Top Leaderboard, Site wide
Winner 2013 Webby Awards for Best Political Website
Top Banner, Site wide
Apr 24, 2014

 Choose a size
Text Size

DIG DIRECTOR

Robert Scheer
Robert Scheer is editor in chief of Truthdig. He is a nationally syndicated columnist, author of seven books and a co-host of the political radio program "Left, Right and Center."...








 
 

Robert Scheer: Gaping Holes in the 9/11 Narrative

Five years out from the attacks, why do we still know so little about what really happened that day?



What we still dont know about 9/11 could kill us. By “we I mean the public that has been kept in the dark for five years by a president who may know the truth but has chosen to ignore it. Instead of grappling with the thorny origins of that disaster, George Bush willfully turned the nation’s attention and resources to a totally unrelated and disastrous imperial adventure in Iraq.
 
Just how unrelated was definitively established last Friday with the belated release of the Senate Intelligence Committee’s second report, which concluded that there not only was zero connection between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda, but that Iraq was the one country in the region where Osama bin Laden could not operate.

The story was much different in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, the two countries that had recognized and otherwise supported the Taliban government that hosted bin Laden during the run-up to 9/11. Fifteen of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, and yet there has been no serious investigation of the extended royal familys role in the recruitment of bin Laden’s soldiers” and the ease with which they secured legal visas to enter the United States.

While funds for Al Qaeda emanated from the Saudi kingdom, the essential logistical support for Al Qaeda came from Pakistan. Now, five years later, bin Laden and the remnants of his organization are assumed by the United States to have found refuge in Pakistans unruly tribal region, where the Pakistan government recently has reduced its forces, conceding that it could not defeat local tribesmen sympathetic to the Taliban.

Nor has there been any credible accounting of the role of Pakistan’s intelligence community, then and now, in support of Islamic terrorists on both sides of the Pakistan-Afghan border. Or in the passage of Pakistans nuclear secrets to what Bush refers to as “rogue nations.”

Recall that the predominant excuse for invading Iraq was the claim that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and would be willing to pass them on to rogue regimes and terrorists. Not only were such weapons not found, but the evidence from the accounts of former administration insiders and the Senate Intelligence Committee makes clear that the administration was consciously cherry-picking the evidence to shore up its fraudulent case.

There were weapons of mass destruction being shipped to “rogue nations, but they were coming from Pakistan in an extensive program headed by Abdul Qadeer (A.Q.) Khan, the father of the “Islamic bomb.” The Pakistan government has admitted that Khan passed on to North Korea, Libya and Iran technical know-how and vital materials for the creation of nuclear weapons.  But Khan was pardoned of any crimes by Pakistan’s dictator general, President Gen. Pervez Musharraf. Khan is restricted only by a loose form of house arrest and has never been made available to U.S. investigators. Yet the Bush administration dropped the sanctions originally imposed on Pakistan in reprisal for its development of nuclear weapons in return for Pakistans support in the “war on terror.”

As for Afghanistan, the Taliban is on the rise. NATO commanders last week urgently requested more troops, and the country is now torn by the anarchy of a narco-state that is supplying 92% of the world’s heroin market and generating massive profits for gangsters and terrorists alike.  The country is now as dangerous for American soldiers as is Iraq.

Despite this sorry record of neglect in Southwest Asia and the creation of a quagmire and recruiting poster for terrorism in Iraq, Bush once again arrogantly asserts that his policies have made us safer, even as he has undermined our domestic freedoms and mocked the U.S. commitment to international law, particularly concerning the treatment of prisoners.

Last week, Bush conceded that there were indeed secret CIA prisons, when finally announcing that the group of “key witnesses” to the 9/11 disaster would be moved to Guantanamo and for once afforded visits from the Red Cross and minimal legal representation. Some of them have been interrogated in secret for up to five years, with the Bush administration left as the sole interpreter of what they revealed.

After five years of official deceit, it is not too difficult to believe that the isolation of those prisoners was done less for reasons of learning the truth about 9/11 and more in an effort to politically manage the narrative released to the public.

There is glaring evidence that the latter was the case.  The 9/11 Commission report contains a disclaimer box on page 146, in which it is stated that the report’s account of what happened on 9/11 was in considerable measure based on what those key witnesses allegedly told interrogators, and that the commissioners were not allowed to meet the witnesses or their interrogators.

We submitted questions for use in the interrogations, but had no control over whether, when or how questions of particular interest would be asked. Nor were we allowed to talk to the interrogators so that we could better judge the credibility of the detainees and clarify ambiguities in the reporting.”

In short, the most cited source that we have on what happened on 9/11, the much celebrated 9/11 Commission Report, was stage-managed by the Bush administration, just as it has controlled and distorted so much other information.

In light of that sorry record of the propagandistic exploitation of the 9/11 tragedy for partisan political purpose, is it any wonder that large numbers of Americans have doubts about all of it and that a considerable industry of documentaries and investigative reports has sprung up with alternative theories ranging from the plausible to the absurd? 

In the sidebar to the left, we offer some examples of the better of those efforts, not by way of endorsing them but rather because there is so much reason to doubt the “truth” as the Bush administration has packaged it.

Dig last updated on Sep. 10, 2006


Get truth delivered to
your inbox every week.


More Below the Ad

Advertisement

Square, Site wide

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

By Ken, December 12, 2006 at 7:33 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Manni:

Get a life.
You have no concrete proof for your contrived conspiracy theory.
What you think you saw is often not what is !
Ask any magician ! 
It is all paranoia on your part and the others who write here for attention.
There is no conspiracy theory, it is in your own paranoid minds.
Take it from there !

Take care

Report this

By Jo-Jo, December 11, 2006 at 1:47 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

As if Evil Moslums are only likely to use Nuke bombs and we Yankees are saints with over 10,000 nukes pointed east ward.
Listen fool,USi used a nuke bomb on Japan because it was cutting into the trade roots,even after it was begging to sign a peace treaty.
The country most dangerous is us (U.S. ) and along with our side kicks Israel/UK.
Get this—911 was not done by Arabs but done on ourselves by our government.It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out who the real sh!t is! Can any one think of any Moslum nation that kills it’s own for profit and another country’s interests ?

Report this

By Maani, December 11, 2006 at 11:23 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

All:

Trolls like Ken may actually be providing a valuable and important service: they force us to “tighten” our positions with additional scientific, academic and other support.  True, many of us have been involved in 9/11 truth research almost from the beginning, and thus have quite a bit of solid support for our positions.  But it never hurts to strengthen that support.  Ken, and others like him, provide us with impetus to do so.

That said, and as I noted previously, it is critical that we not get caught up in the agent provocateur tactics of people like Ken by focusing on broader socio-political issues like Israel etc. (much less deliberate attempts to provoke us with epithets and invective).  Yes, those issues are important, but that is NOT the focus of this thread.

As long as everyone keeps this in mind, and remains focused on the issue, responses to Ken et al can be a valuable tool for self-support.

Peace.

Report this

By Jackie T. Gabel, December 10, 2006 at 9:23 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

RE:    •    Comment #40793 by Ken  on  12/04  at  6:45 pm — “The very people who want to see the destruction of the “Great Satan” have been able to infiltrate this Truthdig website, and other sites, to influence American public opinion AGAINST their own freely elected democratic government…you think 911 was bad, wait to you see them get hold of nuclear weapons and kill a couple of million Americans in the name of Allah ! Stop being a fool, this is no joke ! Islamic conversion of the world is their main goal and that includes you ! God Bless.”

>>>>>>>>>obvious trolls

like Ken, are sapping your energy and (as brokers say) churning the account. Hard to tell, he/she could be a provocateur from either side of this issue. For example, our local daily is staffed with loads of the sort of wimpy liberals famous for “leaving the room when a fight breaks out.” But, I’ve often suspected they publish utterly dumb letters by conservatives, simply for the poorly educated and uninformed light in which it casts their ilk. Ken could really be that, or just posing.

Report this

By George in Toronto, December 10, 2006 at 5:38 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Ken—you got some kind of hang-up with Israel and zionist Jews. I get the thinking that your acting dumb and don’t want the evidence to point to the 5 dancing mossad jews.
Israel has been envolved in numerous killings and to them 911 was another botched job.Without Mamma USA’s politicians and the Zionist media,—we Americans would be bombing the crap out of Israel,instead of Iraq. As we should have done in that covered up,” the USS Liberty bombings and killings.”
So Ken, Some Americans are getting wise to your thug coherts!

Report this

By Jail Bush Cheney Rumsfeld Joint Chiefs, December 10, 2006 at 3:24 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

nice to see the debate has taken up wtc 7.  for comic relief the recent debunkers from popular mechanics claimed that the “government” showed them, and only them, photos of the backside of wtc7 that was scooped out from damage and that is why the bldg. fell straight down in less than 10 seconds. of course if that were true, why would the “government” show these pics only to a couple of hack non-journalists and no one else.  THE REAL NEWS is that Streisand’s husband actor, (what’s his name again?), and David Lynch came out of the closet on 911 on nationwide television on the same day.  the show aired in the western u.s. but was preempted by a fake news conference in the midwest and the east.  when streisand comes clean the game will be different.  meanwhile the democrats, all of them, are playing quarterback for the killers. if someone can explain that to me, i would like to know but it doesn’t surprise me.  the story about lynch is on alex jones’ site http://www.infowars.com.  can we now talk about chemtrails?? http://www.californiaskywatch.com

Report this

By Al Wright, December 9, 2006 at 5:46 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The Controlled Demo camp cannot answer literally the first question about the collapse of the towers: What initiated the collapse?

The Controlled Demo camp imagines a finger on a button.  But this still leaves the question: Why push the button at 56 minutes or 102 minutes post-impact?

Perhaps plotters saw the building start to deform, or overheard radio reports that the towers were visibly deforming and the orders to withdraw emergency personnel, or perhaps the plotters overheard the police helicopter reports that the top fifteen floors of the North tower “were glowing red” and, “it’s not going to take long before the North tower comes down”, and, after hearing the reports, the plotters then decided to push the button before the tower topples on its own.  But that’s admitting that a natural process could initiate the collapse.

If you asked the demolition plotters for their reasons, they might answer, “Reasons. We don’t need no stinking reasons.”  Which is just an admission that the Controlled Demo camp has no reason for the 56 vs. 102 minute phenomenon.

The natural process has been explained elsewhere, but I’ll quickly replay it.  Jet impact damages some of the supporting steel colums.  Two-phase fire follows: high intensity jet-fueled fire, then a lower intensity fire continues until collapse.  As the steel heats up, it bends.  In a fairly linear time-dependent process, the fire transfers its heat to the steel.  The force bearing down on the supporting columns is a linear function of the supported mass.  Leverage is linearly proportional the length of the lever.  All these linear functions result in an inverse linear function, namely, the 56 vs. 102 minute phenomenon.

17 floors above impact/33 fls above impact=0.52

0.52 X 102 mins = 53 mins predicted time-to-collapse

Actual time-to-collapse was 56 minutes. Close enough for government work.

You will try to rebut that the fires did not get hot enough.  But look at the structure of the towers: a metal shell with windows. In my kitchen I have a metal shell with a window and a combustion source: I call it an oven.  A firefighter reported that they could knock down the fire with only two hoses.  Did that firefighter do a comprehensive survey, or was he referring to where he first encountered a fire: most likely on a floor below the main fires?  The towers blew smoke like two great smokestacks: Do you find it likely that two hoses could knock down such a fire?  Then there are the top fifteen floors of the North tower which “were glowing red”.  How does the Controlled Demo theory account for glowing red: perhaps the plotters ran a hugh electric current through the steel?

There are also psychological questions to be explained.  Such as,

Why would plotters do jets and demolition?  Why not just do Demo, then you can call in the exact detonation times a few minutes beforehand to the national media and claim irrefutable credit or place blame?

Why not wire the towers to fall like great smokestacks?  It’s easier and quicker than wiring them to superficially resemble a controlled demolition.  Why care about damagaing any adjacent structures?

The Controlled Demo camp has no explanation for any of the questions raised here.  There is as much evidence that the whimsical hand of the Almighty struck down those towers as there is for the Controlled Demo theory.

So I think it’s time to agree, and admit, what the Controlled Demo theory is: Just another case of Deus Ex Machina.  The only difference: Instead of inventing unseen powerful gods with mysterious motives to step forward and resolve the mystery, you’ve invented unseen powerful demolition plotters with mysterious motives.


Is it true that human nature never changes?

Report this

By Ken, December 9, 2006 at 5:39 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

To geo & others:

The so called explosions heard while the towers collapsed is simply the SOUND of the floors pancaking down one on top of the other.
Please try to imagine the tremendous kinetic force happening as the concrete & steel buildings fell !
The buildings were not made of cards !

Ha, Ha, you never took this into account and cannot look beyond your contrived conspiracy theory!

Take care guys

Report this

By Ken, December 9, 2006 at 4:18 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Tampa Dave

You keep saying, never has a steel framed building collapsed due to fire.
You keep chanting this mantra !
Well my friend, Never has a steel framed structure, 110 stories tall, been hit by a commercial jetliner traveling at 500 mph which then internally exploded into a fireball.
You just don’t understand the tremendous amount of kinetic energy that was released ! You must be a fool.
Stop with the mantra already, its not working.
As for the Palestinians happy and dancing, interviews were done, and indeed, they were very happy about the whole thing, just like you were !
You can say anything about the free press in this country, however, what reasonable person would be believe someone who rants that old Jew hating mantra, THE JEWS DID IT !
Your audience is more like those who THINK like Radical Muslim Arabs or Fascists.
These groups would love to see the destruction of the United States of America ! You can all go to hell !
Zionists Jews sure do not want to see the destruction of the USA, it is their only true supporter in this whole rotten world !
Think about that fool ?

Report this

By Skruff, December 9, 2006 at 2:45 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

In doing a bit of amature research, I find that there is a high probability that the skin of the airplanes which hit the WTC towers had a Magnesium alloy. and that several componants of these planes were 100% Magnesium.  Given easy ignition, and a high burn temp,  Does this change anything? Seema it could account for the molten metal mentioned in one of the below posts.

Report this

By Jackie T. Gabel, December 9, 2006 at 2:26 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

RE: Comment #41471 by Mac McKinney  on  12/08  at  8:54 pm — “So while we are trying to uncover just whose hatred and negativity caused 9/11, it only defeats our purposes to indulge in the same negative emotions ourselves.”

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fabricated hatred

The Myth of Islamo Fascism has been built by cold calculating intelligence professionals. Their so-called Clash of Civilizations is fabricated as well. We are seeing a Strategy of Tension, no different but magnitudes larger than what we saw in Cold War Europe. The pseudo-gang, false flag techniques developed by the British to undermine the Mau Mau uprising is no different. Al Queda is a CIA/MI-6 asset. The 911 criminals running their 911 patsies under the cover of Able Danger has absolutely nothing to do with Islam, Christianity or Judaism. These cloaks have been pulled over this broad range of black-ops/psy-ops as both subterfuge and emotional stimulation to heighten the fear and loathing. The War of Terror is certainly real in terms of its horror. It is however, a massive manipulation which damages any chance for genuine peace.

Report this

By Mac McKinney, December 8, 2006 at 9:54 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Alright you mugs, if we are going to keep this Truthdig from degenerating into All-Star Wrestling, complete with name-calling, eye-gouging and mudslinging, then everyone has to drop the stereotyping, race-baiting, and vitriole and stick to the arguments and discourse. 9/11 wasn’t a Jewish plot anymore than it was a Muslim plot. Zionists don’t equal Judaism any more than the Nazis equal Christianity or al Qaeda equals Islam. We play these gangs’ sick game when we start lumping everyone together into groups to hate.

There is a time and place for rational hatred, toward individuals that you know are harming you, but even then, there is something rather self-defeating about hatred. The problem is that when you hate someone or something, you are actually energizing that person or entity, attracting him or it to you. Since your thoughts shape your reality, when your mind is intensely focused with hatred, you are literally helping to manifest the object of your scorn in some manner, often quite unpronounced, and ensuring yourself a negative trip.

Jesus was able to figure this out. That is why he said to love your enemy and turn the other cheek, because to hate your enemy just maintains a destructive, negative relationship, where soon you are losing a finger, then an eyeball, then your leg, and finally your life. The bitter harvest of hatred. How much easier to negotiate and shake hands.

Interestingly enough, Mohammed, the Prophet of Islam, was also a skilled peacemaker. That was one reason he gained a standing in the Arab community, because he was an effective arbitrator. After jealous tribal leaders eventually banned him from Mecca, he was invited to Medina to arbitrate there and soon became Medina’s leader. Attacked by the still antagonistic tribes from Mecca, his military leadership eventually won the day and he ultimately took Mecca, but instead of sacking the city and slaughtering the Meccans, standard practice in those days, he offered them peace, forgiveness and future propserity, astonishing everyone. The pleasant harvest of love.

So while we are trying to uncover just whose hatred and negativity caused 9/11, it only defeats our purposes to indulge in the same negative emotions ourselves.

Report this

By Tampa DAve, December 8, 2006 at 6:08 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Ken:

One more response to your comments.  You have called your President a liar.  He said that 19 Arabs with box cutters, led by a person dying of kidney disease, conspired to the acts of 9/11.

Your President said this, in other words that there was a conspiracy to hurt America because they hate our freedom. 

You said there was no conspiracy.

You callin’ the Texas boy a liar?  Doesn’t sound healthy to me.

Also, just for laffs, you want to tell us how “physics” caused the squibs below the falling floors.  In the past, squibs were always a certain sign that explosives were in use. Since my major was Physical Chemistry, I had to study a lot of physics, and   I never read that it could be suspended for one day by people with box cutters. 

Also, in the history of the world, except for Towers 1, 2, and bldg 7, NO steel-frame buildings have ever fallen due to fire. This is because of the high heat required to soften steel enough to cause it to collapse, and the extreme difficulty with getting a fire to burn that hot.  If burning kerosene would cause a steel structure to collapse, all the millions of kerosene heaters in the world should have collapsed on 9/11 as well.

You keep saying “physics” the way preachers say “the bible”, but I don’t think you really know more than that one word. 

Tampa Dave

Report this

By TampaDave, December 8, 2006 at 5:57 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Ken:
I agree that you are probably just here to stir the pot, and that the best idea is just to ignore you.

You mentioned Palestinians dancing around after 9/11.  It turns out that the video footage you saw, that inflamed so many Americans, was actually several years old, and the networks trotted it out to create anger, an emotion that is guaranteed to keep people from seeing the truths that we weren’t supposed to see.

It is clear to me that anyone with one eye and half sense can look at the facts and see that the story we were told about 9/11 is not even half-baked, not even half true.  Half of New Yorkers know this without any brain strain.

Some people, obviously yourself included, don’t want to see inconvenient truths, so they scream loudly whenever one is apparent.

Tampa Dave

Report this

By Skruff, December 8, 2006 at 5:01 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Skruff = Harry H. Snyder III Whiting Maine

Comment #41305 by Just Plain Mad on 12/07 at 9:26 pm says:

“In fact, no one that were in the towers that died were Jewish.”

This is so very wrong, and nice sentence construction too!

I’m not suprised that like the cowardly Nazis, you hide behind a false name…

I know you are not interested in truth, but in case some other reader is…. here is the list (only partial) of Jewish dead from the towers on 9/11

http://www.thejewishweek.com/bottom/specialcontent.php3?artid=365

Boy Oh Boy,,, first Jews are labled “fat cat bankers” than some nerd says there were no Jews in America’s largest financial center building…

Exactly what people do you suppose the “Cantor” of Cantor/Fitzgerald is related

Report this

By Maani, December 8, 2006 at 2:21 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Edward:

I completely agree.  However, many of us focus at least partially on the collapses because they were the most dramatically visual images of that day, and were thus the most “traumatic” for most people.  And because a controlled demolition could not have occurred without government involvement, this becomes quite a “linchpin” in the 9/11 scenario.

Ken:

At the risk of getting into a pissing contest, I cannot blame you for not knowing that I am a 41-year New York City resident who knows this city better than most, and whose father worked on the 68th floor of the north tower for 4 years.  I am as familiar with the WTC area as you are.  In addition, while it is true that I was not “on site” on 9/11, two of my friends were, one on the 34th floor of the north tower and one on the street watching from the exact spot we are talking about: a block north of the north tower.  And when my friend on on the 34th floor left the building, he also ended up just north of the north tower

According to both of them (and all video footage that I have seen), the north tower did NOT collapse “toward” WTC 7.  It collapsed almost straight down - though, admittedly, as it collapsed some debris spilled “toward” WTC 7.

However, every single photo of WTC 7 ever published - on both sides of this debate - shows that, at most, the building sustained minimal external damage, and only two or three isolated fires (the origins of which are still unknown, as even the NIST report admits).

Thus, as I noted, even if we ACCEPT (which many of us do not) that debris from the north tower caused external damage to WTC 7 - and even if we add to this the possibility (which many of us do NOT support) that the collapse of the towers caused substructure damage to WTC 7 as a result of “vibrational force” - that STILL does not explain the complete collapse of WTC 7 at free fall speed PERFECTLY into its own footprint.  I would add that every video of the collapse of WTC 7 - again, on both sides of the debate - show the collapse beginning with an “indentation” in the roof, which is exactly what occurs in a perfect controlled demolition.

No, my friend, you did not “get me.”  Far from it.

Peace.

Report this

By Ken, December 8, 2006 at 1:10 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

To George:

I am not the fool, you are.
I was there and saw the whole thing.
You talk about molten steel spewing out of the lower floor beneath the impact area.
The huge commercial plane went into the South Tower at over 500 miles per hr., loaded with jet fuel, and exploded internally within the building.
You evidently cannot understand the huge internal damage that was caused by that impact and explosion.
It is well known fact that when a projectile is shot @ HIGH VELOCITY and enters an object, the entrance damage is much smaller than the internal damage and exit damage. This was shown by another conspiracy theory, the Kennedy assassination.
I have no doubt that this huge explosion caused the structure to weaken by twisting, bending and dislocating the supporting steel beams and the intense initial heat of the explosion melted the internal floor supports and structural steel.
When you really give it some thought, it was not strange at all that the buildings collapsed.
You have your own views and that is your personal distorted view of what you thought you saw.
Again, no conspiracy, good old physics brought down the Towers. END OF CONVERSATION !

Report this

By Edward, December 8, 2006 at 1:03 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

“Just Plain Mad,” Turning 9/11 into a Zionist issue makes it an even more difficult road to travel.. Sure it seems that some Zionists have played a part, but first and foremost it was the NeoCons of the U.S. Government…  Not all Jewish people support the more extremist Zionist individuals, and in fact a large portion of the people in Israel have a progressive bend..

Also there are a number of influential people in the 9/11 truth movement who are Jewish, one of the best 9/11 websites on the internet is created by Mark Robinowitz, it’s link is here..

http://www.oilempire.us/

Report this

By Ken, December 8, 2006 at 12:29 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Just Plain Mad:

You are an uneducated fool and probably a muslim arab who hates the United States and blames Jews for everything that goes wrong in the world.
It was the Palestinians who were dancing on 9/11 and praising allah. That is documented fact.
It can be proved by video tapes that filmed the whole thing in the West Bank & Gaza.
Shut your disgusting lying mouth and go back to praying to allah and ask for your soul not to burn in hell. I doubt he will listen.

Report this

By George, December 8, 2006 at 10:56 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Ken,please explain the molten steel metal spuing out from lower floors,well below the ones hit by the plane ?
Watch this video before you make an ass of yourself—Ken !
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVzQfa_V1jw&mode=related&search;=

Report this

By Just Plain Mad, December 7, 2006 at 10:26 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Anyone that still believes that 19 arabs and a Guy hidden in some far away mountains with only a cell phone and a lap top could have pulled the 911 capper is very stupid and a imbecile. I would suggest you read the following paragraph and realize the blight that is rottening our great nation. When will a cure be found ?-Only when we kick the crap out of the many liars in government and the media.
Enjoy !
*********************************************
The blowing up of the King David Hotel on July 22, 1946. killing 92 people and blaming it on the Palistinians was not the first act of terrorism but one of their most important acts of terrorism by the Zionists. It is an event that is celebrated to this day by the Israelis. The first words out of the mouths of the dancing Israeli’s on 9/11/2001, when they were celebrating the destruction of the towers in New York to the police was that they should be looking for Palistinians. The Israeli cabinet certainly wasn’t crying over the tragedy. In fact, no one that were in the towers that died were Jewish.
Just plain mad

Report this

By Ken, December 7, 2006 at 8:10 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Manni:

You are wrong.
The North Tower did fall towards WTC 7.
I guess you really did not observe the many different camera angles that were taken of the collapse.
WTC 7 was 47 stories tall the other buildings were very short and not in the direct path of the fall. The Tower was not blocked at all by those buildings when it fell towards WTC 7.
That is fact pal, I know.
I work in the area and for 26 yrs I would go to the World trade Center almost everyday for lunch or shopping. 
You don’t know the area and really are talking off the top of your head.
I suggest you know nothing about what really happened.
Your ignorance of the WTC area is obvious and your conspiracy theory supported by incorrect info.
Sorry pal, got you !

Report this

By Edward, December 7, 2006 at 7:49 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Demolition theories are interesting, however I feel that they distract from the bigger issue of government involvement in 9/11.  Although there is much evidence to support those theories, in the end they always boil down to an argument of conflicting scientific analysis. 

Some much better issues to focus on are the past examples of government sponsored terrorism, the insider trading which happened before 9/11, the numerous specific warnings the government received before the attacks, the blocked investigations before and after the attacks, Rumsfeld making an announcement of 2.3 Trillion Dollars mysteriously missing from the Pentagon on the day before the attacks, the phony war in Afghanistan, Bush giving a speech surrounded by women and children 25 minutes after knowing for sure that the nation was under attack and that he was a target, ect..

Please take a look at the following recently expanded website which speaks about many of these issues..

http://www.newsofinterest.tv/911.html

Report this

By Maani, December 7, 2006 at 3:03 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Al:

But that is NOT what happened; i.e., the twin towers did NOT fall in the direction of WTC 7.

As well, your theory is weak.  You suggest that the weight and force of the collapse of the twin towers might have weakened the substructure or actual structure of WTC 7.  However, this is insupportable for at least two reasons.

First, WTC 7 was not nearly as close to the towers as WTC 6 and WTC 5, neither of which sustained substructural damage; although debris from the twin towers hit those two buildings, causing massive fires, the structures of those two buildings remained intact.  And they were much closer to the twin towers than WTC 7.

Second, even if we allow for BOTH external and substructural damage to WTC 7 as a result of the collapses of the twin towers, this would still not explain WTC 7’s collapse in free fall into its own footprint - even moreso than either of the towers.

Nope.  Re WTC 7, you’re gonna have to come up with something FAR more substantive and supportable than damage by vibrational force.

Peace.

Report this

By Al Wright, December 6, 2006 at 11:32 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Dante wrote that Virgil spoke, “...always the man in whom thought thrusts ahead of thought allows the goal he’s set to move far off—the force of one thought saps the other’s force.”

Hence, it’s a mistake to jump ahead to the collapse of 7WTC.

You seem anxious to discard the phenomena observed as the towers collapsed and skip ahead to 7WTC.

Human nature changes very little, if at all.

It doesn’t take too much imagination to appreciate that the massive destructive force, a force roughly equivalent to the yield of the N Korean nuke, released as the two towers collapsed might have had some effect on the structural soundness on 7WTC.

If you would like a well paved path to smooth your worries about 7WTC, then follow this solid mental image.

Imagine that the demolition plotters were lazier and less kind than you have previously imagined.  Instead of wiring the towers to fall straight down and neatly within their foundations, they saved spools of time and great lengths of wire by wiring only one or two of the lower floors.  The goal: to topple the towers like great smokestacks.  And they crash down, with all the force of a concrete idea, directly onto 7WTC.

Report this

By Maani, December 6, 2006 at 9:35 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Skruff:

You can’t be serious: the accumulated weight of 1/8-inch panes of glass?  To say it would be negligible is giving more credence than necessary.

Besides, Gone Fishing was being “kind” in his example.  The reality of what we are talking about is a bowling ball falling at free fall speed (i.e., zero resistance other than wind) and a bowling ball encountering a MINIMUM of three inches (and possibly as much as a foot) of AT LEAST plasterboard (if not steel and concrete) AT LEAST seventy times during its fall.

Please.  No matter how you cut it, the resistance created by the UNDAMAGED floors (at least 2/3 of each building) would have “checked” the speed of the collapse to at least a minimal degree.  Even if we allow only a single second for each floor (which is preposterous), it would have taken the towers between 90 and 110 seconds to collapse.  Yet they both collapsed within 11 seconds - free fall speed.

Physics doesn’t lie.

Peace.

Report this

By Thomas Ellis, December 6, 2006 at 7:45 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Skruff asks,

“BUT, if, the second bowling ball aquired the weight of each piece of glass as it fell???”

Ummmm…The lower floors were ALREADY supporting the weight of the upper floors, and as the upper floors were themselves disintegrating en route downward, that weight would have been progressively less, not more.

Sorry. I too prefer to stay with reality—with the basic laws of physics. What we saw that day—the freefall collapse of three steel-frame buildings into their own footprints—would have been physically impossible without collateral energy input from controlled demolition charges.

And what’s more, those charges were clearly visible as “squibs.” Case closed.

Report this

By Maani, December 6, 2006 at 5:12 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

All:

Check out this article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/06/nyregion/06fire.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print

At the risk of being even further lambasted by our agent provocateur guests (LOL), could this be the first incident of many in this regard - i.e., the silencing of “smaller” people who may have known something?  And consider that law enforcement officals are calling the fire “suspicious.”

Peace.

Report this

By Skruff, December 6, 2006 at 1:16 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

regards Comment #41011 by Gone fishing on 12/06 at 9:08 am

BUT, if, the second bowling ball aquired the weight of each piece of glass as it fell???

I keep going back to my memory of the shit-for-concrete way these buildings were constructed. 

Has anyone ever explored what the 1993 bombing damage to the basement of WTC 1 did in terms of the later trauma?

And in answer to your final paragraph… I believe No One!

Report this

By Gone fishing, December 6, 2006 at 10:08 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

For Kenny Boy—if he can read.
(Comment from brisa ) Dec 6/06
One either has to believe in the laws of physics relative to linear motion or trust that the official narrative of the 911 atrocity is true. They are mutually exclusive.

Objects or buildings that fall at a free-fall rate fall with no resistance. Discounting air resistance, this is the case with WTC1, 2 and especially building 7. The widely trumpeted “pancake collapse theory” would introduce significant resistance as upper floors would have to crash through many tens of stories of undamaged structure. The actual rate of the collapse of these three structures as corroborated by unspinnable video evidence, exposes the fallacious nature of the official explanation. A free-fall rate of collapse is only possible if all structural integrity is eliminated just ahead of the collapse wave. This set of parameters can only be accounted for by the controlled demolition of these buildings.

A parallel analogy would be thus: Say one is going to drop two bowling balls from a height of 100 feet. One will free fall through the air and the other will encounter 1/8th inch panes of glass every foot after the first fifty feet of free-fall. I think you would agree that if these bowling balls were released simultaneously, the one breaking 49 panes of glass would hit the ground later than one in free-fall. Breaking that glass would slow the decent and increase the time it takes to hit the ground. On the other hand, if those 49 panes of glass were shattered just prior to the ball’s arrival in a duplicate experiment, the free-fall rate of both balls would be realized.

Every American has to decide whether to trust this government and corporate controlled news media or whether to apply some critical thinking skills in the evaluation of widely disseminated information concerning the 911 atrocity. Since my government has a long history of protecting me from the truth “for my own good”, I’ll stick with Newton and Galileo.

Report this

By Maani, December 5, 2006 at 7:12 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Since The 9/11 Omission…er…Commission has come up, let me fill in some blanks.

Almost all of the Commissioners had direct ties to members of the Clinton or Bush administrations who might have been called as witnesses.  Almost half had direct or indirect financial, board or other ties to the two arilines of 9/11 (American, United).  The lead counsel for the Commission worked for a law firm that was also representing Arab nationals who had ties to financing terrorism.  And, of course, the Executive Director of the Commission - the one who was actually responsible for the day-to-day direction of resources (what leads to follow, what witnesses to call, etc.) - was none other than Philip Zelikow, one of Condoleezza Rice’s best friends (they also wrote a book together), a member of a conservative think tank that included Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rice and Perle, and a member of the Bush-Cheney transition team.

And THIS is who we are told to belive?!

Talk about conflicts of interest!!

Peace.

Report this

By Jackie T. Gabel, December 5, 2006 at 5:53 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

RE: Comment #40856 by Mac McKinney  on  12/05  at  10:00 am — “This is in response to Comment #40793 by Ken: Poor Ken is the classic product of the cultural wasteland that pervades America. “

>>>>>> save your compassion

Ken my be an innocent observer, or he may be getting paid for his disinfo. rants, though they’re rather crude. Usually conintel and disinfo. plants take agent provocateur positions, like the wildly creative “holographich planes” stories or the stoked up Ward Churchill “Little Eichmans” schtick, but they could be showing up across the spectrum in all sorts of guises.  Note: Churchill has been cointel since he screwed the Weather Underground some 30-odd years ago.

Be advised, “Triple Cross” just out by Peter Lance supports the case for vast incompetence throughout the alphabet spook agencies, when in truth its central character, Ali Mohammad was a CIA asset manipulating al Queda, not the other way around, as Lance writes. This is a huge limited hangout, pushing open as far as possible the “incompetence” escape hatch for the 911 traitors. Watch this one unfold. It’s going to be a real circus. To get the real story on Ali and Able Danger, read “911 Synthetic Terror - Made in USA” by Webster G. Tarpley.

Report this

By Gone fishing, December 5, 2006 at 11:41 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Regarding the 911 commision,I now believe that no commision can be trusted,when the members are handpicked and term limits are set.
This shill body had only 6 months and only $13 million (or less) to operate.
When one member stepped out of line—-gone.
I just came across an old article—enjoy !
************************************************
Inside Politics


By Greg Pierce

  Cleland’s new gig
  Former Sen. Max Cleland, Georgia Democrat, has been nominated by President Bush to serve a four-year term on the board of the Export-Import Bank, and will have to leave the commission investigating the September 11 terror attacks.
  The statutes governing the panel, formally known as the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, bar anyone who holds a federal job such as being on the Ex-Im Board, from being a member, Shaun Waterman of United Press International reports.
  Mr. Cleland has been one of the more outspoken members of the commission, accusing the administration of delaying access to vital documents in an effort to run out the clock on its investigation. The panel, which started work at the beginning of the year, must submit its report by a congressionally mandated deadline of May 27, 2004.
  Commission spokesman Al Felzenberg told UPI that Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, South Dakota Democrat, would nominate Mr. Cleland’s replacement.
  Whoever is chosen will need to get up to speed very quickly on the commission’s work — which is already more than half-completed. But they will not be able to start reviewing the millions of pages of classified documents the commission has received until they get security clearance — a process that can take several weeks.
   
    NOTE: Just like my place of work—if their is a stinker of a shop stewart—he gets promoted to management

Report this

By deborah conner, December 5, 2006 at 11:04 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The manipulation of public media was a big part of 9/11. Some resources on Propaganda techniques:

Sourcewatch
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Propaganda_techniques

Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch’s War on Journalism
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0418038/

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2006/110706spinattack.htm
Fox News Spin Attack Ends With Red-Faced Anchors
9/11 truth scholar Fetzer anticipated slant of Hannity and Colmes spot

And on the internet, we have trolling:
http://www.jfo.org.uk/info/new/troll.htm

Ken’s “you’re with us or against us” posts are an excellent example. Trying to steer the discussion to the personal, the name calling, the fake fistacuffs. Just ways to shut down the discussion.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2006/110706spinattack.htm

Report this

By Mac McKinney, December 5, 2006 at 11:00 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

This is in response to Comment #40793 by Ken:

Poor Ken is the classic product of the cultural wasteland that prevades America. While ending each rant with God Bless and Peace, the contents of Ken’s comments are filled with hatred, paranoia, intolerance and projection. So on the surface Ken strives to be Godly, while in his subconscious he is very dark-minded indeed.

But I was raised with these contradictions too, so I can understand Ken somewhat. I was consumed with rage, fear and anger in my early years toward anyone who didn’t fit in to the very narrow and painful Goldwater/John Birch definition of what a patriotic American is, which was and is threatened by almost evrything. In my day the overriding paranoia was Communism. Now it is Terrorism, in effect the same thing, the fear and dread of the Other.

But all this is in one’s own head, individually and collectively in America. But This is what the powers that be want to have in our heads, so that they can jerk our chains day after day for their ultimate ends, which basically revolve around war and destruction. It is hard to wake up from this stifling matrix of ideology and programed emotions.

So Ken, try to let go of your angst and simultaneously try repeating this phrase as many times as you can, several times a day: “God and I, I and God, God and I are one.” Then try repeating “God is all. God is in all beings” until you feel a little freer and more relaxed. You see, we all suffer from bad perceptions. The narrower one’s perceptions, the greater the angst.

Report this

By Jackie T. Gabel, December 5, 2006 at 10:42 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

RE: Comment #40793 by Ken  on  12/04  at  6:45 pm — ” You think 911 was bad, wait to you see them get hold of nuclear weapons and kill a couple of million Americans in the name of Allah !”

>>>>>>>> of course

As Nero’s counsel, Seneca, warned, “Fabricated terror is like a drug. It always takes a bigger dose to get the same effect.”

If there is a WMD incident anywhere in the world, don’t look to the cave, bin Laden, the laptop; don’t look to the Axis of Evil. Look to Cheney and Cheney’s handlers.

Report this

By skruff@myway.com, December 5, 2006 at 10:15 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

This group of radicals have been able to convince you people that your own government planned 911 !

NO group of individuals has “convinced” me of anything. 

As you point out, I am very ignorant.

I do have a skeptical streak as I lived through Watergate, The Tonken Gulf resolution, The Iran Contra crookedness, The Lying Warren Commission

Dag Hammerjould’s plane crash, The Salvator Allende murder.

I suppose I should believe “my (sic) Government”  BUT they often lie to me without even providing partial cover.

....and my “ignorance” of Arab culture and their (alleged??) goals has to do with the fact that in my schooling, the mention of “arabs” came up only once in connection with the protest over the siting of the “New Israel.”

Report this

By winterfire6, December 4, 2006 at 7:50 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Perhaps there should be a difference between War spending and Defense spending.

They are definitely not the same thing, and as we have learned lately, they are often at cross purposes.

Of course, we should defend our country and our citizens, but war, declared basically to fullfil hidden agendas, is not the same as defense. As a matter of fact, it can prove to serve the opposite purpose, as we have also learned, unless, of course, we are retarded.

Report this

By Ken, December 4, 2006 at 7:45 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Skruff:

You are really a very ignorant individual.
You cannot even see the big picture that is being planned by Islamic radicals for the infidels in the United States !
This group of radicals have been able to convince you people that your own government planned 911 !
They are also claiming the Jews instigated the whole thing.
How stupid can you people be ?
The very people who want to see the destruction of the “Great Satan” have been able to infiltrate this Truthdig website, and other sites, to influence American public opinion AGAINST their own freely elected democratic government!
These are dangerous people and they really do mean to destroy us.
Just read that junk from - Fadel Abdullah - COMMENT#40558 you can feel the hate come out of his disgusting mouth about America & Jews !
You think 911 was bad, wait to you see them get hold of nuclear weapons and kill a couple of million Americans in the name of Allah !
Stop being a fool, this is no joke !
Islamic conversion of the world is their main goal and that includes you !
God Bless

Report this

By Jail Bush Cheney Rumsfeld Joint Chiefs, December 4, 2006 at 4:42 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Al Wright has lots of time on his hands but dispite many challenges issued by me, he continues to ignore the collapse of WTC7.  This seems to be all anyone can do with it that defends the “company” analysis. The 911 Commission report ignored it completely. I asked Slade Gordon—to his face how this could be. How could this be?!  His reply?  “We dealt with what was relevant to our study”  Al, you are a bright guy, more adept at logic and math than a concrete thinker like myself, would you please explain how a 46 story building could suddenly collapse in it’s own footprint with virtually no provocation save a few transient fires in the building that were not widespread enough to have been falsely accused as the cause?  You keep referring to the twin towers as though those are all we are looking at.  Al, all of your philosophical and mathematical ramblings are not worth a damn until you add wtc7 to your equation.

Report this

By deborah conner, December 4, 2006 at 12:18 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Jail Bush Cheney Rumsfeld Joint Chiefs on 12/03 at 10:09 pm writes:

BEST YET ARTICLE ON 911 TRUTH MOVEMENT IN MAINSTREAM MEDIA: WASHINGTON POST
http://www.wanttoknow.info/060908.911conspiracytheorists >>

The whole website—magnificent. And speaking of odd things around days before and after 9/11, this one:

CBS Reports Pentagon
Cannot Account for $2.3 Trillion

“‘According to some estimates we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions,’ Rumsfeld admitted. $2.3 trillion — that’s $8,000 for every man, woman and child in America.”
—CBS, 1/29/02

Dear friends,

One day before the 9/11 attacks, US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld made the above astonishing admission. Besides being reported months later in the CBS report given below, the quote is still posted at http://www.defenselink.mil/speeches/2001/s20010910-secdef.html on the Department of Defense website. And on PBS at http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/military/jan-june01/dollars_2-12.html we learn that this figure came from a report of the Pentagon’s inspector general. “Its own auditors admit the military cannot account for 25 percent of what it spends,” reports CBS News Correspondent Vince Gonzales.

The timing of this admission just one day before 9/11 kept this story from even making the news at the time. Even when it was finally reported months later, this revelation received scant coverage. Why is this startling news not given top headlines in large bold print on all of the nation’s newspapers? Why to this day is our press hardly mentioning this most vital issue? Please help to play the role at which the press is so sadly failing by sending this message to your friends and colleagues. With the power of the Internet, we can inform the public of all that is going on the behind the scenes and inspire people to work together for a brighter future. You take care and remember that every one of us makes a difference!

With best wishes,
Fred Burks for the WantToKnow.info Team


http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/01/29/eveningnews/main325985.shtml

(CBS) On Sept. 10, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld declared war. Not on foreign terrorists, “the adversary’s closer to home. It’s the Pentagon bureaucracy,” he said.

He said money wasted by the military poses a serious threat.

“In fact, it could be said it’s a matter of life and death,” he said.

Rumsfeld promised change but the next day – Sept. 11—the world changed and in the rush to fund the war on terrorism, the war on waste seems to have been forgotten.

Just last week President Bush announced, “my 2003 budget calls for more than $48 billion in new defense spending.”

More money for the Pentagon, CBS News Correspondent Vince Gonzales reports, while its own auditors admit the military cannot account for 25 percent of what it spends.

“According to some estimates we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions,” Rumsfeld admitted.

$2.3 trillion — that’s $8,000 for every man, woman and child in America. To understand how the Pentagon can lose track of trillions, consider the case of one military accountant who tried to find out what happened to a mere $300 million.

“We know it’s gone. But we don’t know what they spent it on,” said Jim Minnery, Defense Finance and Accounting Service.

Minnery, a former Marine turned whistle-blower, is risking his job by speaking out for the first time about the millions he noticed were missing from one defense agency’s balance sheets. Minnery tried to follow the money trail, even crisscrossing the country looking for records.

“The director looked at me and said ‘Why do you care about this stuff?’ It took me aback, you know? My supervisor asking me why I care about doing a good job,” said Minnery.

He was reassigned and says officials then covered up the problem by just writing it off.

“They have to cover it up,” he said. “That’s where the corruption comes in. They have to cover up the fact that they can’t do the job.”

more

Report this

By Montie Shields USAF RET., December 4, 2006 at 1:12 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Here is something I have been thinking about
for a long time. After 9/11 when all planes
were grounded, Bush provided a plane for his
Royal Saudi friends, and some of Osama bin
Laden’s family to fly them out of the country.
I just can’t imagine anyone providing a plane
to the family of someone that had just murdered
thousands of Americans, and destroyed two
great buildings. Later I read an article that
bin Laden’s ex-sister-in-law said The Saudi
Royal family, and bin Laden’s family was still
supporting him. Another article stated that when
Bush decided to run for President, he went to
his Saudi friend to ask his advice.
P.S. While he provided a plane for his friends
President Clinton was out of the country, and
to get back in he had to fly to Canada then
rent a car to get back in the country.

Report this

By Jail Bush Cheney Rumsfeld Joint Chiefs, December 3, 2006 at 11:09 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

BEST YET ARTICLE ON 911 TRUTH MOVEMENT IN MAINSTREAM MEDIA: WASHINGTON POST
http://www.wanttoknow.info/060908.911conspiracytheorists

agree with suggestion to ignore ignorant racists and hate mongers, often they are there to incite and get people to coalesce around an argument.  besides—they are lousy spellers which often denotes inferior intelligence.

Report this

By Al Wright, December 3, 2006 at 10:47 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Please join me in a thought experiment that should yield a greater appreciation for the question: How do we know what we think we know?

Imagine the twin towers as two big black boxes.  They resembled big boxes, but this is only coincidental, they could be any shape.  For our purposes, the most important feature of the twin towers is their twin-ness.

For now, we will ignore any mechanisms of action and the inner workings of the big black boxes.  Limiting ourselves to what we can plainly observe from a distance as the towers collapsed, we now stand on equal footing.

From a safe distance we see both towers hit and then fall.  Being careful observers, we note that one tower was stuck at floors 93 to 99, and then collasped after burning for 102 minutes.  The other twin was struck at floors 77 to 84, and then collapsed after burning for 56 minutes.

Now imagine an evil tormentor and a third tower (a third twin?).  The third twin is hit at about the 60th floor by another 767 flying at high speed.  Your tormentor gives you a gun-to-the-head choice: Will the third twin fall before or after the 100-minute mark?  You begin to protest that you’d like better control of impact angle, airspeed, and you’d like to check for any funny business, but then your tormentor raises his pistol.  Noting from the first two trials that the lower down the tower is hit the faster it falls, your only reasonable guess is under the 100-minute mark.

Doesn’t this prove that the jets brought down the towers?  Of course not.  If we were to conclude from only two trials that the jets caused the observed effects, then we would be guily of what David Hume called, “an unpardonable temerity to judge the whole course of nature from one single experiment, however accurate or certain.”

Even 50 towers collapsing on schedule doesn’t prove that they were not all wired, everyone of them, for controlled demo.  We are up against the problem that correlation does not necessarily mean causation.

So why bring up the whole thought experiment if it really doesn’t tell us anything? We may learn something yet.

Assuming a fairly linear segment of a natural function over the middle to upper-middle floors of the towers, and doing a little math with the inverse relationship between the number of floors supported above impact and the time to collapse yields,

  17 floors/33 floors = 0.52

  0.52 X 102 minutes = a predicted fall time of 53 minutes

Actual time to fall was 56 minutes.  Close enough, as they say, for government work.


This means that there may be some unseen underlying process that yields an inverse realtionship betwenn collapse time and the number of supported floors, ...or not.  It could be that the demolition plotters selected 56 and 102 minutes for some random, mysterious, or even accidental reason.  Or the plotters might have picked those times to mimic an unseen natural process that they foresaw as maybe causing the towers to collapse in an inverse time/mass relationship.  Or it could actually be a natural process.

Which do you think is most likely, if you had to make a gun-to-the-head choice?

Report this

By Maani, December 3, 2006 at 5:47 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

All:

Although I side a touch more with Fadel than with Ken, I would suggest that, while they both do indeed have every right to their opinions, the rest of us simply ignore them and go on with our discussion, since BOTH of them are hijacking this thread and trying to “change the subject”; i.e., get us all to focus on THEM and their inanities (though Fadel, at least, has made some good points on the issue) rather than on the subject at hand.  We are being waylaid, and we are allowing it to happen.

Anyone - and that includes both Fadel and Ken - who wishes to continue with the discussion at hand is welcome to do so.  Otherwise, I suggest that everyone else simply ignore them and not respond to their posts.

Peace.

Report this

By Skruff, December 3, 2006 at 3:44 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I was born here too, and to me, “multicultural” means “including Arabs and Muslims, Hindu, Persians, Chinese and as well as JewsChristians and Budists.

In fact, I’m ready to accept anyone who goes through the LEGAL channels to get here.

Talk about steriotypes… I met a group of Iraqis at the University of Maine a few years back.  I thought I’d hussle them in a game of golf… They seemed mildly interested, so we went out on the course   them -8 average… me +2

I’ve had a great deal of respect for Iraqi poker faces ever since!

Report this

By Ken, December 3, 2006 at 6:02 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

To Fadel Abdallah:

This is a democratic free speech and secular country ! Don’t tell me what I can say or think, this is not some Islamic dictatorship !
We really don’t need your kind, Arab Muslims, over here supporting anti-American conspiracy theories !
I know in your country, under Islamic law, I would be killed !
I REALLY DON’T CARE TO HEAR YOUR LIES !
I was born and raised in the United States. I love this country. It is the greatest country in the world ! I would rather live here than in any other place in the world !
I see you are monitoring this forum also !
I was right about anti-American propaganda being done on this Truthdig Website !
The FBI should investigate what is going on here with 99% of the comments spouting false anti-American hate propaganda.
Fadel, I suggest you stop it now, and tell your people that multi-cultural democracy is the answer to your problems in Arab lands.
Islamic country rule must be replaced by Democratic rule!
Your hate of Jews is evident and having them being part of the 911 conspiracy theory is just some more scapegoat anti-Jewish crap !
Your kind is not welcome in the United States, please leave !

Thank you
God Bless
Peace my friend

Report this

By Expanded 9/11 Summary Page, December 3, 2006 at 12:10 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Please take a look at the following page which summarizes a lot of the issues about the 9/11 attacks.. it has been recently expanded to cover the issues of insider trading, past examples of terrorism, drills and exercises before and during the attacks, government officials who have gone public, and what key individuals were doing on the day of the attacks.

http://www.newsofinterest.tv/911.html

Report this

By Fadel Abdallah, December 2, 2006 at 9:34 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

To Ken with my deepest scorn!
I’ve been bearing with unprecedented patience your irrational rants till I read your latest and I found great urge to respond. Here’s a piece of my mind:
1.  You must be a man of no sense of shame or honor, to keep coming back to this site when you have given your word that you’re quitting. This tells a lot about what type of questionable character you have. You must be a mental case, as Craig Lane, comment # 40411, rightly points out.
2.  You must be one of the most radical Zionists that ever existed. You’re motivated in your rants by your loyalty to terrorist Zionism than the false patriotism you pretend to have.
3.  Most likely you know, or you have a gut feeling that such sophisticated and complex operation could not have been carried out without the collaboration, planning and know-how of the Israeli Mossad. It seems to me you’re getting so nervous as you read the undisputable facts and truths brought forth by the real patriotic Americans who insist on knowing the truth of 9/11.
4.  I wish I can claim for Arabs and Muslims the sophistication in planning and executing such a complex operation. Then I would be consoled that the day will soon come when they’re going to outdo and outmaneuver evil Zionism. I know my people and how disorganized and undisciplined they are. I always joke with bitterness how Muslims can’t ever agree on fixing one day for all Muslims to celebrate the Feast of Breaking the fast of Ramadan. I don’t know how any person in his right mind would believe that a bunch of people, living in caves and constantly on the run, can plan and execute an operation of this magnitude in the land of the one superpower of the world, with it’s multi-billion security system. And to top the myth of this, they were able to hijack these planes with box-cutters! 
5.  You’re also motivated by your fanatical hatred towards Islam and Muslims which you would like to exterminate from the face of the earth if it was in your power to do so. I strongly resent that you keep bringing the name of Allah and Islam on your filthy mouth.
6.  It’s now a common knowledge that as early as the 1970’s, the Zionist architect Henry Kissinger advocated a military operation in the Middle East to occupy permanently the oil fields. This was done on the behest of Israel and its lobby who control America. The planning to find a justification for invading the Middle East was in the working since the time of Kissinger, The final opportunity came during the presidency of the drunk-behind-the-wheel George Bush whose brain cells were known to be destroyed due to his many years of being given to alcoholic consumption. Bush, of course had never had the brain to plan anything; the planning and execution was done by his Zionist handlers and other merchants of death who stood to benefit most from the tragedy of 9/11. It took nine months of Bush’s first term for the insiders to put the final touches on the 9/11 operation. And Israel and its Mossad where at the helm.
7.  I do have a clear idea how the alleged hijackers, mostly Saudis, ended on these planes. They were mostly well to do Saudis who were in America, having fun with sex and drinking. Most likely they overstated their visiting visas, and the right time of the operation they were shoved into these planes under the pretext of being deported for visa violation. One cannot rule out the involvement of the Saudi secret services in providing those scapegoats. A dead conscience and money can go a long way in promoting evil in these days before the Final Days!
8.  In conclusion, I would quote in agreement george # 40504 who said, “…Israel operating a false flag on Americans to stir up sufficient Islamophobia to launch a war on Islam”, but also to financially benefit the merchants of death. It’s like hitting two birds with one stone.

Report this

By Jail Bush, December 2, 2006 at 7:46 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I think the question of knowledge and literacy has passed the previous poster by when referring to the small group of people that aggressively question the official story and conclude that elements within the “military industrial complex” (pardon the phrase) were responsible for 911.  the last new york times poll has 86% of americans who don’t accept the official story.  so i might think that he is a hold over from the flat earth society or worse the “intelligent” design crowd.  good info. below.

Best 9/11 Information Document: Over 50 senior military, intelligence, and government officials are now on record questioning 9/11. Read media statements from members of congress, a former director of the FBI, a former chief economist of President George W. Bush, an assistant secretary of the Treasury under President Reagan, the former head of advanced space programs for the Department of Defense under Reagan, a British cabinet minister under Prime Minister Tony Blair, and more. In reports on respected websites (links provided), each of these prominent leaders now claims that there are serious problems with the official government story of 9/11.

Senior Military, Intelligence, and Government Officials Question 9/11 Commission Report
http://www.WantToKnow.info/officialsquestion911commissionreport


9/11 Information News Articles: We have collected many news articles from highly respected media sources which contain eye-opening information exposing various aspects of the 9/11 cover-up. Links are always provided to the original sources for verification. The first link below contains one-paragraph excerpts from incredibly revealing news articles with the most important articles listed first. The second link provides the same article excerpts listed by order of date posted to WantToKnow.info, while the third lists them by the article date. The fourth link below contains a list of only headlines and links to some of the most important articles on 9/11. Below these four links, headlines and links to the entire text of several of the very best articles are also provided.

http://www.WantToKnow.info/911newsarticles - Highly revealing 9/11 news excerpts

http://www.WantToKnow.info/911newsstories - News excerpts by date posted to website

http://www.WantToKnow.info/911mediaarticles - News excerpts listed in reverse date order

http://www.WantToKnow.info/medianewsarticles#a911 - Headlines and links only


Best 9/11 Information Articles:

Washington Post and MSNBC Reveal Growing Power, Prestige of the 9/11 Movement
http://www.WantToKnow.info/060908.911conspiracytheorists

Time Magazine Explores 9/11 Conspiracies and Poll Showing Many Believe 9/11 Cover-up
http://www.WantToKnow.info/060903time.911conspiracies

CNN Gives Major Coverage to 9/11 Cover-up in March 2006 With Charlie Sheen, Others
http://www.WantToKnow.info/cnn9-11cover-up

Ex-FBI Chief Accuses 9/11 Commission of Cover-up in Wall Street Journal
http://www.WantToKnow.info/051126abledangerlouisfreeh

New York Times article on 9/11 movement, 9/11 polls, 9/11 convention
http://www.WantToKnow.info/060610newyorktimes9-11truth

Association of Influential Scholars Challenges 9/11 Commission Results - Miami Herald
http://www.WantToKnow.info/060223scholarsfor911truth

Los Angeles Times Questions Official 9/11 Story in Revealing Interview
http://www.WantToKnow.info/911conspiracy

ABC News: U.S. Military Planned to Orchestrate Terrorism Against U.S. Citizens as War Pretext
http://www.WantToKnow.info/010501operationnorthwoods

Report this

By winterfire6, December 2, 2006 at 7:06 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Ken, if you really believe that we are the paranoid nutcases, or pro-Muslim, anti-American, traitors that you imply that we all are, you really should get professional help.

If you want to follow G.W and the Dick over a cliff, that is entirely your business, and I doubt seriously that anyone here would waste a nano-second trying to stop you.

But we won’t go with you.

There are war crimes and crimes against humanity involved in this mess. Members of the Bush personality cult are no safer than those who have followed and supported other authoritarian, international criminals in the past.

Report this

By Al Wright, December 2, 2006 at 5:41 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I see that the ad hominem logically fallacy is alive and well here.  The intelligence, educational background, special qualifications, etc., of the person presenting the argument have nothing to do with the soundness of the argument itself.  When someone tries the abusive form of the ad hominem fallacy, well…

That’s about all I have to say about that.

In the future I hope you would carefully read and comment on the soundness of the argument.

Apparently you misread my response to the argument that one of the more intelligent and considerate members of the Controlled Demo camp had presented involving the First Law of Thermodynamics, a.k.a. Conservation of Energy.

Go back and read carefully, and you will find that I was using the 250 metric tons of TNT as a convenient, and commonly used, measure of energy released in highly destructive events.  I plainly acknowledged that thermite/thermate is the chemical energy source offered up by the Controlled Demo camp.

Further, you support my assertion that relatively small charges are used in controlled demo work to implode a structure. (Fourth sentence of my first paragraph.)  As you said, “—would only take one ton of explosives, in small separate units”.  So, I guess you want to help refute the energy deficient argument that the Controlled Demo camp would like to make?

There is a high probability that I will not respond to any more ad hominem attacks.  Please remember that my ignoring them, doesn’t make them valid.  Ad hominem arguments, while they may be fun for you, do not get us any closer to the truth.

Report this

By Ken, December 2, 2006 at 4:39 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I know you would all like me to stay away, so you can have total agreement with your contrived 911 conspiracy theory, but I will not !
You are a small group of people who tell lies for the reason of discrediting the government of the United States & distorting the views of the large amount of uneducated people in the U.S. & the world. 
Again people, stop talking foolishness !
There was no conspiracy on 911 !
Talk all you want.
Those of you who support this ridiculous theory are but a handful of paranoid individuals who are probably members of anti-American - PRO Muslim propaganda organizations trying to distort the facts !
I explained to you that such an act of destruction and detailed planning could not be kept secret, impossible, get it !
There is not even one of you who claim to have personal knowledge of this conspiracy or been part of this conspiracy, not one of you !
I am sure this statement of mine will bring out the lunatics who will say ” I was part of it or know people who were part of the conspiracy” !
Be real, no way this has been kept secret by the thousands of people that would have been necessary to plan,carry out & cover up this alleged conspiracy !
So keep on talking your nonsense, it really does not matter what you say !
In the words of your leaders, “Praised be Allah for the destruction of the American Infidel” !

Report this

By winterfire6, December 2, 2006 at 4:10 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I doubt anyone here believes that George W. Bush could pull off a job like 9/11. What’s more, I doubt any president in our past could, with the possible exception of our only president who has spent his entire adult life connected to the CIA. That would be W’s Poppy, GHWB. No, I don’t think GHWB was behind it.

But there are people, both in and out of government, who could.

According to Paul O’Neil, life long Republican and true conservative, Iraq was on the table from the first national security meeting, to which he was a party. Invading Iraq was all anyone wanted to talk about. The meeting ended with Bush saying, O.K., find me away to do it. I believe that someone did.

If anyone is seriously looking for who might have been involved, I would suggest looking carefully at the NeoCons, ex-black ops guys and their corporate pals.

Report this

By george, December 2, 2006 at 10:43 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Wow - more sleight of hand.

Sheer knows GEORGE BUSH was the ‘mark’ in the 9/11 operation. Bush needed plausible deniability, so he was not in the loop. This was Cheney and Israel operating a false flag on Americans to stir up sufficient Islamophobia to launch a war on Islam.

Our messianic smurf was only a sock puppet.

Jews like Sheer deny ethnocentric bias and allegiance when hawking that Islam is coming for you in your sleep.

Sift the Jews from any given discussion on the Middle East, and you will get a better picture.

Report this

By deborah conner, December 1, 2006 at 1:37 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Ken Schreier writes: The 911 Conspiracy Theory “What a JOKE” :

You must think President Bush is a genius !
To carry out such a plan would require great detailed planning and would have to include hundreds of people to carry it out and thousands to keep it secret… ! >>

Oh. Like the conspiracy that there were WMD in Iraq? Or the way Bush pulled off a whole invasion, enriching his cronies, emptying our coffers, sacrificing how many?—all by sleight of hand?

You mean an administration “relying on inadequate intelligence, exaggerated claims and premature judgments, keeping Congress in the dark while wooing a gullible press, cheered on by partisans, pundits, and editorial writers safely divorced from realities on the ground…?”
Read all about it, straight from the horse’s mouth:
http://www.harpers.org/TheNextWar.html


Or maybe Iran/contra? Review it: 20 Years Later and What It Means http://www.thenation.com/blogs/capitalgames?pid=143725

Can you believe it? They’re still in power?

Or how about Boston Globe’s report on making a World Wide Theocracy, world-without-end…
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/10/08/bush_brings_faith_to_foreign_aid/

There’s lots of folks who believe John Hagee. Bush just had him to the White House on Nov. 13.

Or how about The Downing Street Memo? http://rawstory.com/other/conyersreportrawstory.pdf  This administrations lies out in the open, and still they go on. 

I guess people don’t believe things until they’re on the tube.

No end of stuff here, good old conspiracies:
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/

All stuff no one would believed.

The crazy people are the folks who still believe FOX news.

DMConner
“Listen, Moirai (Fates) ... hear our prayers ... send us rose-bloomed Eunomia (Good Order in civic government) and her bright-throned sisters Dike (Justice) and garland-wearing Eirene (Peace), and make this city forget its heavy-hearted misfortunes.” - Greek Lyric V Anonymous Fragments 1018 (from Stobaeus, Anthology)

Report this

By Craig R. Lane, December 1, 2006 at 12:06 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

“It is sure easier to believe that you people are mentally disturbed then such a conspiracy plan can be carried out and implemented to perfection by George W. Bush !”

It seems that Ken has unwittingly, (as I am sure Ken does most things), hit the nail on the head with this statement. I guess every squirrel gets a nut every once in a while.

No Ken, I guess it is impossible for you to believe anything that you can’t imagine, huh? This can also be a form of mental illness. Either that or you are an indeed an idiot. I don’t believe that anyone here has said that Bush carried out the atrocity of which we speak single handedly, I don’t think anyone here believes that he has the brains. I do believe that he took part in the events that unfolded on 9/11, (and may have had prior knowledge of the events). I am suspicious of why you keep coming back Ken. Is it to feel, (however incorrect you probably are), that you are smarter than all of us who have written here? Or is it because you have no self control, (you have written at the end of each of your missives that you are never to return)? Is it out of fear? Or are you paid to write your moronic rants to sites such as this, (I know, I know, another conspiracy theory)? One thing is for sure, you obviously mistake all of us as beings who cannot continue through life until we know how you feel about our whether our thought processes meet with your approval. You have definitely mistaken us for people who care what you think, when it seems you cannot perform the act of thought. I think you will be back to write about how important and righteous you must be to us, and how insignificant we all shall remain to you.

Report this

By Ken Schreier, December 1, 2006 at 10:43 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The 911 Conspiracy Theory “What a JOKE” :

You must think President Bush is a genius !
To carry out such a plan would require great detailed planning and would have to include hundreds of people to carry it out and thousands to keep it secret. It is just not possible !
This would include: Bin-Laden and his crew,the airline security staff, demolition experts, military personnel, media people, Bush’s own cabinet staff, democratic and republican politicians, etc.
To keep such a plan under wraps, except to the conspiracy people on this site who do not claim that they helped plan it, is not possible !
There is no truth to any of your paranoid reasoning.
I am sorry to say that you should all seek psychiatric help for your conditions.
Maybe medication can help you ?
It is sure easier to believe that you people are mentally disturbed then such a conspiracy plan can be carried out and implemented to perfection by George W. Bush !
See how much plausible my theory is than yours !
Get help people & take care !

Report this

By Jo-Jo, November 30, 2006 at 8:50 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Al,what does a Botany degree have to do with explosives ?
Listen you nitwit—explosives used in downing large concrete bldgs,only do one thing—puncture and weaken the main bearing supports. Thermite cuts(slices) the steel beams. And down they go.
Al-you must have been the dumbest kid in your class,how did you get out of grade school?

Taking the largest concrete Bldg stucture known—would only take a one ton of explosives,in small seperate units. If the structure is mainly steel girders—thermite is used. Explosives were used on the concrete rod steel reinforced columns. Seems little you know about X-plosives—TNT is not used anymore in BLDG demo.

Report this

By Al Wright, November 30, 2006 at 2:25 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I have a degree in botany, but I don’t think I look like a plant.

Please forgive my weakness for puns.  I am, after all, only human, all too human.

I appreciate your comments about the First Law of Thermodynamics, a.k.a. Conservation of Energy.  However, the First Law will ultimately work against the Controlled Demo theory.  There was massive energy released as the towers collapsed.  I hope that we can agree that the goal of a controlled demolition is to use strategically-placed, relatively small charges to implode a structure.

Your contention is that the work done as the massive structure released its potential energy is insufficient to account for all the damage, and that work done by the chemical explosives is required to account for all the damage.  Basically, you imagine that there is an energy deficient that must be accounted for by the addition of chemical energy.

Tower height: 410 meters. Tower weight: 450,000,000kg.  Calculated potential energy is 10 to the 12th Joules.  The energy released by one tower is roughly equivalent to 250 metric tons of TNT.

How much additional chemical explosive energy do you imagine would be needed to account for the imagained energy deficient?

Against the background noise of 250 metric tons of TNT, what would be the detection limit?  I imagine that ten percent is a reasonable guess.  25 metric tons equals 55,000 pounds of TNT.  55 pickup truck loads.  I imagine that’s possible, but is it likely?  And remember 25 metric tons is the detection limit.  How many more loads must be concealed to do any real additional damage?

Thermite/thermante is the imagined source of the additional chemical energy for the Controlled Demo camp.  Thermite is not a high explosive.  Thermite burns in an exothermic reaction, but will not generate any explosive pressure.

I would be careful about that “Argument from lack of imagination” fallacy.  Any time you start off with “I fail to see” and conclude with “so it’s the ONLY plausible explanation” it is likely that you’ve stepped in it.

I’d like to address only one phenomenon at a time, but I’ve broken stride to address the First Law issue.

Can we agree that the Controlled Demo theory offers no better explanation for the 56 vs, 102 minute phenomenon than that the ways of demolition plotters are intentionally mysterious, or that the terrorists showed a hint of kindness when they let most people evacuate before pulling the building?

I will offer a reasonable explanation for the 56 vs. 102 minute phenomenon soon.

BTW, I also thought Bush’s body language was especially strange that morning.  But I’m not sure what it means.

Report this

By not all wright, November 30, 2006 at 10:03 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

WTC 7.  Please explain.  End of Debate.  Otherwise Al Wright is beginning to look like a plant.

Report this

By Skruff, November 30, 2006 at 8:00 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Jail Bush Cheney says

“...the buildings were not poorly built, that is a myth perpetrated by the disinformation machine like popular mechanics, a hearst owned rag.”

I don’t read popular mechanics. I was there when the buildings went up.  I read the newspapers, listened to the radion and occasionally ate my lunch with construction workers on the site of the WTC. 

The news of that day was filled with stories of poor workmanship (remember this was a government project) kick-backs, fraud, and maffia graft.

Now of course, I would also be skeptical of someone who I did not know saying they were eyewhitness to construction…. BUT does anyone else here remember the “Cortlandt street subway station? (a local stop on the South Ferry IRT)

Report this

By winterfire6, November 30, 2006 at 7:04 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I will be the first to admit that I know very little aout physics, and even less about controlled demolitions, but I have studied psychology all of my life; research, clinical, social and forensic.

So, what is the real difference between so-called conspiracy theorists and those who readily believe everythig the government. (I am not talking about conspiracy buffs here; people who get a kick out of looking for conspiracies everywhere, as a hobby, like stamp or insect collecting.)I am talking about people who would really rather not see conspiracies anywhere, because to do so is scary as hell.

One of the major differences is life experience. Some of us know what our government, in any of its incarnations, is capable of doing, because we either have seen some of it, with our own eyes, up close and personal, or have seen the evidence through documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, by others who have had some experience with Uncle Sam’s dark side and have decided to dig a little deeper. Those people do not discount alternative theories until they done some research.

When I did my turn in forensic psychology, years ago, I had the opportunity to work with some very good detectives and even a few FBI agents. My most memorable lesson from these remarkable guys was really quite simple: Coincidence, esecially more than one, should always throw up red flags.

The first thing I did, when I became suspicious about the official conspiracy theory of 9/11 was to begin looking for coincidences. I didn’t have to look far. There are enough of them to choke a (pet) goat.


The Bush Family alone has more coincidences surrounding them than any rational person could swallow. They should be called “the first family of coincidence.”

The Hinckleys, parents of John Hinckley, the guy who attempted to assassinate Reagan, were very close friends and huge financial supporters of GWHB’s political career. Bush son, Neil, and his now ex-wife, Sharon were due to have dinner with the other Hinckley brother and his date on the evening of the attempt on Reagan’s life that morning. The dinner was called off.

I guess we all know of the closeness of the Bush family, not only with the Saudi royals, but with the bin Ladens. Salim bin Laden, Osama’s eldest brother, helped bail GW out of one of his failed businesss ventures with the help of James Bath of Texas as a go-thrugh.

When BCCI was busted, as the biggest money laudering organization ever, it was found that not only did Osama bin Laden have an account with the Pakistani-based bank, but George W Bush had a sizeable loan with them as well.

I guess that for me the hardest coincidence of all to swallow has been with us from the very beginning: The PNAC Document speaking of the need for another Pearl Harbor type incident if the Neocons were going to be able to carry out their goofy agenda and then low and behold, a miracle! It happened. Is Osama really the instrument of God, giving the Neocons exactly what they needed? Please, give me a break!

I shall never forget the body language, the eye shifts and the over-all expression on Bush’s face when he was informed that the country was under attack. Talk about something not adding up.

I may be an idiot when it comes to physics, but we are trained to read body language, the shifting of eyes in certain directions and other outer signs of an inner state. Bush’s own words about what went on that morning and what he was thinking from moment to moment, prove he is a consumate liar; his outer signs contradict everything he has said.

Why lie about the most important and consequential event in America’s modern history?

Report this

By Thomas Ellis, November 30, 2006 at 5:45 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Al—

I fail to see what the timing of the collapses has to do with our willingness to accept a hypothesis based upon the fundamental laws of thermodynamics—that energy output cannot possibly exceed energy input. There were three energy inputs: the impact, the resulting fuel fires, and gravity. The output was the catastrophic collapse, at freefall rate, of three steel-frame buildings, only two of which were hit. How anybody would accept the former as providing sufficient energy for the latter, without a collateral energy input (i.e. controlled demolition) baffles me beyond all measure.

Neither steel nor concrete nor insulation is an explosive substance—they don’t burn or explode or disintegrate when in contact with a heat source, and the steel beams were designed to support the gravitational weight of the floors above them; the collapse of these floors would not have added a single gram to that weight.  So controlled demolition is the ONLY plausible explanation for these three collapsing buildings.

There is much that we don’t know—much we will probably never know—about the events on 9/11—but this much we can know for certain.

Report this

By Al Wright, November 30, 2006 at 12:48 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Please keep in mind that I am willing to concede that what we saw on 11 September 2001 was a conspiracy unfolding.

My contention is that a controlled demolition was not part of the plans.

If members of the Controlled Demo camp wish to hone their positions, then you camp might be served best by sharpening your arguments relevant to the collapse of the towers.

I offer this criticism with respect and honor, as I hope you would honor me if you find fault in my logic.  Mutual respect carries us to the common ground of truth.

The argument “as I see it, the falling of one bldg. after the one that was hit first only adds to the controlled demolition ‘theory/fact’ as there was nothing else that could explain it’s seemingly advanced collapse.” is an example of a well-known logical fallacy.

To learn more about the fallacy, go to wikipedia and search for “Argument from lack of imagination”.  Delicious irony. Yum.

I take your counterpoint to my assertion that we should agree that the 56 vs. 102 minute phenomenon is a point against the Controlled Demo theory.  “Or not.  A criminal tries not to fit a pattern.”  Indeed, the ways of demolition plotters are intentionally without pattern, and mysterious.

Can we agree that the 56 vs. 102 minutes post-impact time-to-collapse is a phenomenon?

Perhaps we can agree further, and as an understanding of ground rules, that we should not count a phenomenon against the Controlled Demo theory until I offer a reasonable explanation?  Is a two-point swing possible, like in match-play golf, minus one point for the Controlled Demo theory if it is unable to provide a reason other than “intentionally mysterious ways” and plus one one point for the opposing theory?

Report this

By Jail Bush Cheney Rumsfeld Joint Chiefs, November 29, 2006 at 10:30 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

the buildings were not poorly built, that is a myth perpetrated by the disinformation machine like popular mechanics, a hearst owned rag.  i would recommend the dvd 911 mysteries that covers the structure of the bldg. in detail, and the testimony of kevin ryan, the UL laboratory employee who was fired for continuing to ask the tough questions. UL certified the steel in the WTC.  Lastly, I have not read all of the notices on this board but would MR. Wright please explain the collapse of WTC 7.  That challenge has not been met.  Thank you,  Impeach, Arrest, Execute…

Report this

By Maani, November 29, 2006 at 8:57 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Skruff:

When we talk about the towers collapsing into their footprints, it is understood that, based on the height and volume of the towers, those “footprints” are wider than normal.  Thus, even an openly and completely planned CD of the towers would have led to some damage of some surrounding buildings.  Thus, there is nothing contradictory here.

You mention the Maine and the Reichstag.  Let’s also include two others in this century.

Pearl Harbor.  The Japanese “enigma” code was broken in April of 1941.  And Roosevelt knew that the Japanese were planning a “surprise” attack on “an American naval base.”  What some researchers believe is that Roosevelt may have assumed that it would be Guam, since that was so much closer to Japan, and that he was willing to take any materiel and personnel looses there as “acceptable” as an excuse to enter the war (which over 80% of Americans were opposed to doing at that time).  Thus, although he may not have known that the target was Pearl Harbor, he nevertheless “permitted” the attack so the U.S. had an excuse to enter the war.

Gulf of Tonkin.  The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution - which escalated the “war” in Vietnam to a full-scale military incursion - was based on an alleged incident in which a U.S. destroyer was fired upon (and, some claimed, sunk) by Vietcong fire.  However, it is now well-documented that no such incident ever occurred: no such naval vessel was in the Gulf at the time, and the Vietcong did not fire on any U.S. vessel.

Deborah says, “None of us have access to all the ‘facts’ of that day. It was a deliberate puzzle, and all we have to solve it is the evidence we can muster and what motives we might reason out from that.”

In this regard, there is great truth to the belief that the first question that must be asked in any such situation is: who benefitted?

If we assume the “official story” to be true, then the answer would be “OBL and Al Qaeda.”  And yet if you give it some serious thought, you will realize that neither OBL nor Al Qaeda benefitted 9/11.  Indeed, they lost FAR more than they gained.  True, they may have gained SOME “recruitment” (though this is not certain, at least until we invaded Iraq…), but they lost all effectiveness, since the entire civilized world (led by the U.S. and Britain) went after them big time, thus hampering future movements and actions.  Thus, those who SHOULD have benefitted from 9/11 (assuming the official story is true) did not.

Finally, one aspect of 9/11 that has not been brought up is the non-capture of OBL.  Do you think it is coincidence?  Do you REALLY think a single old bearded terrorist could permanently evade the combined efforts of the SEALs, Army Rangers, Marines, and British and U.S. forces?

Please.  Re OBL, first Bush said, “dead or alive” and “smoke’em out.”  Yet a year later he said, “I don’t really think of him anymore.  He has been marginalized, and the war on terror is bigger than one person or one group.”

Why change his tune?  Unless he never planned to capture OBL - because OBL was simply a member of a larger cadre that included Bush himself (or at least others high up in his administration).

And although he will “trot out” OBL’s name when it suits him - i.e., to keep the populace in fear (as recently, when a “new” tape popped up, and Bush said, “Bin Laden should be taken seriously”) - it is more than just a little coincidental that there has been no continued effort to capture OBL.

Peace.

Report this

By jo-jo, November 29, 2006 at 8:03 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

How is it that Scruff gets to post—about Nazies and mine never sees the light of Day. Haey,Kenny(Scruff),you need some glasses and see a eye specialist,before you make us vomit.You start out on our side and goof off.Are you sure it was a church not a Sinagod ?

Report this

By Skruff, November 29, 2006 at 2:26 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

While it is not even close to an analogy, The USS Maine (sunk in the Havana Harbor on February 15, 1898 was the catalyst that started the Spanish American war.  Relations with Spain were already strained, and the US interest was to remove Spanish influence from the western hemisphere. 

Mission accomplished

and the Reichstag fire

The following C&P From Wikipedia:

Hitler had been sworn in as Chancellor and head of the coalition government on January 30, 1933. His first act was to ask Paul von Hindenburg to dissolve the Reichstag so that he could increase the number of Nazi seats in the government. Hitler’s request was granted and elections were set for March 5, 1933. Hitler’s aim was first to acquire a 50% and over majority to become Chancellor by right and secure his position, which at the time was relatively weak as he had been imposed by the President and could be easily removed by the latter. Hitler did however plan in the near future to abolish democracy in a more or less legal fashion by activating the Enabling Act. The Enabling Act was a special power allowed by the Weimar Constitution to give the Chancellor the power to pass laws by decree for four years, without the involvement of the Reichstag. Under the existing Weimar constitution, under Article 48, the President could rule by decree in times of emergency. The unprecedented element of the Enabling Act was that the government itself possessed these powers. The Enabling Act was only supposed to be used in times of extreme emergency, and in fact had only been used once before, in 1923-24 when the government used the Enabling Act to rescue Germany from hyperinflation. To activate the Enabling Act a party required a vote by a two-thirds majority in the Reichstag. In January 1933, the Nazis had only 32% of the seats and thus were in no position to activate the Enabling Act. It had a four-year application and would have to be renewed after this.

During the election campaign, the Nazis had run on a platform of fervent anti-communism, insisting that Germany was on the verge of a Communist revolution, and that the only way to stop the revolution was to pass the Enabling Act. Hitler’s platform in the campaign comprised little more than demands that voters increase the Nazi share of seats so that the Enabling Act could be passed. In order to decrease the number of opposition members who could vote against the Enabling Act, Hitler had planned to ban the Kommunistische Partei Deutschlands (the Communist Party of Germany or KPD), which at the time held 17% of the parliament’s seats, after the elections and before the new Reichstag convened. The Reichstag Fire allowed Hitler to accelerate the banning of the Communist Party and was used to confirm Nazi claims of a pending Communist revolution. The Nazis argued the Reichstag fire was meant to serve as a signal to launch the revolution, and warned the German public about the grisly fate they would suffer under Communist rule.

sound remotely familar?

I have no compunctions about embracing the idea that 9/11 involved our government. I do question some of the conclusions reached here, especially concerning the way the towers fell. 

They did not fall in their own footprint.
They took out a bunch or realestate when they fell, including a hotel, a church, and much of the AmEx building

The towers were cheap and flawed in their construction. there was a cheap concrete and graft story a week.

Even the inept slugs who run our government wouldn’t be so stupid as to do a controlled demolition where it could be observed by so many knowledgable people….

OK now I’m a windbag… Bring on the insults!

Report this

By Maani, November 29, 2006 at 11:34 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

All:

Re Al wright’s comment about the time between the two collapses, geo is correct: a “controlled demolition” is just that: controlled.  So the timing would have been deliberate.  Indeed, it may well have had something to do with when the last large group of people who could leave each building did so: after all, it is awfully coincidental that the towers collapsed only AFTER the vast majority of people had been evacuated.  And most of those NOT evacuated were on inaccessible floors.  So far from undermining the 9/11 Truth movement, the CD theory strongly supports it.

Re the temperature of diesel fuel fires and the melting point of steel, let’s put this one to bed.  From Wikipedia:

“Jet A…the standard jet fuel type in the U.S…burns at a maximum of 980 degrees Centigrade…” [i.e., 1796 Fahrenheit]  And this is more than twice the “open air” burning temperature.

“Steel melts at around 1370 degrees Centigrade” [i.e., 2498 Fahrenheit]  And this includes iron-alloy steel.

Every physics and engineering site on the Web more or less agrees with these figures, within acceptable parameters that make it clear that jet fuel fires - especially “open air” fires - cannot melt steel.  End of story.

Re Ken’s comments about 707s vs 767s:

Boeing 707:
Wingspan: 145 feet
Length: 152 feet
Gross Weight: 336,000 lbs
Cruising Speed: 607 mph

Boeing 767 (both planes that hit the WTC):
Wingspan: 156 feet
Length: 159 feet
Gross Weight: 312,000 lbs
Cruising Speed: 550 mph

Thus, the 707 - which the WTC was built to withstand - is actually heavier than the 767 when fully-loaded (i.e., including fuel).  End of story.

As for Ken’s comment about structural damage to the interior, it is true that the impact took out a few of the core columns.  But niether plane took out enough of the core columns, even on those floors, to cause a complete collapse of both buildings - especially given that there was ZERO damage to the first 70+ floors of each tower.

As an aside, Ken may be doing all of us a great service, since he is helping us to “hone” our positions with ever more research and support.  Though I must ask Ken: while you are free to stay (this being a democratic country and website), how many “final” statements do you intend to make?  LOL.

Peace.

Report this

By Skruff, November 29, 2006 at 11:06 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Geo:
Actually, I believe the gold you discuss in the post below, belonged to the Bank of Nova Scotia…

I could be mistaken.

Report this

By deborah conner, November 29, 2006 at 9:40 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Al Wright writes:

>>we should agree that the 56 vs. 102 minute phenomenon is a point against the Controlled Demo theory. >>

Or not. A criminal tries to not fit a pattern.

None of us have access to all the ‘facts’ of that day. It was a deliberate puzzle, and all we have to solve it is the evidence we can muster and what motives we might reason out from that. We turn to experts, needing to hear all their views just as also evaluate even their credentials and motives.

But what is this debate really about? The fact that a preponderance of us are not satisfied with the official account. Why? Looking back at 911 in perspective, we more questions the time, because the majority of us no longer trust the media or this administration. Watching the news that day, we see it all again, played out on these many tapes that surface on the internet. The passion has passed, and we can take a more sober look. It’s wise to do so, for it was a passionate time. Looking back, we see FOX news calling for war within the first hour. We see how we were told what to think, and later what to forget. We were confused, so confused that the majority of Americans came away thinking Iran was involved with 911. And many other things that were just plain wrong. http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/international_security_bt/102.php?nid=&id;=&pnt=102&lb=brusc Who misinformed us? Why?

It’s all of a piece, this debate. 911 was used as the cornerstone in making major changes in law, policy, privacy, use of revenue. Use and organization of Intelligence. People’s lives, innocent people, thousands of miles away. We were asked to take these changes on faith, the word of our ‘elected’ decision makers, even at a time when the veracity of their election was in doubt. There was no mandate. We were rushed. As to how our leaders are informed—how Congress makes decisions to hold investigations, fund invasions, or when to abdicate their responsibility to the whims of the Executive in the process of deciding when we go to war—we can listen to those who were there, the ones who hold the plans that we even now are not allowed to see. http://www.harpers.org/TheNextWar.html
By what right are we not allowed to know? 

We, as the citizens who have the responsibility for making informed choices in this Democracy— we who “supporting and uphold” the Constitution, the least we can do when our brothers and sisters in uniform pledge life and limb to that very endeavor— cannot function without good information, real debate rather than spin, a sound media and government we can trust. This debate is about all these things. 

To add another piece, I wondered about the timing of the below. The day before 911. What does it tell us? Why don’t we know? 


US pulls the plug on Muslim websites

http://www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/journalist/story/0,7792,549590,00.html

wayback: http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/journalist/story/0,7792,549590,00.html

Islamic groups have condemned a government crackdown on a Texan telecoms company as part of a “witch-hunt”, writes Brian Whitaker

Monday September 10, 2001
Guardian Unlimited

Five hundred websites - many of them with an Arab or Muslim connection - crashed last Wednesday when an anti-terrorism taskforce raided InfoCom Corporation in Texas.

The 80-strong taskforce that descended upon the IT company included FBI agents, Secret Service agents, Diplomatic Security agents, tax inspectors, immigration officials, customs officials, department of commerce officials and computer experts…. more


DMConner
“Listen, Moirai (Fates) ... hear our prayers ... send us rose-bloomed Eunomia (Good Order in civic government) and her bright-throned sisters Dike (Justice) and garland-wearing Eirene (Peace), and make this city forget its heavy-hearted misfortunes.” - Greek Lyric V Anonymous Fragments 1018 (from Stobaeus, Anthology)

Report this

By geo, November 29, 2006 at 5:20 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Al Wright—recall that under one of the WTC, a fully loaded truck of gold was found that belonged to the royal bank and was part of missing gold ?
However—explosive charges are detonated by computer software.No fool would let both towers go at once.Like fireworks display—one at a time.
By the way—-that unaccounted helacopter buzzing around the towers—try arguing-not a control center for the show.

Report this

By Jail Bush Cheney Rumsfeld Joint Chiefs, November 29, 2006 at 1:32 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Al Wright.  All right !  A debate it is.  the debate should be either in person or over a speaker phone and should be recorded.  preferably in person.  this is not the forum for this kind of debate unless you are willing to provide facts, not opinion or conjecture that substantiate and explain how 3 buildings could have imploded at free fall speed into their own footprint without having been professionally demolished.  statistically this is impossible.  to drop just one as those 3 fell takes great skill and care and for 3 to happen in the same way at the same time with little provocation…  you tell me.  facts,  how did it happen.  no belief systems, please.

Report this

By Al Wright, November 28, 2006 at 9:18 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I accept your invitation to debate the Controlled Demo theory.

I am defending the position that it is entirely possible that a conspiracy plot did unfold on 11 September 2001, but that a controlled demolition was not in the plans.

I believe that the laws of physics are constant.  I believe that human nature changes very little.

We agree that there are intelligent people in the Controlled Demo camp.  We should also agree that the Controlled Demo theory undermines the credibility of the 911 Truth Community.

It is natural for people to want a coherent explanation of all phenomena.  All of the phenomena observed during the collapse of the towers can be accounted for without bringing thermate into the mix.

How does the Controlled Demo theory account for the phenomenon of one tower collapsing 56 minutes after impact and it’s twin taking 102 minutes?

A reasonable approach for your camp might be to suggest that, like our Lord’s ways, the ways of demolition plotters are mysterious.

But really, if you can’t come up with a better explanation than mysterious ways, then we should agree that the 56 vs. 102 minute phenomenon is a point against the Controlled Demo theory.

Report this

By geo, November 28, 2006 at 5:22 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

check this recent BBC clip from BBC
http://www.ricksiegel.com/web/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=119
Sometimes you can’t get to the site.Keep trying—Does anyone dispute it ?
Her is minus the video;
*************************************************
Footage 9/11:The Twin Towers Shows Positive Proof of Explosives
Posted by: ricksiegel on Friday, November 10, 2006 - 10:43 PM 8007 Reads

” On September 7, 2006 the BBC showed a special anniversary program for the anniversary of 911 events. The show was called “911: The TwinTowers”. The video is of great significance as you can see and hear the Tower being demolished and hear the sequence of charges.


The sound allegedly has not been enhanced in any way and is even distorted by the Google encoding yet sets itself in accord with the testimony of most eyewitness testimony. That includes testimony from the FDNY firefighters.

The building had 114 floors and took approximately 10 seconds to collapse. In this video fourteen explosions can be heard in a period of 5 seconds dispelling any belief in a “pancake theory”.

While more and more evidence piles up and the floodgates are ready to burst one ponders what it will take for the people to finally get up and kick the people subverting the indictments into jail. Instead we note that they have now been promoted to higher positions of power/ they have passed more draconian laws stripping more freedoms and liberties in the belief that it will save us from the invisible enemy who cannot be killed.

If you or yours were murdered, would you not hope for a murder investigation? 3000 people died in NYC that day and there has not been one murder investigation, indictment or trial for any crime. Not one.

The government cover-up starts there. Indict the criminals

Rudolph Giuliani
Destruction of 3000 murder crime scenes
250 murders of Firemen - Knowingly allowing 250 firemen to stay in the Towers when he had for warning of them coming down.

Christine Todd Whitman
Causing pain, suffering and death to 1000’s of workers who depended on her claim to safe air.

George W. Bush
Job Negligence in protecting the nation
Criminal invasion of another nation under false pretenses
Murder of 100,000 Iraqi’s
Murder of 3000 US service people

Larry Silverstein
Insurance Fraud

Report this

By Jail Bush Cheney Rumsfeld Joint Chiefs, November 28, 2006 at 2:31 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

the 911 truth community has challenged anyone from the government or any community that refutes the controlled demolition “theory” to debate many times. NO ONE HAS STEPPED UP TO DEBATE A MEMBER OF THE 911 TRUTH COMMUNITY AND NO ONE EVER WILL.  THEIR POSITION CANNOT BE SUBSTANTIATED. Questions like why did one building fall faster than the other does not alter the basic laws of science, observation, and the fact that the fall of all three buildings met the incontrovertable subjective criteria of controlled demolition.  explain free fall speed, bldg. no. 7, and if you buy the already debunked pancake theory then where are the core supports and what and how facilitated their total disappearance and transformation into molten metal for 3 weeks under the wreckage.  as i see it, the falling of one bldg. after the one that was hit first only adds to the controlled demolition “theory/fact” as there was nothing else that could explain it’s seemingly advanced collapse.  i think that this debate is a waste of time (as you can see i have spent plenty) as those who don’t want to include basic laws of physics and observation to the debate will always think what they want to think.  what about the pentagon “hit” the stand down order by cheney that was observed and testified to by norman minetta, the secret service allowing bush to stay in a well publicized location rather than taking him to safety, the phoney terrorist drills that supposedly tied up all of our planes that just happened to be out at the same time as the “terrorist” attacks, the statement a few months ago by the fbi that there is no hard evidence connecting bin laden with 911 (look it up) and the other absurdities that seemed to converge on that fateful day to give bush the ultimate gift of the ensuing repressive legislation that has been on the drawing boards for decades.  there’s a bigger picture here that begs the small minded to understand that 911 was just business as usual for this government.  check out “operation northwoods” or the liberty incident.  a good primer to all this is alex jones film, “terror storm” the material on the london bombing is jaw dropping and shows that 911 and the london bombing were done in the same way using terror drills as the method of operation.

Report this

By Al Wright, November 28, 2006 at 10:46 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

There are fascinating epistemological and psychological aspects to the Controlled Demolition debate.  How do we know what we think we know?

Clearly there are intelligent people on both sides of the Controlled Demo debate.

Technically speaking, I am agnostic on Controlled Demo.  However, I find it very unlikely.

Accepting the Controlled Demo theory leads to additional questions.  I’d like to ask a question of the Controlled Demo camp, and I apologize if it has already been answered.

Why would the first tower hit be the second tower to fall?  Which is really asking, Why would demolition plotters pull one tower after 56 minutes but wait 102 minutes to pull the other tower?

Report this

By Mac McKinney, November 26, 2006 at 9:30 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

In response to Comment #39786 by Skruff

Hey Skruff,

You may have been cutting steel for a long time, but you are not explaining the actual dynamics of cutting steel, nor the temperatures required, to your readers. Consequently, you are leading people to believe that the lower temperature heat of “fuel fires” can “melt” steel.

First let me point out that every internal cumbustion engine on the freeway is running a “fuel fire”, be it gasoline, diesel oil or whatever these days. If any of these fuel fires, which may be ongoing for hours at a time, could melt steel, then we would see engines dripping molten metal all over the place all day and night on every street in America. But I know you don’t mean that. The fuel needs a “kicker”, so to speak, to raise its temperature to the point of actually affecting steel.

I was a welder and burner in the Navy and in shipyards for years, so I have had to cut through some pretty massive stuff. So here is a little education for the public: The only way to cut thick steel with a “fuel” is with a torch that combines said fuel, either acetylene or natural gas in shipyards, with compressed oxygen in a mixing chamber, which creates very high temperatures potentially.

Acetylene by itself creates a weak yellow flame of low temperature (about 1500 degrees F) when lit. However, when it is properly mixed with oxygen, the combination can create temperatures between 5700 degrees and 6300 degrees Fahrenheit, more than hot enough to melt mild steel, which begins to turn white hot around 2500 degrees and will start melting around 2759 degrees F.

One has to set a torch to a blue “neutral” flame of about 5900 degrees F to properly preheat steel for cutting. Then one holds the tip close to one spot on the steel long enough for the steel to change colors from gray to bright red throughout its thickness before one hits the oxygen trigger, unleashing a concentrated blast of pure oxygen that literally burns or oxidizes the steel into molten slag. We are talking about a temperature of 6300 degrees F now.

To melt the Twin Towers’ massive steel columns with jet fuel is impossible, even if the fuel burns for days. Jet fuel combined with winds is not the same as a fuel combined with pure oxygen by any stretch of the imagination. The winds would actually disperse the flames and heat instead of concentrating them. Moreover, jet fuel, being so volatile, burned off quickly in the initial fire balls, so the main thing fueling the fires after a few minutes would be office furnishings and equipment and whatever was in the walls.

Moreover, as thick and wide as the core columns were, they would be very difficult to cut even with an oxy-acetylene torch, let alone without one. However, shaped cutter charges with explosives such as thermite or thermate can also generate high temperatures approaching 6000 degrees F and slice through steel columns instantaneously and neatly, with cleaner cuts than a torch.

More food for eveyone’s thoughts.

Report this

By geo, November 26, 2006 at 8:07 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Oil chager Skruff is all hot air.
To him—try using just shop air on anyfuel and see if it melts 2 inch girders-chump!
I run a shop for 40 years and I can’t do it—please let us on the secret ?

Report this

By Ken, November 26, 2006 at 8:07 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Final comment:

Anyone who was there, and saw the tremendous impact and explosion caused by the jet fuel loaded commercial airplanes, realized that it was a miracle that the 2 towers did not collapse sooner !
Do you conspiracy people realize what would be the explosive force of a 767 wide body Boeing jet,fully loaded with jet fuel, crashing into a stationary object at 500 miles per hour ?
Do you think that the explosive force would be able to blow out steel beams and deform others on impact ?  I believe so !
I challenge you to get the real facts !
I suggest someone get 2 qualified experts in the fields of physics and aerodynamics to work out the explosive force of such an impact and see if it is enough to melt, warp and break the steel beams and trusses in the World Trade Towers !
If the answer is yes, as I know it will be, all you conspiracy people can go home !
If, not, I will then become one of you !
Fat chance but, no way it was not enough force !
I was there and felt the impact and saw the external damage which had to be much less than the internal damage !
That explosion, especially in the South Tower, was tremendous and caused by the force of impact from a large 767 commercial Boeing jet moving at over 500 miles per hour & fully loaded with jet fuel !
That is the facts, and so was the result !
So have those 2 experts write a comment stating their qualifications and their findings !
Do not refer me to websites of claimed experts who only talk about their conspiracy theory !
I want objective experts who only comment on the physics of impact and explosive force caused by those airliners !
I will be waiting, but I am sure you will never be able to get any qualified experts to agree with you conspiracy theorists !
I will be waiting & waiting & waiting, etc - - -

Report this

By Thomas I. Ellis, November 26, 2006 at 6:32 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Here we go again…

As anyone watching these crashes knows full well, the jet fuel was consumed rapidly on impact (as one would expect in an open-air fire), and in the second impact particularly, was mostly consumed in a bright orange fireball OUTSIDE the building. In order for kerosene or any other fuel to reach the temperature necessary to melt or even warp steel, it would have to be a controlled, focused burn, as with an acetylene torch. Clearly, an open-air fire is anything but controlled or focused. And besides, an hour later, as everyone saw, that fire was mostly smoke—meaning that it was getting cooler, not hotter.

But even if we grant, against every probability, that the impact, the jet fuel, or the ensuing office fire generated enough heat to melt or weaken the thick steel beams in the core (although this has never happened, even in far more intense fires in other buildings of comparable size)—what about all the other unaffected parts of the steel core, all the way down some 80-odd floors? And at free-fall rate? Give me a break! What universe do you live in, anyway?

I am astounded at the amount of blind and willful denial people still have about this one day in history—do you honestly believe that the known laws of physics were simply suspended that day? Along with all the standard procedures for NORAD in intercepting errant flights? Not to mention the airlines who would have had to violate every known procedure of air travel to let Arab terrorists aboard whose names were not on the passenger list.

Absolutely every bit of evidence here, both direct and circumstantial, points to an inside job. Sure it’s hard to imagine that our government would plan such a thing, and that nobody would spill the beans, then or now. But the overwhelming evidence on all fronts leaves me with no other possible conclusion—and those who would refute this evidence simply haven’t offered any compelling arguments to support their claims, or to explain away all these glaring anomalies.

Report this

By Gone fishing, November 26, 2006 at 5:10 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

We can show them real prove and still the Bush shills will not accept that 911 was not done buy Arabs but by zionist Jews. Don’t believe it,then your in the same league as Ken—dunce ! Please do watch the following videos—they tell the issue—zionist did us in.
1)
http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=22378046&blogID=183265289
2)
http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=22378046&blogID=183265289
3)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4834790699362957259
By the way my favourite song and clips of clasic movie is the following—I think of Bush as the main character.—-Monster-made up of dead meat !
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9J18H03w_wg
Cheers to all that are trying to get the truth out.

Report this

By Skruff, November 26, 2006 at 2:04 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I thought this was a discussion by rational, sometimes educated, folks truely seeking truth. 

Quoting a fictional space alien, and espousing garbage such as: “fuel fires cannot melt steel” makes this worth less than my time. This is only one of many sites I have visited Some more way out…. some less.

I never bought the official story about the WTC disaster, there is definately MORE to this tale… but I also know from 40-years of experience that fueled fires CAN melt steel.  I do it every day in my auto and truck recycling business. (oh, BTW no formal education here.)  I have seen steel girders cut using various gasses. there are often splotches of molten steel on the concrete where I cut frame.

So, I’m left to wonder….as usual the internet is no assistance

Report this

By Logic To Counter 911 Non-Thinkers, November 26, 2006 at 1:03 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

“Nowhere am I so desperately needed as among a shipload of illogical humans.” -Spock

Most folks don’t think, not logically, about 9-11. Most people prefer that others-so-called experts—do the thinking for them. Understandably, to really think about the events of 9-11 requires a love of truth, a logical mind, a rational mind far removed from emotion and prejudice, and a trust of scientific law rather than an unquestioning trust of the state. Let us now look at only five facets using these principles of logic.

1. A building constructed over a highly sensitive, highly dangerous, highly expensive industrial site will be engineered and constructed that much stronger. Logical and rational, right?  WTC-7 was engineered to be stronger, not weaker, than other buildings surrounding it, simply because it enclosed an electrical power station. But WTC-7 fell at near free fall speed. Logical deduction would conclude building 7 was purposely demolished at the end of the day on September 11, 2001, most likely to destroy evidence of arson and to clear the WTC site entirely.

2. Fuel fires burn intensely for short periods of time. Fuel fires also burn at well-known scientific temperatures. Scientifically, and thus logically, fuel fires cannot melt steel, which requires blast furnace conditions. Melted pools of steel were discovered, observed and recorded in the debris of three steel skyscrapers long after September 11, 2001. Logically then, fuel fires alone did not destroy the World Trade Center. Logically then, some other, far more powerful substance that could melt steel must have.

3. Passengers on commercial jets are required to check in at the desk and present their ticket and boarding pass. No passenger is allowed to board a major commercial carrier without first being logged onto a computer today. This list of passengers is called a flight manifest. This list of passengers is available to airline personnel within minutes. Logically then, the names of ALL hijackers should have appeared in the mainstream media hours (and days) after the flights crashed. They did not. Either there never were any hijackers or they boarded through the complicity of airline personnel, thus indicating a greater conspiracy. Logical.

4. When the chief of security of one government gives $100,000 to an alleged terrorist mastermind, and then meets with the security heads of the government to be attacked on the exact day of the attack, logically, some complicity is suspected. In the days before September 11, 2001 the head of Pakistani Intelligence, General Mahmoud Ahmed, wired $100,000 to the lead hijacker, Mohammed Atta. Ahmed then attended breakfast on the morning of 9-11 with Porter Goss, the head of the House Intelligence Committee (and the next head of the CIA) and Florida Senator Bob Graham. Coincidentally, Florida was home base to most of the alleged hijackers. According to the FBI, Indian Intelligence and several press reports, General Mahmoud Ahmad, the alleged “money-man” (to use the FBI expression), allegedly ordered the bank transfer of $100,000 to the accused 9/11 ring-leader, Mohamed Atta, and then met on the morning of the attack with a trio of US lawmakers and top intelligence insiders, Bob Graham, Porter Goss and Jon Kyl for a friendly breakfast. What exactly did they discuss? 

5. Airplane parts are easily traceable. Airplane parts are stamped with serial numbers. Machined airplane parts are made to exact specifications. Logically an aviation expert could take any large, machined part from any of the 911 attack sites and say, yes or no, this part originated from a Boeing 757. Or did NOT originate from a Boeing 757, as Jon Carlson claims. Scientific study of the engine parts alone could have demolished any and all 911 conspiracies. Logical, correct? But because no such investigations were permitted or conducted, a huge government conspiracy appears likely. Logically then, one could conclude the conspirators had something to hide.

Report this

By Mac McKinney, November 26, 2006 at 12:54 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

For all you cats who don’t think explosives were involved in the WTC collapses, please read these eyewitness quotes from firefighters, paramedics etc., that can be found at: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc2_cutter.html

“It actually gave at a lower floor, not the floor where the plane hit, because we originally had thought there was like an internal detonation explosives because it went in succession, boom, boom, boom, boom, and then the tower came down.” [Ed Cachia - Firefighter [Engine 53]]

“We were there I don’t know, maybe 10, 15 minutes and then I just remember there was just an explosion. It seemed like on television they blow up these buildings. It seemed like it was going all the way around like a belt, all these explosions.” [Rich Banaciski - Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.)]

“When I looked in the direction of the Trade Center before it came down, before No. 2 came down, ..I saw low-level flashes. In my conversation with Lieutenant Evangelista, never mentioning this to him, he questioned me and asked me if I saw low-level flashes in front of the building, and I agreed with him because I thought—at that time I didn’t know what it was. I mean, it could have been as a result of the building collapsing, things exploding, but I saw a flash flash flash and then it looked like the building came down…..”
[Stephen Gregory - Assistant Commissioner (F.D.N.Y.)]

“Somewhere around the middle of the World Trade Center, there was this orange and red flash coming out. Initially it was just one flash. Then this flash just kept popping all the way around the building and that building had started to explode. The popping sound, and with each popping sound it was initially an orange and then a red flash came out of the building and then it would just go all around the building on both sides as far as I could see. These popping sounds and the explosions were getting bigger, going both up and down and then all around the building.” [Karin Deshore - Captain (E.M.S.)]

“It was a frigging noise. At first I thought it was—do you ever see professional demolition where they set the charges on certain floors and then you hear “Pop, pop, pop, pop, pop” That’s exactly what—because I thought it was that. When I heard that frigging noise, that’s when I saw the building coming down.” [Daniel Rivera - Paramedic (E.M.S.)]

“As we are looking up at the building, what I saw was, it looked like the building was blowing out on all four sides. We actually heard the pops. Didn’t realize it was the falling—you know, you heard the pops of the building. You thought it was just blowing out.” [Joseph Meola - Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.)]

People can speculate about super-heated kerosene, virtual forges and the rationality of demolition plotters all they want, but here is eye-witness testimony staring everyone in the face from professional personnel that were there and heard and saw explosions that mirror the sound and sight effects of high-velocity explosives used in controlled demolitions.

What is the one proven technique that can collapse any building in mere seconds?

Answer: a controlled demolition.

What is one of the most powerful explosives available for demolition? Thermate. Was evidence of this found at the WTC sites? Yes:

“Based on chemical analysis of WTC structural steel residue, a Brigham Young University physics professor has identified the material as Thermate. Thermate is the controlled demolition explosive thermite plus sulfur. Sulfur cases the thermite to burn hotter, cutting steel quickly and leaving trails of yellow colored residue.

“Prof. Steven Jones…has analyised materials from WTC and has detected the existence of thermate, used for ‘cutting’ the steel support columns, as evident in the photo below.” (http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/06/341238.shtml)

Food for thought.

Report this

By Ken Schreier, November 25, 2006 at 6:40 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

To End this Discussion, read my previous remarks, let me conclude:

No doubt BOTH Towers collapsed due to the impact of the commercial jet liners and intense internal heat which melted the floor support trusses!
This has been all dealt with before by the experts who built the buildings and the experts who examined the forensic evidence and videos of its collapse !
WTC Tower 7 was hit by the North tower when it fell , and it did crumble down and to the north side, where impact happened, and then down due to gravity ! It hit the lower floors of WTC Tower 7 and severly damaged the lower floors !
There is a question as to how this building finally collapsed ?
Based on the videos, it appears to be a controlled explosive demolition !
Larry Silverstein, the owner of the site, is shown on a video stating the building was “pulled” for safety reasons! It is not known whether this is an edited video to prove the theories of the conspiracy crew ! Mr. Silverstein has never publicly stated the building was demolished by demolition explosives !
However, even if it was, this gives no proof to a conspiracy theory that the Bush administration planned this whole horrible act of mass murder !
It only means that this aspect was never reported and should be looked into for the lone purpose as to why it was not told as a matter of historical truth and nothing more ! 
However, it really made no sense for them to cover this up !
Bin Laden and his crew already took responsibility for the attack !
So it would be interesting to see if what Silverstein said was true or not !

Report this

By Skruff, November 25, 2006 at 3:59 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I’m still left with the knowledge that kerosene backed by forced air CAN reduce the tensular strength of steel.  with all those concrete floors above, weight does the rest…

AND

kerosene does not stay in a lump once released from container… it pours down stairways elevator shafts, and crevises.  where forced air currents make it just as potent as my torch.

just a thought.

Report this

By Al Wright, November 24, 2006 at 11:13 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I’m with you, but step through the looking glass and think like a covert operator: You mission is to shock the American people and give pretence for a counterattack.

If one airplane fails, then you are left with one tower wired for controlled demolition.  Why risk that possibility?

What does collapsing the towers buy you?  The impact of the two jets delievered grave damage, mental and physical.  Mission Accomplished.  Why risk detection as your crew places thermite charges?

Then there are questions about the timing of detonation.  Someone must have had a finger on a remote ignition system.  A timed detonation would be too risky, because if one pilot fails to deliver, then now you have to explain why only one tower was hit and yet both towers fell.  Why not blow the building immediately after impact?  Out of compassion?

Do you believe a well-trained operation, armed with explosive know-how, would have taken unnecessary risks?

Report this

By Jail Bush Cheney Rumsfeld Joint Chiefs, November 24, 2006 at 8:35 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

C-SPAN AIRS BERKELEY 911 TRUTH CONFERENCE THIS WEEKEND. 
“9/11 and American Empire: Intellectuals Speak Out”

This is the most important book of our time. Distinguished national and international scientists and scholars present massive evidence that the 9/11 Commission Report is a hoax and that the 9/11 “terrorist attack” has been manipulated to serve a hegemonic agenda in the Middle East.

—Paul Craig Roberts, former assistant secretary of the US Treasury

Practically from the moment the dust settled in New York and Washington after the attacks of September 11, a movement has grown of survivors, witnesses, and skeptics who have never been satisfied with the government’s official account of what happened.

When theologian David Ray Griffin turned his attention to this topic in his book The New Pearl Harbor (2003), he helped give voice to many Americans and people around the world. Were the military and the FAA really that incompetent?

Both the government and the mainstream media have since tried to portray the 9/11 truth movement as led by “conspiracy theorists”. This collection of essays by intellectuals shows this caricature to be untrue. These authors, writing out of a variety of academic disciplines, meticulously and convincingly chip away at the edifice of the official story, laying bare an enormous deception.

David Ray Griffin is professor of philosophy of religion and theology, emeritus, at Claremont School of Theology and Claremont Graduate University in Claremont, California, where he remains a co-director of the Center for Process Studies.

Peter Dale Scott is a former Canadian diplomat and professor at the University of California, Berkeley.

ADDITIONAL BLURBS


For far too long, the very reasonable questions raised by 9/11 have been ignored and even ridiculed by America’s press and politicians, who treat the subject with the sort of willful blindness that suggests a wish not to find out unpleasant truths.

—Mark Crispin Miller, professor of culture and communications, New York University, and author of Cruel and Unusual: Bush/Cheney’s New World Order and Fooled Again: How the Right Stole the 2004 Election

David Ray Griffin and Peter Dale Scott point out that the book’s publication “signals the beginning of a new phase of the 9/11 Truth Movement, one in which scholars will play an increasingly larger role.” Griffin and Scott have assembled academics, scientists, engineers, and intellectuals with fine minds and courageous hearts to deliver the bitter pill—the official explanation of the events of 9/11 is false and the evidence indicating an inside job is significant.

—Catherine Austin Fitts, assistant secretary for housing, first Bush administration

It has long been clear that the Bush-Cheney administration cynically exploited the attacks of 9/11 to promote its imperial designs. But the present volume confronts us with evidence for an even more disturbing conclusion: that the 9/11 attacks were themselves orchestrated by this administration precisely so they could be thus exploited.  It is also the case that the whole “war on terror” was based on a prior deception. This book hence confronts the American people—indeed the people of the world as a whole—-with an issue second to none in importance and urgency. I give this book my highest possible recommendation.

—Ray McGovern, former CIA analyst and founder of VIPS (Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity)

All Americans who love their country enough to dig into the facts of these critical times will be well rewarded by examining David Griffin’s books. 9/11 truth is a very important issue—with the power to bring lasting change to our country.

—The Rev. William Sloane Coffin Jr., former pastor Riverside Church, New York

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3195658770053494633
http://www.booktv.org/schedule/

Report this

By deborah conner, November 24, 2006 at 9:23 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Comment #39546 by Skruff on 11/24 at 4:44 am

>>Please tell me how my kerosene fired torch melts steel?  I do not pretend to “know” anything.. I see, and reason on the basis of my experience.  I’ve been cutting up cars for 40 years, and with enough oxygen, you can use any fuel to cut steel.>> 

Try this:

http://www.metalwebnews.com/howto/gtwelding.html

Report this

By Skruff, November 24, 2006 at 5:44 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Please tell me how my kerosene fired torch melts steel?  I do not pretend to “know” anything.. I see, and reason on the basis of my experience.  I’ve been cutting up cars for 40 years, and with enough oxygen, you can use any fuel to cut steel. 

Additionally, when when the planes hit the towers one can clearly see the windown blow out on the opposite side of the buildings..

If you have ever been on the deck of the Empire State Building, or the roof of the Pan Am (now Met Life) you know that these tall buildings create their own wind currents.  That is why the heliport on the old Pan Am was closed. wind currents made landings very dangerous.

When there was a fire on the 14th floor of a building up off Columbus circle (in the 70’s, the air currents went crazy down on Amsterdam Ave although there was hardly any forcasted wind that day.

I’m not sure but I suggest this focus on what caused the WTC collaps could cause people to focus on “facts” which lead no where so other facts which lead to truth will be ignored.

ALSO I don’t see how name calling (conspiricy theorists…nuts…etc) helps anyone have a rational discussion.

Report this

By jail bush, November 23, 2006 at 11:07 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

people who wrap themselves in the conspiracy flag and neatly dismiss 911 truth evidence seem to be consistent in one thing and that is addressing the facts.  when they do, they create their own facts and dismiss what is scientific fact.  all three buildings fell at free fall speed.  this is fact, not theory.  building 7, the real smoking gun, fell with no provocation save a few transient fires.  it also fell at free fall speed.  the fires were burning cold as evidenced by the black smoke.  black smoke means a cold fire.  thermite, an explosive, has been found on a piece of metal retrieved from the site.  think what you will, create your own reality but consider this:  a steel framed structure has never been brought down by a fire dispite some that have burned for over 24 hours.  never before 911 and never since.  miraculously 3 buildings came down at free fall speed on the same day and even more miraculously they came down with very localized fires burning at around 1000 degrees when steel usually melts at around 2800 degrees.  perhaps there is a goddess, i don’t know.  i would imagine that god rather than goddess was involved in suspending the laws of physics on that morning.

Report this

By deborah conner, November 23, 2006 at 4:04 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

re Comment #39413 by Skruff, who says—

“As to the tempeture of the fire, the jet-fuel (Kerosene NOT Diesel) burns at 3000 degrees accelerated with oxygen.  additionally there was enough polymer in that building to get a good forge going…” 

Nope. ...Kerosene burns at approximately 860 degrees celsius in ambient air and less in a confined space where the fire tends to use up oxygen. (ASCE 2003)

Report this

By Ken Schreier, November 23, 2006 at 3:59 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

To Tampa DAve:

The buildings were designed to withstand the impact of a 707 commercial jet which was the largest of its kind at that time !
It was not made to withstand todays larger jets !
Even based on the 707 jet, the designers did not plan that some lunatic would open up the throttle and crash it into the buildings at 500 miles per hour !
So you really don’t know everything pal !
That is fact my friend. It was indeed a miracle that the buildings stayed up as long as they did !
Also, the South Tower did not crumble straight down as you stated !
To the contrary , the top portion above the impact zone toppled eastward, where the jet damaged the outer steel skin of the building, and then downward, due to gravity, which brought the rest of the structure down.
This is evident if you watch the video tapes !
Bottom line, it was the structural damage and intense heat that brought the buildings down !
But as I said before, conspiracy theory people will never accept the truth unless they were actually standing in the buildings and watching it all happen second by second !
Of course this can never be, so the conspiracy people will talk on and on !

Take care pal !

Report this

By Jail Bush, November 23, 2006 at 3:22 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

My 9/11 Truth Brothers & Sisters

Thanksgiving is here and let us give thanks! We have plenty of reasons to be grateful today. One of those is the presence of a holy man among us - Dr David Ray Griffin - and this quietly effective man brings 9/11 truth to C-Span again! His first appearance on C-Span ‘rocked my world’ in April 2005 and I thank Kevin Barrett for alerting me to that presentation.

This will be the third time that C-Span has shown 9/11 presentations and each time it does, the impact reverberates throughout society and a perceptible shift occurs. Take advantage of the holidays and use the face to face time with people you rarely see to bend their ear about 9/11 and remind them to tune in to watch the program Friday & Saturday.

We’ve come a long way, baby!

Report this

By david morrison (correction to last post), November 23, 2006 at 12:46 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

correction to last comment of mine should have been that the debate as to whether it was a controlled demolition is only among people who have NOT done the research.  also, the popular mechanics article has been debunked and debunked.  the authors claimed that the government showed them photos of the other side of wtc 7 that was partially scooped out but would not show them to anyone else.  RIGHT !!!  What sense does that make and who in the world (other than the idiots that do) would believe that as proof. then why did the bldg. not topple over on it’s side like a tree would rather than neatly imploding at free fall speed into it’s own footprint like the other two bldgs. that were neatly demolished in the same way.  that bush/condi/et al appeared to have ignored all of the warnings and closed out investigations on bin laden et al gives them the incompetance excuse.  it gives them the “let it happen” alibi via their own incompetance rather than the “made it happen”  through their own planning.  buildings don’t fall at free fall speed unless you blow out the resistance from the base. basic physics.  but since bush is a messenger from god, perhaps he was able to suspend the laws of physics for just that time to “let it happen.”  Also, popular mechanics has changed their story 3 times.  this is the latest 2006 version.

Report this

By david morrison, November 23, 2006 at 12:32 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

To quote Kevin Ryan, the only employee working for Underwriter’s Laboratories who had the courage to say that it was impossible for the steel to melt under those circumstances, “If it looks like a controlled demolition, meets the criteria of a controlled demolition, it is a controlled demolition.”  Ryan was fired after his statements and has just released a book.  There is so much material out there that proves mitary, government set up in 911 that it is only debated among people who have done the research.  None of the buildings were set built in a shoddy manner, this is the debunker’s propaganda.  Before making stupid, unsubstantiated statements about how the bldgs. were hit and why the heat melted the buildings—3 buildings downed in exactly the same way is statistically impossible by the way—watch the new dvd “911 mysteries”  it is devoted solely to investigation of the construction and collapse of the bldgs.  It is irrefutable, incontestable and aside from that, factual that the bldgs were brought down by controlled demolition.  the debate is over.  now the details of what was used and how they were placed is emerging.  anyone who holds any other view is only doing so to remain passive and able to turn attention elsewhere as the acceptance of the reality of 911 becomes a commitment to 911 truth activism.

Report this

By Jackie T. Gabel, November 23, 2006 at 11:59 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Again, how exactly WTC collapsed addresses none of this:

1) textbook scenario: inept patsies, protective moles, expert executioners, a compliant media—all documented

2) Pentagon & POTUS security stripped—documented treasonable actions

3) “Angel is next” threat—documented (at first admitted, then denied, like all “official” 911 accounts, continually changing story)

4) POTUS’ capitulation—and finally the call to Putin to report US post-9/11 Middle East invasion and occupation plan and to warn that Russia had better not interfere—plans drafted months before

Many media insiders know all this. “Angle is next,” was even reported by NY Times’ William Safire, but not followed up on.  Virtually none within the corporate media are genuinely free to do so - job-loss threats, or worse, make 9/11Truth the media 3rd rail.

An rogue network within CIA, NSA, FBI, MI-5, MI-6, commissioned by an extreme faction of the global oligarchy, executed this putsch. It’s the current edition of the same gang that ran Iran-Contra and the Mujahidin and now runs al Queda in collaboration with MI-6. The goal is extreme tension, instability and chaos, especially in the Middle Eastern “failed” states, ultimately to generate pretexts for military intervention so as to control oil, drug and arms markets, in a desperate effort to save the collapsing perto-drug-arms dollar.

Report this

By Thomas Ellis, November 23, 2006 at 7:19 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Thank you, Ken, for finally trying to make a coherent causal argument, rather than simply ranting and raving at us. (If you can also stop using exclamation marks at the end of every sentence, you will take one more wholesome step back into the realm of rational discourse.)

That said, your argument still begs many questions:

(1) if, as you suggest, the steel beams collapsed on one side where they were hit by the jet, why did the building collapse straight down symmetrically, rather than listing to one side and then, through angular momentum, toppling in that direction? If this had happened, of course, the angular momentum would have increased the weight on one side of the building while decreasing it on the other, resulting, perhaps, in the asymmetrical collapse of several floors below as the top of the building tipped and fell onto neighboring buildings. Nothing of this sort happened.

(2) as any physicist can tell you, an open, increasingly smoky fire fed by paper, computers, office furniture, and fire-retardant carpeting does not generate anywhere near enough heat to melt steel, and the steel core was weakened only on the side of the impact, while the 70 to 80-odd floors below were undamaged. So one might expect the building to sag on that side, but certainly not to collapse catastrophically, at freefall rate, straight down through itself. As you yourself observed, the second plane went right through the corner of the building, and the fuel exploded in a yellow fireball outside the building, so it hardly touched the 47 thick steel columns in the core that supported the entire structure. 

(3) Both buildings clearly withstood the impacts, exactly as they had been designed to do, for an hour thereafter. The fires were by this time diminishing (thick, billowing smoke indicates a cooling fire with wasted fuel), not increasing in intensity.

And once again, Ken, no other steel-frame building has ever—repeat ever—collapsed into itself like a house of cards due to fire alone. The only known mechanism for bringing about such a collapse is controlled demolition.

So your argument, while more civil and rational than before, is still not very convincing.

Report this

Page 4 of 7 pages « First  <  2 3 4 5 6 >  Last »

 

AP

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

 
 
 

Advertisement

Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 


A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.