charter Member,
Structural Engineering Institute of the American Society of Civil
Engineers
Charles Pegelow, structural engineer, of Houston, Texas
William Rice, P.E., structural engineer, former professor of Vermont
Technical College
When considered along with the other prominent scientists who question
9/11, it becomes impossible for any thinking person to accept at face
value the government's version of the destruction of the World Trade
Center.
More experts who who have used science and hard evidence to prove
demolition:
http://journalof911studies.com/
Still more engineers and experts who explain why the Bush regime's
magic fire theory is physically impossible.
Another one:
http://www.vermontguardian.com/commentary/032007/TwinTowers.shtml
And quite a few more:
More yet:
http://11syyskuu.blogspot.com/2006/02/destruction-of-wtc-7.html
And a copple hundred more:
http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/engineers.html
--
http://911research.wtc7.net
http://stj911.org
http://stopthelie.com/1-hour_guide_to_911.html
http://www.911truth.org
Here's what happens to steel framed buildings exposed
to raging infernos for hours on end.
http://davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr69c.html
On 9-11-01, WTC7, a 47 story steel framed building, which
had only small, random fires, dropped in perfect symmetry
at near free fall speed as in a perfectly executed controlled
demolition.
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.html
http://wtc7.net/articles/FEMA/WTC_ch5.htm
Ever wonder who benefits from the 700 MILLION
U.S. taxpayer dollars spent each DAY in Iraq?
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0223-08.htm
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?list=type&type=21
"They are waging a campaign of murder and destruction. And
there is no limit to the innocent lives they are willing to
take... men with blind hatred and armed with lethal weapons
who are capable of any atrocity... they respect no laws of
warfare or morality."
-bu$h describing his own illegal invasion of Iraq.
http://www.robert-fisk.com/iraqwarvictims_mar2003.htm
http://www.commondreams.org/
http://thirdworldtraveler.com/
"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things
that matter." -- Martin Luther King Jr.
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is
not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."
-- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)
Don't let bu$h do to the United States what his very close
friend and top campaign contributor, Ken Lay, did to Enron...
--
http://911research.wtc7.net
http://stj911.org
http://stopthelie.com/1-hour_guide_to_911.html
http://www.911truth.org
Here's what happens to steel framed buildings exposed
to raging infernos for hours on end.
http://davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr69c.html
On 9-11-01, WTC7, a 47 story steel framed building, which
had only small, random fires, dropped in perfect symmetry
at near free fall speed as in a perfectly executed controlled
demolition.
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.html
http://wtc7.net/articles/FEMA/WTC_ch5.htm
Ever wonder who benefits from the 700 MILLION
U.S. taxpayer dollars spent each DAY in Iraq?
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0223-08.htm
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?list=type&type=21
"They are waging a campaign of murder and destruction. And
there is no limit to the innocent lives they are willing to
take... men with blind hatred and armed with lethal weapons
who are capable of any atrocity... they respect no laws of
warfare or morality."
-bu$h describing his own illegal invasion of Iraq.
http://www.robert-fisk.com/iraqwarvictims_mar2003.htm
http://www.commondreams.org/
http://thirdworldtraveler.com/
"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things
that matter." -- Martin Luther King Jr.
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is
not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."
-- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)
Don't let bu$h do to the United States what his very close
friend and top campaign contributor, Ken Lay, did to Enron...
"The new America, born in sin and arrogance, delusional
in Manifest Destiny, bred in overabundant gluttony,
consumerist and materialist, fathered by George W. Bush,
Dick Cheney and the Cabal of Criminality, a country flocked
by sheeple, ignorant and conditioned, indifferent to a world
growing up around it, living delusions of empire and of
omnipotence, building hatred against it and its policies
throughout the planet, slowly dumbing down its citizens,
losing its edge in the sciences and arts, producing a nation
of acquiescent automatons brainwashed to never question
authority and always faithfully follow the crimes of governance."
- Manuel Valenzuela
Henry
> WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
> By Herman Schoenfeld
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2006/11/overwhelming-majority-of-credible.html
MILITARY LEADERS
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense under President Ronald Reagan
(Col. Ronald D. Ray) said that the official story of 9/11 is "the dog
that doesn't hunt" (bio)
Director of the U.S. "Star Wars" space defense program in both
Republican and Democratic administrations, who was a senior air force
colonel who flew 101 combat missions (Col. Robert Bowman) stated that
9/11 was an inside job. He also said:
"If our government had merely [done] nothing, and I say that as an old
interceptor pilot—I know the drill, I know what it takes, I know how
long it takes, I know what the procedures are, I know what they were,
and I know what they’ve changed them to—if our government had merely
done nothing, and allowed normal procedures to happen on that morning of
9/11, the Twin Towers would still be standing and thousands of dead
Americans would still be alive. [T]hat is treason!"
U.S. Army Air Defense Officer and NORAD Tac Director, decorated with the
Purple Heart, the Bronze Star and the Soldiers Medal (Capt. Daniel
Davis) stated:
"there is no way that an aircraft . . . would not be intercepted
when they deviate from their flight plan, turn off their transponders,
or stop communication with Air Traffic Control ... Attempts to obscure
facts by calling them a 'conspiracy Theory' does not change the truth.
It seems, 'Something is rotten in the State.' "
President of the U.S. Air Force Accident Investigation Board, who also
served as Pentagon Weapons Requirement Officer and as a member of the
Pentagon's Quadrennial Defense Review, and who was awarded Distinguished
Flying Crosses for Heroism, four Air Medals, four Meritorious Service
Medals, and nine Aerial Achievement Medals (Lt. Col. Jeff Latas) is a
member of a group which doubts the government's version of 9/11
U.S. General, Commanding General of U.S. European Command and Supreme
Allied Commander Europe, decorated with the Bronze Star, Silver Star,
and Purple Heart (General Wesley Clark) said "We've never finished the
investigation of 9/11 and whether the administration actually misused
the intelligence information it had. The evidence seems pretty clear to
me. I've seen that for a long time."
Air Force Colonel and key Pentagon official (Lt. Colonel Karen
Kwiatkowski) finds various aspects of 9/11 suspicious. She also said:
(at page 26):
"I have been told by reporters that they will not report their own
insights or contrary evaluations of the official 9/11 story, because to
question the government story about 9/11 is to question the very
foundations of our entire modern belief system regarding our government,
our country, and our way of life. [However], questioning the official
story is also simply and fundamentally American."
Lieutenant colonel, 24-year Air Force career, Vice Chancellor for
Student Affairs at the Defense Language Institute (Lt. Colonel Steve
Butler) said "Of course Bush knew about the impending attacks on
America. He did nothing to warn the American people because he needed
this war on terrorism."
Two-Star general (Major General Albert Stubbelbine) questions the attack
on the Pentagon
U.S. Air Force fighter pilot, former instructor at the USAF Fighter
Weapons School and NATO’s Tactical Leadership Program, with a 20-year
Air Force career (Lt. Colonel Guy S. Razer) said the following:
"I am 100% convinced that the attacks of September 11, 2001 were
planned, organized, and committed by treasonous perpetrators that have
infiltrated the highest levels of our government ....
Those of us in the military took an oath to "support and defend the
Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and
domestic". Just because we have retired does not make that oath invalid,
so it is not just our responsibility, it is our duty to expose the real
perpetrators of 9/11 and bring them to justice, no matter how hard it
is, how long it takes, or how much we have to suffer to do it.
We owe it to those who have gone before us who executed that same
oath, and who are doing the same thing in Iraq and Afghanistan right
now. Those of us who joined the military and faithfully executed orders
that were given us had to trust our leaders. The violation and abuse of
that trust is not only heinous, but ultimately the most accurate
definition of treason!"
U.S. Marine Corps lieutenant colonel, a fighter pilot with over 300
combat missions flown and a 21-year Marine Corps career (Lt. Colonel
Shelton F. Lankford) believes that 9/11 was an inside job, and said:
"This isn't about party, it isn't about Bush Bashing. It's about
our country, our constitution, and our future. ...
Your countrymen have been murdered and the more you delve into it
the more it looks as though they were murdered by our government, who
used it as an excuse to murder other people thousands of miles away.
If you ridicule others who have sincere doubts and who know factual
information that directly contradicts the official report and who want
explanations from those who hold the keys to our government, and have
motive, means, and opportunity to pull off a 9/11, but you are too lazy
or fearful, or ... to check into the facts yourself, what does that make
you? ....
Are you afraid that you will learn the truth and you can't handle
it? ..."
U.S. Navy 'Top Gun' pilot (Commander Ralph Kolstad) who questions the
official account of 9/11 and is calling for a new investigation, says
"When one starts using his own mind, and not what one was told, there is
very little to believe in the official story".
The Group Director on matters of national security in the U.S.
Government Accountability Office said that President Bush did not
respond to unprecedented warnings of the 9/11 disaster and conducted a
massive cover-up instead of accepting responsibility
Additionally, numerous military leaders from allied governments have
questioned 9/11, such as:
Canadian Minister of Defense, the top military leader of Canada (Paul
Hellyer)
Assistant German Defense Minister (Andreas Von Bulow)
Commander-in-chief of the Russian Navy (Anatoli Kornukov)
Chief of staff of the Russian armed forces (General Leonid Ivashov)
INTELLIGENCE PROFESSIONALS
Former military analyst and famed whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg recently
said that the case of a certain 9/11 whistleblower is "far more
explosive than the Pentagon Papers". He also said that the government is
ordering the media to cover up her allegations about 9/11. And he said
that some of the claims concerning government involvement in 9/11 are
credible, that "very serious questions have been raised about what they
[U.S. government officials] knew beforehand and how much involvement
there might have been", that engineering 9/11 would not be humanly or
psychologically beyond the scope of the current administration, and that
there's enough evidence to justify a new, "hard-hitting" investigation
into 9/11 with subpoenas and testimony taken under oath.
A 27-year CIA veteran, who chaired National Intelligence Estimates and
personally delivered intelligence briefings to Presidents Ronald Reagan
and George H.W. Bush, their Vice Presidents, Secretaries of State, the
Joint Chiefs of Staff, and many other senior government officials
(Raymond McGovern) said “I think at simplest terms, there’s a cover-up.
The 9/11 Report is a joke”, and is open to the possibility that 9/11 was
an inside job.
A 29-year CIA veteran, former National Intelligence Officer (NIO) and
former Director of the CIA's Office of Regional and Political Analysis
(William Bill Christison) said “I now think there is persuasive evidence
that the events of September did not unfold as the Bush administration
and the 9/11 Commission would have us believe. ... All three [buildings
that were destroyed in the World Trade Center] were most probably
destroyed by controlled demolition charges placed in the buildings
before 9/11." (and see this).
20-year Marine Corps infantry and intelligence officer, the
second-ranking civilian in U.S. Marine Corps Intelligence, and former
CIA clandestine services case officer (David Steele) stated that "9/11
was at a minimum allowed to happen as a pretext for war", and it was
probably an inside job (see Customer Review dated October 7, 2006).
A decorated 20-year CIA veteran, who Pulitzer-Prize winning
investigative reporter Seymour Hersh called "perhaps the best
on-the-ground field officer in the Middle East”, and whose astounding
career formed the script for the Academy Award winning motion picture
Syriana (Robert Baer) said that"the evidence points at" 9/11 having had
aspects of being an inside job .
The Division Chief of the CIA’s Office of Soviet Affairs, who served as
Senior Analyst from 1966 - 1990. He also served as Professor of
International Security at the National War College from 1986 - 2004
(Melvin Goodman) said "The final [9/11 Commission] report is ultimately
a coverup."
Professor of History and International Relations, University of
Maryland. Former Executive Assistant to the Director of the National
Security Agency. Former military attaché in China. 21-year career in
U.S. Army Intelligence (Major John M. Newman, PhD, U.S. Army)
questions the government's version of the events of 9/11.
The head of all U.S. intelligence, the Director of National Intelligence
(Mike McConnel) said "9/11 should have and could have been prevented"
9/11 COMMISSIONERS
The 9/11 Commissioners knew that military officials lied to the
Commission, and considered recommending criminal charges for such false
statements, yet didn't bother to tell the American people (free
subscription required).
Indeed, the co-chairs of the Commission (Thomas Keane and Lee Hamilton)
now admit that the Commission largely operated based upon political
considerations.
9/11 Commission co-chair Lee Hamilton says "I don't believe for a minute
we got everything right", that the Commission was set up to fail, that
people should keep asking questions about 9/11, that the 9/11 debate
should continue, and that the 9/11 Commission report was only "the first
draft" of history.
9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey said that "There are ample reasons to
suspect that there may be some alternative to what we outlined in our
version . . . We didn't have access . . . ."
9/11 Commissioner Timothy Roemer said "We were extremely frustrated with
the false statements we were getting"
Former 9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned from the Commission,
stating: "It is a national scandal"; "This investigation is now
compromised"; and "One of these days we will have to get the full story
because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House
wants to cover it up".
The Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission (John Farmer) who led the 9/11
staff's inquiry, said "I was shocked at how different the truth was from
the way it was described .... The tapes told a radically different story
from what had been told to us and the public for two years.... This is
not spin. This is not true."
SCIENTISTS
A prominent physicist with 33 years of service for the Naval Research
Laboratory in Washington, DC (Dr. David L. Griscom) said that the
official theory for why the Twin Towers and world trade center building
7 collapsed "does not match the available facts" and supports the theory
that the buildings were brought down by controlled demolition
A world-renowned scientist, recipient of the National Medal of Science,
America's highest honor for scientific achievement (Dr. Lynn Margulis) said:
"I suggest that those of us aware and concerned demand that the
glaringly erroneous official account of 9/11 be dismissed as a fraud and
a new, thorough, and impartial investigation be undertaken."
The former head of the Fire Science Division of the government agency
which claims that the World Trade Centers collapsed due to fire (the
National Institute of Standards and Technology), who is a Ph.D. in
mechanical engineering, with more than 25 years experience in fire
research and its applications, and is a professor in the Department of
Fire Protection Engineering at the University of Maryland (Dr. James
Quintiere), called for an independent review of the World Trade Center
Twin Tower collapse investigation. "I wish that there would be a peer
review of this," he said, referring to the NIST investigation. "I think
all the records that NIST has assembled should be archived. I would
really like to see someone else take a look at what they've done; both
structurally and from a fire point of view. ... I think the official
conclusion that NIST arrived at is questionable."
Former Director for Research, Director for Aeronautical Projects, and
Flight Research Program Manager for NASA's Dryden Flight Research
Center, who holds masters degrees in both physics and engineering (Dwain
A. Deets) says:
"The many visual images (massive structural members being hurled
horizontally, huge pyroclastic clouds, etc.) leave no doubt in my mind
explosives were involved [in the destruction of the World Trade Centers
on 9/11].''
A prominent physicist, former U.S. professor of physics from a top
university, and a former principal investigator for the U.S. Department
of Energy, Division of Advanced Energy Projects (Dr. Steven E. Jones)
stated that the world trade centers were brought down by controlled
demolition
A U.S. physics professor who teaches at several universities (Dr.
Crockett Grabbe) believes that the World Trade Centers were brought down
by controlled demolition
An expert on demolition (Bent Lund) said that the trade centers were
brought down with explosives (in Danish)
A Dutch demolition expert (Danny Jowenko) stated that WTC 7 was imploded
A safety engineer and accident analyst for the Finnish National Safety
Technology Authority (Dr. Heikki Kurttila) stated regarding WTC 7 that
"The great speed of the collapse and the low value of the resistance
factor strongly suggest controlled demolition."
A 13-year professor of metallurgical engineering at a U.S. university,
with a PhD in materials engineering, a former Congressional Office of
Technology Assessment Senior Staff Member (Dr. Joel S. Hirschhorn), is
calling for a new investigation of 9/11
A Danish professor of chemistry (Dr. Niels Harrit) said, in a mainstream
Danish newspaper, "WTC7 collapsed exactly like a house of cards. If the
fires or damage in one corner had played a decisive role, the building
would have fallen in that direction. You don't have to be a woodcutter
to grasp this" (translated)
A former guidance systems engineer for Polaris and Trident missiles and
professor emeritus, mathematics and computer science at a university
concluded (Dr. Bruce R. Henry) that the Twin Towers "were brought down
by planted explosives."
A professor of mathematics (Gary Welz) said "The official explanation
that I've heard doesn't make sense because it doesn't explain why I
heard and felt an explosion before the South Tower fell and why the
concrete was pulverized"
STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS AND ARCHITECTS
A prominent engineer with 55 years experience, in charge of the design
of hundreds of major building projects including high rise offices,
former member of the California Seismic Safety Commission and former
member of the National Institute of Sciences Building Safety Council
(Marx Ayres) believes that the World Trade Centers were brought down by
controlled demolition (see also this)
Two professors of structural engineering at a prestigious Swiss
university (Dr. Joerg Schneider and Dr. Hugo Bachmann) said that, on
9/11, World Trade Center 7 was brought down by controlled demolition
(translation here)
Charles Pegelow, structural engineer, of Houston, Texas (and see this)
Dennis Kollar, structural engineer, of West Bend, Wisconsin
Doyle Winterton, structural engineer (retired)
Haluk Akol, Structural Engineer and architect (ret.)
William Rice, P.E., structural engineer, former professor of Vermont
Technical College
An architect, member of the American Institute of Architects, who has
been a practicing architect for 20 years and has been responsible for
the production of construction documents for numerous steel-framed and
fire-protected buildings for uses in many different areas, including
education, civic, rapid transit and industrial use (Richard Gage)
disputes the claim that fire and airplane damage brought down the World
Trade Centers and believes there is strong evidence of controlled
demolition (many other architects who question 9/11 are listed here)
LEGAL SCHOLARS
Former Federal Prosecutor, Office of Special Investigations, U.S.
Department of Justice under Presidents Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan;
former U.S. Army Intelligence officer, and currently a widely-sought
media commentator on terrorism and intelligence services (John Loftus)
questions the government's version of 9/11.
Former Inspector General, U.S. Department of Transportation; former
Professor of Aviation, Dept. of Aerospace Engineering and Aviation and
Professor of Public Policy, Ohio State University (Mary Schiavo)
questions the government's version of 9/11.
Professor of International Law at the University of Illinois, Champaign;
a leading practitioner and advocate of international law; responsible
for drafting the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, the
American implementing legislation for the 1972 Biological Weapons
Convention; served on the Board of Directors of Amnesty International
(1988-1992), and represented Bosnia- Herzegovina at the World Court,
with a Doctor of Law Magna Cum Laude as well as a Ph.D. in Political
Science, both from Harvard University (Dr. Francis Boyle) questions the
government's version of 9/11.
Former prosecutor in the Organized Crime and Racketeering Section of the
U.S. Justice Department and a key member of Attorney General Bobby
Kennedy’s anti-corruption task force; former assistant U.S. Attorney for
the Northern District of Illinois (J. Terrence "Terry" Brunner)
questions the government's version of 9/11.
Professor Emeritus, International Law, Professor of Politics and
International Affairs, Princeton University; in 2001 served on the
three-person UN Commission on Human Rights for the Palestine
Territories, and previously, on the Independent International Commission
on Kosovo (Richard Falk) questions the government's version of 9/11.
Bessie Dutton Murray Distinguished Professor of Law Emeritus and
Director, Center for Human Rights, University of Iowa; Fellow, World
Academy of Art and Science. Honorary Editor, Board of Editors, American
Journal of International Law (Burns H. Weston) questions the
government's version of 9/11.
Former president of the National Lawyers Guild (C. Peter Erlinder), who
signed a petition calling for a real investigation into 9/11. And see
petition.
Assistant Professor of Criminal Justice at Troy University; associate
General Counsel, National Association of Federal Agents; Retired Agent
in Charge, Internal Affairs, U.S. Customs, responsible for the internal
integrity and security for areas encompassing nine states and two
foreign locations; former Federal Sky Marshall; 27-year U.S. Customs
career (Mark Conrad) questions the government's version of 9/11.
Professor of Law, University of Freiburg; former Minister of Justice of
West Germany (Horst Ehmke) questions the government's version of 9/11.
Director of Academic Programs, Institute for Policy and Economic
Development, University of Texas, El Paso, specializing in executive
branch secrecy policy, governmental abuse, and law and bureaucracy;
former U.S. Army Signals Intelligence officer; author of several books
on law and political theory (Dr. William G. Weaver) questions the
government's version of 9/11.
Famed trial attorney (Gerry Spence) questions the government's version
of 9/11.
Former Instructor of Criminal Trial Practice, Boalt Hall School of Law,
University of California at Berkeley 11-year teaching career. Retired
Chief Assistant Public Defender, Contra Costa County, California 31-year
career (William Veale) said:
"When you grow up in the United States, there are some bedrock
principles that require concerted effort to discard. One is the
simplest: that our leaders are good and decent people whose efforts may
occasionally warrant criticism but never because of malice or
venality... But one grows up. ... And with the lawyer's training comes
the reliance on evidence and the facts that persuade... After a lot of
reading, thought, study, and commiseration, I have come to the
conclusion that the attacks of 9/11 were, in their essence, an inside
job perpetrated at the highest levels of the U S government."
MEMBERS OF CONGRESS
Current U.S. Senator (Patrick Leahy) states "The two questions that the
congress will not ask . . . is why did 9/11 happen on George Bush's
watch when he had clear warnings that it was going to happen? Why did
they allow it to happen?"
Current Republican Congressman (Ron Paul) states that "we see the [9/11]
investigations that have been done so far as more or less cover-up and
no real explanation of what went on"
Current Democratic Congressman (Dennis Kucinich) hints that we aren't
being told the truth about 9/11
Former Democratic Senator (Mike Gravel) states that he supports a new
9/11 investigation and that we don't know the truth about 9/11
Former U.S. Republican Congressman and senior member of the House Armed
Services Committee, and who served six years as the Chairman of the
Military Research and Development Subcommittee (Curt Weldon) has shown
that the U.S. tracked hijackers before 9/11, is open to hearing
information about explosives in the Twin Towers, and is open to the
possibility that 9/11 was an inside job
FAMILY MEMBERS AND HEROIC FIRST RESPONDERS
A common criticism of those who question 9/11 is that they are being
"disrespectful to the victims and their families".
However, half of the victim's families believe that 9/11 was an inside
job (according to the head of the largest 9/11 family group, Bill Doyle)
(and listen to this interview). Many family and friends of victims not
only support the search for 9/11 truth, but they demand it (please
ignore the partisan tone). See also this interview.
Indeed, it has now become so clear that the 9/11 Commission was a
whitewash that the same 9/11 widows who called for the creation of the
9/11 Commission are now demanding a NEW investigation (see also this video).
And dying heroes, soon-to-be victims themselves, the first responders
who worked tirelessly to save lives on and after 9/11, say that
controlled demolition brought down the Twin Towers and that a real
investigation is necessary.
PSYCHIATRISTS AND PSYCHOLOGISTS
Finally, those who attack people who question the government's version
of 9/11 as "crazy" may wish to review the list of mental health
professionals who have concluded that the official version of 9/11 is false:
Psychiatrist Carol S. Wolman, MD
Psychiatrist E. Martin Schotz
Associate Clinical Professor of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke
University Medical Center, as well as Radiology, at Duke University
Medical Center D. Lawrence Burk, Jr., MD
Board of Governors Distinguished Service Professor of Psychology and
Associate Dean of the Graduate School at Ruters University Barry R.
Komisaruk
Professor of Psychology at University of New Hampshire William Woodward
Professor of Psychology at University of Essex Philip Cozzolino
Professor of Psychology at Goddard College Catherine Lowther
Professor Emeritus of Psychology at California Institute of Integral
Studies Ralph Metzner
Professor of Psychology at Rhodes University Mike Earl-Taylor
Retired Professor of Psychology at Oxford University Graham Harris
Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology from the University of Nebraska and
licensed Psychologist Ronald Feintech
Ph.D. Clinical Neuropsychologist Richard Welser
THOUSANDS OF OTHERS
The roster above is only a sample. There are too many Ph.D. scientists
and engineers, architects, military and intelligence officials,
politicians, legal scholars and other highly-credible people who
question 9/11 -- literally thousands -- to list in one place. Here are a
few additional people to consider:
The former director of the FBI (Louis Freeh) says there was a cover up
by the 9/11 Commission
Former air traffic controller, who knows the flight corridor which the
two planes which hit the Twin Towers flew "like the back of my hand" and
who handled two actual hijackings (Robin Hordon) says that 9/11 could
not have occurred as the government says, and that planes can be tracked
on radar even when their transponders are turned off (also, listen to
this interview)
Perhaps "the premiere collapse expert in the country", who 9/11
Commissioner Timothy Roemer referred to as a "very, very respected
expert on building collapse", the head of the New York Fire Department's
Special Operations Command and the most highly decorated firefighter in
its NYFD history, who had previously "commanded rescue operations at
many difficult and complex disasters, including the Oklahoma City
Bombing, the 1993 World Trade Center Bombing, and many natural disasters
worldwide" thought that the collapse of the South Tower was caused by
bombs, because the collapse of the building was too even to have been
caused by anything else (pages 5-6).
Former Deputy Secretary for Intelligence and Warning under Nixon, Ford,
and Carter (Morton Goulder), former former Deputy Director to the White
House Task Force on Terrorism (Edward L. Peck), and former US Department
of State Foreign Service Officer (J. Michael Springmann), as well as a
who's who of liberals and independents) jointly call for a new
investigation into 9/11
Former FBI agent (Robert Wright) says "The FBI, rather than trying to
prevent a terrorist attack, was merely gathering intelligence so they
would know who to arrest when a terrorist attack occurred."
Former FBI translator, who the Department of Justice's Inspector General
and several senators have called extremely credible (free subscription
required) (Sibel Edmonds), said "If they were to do real investigations
we would see several significant high level criminal prosecutions in
this country. And that is something that they are not going to let out.
And, believe me; they will do everything to cover this up". She also is
leaning towards the conclusion that 9/11 was an inside job.
Hmmm . . . maybe 9/11 Truthers are not nuts.
posted by George Washington at 2:15 PM
[Like this post? Please click here to share it on digg, reddit,
technorati, del.icio.us, stumbleupon, propeller and other social
networking sites.]
3 Comments:
Jill said...
Great read...we are on the same wavelength, I have a document very
similar to the one you just posted. I looked for your e-mail on
911blogger so I could send it to you but it wasn't posted. I think you
might like to read it and/or send it as well to as many people as
possible. I would post here but it is 35 pages long, so send me your
email and I'll send to you. All info comes from the patriots question
site, just a slightly more sarcastic viewpoint!
Jill
6:35 PM
Davol White said...
Very interesting. It's like what I've been saying for years now,
and its why this cover up isn't just going to quiet down and go away. I
like to say, "too many people know a controlled demolition when they see
one." How dare they try to BS the American people like this. Sibel
Edmons has hinted that she is willing to defy her gag order and talk to
any major network that agrees to interview her and broadcast the
intgerview uncencored. Too bad that's too much ask of our Pravda
American media. This must not stand.
3:09 PM
Oberststuhlherr said...
It's important to bear in mind that one of the common ploys used by
political criminals is to have some of their own players appear to break
ranks and point fingers back in the direction of the perpetrators.
There are many strategic, tactical and psychological advantages to
doing so. If they point in the wrong direction, it can serve as a
delaying tactic. If they gain the trust and support of the masses, the
false opponents can take control of the investigation and prosecution,
ensuring that nothing comes of it. They can also sow the seeds of
confusion by claiming falsely that no 757 hit the Pentagon. This kind of
false opposition can also serve to shore up essential parts of the OCT
such as the myth of al Qaeda and Islamic terrorists, thus perpetuating
this insane holy war against Islam.
Henry
> Not to mention, the logistics aren't there. Wiring a building like
the one
> tower would take countless miles of cabling
The charges can be detonated via computer generated radio signal.
Tell us what you "think" caused WTC7's massive steel frame to
disintegrate.
Here are some photos of WTC4, which was much closer to the towers
than WTC7, and was completely gutted by severe fires and partially
crushed by heavy impacts.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/wtc4des1.html
This photo of WTC4 really demonstrates the incredible strength of
steel framed buildings.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/docs/bjh/14.jpg
Here are some photos of WTC5 & 6 after the tower demolitions.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/gzpo1.html
Here's a photo of WTC7 after the tower demolitions.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/wtc7fire3.html
This illustration shows the location of the various WTC buildings
as well as the range of debris impact.
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/b7/collateral.html
Here are photos of WTC7's "inferno".
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/wtc7fire1.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/attack/wtc7.html
Here is a video of WTC7's picture perfect controlled demolition.
http://www.911research.com/wtc/evidence/videos/docs/wtc7_collapse2.mpg
Here are more videos of WTC7's demolition.
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.html
We're still waiting for the kooks to provide us with a logical
explanation other than controlled demolition for the fact that the
buildings closest to the towers remained standing, while WTC7's
massive hurricane resistant steel frame suddenly disintegrated and
dropped at virtual free fall speed and perfect symmetry. Limited,
isolated fires can not possibly cause such a failure. In fact, no
steel framed building has ever collapsed due to fire.
It seems controlled demolition is the only possible cause of WTC7's
demolition. Even Bush's FEMA was forced to admit the following:
"The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and how they caused the
building to collapse remain unknown at this time. Although the
total diesel fuel on the premises contained massive potential
energy, the best hypothesis has only a low probability of
occurrence. Further research, investigation, and analyses are
needed to resolve this issue."
Henry
> "Robert Weldon" <rweldon....@jrpspamblock.ca> wrote
>> When did I become Jewish?
> When you first acted as if you had more than three
> functioning neurons.
Your many betters don't consider more than three
to be all that smart, Petie. You seem to have at
least a dozen functioning neurons and you're a
helpless imbecile. Besides, if Jews were as brilliant
as you're trying to imply, Israel wouldn't be dependent
on welfare handouts from working U.S. taxpayers for
its very survival. As it is, we give Israel about 10
million dollars per DAY in welfare handouts. Do you
"think" a dependence on welfare handouts is a sign of
intelligence, Petie?
Do you also "think" that constantly being in trouble
with the law is a sign of intelligence? No nation has
been reprimanded by The United Nations as many times
as Israel, nor stands in violation of as many U.N.
Resolutions. Israel is a criminal, welfare dependent
state. Your many betters don't see that as admirable
behavior in people or nations....
http://11syyskuu.blogspot.com/2006/02/destruction-of-wtc-7.html
The Destruction of WTC 7
Latest updates:
5 Sep 06: NIST
postpones its report until 2007, will consider if explosions occurred
25 Sep
06: a demolition expert and two structural design professors: WTC 7 was a
controlled demolition
13 Dec 06: Heikki Kurttila (DEng): WTC 7 fell as fast
as an object falling the same distance through air
1 Jan 07: Frank Legge
(Ph.D.): The rate of descent of WTC 7 almost equals gravitational free fall
12 Feb 07: Several witnesses to controlled demolition come forward
4 Mar
07: Structural Engineer William Rice refutes official explanation of WTC
collapses
World Trade Center 7 was the third skyscraper destroyed on
September 11 2001. It was not hit by a plane. The picture on the left
shows WTC
7 after the collapse of the Twin Towers.
The final investigation report
on its collapse has been postponed many times. As of this writing (over 5,5
years after the destruction), it still has not been published.
This
steel-framed skyscraper, completed in 1987, was located 110 meters (350
feet)
away from the closest of the Twin Towers ("WTC 1" on the map below). The
building's tenants included the CIA, the Internal Revenue Service, several
banks, the Mayor's Office of Emergency Management, and the U.S.
Securities &
Exchange Commission. A large number of records of ongoing investigations of
Enron and other companies were destroyed with WTC 7.
No airplane hit WTC
7, but its south facade was damaged by debris ejected from the North Tower,
which collapsed at 10.30 am. There is conflicting information about the
amount
of damage. For example, in the pictures shown in a preliminary official
report
the southwest corner is badly damaged, whereas in the photograph taken
by Aman
Zafar in the afternoon the same corner is intact – see my photo
comparison. The
building was reported on fire at 4.10 pm by CNN, although the fires seem
to have
started several hours earlier. The fires, whose origin is unknown,
appeared on a
number of floors, and the building collapsed at 5.20 pm.
A
high-resolution video of the collapse is available here. The slow-motion
video
animation below shows the totality and symmetry of the destruction.
The
Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA, speculated that office fires
caused
the collapse of the building. It, however, acknowledged in its report in
May
2002: "The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and how they caused the
building to
collapse remain unknown at this time. [...] the best hypothesis has only
a low
probability of occurrence." Later in 2002, Larry Silverstein, the owner
of WTC
7, gave in the America Rebuilds TV program a famous "pull it" statement
that has
commonly been interpreted as meaning that the building was professionally
demolished.
Did WTC 7 collapse as a result of office fires, or was it
demolished with explosives? The answer can be sought by examining the
way in
which the building collapsed.
Collapse Speed
As one can
observe from the videos of WTC 7's collapse, shortly following the
destruction
of its penthouse structures, the building fell to the ground in 6.5
seconds.
This is a phenomenally short time: a stone dropped from the top of the
building
would have reached the ground (covering a distance of 174 meters) in 5.95
seconds – if there were no air resistance! However, in principle the
distance
analyzed should be that from the top of the building to the top of the
debris
pile, not to the ground. As the exact height of the debris pile is not
documented, it is more useful to examine the early stages of the collapse,
during which the debris pile does not need to be taken into account.
According to the video analysis presented in the 9-11 Eyewitness
documentary, starting from the state of rest, WTC 7 fell 100 meters in 4.5
seconds. This results in an acceleration of 9.8 m/s2, corresponding to a
free
fall.
To verify this, I examined the fall of a corner of the building in
one collapse video using Blaze Media Pro video editing software. The
corner fell
56 meters (=the distance between the Start and End lines in the
animation below)
in 3.47 seconds. This results in an acceleration of 9.3 m/s2, which
corresponds
to a very low resistance factor of the structural supports: only 5
percent of
the force of gravity of the building's falling upper section.
I also
measured an acceleration of 8.5 m/s2 for the middle part of the wide
facade in
the picture, which means that the force of resistance of the structural
supports
was 13 percent of the force of gravity of the falling upper section (see
the
calculation in more detail here).
My measurements therefore support the
conclusion presented in 9-11 Eyewitness that the skyscraper fell virtually
unimpeded. The lack of structural resistance seems to be explainable
only by the
destruction of the structural supports through the use of explosives. WTC 7
dropped rather than collapsed. It came down as if only air had separated
the
roof of the building from the street below.
WTC 7 fell on average 7
floors per second (47 / 6.5). One second after the onset of the
collapse, the
speed of descent was almost 10 meters/second; after two seconds, almost 20
meters/second; and at the end, about 60 meters/second (over 200
kilometers/hour). According to the analysis of Frank Legge (Ph.D.), the
rate of
descent of WTC 7 closely matches the rate of gravitational free fall,
which –
combined with the uniformity of the descent throughout the breadth and
length of
the building – is irrefutable evidence of controlled demolition.
Heikki
Kurttila, a Finnish Doctor of Engineering and accident researcher, has made
detailed calculations about the collapse speed of WTC 7. He concludes
that the
short collapse time and low structural resistance "strongly suggest
controlled
demolition". Kurttila notes that an apple dropped from the height of WTC
7's
roof would have taken about 0.5 seconds longer to reach the ground than
it took
the skyscraper to be completely destroyed.
Structural Features of the
Collapse
A striking feature in the collapse of WTC 7 is symmetry. The
collapse progressed evenly throughout the building, and the debris piled up
almost entirely within the foundations of the building (see the picture
below).
The symmetry of WTC 7's descent means that all of its steel supports –
25 central and 58 peripheral columns – were destroyed almost
simultaneously. Any
asymmetry in the damage to structures would have led to asymmetrical
collapse.
By contrast, a fully symmetrical collapse without controlled use of
explosives
would not have followed the principle of least resistance. Local fires and
structural damage here and there could not have weakened all the central
and
peripheral support structures in a way that would have caused all of
them to
give in at the same moment. The simultaneity of the destruction of support
structures throughout the building can, however, be explained by controlled
demolition.
A controlled demolition is also suggested by the drop of
the center of the skyscraper moments before the surrounding structures
started
to fall, as well as by the fact that the outer walls were pulled
inwards. In a
controlled demolition the collapse is caused by first destroying the
weight-carrying core of a building, which "pulls" the exterior walls
inwards
("implosion"). Although the lowest floor with fires was reportedly the
sixth
floor, the building seems to have undergone a traditional demolition,
beginning
from the bottom floor. An emergency worker who witnessed the collapse of
WTC 7
was interviewed on 9/11. He described hearing what sounded like a "clap of
thunder", followed by what looked like "a shockwave ripping through the
building", with windows busting out, and "about a second later the
bottom floor
caved out and the [rest of] the building followed after that". The videos
showing the collapse support his description.
At least one
high-resolution video of the collapse of WTC 7 clearly shows one more
characteristic of controlled demolition: streamers of dust emerging out
of the
building.
A Dutch demolition expert Danny Jowenko (right), who owns
a demolition company and has been in the business for almost 30 years,
concluded
in September 2006 that WTC 7 "is controlled demolition. [...] A team of
experts
did this. This is professional work, without any doubt."
Hugo
Bachmann, a Swiss professor emeritus for structural design and
construction,
said in Tages-Anzeiger : "In my opinion WTC 7 was with great probability
brought
down by controlled demolition done by experts". In addition, Jörg
Schneider,
another Swiss Professor emeritus for structural design and construction,
interprets the existing videos as indices that "WTC 7 was with great
probability
brought down by explosives".
Fire Endurance of Steel
Steel is
very fire-resistant material. In tests conducted by Chorus Construction in
several countries, the fire endurance of steel-framed parking garages was
examined by feeding fires with hydrocarbon fuel. Steel beams and pillars
heated
to a maximum of 360 degrees Celsius, and the breaking of steel was not even
close. In Cardington fire endurance tests, modelled on conditions in real
buildings, unprotected steel was subjected to temperatures of up to 1100
degrees
Celsius (2012 F), but there was no collapse. In the Windsor Building in
Madrid,
an almost 24-hour intensive fire did not collapse the building.
Moreover, the
fires in WTC 7 were insignificant compared to fires in Windsor Building
and all
other skyscraper fires. The latest case is the all-engulfing fire in Al
Nasr
Tower in 2006. Fires have never collapsed a single steel-framed highrise
to the
ground.
In the picture of WTC 7 to the right, the fires are limited
to small areas, almost all windows are intact, and no red heat
indicative of
temperatures capable of softening steel is visible. The situation is the
same in
other photographs taken of the building in late afternoon. In this video
a fair
amount of smoke, but no flames, can be seen. By contrast, WTC 5, which
was badly
damaged by the collapse of the North Tower next to it, burned very
powerfully:
its floors were covered by a sea of flames and all windows were broken.
However,
this building, despite the fact that it had weaker support structures
than WTC
7, did not collapse into a debris pile, but remained standing.
Characteristics of the Debris
The debris of WTC 7 was
extremely hot weeks after the collapse of the building. Thermal imaging
by NASA
showed that the top of the debris pile had a temperature of 730 degrees
Celsius
five days after the collapse. Deeper, and immediately after the
destruction,
temperatures were probably considerably higher. Residual temperatures
like this
cannot be explained by office fires or by an ordinary, gravity-driven
collapse.
When the potential energy of a building experiencing an ordinary
gravitational
collapse turns into thermal energy, the result is only a few degrees'
average
increase in temperature.
According to several reports, molten metal
(also suggested by this video footage) was found under the debris pile
of WTC
buildings. To melt structural steel, temperatures exceeding 1500 degrees
Celsius
are required. Such temperatures are never achieved in office fires. In
addition
to molten metal, partly evaporated steel beams were found in the debris
of WTC
7. As professor Jonathan Barnett pointed out in a New York Times
interview, the
fires in the building could not have produced temperatures capable of
evaporating steel. However, the use of explosives like thermite can produce
temperatures (even 3000 degrees Celsius) that can melt and even
evaporate steel.
FEMA's investigators were not allowed to work in the collapse zone
itself. They were allowed to examine the debris of WTC skyscrapers only in
landfill areas used as temporary storage for the steel debris before its
recycling. By May 2005, when FEMA finished its preliminary report
calling for
further investigation, all the steel debris had been sold and shipped
into the
Far East. Only 156 pieces of steel were chosen for futher analysis, of
which a
ridiculous total of 4 were from WTC 7. Even these no longer seem to exist.
As WTC 7 was evacuated over six hours before its destruction, there
were no grounds for the rapid removal and recycling of the steel debris.
Quite
the contrary: as WTC 7 was one of the three greatest building collapses in
recorded history (the other two being the North and South Towers), the
debris of
the building should have been meticulously examined. Many individuals and
publications, such as the Fire Engineering Magazine, protested strongly
against
the rapid destruction of the evidence.
Witness statements
Craig Bartmer, a NYPD officer, states that he saw WTC 7 come down
and heard a number of explosions in rapid succession. He is convinced
that the
skyscraper was brought down with explosives. Several rescue personnel
have also
come forward saying they were told that the building would be brought
down by
means of explosives. The above-cited testimony about the shockwave and the
lowest floors collapsing first supports controlled demolition.
Interestingly, a
news report on a Finnish TV channel on September 12, 2001, stated that the
authorities brought Building 7 down with explosives due to the apparent
danger
of collapse.
Final Words
Was WTC 7 destroyed as a result
of controlled demolition? Everyone can draw their own conclusions from
the way
in which the building was destroyed and the temperatures produced in the
destruction.
If and when the building was demolished, it must have been
wired with explosives before September 11th. An operation of that magnitude
could not have been accomplished during a couple of chaotic hours. This
is why
the official hypotheses have not touched on the most obvious explanation
for the
collapse of the skyscraper. It is revealing that the 9/11 Commission, which
published its report in 2004, does not mention in a single sentence the
destruction of the third skyscraper resulting from the terrorist attack
in New
York.
FEMA's work has been continued by the National Institute of
Standards and Technology, which has again postponed its report on WTC 7,
this
time until 2007. NIST is now saying that it is also investigating the
hypothesis
that explosions initiated the collapse. Interviewed in the March 2006
issue of
New York Magazine, Dr S. Shyam Sunder, NIST lead investigator, summed up
the
present state of the investigation:
NIST did have "some preliminary
hypotheses" on 7 WTC, Dr. Sunder said. "We are studying the horizontal
movement
east to west, internal to the structure, on the fifth to seventh
floors." Then
Dr. Sunder paused. "But truthfully, I don't really know. We've had trouble
getting a handle on Building No. 7."
Henry
> It was those nasty Arabs that did it, A favorite pastime of Jews in white
> vans is to jump up and down with glee when a American building is
demolish
As well as set their cameras up in advance, just in
case a steel framed building explodes and disintegrates
because of fire for the first time in human history. But
then, these were Mossad agents - friends of the Bush
regime - so they were released...
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/fiveisraelis.html
http://beirut.indymedia.org/ar/2006/12/6287.shtml
Mr Frederick
news:fk4aop$1ir$3...@ruby.cit.cornell.edu...
> Mr Frederick wrote:
>
> > Not to mention, the logistics aren't there. Wiring a building like
> the one
> > tower would take countless miles of cabling
>
> The charges can be detonated via computer generated radio signal.
> Tell us what you "think" caused WTC7's massive steel frame to
> disintegrate.
How the hell did the thousands upon thousands of charges get put in? And
don't say it was when the building was built, because the computer
technology didn't exist then, not to mention the incredible knowledge of
explosive demolition that would have been required.
Henry
Kook drivel and avoidance of the relevant facts and reality.
Here, read and learn.
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Sept_11_2001/UnansweredQuestions_9-11.html
Davorin Vlahovic
<cut>
M'kay, dudes, I've had my fun and from now I'd like for you to omit the
alt.os.linux from the Newsgroups: list. :) I guess people here have been
frowning upon my replies for some time now.
You may post here again if you find out that Linux has somehow been used
in demolitions.
TIA
BrianNZ
Ssssssssshhhhhhhh!! You'll wake Henry up........
In one breath he will tell you WTC7 couldn't possibly fall due to fire
damage because "it's never happened to a steel framed building
before".......and in the next breath tell you how explosive (thermite)
charges were used to drop the twin towers, even though "no buildings
that size have ever been demolished!!!"......then he will switch between
the twin towers and WTC7 all the time just to try and confuse the
situation more.......then there will be the usual 'kooker' insults
thrown, a bit of 'holier than thou' attitude , a few <chuckles>, a lot
of conspiracy jargon, repeated cut'n'pastes (no matter their relevance)
and in the end, there will still be no evidence from him.......You can
either take this 'as read' or try to use logic with Henry and get an 'I
told you so' from me later. Been there, done that..............
Enjoy it before it becomes repetitively pathetic. :)
Henry
> "Henry" <9...@insidejob.gov> wrote in message
> news:fk4aop$1ir$3...@ruby.cit.cornell.edu...
>> Mr Frederick wrote:
>>
>>> Not to mention, the logistics aren't there. Wiring a building like
>> the one
>>> tower would take countless miles of cabling
>> The charges can be detonated via computer generated radio signal.
>> Tell us what you "think" caused WTC7's massive steel frame to
>> disintegrate.
>
> How the hell did the thousands upon thousands of charges get put in?
People put them there with the assistance of Bush's brother, Marvin,
who handled "security".
Tell us what you "think" caused WTC7's massive steel frame to
disintegrate.
Henry
> You'll wake Henry up........
He's already awake. Tell us what makes you cartoon conspiracy kooks
"think" the war criminals and terrorists on the Bush regime, who stated
in writing that they needed a "New Pearl Harbor", are telling the truth,
and the rest of the informed, credible world is lying about the events
of 9-11-01. That's amazingly kooky - especially when the evidence proves
beyond any doubt that it was an inside job.
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2006/11/overwhelming-majority-of-credible.html
MILITARY LEADERS
INTELLIGENCE PROFESSIONALS
9/11 COMMISSIONERS
stated that the world trade centers were brought down by controlled
demolition
A U.S. physics professor who teaches at several universities (Dr.
Crockett Grabbe) believes that the World Trade Centers were brought down
by controlled demolition
An expert on demolition (Bent Lund) said that the trade centers were
(Marx Ayres) believes that the World Trade Centers were brought down by
controlled demolition (see also this)
Two professors of structural engineering at a prestigious Swiss
university (Dr. Joerg Schneider and Dr. Hugo Bachmann) said that, on
9/11, World Trade Center 7 was brought down by controlled demolition
LEGAL SCHOLARS
MEMBERS OF CONGRESS
PSYCHIATRISTS AND PSYCHOLOGISTS
Psychiatrist E. Martin Schotz
THOUSANDS OF OTHERS
Henry
> The only proper way to respond to a troll is to ignore him!
Not if the troll is parroting the Bush regime's 9-11 lies. That's
one topic that's much too important to be ignored.
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Sept_11_2001/UnansweredQuestions_9-11.html
mommy...@gmail.com
>
> Most of your people will never see the high-tech universities, and even
> today there are more people with a visa than there is U.S. people.
> Your average citizen would be unemployable almost everywhere in the
> Europe because of your lousy education system.
>
Which is why Europeans send their children in droves to the US to get
educated and when then they return to Europe they make 10 times their
counterparts who were educated in Europe because they understand the
sciences and mathematics
> It's sad really, going from a superpower which can build things like
> Saturn boosters and SR-71 to people that try to equalize ID and
> evolution. Oh, wait, that was von Braun and friends :) A-Bomb? Einstein
> and Oppenheimer along with earlier works of Lisa Meitner.
>
> Electricity? Nikola Tesla (Serb born in Croatia). Andy Grove (Intel) -
> Magyar. I could go on, but what's the point?
>
You cann't go on as that's the best that eastern Europe produced and
they all had to go to the US. Let's try something in the 20th century
like Bill Joy, Grace Hopper, Kerry Emmanual, Edward Lorenz, Robert
Milliken, Carl Anderson, Willis Lamb. If it wasn't for Bill Joy the
internet wouldn't exist. BBN's TCP stack didn't work, Bill wrote his
own TCP stack that did work and it is the foundation for the current
internet. Got anybody else from Croatia or Hungry? I didn't think so
snowman
single employee within the building seeing anything. No witnesses to
any suspicious persons, no witnesses stating that they saw holes carved
in their office walls or in the halls or anywhere else. Plus the
silence of what would have had to be a lot of people that would be
required to pull such a stunt off.
P. Roehling
"snowman" <x@x.x> wrote
>> How the hell did the thousands upon thousands of charges get put in? And
>> don't say it was when the building was built, because the computer
>> technology didn't exist then, not to mention the incredible knowledge of
>> explosive demolition that would have been required.
> Not to mention getting those same explosives into the building without a
> single employee within the building seeing anything. No witnesses to any
> suspicious persons, no witnesses stating that they saw holes carved in
> their office walls or in the halls or anywhere else. Plus the silence of
> what would have had to be a lot of people that would be required to pull
> such a stunt off.
Um, you're trying to use logic to argue with people who whole-heartedly
believe in black magic.
laughing man
> schoenfeld....@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > WTC Towers: The Case For Controlled Demolition
> > By Herman Schoenfeld
>
Like we've said for years Henry...
Show us REAL proof! Documents, men tied to chair and so full of
sodium pentathol (oh and some of the other fun stuff) that he tells
everything. (be sure to hit him with a taser to stop his chip)
Show me the proof.
Because the only proof you found was online by people misqouting,
taking photos out of context AND who can't even time a building
falling to the ground. Not to mention their math skills are lacking.
PROOF not fubar info, you need to find some real nimrods who can THINK
and have no agenda. I'll give you a nickle if you can present proof to
the world that is so irrefutable the suppremes set up the gallows.
That old buddy is the only proof good enough.
laughing man
> Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
> > The only proper way to respond to a troll is to ignore him!
>
> Not if the troll is parroting the Bush regime's 9-11 lies. That's
> one topic that's much too important to be ignored.
Oh that is rich... So you finally admit to parroting Geo. W. Bush's
lies! Damn just doing your best to hide the truth aren't you? Well
tough cookies buddy! I know it was the SA! So doesn't everyone else.
---
lolrotflmaoteeheehahahohosnicker
Life is like a dick.
When it's soft it's hard to beat
and
When it's hard somebody is going to get fucked!!!
mommy...@gmail.com
<drool from yet another Art Bell fan>
since the government is trying to hide the "truth" maybe you should be
selling tinfoil hats so that we can all see the "truth". I suggest you
got to
to get important information
BrianNZ
> Mr Frederick wrote:
>> "Henry" <9...@insidejob.gov> wrote in message
>> news:fk4aop$1ir$3...@ruby.cit.cornell.edu...
>>> Mr Frederick wrote:
>>>
>>>> Not to mention, the logistics aren't there. Wiring a building like
>>> the one
>>>> tower would take countless miles of cabling
>>> The charges can be detonated via computer generated radio signal.
>>> Tell us what you "think" caused WTC7's massive steel frame to
>>> disintegrate.
>>
>> How the hell did the thousands upon thousands of charges get put in?
>
> People put them there with the assistance of Bush's brother, Marvin,
> who handled "security".
So you firmly believe that statement? How about a couple of facts to
back it up?
How do you know this?
What proof do you have?.....remember, a list of coincidences is not proof.
> Tell us what you "think" caused WTC7's massive steel frame to
> disintegrate.
>
Lets just stick to what you 'think' for now. It's you making the claims
here, so back them up or shut-up!......see above.
Henry
> Um, you're trying to use logic to argue with people who
> whole-heartedly believe in black magic.
True, but how else can we bring them back to reality?
Eventually, all but the most severely brainwashed and
gullible of kooks will be able to see past the Bush
regime's comically impossible lies.
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2006/11/overwhelming-majority-of-credible.html
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2007/05/structural-engineers-question-collapse.html
Structural Engineers Question Collapse of the World Trade Center
One of the arguments that government apologists have used in trying to
prop up the official story of why the World Trade Centers came down on
9/11 is that no structural engineers have questioned the government's
version of events. However, that is now changing.
The following structural engineers have now publicly challenged the
government's account of the destruction of the Trade Centers on 9/11:
Hugo Bachmann and Jörg Schneider, both emeritus professors in
structural engineering at a prestigious Swiss university (translation
here)
Doyle Winterton, structural engineer (retired)
Joseph M. Phelps, MS, PE. Structural Dynamicist (ret.), Charter Member,
Structural Engineering Institute of the American Society of Civil
Engineers
Charles Pegelow, structural engineer, of Houston, Texas
William Rice, P.E., structural engineer, former professor of Vermont
Technical College
When considered along with the other prominent scientists who question
9/11, it becomes impossible for any thinking person to accept at face
value the government's version of the destruction of the World Trade
Center.
More experts who who have used science and hard evidence to prove
demolition:
http://journalof911studies.com/
Still more engineers and experts who explain why the Bush regime's
magic fire theory is physically impossible.
Another one:
http://www.vermontguardian.com/commentary/032007/TwinTowers.shtml
And quite a few more:
More yet:
http://11syyskuu.blogspot.com/2006/02/destruction-of-wtc-7.html
And a copple hundred more:
http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/engineers.html
Henry
> On Dec 16, 3:58 pm, Henry <9...@insidejob.gov> wrote:
>> http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2006/11/overwhelming-majority-of...
> Like we've said for years Henry...
> Show us REAL proof!
> Show us REAL proof!
How many times do you "think" you'll need to see it
before it'll erase the brainwashing of your ruling
masters? Do you still "think" Iraq has WMDs, that
Bush invaded Iraq to bring freedom, and that Iran is
about to nuke the free world? Do you also still "think"
the earth is flat? Choosing to believe the comical, blatant
lies of the war criminals and terrorists on the Bush regime
over science, physics, reality, and hundreds of experts is
pretty silly.
http://911research.wtc7.net
http://stj911.org
http://stopthelie.com/1-hour_guide_to_911.html
http://www.911truth.org
Here's what happens to steel framed buildings exposed
to raging infernos for hours on end.
http://davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr69c.html
On 9-11-01, WTC7, a 47 story steel framed building, which
had only small, random fires, dropped in perfect symmetry
at near free fall speed as in a perfectly executed controlled
demolition.
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.html
http://wtc7.net/articles/FEMA/WTC_ch5.htm
Henry
> On Dec 16, 4:51 pm, Henry <9...@insidejob.gov> wrote:
>> Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
>>> The only proper way to respond to a troll is to ignore him!
>> Not if the troll is parroting the Bush regime's 9-11 lies. That's
>> one topic that's much too important to be ignored.
> Oh that is rich... So you finally admit to parroting Geo. W. Bush's
> lies!
Do learn how to read and think, troll! I and thousands of other
informed, freedom, and justice loving people been exposing
the Bush regime's lies and crimes.
Do you still "think" Iraq has WMDs and that Bush invaded
to promote freedom? How many more lies will Bush have to
tell you before your blind faith in Him is shaken, troll?
<chuckle>
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/wtc4des1.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/docs/bjh/14.jpg
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/gzpo1.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/wtc7fire3.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/b7/collateral.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/wtc7fire1.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/attack/wtc7.html
http://www.911research.com/wtc/evidence/videos/docs/wtc7_collapse2.mpg
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.html
"The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and how they caused the building
to collapse remain unknown at this time. Although the total diesel fuel
on the premises contained massive potential energy, the best hypothesis
has only a low probability of occurrence. Further research,
investigation, and analyses are needed to resolve this issue."
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/december2007/120407_common_knowledge.htm
Ex-Italian President: Intel Agencies Know 9/11 An Inside Job
Man who blew the whistle on Gladio tells Italy's largest newspaper
attacks were run by CIA, Mossad
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
Former Italian President and the man who revealed the existence of
Operation Gladio Francesco Cossiga has gone public on 9/11, telling
Italy's most respected newspaper that the attacks were run by the CIA
and Mossad and that this was common knowledge amongst global
intelligence agencies.
Cossiga was elected President of Italian Senate in July 1983 before
being winning a landslide 1985 election to become President of the
country in 1985.
Cossiga gained respect from opposition parties as one of a rare breed -
an honest politician - and led the country for seven years until April 1992.
Cossiga's tendency to be outspoken upset the Italian political
establishment and he was forced to resign after revealing the existence
of, and his part in setting up, Operation Gladio - a rogue intelligence
(Article continues below)
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2006/11/overwhelming-majority-of-credible.html
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2007/05/structural-engineers-question-collapse.html
http://journalof911studies.com/
Another one:
http://www.vermontguardian.com/commentary/032007/TwinTowers.shtml
More yet:
http://11syyskuu.blogspot.com/2006/02/destruction-of-wtc-7.html
And a couple hundred more:
http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/engineers.html
BrianNZ
> Henry wrote:
>> Mr Frederick wrote:
>>> "Henry" <9...@insidejob.gov> wrote in message
>>> news:fk4aop$1ir$3...@ruby.cit.cornell.edu...
>>>> Mr Frederick wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Not to mention, the logistics aren't there. Wiring a building like
>>>> the one
>>>>> tower would take countless miles of cabling
>>>> The charges can be detonated via computer generated radio signal.
>>>> Tell us what you "think" caused WTC7's massive steel frame to
>>>> disintegrate.
>>>
>>> How the hell did the thousands upon thousands of charges get put in?
>>
>> People put them there with the assistance of Bush's brother, Marvin,
>> who handled "security".
>
>
> So you firmly believe that statement? How about a couple of facts to
> back it up?
>
> How do you know this?
>
> What proof do you have?.....remember, a list of coincidences is not proof.
>
>
Well, Henry.....You had your chance to shine and blew it. Just like I
knew you would! Everytime you are asked a direct question, you simply
ignore the post and move on to cut'n'paste elsewhere. Your inability to
prove anything puts your post into the items below from Pete's link.......
http://www.urban75.org/info/conspiraloons.html
......maybe you should read it and have a look in the mirror
3. Inability to answer questions. For people who loudly advertise their
determination to the principle of questioning everything, they're pretty
poor at answering direct questions from sceptics about the claims that
they make.
7. Inability to withdraw. It's a rare day indeed when a conspiracy
theorist admits that a claim they have made has turned out to be without
foundation, whether it be the overall claim itself or any of the
evidence produced to support it. Moreover they have a liking (see 3.
above) for the technique of avoiding discussion of their claims by
"swamping" - piling on a whole lot more material rather than respond to
the objections sceptics make to the previous lot.
Henry
> Henry wrote:
>> Mr Frederick wrote:
>>> How the hell did the thousands upon thousands of charges get put in?
>> People put them there with the assistance of Bush's brother, Marvin,
>> who handled "security".
> So you firmly believe that statement? How about a couple of facts to
> back it up?
The number of charges is debatable, but if you "think" something other
than human beings rigged the buildings for demolition, you're too kooky
to reach.
Google Marvin Bush WTC security. Also google ACE Elevator WTC. Here,
I'll help you get started, but we've covered this already. If you're
going to participate in the discussion, you should try to pay attention
and keep up. <g>
Keep in mind, the elevators ran through the cores, and we know the
cores were destroyed via demolition. Now we're looking for who and
how.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/sept11/2001/12/19/usat-mechanics.htm
"At the time the elevator mechanics left, dozens of people were
trapped in stuck elevators. Other people lost their lives trying to
rescue those trapped in elevators, including a mechanic from another
company who rushed to the Trade Center from down the street.
The departure of elevator mechanics from a disaster site is unusual. The
industry takes pride in rescues. In the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995,
elevator mechanics worked closely with the firefighters making rescues.
"Nobody knows the insides of a high-rise like an elevator mechanic. They
act as guides for firefighters, in addition to working on elevators,"
says Robert Caporale, editor of Elevator World, a trade magazine."
BrianNZ
> BrianNZ wrote:
>> Henry wrote:
>>> Mr Frederick wrote:
>
>>>> How the hell did the thousands upon thousands of charges get put in?
>
>>> People put them there with the assistance of Bush's brother, Marvin,
>>> who handled "security".
>
>> So you firmly believe that statement? How about a couple of facts to
>> back it up?
>
> The number of charges is debatable, but if you "think" something other
> than human beings rigged the buildings for demolition, you're too kooky
> to reach.
Straight back to tactic #7 with a bit of #1 thrown in (Arrogance and
name-calling)
7. Inability to withdraw. It's a rare day indeed when a conspiracy
theorist admits that a claim they have made has turned out to be without
foundation, whether it be the overall claim itself or any of the
evidence produced to support it. Moreover they have a liking (see 3.
above) for the technique of avoiding discussion of their claims by
"swamping" - piling on a whole lot more material rather than respond to
the objections sceptics make to the previous lot.
It is YOU who 'thinks' the buildings were rigged for demolition, not me.
It is YOU who stated...... "People put them there with the assistance of
Bush's brother, Marvin, who handled "security"."
I've asked for facts and you have offered none, just gone off on a
tangent .....again......and avoided fronting up......again!
> Google Marvin Bush WTC security. Also google ACE Elevator WTC. Here,
> I'll help you get started, but we've covered this already. If you're
> going to participate in the discussion, you should try to pay attention
> and keep up. <g>
Again, it is YOU who is not paying attention....here , let me help you......
YOU stated...... "People put them there with the assistance of Bush's
brother, Marvin, who handled "security"."
What facts do you have to back this up?
> Keep in mind, the elevators ran through the cores, and we know the
> cores were destroyed via demolition. Now we're looking for who and
> how.
'We' don't know that.....thats just what you keep repeating! try and
stay on track. All I wanted to know is what facts you have to back up
your statement "People put them there with the assistance of Bush's
brother, Marvin, who handled "security"."
Once you have established a thread of credability, maybe we can discuss
other things. Until then, please try to just answer that one simple
question.........if you have any facts to back it up, that is.
>
> http://www.usatoday.com/news/sept11/2001/12/19/usat-mechanics.htm
>
> "At the time the elevator mechanics left, dozens of people were trapped
> in stuck elevators. Other people lost their lives trying to rescue those
> trapped in elevators, including a mechanic from another company who
> rushed to the Trade Center from down the street.
>
> The departure of elevator mechanics from a disaster site is unusual. The
> industry takes pride in rescues. In the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995,
> elevator mechanics worked closely with the firefighters making rescues.
>
> "Nobody knows the insides of a high-rise like an elevator mechanic. They
> act as guides for firefighters, in addition to working on elevators,"
> says Robert Caporale, editor of Elevator World, a trade magazine."
>
>
This crap has nothing to do with your earlier claim! The 'fact' (taking
your cut'n'paste' as true) that a "mechanic from another company" died
trying to save people shows it was a good move by the other mechanics
not to stay in that building! They are elevator mechanics, not captains
who are supposed to go down with the ship.........
Go back and read 7.......this part in particular " Moreover they have a
liking for the technique of avoiding discussion of their claims by
P. Roehling
"BrianNZ" <br...@itnz.co.nz> wrote
> Straight back to tactic #7 with a bit of #1 thrown in (Arrogance and
> name-calling)
>
> 7. Inability to withdraw. It's a rare day indeed when a conspiracy
> theorist admits that a claim they have made has turned out to be without
> foundation, whether it be the overall claim itself or any of the evidence
> produced to support it. Moreover they have a liking (see 3. above) for the
> technique of avoiding discussion of their claims by "swamping" - piling on
> a whole lot more material rather than respond to the objections sceptics
> make to the previous lot.
These netkooks remind me of a magazine cartoon I once saw.
A Physics professor is standing at a blackboard filled with sequential
equations and is pointing at a large gap between two of them. The text reads
"And then a miracle occurs"....
Of course it's funny because everyone knows a real scientist wouldn't dare
try that, nor would he get away with it if he did, but that same "And then a
miracle occurs" type of reasoning is all that the netkooks *ever* have to
offer, and then the poor things get upset when we laugh at them.
Oh well.
snowman
good reason why anyone would do such a thing. I see that there is a new
building that now stands on the site of WTC7 that isn't much different
from the old one. Why blow the old one up if you are going to replace
it with something identical? Maybe Larry Silverstein didn't feel like
painting the place?
snowman
> laughing man wrote:
>
>
> > Show us REAL proof!
>
> How many times do you "think" you'll need to see it
> before it'll erase the brainwashing of your ruling
> masters? Do you still "think" Iraq has WMDs, that
> Bush invaded Iraq to bring freedom, and that Iran is
> about to nuke the free world?
You seem to provide the rationale for the US Government's actions.
Whether or not you choose to believe the reports of Iranian nukes, WMD's
in Iraq etc, those allegations would seem to provide the US government
to take the actions that it has engaged in up to this point. Why then
covertly blow up some of the most prominent buildings in NYC? What is
to be gained?
P. Roehling
"snowman" <x@x.x> wrote
> Good link. The funny thing is that not one of these loons can provide a
> good reason why anyone would do such a thing.
Ohhhh! Ohhhh! (Waves hand vigorously in air.) I know the answer to that
one, teacher!
The netloons have various "reasons", and will be thrilled to tell you about
them (although their reasons often contradict eachother) but the best one is
that Osama Bin Laden and the Moslem extremist groups don't really exist at
all: they're just an invention of the evil Bu$h administration that allowed
Bush to blow up the WTC and then blame it on somebody else so he could
invade the middle east and get rich(er) on their oil.
Yes, really.
snowman
> "snowman" <x@x.x> wrote
>
>> Good link. The funny thing is that not one of these loons can provide a
>> good reason why anyone would do such a thing.
>
> Ohhhh! Ohhhh! (Waves hand vigorously in air.) I know the answer to that
> one, teacher!
>
> The netloons have various "reasons", and will be thrilled to tell you about
> them (although their reasons often contradict eachother) but the best one is
> that Osama Bin Laden and the Moslem extremist groups don't really exist at
> all: they're just an invention of the evil Bu$h administration that allowed
> Bush to blow up the WTC and then blame it on somebody else so he could
> invade the middle east and get rich(er) on their oil.
>
> Yes, really.
>
>
mommy...@gmail.com
drivel from a liar snipped.
Read your own posts and note that you match all of the criteria
10 characteristics of conspiracy theorists
1. Arrogance. They are always fact-seekers, questioners, people who
are trying to discover the truth: sceptics are always "sheep", patsies
for Messrs Bush and Blair etc.
2. Relentlessness. They will always go on and on about a conspiracy no
matter how little evidence they have to go on or how much of what they
have is simply discredited. (Moreover, as per 1. above, even if you
listen to them ninety-eight times, the ninety-ninth time, when you say
"no thanks", you'll be called a "sheep" again.) Additionally, they
have no capacity for precis whatsoever. They go on and on at enormous
length.
3. Inability to answer questions. For people who loudly advertise
their determination to the principle of questioning everything,
they're pretty poor at answering direct questions from sceptics about
the claims that they make.
4. Fondness for certain stock phrases. These include Cicero's "cui
bono?" (of which it can be said that Cicero understood the importance
of having evidence to back it up) and Conan Doyle's "once we have
eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however unlikely, must be
the truth". What these phrases have in common is that they are
attempts to absolve themselves from any responsibility to produce
positive, hard evidence themselves: you simply "eliminate the
impossible" (i.e. say the official account can't stand scrutiny) which
means that the wild allegation of your choice, based on "cui
bono?" (which is always the government) is therefore the truth.
5. Inability to employ or understand Occam's Razor. Aided by the
principle in 4. above, conspiracy theorists never notice that the
small inconsistencies in the accounts which they reject are dwarfed by
the enormous, gaping holes in logic, likelihood and evidence in any
alternative account.
6. Inability to tell good evidence from bad. Conspiracy theorists have
no place for peer-review, for scientific knowledge, for the
respectability of sources. The fact that a claim has been made by
anybody, anywhere, is enough for them to reproduce it and demand that
the questions it raises be answered, as if intellectual enquiry were a
matter of responding to every rumour. While they do this, of course,
they will claim to have "open minds" and abuse the sceptics for
apparently lacking same.
7. Inability to withdraw. It's a rare day indeed when a conspiracy
theorist admits that a claim they have made has turned out to be
without foundation, whether it be the overall claim itself or any of
the evidence produced to support it. Moreover they have a liking (see
3. above) for the technique of avoiding discussion of their claims by
"swamping" - piling on a whole lot more material rather than respond
to the objections sceptics make to the previous lot.
8. Leaping to conclusions. Conspiracy theorists are very keen indeed
to declare the "official" account totally discredited without having
remotely enough cause so to do. Of course this enables them to wheel
on the Conan Doyle quote as in 4. above. Small inconsistencies in the
account of an event, small unanswered questions, small problems in
timing of differences in procedure from previous events of the same
kind are all more than adequate to declare the "official" account
clearly and definitively discredited. It goes without saying that it
is not necessary to prove that these inconsistencies are either
relevant, or that they even definitely exist.
9. Using previous conspiracies as evidence to support their claims.
This argument invokes scandals like the Birmingham Six, the Bologna
station bombings, the Zinoviev letter and so on in order to try and
demonstrate that their conspiracy theory should be accorded some
weight (because it's "happened before".) They do not pause to reflect
that the conspiracies they are touting are almost always far more
unlikely and complicated than the real-life conspiracies with which
they make comparison, or that the fact that something might
potentially happen does not, in and of itself, make it anything other
than extremely unlikely.
10. It's always a conspiracy. And it is, isn't it? No sooner has the
body been discovered, the bomb gone off, than the same people are
producing the same old stuff, demanding that there are questions which
need to be answered, at the same unbearable length. Because the most
important thing about these people is that they are people entirely
lacking in discrimination. They cannot tell a good theory from a bad
one, they cannot tell good evidence from bad evidence and they cannot
tell a good source from a bad one. And for that reason, they always
come up with the same answer when they ask the same question.
A person who always says the same thing, and says it over and over
again is, of course, commonly considered to be, if not a monomaniac,
then at very least, a bore.
laughing man
> On Dec 17, 6:57 pm, Henry <9...@insidejob.gov> wrote:
that someone still gives a damn.
> A person who always says the same thing, and says it over and over
> again is, of course, commonly considered to be, if not a monomaniac,
> then at very least, a bore.
I know and you used to be a nice, smart, lucid and intelligent person
until the trauma 6 years ago. Unlike YOU and EVERY moron that watched
in tape delay I watched the tradgedy from after the first impact to
the collapses of both towers.
Unlike you I've been to demo ranges and unlike a large percetage of
the idiots you parrot...I've been to the ranges. There were NO charges
in ANY of hte buildings. But believe what you want...you have the
right to been so wrong it will kill you.
laughing man
Awwww CRAP! Sorry about that scanned down too fast and what was
supposed to be sent to my favorite cult member when to you. My
humblist apologies.
Sad isn't it that the theory the towers were a government conspiracy
have taken on the aspects of a cult...
Henry
> These netkooks remind me of a magazine cartoon I once saw.
>
> A Physics professor is standing at a blackboard filled with sequential
> equations and is pointing at a large gap between two of them. The text reads
> "And then a miracle occurs"....
That's how the kooks make the giant leap from a few minor isolated
fires to the total free fall speed and symmetric disintegration of
WTC7's entire steel frame. You kooks are at least amusing. Your
"reasoning" ability also explains why you're forced to hide behind
your killfile and spew silly drivel when your magic fire miracle is
challenged by your many thinking betters. <chuckle>
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/wtc4des1.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/docs/bjh/14.jpg
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/gzpo1.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/wtc7fire3.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/b7/collateral.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/wtc7fire1.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/attack/wtc7.html
http://www.911research.com/wtc/evidence/videos/docs/wtc7_collapse2.mpg
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.html
Henry
Why do you get into a discussion if you're not going
to pay attention to the facts presented? We've covered
that several times.
http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/spingola/060212
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/silverstein.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/wtc7/index.html
Henry
> Ohhhh! Ohhhh! (Waves hand vigorously in air.) I know the answer to that
> one, teacher!
Yeah, "everybody" "knows" the cave man did it. <chuckle>
Happy coincidenting!
That governments have permitted terrorist acts against their own people
, and have even themselves been perpetrators in order to find strategic
advantage is quite likely true, but this is the United States we're
talking about.
That intelligence agencies, financiers, terrorists and narco-criminals
have a long history together is well established, but the Nugan Hand
Bank , BCCI , Banco Ambrosiano , the P2 Lodge , the CIA/Mafia
anti-Castro/Kennedy alliance, Iran/Contra and the rest were a long time
ago, so there's no need to rehash all that . That was then, this is now !
That Jonathan Bush's Riggs Bank has been found guilty of laundering
terrorist funds and fined a US-record $25 million must embarrass his
nephew George, but it's still no justification for leaping to paranoid
conclusions.
That George Bush's brother Marvin sat on the board of the Kuwaiti-owned
company which provided electronic security to the World Trade Centre,
Dulles Airport and United Airlines means nothing more than you must
admit those Bush boys have done alright for themselves.
That George Bush found success as a businessman only after the
investment of Osama's brother Salem and reputed al Qaeda financier
Khalid bin Mahfouz is just one of those things - one of those crazy things.
That Osama bin Laden is known to have been an asset of US foreign policy
in no way implies he still is .
That al Qaeda was active in the Balkan conflict, fighting on the same
side as the US as recently as 1999, while the US protected its cells, is
merely one of history's little aberrations .
The claims of Michael Springman , State Department veteran of the Jeddah
visa bureau, that the CIA ran the office and issued visas to al Qaeda
members so they could receive training in the United States, sound like
the sour grapes of someone who was fired for making such wild accusations.
That one of George Bush's first acts as President, in January 2001 , was
to end the two-year deployment of attack submarines which were
positioned within striking distance of al Qaeda's Afghanistan camps,
even as the group's guilt for the Cole bombing was established, proves
that a transition from one administration to the next is never an easy task.
That so many influential figures in and close to the Bush White House
had expressed, just a year before the attacks, the need for a "new Pearl
Harbor" before their militarist ambitions could be fulfilled,
demonstrates nothing more than the accidental virtue of being in the
right place at the right time.
That the company PTECH , founded by a Saudi financier placed on
America's Terrorist Watch List in October 2001, had access to the FAA's
entire computer system for two years before the 9/11 attack, means he
must not have been such a threat after all.
That whistleblower Indira Singh was told to keep her mouth shut and
forget what she learned when she took her concerns about PTECH to her
employers and federal authorities, suggests she lacked the big picture.
And that the Chief Auditor for JP Morgan Chase told Singh repeatedly, as
she answered questions about who supplied her with what information,
that "that person should be killed," suggests he should take an anger
management seminar.
That on May 8, 2001 , Dick Cheney took upon himself the job of
co-ordinating a response to domestic terror attacks even as he was
crafting the administration's energy policy which bore implications for
America's military, circumventing the established infrastructure and
ignoring the recommendations of the Hart-Rudman report, merely shows the
VP to be someone who finds it hard to delegate.
That the standing order which covered the shooting down of hijacked
aircraft was altered on June 1, 2001, taking discretion away from field
commanders and placing it solely in the hands of the Secretary of
Defense, is simply poor planning and unfortunate timing. Fortunately the
error has been corrected, as the order was rescinded shortly after 9/11.
That in the weeks before 9/11, FBI agent Colleen Rowley found her
investigation of Zacarias Moussaoui so perversely thwarted that her
colleagues joked that bin Laden had a mole at the FBI, proves the
stress-relieving virtue of humour in the workplace.
That Dave Frasca of the FBI's Radical Fundamentalist Unit received a
promotion after quashing multiple, urgent requests for investigations
into al Qaeda assets training at flight schools in the summer of 2001
does appear on the surface odd, but undoubtedly there's a good reason
for it, quite possibly classified.
That FBI informant Randy Glass , working an undercover sting, was told
by Pakistani intelligence operatives that the World Trade Center towers
were coming down, and that his repeated warnings which continued until
weeks before the attacks, including the mention of planes used as
weapons, were ignored by federal authorities, is simply one of the many
"What Ifs" of that tragic day.
That over the summer of 2001 Washington received many urgent,
senior-level warnings from foreign intelligence agencies and governments
- including those of Germany, France, Great Britain, Russia, Egypt,
Israel, Morocco, Afghanistan and others - of impending terror attacks
using hijacked aircraft and did nothing, demonstrates the pressing need
for a new Intelligence Czar.
That John Ashcroft stopped flying commercial aircraft in July 2001 on
account of security considerations had nothing to do with warnings
regarding September 11, because he said so to the 9/11 Commission.
That former lead counsel for the House David Schippers says he'd taken
to John Ashcroft's office specific warnings he'd learned from FBI agents
in New York of an impending attack – even naming the proposed dates,
names of the hijackers and the targets – and that the investigations had
been stymied and the agents threatened, proves nothing but David
Schipper's pathetic need for attention.
That Garth Nicolson received two warnings from contacts in the
intelligence community and one from a North African head of state, which
included specific site, date and source of the attacks, and passed the
information to the Defense Department and the National Security Council
to evidently no effect, clearly amounts to nothing, since virtually
nobody has ever heard of him.
That in the months prior to September 11, self-described US intelligence
operative Delmart Vreeland sought, from a Toronto jail cell, to get US
and Canadian authorities to heed his warning of his accidental discovery
of impending catastrophic attacks is worthless, since Vreeland was a
dubious character , notwithstanding the fact that many of his claims
have since been proven true .
That FBI Special Investigator Robert Wright claims that agents assigned
to intelligence operations actually protect terrorists from
investigation and prosecution, that the FBI shut down his probe into
terrorist training camps, and that he was removed from a
money-laundering case that had a direct link to terrorism, sounds like
yet more sour grapes from a disgruntled employee.
That George Bush had plans to invade Afghanistan on his desk before 9/11
demonstrates only the value of being prepared .
The suggestion that securing a pipeline across Afghanistan figured into
the White House's calculations is as ludicrous as the assertion that oil
played a part in determining war in Iraq.
That Afghanistan is once again the world's principal heroin producer is
an unfortunate reality, but to claim the CIA is still actively involved
in the narcotics trade is to presume bad faith on the part of the agency.
Mahmood Ahmed , chief of Pakistan's ISI, must not have authorized an al
Qaeda payment of $100,000 to Mohammed Atta days before the attacks, and
was not meeting with senior Washington officials over the week of 9/11,
because I didn't read anything about him in the official report.
That Porter Goss met with Ahmed the morning of September 11 in his
capacity as Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence has no bearing whatsoever upon his recent selection by the
White House to head the Central Intelligence Agency.
That Goss's congressional seat encompasses the 9/11 hijackers' Florida
base of operation, including their flight schools, is precisely the kind
of meaningless factoid a conspiracy theorist would bring up.
It's true that George HW Bush and Dick Cheney spent the evening of
September 10 alone in the Oval Office, but what's wrong with old
colleagues catching up? And it's true that George HW Bush and Shafig bin
Laden, Osama's brother, spent the morning of September 11 together at a
board meeting of the Carlyle Group, but the bin Ladens are a big family.
That FEMA arrived in New York on Sept 10 to prepare for a scheduled
biowarfare drill, and had a triage centre ready to go that was larger
and better equipped than the one that was lost in the collapse of WTC 7,
was a lucky twist of fate.
Newsweek's report that senior Pentagon officials cancelled flights on
Sept 10 for the following day on account of security concerns is only
newsworthy because of what happened the following morning.
That George Bush's telephone logs for September 11 do not exist should
surprise no one, given the confusion of the day.
That Mohamed Atta attended the International Officer's School at Maxwell
Air Force Base, that Abdulaziz Alomari attended Brooks Air Force Base
Aerospace Medical School, that Saeed Alghamdi attended the Defense
Language Institute in Monterey merely shows it is a small world , after all.
That Lt Col Steve Butler , Vice Chancellor for student affairs of the
Defense Language Institute during Alghamdi's terms, was disciplined ,
removed from his post and threatened with court martial when he wrote
"Bush knew of the impending attacks on America. He did nothing to warn
the American people because he needed this war on terrorism. What
is...contemptible is the President of the United States not telling the
American people what he knows for political gain," is the least that
should have happened for such disrespect shown his Commander in Chief.
That Mohammed Atta dressed like a Mafioso, had a stripper girlfriend,
smuggled drugs, was already a licensed pilot when he entered the US,
enjoyed pork chops, drank to excess and did cocaine, was closer to
Europeans than Arabs in Florida, and included the names of defence
contractors on his email list, proves how dangerous the radical
fundamentalist Muslim can be.
That 43 lbs of heroin was found on board the Lear Jet owned by Wally
Hilliard , the owner of Atta's flight school, just three weeks after
Atta enrolled – the biggest seizure ever in Central Florida – was just
bad luck . That Hilliard was not charged shows how specious the claims
for conspiracy truly are.
That Hilliard's plane had made 30-round trips to Venezuela with the same
passengers who always paid cash, that the plane had been supplied by a
pair of drug smugglers who had also outfitted CIA drug runner Barry Seal
, and that 9/11 commissioner Richard ben-Veniste had been Seal's
attorney before Seal's murder , shows nothing but the lengths to which
conspiracists will go to draw sinister conclusions .
Reports of insider trading on 9/11 are false, because the SEC
investigated and found only respectable investors who will remain
nameless involved, and no terrorists, so the windfall profit-taking was
merely, as ever, coincidental.
That heightened security for the World Trade Centre was lifted
immediately prior to the attacks illustrates that it always happens when
you least expect it.
That Hani Hanjour, the pilot of Flight 77, was so incompetent he could
not fly a Cessna in August, but in September managed to fly a 767 at
excessive speed into a spiraling, 270-degree descent and a level impact
of the first floor of the Pentagon, on the only side that was virtually
empty and had been hardened to withstand a terrorist attack, merely
demonstrates that people can do almost anything once they set their
minds to it.
That none of the flight data recorders were said to be recoverable even
though they were located in the tail sections, and that until 9/11, no
solid-state recorder in a catastrophic crash had been unrecoverable,
shows how there's a first time for everything.
That Mohammed Atta left a uniform, a will, a Koran, his driver's license
and a "how to fly planes" video in his rental car at the airport means
he had other things on his mind.
The mention of Israelis with links to military-intelligence having been
arrested on Sept 11 videotaping and celebrating the attacks, of an
Israeli espionage ring surveiling DEA and defense installations and
trailing the hijackers, and of a warning of impending attacks delivered
to the Israeli company Odigo two hours before the first plane hit, does
not deserve a response. That the stories also appeared in publications
such as Ha'aretz and Forward is a sad display of self-hatred among
certain elements of the Israeli media.
That multiple military wargames and simulations were underway the
morning of 9/11 – one simulating the crash of a plane into a building;
another, a live-fly simulation of multiple hijackings – and took many
interceptors away from the eastern seaboard and confused field
commanders as to which was a real hijacked aircraft and which was a
hoax, was a bizarre coincidence, but no less a coincidence.
That the National Military Command Center ops director asked a rookie
substitute to stand his watch at 8:30 am on Sept. 11 is nothing more
than bad timing.
That a recording made Sept 11 of air traffic controllers' describing
what they had witnessed, was destroyed by an FAA official who crushed it
in his hand, cut the tape into little pieces and dropped them in
different trash cans around the building, is something no doubt that
overzealous official wishes he could undo.
That the FBI knew precisely which Florida flight schools to descend upon
hours after the attacks should make every American feel safer knowing
their federal agents are on the ball.
That a former flight school executive believes the hijackers were
"double agents," and says about Atta and associates, "Early on I gleaned
that these guys had government protection. They were let into this
country for a specific purpose," and was visited by the FBI just four
hours after the attacks to intimidate him into silence, proves he's an
unreliable witness, for the simple reason there is no conspiracy .
That Jeb Bush was on board an aircraft that removed flight school
records to Washington in the middle of the night on Sept 12th
demonstrates how seriously the governor takes the issue of national
security.
To insinuate evil motive from the mercy flights of bin Laden family
members and Saudi royals after 9/11 shows the sickness of the
conspiratorial mindset.
Le Figaro's report in October 2001, known to have originated with French
intelligence, that the CIA met Osama bin Laden in a Dubai hospital in
July 2001, proves again the perfidy of the French.
That the tape in which bin Laden claims responsibility for the attacks
was released by the State Department after having been found
providentially by US forces in Afghanistan, and depicts a fattened Osama
with a broader face and a flatter nose, proves Osama, and Osama alone,
masterminded 9/11.
That at the battle of Tora Bora, where bin Laden was surrounded on three
sides, Special Forces received no order to advance and capture him and
were forced to stand and watch as two Russian-made helicopters flew into
the area where bin Laden was believed hiding, loaded up passengers and
returned to Pakistan, demonstrates how confusing the modern battlefield
can be.
That upon returning to Fort Bragg from Tora Bora, the same Special
Operations troops who had been stood down from capturing bin Laden,
suffered a unusual spree of murder/suicides , is nothing more than a
series of senseless tragedies.
Reports that bin Laden is currently receiving periodic dialysis
treatment in a Pakistani medical hospital are simply too incredible to
be true.
That the White House went on Cipro September 11 shows the
foresightedness of America's emergency response.
That the anthrax was mailed to perceived liberal media and the
Democratic leadership demonstrates only the perversity of the terrorist
psyche.
That the anthrax attacks appeared to silence opponents of the Patriot
Act shows only that appearances can be deceiving.
That the Ames-strain anthrax was found to have originated at Fort
Detrick , and was beyond the capability of all but a few labs to refine,
underscores the importance of allowing the investigation to continue
without the distraction of absurd conspiracy theories .
That Republican guru Grover Norquist has been found to have aided
financiers and supporters of Islamic terror to gain access to the Bush
White House, and is a founder of the Islamic Institute, which the
Treasury Department believes to be a source of funding for al Qaeda,
suggests Norquist is at worst, naive, and at best, needs a wider circle
of friends.
That the Department of Justice consistently chooses to see accused 9/11
plotters go free rather than permit the courtroom testimony of al Qaeda
leaders in American custody looks bad, but only because we don't have
all the facts.
That the White House balked at any inquiry into the events of 9/11, then
starved it of funds and stonewalled it, was unfortunate, but since the
commission didn't find for conspiracy it's all a non issue anyway.
That the 9/11 commission's executive director and "gatekeeper," Philip
Zelikow, was so closely involved in the events under investigation that
he testified before the the commission as part of the inquiry, shows
only an apparent conflict of interest.
That commission chair Thomas Kean is, like George Bush, a Texas oil
executive who had business dealings with reputed al Qaeda financier
Khalid bin Mafouz , suggests Texas is smaller than they say it is.
That co-chair Lee Hamilton has a history as a Bush family "fixer,"
including clearing Bush Sr of the claims arising from the 1980 "October
Surprise" , is of no concern, since only conspiracists believe there was
such a thing as an October Surprise.
That FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds accuses the agency of intentionally
fudging specific pre-9/11 warnings and harboring a foreign espionage
ring in its translation department , and claims she witnessed evidence
of the semi-official infrastructure of money-laundering and narcotics
trade behind the attacks, is of no account, since John Ashcroft has
gagged her with the rare invocation of "State Secrets Privilege," and
retroactively classified her public testimony. For the sake of national
security, let us speak no more of her.
That, when commenting on Edmond's case, Daniel Ellsberg remarked that
Ashcroft could go to prison for his part in a cover-up, suggests
Ellsberg is giving comfort to the terrorists, and could, if he doesn't
wise up, find himself declared an enemy combatant .
I could go on. And on and on. But I trust you get the point. Which is
simply this: there are no secrets, an American government would never
accept civilian casualties for geostrategic gain, and conspiracies are
for the weak-minded and gullible.
--
http://911research.wtc7.net
http://stj911.org
http://stopthelie.com/1-hour_guide_to_911.html
http://www.911truth.org
Here's what happens to steel framed buildings exposed
to raging infernos for hours on end.
http://davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr69c.html
On 9-11-01, WTC7, a 47 story steel framed building, which
had only small, random fires, dropped in perfect symmetry
at near free fall speed as in a perfectly executed controlled
demolition.
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.html
http://wtc7.net/articles/FEMA/WTC_ch5.htm
Ever wonder who benefits from the 700 MILLION
U.S. taxpayer dollars spent each DAY in Iraq?
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0223-08.htm
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?list=type&type=21
"The new America, born in sin and arrogance, delusional
Henry
> P. "I'm not psychotic at all" Roehling timidly chirped:
>> Yes, really.
> Lol, for sure :-)
Facts, science, evidence, logic, and reality are
terrifying things for a mindless Bush parroting magic
fire cartoon conspiracy kook, aren't they? That's because
they have a very convincing way of exposing you and
your conspiracy theory as comically absurd, isn't it?
<vbg>
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/wtc4des1.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/docs/bjh/14.jpg
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/gzpo1.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/wtc7fire3.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/b7/collateral.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/wtc7fire1.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/attack/wtc7.html
http://www.911research.com/wtc/evidence/videos/docs/wtc7_collapse2.mpg
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.html
--
http://911research.wtc7.net
http://stj911.org
http://stopthelie.com/1-hour_guide_to_911.html
http://www.911truth.org
Here's what happens to steel framed buildings exposed
to raging infernos for hours on end.
http://davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr69c.html
On 9-11-01, WTC7, a 47 story steel framed building, which
had only small, random fires, dropped in perfect symmetry
at near free fall speed as in a perfectly executed controlled
demolition.
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.html
http://wtc7.net/articles/FEMA/WTC_ch5.htm
Ever wonder who benefits from the 700 MILLION
U.S. taxpayer dollars spent each DAY in Iraq?
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0223-08.htm
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?list=type&type=21
"They are waging a campaign of murder and destruction. And
there is no limit to the innocent lives they are willing to
take... men with blind hatred and armed with lethal weapons
who are capable of any atrocity... they respect no laws of
warfare or morality."
-bu$h describing his own illegal invasion of Iraq.
http://www.robert-fisk.com/iraqwarvictims_mar2003.htm
http://www.commondreams.org/
http://thirdworldtraveler.com/
"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things
that matter." -- Martin Luther King Jr.
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is
not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."
-- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)
Don't let bu$h do to the United States what his very close
friend and top campaign contributor, Ken Lay, did to Enron...
Henry
> 10 characteristics of conspiracy theorists
My favorite is your complete inability to address
the facts, science, hard evidence, expert research,
or think logically. But I suppose if your "mind"
isn't capable of rational thought at even a very
basic level, you've got little choice but to put
you faith in your ruling masters and parrot the
comical lies they feed you. Pitiful that - but
still rather amusing. <chuckle>
http://www.journalof911studies.com/articles/Journal_2_Evidence_for_demolition_20.pdf
The secrecy surrounding the events after 9/11 prevents public
investigation through normal channels. It is still possible
however to examine the surviving available evidence to see what
can be deduced. If it can be readily deduced that explosives
brought down the buildings then the official explanation for the
collapse, which avoids consideration of explosives, must be
reevaluated in an attempt to discover its purpose. What surviving
evidence is there and what can be deduced from it? In my view the
deductions based on videos may be regarded as virtually irrefutable.
Deductions based on photographs and statements by observers may be
weighed by considering the possibility of forgery and the
variability of witness reports.
Observations and deductions from videos
1. WTC 7 collapsed straight down. This requires that, at the moment
of collapse, if caused by fires weakening the supports, not only did
the north and south pair of walls have to be of equal strength, but
also the east and west pair. Without such symmetry this tall
building would inevitably have toppled over. Even if the fires had been
intense and widespread this dual symmetry would have only a very low
probability of existence. Given the uneven distribution of the small
fires at the time of collapse the probability of the required symmetry
vanishes, hence fires did not cause the collapse.
2. The acceleration downwards of WTC 7 was 30 feet per second per
second. This is so close to the free fall acceleration of 32.2 feet
per second per second in a vacuum that virtually no resistance
throughout the fall can have existed. Also the acceleration of WTC
was constant right from the start. Steel softens slowly as it is heated
and, when just failing, still provides substantial resistance. There
was however no sign of the steel giving way gradually as its
temperature rose. These two observations, taken together, imply that
the support structures were instantly and completely severed.
3. A stream of molten metal, yellow-hot and flashing white-hot, was
observed running from WTC 2 near the plane impact region. Shortly after
this the building collapsed. When metal is white hot it is at a
temperature of at least 1200o C, and when yellow it is at about
1000o C, far hotter than possible from the burning of aircraft fuel
or office materials. The use of an oxidizing chemical reaction, such as
occurs with thermite, or something similar, is implied. The thermite
reaction achieves a temperature well in excess of 2000o C, and
produces molten iron as a by-product, melting point 1540o C. It is
used to cut steel, melting point about 1500o C.
4. During the collapse of WTC 1 and WTC 2 vast clouds of dense dust and
portions of the steel columns were violently thrown out.5 The dust came
mainly from the pulverization of the concrete that was in the floors.
The dust cloud and steel were evident early in the collapse, before the
parts had picked up much speed, so cannot have come from component
impacts. For the pulverization of the concrete, and also to rapidly
expand the dust cloud against the pressure of the atmosphere, a very
substantial additional source of energy is required. The theory that
this energy could have come from the potential energy in the building
is clearly untenable as virtually all of the potential energy had to be
consumed in providing the kinetic energy for the high downward
acceleration, so close to free fall.9
5. Computer simulations by Lu and Jiang show that, for WTC 1 and WTC 2,
collapse in the fire damaged region would have been impossible at the
known temperature of the steel supports.
6. Calculations by Gordon Ross show that, if a floor near the plane
impact site instantly and totally disintegrated, the energy available
from the falling of the top portion would not be sufficient to provide
the energy needed to sustain the collapse through the undamaged
lower portion. Thus, in the absence of explosives, the top would have
decelerated and come to rest.
Deductions from observer statements and photographs
1. Weeks after 9/11 workers were still unearthing extremely hot
material. A photograph shows solid yellow-hot metal clamped in
the jaws of an excavator. The color shows this to be at least
1000o C. This cannot be aluminium, which melts at 660o C, and
therefore must be iron or steel. It is impossible for a fire without
a dense supply of fuel and forced draft to achieve such high
temperatures, hence another energy source must have been involved.
2. Molten metal was observed in the basement of all three buildings
and the high temperatures were confirmed by aerial infra-red imaging.
This observation can be readily explained by the use of thermite which
contains a chemical oxidant, so does not depend on an air supply. The
by-product of its reaction is molten iron. This would explain not only
the high temperatures achieved in a confined space but also the
presence of liquid metal, as described more fully in point 3 of the
list above.
3. Numerous eye witnesses reported hearing and feeling explosions. Some
were injured and some reported being blown off their feet.
4. A photograph of WTC 2 shortly after the collapse commenced shows the
falling top block distorting, though it was straight just before the
fall commenced. As there can be no force acting on the block during
free fall, this could not have occurred unless the block had already
lost its support structure.
Henry
> Awwww CRAP! Sorry about that scanned down too fast and what was
> supposed to be sent to my favorite cult member when to you.
Magic fire cartoon conspiracy kooks tend to have great
difficulty expressing their "thoughts" using English.
> My humblist apologies.
No worries, We've seen it many times before. In addition
to their comical, pitiful, and desperate avoidance of the
facts and evidence, Bush parroting cartoon conspiracy clowns
tend to share severely stunted "intellects". <chuckle>
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2006/11/overwhelming-majority-of-credible.html
MILITARY LEADERS
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense under President Ronald Reagan
(Col. Ronald D. Ray) said that the official story of 9/11 is "the dog
that doesn't hunt" (bio)
Director of the U.S. "Star Wars" space defense program in both
Republican and Democratic administrations, who was a senior air force
colonel who flew 101 combat missions (Col. Robert Bowman) stated that
9/11 was an inside job. He also said:
"If our government had merely [done] nothing, and I say that as an
old interceptor pilot—I know the drill, I know what it takes, I know how
long it takes, I know what the procedures are, I know what they were,
and I know what they’ve changed them to—if our government had merely
done nothing, and allowed normal procedures to happen on that morning of
9/11, the Twin Towers would still be standing and thousands of dead
Americans would still be alive. [T]hat is treason!"
U.S. Army Air Defense Officer and NORAD Tac Director, decorated with the
Purple Heart, the Bronze Star and the Soldiers Medal (Capt. Daniel
Davis) stated:
"there is no way that an aircraft . . . would not be intercepted
when they deviate from their flight plan, turn off their transponders,
or stop communication with Air Traffic Control ... Attempts to obscure
facts by calling them a 'conspiracy Theory' does not change the truth.
It seems, 'Something is rotten in the State.' "
President of the U.S. Air Force Accident Investigation Board, who also
served as Pentagon Weapons Requirement Officer and as a member of the
Pentagon's Quadrennial Defense Review, and who was awarded Distinguished
Flying Crosses for Heroism, four Air Medals, four Meritorious Service
Medals, and nine Aerial Achievement Medals (Lt. Col. Jeff Latas) is a
member of a group which doubts the government's version of 9/11
U.S. General, Commanding General of U.S. European Command and Supreme
Allied Commander Europe, decorated with the Bronze Star, Silver Star,
and Purple Heart (General Wesley Clark) said "We've never finished the
investigation of 9/11 and whether the administration actually misused
the intelligence information it had. The evidence seems pretty clear to
me. I've seen that for a long time."
Air Force Colonel and key Pentagon official (Lt. Colonel Karen
Kwiatkowski) finds various aspects of 9/11 suspicious. She also said:
(at page 26):
"I have been told by reporters that they will not report their own
insights or contrary evaluations of the official 9/11 story, because to
question the government story about 9/11 is to question the very
foundations of our entire modern belief system regarding our government,
our country, and our way of life. [However], questioning the official
story is also simply and fundamentally American."
Lieutenant colonel, 24-year Air Force career, Vice Chancellor for
Student Affairs at the Defense Language Institute (Lt. Colonel Steve
Butler) said "Of course Bush knew about the impending attacks on
America. He did nothing to warn the American people because he needed
this war on terrorism."
Two-Star general (Major General Albert Stubbelbine) questions the attack
on the Pentagon
U.S. Air Force fighter pilot, former instructor at the USAF Fighter
Weapons School and NATO’s Tactical Leadership Program, with a 20-year
Air Force career (Lt. Colonel Guy S. Razer) said the following:
"I am 100% convinced that the attacks of September 11, 2001 were
planned, organized, and committed by treasonous perpetrators that have
infiltrated the highest levels of our government ....
Those of us in the military took an oath to "support and defend the
Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and
domestic". Just because we have retired does not make that oath invalid,
so it is not just our responsibility, it is our duty to expose the real
perpetrators of 9/11 and bring them to justice, no matter how hard it
is, how long it takes, or how much we have to suffer to do it.
We owe it to those who have gone before us who executed that same
oath, and who are doing the same thing in Iraq and Afghanistan right
now. Those of us who joined the military and faithfully executed orders
that were given us had to trust our leaders. The violation and abuse of
that trust is not only heinous, but ultimately the most accurate
definition of treason!"
U.S. Marine Corps lieutenant colonel, a fighter pilot with over 300
combat missions flown and a 21-year Marine Corps career (Lt. Colonel
Shelton F. Lankford) believes that 9/11 was an inside job, and said:
"This isn't about party, it isn't about Bush Bashing. It's about
our country, our constitution, and our future. ...
Your countrymen have been murdered and the more you delve into it
the more it looks as though they were murdered by our government, who
used it as an excuse to murder other people thousands of miles away.
If you ridicule others who have sincere doubts and who know factual
information that directly contradicts the official report and who want
explanations from those who hold the keys to our government, and have
motive, means, and opportunity to pull off a 9/11, but you are too lazy
or fearful, or ... to check into the facts yourself, what does that make
you? ....
Are you afraid that you will learn the truth and you can't handle
it? ..."
U.S. Navy 'Top Gun' pilot (Commander Ralph Kolstad) who questions the
official account of 9/11 and is calling for a new investigation, says
"When one starts using his own mind, and not what one was told, there is
very little to believe in the official story".
The Group Director on matters of national security in the U.S.
Government Accountability Office said that President Bush did not
respond to unprecedented warnings of the 9/11 disaster and conducted a
massive cover-up instead of accepting responsibility
Additionally, numerous military leaders from allied governments have
questioned 9/11, such as:
Canadian Minister of Defense, the top military leader of Canada (Paul
Hellyer)
Assistant German Defense Minister (Andreas Von Bulow)
Commander-in-chief of the Russian Navy (Anatoli Kornukov)
Chief of staff of the Russian armed forces (General Leonid Ivashov)
INTELLIGENCE PROFESSIONALS
Former military analyst and famed whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg recently
said that the case of a certain 9/11 whistleblower is "far more
explosive than the Pentagon Papers". He also said that the government is
ordering the media to cover up her allegations about 9/11. And he said
that some of the claims concerning government involvement in 9/11 are
credible, that "very serious questions have been raised about what they
[U.S. government officials] knew beforehand and how much involvement
there might have been", that engineering 9/11 would not be humanly or
psychologically beyond the scope of the current administration, and that
there's enough evidence to justify a new, "hard-hitting" investigation
into 9/11 with subpoenas and testimony taken under oath.
A 27-year CIA veteran, who chaired National Intelligence Estimates and
personally delivered intelligence briefings to Presidents Ronald Reagan
and George H.W. Bush, their Vice Presidents, Secretaries of State, the
Joint Chiefs of Staff, and many other senior government officials
(Raymond McGovern) said “I think at simplest terms, there’s a cover-up.
The 9/11 Report is a joke”, and is open to the possibility that 9/11 was
an inside job.
A 29-year CIA veteran, former National Intelligence Officer (NIO) and
former Director of the CIA's Office of Regional and Political Analysis
(William Bill Christison) said “I now think there is persuasive evidence
that the events of September did not unfold as the Bush administration
and the 9/11 Commission would have us believe. ... All three [buildings
that were destroyed in the World Trade Center] were most probably
destroyed by controlled demolition charges placed in the buildings
before 9/11." (and see this).
20-year Marine Corps infantry and intelligence officer, the
second-ranking civilian in U.S. Marine Corps Intelligence, and former
CIA clandestine services case officer (David Steele) stated that "9/11
was at a minimum allowed to happen as a pretext for war", and it was
probably an inside job (see Customer Review dated October 7, 2006).
A decorated 20-year CIA veteran, who Pulitzer-Prize winning
investigative reporter Seymour Hersh called "perhaps the best
on-the-ground field officer in the Middle East”, and whose astounding
career formed the script for the Academy Award winning motion picture
Syriana (Robert Baer) said that"the evidence points at" 9/11 having had
aspects of being an inside job .
The Division Chief of the CIA’s Office of Soviet Affairs, who served as
Senior Analyst from 1966 - 1990. He also served as Professor of
International Security at the National War College from 1986 - 2004
(Melvin Goodman) said "The final [9/11 Commission] report is ultimately
a coverup."
Professor of History and International Relations, University of
Maryland. Former Executive Assistant to the Director of the National
Security Agency. Former military attaché in China. 21-year career in
U.S. Army Intelligence (Major John M. Newman, PhD, U.S. Army)
questions the government's version of the events of 9/11.
The head of all U.S. intelligence, the Director of National Intelligence
(Mike McConnel) said "9/11 should have and could have been prevented"
9/11 COMMISSIONERS
The 9/11 Commissioners knew that military officials lied to the
Commission, and considered recommending criminal charges for such false
statements, yet didn't bother to tell the American people (free
subscription required).
Indeed, the co-chairs of the Commission (Thomas Keane and Lee Hamilton)
now admit that the Commission largely operated based upon political
considerations.
9/11 Commission co-chair Lee Hamilton says "I don't believe for a minute
we got everything right", that the Commission was set up to fail, that
people should keep asking questions about 9/11, that the 9/11 debate
should continue, and that the 9/11 Commission report was only "the first
draft" of history.
9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey said that "There are ample reasons to
suspect that there may be some alternative to what we outlined in our
version . . . We didn't have access . . . ."
9/11 Commissioner Timothy Roemer said "We were extremely frustrated with
the false statements we were getting"
Former 9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned from the Commission,
stating: "It is a national scandal"; "This investigation is now
compromised"; and "One of these days we will have to get the full story
because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House
wants to cover it up".
The Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission (John Farmer) who led the 9/11
staff's inquiry, said "I was shocked at how different the truth was from
the way it was described .... The tapes told a radically different story
from what had been told to us and the public for two years.... This is
not spin. This is not true."
SCIENTISTS
A prominent physicist with 33 years of service for the Naval Research
Laboratory in Washington, DC (Dr. David L. Griscom) said that the
official theory for why the Twin Towers and world trade center building
7 collapsed "does not match the available facts" and supports the theory
that the buildings were brought down by controlled demolition
A world-renowned scientist, recipient of the National Medal of Science,
America's highest honor for scientific achievement (Dr. Lynn Margulis) said:
"I suggest that those of us aware and concerned demand that the
glaringly erroneous official account of 9/11 be dismissed as a fraud and
a new, thorough, and impartial investigation be undertaken."
The former head of the Fire Science Division of the government agency
which claims that the World Trade Centers collapsed due to fire (the
National Institute of Standards and Technology), who is a Ph.D. in
mechanical engineering, with more than 25 years experience in fire
research and its applications, and is a professor in the Department of
Fire Protection Engineering at the University of Maryland (Dr. James
Quintiere), called for an independent review of the World Trade Center
Twin Tower collapse investigation. "I wish that there would be a peer
review of this," he said, referring to the NIST investigation. "I think
all the records that NIST has assembled should be archived. I would
really like to see someone else take a look at what they've done; both
structurally and from a fire point of view. ... I think the official
conclusion that NIST arrived at is questionable."
Former Director for Research, Director for Aeronautical Projects, and
Flight Research Program Manager for NASA's Dryden Flight Research
Center, who holds masters degrees in both physics and engineering (Dwain
A. Deets) says:
"The many visual images (massive structural members being hurled
horizontally, huge pyroclastic clouds, etc.) leave no doubt in my mind
explosives were involved [in the destruction of the World Trade Centers
on 9/11].''
A prominent physicist, former U.S. professor of physics from a top
university, and a former principal investigator for the U.S. Department
of Energy, Division of Advanced Energy Projects (Dr. Steven E. Jones)
stated that the world trade centers were brought down by controlled
demolition
A U.S. physics professor who teaches at several universities (Dr.
Crockett Grabbe) believes that the World Trade Centers were brought down
by controlled demolition
An expert on demolition (Bent Lund) said that the trade centers were
brought down with explosives (in Danish)
A Dutch demolition expert (Danny Jowenko) stated that WTC 7 was imploded
A safety engineer and accident analyst for the Finnish National Safety
Technology Authority (Dr. Heikki Kurttila) stated regarding WTC 7 that
"The great speed of the collapse and the low value of the resistance
factor strongly suggest controlled demolition."
A 13-year professor of metallurgical engineering at a U.S. university,
with a PhD in materials engineering, a former Congressional Office of
Technology Assessment Senior Staff Member (Dr. Joel S. Hirschhorn), is
calling for a new investigation of 9/11
A Danish professor of chemistry (Dr. Niels Harrit) said, in a mainstream
Danish newspaper, "WTC7 collapsed exactly like a house of cards. If the
fires or damage in one corner had played a decisive role, the building
would have fallen in that direction. You don't have to be a woodcutter
to grasp this" (translated)
A former guidance systems engineer for Polaris and Trident missiles and
professor emeritus, mathematics and computer science at a university
concluded (Dr. Bruce R. Henry) that the Twin Towers "were brought down
by planted explosives."
A professor of mathematics (Gary Welz) said "The official explanation
that I've heard doesn't make sense because it doesn't explain why I
heard and felt an explosion before the South Tower fell and why the
concrete was pulverized"
STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS AND ARCHITECTS
A prominent engineer with 55 years experience, in charge of the design
of hundreds of major building projects including high rise offices,
former member of the California Seismic Safety Commission and former
member of the National Institute of Sciences Building Safety Council
(Marx Ayres) believes that the World Trade Centers were brought down by
controlled demolition (see also this)
Two professors of structural engineering at a prestigious Swiss
university (Dr. Joerg Schneider and Dr. Hugo Bachmann) said that, on
9/11, World Trade Center 7 was brought down by controlled demolition
(translation here)
Charles Pegelow, structural engineer, of Houston, Texas (and see this)
Dennis Kollar, structural engineer, of West Bend, Wisconsin
Doyle Winterton, structural engineer (retired)
Haluk Akol, Structural Engineer and architect (ret.)
William Rice, P.E., structural engineer, former professor of Vermont
Technical College
An architect, member of the American Institute of Architects, who has
been a practicing architect for 20 years and has been responsible for
the production of construction documents for numerous steel-framed and
fire-protected buildings for uses in many different areas, including
education, civic, rapid transit and industrial use (Richard Gage)
disputes the claim that fire and airplane damage brought down the World
Trade Centers and believes there is strong evidence of controlled
demolition (many other architects who question 9/11 are listed here)
LEGAL SCHOLARS
Former Federal Prosecutor, Office of Special Investigations, U.S.
Department of Justice under Presidents Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan;
former U.S. Army Intelligence officer, and currently a widely-sought
media commentator on terrorism and intelligence services (John Loftus)
questions the government's version of 9/11.
Former Inspector General, U.S. Department of Transportation; former
Professor of Aviation, Dept. of Aerospace Engineering and Aviation and
Professor of Public Policy, Ohio State University (Mary Schiavo)
questions the government's version of 9/11.
Professor of International Law at the University of Illinois, Champaign;
a leading practitioner and advocate of international law; responsible
for drafting the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, the
American implementing legislation for the 1972 Biological Weapons
Convention; served on the Board of Directors of Amnesty International
(1988-1992), and represented Bosnia- Herzegovina at the World Court,
with a Doctor of Law Magna Cum Laude as well as a Ph.D. in Political
Science, both from Harvard University (Dr. Francis Boyle) questions the
government's version of 9/11.
Former prosecutor in the Organized Crime and Racketeering Section of the
U.S. Justice Department and a key member of Attorney General Bobby
Kennedy’s anti-corruption task force; former assistant U.S. Attorney for
the Northern District of Illinois (J. Terrence "Terry" Brunner)
questions the government's version of 9/11.
Professor Emeritus, International Law, Professor of Politics and
International Affairs, Princeton University; in 2001 served on the
three-person UN Commission on Human Rights for the Palestine
Territories, and previously, on the Independent International Commission
on Kosovo (Richard Falk) questions the government's version of 9/11.
Bessie Dutton Murray Distinguished Professor of Law Emeritus and
Director, Center for Human Rights, University of Iowa; Fellow, World
Academy of Art and Science. Honorary Editor, Board of Editors, American
Journal of International Law (Burns H. Weston) questions the
government's version of 9/11.
Former president of the National Lawyers Guild (C. Peter Erlinder), who
signed a petition calling for a real investigation into 9/11. And see
petition.
Assistant Professor of Criminal Justice at Troy University; associate
General Counsel, National Association of Federal Agents; Retired Agent
in Charge, Internal Affairs, U.S. Customs, responsible for the internal
integrity and security for areas encompassing nine states and two
foreign locations; former Federal Sky Marshall; 27-year U.S. Customs
career (Mark Conrad) questions the government's version of 9/11.
Professor of Law, University of Freiburg; former Minister of Justice of
West Germany (Horst Ehmke) questions the government's version of 9/11.
Director of Academic Programs, Institute for Policy and Economic
Development, University of Texas, El Paso, specializing in executive
branch secrecy policy, governmental abuse, and law and bureaucracy;
former U.S. Army Signals Intelligence officer; author of several books
on law and political theory (Dr. William G. Weaver) questions the
government's version of 9/11.
Famed trial attorney (Gerry Spence) questions the government's version
of 9/11.
Former Instructor of Criminal Trial Practice, Boalt Hall School of Law,
University of California at Berkeley 11-year teaching career. Retired
Chief Assistant Public Defender, Contra Costa County, California 31-year
career (William Veale) said:
"When you grow up in the United States, there are some bedrock
principles that require concerted effort to discard. One is the
simplest: that our leaders are good and decent people whose efforts may
occasionally warrant criticism but never because of malice or
venality... But one grows up. ... And with the lawyer's training comes
the reliance on evidence and the facts that persuade... After a lot of
reading, thought, study, and commiseration, I have come to the
conclusion that the attacks of 9/11 were, in their essence, an inside
job perpetrated at the highest levels of the U S government."
MEMBERS OF CONGRESS
Current U.S. Senator (Patrick Leahy) states "The two questions that the
congress will not ask . . . is why did 9/11 happen on George Bush's
watch when he had clear warnings that it was going to happen? Why did
they allow it to happen?"
Current Republican Congressman (Ron Paul) states that "we see the [9/11]
investigations that have been done so far as more or less cover-up and
no real explanation of what went on"
Current Democratic Congressman (Dennis Kucinich) hints that we aren't
being told the truth about 9/11
Former Democratic Senator (Mike Gravel) states that he supports a new
9/11 investigation and that we don't know the truth about 9/11
Former U.S. Republican Congressman and senior member of the House Armed
Services Committee, and who served six years as the Chairman of the
Military Research and Development Subcommittee (Curt Weldon) has shown
that the U.S. tracked hijackers before 9/11, is open to hearing
information about explosives in the Twin Towers, and is open to the
possibility that 9/11 was an inside job
FAMILY MEMBERS AND HEROIC FIRST RESPONDERS
A common criticism of those who question 9/11 is that they are being
"disrespectful to the victims and their families".
However, half of the victim's families believe that 9/11 was an inside
job (according to the head of the largest 9/11 family group, Bill Doyle)
(and listen to this interview). Many family and friends of victims not
only support the search for 9/11 truth, but they demand it (please
ignore the partisan tone). See also this interview.
Indeed, it has now become so clear that the 9/11 Commission was a
whitewash that the same 9/11 widows who called for the creation of the
9/11 Commission are now demanding a NEW investigation (see also this video).
And dying heroes, soon-to-be victims themselves, the first responders
who worked tirelessly to save lives on and after 9/11, say that
controlled demolition brought down the Twin Towers and that a real
investigation is necessary.
PSYCHIATRISTS AND PSYCHOLOGISTS
Finally, those who attack people who question the government's version
of 9/11 as "crazy" may wish to review the list of mental health
professionals who have concluded that the official version of 9/11 is false:
Psychiatrist Carol S. Wolman, MD
Psychiatrist E. Martin Schotz
Associate Clinical Professor of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke
University Medical Center, as well as Radiology, at Duke University
Medical Center D. Lawrence Burk, Jr., MD
Board of Governors Distinguished Service Professor of Psychology and
Associate Dean of the Graduate School at Ruters University Barry R.
Komisaruk
Professor of Psychology at University of New Hampshire William Woodward
Professor of Psychology at University of Essex Philip Cozzolino
Professor of Psychology at Goddard College Catherine Lowther
Professor Emeritus of Psychology at California Institute of Integral
Studies Ralph Metzner
Professor of Psychology at Rhodes University Mike Earl-Taylor
Retired Professor of Psychology at Oxford University Graham Harris
Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology from the University of Nebraska and
licensed Psychologist Ronald Feintech
Ph.D. Clinical Neuropsychologist Richard Welser
THOUSANDS OF OTHERS
The roster above is only a sample. There are too many Ph.D. scientists
and engineers, architects, military and intelligence officials,
politicians, legal scholars and other highly-credible people who
question 9/11 -- literally thousands -- to list in one place. Here are a
few additional people to consider:
The former director of the FBI (Louis Freeh) says there was a cover up
by the 9/11 Commission
Former air traffic controller, who knows the flight corridor which the
two planes which hit the Twin Towers flew "like the back of my hand" and
who handled two actual hijackings (Robin Hordon) says that 9/11 could
not have occurred as the government says, and that planes can be tracked
on radar even when their transponders are turned off (also, listen to
this interview)
Perhaps "the premiere collapse expert in the country", who 9/11
Commissioner Timothy Roemer referred to as a "very, very respected
expert on building collapse", the head of the New York Fire Department's
Special Operations Command and the most highly decorated firefighter in
its NYFD history, who had previously "commanded rescue operations at
many difficult and complex disasters, including the Oklahoma City
Bombing, the 1993 World Trade Center Bombing, and many natural disasters
worldwide" thought that the collapse of the South Tower was caused by
bombs, because the collapse of the building was too even to have been
caused by anything else (pages 5-6).
Former Deputy Secretary for Intelligence and Warning under Nixon, Ford,
and Carter (Morton Goulder), former former Deputy Director to the White
House Task Force on Terrorism (Edward L. Peck), and former US Department
of State Foreign Service Officer (J. Michael Springmann), as well as a
who's who of liberals and independents) jointly call for a new
investigation into 9/11
Former FBI agent (Robert Wright) says "The FBI, rather than trying to
prevent a terrorist attack, was merely gathering intelligence so they
would know who to arrest when a terrorist attack occurred."
Former FBI translator, who the Department of Justice's Inspector General
and several senators have called extremely credible (free subscription
required) (Sibel Edmonds), said "If they were to do real investigations
we would see several significant high level criminal prosecutions in
this country. And that is something that they are not going to let out.
And, believe me; they will do everything to cover this up". She also is
leaning towards the conclusion that 9/11 was an inside job.
--
http://911research.wtc7.net
http://stj911.org
http://stopthelie.com/1-hour_guide_to_911.html
http://www.911truth.org
Here's what happens to steel framed buildings exposed
to raging infernos for hours on end.
http://davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr69c.html
On 9-11-01, WTC7, a 47 story steel framed building, which
had only small, random fires, dropped in perfect symmetry
at near free fall speed as in a perfectly executed controlled
demolition.
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.html
BrianNZ
> P. "I'm not psychotic at all" Roehling timidly chirped:
>
>> These netkooks remind me of a magazine cartoon I once saw.
>>
>> A Physics professor is standing at a blackboard filled with sequential
>> equations and is pointing at a large gap between two of them. The text
>> reads "And then a miracle occurs"....
>
>
> That's how the kooks make the giant leap from a few minor isolated
> fires to the total free fall speed and symmetric disintegration of
> WTC7's entire steel frame. You kooks are at least amusing. Your
> "reasoning" ability also explains why you're forced to hide behind
> your killfile and spew silly drivel when your magic fire miracle is
> challenged by your many thinking betters. <chuckle>
I don't have you killfiled and I'm still waiting for you to back up your
outrageous claims from yesterday. Instead (as expected) you have gone
off on a tangent and moved from George Bush's brothers involvement in
the wiring of the twin towers to the WTC7 fires.
>
................................................................................
> <snip conspiracy theorists tactic #7 > 7. Inability to withdraw. It's a rare day indeed when a conspiracy
>> theorist admits that a claim they have made has turned out to be without
>> foundation, whether it be the overall claim itself or any of the evidence
>> produced to support it. Moreover they have a liking (see 3. above) for the
>> technique of avoiding discussion of their claims by "swamping" - piling on
>> a whole lot more material rather than respond to the objections sceptics
>> make to the previous lot.
................................................................................
>
> We're still waiting for the kooks to provide us with a logical
> explanation other than controlled demolition
> for the fact that the
> buildings closest to the towers remained standing, while WTC7's
> massive hurricane resistant steel frame suddenly disintegrated and
> dropped at virtual free fall speed and perfect symmetry. Limited,
> isolated fires can not possibly cause such a failure. In fact, no
> steel framed building has ever collapsed due to fire.
In fact, no buildings the size of the twin towers have ever been
demolished using explosives. Using your 'it has never happened before,
therefore it's impossible' style of logic, this is proof that the twin
towers were not demolished?
You can't have it both ways........
> It seems controlled demolition is the only possible cause of WTC7's
> demolition.
With the key word here being 'seems'........hardly a factual proof, just
more 'what if' with no substance.
Anyway, back to where we were yesterday with your unanswered
questions.......
P. Roehling
"BrianNZ" <br...@itnz.co.nz> wrote
> I don't have you killfiled and I'm still waiting for you to back up your
> outrageous claims from yesterday. Instead (as expected) you have gone off
> on a tangent and moved from George Bush's brothers involvement in the
> wiring of the twin towers to the WTC7 fires.
True unfettered brilliance such as Hen3ry's cannot be expected to churn the
muddy gutters of logic, truth, or proof like the rest of us.
He's above all that.
BrianNZ
He tricked me into thinking there was a glimmer of sanity by replying to
on topic posts and some of what he said made sense.......but your list
of conspiracy theory tactics was right on the button!! They can all be
applied to his posts at one time or another.
His refusal to acknowledge anything outside his pet sites shows his
blinkers are on permanently and there is nothing that could be said to
get him to back up any of his off the cuff statements.......we are just
supposed to take it as truth 'cos Henry said it!.
He has shown time and time again that he can't back up his remarks, so
even if he did get some truth in there, it would be swallowed up in the
other lies and half truths.
The phrase "Chicken Little" would suit him well.
Not to worry......it's game over time......
snowman
> snowman wrote:
>> P. "I'm not psychotic at all" Roehling timidly chirped:
>
>>> Yes, really.
>
>> Lol, for sure :-)
>
>
> Facts, science, evidence, logic, and reality are
> terrifying things for a mindless Bush parroting magic
> fire cartoon conspiracy kook, aren't they?
~snip~
Stop right there. You speak of facts, science, evidence and logic yet
you immediately contradict those things with a statement that speaks of
"Bush parroting fire cartoon conspiracy kook". Facts, science evidence
and logic all speak of objectivity. Yet your statement is laced
completely with subjectivity, something that immediately betrays any
'evidence' that you put forth. I really don't care what you think about
GWB, you may love him or hate him. But it is up to the reader to
formulate his/her own opinion of him. Sadly, the lack of objectivity in
your opening statement does not lend itself to an objective examination
of the facts. In fact, it demands completely the opposite.
snowman
> snowman wrote:
>> Henry wrote:
>>> laughing man wrote:
>
>>> > Show us REAL proof!
>>>
>>> How many times do you "think" you'll need to see it
>>> before it'll erase the brainwashing of your ruling
>>> masters? Do you still "think" Iraq has WMDs, that
>>> Bush invaded Iraq to bring freedom, and that Iran is
>>> about to nuke the free world?
>>
>> You seem to provide the rationale for the US Government's actions.
>> Whether or not you choose to believe the reports of Iranian nukes,
>> WMD's in Iraq etc, those allegations would seem to provide the US
>> government to take the actions that it has engaged in up to this
>> point. Why then covertly blow up some of the most prominent buildings
>> in NYC? What is to be gained?
>
>
> Why do you get into a discussion if you're not going
> to pay attention to the facts presented? We've covered
> that several times.
>
> http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/spingola/060212
> http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/silverstein.html
> http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/wtc7/index.html
>
>
question. Why blow up WTC7 to replace it with an identical building?
P. Roehling
"BrianNZ" <br...@itnz.co.nz> wrote
> He tricked me into thinking there was a glimmer of sanity by replying to
> on topic posts and some of what he said made sense.......but your list of
> conspiracy theory tactics was right on the button!! They can all be
> applied to his posts at one time or another.
Poor Hen3ry. He hates us because he thinks we've made him look like a fool,
and is incapable of understanding that it's his very own posts that did the
job.
laughing man
> laughing man wrote:
>
> > Awwww CRAP! Sorry about that scanned down too fast and what was
> > supposed to be sent to my favorite cult member when to you.
>
> Magic fire cartoon conspiracy kooks tend to have great
> difficulty expressing their "thoughts" using English.
What magic fire? YOU and the other ilk you parrot and past from
believe in magic fires, mysterious explosives etc.
I NEVER communicate in english... I speak/write in american. You
continue to use a foriegn langauge to make yourself appear sane and
intelligent. What a shame you are failing miserablly.
> > My humblist apologies.
>
> No worries, We've seen it many times before. In addition
> to their comical, pitiful, and desperate avoidance of the
> facts and evidence, Bush parroting cartoon conspiracy clowns
> tend to share severely stunted "intellects". <chuckle>
Yes you do...you act just georgie. Desperately avoiding the facts and
evidence that arab muslims did it of their own volition...granted that
fruitcake in venezula might have paid for the job.
Henry
> Henry wrote:
>> Facts, science, evidence, logic, and reality are
>> terrifying things for a mindless Bush parroting magic
>> fire cartoon conspiracy kook, aren't they?
>
> ~snip~
> Stop right there. You speak of facts, science, evidence and logic yet
> you immediately contradict those things
Wrong, I post those things because they support everything I've
written. Here they are again.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/wtc4des1.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/docs/bjh/14.jpg
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/gzpo1.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/wtc7fire3.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/b7/collateral.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/wtc7fire1.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/attack/wtc7.html
http://www.911research.com/wtc/evidence/videos/docs/wtc7_collapse2.mpg
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.html
Look at the height of WTC7:
http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/9-11%20Picture1.jpg
Then look at how it collapsed:
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.html
Small random fires can't possibly make a steel framed building
do that. Not even a raging inferno can cause a steel building to
do anything even remotely close to that. Only a very well executed
controlled demolition can cause the total, instant, and symmetric
failure of all steel support columns that took place in WTC7.
That was very solidly braced and virtually undamaged steel frame.
It was dramatically over engineered to withstand hurricane force
winds and mild earth quakes. Look at the still photos at 1 second
intervals. The building stays perfectly straight and level all the
way down. Every one of the 58 steel perimeter columns failed at
exactly the same time, and they all failed totally, putting up
essentially zero resistance. That's proved by the collapse time of
6.6 seconds compared to 6 seconds free fall. The southwest corner
of WTC7 was damaged by debris from the north tower, and there were
small random fires in the building, although it's anyone's guess how
they were ignited. But asymmetric damage and random fires don't cause
steel framed buildings to collapse even slowly and asymmetrically.
This is what happens to steel framed buildings exposed to raging
infernos for hours on end.
http://davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr69c.html
The 2000% reserve strength designed into the steel frames of
the towers could not possibly have been overcome by the force
of gravity alone. The fact that it was exceeded to such an
extreme degree that the undamaged steel frame offered no
measurable resistance, proves conclusively that the lower
structures were destroyed before being impacted.
From:
http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20060327100957690
"The Twin Towers and Why They Fell
It would help to begin with an accurate description of the WTC towers
in terms of quality of design and construction. In July of 1971, the
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) presented a national award
judging the buildings to be "the engineering project that demonstrates
the greatest engineering skills and represents the greatest
contribution to engineering progress and mankind."3 Others noted that
"the World Trade Center towers would have an inherent capacity to
resist unforeseen calamities." This capacity stemmed from the use of
special high-strength steels. In particular, the perimeter columns
were designed with tremendous reserve strength whereby "live loads on
these columns can be increased more than 2,000% before failure occurs.
More on the incredible strength of the towers can be found here:
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/design.html
"There is evidence that the Twin Towers were designed with an even
greater measure of reserve strength than typical large buildings.
According to the calculations of engineers who worked on the Towers'
design, all the columns on one side of a Tower could be cut, as well
as the two corners and some of the columns on each adjacent side, and
the building would still be strong enough to withstand a
100-mile-per-hour wind. 3"
The massive steel frames of the towers were far too strong to
collapse only under their own weight. That's been proved through
physics, and that's why no other steel framed buildings have ever
collapsed that way unless they were demolished. See Gordon Ross'
excellent paper on momentum transfer on this page:
http://worldtradecentertruth.com/
As common sense would dictate, even if all the perimeter and
core columns near the top of the tower were somehow destroyed
simultaneously so that the top 20 stories or so dropped onto the
remaining undamaged frame, after some bending and compression,
the collapse would have stopped, or the upper block would have
fallen off to the side. Gordon Ross proves that with physics.
The official conspiracy requires us to believe that falling
directly =through= the massive undamaged steel frames, including
the 47 interconnected central core columns:
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/arch/core.html
provided little more resistance than air. This is proved by
the fact that debris falling outside the towers hit the ground
about the same time as the debris falling through the towers.
Making the government's conspiracy theory even more implausible,
is the fact that the steel at the top of the towers was over
ten times lighter and thinner than the undamaged steel in the
lower section. Look at the massive core column cross section in
the bottom photo.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/arch/core.html
The official conspiracy theory says that crushing 47 of those
columns, all interconnected with even more steel, =and= destroying
all the perimeter columns, =and= "pancaking" all the floors, and
stairways, produced about the same kinetic friction as falling
though air. That, of course, is not physically possible.
Observe the rotating and disintegrating block on the South
Tower.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/wtc2exp4.html
Notice that the corners are curved, as the block's internal
destruction is already taking place. If it had not been destroyed
through demolition, it would have continued to rotate and fall off
the building as an intact block. Also, notice that the block is
tilting towards the corner where it was impacted. The opposite
corner was undamaged by impact or fire, as proved by photo
evidence.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/wtc2exp1.html
As the top section of that tower is rotating, the high strength,
fire resistant perimeter columns on one side of the building are
being compressed, and on the opposite side, where the building
was not damaged by fire or impact, the weight above them is greatly
rediced.
Why do you think the undamaged steel perimeter frame with reduced
weight above it is exploding and collapsing at the same rate as
the fire and impact damaged side that has most of the weight of the
rotating block on it? Seems more than a little odd, doesn't it? Here's
some information on the perimeter columns.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/arch/perimeter.html
Now watch this video:
http://plaguepuppy.net/public_html/collapse%20update/wtc-2_explodes.avi
Does that look like the gradual bending and buckling of an
over heated steel frame to you? If so, what do you think is
causing those huge explosions and dust clouds that make it
look like a controlled demolition? Keep in mind that this is
at the onset of the collapse, so nothing is falling quickly
yet.
--
http://911research.wtc7.net
http://stj911.org
http://stopthelie.com/1-hour_guide_to_911.html
http://www.911truth.org
Here's what happens to steel framed buildings exposed
to raging infernos for hours on end.
http://davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr69c.html
On 9-11-01, WTC7, a 47 story steel framed building, which
had only small, random fires, dropped in perfect symmetry
at near free fall speed as in a perfectly executed controlled
demolition.
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.html
http://wtc7.net/articles/FEMA/WTC_ch5.htm
Henry
> Henry wrote:
>> P. "I'm not psychotic at all" Roehling timidly chirped:
>>> These netkooks remind me of a magazine cartoon I once saw.
>>> A Physics professor is standing at a blackboard filled with
>>> sequential equations and is pointing at a large gap between two of
>>> them. The text reads "And then a miracle occurs"....
>> That's how the kooks make the giant leap from a few minor isolated
>> fires to the total free fall speed and symmetric disintegration of
>> WTC7's entire steel frame. You kooks are at least amusing. Your
>> "reasoning" ability also explains why you're forced to hide behind
>> your killfile and spew silly drivel when your magic fire miracle is
>> challenged by your many thinking betters. <chuckle>
>
>
> I don't have you killfiled and I'm still waiting for you to back up your
> outrageous claims from yesterday.
That referred to Petie, and I replied to your post
earlier. Also, the outrageous claims are on your
end. Since basic physics is obviously well beyond
your grasp, tell us how a man living in a cave thousands
of miles away without so much as cell phone service
shut down the U.S. Military defense system.
--
http://davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr69c.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.html
http://wtc7.net/articles/FEMA/WTC_ch5.htm
http://www.commondreams.org/
http://thirdworldtraveler.com/
Henry
> Henry wrote:
>> snowman wrote:
>>> You seem to provide the rationale for the US Government's actions.
>>> Whether or not you choose to believe the reports of Iranian nukes,
>>> WMD's in Iraq etc, those allegations would seem to provide the US
>>> government to take the actions that it has engaged in up to this
>>> point. Why then covertly blow up some of the most prominent
>>> buildings in NYC? What is to be gained?
>> Why do you get into a discussion if you're not going
>> to pay attention to the facts presented? We've covered
>> that several times.
>> http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/spingola/060212
>> http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/silverstein.html
>> http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/wtc7/index.html
> See my previous post. In the meanwhile, perhaps you could answer my
> question. Why blow up WTC7 to replace it with an identical building?
I just did. Do you know how to click on a link and
read? Here, try again. Why are you acting like an
imbecile?
http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/spingola/060212
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/silverstein.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/wtc7/index.html
--
Henry
> Poor Hen3ry.
Actually, I'm quite wealthy. You're lying and
obsessing about your betters again. <vbg>
> He hates us
How many people are you today, Petie? <chuckle>
Regardless, you're far too silly and pitiful to
be hated. Besides, I really appreciate your repeated
and convincing confirmation that Bush parroting
cartoon conspiracy kooks can not and will not defend
their cartoon fairy tale with anything even remotely
close to facts or evidence. More often than not, they
display a comical lack of intelligence and rational
thought, and are reduced to spewing irrelevant drivel
about their betters. In extreme cases like yours, they
disgrace themselves further by hiding and cowering behind
a killfile while they spew their irrelevant fact free
drivel. Again, thanks for showing us how the "mind"
of a Bush parotting conspiracy kook "functions". :-)
Here are some photos of WTC4, which was much closer to the towers
than WTC7, and was completely gutted by severe fires and partially
crushed by heavy impacts.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/wtc4des1.html
This photo of WTC4 really demonstrates the incredible strength of
steel framed buildings.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/docs/bjh/14.jpg
Here are some photos of WTC5 & 6 after the tower demolitions.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/gzpo1.html
Here's a photo of WTC7 after the tower demolitions.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/wtc7fire3.html
This illustration shows the location of the various WTC buildings
as well as the range of debris impact.
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/b7/collateral.html
Here are photos of WTC7's "inferno".
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/wtc7fire1.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/attack/wtc7.html
Here is a video of WTC7's picture perfect controlled demolition.
http://www.911research.com/wtc/evidence/videos/docs/wtc7_collapse2.mpg
Here are more videos of WTC7's demolition.
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.html
We're still waiting for the kooks to provide us with a logical
explanation other than controlled demolition for the fact that the
buildings closest to the towers remained standing, while WTC7's
massive hurricane resistant steel frame suddenly disintegrated and
dropped at virtual free fall speed and perfect symmetry. Limited,
isolated fires can not possibly cause such a failure. In fact, no
steel framed building has ever collapsed due to fire.
It seems controlled demolition is the only possible cause of WTC7's
demolition. Even Bush's FEMA was forced to admit the following:
"The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and how they caused the building
to collapse remain unknown at this time. Although the total diesel fuel
on the premises contained massive potential energy, the best hypothesis
has only a low probability of occurrence. Further research,
investigation, and analyses are needed to resolve this issue."
Look at the height of WTC7:
http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/9-11%20Picture1.jpg
Then look at how it collapsed:
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.html
Small random fires can't possibly make a steel framed building
do that. Not even a raging inferno can cause a steel building to
do anything even remotely close to that. Only a very well executed
controlled demolition can cause the total, instant, and symmetric
failure of all steel support columns that took place in WTC7.
That was very solidly braced and virtually undamaged steel frame.
It was dramatically over engineered to withstand hurricane force
winds and mild earth quakes. Look at the still photos at 1 second
intervals. The building stays perfectly straight and level all the
way down. Every one of the 58 steel perimeter columns failed at
exactly the same time, and they all failed totally, putting up
essentially zero resistance. That's proved by the collapse time of
6.6 seconds compared to 6 seconds free fall. The southwest corner
of WTC7 was damaged by debris from the north tower, and there were
small random fires in the building, although it's anyone's guess how
they were ignited. But asymmetric damage and random fires don't cause
steel framed buildings to collapse even slowly and asymmetrically.
This is what happens to steel framed buildings exposed to raging
infernos for hours on end.
http://davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr69c.html
The 2000% reserve strength designed into the steel frames of
From:
http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20060327100957690
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/design.html
http://worldtradecentertruth.com/
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/arch/core.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/arch/core.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/wtc2exp4.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/wtc2exp1.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/arch/perimeter.html
Now watch this video:
http://plaguepuppy.net/public_html/collapse%20update/wtc-2_explodes.avi
--
http://davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr69c.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.html
http://wtc7.net/articles/FEMA/WTC_ch5.htm
"The new America, born in sin and arrogance, delusional
Henry
> Henry wrote:
>> Mr Frederick wrote:
>>> How the hell did the thousands upon thousands of charges get put in?
>> People put them there with the assistance of Bush's brother, Marvin,
>> who handled "security".
> So you firmly believe that statement? How about a couple of facts to
> back it up?
The number of charges is debatable, but if you "think" something other
than human beings rigged the buildings for demolition, you're too kooky
to reach.
Google Marvin Bush WTC security. Also google ACE Elevator WTC. Here,
I'll help you get started, but we've covered this already. If you're
going to participate in the discussion, you should try to pay attention
and keep up. <g>
Keep in mind, the elevators ran through the cores, and we know the
cores were destroyed via demolition. Now we're looking for who and
how.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/sept11/2001/12/19/usat-mechanics.htm
"At the time the elevator mechanics left, dozens of people were
trapped in stuck elevators. Other people lost their lives trying to
rescue those trapped in elevators, including a mechanic from another
company who rushed to the Trade Center from down the street.
The departure of elevator mechanics from a disaster site is unusual. The
industry takes pride in rescues. In the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995,
elevator mechanics worked closely with the firefighters making rescues.
"Nobody knows the insides of a high-rise like an elevator mechanic. They
act as guides for firefighters, in addition to working on elevators,"
says Robert Caporale, editor of Elevator World, a trade magazine."
--
http://davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr69c.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.html
http://wtc7.net/articles/FEMA/WTC_ch5.htm
http://www.commondreams.org/
http://thirdworldtraveler.com/
"The new America, born in sin and arrogance, delusional
in Manifest Destiny, bred in overabundant gluttony,
consumerist and materialist, fathered by George W. Bush,
Dick Cheney and the Cabal of Criminality, a country flocked
by sheeple, ignorant and conditioned, indifferent to a world
growing up around it, living delusions of empire and of
omnipotence, building hatred against it and its policies
throughout the planet, slowly dumbing down its citizens,
losing its edge in the sciences and arts, producing a nation
of acquiescent automatons brainwashed to never question
authority and always faithfully follow the crimes of governance."
- Manuel Valenzuela
--
http://davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr69c.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.html
http://wtc7.net/articles/FEMA/WTC_ch5.htm
http://www.commondreams.org/
http://thirdworldtraveler.com/
Henry
> As Hen3ry
Petie, someday you should try to make through
a day without obsessing over me. We know it'll
be a tough challenge, but if you succeed, you'll
be a better "man" for it, and your many betters
will stop laughing at you - for a few minutes,
anyway. <chuckle>
Petie "I'm not psychotic at all" Roehling timidly chirped:
> This is irrefutable proof that Hen3ry's parents were sold a useless
product
> by a sneering CIA armor salesman who was actually a disguised Dick
Cheney!
Petie, people who value traits like strength of character,
honesty, integrity, and intelligence already look down at
you as a weak minded, helpless, self deprecating fool
because of your crippling obsession with me, your endless
childish lies, and your hiding and cowering behind your
killfile.
Your psychosis appears to be so severe, and your intellect so
weak and demented, that you actually "think" you make others
look bad by "insulting" their parents while you hide and cower
behind your killfile. As my most rabid and obsessed critic, it
is indeed refreshing that you have revealed the true nature of
your "character" for all to see.
You are your own worst enemy, and I actually pity you...
--
http://davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr69c.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.html
http://wtc7.net/articles/FEMA/WTC_ch5.htm
http://www.commondreams.org/
http://thirdworldtraveler.com/
--
http://davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr69c.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.html
http://wtc7.net/articles/FEMA/WTC_ch5.htm
http://www.commondreams.org/
http://thirdworldtraveler.com/
Henry
>> > Awwww CRAP! Sorry about that scanned down too fast and what was
>> > supposed to be sent to my favorite cult member when to you.
>> Magic fire cartoon conspiracy kooks tend to have great
>> difficulty expressing their "thoughts" using English.
> What magic fire?
The one you Bush parroting conspiracy kooks "think"
caused WTC7's demolition. The fact that you kooks can't
produce even *one* credible expert who can explain how
fires could have caused WTC7's obvious demolition should
tell you something.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/wtc4des1.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/docs/bjh/14.jpg
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/gzpo1.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/wtc7fire3.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/b7/collateral.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/wtc7fire1.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/attack/wtc7.html
http://www.911research.com/wtc/evidence/videos/docs/wtc7_collapse2.mpg
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.html
--
http://911research.wtc7.net
http://stj911.org
http://stopthelie.com/1-hour_guide_to_911.html
http://www.911truth.org
Here's what happens to steel framed buildings exposed
to raging infernos for hours on end.
http://davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr69c.html
On 9-11-01, WTC7, a 47 story steel framed building, which
had only small, random fires, dropped in perfect symmetry
at near free fall speed as in a perfectly executed controlled
demolition.
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.html
http://wtc7.net/articles/FEMA/WTC_ch5.htm
Henry
> Hen3ry's
Petie, when you mindlessly and endlessly obsess
about me while hiding and cowering behind your
killfile, you only confirm what I've been saying
all along - Bush parroting cartoon conspiracy kooks
are simple minded imbeciles, and as such, are pitifully
incapable of addressing the facts or defending their kooky
fairy tales and fantasies.
Thanks again for your contributions. <chuckle>
Here are some photos of WTC4, which was much closer to the towers
than WTC7, and was completely gutted by severe fires and partially
crushed by heavy impacts.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/wtc4des1.html
This photo of WTC4 really demonstrates the incredible strength of
steel framed buildings.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/docs/bjh/14.jpg
Here are some photos of WTC5 & 6 after the tower demolitions.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/gzpo1.html
Here's a photo of WTC7 after the tower demolitions.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/wtc7fire3.html
This illustration shows the location of the various WTC buildings
as well as the range of debris impact.
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/b7/collateral.html
Here are photos of WTC7's "inferno".
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/wtc7fire1.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/attack/wtc7.html
Here is a video of WTC7's picture perfect controlled demolition.
http://www.911research.com/wtc/evidence/videos/docs/wtc7_collapse2.mpg
Here are more videos of WTC7's demolition.
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.html
We're still waiting for the kooks to provide us with a logical
explanation other than controlled demolition for the fact that the
buildings closest to the towers remained standing, while WTC7's
massive hurricane resistant steel frame suddenly disintegrated and
dropped at virtual free fall speed and perfect symmetry. Limited,
isolated fires can not possibly cause such a failure. In fact, no
steel framed building has ever collapsed due to fire.
It seems controlled demolition is the only possible cause of WTC7's
--
http://davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr69c.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.html
http://wtc7.net/articles/FEMA/WTC_ch5.htm
http://www.commondreams.org/
http://thirdworldtraveler.com/
--
http://davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr69c.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.html
http://wtc7.net/articles/FEMA/WTC_ch5.htm
http://www.commondreams.org/
http://thirdworldtraveler.com/
Henry
> Not to worry......it's game over time......
Of course it is. You believe in a reality
defying cartoon fantasy on blind faith and
ignorance alone. Your comically absurd fairy
tale has been proven beyond *any* doubt by
hundreds of highly qualified experts to be
physically impossible, and you can't find even
*one* credible expert who can explain how fires
caused any of the three steel framed skyscrapers
to completely disintegrate in a mater of seconds.
There's a very logical reason for that.
When only knowns liars and ignorant fools agree
with you, and none of them can address the facts,
it's time to rethink your theory, isn't it?
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2006/11/overwhelming-majority-of-credible.html
MILITARY LEADERS
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense under President Ronald Reagan
(Col. Ronald D. Ray) said that the official story of 9/11 is "the dog
that doesn't hunt" (bio)
Director of the U.S. "Star Wars" space defense program in both
Republican and Democratic administrations, who was a senior air force
colonel who flew 101 combat missions (Col. Robert Bowman) stated that
9/11 was an inside job. He also said:
"If our government had merely [done] nothing, and I say that as an
old interceptor pilot?I know the drill, I know what it takes, I know how
long it takes, I know what the procedures are, I know what they were,
and I know what they?ve changed them to?if our government had merely
Weapons School and NATO?s Tactical Leadership Program, with a 20-year
INTELLIGENCE PROFESSIONALS
(Raymond McGovern) said ?I think at simplest terms, there?s a cover-up.
The 9/11 Report is a joke?, and is open to the possibility that 9/11 was
an inside job.
A 29-year CIA veteran, former National Intelligence Officer (NIO) and
former Director of the CIA's Office of Regional and Political Analysis
(William Bill Christison) said ?I now think there is persuasive evidence
that the events of September did not unfold as the Bush administration
and the 9/11 Commission would have us believe. ... All three [buildings
that were destroyed in the World Trade Center] were most probably
destroyed by controlled demolition charges placed in the buildings
before 9/11." (and see this).
20-year Marine Corps infantry and intelligence officer, the
second-ranking civilian in U.S. Marine Corps Intelligence, and former
CIA clandestine services case officer (David Steele) stated that "9/11
was at a minimum allowed to happen as a pretext for war", and it was
probably an inside job (see Customer Review dated October 7, 2006).
A decorated 20-year CIA veteran, who Pulitzer-Prize winning
investigative reporter Seymour Hersh called "perhaps the best
on-the-ground field officer in the Middle East?, and whose astounding
career formed the script for the Academy Award winning motion picture
Syriana (Robert Baer) said that"the evidence points at" 9/11 having had
aspects of being an inside job .
The Division Chief of the CIA?s Office of Soviet Affairs, who served as
9/11 COMMISSIONERS
LEGAL SCHOLARS
Kennedy?s anti-corruption task force; former assistant U.S. Attorney for
MEMBERS OF CONGRESS
PSYCHIATRISTS AND PSYCHOLOGISTS
Psychiatrist E. Martin Schotz
THOUSANDS OF OTHERS
--
http://911research.wtc7.net
http://stj911.org
http://stopthelie.com/1-hour_guide_to_911.html
http://www.911truth.org
"The new America, born in sin and arrogance, delusional
BrianNZ
> BrianNZ wrote:
> > Henry wrote:
> >> Mr Frederick wrote:
>
> >>> How the hell did the thousands upon thousands of charges get put in?
>
> >> People put them there with the assistance of Bush's brother, Marvin,
> >> who handled "security".
>
> > So you firmly believe that statement? How about a couple of facts to
> > back it up?
>
> The number of charges is debatable, but if you "think" something other
> than human beings rigged the buildings for demolition, you're too kooky
> to reach.
Youv'e already posted this cut'n'paste in reply to me earlier. So I'll
just cut'n'paste my reply in the hope that maybe you will be able to
answer the question this time around or will you just continue to avoid
the question and carry on this charade........
"It is YOU who 'thinks' the buildings were rigged for demolition, not me.
It is YOU who stated...... "People put them there with the assistance of
Bush's brother, Marvin, who handled "security"."
I've asked for facts and you have offered none, just gone off on a
tangent .....again......and avoided fronting up......again!"
> Google Marvin Bush WTC security. Also google ACE Elevator WTC. Here,
> I'll help you get started, but we've covered this already. If you're
> going to participate in the discussion, you should try to pay attention
> and keep up. <g>
"Again, it is YOU who is not paying attention....here , let me help
you......
YOU stated...... "People put them there with the assistance of Bush's
brother, Marvin, who handled "security"."
What facts do you have to back this up?"
> Keep in mind, the elevators ran through the cores, and we know the
> cores were destroyed via demolition. Now we're looking for who and
> how.
"'We' don't know that.....thats just what you keep repeating! try and
stay on track. All I wanted to know is what facts you have to back up
your statement "People put them there with the assistance of Bush's
brother, Marvin, who handled "security"."
Once you have established a thread of credability, maybe we can discuss
other things. Until then, please try to just answer that one simple
question.........if you have any facts to back it up, that is."
>
> http://www.usatoday.com/news/sept11/2001/12/19/usat-mechanics.htm
>
> "At the time the elevator mechanics left, dozens of people were
> trapped in stuck elevators. Other people lost their lives trying to
> rescue those trapped in elevators, including a mechanic from another
> company who rushed to the Trade Center from down the street.
>
> The departure of elevator mechanics from a disaster site is unusual. The
> industry takes pride in rescues. In the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995,
> elevator mechanics worked closely with the firefighters making rescues.
>
> "Nobody knows the insides of a high-rise like an elevator mechanic. They
> act as guides for firefighters, in addition to working on elevators,"
> says Robert Caporale, editor of Elevator World, a trade magazine."
>
>
"This crap has nothing to do with your earlier claim! The 'fact' (taking
your cut'n'paste' as true) that a "mechanic from another company" died
trying to save people shows it was a good move by the other mechanics
not to stay in that building! They are elevator mechanics, not captains
who are supposed to go down with the ship.........
Go back and read 7.......this part in particular " Moreover they have a
liking for the technique of avoiding discussion of their claims by
BrianNZ
> BrianNZ wrote:
>
> > Not to worry......it's game over time......
>
> Of course it is. You believe in a reality
> defying cartoon fantasy on blind faith and
> ignorance alone. Your comically absurd fairy
> tale has been proven beyond *any* doubt by
> hundreds of highly qualified experts to be
> physically impossible, and you can't find even
> *one* credible expert who can explain how fires
> caused any of the three steel framed skyscrapers
> to completely disintegrate in a mater of seconds.
> There's a very logical reason for that.
> When only knowns liars and ignorant fools agree
> with you, and none of them can address the facts,
> it's time to rethink your theory, isn't it?
>
It is you telling lies and failing to address the facts there, Henry.
It's you trying to prove your theory, not me trying to prove anything.
All I'm after is a straight answer, which I would have thought someone
such as yourself who is into the 'truth' re. 9/11 would have been able
to supply from your long list of cut'n'pastes.
I have repeatedly asked and re-asked for ONE simple answer and you have
avoided it like the plague.
.................................................................
Re. explosive charges in the twin towers. (Try and stick to just this
one thing!)
"YOU stated...... "People put them there with the assistance of Bush's
brother, Marvin, who handled "security"."
What facts do you have to back this up?"
.................................................................
I don't mind if thats your theory, you are free to think what you want,
but don't try and pass it off as 'fact' just because you have repeated
it so many times.
This is where you let yourself down time and time again. If you were
just to say you don't believe the official version and give your
'theory' on what 'might' have happened, you would have some credibility.
But stating your theory as 'fact' with nothing to back it up other than
"'cos I said so" just makes you look like a fool.
snowman
> snowman wrote:
> > Henry wrote:
>
> >> Facts, science, evidence, logic, and reality are
> >> terrifying things for a mindless Bush parroting magic
> >> fire cartoon conspiracy kook, aren't they?
> >
> > ~snip~
>
> > Stop right there. You speak of facts, science, evidence and logic yet
> > you immediately contradict those things
>
> Wrong, I post those things because they support everything I've
> written. Here they are again.
No they do not. Your opening statement destroys any objectivity that
you profess. The reader should be able to make up his/her mind without
you prompting about 'Bush' and 'cartoon conspiracy kook'.
snowman
> snowman wrote:
> > Henry wrote:
> >> snowman wrote:
>
> >>> You seem to provide the rationale for the US Government's actions.
> >>> Whether or not you choose to believe the reports of Iranian nukes,
> >>> WMD's in Iraq etc, those allegations would seem to provide the US
> >>> government to take the actions that it has engaged in up to this
> >>> point. Why then covertly blow up some of the most prominent
> >>> buildings in NYC? What is to be gained?
>
> >> Why do you get into a discussion if you're not going
> >> to pay attention to the facts presented? We've covered
> >> that several times.
>
> >> http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/spingola/060212
> >> http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/silverstein.html
> >> http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/wtc7/index.html
>
> > See my previous post. In the meanwhile, perhaps you could answer my
> > question. Why blow up WTC7 to replace it with an identical building?
>
> I just did. Do you know how to click on a link and
> read? Here, try again. Why are you acting like an
> imbecile?
>
> http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/spingola/060212
> http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/silverstein.html
> http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/wtc7/index.html
>
>
>
explain the answer to this question. I've already looked through these
sites as well as others, the answer to that question isn't there. So
once again I ask you, why blow up WTC7 to replace it with an identical
building? Where is the gain in that action? Who profits? Please keep
in mind, I'm interested in your answer, not a link to a lengthy
conspiracy site that doesn't say anything.
snowman
> laughing man wrote:
> > On Dec 18, 4:21 pm, Henry <9...@insidejob.gov> wrote:
> >> laughing man wrote:
>
> >> > Awwww CRAP! Sorry about that scanned down too fast and what was
> >> > supposed to be sent to my favorite cult member when to you.
>
> >> Magic fire cartoon conspiracy kooks tend to have great
> >> difficulty expressing their "thoughts" using English.
>
> > What magic fire?
>
> The one you Bush parroting conspiracy kooks "think"
> caused WTC7's demolition.
Why then would GWB have WTC7 blown up? Why did he replace it with an
identical building?
mommy...@gmail.com
> Observations and deductions from videos
>
> 1. WTC 7 collapsed straight down. This requires that, at the moment
> of collapse, if caused by fires weakening the supports, not only did
> the north and south pair of walls have to be of equal strength, but
> also the east and west pair. Without such symmetry this tall
> building would inevitably have toppled over. Even if the fires had been
> intense and widespread this dual symmetry would have only a very low
> probability of existence. Given the uneven distribution of the small
> fires at the time of collapse the probability of the required symmetry
> vanishes, hence fires did not cause the collapse.
From your videos WTC-7 DID NOT FALL straight down. THE CONSPIRACY
KOOKS edited out the last portion of the videos that contradicts their
theories. Watching the videos shows that WTC 7 did NOT fall straight
down- it fell to the southwest. The debris falling to the southwest
damaged two other buildings so badly they had to be demolished. THOSE
ARE OBSERVABLE FACTS.
> 2. The acceleration downwards of WTC 7 was 30 feet per second per
> second. This is so close to the free fall acceleration of 32.2 feet
> per second per second in a vacuum that virtually no resistance
> throughout the fall can have existed. Also the acceleration of WTC
In every photo and every video, you can see columns far outpacing the
collapse of the building. Not only are the columns falling faster than
the building but they are also falling faster than the debris cloud
which is ALSO falling faster than the building. This proves the
buildings fell well below free fall speed. That is, unless the beams
had a rocket pointed to the ground.
Just look at any video you like and watch the perimeter columns.
The deceptive videos by conspiracy kooks stop the timer of the fall at
10:09 when only the perimeter column hits the ground and not the
building itself. If you notice, the building just finishes
disappearing behind the debris cloud which is still about 40 stories
high. Seismograph trace of the collapse of WTC 7 indicates that
parts of the building were hitting the ground for 18 seconds. This
means the collapse took at least 18 seconds, of which only the last
approximately 15 seconds are visible in videos: 8 seconds for the
penthouses and 7 seconds for the north wall to come down.
> was constant right from the start. Steel softens slowly as it is heated
> and, when just failing, still provides substantial resistance. There
> was however no sign of the steel giving way gradually as its
> temperature rose. These two observations, taken together, imply that
> the support structures were instantly and completely severed.
Except that the diesel fuel in WTC-7 burned for 7 hours. The fire was
fed by tanks of diesel fuel that many tenants used to run emergency
generators. Most tanks throughout the building were fairly small, but
a generator on the fifth floor was connected to a large tank in the
basement via a pressurized line. This pressurized line was supplying
fuel [to the fire] for a long period of time. Since the steel was
heated by the burning diesel fuel it lost strength until it finally
collapsed.
The abstract of the paper by Lu and Jiang (2002) says:
Abstract: Mechanical simulation and parameter discussion for the
collapse of WTC (World Trade Center) after aeroplane impact are
presented in this paper with the dynamic FEA software of LS-DYNA. The
simulation results are very close to the real situation, which means
that such type of special damage process can be recurred on the
computer with proper parameter and numerical model. The results show
that the direct reason for the collapse is the softening of steel
under fire and the chain reaction damage of floors under the impact
load of upper floors. If improve the fire resistance and the ductility
of the structure, the collapse may can be avoided.
The paper Lu and Jiang (2002) states that the collapse of the building
was due to the impact of the aircraft. The exact wording of the paper
contradicts your statements. The abstract of the Lu and Jiang (2002)
paper is given below:
Abstract: Mechanical simulation and parameter discussion for the
collapse of WTC (World Trade Center) after aeroplane impact are
presented in this paper with the dynamic FEA software of LS-DYNA. The
simulation results are very close to the real situation, which means
that such type of special damage process can be recurred on the
computer with proper parameter and numerical model. The results show
that the direct reason for the collapse is the softening of steel
under fire and the chain reaction damage of floors under the impact
load of upper floors. If improve the fire resistance and the ductility
of the structure, the collapse may can be avoided.
I'd keep going point by point showing that the conspiracy kooks either
are knowingly lying about the facts or have little or no understanding
of any science whatsoever. Don't give me a list of Ph.Ds who think it
is a government conspiracy unless they are engineers and scientists. I
don't care what a retired sociology professor from a 200 student
private college in Idaho thinks
Michael Heiming
[..]
>> http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/spingola/060212
>> http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/silverstein.html
>> http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/wtc7/index.html
> I'm not about to spend endless hours looking for a few words that might
> explain the answer to this question. I've already looked through these
> sites as well as others, the answer to that question isn't there. So
> once again I ask you, why blow up WTC7 to replace it with an identical
> building? Where is the gain in that action? Who profits? Please keep
> in mind, I'm interested in your answer, not a link to a lengthy
> conspiracy site that doesn't say anything.
Unsure what this has to do with Linux? Anyway, it seems asbestos
in all buildings where the most likely reason.
--
Michael Heiming (X-PGP-Sig > GPG-Key ID: EDD27B94)
mail: echo zvp...@urvzvat.qr | perl -pe 'y/a-z/n-za-m/'
#bofh excuse 157: Incorrect time synchronization
Henry
> Henry wrote:
>> Keep in mind, the elevators ran through the cores, and we know the
>> cores were destroyed via demolition. Now we're looking for who and
>> how.
> "'We' don't know that.....
By "we", I mean anyone who is even vaguely familiar
with the construction of the towers and has even a
very basic grasp of the properties of steel. The elevators
definitely ran through the cores. If you intend to
participate in the discussion, you really should make
some attempt to learn a few of the basic relevant facts.
And of course heating a tall steel box column near the
top - even if it's heated to the point of failure - can't
possibly cause it to fall through itself all the way to
the ground at free fall speed - or any speed. That comical
kook theory is too stupid to even waste time debunking. So
yes, we do know for a fact that the cores were destroyed
through demolition. Now we can look into how they could
have been accessed, and by whom.
>> http://www.usatoday.com/news/sept11/2001/12/19/usat-mechanics.htm
>> "At the time the elevator mechanics left, dozens of people were
>> trapped in stuck elevators. Other people lost their lives trying to
>> rescue those trapped in elevators, including a mechanic from another
>> company who rushed to the Trade Center from down the street.
>> The departure of elevator mechanics from a disaster site is unusual. The
>> industry takes pride in rescues. In the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995,
>> elevator mechanics worked closely with the firefighters making rescues.
>> "Nobody knows the insides of a high-rise like an elevator mechanic. They
>> act as guides for firefighters, in addition to working on elevators,"
>> says Robert Caporale, editor of Elevator World, a trade magazine."
> "This crap
That's not crap. It's facts and truth. We know Bush parroting
cartoon conspiracy kooks fear and avoid facts and truth, but that
won't change them or make them any less relevant.
When will you "explain" to us how you "think" the Cave Man shut
down the United States Military Air Defense Network from thousands
of miles away? That's definitely one of the more comical claims of
your cartoon kook theory. Please elaborate. <chuckle>
Henry
>> Observations and deductions from videos
>> 1. WTC 7 collapsed straight down. This requires that, at the moment
>> of collapse, if caused by fires weakening the supports, not only did
>> the north and south pair of walls have to be of equal strength, but
>> also the east and west pair. Without such symmetry this tall
>> building would inevitably have toppled over. Even if the fires
had been
>> intense and widespread this dual symmetry would have only a very low
>> probability of existence. Given the uneven distribution of the small
>> fires at the time of collapse the probability of the required
symmetry
>> vanishes, hence fires did not cause the collapse.
> From your videos
None of the videos of WTC7 are mine.
> WTC-7 DID NOT FALL straight down.
Of course it did. No one with a working mind would
attempt to deny that. All the videos confirm it.
Why don't you take a few minutes to watch the videos
first, then comment?
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.html
> In every photo and every video, you can see columns far outpacing the
> collapse of the building. Not only are the columns falling faster than
> the building but they are also falling faster than the debris cloud
> which is ALSO falling faster than the building.
More cartoon conspiracy kook drivel. In this video, the demolition
wave clearly out paces debris falling beside it.
http://www.911research.com/wtc/evidence/videos/docs/s_tower_collapse3.mpeg
But of course, it has been proven that the steel frames
couldn't fall through themselves under their own weight
at any speed, so even they disintegrated and fell slower
than the debris, we would still have irrefutable proof of
demolition. The molten metal, the multiple violent explosions,
the pulverized concrete, bodies, and contents of the towers, the
free fall speed, and the symmetry are all bonus proofs to help
convince the ultra slow learners. :-)
>> was constant right from the start. Steel softens slowly as it is
heated
>> and, when just failing, still provides substantial resistance. There
>> was however no sign of the steel giving way gradually as its
>> temperature rose. These two observations, taken together, imply that
>> the support structures were instantly and completely severed.
> Except that the diesel fuel in WTC-7 burned for 7 hours.
That's a guess with no evidence to support it, and even if true, the
diesel fire only affected a tiny percentage of the steel in the frame.
And of course, gradually heated steel will still fail gradually, if it
fails at all. But most of the steel in WTC7 was never exposed to any
heat. From photo and video evidence, we know the steel columns in the
north perimeter wall weren't heated, yet they all failed instantly,
totally, and simultaneously. That's how we know for a fact that it was
a perfectly executed demolition. As the experts have proven and stated,
nothing else could have caused that type of failure. Anyone who views
the WTC7 demolition videos and tries to claim it was somehow caused by
an invisible fire has to be immediately dismissed as a kook.
> The paper Lu and Jiang (2002) states that the collapse
> of the building was due to the impact of the aircraft.
Conspiracy kooks spew a lot of easily debunked drivel.
The buildings were designed to withstand multiple jet
impacts, and we all saw them survive one each with ease.
The jets only took out about 15% of the support columns,
and of course, none of the steel below the impacts was
damaged, so that part could not have failed without
demolition. Steel box columns with 5 inch thick walls
can't fall through themselves under their own weight.
In fact, steel columns can be driven deep into the ground
by pile driving. Again, common sense. You're either trolling,
or you're incapable of rational thought.
> I'd keep going point by point showing that the conspiracy
> kooks either are knowingly lying.
We already know that you're either lying, you're an imbecile,
or both. No one with a even a basic knowledge of the facts and
a working mind disputes the now proven fact that the towers and
WTC7 were deliberately demolished. And if your mind is so far gone
that you still don't get it, there is far more proof without even
considering the demolitions. Next time your mommy calls, have her
go over this site with you. <chuckle>
> Don't give me a list of Ph.Ds who think it
> is a government conspiracy unless they are engineers
--
http://davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr69c.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.html
http://wtc7.net/articles/FEMA/WTC_ch5.htm
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
TopPoster
Operation Gladio, has told Italy's oldest and most widely read newspaper
that the 9-11 terrorist attacks were run by the CIA and Mossad, and that
this was common knowledge among global intelligence agencies. In what
translates awkwardly into English, Cossiga told the newspaper Corriere della
Sera:
"All the [intelligence services] of America and Europe.know well that the
disastrous attack has been planned and realized from the Mossad, with the
aid of the Zionist world in order to put under accusation the Arabic
countries and in order to induce the western powers to take part . in Iraq
[and] Afghanistan."
Cossiga was elected president of the Italian Senate in July 1983 before
winning a landslide election to become president of the country in 1985, and
he remained until 1992.
Cossiga's tendency to be outspoken upset the Italian political
establishment, and he was forced to resign after revealing the existence of,
and his part in setting up, Operation Gladio. This was a rogue intelligence
network under NATO auspices that carried out bombings across Europe in the
1960s, 1970s and '80s. Gladio's specialty was to carry out what they termed
"false flag" operations-terror attacks that were blamed on their domestic
and geopolitical opposition.
In March 2001, Gladio agent Vincenzo Vinciguerra stated, in sworn testimony,
"You had to attack civilians, the people, women, children, innocent people,
unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite
simple: to force . the public to turn to the state to ask for greater
security."
Cossiga first expressed his doubts about 9-11 in 2001, and is quoted by 9-11
researcherWebster Tarpley saying "The mastermind of the attack must have
been a sophisticated mind, provided with ample means not only to recruit
fanatic kamikazes, but also highly specialized personnel. I add one thing:
it could not be accomplished without infiltrations in the radar and
flight security personnel."
Coming from a widely respected former head of state, Cossiga's assertion
that the 9-11 attacks were an inside job and that this is common knowledge
among global intelligence agencies is illuminating. It is one more
eye-opening confirmation that has not been mentioned by America's propaganda
machine in print or on TV. Nevertheless, because of his experience and
status in the world, Cossiga cannot be discounted as a crackpot.
--
Socrates taught his students that the pursuit of truth can only begin once
they start to question and analyze every belief that they ever held dear. If
a certain belief passes the tests of evidence, deduction, and logic, it
should be kept. If it doesn't, the belief should not only be discarded, but
the thinker must also then question why he was led to believe the erroneous
"Henry" <9...@insidejob.gov> wrote in message
news:fkf3q9$1uc$1...@ruby.cit.cornell.edu...
P. Roehling
"TopPoster" <TopP...@Poster.Com> wrote
> --
> Socrates taught his students that the pursuit of truth can only begin once
> they start to question and analyze every belief that they ever held dear.
> If
> a certain belief passes the tests of evidence, deduction, and logic, it
> should be kept. If it doesn't, the belief should not only be discarded,
> but
> the thinker must also then question why he was led to believe the
> erroneous
http://www.urban75.org/info/conspiraloons.html
See #4 in particular.
snowman
> In alt.os.linux snowman <x@x.x> wrote:
> [..]
>
>>> http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/spingola/060212
>>> http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/silverstein.html
>>> http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/wtc7/index.html
>
>> I'm not about to spend endless hours looking for a few words that might
>> explain the answer to this question. I've already looked through these
>> sites as well as others, the answer to that question isn't there. So
>> once again I ask you, why blow up WTC7 to replace it with an identical
>> building? Where is the gain in that action? Who profits? Please keep
>> in mind, I'm interested in your answer, not a link to a lengthy
>> conspiracy site that doesn't say anything.
>
> Unsure what this has to do with Linux? Anyway, it seems asbestos
> in all buildings where the most likely reason.
>
Should check the /var file for the error logs perhaps? ;-) I agree, on
both counts.
Rob Kleinschmidt
> "If our government had merely [done] nothing, and I say that as an
> old interceptor pilot--I know the drill, I know what it takes, I know how
> long it takes, I know what the procedures are, I know what they were,
> and I know what they've changed them to--if our government had merely
> done nothing, and allowed normal procedures to happen on that morning of
> 9/11, the Twin Towers would still be standing and thousands of dead
> Americans would still be alive. [T]hat is treason!"
Prior to 9/11, how many hijacked airliners were shot down
by Norad as a matter of normal proceedure ?
Davorin Vlahovic
> Cossiga was elected president of the Italian Senate in July 1983 before
> winning a landslide election to become president of the country in 1985, and
> he remained until 1992.
BTW, this is quite an accomplishment since Italy has had a weird habbit of
changing the entire government every 8-14 months :)
--
Ignorance has taken over
Yo, we gotta take the power back!
-- Rage Against The Machine, Take the power back
Davorin Vlahovic
oh, yeah, now get off of alt.os.linux. All of you.
Davorin Vlahovic
> On Dec 16, 5:49 am, Davorin Vlahovic <nr...@ylf.krs.ref.rh> wrote:
>>
>> Most of your people will never see the high-tech universities, and even
>> today there are more people with a visa than there is U.S. people.
>> Your average citizen would be unemployable almost everywhere in the
>> Europe because of your lousy education system.
>>
>
> Which is why Europeans send their children in droves to the US to get
> educated and when then they return to Europe they make 10 times their
> counterparts who were educated in Europe because they understand the
> sciences and mathematics
You got it wrong - Europeans get there educated. They just need the
money and equipment to make experiments since there is a synergy
between science, money and a free market of 300 million people.
Know what? Fool and his money soon part. :)
> You cann't go on as that's the best that eastern Europe produced
:')
You've never been to any science conference, have you? :D Yeah, I'm not
thinking of Creation "Science" either.
> and they all had to go to the US.
Yes, because of, you know, WWI and WWII, then communism. It's pretty
much the same deal in the U.S. now - smart people had to leave.
> Let's try something in the 20th century
> like Bill Joy, Grace Hopper, Kerry Emmanual, Edward Lorenz, Robert
> Milliken, Carl Anderson, Willis Lamb. If it wasn't for Bill Joy the
> internet wouldn't exist.
Yes, well, who invented computers? There couldn't have been Internet
without von Neumann, Alan Turing, Ada Lovelace, Charles Babbage, Konrad
Zeuse, Federico Faggin and Masatoshi Shima (first integrated CPU, 4004),
etc, etc, etc.
> BBN's TCP stack didn't work, Bill wrote his
> own TCP stack that did work and it is the foundation for the current
> internet.
Yes, we know the history of computing.
> Got anybody else from Croatia or Hungry? I didn't think so
You got that right - you didn't think :) It's not Hungry (got
munchies?), it's Hungary.
I'll just give you one example? Ever heard of ECC RAM? Well, it was
first invented and designed by a guy who was a movie star when
little - Tomislav Žganec (from Croatia). Just a bit of trivia, he was
a star of "Tko pjeva zlo ne misli" (He who sings doesn't think of evil)
and "Imam dva tate i dvije mame" (I've got two dads and two moms).
Kind of like Hedwig Eva Maria Kiesler who invented spread spectrum radio
communications for torpedoes to sink Hitler's subs. You probably know
her by her Hollywood stage name - Heddy Lamar. Oh, while we're
mentioning female scientists, let's mention Lise Meitner, the first
human to split the atom and the mother of A-bomb.
Just to rub it in, let's say this - our (European) actors are pretty much
geniuses, some of our rock stars are doctors of astrophysics
(Brian May of Queen fame) and you've got - what? Paris Hilton and
Britney Spears?
And, just since we're on a Linux group (and I don't want to be too OT),
I'd like to mention Linus Torvalds :)
Now, be considerate enough and get the hell out of alt.os.linux.
Thank you for your attention.
laughing man
> laughing man wrote:
>
> > On Dec 18, 4:21 pm, Henry <9...@insidejob.gov> wrote:
> >> laughing man wrote:
>
> >> > Awwww CRAP! Sorry about that scanned down too fast and what was
> >> > supposed to be sent to my favorite cult member when to you.
>
> >> Magic fire cartoon conspiracy kooks tend to have great
> >> difficulty expressing their "thoughts" using English.
>
> > What magic fire?
>
> The one you Bush parroting conspiracy kooks "think"
> caused WTC7's demolition.
SO what you are saying herr stalin is that an aircraft carrying 50-70
THOUSAND POUNDS of JP4 isn't going to signifigantly effect will NOT
cause cummulative structural failure? Damn your cult leaders are a
stupid bunch...especially the ones what earned a sheepskin, they ought
to demand a refund.
> The fact that you kooks can't
> produce even *one* credible expert who can explain how
> fires could have caused WTC7's obvious demolition should
> tell you something.
Then you are not cognizant of the physical damage of WTC7.
> Here are some photos of WTC4, which was much closer to the towers
> than WTC7, and was completely gutted by severe fires and partially
> crushed by heavy impacts.
And your point is? I've btdt with explosives and heating steel. Here
is a a thought experitment/real experiment. Go outside on -40F. Take 3
or 4 T-Posts (steel fence post) Using ONLY a MAPP torch with no Oxygen
suppliment, I want you show me those bars can not be heated up to a
temperature that will allow precision bending of the metal.I will give
you a free hint...I already did it.
You belong to a cult and for that I pity you. Bearing such hate for
the government must be eating you alive.