QUOTE (metamars+Feb 1 2006, 04:52 AM)
QUOTE (zoktoberfest+Feb 1 2006, 02:50 AM)
Notice that the peripheral column section has rotated +/- 90 degrees. A vertical collapse force would favor end-over-end rotation in a horizontal plane. Studying this photo, however, suggests a rotation along a vertical plain. How else could it have made a vertical entry gash. Vertical rotation would require a purely outward force. If the core, eventually, transfered its' entire burden to the peripheral columns, why do they show no signs of deformity? If there was enough down-ward force to throw them 250', you would think that some bending would have occurred.
Silly goose, you're obviously not considering the SIDEWAYS 'Amazing Bellows Effect' !!
If the 'subterranean' Amazing Bellows could fan the smoldering WTC garbage+ sufficiently to keep metal glowingly hot for weeks after the collapse, how hard is it for their horizontal 'cousins' to blow out a few teensy weensy exterior column pieces sideways?
In fact, now that I think of it, maybe THAT'S what happened to the spire! It got blown off sideways by the HAB (Horizontal Amazing Bellows).
I thing the US Military should look into HAB. Think of the weapons potential, if they can only figure out how to harness this mysterious, natural phenomenon which was under our noses all this time!
BTW, where'd you find this picture? Kidding aside, it's excellent photographic evidence pointing to what really happened.
Translation: "Hi, my name is "metamars the straw man". I'd like to bring up a "bellows" argument which never existed before until I made it up, just to show you how silly I can be. Yes, I know, it's stupid but it works for the morons that listen to me.
I'll use an effect which a member came up with the explain the heat under the debris field (Trucks creating a Bellows effect as they pass over the site removing debris. He said it was just ONE of many possibilities to explain the hot steel, not that it happened.) then create the absurd notion that someone here used that bellows idea to explain the collapse itself. Aren't I smart?" - metamars the straw man
2 airplanes caused all this damage ? looks like a bombs hit it.......
QUOTE (reasonwhy+Feb 1 2006, 06:14 AM)
QUOTE (adoucette+Jan 31 2006, 09:24 PM)
http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/5489.jpg
Arthur,
If you look close, you can see a stream of air bellowing up from beneath the truck so strong it is lifting the truck tires millimeters off the ground. I would hurry and publish your theory.
Actually, If you look even closer you see it's reasonwhy laying under the truck!. AMASING!
What on earth are you on about ?
No, the question is what are YOU 'ON'.
What on earth are you on about ?
No, the question is what are YOU 'ON'.
Common Sense, are you the best the conspirators can put forward? Try to do better because Rove is going to raise our taxes and bring in professionals.
Is this a joke ?
What on earth are you on about ?
No, the question is what are YOU 'ON'.
Common Sense, are you the best the conspirators can put forward? Try to do better because Rove is going to raise our taxes and bring in professionals.
Oh, I get it, this is what you neo-cons call PROJECTION. You shill for Rove by taking the focus off Bush's real crimes, crimes with real evidence, then say someone else is the shill to preempt anyone from saying it about you... I've heard Rove is a master at this but I never get to see it up close like this. Just what do you get from this anyway? A job picking up children's bodies in Iraq maybe?
Is this a joke ?
I'm not sure what someone with a one dimensional mind would think of it. Trying to explain something so simple to an even simpler mind as yours is the real joke.
It ?
Do you mean the historical fraud that was perpetuated on 9-11, that has inevitably led to the American Government presenting information what they construe to be of historical importance without thinking of whether or not it is contextually correct or logical for that matter....
It's also known as "making it up as you go along"
It ?
Do you mean the historical fraud that was perpetuated on 9-11, that has inevitably led to the American Government presenting information what they construe to be of historical importance without thinking of whether or not it is contextually correct or logical for that matter....
It's also known as "making it up as you go along"
'This sense of immediacy and truthfulness which is the result of watching a steady stream of images interpreted with authority is what George Gerbner warned about as'instant history' - that is, history constructed by technology which 'concentrates power, shrinks time, and speeds action to the point where reporting, making and writing history merge'
Do you mean the historical fraud that was perpetuated on 9-11, that has inevitably led to the American Government presenting information what they construe to be of historical importance without thinking of whether or not it is contextually correct or logical for that matter....
Except you have NO EVIDENCE that it WAS a historical fraud.
They should take back your degree, you obviously lack logical reasoning ability.
Arthur
We know that this is a 'typo' (on the PART of FEMA), and that section still MUST have weighed ~ 30 - 60 Tons.
Foxx,
While the distance quoted is reasonable, I'm curious about the
MUST have weighed ~ 30 to 60 tons.
We know the steel got thinner as it went up to keep the building the same dimensions, and of course this would be one of the upper perimeter pieces.
It seems to me that 30 tons (60,000 lbs) seems a lot for that relatively small hunk of steel
I found the steel weighs ~16,000 lbs per cubic meter.
The perimeter columns were 14" square x 36 ft. At the upper elevations they were 7/16" thick steel (65ksi).
3 of these columns were connected by spandrels, which were 52" x 10 ft and at the upper elevations they were also 7/16" steel. There were 3 spandrels per section.
Which works out to ~ .8 of a cubic meter per section
Which works out to a bit less than 7 tons per section.
Which means you'd need more than 4 sections to get to 30 tons.
Seems your numbers keep going the wrong way Foxx.
Of course your FIRST clue should have been that if the sections weighed 60 tons then the weight of the 2,640 of them would exceed the total weight of the steel used to build a tower.
But hey, you've been looking at this 4 years, I've only been at it 4 months, I could be wrong.
Arthur
Indeed if the section was ejected as falling debris ripped it away from the structure one would expect some rotation and that it would resemble a , "door suddenly freed at the last moment from its' hinges". At the very least one certainly would not expect it to be ejected by having all the connections sheared simultaneously in such a chaotic situation. On the other hand if it were explosives then a series of purely cutter+ kicker charges could be expected to be simultaneous and send it off the structure with little or no rotation.
Thanks zoctober!
Arthur , so then the section that hit the Banker's Trust was probably less than 100 tons as Foxx surmises, and it went 240 feet rather than 600 feet as Foxx states?
Hmmm, then that makes the energy required to send it into the Banker's Trust much less than even that 1/600 th of the kinetic energy of the falling upper section of the south tower. Basically a glancing blow on that perimeter section!
I do love how Foxx can point to the columns that impaled the Banker's Trust and WFC 3 and yet still claim that this could not have happened to WTC 7 except to the one corner where he cannot deny that it did happen. I also gotta love how he complains that Banker's Trust and WFC 3 did not fall down like WTC 7 when he is aware that those two buildings were
a ) typical post and beam structures through out, unlike the cantilevered WTC 7
b ) did not contain the supplies of fuel that WTC 7 did
c ) did not experience the fires that WTC 7 did.
,,, and he calls me a sophist(a word I seem to have taught him BTW)
Arthur , so then the section that hit the Banker's Trust was probably less than 100 tons as Foxx surmises, and it went 240 feet rather than 600 feet as Foxx states?
Foxx corrected the distance after I pointed out to him that 600 feet was wrong, however he was just repeating that distance from the FEMA report.
While it should have been obvious that it was not that far, I along with a lot of other people had seen that statment a number of times and not "connected the dots". It just so happened that because of Foxx's post I wanted to see where the Banker's Trust building was in relationship to the WTC 2 tower, and then when I pulled up the overhead view of the site the discrepancy in distance caught my eye.
I don't know where Foxx got the 100 ton number from. He DOES correct the (again) incorrect FEMA number that was even MORE outrageous.
I assume he guessed at the weight of a set of columns and thus came up with his "MUST have weighed ~ 30 to 60 tons".
It really didn't take that long to figure the right weight out though. Most everything you need is in the NIST report, all I needed to find was the weight of a cubic meter of structural steel and I used the HIGHEST NUMBER found for that (though the range is pretty small anyway). Then translate the columns and spanderels to cubic measure and poof.
One Three column set with spandrels is a bit less than 7 tons.
The Bankers Trust building appears to have been hit with a section made up of 3 three column sections, or ~ 20 tons. That's 20% of Foxx's estimated weight.
The other building, the WFC 3 building, apparently a bit further away than Bankers, but it was hit by what appears to not even be a complete 3 column section, is the one he estimates at ~30 to 60 tons. In reality its ~ 7 tons. Again, a gross over estimation, but even so his numbers are still much more accurate than the FEMA numbers.
So, no I would not use this to skewer Foxx with. I'm assuming his error(s) were unintentional (we all estimate here). All I expect him to do is agree with my assessment or show where its wrong. If he agrees, then simply use the correct weights in the future.
And this is even after he called me a scumbag for posting pictures that were a tad large. Why he would refer to me as the slang name for a prophylatic for posting a large picture is beyond me. Maybe its a Canadian thing.
Arthur
now, do the columns, not have to buckle to fail? isn't that the story? cause i see a lot of straight pieces. most of the perimeter columns are straight still. like there were knocked out sideways, as opposed to buckled. see 'em? they're lying all over the place. they're even stuck into the sides of buildings.
No that's one of the ideas that Gordon is pushing. There are multiple failure modes, which if you READ the NIST report you would know about.
http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/4158.jpg
This picture shows one of the MORE COMMON failure modes. Look at the columns in the foreground. The BOLTS holding the columns together failed.
Arthur
Indeed if the section was ejected as falling debris ripped it away from the structure one would expect some rotation and that it would resemble a , "door suddenly freed at the last moment from its' hinges". At the very least one certainly would not expect it to be ejected by having all the connections sheared simultaneously in such a chaotic situation. On the other hand if it were explosives then a series of purely cutter+ kicker charges could be expected to be simultaneous and send it off the structure with little or no rotation.
Thanks zoctober!
Arthur , so then the section that hit the Banker's Trust was probably less than 100 tons as Foxx surmises, and it went 240 feet rather than 600 feet as Foxx states?
Hmmm, then that makes the energy required to send it into the Banker's Trust much less than even that 1/600 th of the kinetic energy of the falling upper section of the south tower. Basically a glancing blow on that perimeter section!
I do love how Foxx can point to the columns that impaled the Banker's Trust and WFC 3 and yet still claim that this could not have happened to WTC 7 except to the one corner where he cannot deny that it did happen. I also gotta love how he complains that Banker's Trust and WFC 3 did not fall down like WTC 7 when he is aware that those two buildings were
a ) typical post and beam structures through out, unlike the cantilevered WTC 7
b ) did not contain the supplies of fuel that WTC 7 did
c ) did not experience the fires that WTC 7 did.
,,, and he calls me a sophist(a word I seem to have taught him BTW)
If one assumes the "subject" of explosives, one then might assume the "object" would be the core and its' destruction. This would suggest a blast force eminating from a more centralized point behind the south face. The center of the face is closer to the core than the adjoining (SE) corner sector is. If there was a core blast, its' force and debris would act upon the centeral region of the south face before it extending into the (SE) corner. That millisecond differential defines the door action. The hinge would have been at or close to the SE corner. This speculation, by the way , gives the best line-of sight trajectory into the bank buildings face.
Quote;yesitdid
Indeed if the section was ejected as falling debris ripped it away from the structure one would expect some rotation and that it would resemble a , "door suddenly freed at the last moment from its' hinges".
Define your idea of a door. If your talking about a "garage door" that you pull open from the bottom, that pivots around a horizontal axis, then I might agree. You open a normal (verticle) door by pushing out,not down.
Quote;yesitdid
. At the very least one certainly would not expect it to be ejected by having all the connections sheared simultaneously in such a chaotic situation.
Who is assumming that? What is the point of this statement? Oh thats right, the point is to have no point. Are you trying to be schneibster's understudy or what? Your welcome, yesitdid!
Arthur,
If you look close, you can see a stream of air bellowing up from beneath the truck so strong it is lifting the truck tires millimeters off the ground. I would hurry and publish your theory.
Actually, If you look even closer you see it's reasonwhy laying under the truck!. AMASING!
QUOTE (frater plecticus+Feb 1 2006, 09:29 AM)
Looking at these photos, it seems pretty incredulous that catalyst for all this damage was "2 terrorist-laden airplanes fueled by a hatred for our values armed with only bolt crops and Korans"
I'll be looking forward to your paper based on what you think...
I'll be looking forward to your paper based on what you think...
QUOTE (frater plecticus+Feb 1 2006, 10:54 AM)
2 airplanes caused all this damage ? looks like a bombs hit it.......
You are ignoring the gravity of the situation.
Arthur
You are ignoring the gravity of the situation.
Arthur
QUOTE (Common Sense+Feb 1 2006, 10:47 AM)
Translation: "Hi, my name is "metamars the straw man". I'd like to bring up a "bellows" argument which never existed before until I made it up, just to show you how silly I can be. Yes, I know, it's stupid but it works for the morons that listen to me.
I'll use an effect which a member came up with the explain the heat under the debris field (Trucks creating a Bellows effect as they pass over the site removing debris. He said it was just ONE of many possibilities to explain the hot steel, not that it happened.) then create the absurd notion that someone here used that bellows idea to explain the collapse itself. Aren't I smart?" - metamars the straw man
Actually its even better than this.
My whole point was it was difficult to prove a NEGATIVE.
Thus the example of the truck driven Bellows, as an example of one of MANY POSSIBLE sources of forced air.
Which, while the CTers have made fun of every other page or so, have NEVER shown it to not be possible.
Thus continuing to prove my point.
To claim what COULD or COULD NOT be happening in that EVER CHANGING pile of debris is NOT POSSIBLE.
It is the ESSENCE of CHAOS and one can not predict all the possible interactions within a pile of mixed debris of that size.
To say for instance that the ONLY explanation for things to burn for months is thermite is patently ridiculous.
Arthur
I'll use an effect which a member came up with the explain the heat under the debris field (Trucks creating a Bellows effect as they pass over the site removing debris. He said it was just ONE of many possibilities to explain the hot steel, not that it happened.) then create the absurd notion that someone here used that bellows idea to explain the collapse itself. Aren't I smart?" - metamars the straw man
Actually its even better than this.
My whole point was it was difficult to prove a NEGATIVE.
Thus the example of the truck driven Bellows, as an example of one of MANY POSSIBLE sources of forced air.
Which, while the CTers have made fun of every other page or so, have NEVER shown it to not be possible.
Thus continuing to prove my point.
To claim what COULD or COULD NOT be happening in that EVER CHANGING pile of debris is NOT POSSIBLE.
It is the ESSENCE of CHAOS and one can not predict all the possible interactions within a pile of mixed debris of that size.
To say for instance that the ONLY explanation for things to burn for months is thermite is patently ridiculous.
Arthur
QUOTE (adoucette+Feb 1 2006, 03:11 PM)
To say for instance that the ONLY explanation for things to burn for months is thermite is patently ridiculous.
Arthur
It just goes to their character. Anyone who believes these people need a brain scan to determine to diagnose for clinically vegetative state. I say pull the plug now.
Arthur
It just goes to their character. Anyone who believes these people need a brain scan to determine to diagnose for clinically vegetative state. I say pull the plug now.
QUOTE (Guest_Jeff+Feb 1 2006, 01:47 PM)
It's time to stop loony conspiracy theories about Sept 11
Astute observers of history are aware that for every notable event there will usually be at least one ,often several wild conspiracy theories which spring up around it. "The CIA killed Hendrix" " The Pope had John Lennon murdered ", "Hitler was half Werewolf", "Space aliens replaced Nixon with a clone" etc,etc. The bigger the event, the more ridiculous and more numerous are the fanciful rantings which circulate in relation to it.
So its hardly surprising that the events of Sept 11 2001 have spawned their fair share of these ludicrous fairy tales. And as always, there is - sadly - a small but gullible percentage of the population eager to lap up these tall tales, regardless of facts or rational analysis.
One of the wilder stories circulating about Sept 11, and one that has attracted something of a cult following amongst conspiracy buffs is that it was carried out by 19 fanatical Arab hijackers, masterminded by an evil genius named Osama bin Laden, with no apparent motivation other than that they "hate our freedoms."
Never a group of people to be bothered by facts, the perpetrators of this cartoon fantasy have constructed an elaborately woven web of delusions and unsubstantiated hearsay in order to promote this garbage across the internet and the media to the extent that a number of otherwise rational people have actually fallen under its spell.
Normally I don't even bother debunking this kind of junk, but the effect that this paranoid myth is beginning to have requires a little rational analysis, in order to consign it to the same rubbish bin as all such silly conspiracy theories.
These crackpots even contend that the extremist Bush regime was caught unawares by the attacks, had no hand in organizing them, and actually would have stopped them if it had been able. Blindly ignoring the stand down of the US air-force, the insider trading on airline stocks - linked to the CIA, the complicit behavior of Bush on the morning of the attacks, the controlled demolition of the WTC, the firing of a missile into the Pentagon and a host of other documented proofs that the Bush regime was behind the attacks, the conspiracy theorists stick doggedly to a silly story about 19 Arab hijackers somehow managing to commandeer 4 planes simultaneously and fly them around US airspace for nearly 2 hours ,crashing them into important buildings, without the US intelligence services having any idea that it was coming, and without the Air Force knowing what to do. (...)
Rest of article at Portland IMC
9/11: Debunking The Myths
PM examines the evidence and consults the experts to refute the most persistent conspiracy theories of September 11.
FROM THE MOMENT the first airplane crashed into the World Trade Center on the morning of September 11, 2001, the world has asked one simple and compelling question: How could it happen?
Three and a half years later, not everyone is convinced we know the truth. Go to Google.com, type in the search phrase "World Trade Center conspiracy" and you'll get links to an estimated 628,000 Web sites. More than 3000 books on 9/11 have been published; many of them reject the official consensus that hijackers associated with Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda flew passenger planes into U.S. landmarks.
Healthy skepticism, it seems, has curdled into paranoia. Wild conspiracy tales are peddled daily on the Internet, talk radio and in other media. Blurry photos, quotes taken out of context and sketchy eyewitness accounts have inspired a slew of elaborate theories: The Pentagon was struck by a missile; the World Trade Center was razed by demolition-style bombs; Flight 93 was shot down by a mysterious white jet. As outlandish as these claims may sound, they are increasingly accepted abroad and among extremists here in the United States.
To investigate 16 of the most prevalent claims made by conspiracy theorists, POPULAR MECHANICS assembled a team of nine researchers and reporters who, together with PM editors, consulted more than 70 professionals in fields that form the core content of this magazine, including aviation, engineering and the military.
In the end, we were able to debunk each of these assertions with hard evidence and a healthy dose of common sense. We learned that a few theories are based on something as innocent as a reporting error on that chaotic day. Others are the byproducts of cynical imaginations that aim to inject suspicion and animosity into public debate. Only by confronting such poisonous claims with irrefutable facts can we understand what really happened on a day that is forever seared into world history.
The "Pod People" And The Plane
Astute observers of history are aware that for every notable event there will usually be at least one ,often several wild conspiracy theories which spring up around it. "The CIA killed Hendrix" " The Pope had John Lennon murdered ", "Hitler was half Werewolf", "Space aliens replaced Nixon with a clone" etc,etc. The bigger the event, the more ridiculous and more numerous are the fanciful rantings which circulate in relation to it.
So its hardly surprising that the events of Sept 11 2001 have spawned their fair share of these ludicrous fairy tales. And as always, there is - sadly - a small but gullible percentage of the population eager to lap up these tall tales, regardless of facts or rational analysis.
One of the wilder stories circulating about Sept 11, and one that has attracted something of a cult following amongst conspiracy buffs is that it was carried out by 19 fanatical Arab hijackers, masterminded by an evil genius named Osama bin Laden, with no apparent motivation other than that they "hate our freedoms."
Never a group of people to be bothered by facts, the perpetrators of this cartoon fantasy have constructed an elaborately woven web of delusions and unsubstantiated hearsay in order to promote this garbage across the internet and the media to the extent that a number of otherwise rational people have actually fallen under its spell.
Normally I don't even bother debunking this kind of junk, but the effect that this paranoid myth is beginning to have requires a little rational analysis, in order to consign it to the same rubbish bin as all such silly conspiracy theories.
These crackpots even contend that the extremist Bush regime was caught unawares by the attacks, had no hand in organizing them, and actually would have stopped them if it had been able. Blindly ignoring the stand down of the US air-force, the insider trading on airline stocks - linked to the CIA, the complicit behavior of Bush on the morning of the attacks, the controlled demolition of the WTC, the firing of a missile into the Pentagon and a host of other documented proofs that the Bush regime was behind the attacks, the conspiracy theorists stick doggedly to a silly story about 19 Arab hijackers somehow managing to commandeer 4 planes simultaneously and fly them around US airspace for nearly 2 hours ,crashing them into important buildings, without the US intelligence services having any idea that it was coming, and without the Air Force knowing what to do. (...)
Rest of article at Portland IMC
9/11: Debunking The Myths
PM examines the evidence and consults the experts to refute the most persistent conspiracy theories of September 11.
FROM THE MOMENT the first airplane crashed into the World Trade Center on the morning of September 11, 2001, the world has asked one simple and compelling question: How could it happen?
Three and a half years later, not everyone is convinced we know the truth. Go to Google.com, type in the search phrase "World Trade Center conspiracy" and you'll get links to an estimated 628,000 Web sites. More than 3000 books on 9/11 have been published; many of them reject the official consensus that hijackers associated with Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda flew passenger planes into U.S. landmarks.
Healthy skepticism, it seems, has curdled into paranoia. Wild conspiracy tales are peddled daily on the Internet, talk radio and in other media. Blurry photos, quotes taken out of context and sketchy eyewitness accounts have inspired a slew of elaborate theories: The Pentagon was struck by a missile; the World Trade Center was razed by demolition-style bombs; Flight 93 was shot down by a mysterious white jet. As outlandish as these claims may sound, they are increasingly accepted abroad and among extremists here in the United States.
To investigate 16 of the most prevalent claims made by conspiracy theorists, POPULAR MECHANICS assembled a team of nine researchers and reporters who, together with PM editors, consulted more than 70 professionals in fields that form the core content of this magazine, including aviation, engineering and the military.
In the end, we were able to debunk each of these assertions with hard evidence and a healthy dose of common sense. We learned that a few theories are based on something as innocent as a reporting error on that chaotic day. Others are the byproducts of cynical imaginations that aim to inject suspicion and animosity into public debate. Only by confronting such poisonous claims with irrefutable facts can we understand what really happened on a day that is forever seared into world history.
The "Pod People" And The Plane
QUOTE (frater plecticus+Feb 1 2006, 02:22 PM)
QUOTE
Yet more evidence Mel is a paid Rove shill. Progressives/liberals don't dehumanize gays. Next I expect he'll call someone a ni**ger.
If these people aren't working for Rove they sure act like it.
If these people aren't working for Rove they sure act like it.
What on earth are you on about ?
No, the question is what are YOU 'ON'.
QUOTE (Common Sense+Feb 1 2006, 08:16 AM)
QUOTE (frater plecticus+Feb 1 2006, 02:22 PM)
QUOTE
Yet more evidence Mel is a paid Rove shill. Progressives/liberals don't dehumanize gays. Next I expect he'll call someone a ni**ger.
If these people aren't working for Rove they sure act like it.
If these people aren't working for Rove they sure act like it.
What on earth are you on about ?
No, the question is what are YOU 'ON'.
Common Sense, are you the best the conspirators can put forward? Try to do better because Rove is going to raise our taxes and bring in professionals.
QUOTE (frater plecticus+Feb 1 2006, 02:54 PM)
2 airplanes caused all this damage ? looks like a bombs hit it.......
WARNING 3 Dimensional thinking below, Read at your own risk..
To a moron looking at the pictures without putting them in context it may look that way but being one you left a few steps out. The extra steps my be to much for you. Proceed at your own risk...
Real slow now...
Two planes hit the towers...
Which caused a fire
Which progressively weakened the building
Which after time caused a collapse
[Are you still with me? If you feel dizzy you can stop here and pick up on it later..]
Which pancaked the floors
Which compressed everything between the floors including debris
Which forced the debris and air out the sides
Which pushed on the already falling debris including columns
Which were falling over like 110 story stack of domino's placed on end
Hopefully you're still with us. (Though ever being "With us" in the cognitive sense may not apply.)
I know this is more than the one sentence you look for in explainations but there you have it. The only thing amasing is that your limited IQ can't understand this.
WARNING 3 Dimensional thinking below, Read at your own risk..
To a moron looking at the pictures without putting them in context it may look that way but being one you left a few steps out. The extra steps my be to much for you. Proceed at your own risk...
Real slow now...
Two planes hit the towers...
Which caused a fire
Which progressively weakened the building
Which after time caused a collapse
[Are you still with me? If you feel dizzy you can stop here and pick up on it later..]
Which pancaked the floors
Which compressed everything between the floors including debris
Which forced the debris and air out the sides
Which pushed on the already falling debris including columns
Which were falling over like 110 story stack of domino's placed on end
Hopefully you're still with us. (Though ever being "With us" in the cognitive sense may not apply.)
I know this is more than the one sentence you look for in explainations but there you have it. The only thing amasing is that your limited IQ can't understand this.
QUOTE
Real slow now...
Two planes hit the towers...
Which caused a fire
Which progressively weakened the building
Which after time caused a collapse
[Are you still with me? If you feel dizzy you can stop here and pick up on it later..]
Which pancaked the floors
Which compressed everything between the floors including debris
Which forced the debris and air out the sides
Which pushed on the already falling debris including columns
Which were falling over like 110 story stack of domino's placed on end
Two planes hit the towers...
Which caused a fire
Which progressively weakened the building
Which after time caused a collapse
[Are you still with me? If you feel dizzy you can stop here and pick up on it later..]
Which pancaked the floors
Which compressed everything between the floors including debris
Which forced the debris and air out the sides
Which pushed on the already falling debris including columns
Which were falling over like 110 story stack of domino's placed on end
Is this a joke ?
QUOTE (reasonwhy+Feb 1 2006, 04:25 PM)
QUOTE (Common Sense+Feb 1 2006, 08:16 AM)
QUOTE (frater plecticus+Feb 1 2006, 02:22 PM)
QUOTE
Yet more evidence Mel is a paid Rove shill. Progressives/liberals don't dehumanize gays. Next I expect he'll call someone a ni**ger.
If these people aren't working for Rove they sure act like it.
If these people aren't working for Rove they sure act like it.
What on earth are you on about ?
No, the question is what are YOU 'ON'.
Common Sense, are you the best the conspirators can put forward? Try to do better because Rove is going to raise our taxes and bring in professionals.
Oh, I get it, this is what you neo-cons call PROJECTION. You shill for Rove by taking the focus off Bush's real crimes, crimes with real evidence, then say someone else is the shill to preempt anyone from saying it about you... I've heard Rove is a master at this but I never get to see it up close like this. Just what do you get from this anyway? A job picking up children's bodies in Iraq maybe?
QUOTE (frater plecticus+Feb 1 2006, 04:40 PM)
QUOTE
Real slow now...
Two planes hit the towers...
Which caused a fire
Which progressively weakened the building
Which after time caused a collapse
[Are you still with me? If you feel dizzy you can stop here and pick up on it later..]
Which pancaked the floors
Which compressed everything between the floors including debris
Which forced the debris and air out the sides
Which pushed on the already falling debris including columns
Which were falling over like 110 story stack of domino's placed on end
Two planes hit the towers...
Which caused a fire
Which progressively weakened the building
Which after time caused a collapse
[Are you still with me? If you feel dizzy you can stop here and pick up on it later..]
Which pancaked the floors
Which compressed everything between the floors including debris
Which forced the debris and air out the sides
Which pushed on the already falling debris including columns
Which were falling over like 110 story stack of domino's placed on end
Is this a joke ?
I'm not sure what someone with a one dimensional mind would think of it. Trying to explain something so simple to an even simpler mind as yours is the real joke.
Is that the best counter-argument you can come up with?
Go back to your handler, you inept incompetent charlatan.
I guess this was to be expected, a ragtag of sequential events woven together in a bombastic physical conspiracy.
Go back to your handler, you inept incompetent charlatan.
QUOTE
Real slow now...
Two planes hit the towers...
Which caused a fire
Which progressively weakened the building
Which after time caused a collapse
[Are you still with me? If you feel dizzy you can stop here and pick up on it later..]
Which pancaked the floors
Which compressed everything between the floors including debris
Which forced the debris and air out the sides
Which pushed on the already falling debris including columns
Which were falling over like 110 story stack of domino's placed on end
Two planes hit the towers...
Which caused a fire
Which progressively weakened the building
Which after time caused a collapse
[Are you still with me? If you feel dizzy you can stop here and pick up on it later..]
Which pancaked the floors
Which compressed everything between the floors including debris
Which forced the debris and air out the sides
Which pushed on the already falling debris including columns
Which were falling over like 110 story stack of domino's placed on end
I guess this was to be expected, a ragtag of sequential events woven together in a bombastic physical conspiracy.
[QUOTE=Common Sense,Feb 1 2006, 06:33 AM][QUOTE=zoktoberfest,Feb 1 2006, 02:50 AM] [QUOTE=Foxx,Jan 31 2006, 10:51 AM]
Notice that the peripheral column section has rotated at least +/- 90 degrees as it flew through the air. A purely downward collapse force would favor end-over-end rotation in a horizontal plane. Studying this photo, however, suggests a rotation along a vertical plain. Like the motion of a violently opened door suddenly freed at the last moment from its' hinges. It hit the bank building on a leading edge. Maybe it rotated 270 degrees or even the next next multiple. How else could it have made a vertical entry gash. Vertical rotation would require a purely outward force. You open a door by pushing out, not down.
If the core, eventually, transfered its' entire burden to the peripheral columns, why do they show no signs of deformity? If there was enough down-ward force to throw them 250', you would think that some bending would have occurred.
[/QUOTE]
Tell me something genius, if it went horizontally with tremendous force as in "Explosion" (Something not seen in any video. They all show the steel falling away from the building with the compression of air. Debris under each collapsed floor was being squeezed out the sides. The effect pushed the debris from the collapsed floor be
If it was traveling horizontally as you suggest it should have only made a hole and landed in the building. Not hang out side of it like it scrapped the wall on the way down...
Your whole post is BS.[/QUOTE]
Once again, the comprehension of the English language needs to be rescued.
"If it was traveling horizontally as you suggest it should have only made a hole and landed in the building". CS
"Studying this photo, however, suggests a rotation along a vertical plain. Like the motion of a violently opened door suddenly freed at the last moment from its' hinges. It hit the bank building on a leading edge". Zoktoberfest
My pure assumption as to why the vertical gash extends so far above the apparent point of impact is: the area of the column section was larger and hit higher. Some of the material fell out as it migrated downward under the weight of it substantial mass.
Notice that the peripheral column section has rotated at least +/- 90 degrees as it flew through the air. A purely downward collapse force would favor end-over-end rotation in a horizontal plane. Studying this photo, however, suggests a rotation along a vertical plain. Like the motion of a violently opened door suddenly freed at the last moment from its' hinges. It hit the bank building on a leading edge. Maybe it rotated 270 degrees or even the next next multiple. How else could it have made a vertical entry gash. Vertical rotation would require a purely outward force. You open a door by pushing out, not down.
If the core, eventually, transfered its' entire burden to the peripheral columns, why do they show no signs of deformity? If there was enough down-ward force to throw them 250', you would think that some bending would have occurred.
[/QUOTE]
Tell me something genius, if it went horizontally with tremendous force as in "Explosion" (Something not seen in any video. They all show the steel falling away from the building with the compression of air. Debris under each collapsed floor was being squeezed out the sides. The effect pushed the debris from the collapsed floor be
If it was traveling horizontally as you suggest it should have only made a hole and landed in the building. Not hang out side of it like it scrapped the wall on the way down...
Your whole post is BS.[/QUOTE]
Once again, the comprehension of the English language needs to be rescued.
"If it was traveling horizontally as you suggest it should have only made a hole and landed in the building". CS
"Studying this photo, however, suggests a rotation along a vertical plain. Like the motion of a violently opened door suddenly freed at the last moment from its' hinges. It hit the bank building on a leading edge". Zoktoberfest
My pure assumption as to why the vertical gash extends so far above the apparent point of impact is: the area of the column section was larger and hit higher. Some of the material fell out as it migrated downward under the weight of it substantial mass.
QUOTE (frater plecticus+Feb 1 2006, 04:58 PM)
Is that the best counter-argument you can come up with?
Go back to your handler, you inept incompetent charlatan.
I guess this was to be expected, a ragtag of sequential events woven together in a bombastic physical conspiracy.
I can smell your synaptic endings frying now. I know it's a it much for you but if you take the aluminum foil off that pea sized skull and put on the thinking cap you might comprehend it.
Go back to your handler, you inept incompetent charlatan.
QUOTE
Real slow now...
Two planes hit the towers...
Which caused a fire
Which progressively weakened the building
Which after time caused a collapse
[Are you still with me? If you feel dizzy you can stop here and pick up on it later..]
Which pancaked the floors
Which compressed everything between the floors including debris
Which forced the debris and air out the sides
Which pushed on the already falling debris including columns
Which were falling over like 110 story stack of domino's placed on end
Two planes hit the towers...
Which caused a fire
Which progressively weakened the building
Which after time caused a collapse
[Are you still with me? If you feel dizzy you can stop here and pick up on it later..]
Which pancaked the floors
Which compressed everything between the floors including debris
Which forced the debris and air out the sides
Which pushed on the already falling debris including columns
Which were falling over like 110 story stack of domino's placed on end
I guess this was to be expected, a ragtag of sequential events woven together in a bombastic physical conspiracy.
I can smell your synaptic endings frying now. I know it's a it much for you but if you take the aluminum foil off that pea sized skull and put on the thinking cap you might comprehend it.
QUOTE (zoktoberfest+Feb 1 2006, 05:07 PM)
[QUOTE=Common Sense,Feb 1 2006, 06:33 AM][QUOTE=zoktoberfest,Feb 1 2006, 02:50 AM] [QUOTE=Foxx,Jan 31 2006, 10:51 AM]
Notice that the peripheral column section has rotated at least +/- 90 degrees as it flew through the air. A purely downward collapse force would favor end-over-end rotation in a horizontal plane. Studying this photo, however, suggests a rotation along a vertical plain. Like the motion of a violently opened door suddenly freed at the last moment from its' hinges. It hit the bank building on a leading edge. Maybe it rotated 270 degrees or even the next next multiple. How else could it have made a vertical entry gash. Vertical rotation would require a purely outward force. You open a door by pushing out, not down.
If the core, eventually, transfered its' entire burden to the peripheral columns, why do they show no signs of deformity? If there was enough down-ward force to throw them 250', you would think that some bending would have occurred.
[/QUOTE]
Tell me something genius, if it went horizontally with tremendous force as in "Explosion" (Something not seen in any video. They all show the steel falling away from the building with the compression of air. Debris under each collapsed floor was being squeezed out the sides. The effect pushed the debris from the collapsed floor be
If it was traveling horizontally as you suggest it should have only made a hole and landed in the building. Not hang out side of it like it scrapped the wall on the way down...
Your whole post is BS.[/QUOTE]
Once again, the comprehension of the English language needs to be rescued.
"If it was traveling horizontally as you suggest it should have only made a hole and landed in the building". CS
"Studying this photo, however, suggests a rotation along a vertical plain. Like the motion of a violently opened door suddenly freed at the last moment from its' hinges. It hit the bank building on a leading edge". Zoktoberfest
My pure assumption as to why the vertical gash extends so far above the apparent point of impact is: the area of the column section was larger and hit higher. Some of the material fell out as it migrated downward under the weight of it substantial mass.
Do you have any evidence for this conclusion or are you just still pulling shait out of your A$$?
Notice that the peripheral column section has rotated at least +/- 90 degrees as it flew through the air. A purely downward collapse force would favor end-over-end rotation in a horizontal plane. Studying this photo, however, suggests a rotation along a vertical plain. Like the motion of a violently opened door suddenly freed at the last moment from its' hinges. It hit the bank building on a leading edge. Maybe it rotated 270 degrees or even the next next multiple. How else could it have made a vertical entry gash. Vertical rotation would require a purely outward force. You open a door by pushing out, not down.
If the core, eventually, transfered its' entire burden to the peripheral columns, why do they show no signs of deformity? If there was enough down-ward force to throw them 250', you would think that some bending would have occurred.
[/QUOTE]
Tell me something genius, if it went horizontally with tremendous force as in "Explosion" (Something not seen in any video. They all show the steel falling away from the building with the compression of air. Debris under each collapsed floor was being squeezed out the sides. The effect pushed the debris from the collapsed floor be
If it was traveling horizontally as you suggest it should have only made a hole and landed in the building. Not hang out side of it like it scrapped the wall on the way down...
Your whole post is BS.[/QUOTE]
Once again, the comprehension of the English language needs to be rescued.
"If it was traveling horizontally as you suggest it should have only made a hole and landed in the building". CS
"Studying this photo, however, suggests a rotation along a vertical plain. Like the motion of a violently opened door suddenly freed at the last moment from its' hinges. It hit the bank building on a leading edge". Zoktoberfest
My pure assumption as to why the vertical gash extends so far above the apparent point of impact is: the area of the column section was larger and hit higher. Some of the material fell out as it migrated downward under the weight of it substantial mass.
Do you have any evidence for this conclusion or are you just still pulling shait out of your A$$?
QUOTE
I can smell your synaptic endings frying now. I know it's a it much for you but if you take the aluminum foil off that pea sized skull and put on the thinking cap you might comprehend it.
It ?
Do you mean the historical fraud that was perpetuated on 9-11, that has inevitably led to the American Government presenting information what they construe to be of historical importance without thinking of whether or not it is contextually correct or logical for that matter....
It's also known as "making it up as you go along"
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| I can smell your synaptic endings frying now. I know it's a it much for you but if you take the aluminum foil off that pea sized skull and put on the thinking cap you might comprehend it. |
It ?
Do you mean the historical fraud that was perpetuated on 9-11, that has inevitably led to the American Government presenting information what they construe to be of historical importance without thinking of whether or not it is contextually correct or logical for that matter....
It's also known as "making it up as you go along"
'This sense of immediacy and truthfulness which is the result of watching a steady stream of images interpreted with authority is what George Gerbner warned about as'instant history' - that is, history constructed by technology which 'concentrates power, shrinks time, and speeds action to the point where reporting, making and writing history merge'
QUOTE (frater plecticus+Feb 1 2006, 01:50 PM)
Do you mean the historical fraud that was perpetuated on 9-11, that has inevitably led to the American Government presenting information what they construe to be of historical importance without thinking of whether or not it is contextually correct or logical for that matter....
Except you have NO EVIDENCE that it WAS a historical fraud.
They should take back your degree, you obviously lack logical reasoning ability.
Arthur
whooa. you gonna scratch my eyes out too ???
QUOTE (Foxx+Feb 1 2006, 03:59 AM)
We know that this is a 'typo' (on the PART of FEMA), and that section still MUST have weighed ~ 30 - 60 Tons.
Foxx,
While the distance quoted is reasonable, I'm curious about the
MUST have weighed ~ 30 to 60 tons.
We know the steel got thinner as it went up to keep the building the same dimensions, and of course this would be one of the upper perimeter pieces.
It seems to me that 30 tons (60,000 lbs) seems a lot for that relatively small hunk of steel
I found the steel weighs ~16,000 lbs per cubic meter.
The perimeter columns were 14" square x 36 ft. At the upper elevations they were 7/16" thick steel (65ksi).
3 of these columns were connected by spandrels, which were 52" x 10 ft and at the upper elevations they were also 7/16" steel. There were 3 spandrels per section.
Which works out to ~ .8 of a cubic meter per section
Which works out to a bit less than 7 tons per section.
Which means you'd need more than 4 sections to get to 30 tons.
Seems your numbers keep going the wrong way Foxx.
Of course your FIRST clue should have been that if the sections weighed 60 tons then the weight of the 2,640 of them would exceed the total weight of the steel used to build a tower.
But hey, you've been looking at this 4 years, I've only been at it 4 months, I could be wrong.
Arthur
QUOTE (frater plecticus+Feb 1 2006, 02:03 PM)
whooa. you gonna scratch my eyes out too ???
What would be the point, you obviously don't use them.
Arthur
What would be the point, you obviously don't use them.
Arthur
QUOTE (Guest+Oct 26 2005, 11:16 PM)
LOL
I suppose that the 9-11 conspiracy theorists paid off all of these witnesses to make these statements too:
From THE NEW YORK TIMES:
Assistant Fire Commissioner: "I thought . . . before . . . No. 2 came down, that I saw low-level flashes. . . . I . . . saw a flash flash flash . . . [at] the lower level of the building. You know like when they . . . blow up a building. . . ?”
Source:
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyreg...ory_Stephen.txt
NYC firefighter: “It actually gave at a lower floor, not the floor where the plane hit. . . [W]e 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.”
Source:
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyreg...chia_Edward.txt
From The San Francisco Chronicle / SFGate.com:
Captain of Emergency Medical Services: "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 ... and with each popping sound it was initially an orange and then red flash came out of the building and then it would just go all around the building on both sides ... as far as could see these popping sounds and the explosions were getting bigger going both up and down and then all around the building"
Source:
http://sfgate.com/gate/pictures/2005/09/10...rin_deshore.pdf
Related articles:
Another 9/11 Smoking Gun
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2005/...moking-gun.html
Below the Belt
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2005/10/below-belt.html
Compare these building demolition videos to the statements above:
* J.L. Hudson Department Store - Detroit, Michigan
http://www.controlled-demolition.com/image...nt/jlhudson.mpg
* Seattle Kingdome
http://www.controlled-demolition.com/image...nt/kingdome.mpg
* Various building demolitions
http://www.implosionworld.com/cinema.htm
More statements from 9-11 witnesses:
Firemen recall "detonations" in South Tower:
fireman2: We made it outside, we made it about a block.
fireman1: We made it at least 2 blocks.
fireman2: 2 blocks.
fireman1: and we started runnin'
fireman2: poch-poch-poch-poch-poch-poch-poch
fireman1: Floor by floor it started poppin' out ..
fireman2: It was as if as if they had detonated, det..
fireman1: yea detonated yea
fireman2: as if they had planned to take down a building,
boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom ...
fireman1: All the way down, I was watchin it, and runnin'
(60 second video clip):
http://911research.com/wtc/evidence/videos...n_firehouse.mpg
Member of the FDNY:
"We were trying to get some of the people out, but then there was secondary explosions and then subsequent collapses."
Video: http://www.911blimp.net/videos/FDNY-explosions.mov
Firefighter:
"As we were getting our gear on and making our way to the stairway, there was a heavy duty explosion."
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/heavy.duty.explosion.wmv
September 12, 2001, New York City, People.com
Louie Cacchioli, 51, is a firefighter assigned to Engine 47 in Harlem.
We were the first ones in the second tower after the plane struck. I was taking firefighters up in the elevator to the 24th floor to get in position to evacuate workers. On the last trip up a bomb went off. We think there was bombs set in the building...
Source:
http://prisonplanet.com/louie_cacchioli.htm
NBC Reporter, Pat Dawson:
[Albert Turi the Chief of Safety for the New York Fire Department] received word of the possibility of a secondary device, that is another bomb going off. He tried to get his men out as quickly as he could, but he said there was another explosion which took place, and then an hour after the first hit, the first crash that took place, he said there was another explosion that took place in one of the towers here, so obviously according to his theory he thinks that there were actually devices that were planted in the building. One of the secondary devices he thinks that took place after the initial impact he thinks may have been on the plane that crashed into one of the towers. The second device, he thinks, he speculates, was probably planted in the building.“
Video clip of Pat Dawson reporting on the comments made by Albert Turi, Chief of Safety for the New York City Fire Department, claiming there were bombs planted in the WTC:
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.reporter.1.wmv
MSNBC Reporter, Rick Sanchez:
"Police have found what they believe to be a suspicious device and they fear that it may lead to another explosion...I spoke with some police officials moments ago, Chris, and they told me they have reason to believe that one of the explosion at the WTC besides the ones made with the planes, may have been caused by a van that was parked on the building that may have had an explosive device in it."
Rick Sanchez video clip:
http://www.terrorize.dk/911/comments/911.w....explosives.wmv
War Corespondent, Jack Kelley:
"Apparently what appears to happen was that at the same time two planes hit the building that there... that the FBI most likely thinks that there was a car or truck packed with explosives underneath the buildings which also exploded at the same time..."
Video clip:
http://www.terrorize.dk/911/comments/911.w....jack.kelley.rm
MSNBC Reporter, Ann Thompson:
"At 10:30 I tried to leave the building, but as I got outside I heard a second explosion and another rumble and more smoke and more dust. I ran inside the building and the chandelier shook and again black smoke filled the air. Within another five minutes we were covered again with more soot and more dust. And then a fire marshal came in and said we had to leave, because if there was a third explosion this building might not last.."
Video: http://www.terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.....explosions.wmv
Street Reporter:
"45 minutes into the taping we were doing, there was an explosion. It was way up where the fire was and the whole building at that point bellied out in flames and everybody ran."
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.reporter.2.wmv
Witness / 9-11 survivor:
"I was about five blocks away when I heard explosions... three thuds and turned around to see the building that we just got out of... tip over and fall in on itself."
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.witness.1.wmv
Witness / 9-11 survivor:
"...and then all of a sudden it started like... it sounded like gunfire... you know, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang and then all of a sudden three big explosions."
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.witness.2.wmv
"When we got to about 50 feet from the South Tower, we heard the most eerie sound that you would ever hear. A high-pitched noise and a popping noise made everyone stop. We all looked up. At the point, it all let go. The way I see it, it had to be the rivets. The building let go. There was an explosion and the whole top leaned toward us and started coming down. I stood there for a second in total awe, and then said, "What the F###?" I honestly thought it was Hollywood."
- Eye-witness Jeff Birnbaum, president of Broadway Electrical Supply Co., New York
http://september11.ceenews.com/ar/electric...trical_supplys/
Terror in the City, September 12 , 2001, Notes from Robert Ivy, FAIA Editor-in-chief
...we felt a rumble like faraway thunder and turned. The impossible was happening. The south tower of the World Trade Center shook, and in what resembled an elemental act, fell to earth in a mighty shout. The entire dissolution, the changeover from solid elements to ash, took only seconds, and it was gone...
http://www.archrecord.com/news/fromTheFiel.../0109terror.asp
An Eye-Witness Account of the World Trade Center Attacks
from Neil deGrasse Tyson
The following is the text from an email Neil deGrasse Tyson sent to his family and friends on 12 September 2001. Neil witnessed the attacks on the twin towers from his apartment only six blocks from the World Trade Center. He is Director of the Hayden Planetarium of the American Museum of Natural History, which is located in New York City. Neil also serves as The Planetary Society's Vice President...
From: Neil deGrasse Tyson
Sent: 10AM, Wednesday, 12 September 2001
Subject: The Horror, The Horror
...4) As more and more and more and more and more emergency vehicles descended on the World Trade Center, I hear a second explosion in WTC 2, then a loud, low-frequency rumble that precipitates the unthinkable -- a collapse of all the floors above the point of explosion. First the top surface, containing the helipad, tips sideways in full view. Then the upper floors fall straight down in a demolition-style implosion, taking all lower floors with it, even those below the point of the explosion...
...6) I decide it's time to get my daughter, who was taken by the parents of a friend of hers to a small office building, six blocks farther from the WTC than my apartment. As I dress for survival: boots, flashlight, wet towels, swimming goggles, bicycle helmet, gloves, I hear another explosion followed by a now all-too familiar rumble that signaled the collapse of WTC 1, the first of the two towers to have been hit. I saw the iconic antenna on this building descend straight down in an implosion twinning the first...
Tuesday, 11 September, 2001, Eyewitnesses tell of horror, BBC News
"...I saw everything from my balcony in Soho. The first plane tried to veer off the tower but slammed straight into it, followed by the second plane," Nadine Keller of New York City wrote in an e-mail to BBC News Online.
"There was smoke everywhere. I heard the bomb and saw both buildings crumble like biscuits," Ms Keller said.
The BBC received more than 1,300 e-mails from witnesses and other concerned readers within the first few hours after the attack.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1537500.stm
9/11 Survivor Describes Multiple Explosions
"There were explosions going off everywhere. I was convinced that there were bombs planted all over the place and someone was sitting at a control panel pushing detonator buttons. I was afraid to go down Church Street toward Broadway, but I had to do it. I ended up on Vesey Street. There was another explosion. And another. I didn't know where to run."
Source: "Teresa Veliz: A Prayer to Die Quickly and Painlessly," in September 11: An Oral History by Dean E. Murphy (Doubleday, 2002), pp 9-15. http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/veliz-bombs.htm
“Amazing, incredible pick your word. For the third time today, it’s reminiscent of those pictures we’ve all seen too much on television before, where a building was deliberately destroyed by well placed dynamite to knock it down.”
- CBS News anchor Dan Rather commenting on the collapse of Building 7, September 11, 2001 at approx 5:20pm EST.
Video: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/w..._demolition.mpg
Excerpt from a radio interview with Indira Singh, ground zero rescue worker and 9/11 whistleblower. She says that she and others were told to move away from Building 7, by persons that she thought were members of the FDNY, because they were "going to have to bring it down":
Radio host Bonnie Falkner: How long did you work as an emergency medical technician and exactly what is it that you were doing (at ground zero)?
Indira Singh: ...when I got there we were setting up triage sites (at ground zero), close, very close to the area. The triage site that I was setting up was behind, well, to the east of Building 7 where Building 7 came down...
...we were setting up triages as close to the pile as possible… so what we were doing was setting up different kinds of stations… IV stations, cardiac stations, wound stations, burn stations ...just trying to have an organized space. What happened with that particular triage site is that pretty soon afternoon, after mid-day on 9/11 we had to evacuate that because they told us Building 7 was coming down...
...I do believe that they brought Building 7 down...
...by noon or one o'clock they told us we had to move from that triage site up to Pace University a little further away because Building 7 was going to come down or being brought down.
Bonnie Falkner: Did they actually use the word "brought" down and who was it that was telling you this?
Indira Singh: The fire department... the fire department and they did use the word "we're going to have to bring it down."
The entire interview can be listened to at the link below. The excerpts from above can be found approximately 10 minutes into the interview.
Guns & Butter Radio interview w/ Indira Singh hosted by Bonnie Falkner - April 27th 2005:
http://tinyurl.com/7dww8
Fire officer Paul Isaac Jr. asserted that 9-11 was an inside job last September 11 at ground zero where mourners and protesters were gathered; “I know 9-11 was an inside job. The police know it’s an inside job; and the firemen know it too”, said Isaac.
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/bombs_inside_wtc.html
Goodafternoon,
My name is Paul Isaac Jr and I am writing to imform those on this board and at other websites that the wingtv article writen in regards to the 05 WTC Memorial is false. There was never any mention about this subject at the memorial. As a matter of fact I did have a discussion with them on there inappropriate behave at the event. They were insulting the attendees and families with there profanity and lack of respect for the event.
Dylan Avery Loosechange 2nd edition shows what actually occured at the event after I read these knuckleheads the RIOT ACT for their behavior. The Proof should be on the tape LC2E in which there were photos taken we my and the NYPD Police detail standing there the whole time. I don't thinkm the NYPD detail standing there would've taken photos for the families and attendees with someone who according to wingtvs' scott magufka make believe story. The false write up was retaliatory on the grounds that I basically ruined their day. The proof is also in the write up by the Village Voice which also shows what actually occured. Even someone who was there with them wearing their Wingtv shirt cooborates that I called them Goverment Agent provocatures but no mention on the subject they spoke. their towards the memorial and the family members in attendance was unacceptable to say the least.
If you really want to see how these people work google; Lisa Guliani calls FBI on Revere Radio Network" and ask yourself if there is a credibility issue regarding FBI imformants making up flase stories? Lisa gulianis' E mail is Wingedpiper@yahoo.com ask her why she wrote such BS? Ask her why she keeps company with the sort of people listed as predicate felons out of Denver CO by the of Tim White. Mr white seems to have some problems he needs to be dealing with first at home before making threats to people who aren't scared in the least.
Again The wingtv article is false.
Thank you
Paul Isaac Jr
Rsqsrvs@yahoo.com
I suppose that the 9-11 conspiracy theorists paid off all of these witnesses to make these statements too:
From THE NEW YORK TIMES:
Assistant Fire Commissioner: "I thought . . . before . . . No. 2 came down, that I saw low-level flashes. . . . I . . . saw a flash flash flash . . . [at] the lower level of the building. You know like when they . . . blow up a building. . . ?”
Source:
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyreg...ory_Stephen.txt
NYC firefighter: “It actually gave at a lower floor, not the floor where the plane hit. . . [W]e 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.”
Source:
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyreg...chia_Edward.txt
From The San Francisco Chronicle / SFGate.com:
Captain of Emergency Medical Services: "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 ... and with each popping sound it was initially an orange and then red flash came out of the building and then it would just go all around the building on both sides ... as far as could see these popping sounds and the explosions were getting bigger going both up and down and then all around the building"
Source:
http://sfgate.com/gate/pictures/2005/09/10...rin_deshore.pdf
Related articles:
Another 9/11 Smoking Gun
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2005/...moking-gun.html
Below the Belt
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2005/10/below-belt.html
Compare these building demolition videos to the statements above:
* J.L. Hudson Department Store - Detroit, Michigan
http://www.controlled-demolition.com/image...nt/jlhudson.mpg
* Seattle Kingdome
http://www.controlled-demolition.com/image...nt/kingdome.mpg
* Various building demolitions
http://www.implosionworld.com/cinema.htm
More statements from 9-11 witnesses:
Firemen recall "detonations" in South Tower:
fireman2: We made it outside, we made it about a block.
fireman1: We made it at least 2 blocks.
fireman2: 2 blocks.
fireman1: and we started runnin'
fireman2: poch-poch-poch-poch-poch-poch-poch
fireman1: Floor by floor it started poppin' out ..
fireman2: It was as if as if they had detonated, det..
fireman1: yea detonated yea
fireman2: as if they had planned to take down a building,
boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom ...
fireman1: All the way down, I was watchin it, and runnin'
(60 second video clip):
http://911research.com/wtc/evidence/videos...n_firehouse.mpg
Member of the FDNY:
"We were trying to get some of the people out, but then there was secondary explosions and then subsequent collapses."
Video: http://www.911blimp.net/videos/FDNY-explosions.mov
Firefighter:
"As we were getting our gear on and making our way to the stairway, there was a heavy duty explosion."
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/heavy.duty.explosion.wmv
September 12, 2001, New York City, People.com
Louie Cacchioli, 51, is a firefighter assigned to Engine 47 in Harlem.
We were the first ones in the second tower after the plane struck. I was taking firefighters up in the elevator to the 24th floor to get in position to evacuate workers. On the last trip up a bomb went off. We think there was bombs set in the building...
Source:
http://prisonplanet.com/louie_cacchioli.htm
NBC Reporter, Pat Dawson:
[Albert Turi the Chief of Safety for the New York Fire Department] received word of the possibility of a secondary device, that is another bomb going off. He tried to get his men out as quickly as he could, but he said there was another explosion which took place, and then an hour after the first hit, the first crash that took place, he said there was another explosion that took place in one of the towers here, so obviously according to his theory he thinks that there were actually devices that were planted in the building. One of the secondary devices he thinks that took place after the initial impact he thinks may have been on the plane that crashed into one of the towers. The second device, he thinks, he speculates, was probably planted in the building.“
Video clip of Pat Dawson reporting on the comments made by Albert Turi, Chief of Safety for the New York City Fire Department, claiming there were bombs planted in the WTC:
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.reporter.1.wmv
MSNBC Reporter, Rick Sanchez:
"Police have found what they believe to be a suspicious device and they fear that it may lead to another explosion...I spoke with some police officials moments ago, Chris, and they told me they have reason to believe that one of the explosion at the WTC besides the ones made with the planes, may have been caused by a van that was parked on the building that may have had an explosive device in it."
Rick Sanchez video clip:
http://www.terrorize.dk/911/comments/911.w....explosives.wmv
War Corespondent, Jack Kelley:
"Apparently what appears to happen was that at the same time two planes hit the building that there... that the FBI most likely thinks that there was a car or truck packed with explosives underneath the buildings which also exploded at the same time..."
Video clip:
http://www.terrorize.dk/911/comments/911.w....jack.kelley.rm
MSNBC Reporter, Ann Thompson:
"At 10:30 I tried to leave the building, but as I got outside I heard a second explosion and another rumble and more smoke and more dust. I ran inside the building and the chandelier shook and again black smoke filled the air. Within another five minutes we were covered again with more soot and more dust. And then a fire marshal came in and said we had to leave, because if there was a third explosion this building might not last.."
Video: http://www.terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.....explosions.wmv
Street Reporter:
"45 minutes into the taping we were doing, there was an explosion. It was way up where the fire was and the whole building at that point bellied out in flames and everybody ran."
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.reporter.2.wmv
Witness / 9-11 survivor:
"I was about five blocks away when I heard explosions... three thuds and turned around to see the building that we just got out of... tip over and fall in on itself."
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.witness.1.wmv
Witness / 9-11 survivor:
"...and then all of a sudden it started like... it sounded like gunfire... you know, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang and then all of a sudden three big explosions."
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.witness.2.wmv
"When we got to about 50 feet from the South Tower, we heard the most eerie sound that you would ever hear. A high-pitched noise and a popping noise made everyone stop. We all looked up. At the point, it all let go. The way I see it, it had to be the rivets. The building let go. There was an explosion and the whole top leaned toward us and started coming down. I stood there for a second in total awe, and then said, "What the F###?" I honestly thought it was Hollywood."
- Eye-witness Jeff Birnbaum, president of Broadway Electrical Supply Co., New York
http://september11.ceenews.com/ar/electric...trical_supplys/
Terror in the City, September 12 , 2001, Notes from Robert Ivy, FAIA Editor-in-chief
...we felt a rumble like faraway thunder and turned. The impossible was happening. The south tower of the World Trade Center shook, and in what resembled an elemental act, fell to earth in a mighty shout. The entire dissolution, the changeover from solid elements to ash, took only seconds, and it was gone...
http://www.archrecord.com/news/fromTheFiel.../0109terror.asp
An Eye-Witness Account of the World Trade Center Attacks
from Neil deGrasse Tyson
The following is the text from an email Neil deGrasse Tyson sent to his family and friends on 12 September 2001. Neil witnessed the attacks on the twin towers from his apartment only six blocks from the World Trade Center. He is Director of the Hayden Planetarium of the American Museum of Natural History, which is located in New York City. Neil also serves as The Planetary Society's Vice President...
From: Neil deGrasse Tyson
Sent: 10AM, Wednesday, 12 September 2001
Subject: The Horror, The Horror
...4) As more and more and more and more and more emergency vehicles descended on the World Trade Center, I hear a second explosion in WTC 2, then a loud, low-frequency rumble that precipitates the unthinkable -- a collapse of all the floors above the point of explosion. First the top surface, containing the helipad, tips sideways in full view. Then the upper floors fall straight down in a demolition-style implosion, taking all lower floors with it, even those below the point of the explosion...
...6) I decide it's time to get my daughter, who was taken by the parents of a friend of hers to a small office building, six blocks farther from the WTC than my apartment. As I dress for survival: boots, flashlight, wet towels, swimming goggles, bicycle helmet, gloves, I hear another explosion followed by a now all-too familiar rumble that signaled the collapse of WTC 1, the first of the two towers to have been hit. I saw the iconic antenna on this building descend straight down in an implosion twinning the first...
Tuesday, 11 September, 2001, Eyewitnesses tell of horror, BBC News
"...I saw everything from my balcony in Soho. The first plane tried to veer off the tower but slammed straight into it, followed by the second plane," Nadine Keller of New York City wrote in an e-mail to BBC News Online.
"There was smoke everywhere. I heard the bomb and saw both buildings crumble like biscuits," Ms Keller said.
The BBC received more than 1,300 e-mails from witnesses and other concerned readers within the first few hours after the attack.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1537500.stm
9/11 Survivor Describes Multiple Explosions
"There were explosions going off everywhere. I was convinced that there were bombs planted all over the place and someone was sitting at a control panel pushing detonator buttons. I was afraid to go down Church Street toward Broadway, but I had to do it. I ended up on Vesey Street. There was another explosion. And another. I didn't know where to run."
Source: "Teresa Veliz: A Prayer to Die Quickly and Painlessly," in September 11: An Oral History by Dean E. Murphy (Doubleday, 2002), pp 9-15. http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/veliz-bombs.htm
“Amazing, incredible pick your word. For the third time today, it’s reminiscent of those pictures we’ve all seen too much on television before, where a building was deliberately destroyed by well placed dynamite to knock it down.”
- CBS News anchor Dan Rather commenting on the collapse of Building 7, September 11, 2001 at approx 5:20pm EST.
Video: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/w..._demolition.mpg
Excerpt from a radio interview with Indira Singh, ground zero rescue worker and 9/11 whistleblower. She says that she and others were told to move away from Building 7, by persons that she thought were members of the FDNY, because they were "going to have to bring it down":
Radio host Bonnie Falkner: How long did you work as an emergency medical technician and exactly what is it that you were doing (at ground zero)?
Indira Singh: ...when I got there we were setting up triage sites (at ground zero), close, very close to the area. The triage site that I was setting up was behind, well, to the east of Building 7 where Building 7 came down...
...we were setting up triages as close to the pile as possible… so what we were doing was setting up different kinds of stations… IV stations, cardiac stations, wound stations, burn stations ...just trying to have an organized space. What happened with that particular triage site is that pretty soon afternoon, after mid-day on 9/11 we had to evacuate that because they told us Building 7 was coming down...
...I do believe that they brought Building 7 down...
...by noon or one o'clock they told us we had to move from that triage site up to Pace University a little further away because Building 7 was going to come down or being brought down.
Bonnie Falkner: Did they actually use the word "brought" down and who was it that was telling you this?
Indira Singh: The fire department... the fire department and they did use the word "we're going to have to bring it down."
The entire interview can be listened to at the link below. The excerpts from above can be found approximately 10 minutes into the interview.
Guns & Butter Radio interview w/ Indira Singh hosted by Bonnie Falkner - April 27th 2005:
http://tinyurl.com/7dww8
Fire officer Paul Isaac Jr. asserted that 9-11 was an inside job last September 11 at ground zero where mourners and protesters were gathered; “I know 9-11 was an inside job. The police know it’s an inside job; and the firemen know it too”, said Isaac.
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/bombs_inside_wtc.html
Goodafternoon,
My name is Paul Isaac Jr and I am writing to imform those on this board and at other websites that the wingtv article writen in regards to the 05 WTC Memorial is false. There was never any mention about this subject at the memorial. As a matter of fact I did have a discussion with them on there inappropriate behave at the event. They were insulting the attendees and families with there profanity and lack of respect for the event.
Dylan Avery Loosechange 2nd edition shows what actually occured at the event after I read these knuckleheads the RIOT ACT for their behavior. The Proof should be on the tape LC2E in which there were photos taken we my and the NYPD Police detail standing there the whole time. I don't thinkm the NYPD detail standing there would've taken photos for the families and attendees with someone who according to wingtvs' scott magufka make believe story. The false write up was retaliatory on the grounds that I basically ruined their day. The proof is also in the write up by the Village Voice which also shows what actually occured. Even someone who was there with them wearing their Wingtv shirt cooborates that I called them Goverment Agent provocatures but no mention on the subject they spoke. their towards the memorial and the family members in attendance was unacceptable to say the least.
If you really want to see how these people work google; Lisa Guliani calls FBI on Revere Radio Network" and ask yourself if there is a credibility issue regarding FBI imformants making up flase stories? Lisa gulianis' E mail is Wingedpiper@yahoo.com ask her why she wrote such BS? Ask her why she keeps company with the sort of people listed as predicate felons out of Denver CO by the of Tim White. Mr white seems to have some problems he needs to be dealing with first at home before making threats to people who aren't scared in the least.
Again The wingtv article is false.
Thank you
Paul Isaac Jr
Rsqsrvs@yahoo.com
QUOTE
Notice that the peripheral column section has rotated at least +/- 90 degrees as it flew through the air. A purely downward collapse force would favor end-over-end rotation in a horizontal plane. Studying this photo, however, suggests a rotation along a vertical plain. Like the motion of a violently opened door suddenly freed at the last moment from its' hinges
Indeed if the section was ejected as falling debris ripped it away from the structure one would expect some rotation and that it would resemble a , "door suddenly freed at the last moment from its' hinges". At the very least one certainly would not expect it to be ejected by having all the connections sheared simultaneously in such a chaotic situation. On the other hand if it were explosives then a series of purely cutter+ kicker charges could be expected to be simultaneous and send it off the structure with little or no rotation.
Thanks zoctober!
Arthur , so then the section that hit the Banker's Trust was probably less than 100 tons as Foxx surmises, and it went 240 feet rather than 600 feet as Foxx states?
Hmmm, then that makes the energy required to send it into the Banker's Trust much less than even that 1/600 th of the kinetic energy of the falling upper section of the south tower. Basically a glancing blow on that perimeter section!
I do love how Foxx can point to the columns that impaled the Banker's Trust and WFC 3 and yet still claim that this could not have happened to WTC 7 except to the one corner where he cannot deny that it did happen. I also gotta love how he complains that Banker's Trust and WFC 3 did not fall down like WTC 7 when he is aware that those two buildings were
a ) typical post and beam structures through out, unlike the cantilevered WTC 7
b ) did not contain the supplies of fuel that WTC 7 did
c ) did not experience the fires that WTC 7 did.
,,, and he calls me a sophist(a word I seem to have taught him BTW)
"Hmmm, then that makes the energy required to send it into the Banker's Trust much less than even that 1/600 th of the kinetic energy of the falling upper section of the south tower. Basically a glancing blow on that perimeter section!"
Even if this whopper is repeated often enough, and boy you lot have gave it your all, it is far too big a whopper to be believed.
Also, its a pity the evidence shows the tower exploding before this ludicrous scenario could apply eh.
Back to HOT CRUNCHES, bellows and bullshit lads.
Even if this whopper is repeated often enough, and boy you lot have gave it your all, it is far too big a whopper to be believed.
Also, its a pity the evidence shows the tower exploding before this ludicrous scenario could apply eh.
Back to HOT CRUNCHES, bellows and bullshit lads.
QUOTE (brian+Feb 1 2006, 07:12 PM)
"Hmmm, then that makes the energy required to send it into the Banker's Trust much less than even that 1/600 th of the kinetic energy of the falling upper section of the south tower. Basically a glancing blow on that perimeter section!"
Even if this whopper is repeated often enough, and boy you lot have gave it your all, it is far too big a whopper to be believed.
Also, its a pity the evidence shows the tower exploding before this ludicrous scenario could apply eh.
Back to HOT CRUNCHES, bellows and bullshit lads.
Riiight!
So do you have a specific rebuttal or just the above that you pulled from your butt?
Even if this whopper is repeated often enough, and boy you lot have gave it your all, it is far too big a whopper to be believed.
Also, its a pity the evidence shows the tower exploding before this ludicrous scenario could apply eh.
Back to HOT CRUNCHES, bellows and bullshit lads.
Riiight!
So do you have a specific rebuttal or just the above that you pulled from your butt?
QUOTE (yesitdid+Feb 1 2006, 02:58 PM)
Arthur , so then the section that hit the Banker's Trust was probably less than 100 tons as Foxx surmises, and it went 240 feet rather than 600 feet as Foxx states?
Foxx corrected the distance after I pointed out to him that 600 feet was wrong, however he was just repeating that distance from the FEMA report.
While it should have been obvious that it was not that far, I along with a lot of other people had seen that statment a number of times and not "connected the dots". It just so happened that because of Foxx's post I wanted to see where the Banker's Trust building was in relationship to the WTC 2 tower, and then when I pulled up the overhead view of the site the discrepancy in distance caught my eye.
I don't know where Foxx got the 100 ton number from. He DOES correct the (again) incorrect FEMA number that was even MORE outrageous.
I assume he guessed at the weight of a set of columns and thus came up with his "MUST have weighed ~ 30 to 60 tons".
It really didn't take that long to figure the right weight out though. Most everything you need is in the NIST report, all I needed to find was the weight of a cubic meter of structural steel and I used the HIGHEST NUMBER found for that (though the range is pretty small anyway). Then translate the columns and spanderels to cubic measure and poof.
One Three column set with spandrels is a bit less than 7 tons.
The Bankers Trust building appears to have been hit with a section made up of 3 three column sections, or ~ 20 tons. That's 20% of Foxx's estimated weight.
The other building, the WFC 3 building, apparently a bit further away than Bankers, but it was hit by what appears to not even be a complete 3 column section, is the one he estimates at ~30 to 60 tons. In reality its ~ 7 tons. Again, a gross over estimation, but even so his numbers are still much more accurate than the FEMA numbers.
So, no I would not use this to skewer Foxx with. I'm assuming his error(s) were unintentional (we all estimate here). All I expect him to do is agree with my assessment or show where its wrong. If he agrees, then simply use the correct weights in the future.
And this is even after he called me a scumbag for posting pictures that were a tad large. Why he would refer to me as the slang name for a prophylatic for posting a large picture is beyond me. Maybe its a Canadian thing.
Arthur
QUOTE (newton+Feb 1 2006, 03:25 AM)
now, do the columns, not have to buckle to fail? isn't that the story? cause i see a lot of straight pieces. most of the perimeter columns are straight still. like there were knocked out sideways, as opposed to buckled. see 'em? they're lying all over the place. they're even stuck into the sides of buildings.
No that's one of the ideas that Gordon is pushing. There are multiple failure modes, which if you READ the NIST report you would know about.
http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/4158.jpg
This picture shows one of the MORE COMMON failure modes. Look at the columns in the foreground. The BOLTS holding the columns together failed.
Arthur
QUOTE (yesitdid+Feb 1 2006, 10:58 AM)
QUOTE
Notice that the peripheral column section has rotated at least +/- 90 degrees as it flew through the air. A purely downward collapse force would favor end-over-end rotation in a horizontal plane. Studying this photo, however, suggests a rotation along a vertical plain. Like the motion of a violently opened door suddenly freed at the last moment from its' hinges
Indeed if the section was ejected as falling debris ripped it away from the structure one would expect some rotation and that it would resemble a , "door suddenly freed at the last moment from its' hinges". At the very least one certainly would not expect it to be ejected by having all the connections sheared simultaneously in such a chaotic situation. On the other hand if it were explosives then a series of purely cutter+ kicker charges could be expected to be simultaneous and send it off the structure with little or no rotation.
Thanks zoctober!
Arthur , so then the section that hit the Banker's Trust was probably less than 100 tons as Foxx surmises, and it went 240 feet rather than 600 feet as Foxx states?
Hmmm, then that makes the energy required to send it into the Banker's Trust much less than even that 1/600 th of the kinetic energy of the falling upper section of the south tower. Basically a glancing blow on that perimeter section!
I do love how Foxx can point to the columns that impaled the Banker's Trust and WFC 3 and yet still claim that this could not have happened to WTC 7 except to the one corner where he cannot deny that it did happen. I also gotta love how he complains that Banker's Trust and WFC 3 did not fall down like WTC 7 when he is aware that those two buildings were
a ) typical post and beam structures through out, unlike the cantilevered WTC 7
b ) did not contain the supplies of fuel that WTC 7 did
c ) did not experience the fires that WTC 7 did.
,,, and he calls me a sophist(a word I seem to have taught him BTW)
If one assumes the "subject" of explosives, one then might assume the "object" would be the core and its' destruction. This would suggest a blast force eminating from a more centralized point behind the south face. The center of the face is closer to the core than the adjoining (SE) corner sector is. If there was a core blast, its' force and debris would act upon the centeral region of the south face before it extending into the (SE) corner. That millisecond differential defines the door action. The hinge would have been at or close to the SE corner. This speculation, by the way , gives the best line-of sight trajectory into the bank buildings face.
Quote;yesitdid
Indeed if the section was ejected as falling debris ripped it away from the structure one would expect some rotation and that it would resemble a , "door suddenly freed at the last moment from its' hinges".
Define your idea of a door. If your talking about a "garage door" that you pull open from the bottom, that pivots around a horizontal axis, then I might agree. You open a normal (verticle) door by pushing out,not down.
Quote;yesitdid
. At the very least one certainly would not expect it to be ejected by having all the connections sheared simultaneously in such a chaotic situation.
Who is assumming that? What is the point of this statement? Oh thats right, the point is to have no point. Are you trying to be schneibster's understudy or what? Your welcome, yesitdid!
Here's a well documented article debunking the popular mechanics piece of propaganda:
Popular Mechanics Attacks Its "9/11 LIES" Straw Man
Excerpt :
It ?
Do you mean the historical fraud that was perpetuated on 9-11, that has inevitably led to the American Government presenting information what they construe to be of historical importance without thinking of whether or not it is contextually correct or logical for that matter....
It's also known as "making it up as you go along"
It ?
Do you mean the historical fraud that was perpetuated on 9-11, that has inevitably led to the American Government presenting information what they construe to be of historical importance without thinking of whether or not it is contextually correct or logical for that matter....
It's also known as "making it up as you go along"
'This sense of immediacy and truthfulness which is the result of watching a steady stream of images interpreted with authority is what George Gerbner warned about as'instant history' - that is, history constructed by technology which 'concentrates power, shrinks time, and speeds action to the point where reporting, making and writing history merge'
DISSERTATION FOR DEGREE (1999)
http://plectic.com/diss.pdf
Yes, you know, the ficticious historical fraud you are using to cover up the real historical fraud. Like inventing WMD evidence that doesn't exist. It goes with inventing 9/11 conspiracy evidence that doesn't exist. I can see Roves theme in your replies.
Popular Mechanics Attacks Its "9/11 LIES" Straw Man
Excerpt :
QUOTE
Intercepts Not Routine
CLAIM [from the 9/11 truth movement]: It has been standard operating procedures for decades to immediately intercept off-course planes that do not respond to communications from air traffic controllers. ...
PM dismisses this "claim," excerpted from OilEmpire.us with the following sweeping 'fact':
"In the decade before 9/11 NORAD intercepted only one civilian plane over North America: golfer Payne Stewart's Learjet, in October 1999."
How's that for a blatant lie?
CLAIM [from the 9/11 truth movement]: It has been standard operating procedures for decades to immediately intercept off-course planes that do not respond to communications from air traffic controllers. ...
PM dismisses this "claim," excerpted from OilEmpire.us with the following sweeping 'fact':
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Intercepts Not Routine CLAIM [from the 9/11 truth movement]: It has been standard operating procedures for decades to immediately intercept off-course planes that do not respond to communications from air traffic controllers. ... PM dismisses this "claim," excerpted from OilEmpire.us with the following sweeping 'fact': In the decade before 9/11 NORAD intercepted only one civilian plane over North America: golfer Payne Stewart's Learjet, in October 1999. This bold assertion flies in the face of an Associated Press report of scramble frequencies that quotes the same Maj. Douglas Martin that is one of PM's cited experts, Maj. Douglas Martin, [3] QUOTE From Sept. 11 to June, NORAD scrambled jets or diverted combat air patrols 462 times, almost seven times as often as the 67 scrambles from September 2000 to June 2001, Martin said. |
"In the decade before 9/11 NORAD intercepted only one civilian plane over North America: golfer Payne Stewart's Learjet, in October 1999."
How's that for a blatant lie?
QUOTE (frater plecticus+Feb 1 2006, 05:50 PM)
QUOTE
I can smell your synaptic endings frying now. I know it's a it much for you but if you take the aluminum foil off that pea sized skull and put on the thinking cap you might comprehend it.
It ?
Do you mean the historical fraud that was perpetuated on 9-11, that has inevitably led to the American Government presenting information what they construe to be of historical importance without thinking of whether or not it is contextually correct or logical for that matter....
It's also known as "making it up as you go along"
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| I can smell your synaptic endings frying now. I know it's a it much for you but if you take the aluminum foil off that pea sized skull and put on the thinking cap you might comprehend it. |
It ?
Do you mean the historical fraud that was perpetuated on 9-11, that has inevitably led to the American Government presenting information what they construe to be of historical importance without thinking of whether or not it is contextually correct or logical for that matter....
It's also known as "making it up as you go along"
'This sense of immediacy and truthfulness which is the result of watching a steady stream of images interpreted with authority is what George Gerbner warned about as'instant history' - that is, history constructed by technology which 'concentrates power, shrinks time, and speeds action to the point where reporting, making and writing history merge'
DISSERTATION FOR DEGREE (1999)
http://plectic.com/diss.pdf
Yes, you know, the ficticious historical fraud you are using to cover up the real historical fraud. Like inventing WMD evidence that doesn't exist. It goes with inventing 9/11 conspiracy evidence that doesn't exist. I can see Roves theme in your replies.
QUOTE (Guest_Jeff+Feb 1 2006, 04:41 PM)
Here's a well documented article debunking the popular mechanics piece of propaganda:
Popular Mechanics Attacks Its "9/11 LIES" Straw Man
Excerpt :
Popular Mechanics Attacks Its "9/11 LIES" Straw Man
Excerpt :
QUOTE
Intercepts Not Routine
CLAIM [from the 9/11 truth movement]: It has been standard operating procedures for decades to immediately intercept off-course planes that do not respond to communications from air traffic controllers. ...
PM dismisses this "claim," excerpted from OilEmpire.us with the following sweeping 'fact':
"In the decade before 9/11 NORAD intercepted only one civilian plane over North America: golfer Payne Stewart's Learjet, in October 1999."
How's that for a blatant lie?
Well because 67 scrambles does NOT equate to 67 intercepts.
It turns out that most scrambles don't even involve an intercept, the reasons are many, but failure to ever find the craft is just one of the many reasons why no intercept is ever made. Others being the unidentified plane LANDS, CRASHES, IDENTIFIES ITSELF, etc.
Secondly, and most importantly, the second sentence has TWO QUALIFIERS, OVER NORTH AMERICA and CIVILIAN.
The FIRST statement is about NORAD and doesn't limit it to OVER NORTH AMERICA or Civilian aircraft.
So here's the drill. Find actual evidence that DISPUTES the ONE intercept story.
Secondly, What's the point anyway? It took OVER AN HOUR to intercept Payne Stewart's plane. Which shows the BASIC PREMISE of the 9/11 truth movements claim to be false.
Third, How many YEARS (prior to 2001) had it been since the LAST hijacking?
Fourth, What is NORAD's role in a hijacking? Hint, there IS NOTHING in pre 9/11 world that would allow NORAD to shoot down a US commercial airliner.
Arthur.
Do you mean the historical fraud that was perpetuated on 9-11, that has inevitably led to the American Government presenting information what they construe to be of historical importance without thinking of whether or not it is contextually correct or logical for that matter....
Except you have NO EVIDENCE that it WAS a historical fraud.
They should take back your degree, you obviously lack logical reasoning ability.
Arthur
He'll have to prove it's his then prove he got a degree with it...
Do you mean the historical fraud that was perpetuated on 9-11, that has inevitably led to the American Government presenting information what they construe to be of historical importance without thinking of whether or not it is contextually correct or logical for that matter....
Except you have NO EVIDENCE that it WAS a historical fraud.
They should take back your degree, you obviously lack logical reasoning ability.
Arthur
He'll have to prove it's his then prove he got a degree with it...
Well he's REAL proud of that puppy.
This must be the forth or fifth time he's posted a link to it.
Arthur
CLAIM [from the 9/11 truth movement]: It has been standard operating procedures for decades to immediately intercept off-course planes that do not respond to communications from air traffic controllers. ...
PM dismisses this "claim," excerpted from OilEmpire.us with the following sweeping 'fact':
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Intercepts Not Routine CLAIM [from the 9/11 truth movement]: It has been standard operating procedures for decades to immediately intercept off-course planes that do not respond to communications from air traffic controllers. ... PM dismisses this "claim," excerpted from OilEmpire.us with the following sweeping 'fact': In the decade before 9/11 NORAD intercepted only one civilian plane over North America: golfer Payne Stewart's Learjet, in October 1999. This bold assertion flies in the face of an Associated Press report of scramble frequencies that quotes the same Maj. Douglas Martin that is one of PM's cited experts, Maj. Douglas Martin, [3] QUOTE From Sept. 11 to June, NORAD scrambled jets or diverted combat air patrols 462 times, almost seven times as often as the 67 scrambles from September 2000 to June 2001, Martin said. |
"In the decade before 9/11 NORAD intercepted only one civilian plane over North America: golfer Payne Stewart's Learjet, in October 1999."
How's that for a blatant lie?
Well because 67 scrambles does NOT equate to 67 intercepts.
It turns out that most scrambles don't even involve an intercept, the reasons are many, but failure to ever find the craft is just one of the many reasons why no intercept is ever made. Others being the unidentified plane LANDS, CRASHES, IDENTIFIES ITSELF, etc.
Secondly, and most importantly, the second sentence has TWO QUALIFIERS, OVER NORTH AMERICA and CIVILIAN.
The FIRST statement is about NORAD and doesn't limit it to OVER NORTH AMERICA or Civilian aircraft.
So here's the drill. Find actual evidence that DISPUTES the ONE intercept story.
Secondly, What's the point anyway? It took OVER AN HOUR to intercept Payne Stewart's plane. Which shows the BASIC PREMISE of the 9/11 truth movements claim to be false.
Third, How many YEARS (prior to 2001) had it been since the LAST hijacking?
Fourth, What is NORAD's role in a hijacking? Hint, there IS NOTHING in pre 9/11 world that would allow NORAD to shoot down a US commercial airliner.
Arthur.
QUOTE (adoucette+Feb 1 2006, 05:56 PM)
QUOTE (frater plecticus+Feb 1 2006, 01:50 PM)
Do you mean the historical fraud that was perpetuated on 9-11, that has inevitably led to the American Government presenting information what they construe to be of historical importance without thinking of whether or not it is contextually correct or logical for that matter....
Except you have NO EVIDENCE that it WAS a historical fraud.
They should take back your degree, you obviously lack logical reasoning ability.
Arthur
He'll have to prove it's his then prove he got a degree with it...
QUOTE (frater plecticus+Feb 1 2006, 06:03 PM)
whooa. you gonna scratch my eyes out too ???
You sound excited about it. Would you like someone to?
You sound excited about it. Would you like someone to?
QUOTE (Common Sense+Feb 1 2006, 04:57 PM)
QUOTE (adoucette+Feb 1 2006, 05:56 PM)
QUOTE (frater plecticus+Feb 1 2006, 01:50 PM)
Do you mean the historical fraud that was perpetuated on 9-11, that has inevitably led to the American Government presenting information what they construe to be of historical importance without thinking of whether or not it is contextually correct or logical for that matter....
Except you have NO EVIDENCE that it WAS a historical fraud.
They should take back your degree, you obviously lack logical reasoning ability.
Arthur
He'll have to prove it's his then prove he got a degree with it...
Well he's REAL proud of that puppy.
This must be the forth or fifth time he's posted a link to it.
Arthur
QUOTE (Guest_Sentinel+Feb 1 2006, 06:37 PM)
QUOTE (Guest+Oct 26 2005, 11:16 PM)
LOL
I suppose that the 9-11 conspiracy theorists paid off all of these witnesses to make these statements too:
From THE NEW YORK TIMES:
Assistant Fire Commissioner: "I thought . . . before . . . No. 2 came down, that I saw low-level flashes. . . . I . . . saw a flash flash flash . . . [at] the lower level of the building. You know like when they . . . blow up a building. . . ?”
Source:
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyreg...ory_Stephen.txt
NYC firefighter: “It actually gave at a lower floor, not the floor where the plane hit. . . [W]e 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.”
Source:
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyreg...chia_Edward.txt
From The San Francisco Chronicle / SFGate.com:
Captain of Emergency Medical Services: "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 ... and with each popping sound it was initially an orange and then red flash came out of the building and then it would just go all around the building on both sides ... as far as could see these popping sounds and the explosions were getting bigger going both up and down and then all around the building"
Source:
http://sfgate.com/gate/pictures/2005/09/10...rin_deshore.pdf
Related articles:
Another 9/11 Smoking Gun
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2005/...moking-gun.html
Below the Belt
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2005/10/below-belt.html
Compare these building demolition videos to the statements above:
* J.L. Hudson Department Store - Detroit, Michigan
http://www.controlled-demolition.com/image...nt/jlhudson.mpg
* Seattle Kingdome
http://www.controlled-demolition.com/image...nt/kingdome.mpg
* Various building demolitions
http://www.implosionworld.com/cinema.htm
More statements from 9-11 witnesses:
Firemen recall "detonations" in South Tower:
fireman2: We made it outside, we made it about a block.
fireman1: We made it at least 2 blocks.
fireman2: 2 blocks.
fireman1: and we started runnin'
fireman2: poch-poch-poch-poch-poch-poch-poch
fireman1: Floor by floor it started poppin' out ..
fireman2: It was as if as if they had detonated, det..
fireman1: yea detonated yea
fireman2: as if they had planned to take down a building,
boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom ...
fireman1: All the way down, I was watchin it, and runnin'
(60 second video clip):
http://911research.com/wtc/evidence/videos...n_firehouse.mpg
Member of the FDNY:
"We were trying to get some of the people out, but then there was secondary explosions and then subsequent collapses."
Video: http://www.911blimp.net/videos/FDNY-explosions.mov
Firefighter:
"As we were getting our gear on and making our way to the stairway, there was a heavy duty explosion."
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/heavy.duty.explosion.wmv
September 12, 2001, New York City, People.com
Louie Cacchioli, 51, is a firefighter assigned to Engine 47 in Harlem.
We were the first ones in the second tower after the plane struck. I was taking firefighters up in the elevator to the 24th floor to get in position to evacuate workers. On the last trip up a bomb went off. We think there was bombs set in the building...
Source:
http://prisonplanet.com/louie_cacchioli.htm
NBC Reporter, Pat Dawson:
[Albert Turi the Chief of Safety for the New York Fire Department] received word of the possibility of a secondary device, that is another bomb going off. He tried to get his men out as quickly as he could, but he said there was another explosion which took place, and then an hour after the first hit, the first crash that took place, he said there was another explosion that took place in one of the towers here, so obviously according to his theory he thinks that there were actually devices that were planted in the building. One of the secondary devices he thinks that took place after the initial impact he thinks may have been on the plane that crashed into one of the towers. The second device, he thinks, he speculates, was probably planted in the building.“
Video clip of Pat Dawson reporting on the comments made by Albert Turi, Chief of Safety for the New York City Fire Department, claiming there were bombs planted in the WTC:
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.reporter.1.wmv
MSNBC Reporter, Rick Sanchez:
"Police have found what they believe to be a suspicious device and they fear that it may lead to another explosion...I spoke with some police officials moments ago, Chris, and they told me they have reason to believe that one of the explosion at the WTC besides the ones made with the planes, may have been caused by a van that was parked on the building that may have had an explosive device in it."
Rick Sanchez video clip:
http://www.terrorize.dk/911/comments/911.w....explosives.wmv
War Corespondent, Jack Kelley:
"Apparently what appears to happen was that at the same time two planes hit the building that there... that the FBI most likely thinks that there was a car or truck packed with explosives underneath the buildings which also exploded at the same time..."
Video clip:
http://www.terrorize.dk/911/comments/911.w....jack.kelley.rm
MSNBC Reporter, Ann Thompson:
"At 10:30 I tried to leave the building, but as I got outside I heard a second explosion and another rumble and more smoke and more dust. I ran inside the building and the chandelier shook and again black smoke filled the air. Within another five minutes we were covered again with more soot and more dust. And then a fire marshal came in and said we had to leave, because if there was a third explosion this building might not last.."
Video: http://www.terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.....explosions.wmv
Street Reporter:
"45 minutes into the taping we were doing, there was an explosion. It was way up where the fire was and the whole building at that point bellied out in flames and everybody ran."
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.reporter.2.wmv
Witness / 9-11 survivor:
"I was about five blocks away when I heard explosions... three thuds and turned around to see the building that we just got out of... tip over and fall in on itself."
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.witness.1.wmv
Witness / 9-11 survivor:
"...and then all of a sudden it started like... it sounded like gunfire... you know, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang and then all of a sudden three big explosions."
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.witness.2.wmv
"When we got to about 50 feet from the South Tower, we heard the most eerie sound that you would ever hear. A high-pitched noise and a popping noise made everyone stop. We all looked up. At the point, it all let go. The way I see it, it had to be the rivets. The building let go. There was an explosion and the whole top leaned toward us and started coming down. I stood there for a second in total awe, and then said, "What the F###?" I honestly thought it was Hollywood."
- Eye-witness Jeff Birnbaum, president of Broadway Electrical Supply Co., New York
http://september11.ceenews.com/ar/electric...trical_supplys/
Terror in the City, September 12 , 2001, Notes from Robert Ivy, FAIA Editor-in-chief
...we felt a rumble like faraway thunder and turned. The impossible was happening. The south tower of the World Trade Center shook, and in what resembled an elemental act, fell to earth in a mighty shout. The entire dissolution, the changeover from solid elements to ash, took only seconds, and it was gone...
http://www.archrecord.com/news/fromTheFiel.../0109terror.asp
An Eye-Witness Account of the World Trade Center Attacks
from Neil deGrasse Tyson
The following is the text from an email Neil deGrasse Tyson sent to his family and friends on 12 September 2001. Neil witnessed the attacks on the twin towers from his apartment only six blocks from the World Trade Center. He is Director of the Hayden Planetarium of the American Museum of Natural History, which is located in New York City. Neil also serves as The Planetary Society's Vice President...
From: Neil deGrasse Tyson
Sent: 10AM, Wednesday, 12 September 2001
Subject: The Horror, The Horror
...4) As more and more and more and more and more emergency vehicles descended on the World Trade Center, I hear a second explosion in WTC 2, then a loud, low-frequency rumble that precipitates the unthinkable -- a collapse of all the floors above the point of explosion. First the top surface, containing the helipad, tips sideways in full view. Then the upper floors fall straight down in a demolition-style implosion, taking all lower floors with it, even those below the point of the explosion...
...6) I decide it's time to get my daughter, who was taken by the parents of a friend of hers to a small office building, six blocks farther from the WTC than my apartment. As I dress for survival: boots, flashlight, wet towels, swimming goggles, bicycle helmet, gloves, I hear another explosion followed by a now all-too familiar rumble that signaled the collapse of WTC 1, the first of the two towers to have been hit. I saw the iconic antenna on this building descend straight down in an implosion twinning the first...
Tuesday, 11 September, 2001, Eyewitnesses tell of horror, BBC News
"...I saw everything from my balcony in Soho. The first plane tried to veer off the tower but slammed straight into it, followed by the second plane," Nadine Keller of New York City wrote in an e-mail to BBC News Online.
"There was smoke everywhere. I heard the bomb and saw both buildings crumble like biscuits," Ms Keller said.
The BBC received more than 1,300 e-mails from witnesses and other concerned readers within the first few hours after the attack.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1537500.stm
9/11 Survivor Describes Multiple Explosions
"There were explosions going off everywhere. I was convinced that there were bombs planted all over the place and someone was sitting at a control panel pushing detonator buttons. I was afraid to go down Church Street toward Broadway, but I had to do it. I ended up on Vesey Street. There was another explosion. And another. I didn't know where to run."
Source: "Teresa Veliz: A Prayer to Die Quickly and Painlessly," in September 11: An Oral History by Dean E. Murphy (Doubleday, 2002), pp 9-15. http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/veliz-bombs.htm
“Amazing, incredible pick your word. For the third time today, it’s reminiscent of those pictures we’ve all seen too much on television before, where a building was deliberately destroyed by well placed dynamite to knock it down.”
- CBS News anchor Dan Rather commenting on the collapse of Building 7, September 11, 2001 at approx 5:20pm EST.
Video: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/w..._demolition.mpg
Excerpt from a radio interview with Indira Singh, ground zero rescue worker and 9/11 whistleblower. She says that she and others were told to move away from Building 7, by persons that she thought were members of the FDNY, because they were "going to have to bring it down":
Radio host Bonnie Falkner: How long did you work as an emergency medical technician and exactly what is it that you were doing (at ground zero)?
Indira Singh: ...when I got there we were setting up triage sites (at ground zero), close, very close to the area. The triage site that I was setting up was behind, well, to the east of Building 7 where Building 7 came down...
...we were setting up triages as close to the pile as possible… so what we were doing was setting up different kinds of stations… IV stations, cardiac stations, wound stations, burn stations ...just trying to have an organized space. What happened with that particular triage site is that pretty soon afternoon, after mid-day on 9/11 we had to evacuate that because they told us Building 7 was coming down...
...I do believe that they brought Building 7 down...
...by noon or one o'clock they told us we had to move from that triage site up to Pace University a little further away because Building 7 was going to come down or being brought down.
Bonnie Falkner: Did they actually use the word "brought" down and who was it that was telling you this?
Indira Singh: The fire department... the fire department and they did use the word "we're going to have to bring it down."
The entire interview can be listened to at the link below. The excerpts from above can be found approximately 10 minutes into the interview.
Guns & Butter Radio interview w/ Indira Singh hosted by Bonnie Falkner - April 27th 2005:
http://tinyurl.com/7dww8
Fire officer Paul Isaac Jr. asserted that 9-11 was an inside job last September 11 at ground zero where mourners and protesters were gathered; “I know 9-11 was an inside job. The police know it’s an inside job; and the firemen know it too”, said Isaac.
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/bombs_inside_wtc.html
Goodafternoon,
My name is Paul Isaac Jr and I am writing to imform those on this board and at other websites that the wingtv article writen in regards to the 05 WTC Memorial is false. There was never any mention about this subject at the memorial. As a matter of fact I did have a discussion with them on there inappropriate behave at the event. They were insulting the attendees and families with there profanity and lack of respect for the event.
Dylan Avery Loosechange 2nd edition shows what actually occured at the event after I read these knuckleheads the RIOT ACT for their behavior. The Proof should be on the tape LC2E in which there were photos taken we my and the NYPD Police detail standing there the whole time. I don't thinkm the NYPD detail standing there would've taken photos for the families and attendees with someone who according to wingtvs' scott magufka make believe story. The false write up was retaliatory on the grounds that I basically ruined their day. The proof is also in the write up by the Village Voice which also shows what actually occured. Even someone who was there with them wearing their Wingtv shirt cooborates that I called them Goverment Agent provocatures but no mention on the subject they spoke. their towards the memorial and the family members in attendance was unacceptable to say the least.
If you really want to see how these people work google; Lisa Guliani calls FBI on Revere Radio Network" and ask yourself if there is a credibility issue regarding FBI imformants making up flase stories? Lisa gulianis' E mail is Wingedpiper@yahoo.com ask her why she wrote such BS? Ask her why she keeps company with the sort of people listed as predicate felons out of Denver CO by the of Tim White. Mr white seems to have some problems he needs to be dealing with first at home before making threats to people who aren't scared in the least.
Again The wingtv article is false.
Thank you
Paul Isaac Jr
Rsqsrvs@yahoo.com
I feel so bad for people like Paul who have to chase down these lies. (Assuming it is Paul. I like the fact that he left his e-mail which lends credibility)
I hope you guys are happy hurting the very people you say you want to help with these lies. Enough involving the fire, police and ambulance people in this lunacy. Make your case without dragging these people in. They went through enough human cruelty to last a life time. They don't need you to pile on top of it.
Indeed if the section was ejected as falling debris ripped it away from the structure one would expect some rotation and that it would resemble a , "door suddenly freed at the last moment from its' hinges". At the very least one certainly would not expect it to be ejected by having all the connections sheared simultaneously in such a chaotic situation. On the other hand if it were explosives then a series of purely cutter+ kicker charges could be expected to be simultaneous and send it off the structure with little or no rotation.
Thanks zoctober!
Arthur , so then the section that hit the Banker's Trust was probably less than 100 tons as Foxx surmises, and it went 240 feet rather than 600 feet as Foxx states?
Hmmm, then that makes the energy required to send it into the Banker's Trust much less than even that 1/600 th of the kinetic energy of the falling upper section of the south tower. Basically a glancing blow on that perimeter section!
I do love how Foxx can point to the columns that impaled the Banker's Trust and WFC 3 and yet still claim that this could not have happened to WTC 7 except to the one corner where he cannot deny that it did happen. I also gotta love how he complains that Banker's Trust and WFC 3 did not fall down like WTC 7 when he is aware that those two buildings were
a ) typical post and beam structures through out, unlike the cantilevered WTC 7
b ) did not contain the supplies of fuel that WTC 7 did
c ) did not experience the fires that WTC 7 did.
,,, and he calls me a sophist(a word I seem to have taught him BTW)
If one assumes the "subject" of explosives, one then might assume the "object" would be the core and its' destruction. This would suggest a blast force eminating from a more centralized point behind the south face. The center of the face is closer to the core than the adjoining (SE) corner sector is. If there was a core blast, its' force and debris would act upon the centeral region of the south face before it extending into the (SE) corner. That millisecond differential defines the door action. The hinge would have been at or close to the SE corner. This speculation, by the way , gives the best line-of sight trajectory into the bank buildings face.
Quote;yesitdid
Indeed if the section was ejected as falling debris ripped it away from the structure one would expect some rotation and that it would resemble a , "door suddenly freed at the last moment from its' hinges".
Define your idea of a door. If your talking about a "garage door" that you pull open from the bottom, that pivots around a horizontal axis, then I might agree. You open a normal (verticle) door by pushing out,not down.
Quote;yesitdid
. At the very least one certainly would not expect it to be ejected by having all the connections sheared simultaneously in such a chaotic situation.
Who is assumming that? What is the point of this statement? Oh thats right, the point is to have no point. Are you trying to be schneibster's understudy or what? Your welcome, yesitdid!
On the contrary , video of the initial collapse shows a quick unzipping of the perimeter columns as the upper section falls, not simultaneous failure. Your 'garage door' analogy would assume that the connections along one floor all fail simultaneously. That simply will not happen. Might there have been rotation both in the vertical and the horizontal? Yes, in fact it could be fully expected.
In an object this large and heavy that rotation will likely be quite slow.
Now there is the question of how this object did hit the BT bldg.
All that need have happened is a corner of the section hit the bldg first, this will rotate it into the bldg the fashion of which will be dictated as much by the construction of the Banker's Trust building as by the rotation of the falling section.
I'm afraid Physorgforums was doomed to be a laughing stock by page 6 of this thread.
You mean right about when you, er, Schnozz first showed up? Agreed.
I suppose that the 9-11 conspiracy theorists paid off all of these witnesses to make these statements too:
From THE NEW YORK TIMES:
Assistant Fire Commissioner: "I thought . . . before . . . No. 2 came down, that I saw low-level flashes. . . . I . . . saw a flash flash flash . . . [at] the lower level of the building. You know like when they . . . blow up a building. . . ?”
Source:
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyreg...ory_Stephen.txt
NYC firefighter: “It actually gave at a lower floor, not the floor where the plane hit. . . [W]e 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.”
Source:
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyreg...chia_Edward.txt
From The San Francisco Chronicle / SFGate.com:
Captain of Emergency Medical Services: "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 ... and with each popping sound it was initially an orange and then red flash came out of the building and then it would just go all around the building on both sides ... as far as could see these popping sounds and the explosions were getting bigger going both up and down and then all around the building"
Source:
http://sfgate.com/gate/pictures/2005/09/10...rin_deshore.pdf
Related articles:
Another 9/11 Smoking Gun
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2005/...moking-gun.html
Below the Belt
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2005/10/below-belt.html
Compare these building demolition videos to the statements above:
* J.L. Hudson Department Store - Detroit, Michigan
http://www.controlled-demolition.com/image...nt/jlhudson.mpg
* Seattle Kingdome
http://www.controlled-demolition.com/image...nt/kingdome.mpg
* Various building demolitions
http://www.implosionworld.com/cinema.htm
More statements from 9-11 witnesses:
Firemen recall "detonations" in South Tower:
fireman2: We made it outside, we made it about a block.
fireman1: We made it at least 2 blocks.
fireman2: 2 blocks.
fireman1: and we started runnin'
fireman2: poch-poch-poch-poch-poch-poch-poch
fireman1: Floor by floor it started poppin' out ..
fireman2: It was as if as if they had detonated, det..
fireman1: yea detonated yea
fireman2: as if they had planned to take down a building,
boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom ...
fireman1: All the way down, I was watchin it, and runnin'
(60 second video clip):
http://911research.com/wtc/evidence/videos...n_firehouse.mpg
Member of the FDNY:
"We were trying to get some of the people out, but then there was secondary explosions and then subsequent collapses."
Video: http://www.911blimp.net/videos/FDNY-explosions.mov
Firefighter:
"As we were getting our gear on and making our way to the stairway, there was a heavy duty explosion."
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/heavy.duty.explosion.wmv
September 12, 2001, New York City, People.com
Louie Cacchioli, 51, is a firefighter assigned to Engine 47 in Harlem.
We were the first ones in the second tower after the plane struck. I was taking firefighters up in the elevator to the 24th floor to get in position to evacuate workers. On the last trip up a bomb went off. We think there was bombs set in the building...
Source:
http://prisonplanet.com/louie_cacchioli.htm
NBC Reporter, Pat Dawson:
[Albert Turi the Chief of Safety for the New York Fire Department] received word of the possibility of a secondary device, that is another bomb going off. He tried to get his men out as quickly as he could, but he said there was another explosion which took place, and then an hour after the first hit, the first crash that took place, he said there was another explosion that took place in one of the towers here, so obviously according to his theory he thinks that there were actually devices that were planted in the building. One of the secondary devices he thinks that took place after the initial impact he thinks may have been on the plane that crashed into one of the towers. The second device, he thinks, he speculates, was probably planted in the building.“
Video clip of Pat Dawson reporting on the comments made by Albert Turi, Chief of Safety for the New York City Fire Department, claiming there were bombs planted in the WTC:
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.reporter.1.wmv
MSNBC Reporter, Rick Sanchez:
"Police have found what they believe to be a suspicious device and they fear that it may lead to another explosion...I spoke with some police officials moments ago, Chris, and they told me they have reason to believe that one of the explosion at the WTC besides the ones made with the planes, may have been caused by a van that was parked on the building that may have had an explosive device in it."
Rick Sanchez video clip:
http://www.terrorize.dk/911/comments/911.w....explosives.wmv
War Corespondent, Jack Kelley:
"Apparently what appears to happen was that at the same time two planes hit the building that there... that the FBI most likely thinks that there was a car or truck packed with explosives underneath the buildings which also exploded at the same time..."
Video clip:
http://www.terrorize.dk/911/comments/911.w....jack.kelley.rm
MSNBC Reporter, Ann Thompson:
"At 10:30 I tried to leave the building, but as I got outside I heard a second explosion and another rumble and more smoke and more dust. I ran inside the building and the chandelier shook and again black smoke filled the air. Within another five minutes we were covered again with more soot and more dust. And then a fire marshal came in and said we had to leave, because if there was a third explosion this building might not last.."
Video: http://www.terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.....explosions.wmv
Street Reporter:
"45 minutes into the taping we were doing, there was an explosion. It was way up where the fire was and the whole building at that point bellied out in flames and everybody ran."
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.reporter.2.wmv
Witness / 9-11 survivor:
"I was about five blocks away when I heard explosions... three thuds and turned around to see the building that we just got out of... tip over and fall in on itself."
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.witness.1.wmv
Witness / 9-11 survivor:
"...and then all of a sudden it started like... it sounded like gunfire... you know, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang and then all of a sudden three big explosions."
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.witness.2.wmv
"When we got to about 50 feet from the South Tower, we heard the most eerie sound that you would ever hear. A high-pitched noise and a popping noise made everyone stop. We all looked up. At the point, it all let go. The way I see it, it had to be the rivets. The building let go. There was an explosion and the whole top leaned toward us and started coming down. I stood there for a second in total awe, and then said, "What the F###?" I honestly thought it was Hollywood."
- Eye-witness Jeff Birnbaum, president of Broadway Electrical Supply Co., New York
http://september11.ceenews.com/ar/electric...trical_supplys/
Terror in the City, September 12 , 2001, Notes from Robert Ivy, FAIA Editor-in-chief
...we felt a rumble like faraway thunder and turned. The impossible was happening. The south tower of the World Trade Center shook, and in what resembled an elemental act, fell to earth in a mighty shout. The entire dissolution, the changeover from solid elements to ash, took only seconds, and it was gone...
http://www.archrecord.com/news/fromTheFiel.../0109terror.asp
An Eye-Witness Account of the World Trade Center Attacks
from Neil deGrasse Tyson
The following is the text from an email Neil deGrasse Tyson sent to his family and friends on 12 September 2001. Neil witnessed the attacks on the twin towers from his apartment only six blocks from the World Trade Center. He is Director of the Hayden Planetarium of the American Museum of Natural History, which is located in New York City. Neil also serves as The Planetary Society's Vice President...
From: Neil deGrasse Tyson
Sent: 10AM, Wednesday, 12 September 2001
Subject: The Horror, The Horror
...4) As more and more and more and more and more emergency vehicles descended on the World Trade Center, I hear a second explosion in WTC 2, then a loud, low-frequency rumble that precipitates the unthinkable -- a collapse of all the floors above the point of explosion. First the top surface, containing the helipad, tips sideways in full view. Then the upper floors fall straight down in a demolition-style implosion, taking all lower floors with it, even those below the point of the explosion...
...6) I decide it's time to get my daughter, who was taken by the parents of a friend of hers to a small office building, six blocks farther from the WTC than my apartment. As I dress for survival: boots, flashlight, wet towels, swimming goggles, bicycle helmet, gloves, I hear another explosion followed by a now all-too familiar rumble that signaled the collapse of WTC 1, the first of the two towers to have been hit. I saw the iconic antenna on this building descend straight down in an implosion twinning the first...
Tuesday, 11 September, 2001, Eyewitnesses tell of horror, BBC News
"...I saw everything from my balcony in Soho. The first plane tried to veer off the tower but slammed straight into it, followed by the second plane," Nadine Keller of New York City wrote in an e-mail to BBC News Online.
"There was smoke everywhere. I heard the bomb and saw both buildings crumble like biscuits," Ms Keller said.
The BBC received more than 1,300 e-mails from witnesses and other concerned readers within the first few hours after the attack.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1537500.stm
9/11 Survivor Describes Multiple Explosions
"There were explosions going off everywhere. I was convinced that there were bombs planted all over the place and someone was sitting at a control panel pushing detonator buttons. I was afraid to go down Church Street toward Broadway, but I had to do it. I ended up on Vesey Street. There was another explosion. And another. I didn't know where to run."
Source: "Teresa Veliz: A Prayer to Die Quickly and Painlessly," in September 11: An Oral History by Dean E. Murphy (Doubleday, 2002), pp 9-15. http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/veliz-bombs.htm
“Amazing, incredible pick your word. For the third time today, it’s reminiscent of those pictures we’ve all seen too much on television before, where a building was deliberately destroyed by well placed dynamite to knock it down.”
- CBS News anchor Dan Rather commenting on the collapse of Building 7, September 11, 2001 at approx 5:20pm EST.
Video: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/w..._demolition.mpg
Excerpt from a radio interview with Indira Singh, ground zero rescue worker and 9/11 whistleblower. She says that she and others were told to move away from Building 7, by persons that she thought were members of the FDNY, because they were "going to have to bring it down":
Radio host Bonnie Falkner: How long did you work as an emergency medical technician and exactly what is it that you were doing (at ground zero)?
Indira Singh: ...when I got there we were setting up triage sites (at ground zero), close, very close to the area. The triage site that I was setting up was behind, well, to the east of Building 7 where Building 7 came down...
...we were setting up triages as close to the pile as possible… so what we were doing was setting up different kinds of stations… IV stations, cardiac stations, wound stations, burn stations ...just trying to have an organized space. What happened with that particular triage site is that pretty soon afternoon, after mid-day on 9/11 we had to evacuate that because they told us Building 7 was coming down...
...I do believe that they brought Building 7 down...
...by noon or one o'clock they told us we had to move from that triage site up to Pace University a little further away because Building 7 was going to come down or being brought down.
Bonnie Falkner: Did they actually use the word "brought" down and who was it that was telling you this?
Indira Singh: The fire department... the fire department and they did use the word "we're going to have to bring it down."
The entire interview can be listened to at the link below. The excerpts from above can be found approximately 10 minutes into the interview.
Guns & Butter Radio interview w/ Indira Singh hosted by Bonnie Falkner - April 27th 2005:
http://tinyurl.com/7dww8
Fire officer Paul Isaac Jr. asserted that 9-11 was an inside job last September 11 at ground zero where mourners and protesters were gathered; “I know 9-11 was an inside job. The police know it’s an inside job; and the firemen know it too”, said Isaac.
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/bombs_inside_wtc.html
Goodafternoon,
My name is Paul Isaac Jr and I am writing to imform those on this board and at other websites that the wingtv article writen in regards to the 05 WTC Memorial is false. There was never any mention about this subject at the memorial. As a matter of fact I did have a discussion with them on there inappropriate behave at the event. They were insulting the attendees and families with there profanity and lack of respect for the event.
Dylan Avery Loosechange 2nd edition shows what actually occured at the event after I read these knuckleheads the RIOT ACT for their behavior. The Proof should be on the tape LC2E in which there were photos taken we my and the NYPD Police detail standing there the whole time. I don't thinkm the NYPD detail standing there would've taken photos for the families and attendees with someone who according to wingtvs' scott magufka make believe story. The false write up was retaliatory on the grounds that I basically ruined their day. The proof is also in the write up by the Village Voice which also shows what actually occured. Even someone who was there with them wearing their Wingtv shirt cooborates that I called them Goverment Agent provocatures but no mention on the subject they spoke. their towards the memorial and the family members in attendance was unacceptable to say the least.
If you really want to see how these people work google; Lisa Guliani calls FBI on Revere Radio Network" and ask yourself if there is a credibility issue regarding FBI imformants making up flase stories? Lisa gulianis' E mail is Wingedpiper@yahoo.com ask her why she wrote such BS? Ask her why she keeps company with the sort of people listed as predicate felons out of Denver CO by the of Tim White. Mr white seems to have some problems he needs to be dealing with first at home before making threats to people who aren't scared in the least.
Again The wingtv article is false.
Thank you
Paul Isaac Jr
Rsqsrvs@yahoo.com
I feel so bad for people like Paul who have to chase down these lies. (Assuming it is Paul. I like the fact that he left his e-mail which lends credibility)
I hope you guys are happy hurting the very people you say you want to help with these lies. Enough involving the fire, police and ambulance people in this lunacy. Make your case without dragging these people in. They went through enough human cruelty to last a life time. They don't need you to pile on top of it.
QUOTE (zoktoberfest+Feb 1 2006, 08:36 PM)
QUOTE (yesitdid+Feb 1 2006, 10:58 AM)
QUOTE
Notice that the peripheral column section has rotated at least +/- 90 degrees as it flew through the air. A purely downward collapse force would favor end-over-end rotation in a horizontal plane. Studying this photo, however, suggests a rotation along a vertical plain. Like the motion of a violently opened door suddenly freed at the last moment from its' hinges
Indeed if the section was ejected as falling debris ripped it away from the structure one would expect some rotation and that it would resemble a , "door suddenly freed at the last moment from its' hinges". At the very least one certainly would not expect it to be ejected by having all the connections sheared simultaneously in such a chaotic situation. On the other hand if it were explosives then a series of purely cutter+ kicker charges could be expected to be simultaneous and send it off the structure with little or no rotation.
Thanks zoctober!
Arthur , so then the section that hit the Banker's Trust was probably less than 100 tons as Foxx surmises, and it went 240 feet rather than 600 feet as Foxx states?
Hmmm, then that makes the energy required to send it into the Banker's Trust much less than even that 1/600 th of the kinetic energy of the falling upper section of the south tower. Basically a glancing blow on that perimeter section!
I do love how Foxx can point to the columns that impaled the Banker's Trust and WFC 3 and yet still claim that this could not have happened to WTC 7 except to the one corner where he cannot deny that it did happen. I also gotta love how he complains that Banker's Trust and WFC 3 did not fall down like WTC 7 when he is aware that those two buildings were
a ) typical post and beam structures through out, unlike the cantilevered WTC 7
b ) did not contain the supplies of fuel that WTC 7 did
c ) did not experience the fires that WTC 7 did.
,,, and he calls me a sophist(a word I seem to have taught him BTW)
If one assumes the "subject" of explosives, one then might assume the "object" would be the core and its' destruction. This would suggest a blast force eminating from a more centralized point behind the south face. The center of the face is closer to the core than the adjoining (SE) corner sector is. If there was a core blast, its' force and debris would act upon the centeral region of the south face before it extending into the (SE) corner. That millisecond differential defines the door action. The hinge would have been at or close to the SE corner. This speculation, by the way , gives the best line-of sight trajectory into the bank buildings face.
Quote;yesitdid
Indeed if the section was ejected as falling debris ripped it away from the structure one would expect some rotation and that it would resemble a , "door suddenly freed at the last moment from its' hinges".
Define your idea of a door. If your talking about a "garage door" that you pull open from the bottom, that pivots around a horizontal axis, then I might agree. You open a normal (verticle) door by pushing out,not down.
Quote;yesitdid
. At the very least one certainly would not expect it to be ejected by having all the connections sheared simultaneously in such a chaotic situation.
Who is assumming that? What is the point of this statement? Oh thats right, the point is to have no point. Are you trying to be schneibster's understudy or what? Your welcome, yesitdid!
On the contrary , video of the initial collapse shows a quick unzipping of the perimeter columns as the upper section falls, not simultaneous failure. Your 'garage door' analogy would assume that the connections along one floor all fail simultaneously. That simply will not happen. Might there have been rotation both in the vertical and the horizontal? Yes, in fact it could be fully expected.
In an object this large and heavy that rotation will likely be quite slow.
Now there is the question of how this object did hit the BT bldg.
All that need have happened is a corner of the section hit the bldg first, this will rotate it into the bldg the fashion of which will be dictated as much by the construction of the Banker's Trust building as by the rotation of the falling section.
It appears to me that the few, but most distant flung perimeter columns were most likely associated with a corner of one of the towers.
This is the one location, as the building came apart where an accelerated sideways motion appears to make sense (well, makes intuitive sense to me)
Look at this picture and it shows where they KNOW external columns hit beyond the normal circle of heavy debris.
http://thewebfairy.com/nerdcities/WTC/fig-1-7.jpg
Now look at this picture and notice how they tend to line up with the corners of the WTC towers.
http://thewebfairy.com/nerdcities/WTC/fig-1-9A.jpg
Also notice how the center of WTC 7 lines up with the East face of WTC 1
Just a hunch.
Arthur
This is the one location, as the building came apart where an accelerated sideways motion appears to make sense (well, makes intuitive sense to me)
Look at this picture and it shows where they KNOW external columns hit beyond the normal circle of heavy debris.
http://thewebfairy.com/nerdcities/WTC/fig-1-7.jpg
Now look at this picture and notice how they tend to line up with the corners of the WTC towers.
http://thewebfairy.com/nerdcities/WTC/fig-1-9A.jpg
Also notice how the center of WTC 7 lines up with the East face of WTC 1
Just a hunch.
Arthur
The Lugnut Hall of Fame.
Fraterplecticus
Mel
Brian
Reasonwhy
Foxx
Metamars
Cosmo
Newton
------and the rest of that groupwank thinktank.
Who are these lugnuts? They have nothing but diversionary and childish comebacks to anything which proves their groupwank groupthink is just so much nasty ejaculation all over themselves. No one is taking them seriously now. What's their game? Is it a conspiracy by competing chatrooms aimed at making Physorgforums a laughing stock? First it was religious groupwankers, now its scammer-spammer groupwankers. Pitiful that Physorgforums has come to this. Whatever happened to the physics and the science. Is nothing worth preserving any more? Since when is such groupwank groupspouting acceptable debate for what used to be a respected forum site?
fts
Fraterplecticus
Mel
Brian
Reasonwhy
Foxx
Metamars
Cosmo
Newton
------and the rest of that groupwank thinktank.
Who are these lugnuts? They have nothing but diversionary and childish comebacks to anything which proves their groupwank groupthink is just so much nasty ejaculation all over themselves. No one is taking them seriously now. What's their game? Is it a conspiracy by competing chatrooms aimed at making Physorgforums a laughing stock? First it was religious groupwankers, now its scammer-spammer groupwankers. Pitiful that Physorgforums has come to this. Whatever happened to the physics and the science. Is nothing worth preserving any more? Since when is such groupwank groupspouting acceptable debate for what used to be a respected forum site?
fts
GROUPWANK ?
"Whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully– (1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact; (2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or (3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry; shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both."
[18 USC 1001]:
"If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both."
[18 USC 371]
We wouldn't need all this money spent, if we didn't have an "enemy"
"Whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully– (1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact; (2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or (3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry; shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both."
[18 USC 1001]:
"If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both."
[18 USC 371]
QUOTE
MBDA And Raytheon Battle for Air-to-Air Missile Market Dominance
by Staff Writers
Newtown CN (SPX) Feb 01, 2006
A recent analysis by Forecast International estimates that the market for air-to-air missiles will be worth $15.4 billion over the next 10 years, with Raytheon and MBDA sharing the lead. According to Larry Dickerson, Missile Analyst for Forecast International, the continued strong demand for combat aircraft and the drive to modernize air forces is fueling demand for these missiles. More than 52,000 air-to-air missiles will be built worldwide between 2006 and 2015.
"As in previous years, this market is dominated by Raytheon and MBDA," said Dickerson. "Raytheon is on top of this market due to the popularity of the AIM-9X Sidewinder and AIM-120 AMRAAM. Sales of these missiles will be worth $4.5 billion. MBDA, which is producing the MICA and ASRAAM and will introduce the Meteor in the future, will see its air-to-air missile revenues top $3.3 billion through 2015."
MBDA’s Meteor is the company’s challenger to AMRAAM’s dominance of the medium-range air-to-air missile segment. Yet Raytheon is already introducing new versions of the AIM-120 to maintain its market share.
Article: http://tinyurl.com/a3zhb
US Air Force Awards Lockheed Martin Contract For 3rd Advanced MilComms Sat
by Staff Writers
Sunnyvale CA (SPX) Feb 01, 2006
The U.S. Air Force has awarded Lockheed Martin a contract for $491 million to build a third spacecraft for the Advanced Extremely High Frequency (Advanced EHF) program constellation. Advanced EHF satellites will provide global, highly secure, protected, survivable communications for all warfighters serving under the U.S. Department of Defense.
The Advanced EHF system is the successor to the Milstar system, whose capabilities were cited by the Department of Defense as essential to the U.S.-led coalition’s success in Operation Iraqi Freedom. Advanced EHF will provide greater total capacity and offer channel data rates higher than that of Milstar communications satellites. The higher data rates permit transmission of tactical military communications such as real-time video, battlefield maps and targeting data.
Development of the first Advanced EHF satellite is progressing on schedule. The team recently delivered the spacecraft core structure to Lockheed Martin's Mississippi Space & Technology Center for integration with its propulsion subsystem. The second spacecraft is close behind in the production flow.
Article: http://tinyurl.com/cp35e
by Staff Writers
Newtown CN (SPX) Feb 01, 2006
A recent analysis by Forecast International estimates that the market for air-to-air missiles will be worth $15.4 billion over the next 10 years, with Raytheon and MBDA sharing the lead. According to Larry Dickerson, Missile Analyst for Forecast International, the continued strong demand for combat aircraft and the drive to modernize air forces is fueling demand for these missiles. More than 52,000 air-to-air missiles will be built worldwide between 2006 and 2015.
"As in previous years, this market is dominated by Raytheon and MBDA," said Dickerson. "Raytheon is on top of this market due to the popularity of the AIM-9X Sidewinder and AIM-120 AMRAAM. Sales of these missiles will be worth $4.5 billion. MBDA, which is producing the MICA and ASRAAM and will introduce the Meteor in the future, will see its air-to-air missile revenues top $3.3 billion through 2015."
MBDA’s Meteor is the company’s challenger to AMRAAM’s dominance of the medium-range air-to-air missile segment. Yet Raytheon is already introducing new versions of the AIM-120 to maintain its market share.
Article: http://tinyurl.com/a3zhb
US Air Force Awards Lockheed Martin Contract For 3rd Advanced MilComms Sat
by Staff Writers
Sunnyvale CA (SPX) Feb 01, 2006
The U.S. Air Force has awarded Lockheed Martin a contract for $491 million to build a third spacecraft for the Advanced Extremely High Frequency (Advanced EHF) program constellation. Advanced EHF satellites will provide global, highly secure, protected, survivable communications for all warfighters serving under the U.S. Department of Defense.
The Advanced EHF system is the successor to the Milstar system, whose capabilities were cited by the Department of Defense as essential to the U.S.-led coalition’s success in Operation Iraqi Freedom. Advanced EHF will provide greater total capacity and offer channel data rates higher than that of Milstar communications satellites. The higher data rates permit transmission of tactical military communications such as real-time video, battlefield maps and targeting data.
Development of the first Advanced EHF satellite is progressing on schedule. The team recently delivered the spacecraft core structure to Lockheed Martin's Mississippi Space & Technology Center for integration with its propulsion subsystem. The second spacecraft is close behind in the production flow.
Article: http://tinyurl.com/cp35e
We wouldn't need all this money spent, if we didn't have an "enemy"
QUOTE (frater plecticus+Feb 1 2006, 10:16 PM)
We wouldn't need all this money spent, if we didn't have an "enemy"
What does this have to do with how the towers fell?
Way to prove him right, FP...
I'm afraid Physorgforums was doomed to be a laughing stock by page 6 of this thread.
What does this have to do with how the towers fell?
QUOTE
Who are these lugnuts? They have nothing but diversionary and childish comebacks to anything which proves their groupwank groupthink is just so much nasty ejaculation all over themselves. No one is taking them seriously now. What's their game? Is it a conspiracy by competing chatrooms aimed at making Physorgforums a laughing stock?
Way to prove him right, FP...
I'm afraid Physorgforums was doomed to be a laughing stock by page 6 of this thread.
QUOTE (adoucette+Feb 1 2006, 08:49 PM)
Well because 67 scrambles does NOT equate to 67 intercepts.
It turns out that most scrambles don't even involve an intercept, the reasons are many, but failure to ever find the craft is just one of the many reasons why no intercept is ever made. Others being the unidentified plane LANDS, CRASHES, IDENTIFIES ITSELF, etc.
Secondly, and most importantly, the second sentence has TWO QUALIFIERS, OVER NORTH AMERICA and CIVILIAN.
The FIRST statement is about NORAD and doesn't limit it to OVER NORTH AMERICA or Civilian aircraft.
So here's the drill. Find actual evidence that DISPUTES the ONE intercept story.
Secondly, What's the point anyway? It took OVER AN HOUR to intercept Payne Stewart's plane. Which shows the BASIC PREMISE of the 9/11 truth movements claim to be false.
Third, How many YEARS (prior to 2001) had it been since the LAST hijacking?
Fourth, What is NORAD's role in a hijacking? Hint, there IS NOTHING in pre 9/11 world that would allow NORAD to shoot down a US commercial airliner.
Arthur.
Same outright lies as popular mechanics'. Same sources?
Again, for the neophyte : 'interception' doesn't equate 'shoot down'. Interceptions are a standard routine procedure for NORAD.
Posse comitatus doesn't apply because only the military have the ability to intercept any kind of airplanes (hijackings, drug trade or whatever). There are no civilian jetfighters that would intercept anyone, only military jetfighters.
(The 'posse comitatus' lie has been used on this thread so I wanted to point it out.)
It turns out that most scrambles don't even involve an intercept, the reasons are many, but failure to ever find the craft is just one of the many reasons why no intercept is ever made. Others being the unidentified plane LANDS, CRASHES, IDENTIFIES ITSELF, etc.
Secondly, and most importantly, the second sentence has TWO QUALIFIERS, OVER NORTH AMERICA and CIVILIAN.
The FIRST statement is about NORAD and doesn't limit it to OVER NORTH AMERICA or Civilian aircraft.
So here's the drill. Find actual evidence that DISPUTES the ONE intercept story.
Secondly, What's the point anyway? It took OVER AN HOUR to intercept Payne Stewart's plane. Which shows the BASIC PREMISE of the 9/11 truth movements claim to be false.
Third, How many YEARS (prior to 2001) had it been since the LAST hijacking?
Fourth, What is NORAD's role in a hijacking? Hint, there IS NOTHING in pre 9/11 world that would allow NORAD to shoot down a US commercial airliner.
Arthur.
Same outright lies as popular mechanics'. Same sources?
Again, for the neophyte : 'interception' doesn't equate 'shoot down'. Interceptions are a standard routine procedure for NORAD.
Posse comitatus doesn't apply because only the military have the ability to intercept any kind of airplanes (hijackings, drug trade or whatever). There are no civilian jetfighters that would intercept anyone, only military jetfighters.
(The 'posse comitatus' lie has been used on this thread so I wanted to point it out.)
QUOTE (Common Schnense+Feb 1 2006, 10:28 PM)
I'm afraid Physorgforums was doomed to be a laughing stock by page 6 of this thread.
You mean right about when you, er, Schnozz first showed up? Agreed.
QUOTE (Guest_Jeff+Feb 1 2006, 06:32 PM)
QUOTE (adoucette+Feb 1 2006, 08:49 PM)
Well because 67 scrambles does NOT equate to 67 intercepts.
It turns out that most scrambles don't even involve an intercept, the reasons are many, but failure to ever find the craft is just one of the many reasons why no intercept is ever made. Others being the unidentified plane LANDS, CRASHES, IDENTIFIES ITSELF, etc.
Secondly, and most importantly, the second sentence has TWO QUALIFIERS, OVER NORTH AMERICA and CIVILIAN.
The FIRST statement is about NORAD and doesn't limit it to OVER NORTH AMERICA or Civilian aircraft.
So here's the drill. Find actual evidence that DISPUTES the ONE intercept story.
Secondly, What's the point anyway? It took OVER AN HOUR to intercept Payne Stewart's plane. Which shows the BASIC PREMISE of the 9/11 truth movements claim to be false.
Third, How many YEARS (prior to 2001) had it been since the LAST hijacking?
Fourth, What is NORAD's role in a hijacking? Hint, there IS NOTHING in pre 9/11 world that would allow NORAD to shoot down a US commercial airliner.
Arthur.
Same outright lies as popular mechanics'. Same sources?
Again, for the neophyte : 'interception' doesn't equate 'shoot down'. Interceptions are a standard routine procedure for NORAD.
Posse comitatus doesn't apply because only the military have the ability to intercept any kind of airplanes (hijackings, drug trade or whatever). There are no civilian jetfighters that would intercept anyone, only military jetfighters.
(The 'posse comitatus' lie has been used on this thread so I wanted to point it out.)
Jeff
Where did I say an intercept is the same as a shoot-down?
I said a SCRAMBLE does not equate to an INTERCEPT.
Your original post claimed that NORAD immediatedly intercepted off course aircraft, yet you offered NO PROOF that this was or is in fact the case.
And previously in this thread I pointed out it wasn't Posse Comitatus that would likely inhibit a jet jock from firing a missile I talked about RULES OF ENGAGEMENT, which on 9/11 did not allow shooting down a hijacked civilian jetliner, and jet jocks DO pay attention to Rules of Engagement.
Arthur
It turns out that most scrambles don't even involve an intercept, the reasons are many, but failure to ever find the craft is just one of the many reasons why no intercept is ever made. Others being the unidentified plane LANDS, CRASHES, IDENTIFIES ITSELF, etc.
Secondly, and most importantly, the second sentence has TWO QUALIFIERS, OVER NORTH AMERICA and CIVILIAN.
The FIRST statement is about NORAD and doesn't limit it to OVER NORTH AMERICA or Civilian aircraft.
So here's the drill. Find actual evidence that DISPUTES the ONE intercept story.
Secondly, What's the point anyway? It took OVER AN HOUR to intercept Payne Stewart's plane. Which shows the BASIC PREMISE of the 9/11 truth movements claim to be false.
Third, How many YEARS (prior to 2001) had it been since the LAST hijacking?
Fourth, What is NORAD's role in a hijacking? Hint, there IS NOTHING in pre 9/11 world that would allow NORAD to shoot down a US commercial airliner.
Arthur.
Same outright lies as popular mechanics'. Same sources?
Again, for the neophyte : 'interception' doesn't equate 'shoot down'. Interceptions are a standard routine procedure for NORAD.
Posse comitatus doesn't apply because only the military have the ability to intercept any kind of airplanes (hijackings, drug trade or whatever). There are no civilian jetfighters that would intercept anyone, only military jetfighters.
(The 'posse comitatus' lie has been used on this thread so I wanted to point it out.)
Jeff
Where did I say an intercept is the same as a shoot-down?
I said a SCRAMBLE does not equate to an INTERCEPT.
Your original post claimed that NORAD immediatedly intercepted off course aircraft, yet you offered NO PROOF that this was or is in fact the case.
And previously in this thread I pointed out it wasn't Posse Comitatus that would likely inhibit a jet jock from firing a missile I talked about RULES OF ENGAGEMENT, which on 9/11 did not allow shooting down a hijacked civilian jetliner, and jet jocks DO pay attention to Rules of Engagement.
Arthur
QUOTE (From The Sidelines+Feb 1 2006, 05:47 PM)
The Lugnut Hall of Fame.
Fraterplecticus
Mel
Brian
Reasonwhy
Foxx
Metamars
Cosmo
Newton
------and the rest of that groupwank thinktank.
Who are these lugnuts? They have nothing but diversionary and childish comebacks to anything which proves their groupwank groupthink is just so much nasty ejaculation all over themselves. No one is taking them seriously now. What's their game? Is it a conspiracy by competing chatrooms aimed at making Physorgforums a laughing stock? First it was religious groupwankers, now its scammer-spammer groupwankers. Pitiful that Physorgforums has come to this. Whatever happened to the physics and the science. Is nothing worth preserving any more? Since when is such groupwank groupspouting acceptable debate for what used to be a respected forum site?
fts
The main problem in my opinion is the moderators let guests post.
I would not allow anyone who does not register to post.
Since they do, even the few attempts by the moderators to "punish" people for inappropriate posts, simply results in the offenders posting under a slightly different name.
Thus F-P is banned for several weeks but ignores the ban and posts during his "ban" as F-P2.
This behavior encourages lugnuts of the worst sort, as well as some truely un-necessary posts.
I hope the moderators get their act together, as I've enjoyed this site but it is getting steadily worse, and I've been thinking about moving on.
Too much chaff, not enough wheat.
Arthur
Fraterplecticus
Mel
Brian
Reasonwhy
Foxx
Metamars
Cosmo
Newton
------and the rest of that groupwank thinktank.
Who are these lugnuts? They have nothing but diversionary and childish comebacks to anything which proves their groupwank groupthink is just so much nasty ejaculation all over themselves. No one is taking them seriously now. What's their game? Is it a conspiracy by competing chatrooms aimed at making Physorgforums a laughing stock? First it was religious groupwankers, now its scammer-spammer groupwankers. Pitiful that Physorgforums has come to this. Whatever happened to the physics and the science. Is nothing worth preserving any more? Since when is such groupwank groupspouting acceptable debate for what used to be a respected forum site?
fts
The main problem in my opinion is the moderators let guests post.
I would not allow anyone who does not register to post.
Since they do, even the few attempts by the moderators to "punish" people for inappropriate posts, simply results in the offenders posting under a slightly different name.
Thus F-P is banned for several weeks but ignores the ban and posts during his "ban" as F-P2.
This behavior encourages lugnuts of the worst sort, as well as some truely un-necessary posts.
I hope the moderators get their act together, as I've enjoyed this site but it is getting steadily worse, and I've been thinking about moving on.
Too much chaff, not enough wheat.
Arthur
To the Head Groupwanker with the politicodoublespeak fetish.
Fraterplecticus.
You prove me right. Ejaculate much more of this icky stuff and you'll be made to clean up the mess. Just what Physorgforum needed, another slimy paid political groupwanking stooge on somebody's payroll spewing slimy political propaganda in what used to be a physics forum. What next, religious and scammerspammer groupwankers? Oh that's right, too late. They're all here already. Join the gang, Fraterplecticus. Always room for one more wanker. The more slimy the better, it seems, or else Physorgforum would cut out all such drivel that has nothing to do with physics and only clutters up the topic and puts people off from joining in the physics debate.
Fraterplecticus, give us all a break and go paste your slimy posters and political slogans where they belong, on the walls in the street where all you groupwankers live so nice and cosy in bed with each other.
Oh and add JamesX to the list since he wants so much to become a neophyte groupwanker 3rd class. No Brains, no Physics, no Sense, all Loser. But don't despair, just keep trying and you'll make the cover of glossy A88hole Magazine for the Groupwank Fraternity yet.
fts
Fraterplecticus.
You prove me right. Ejaculate much more of this icky stuff and you'll be made to clean up the mess. Just what Physorgforum needed, another slimy paid political groupwanking stooge on somebody's payroll spewing slimy political propaganda in what used to be a physics forum. What next, religious and scammerspammer groupwankers? Oh that's right, too late. They're all here already. Join the gang, Fraterplecticus. Always room for one more wanker. The more slimy the better, it seems, or else Physorgforum would cut out all such drivel that has nothing to do with physics and only clutters up the topic and puts people off from joining in the physics debate.
Fraterplecticus, give us all a break and go paste your slimy posters and political slogans where they belong, on the walls in the street where all you groupwankers live so nice and cosy in bed with each other.
Oh and add JamesX to the list since he wants so much to become a neophyte groupwanker 3rd class. No Brains, no Physics, no Sense, all Loser. But don't despair, just keep trying and you'll make the cover of glossy A88hole Magazine for the Groupwank Fraternity yet.
fts
QUOTE (adoucette+Feb 1 2006, 10:57 PM)
The main problem in my opinion is the moderators let guests post.
I would not allow anyone who does not register to post.
Poor bankster boy, some guests are bothering you?
Promises, promises... You've been throwing these for a couple hundred pages now. Still here?
I would not allow anyone who does not register to post.
Poor bankster boy, some guests are bothering you?
QUOTE
I hope the moderators get their act together, as I've enjoyed this site but it is getting steadily worse, and I've been thinking about moving on.
Promises, promises... You've been throwing these for a couple hundred pages now. Still here?
QUOTE (Guest_Jeff+Feb 1 2006, 07:03 PM)
QUOTE (adoucette+Feb 1 2006, 10:57 PM)
The main problem in my opinion is the moderators let guests post.
I would not allow anyone who does not register to post.
Poor bankster boy, some guests are bothering you?
Promises, promises... You've been throwing these for a couple hundred pages now. Still here?
About what I expected from you.
Do the moderators care if I leave?
I suspect not.
Then again, I'm the second highest poster on this board.
I think they make money based on activity and click throughs.
So they just MIGHT care.
Like I said, If I had my way you would have to register to post.
Doesn't seem to much to ask, and without it the moderators have NO control.
Every board I've seen that allows ANYONE to post, quickly degrades into name calling and BS.
This forum is following that trend.
In most cases what happens is everyone starts complaining to the moderators about some other poster and finally the moderators get tired of dealing with a bunch of squabbles.
Then they take action.
Here's hoping that's soon.
Arthur
PS I believe while the moderators were trying to fix a "problem" in this series of threads a whole thread was killed. I was posting on it the other day when it went bye bye. Had to do with the guy who claimed he had a spreadsheet PROVING that the collapse was too fast.
I would not allow anyone who does not register to post.
Poor bankster boy, some guests are bothering you?
QUOTE
I hope the moderators get their act together, as I've enjoyed this site but it is getting steadily worse, and I've been thinking about moving on.
Promises, promises... You've been throwing these for a couple hundred pages now. Still here?
About what I expected from you.
Do the moderators care if I leave?
I suspect not.
Then again, I'm the second highest poster on this board.
I think they make money based on activity and click throughs.
So they just MIGHT care.
Like I said, If I had my way you would have to register to post.
Doesn't seem to much to ask, and without it the moderators have NO control.
Every board I've seen that allows ANYONE to post, quickly degrades into name calling and BS.
This forum is following that trend.
In most cases what happens is everyone starts complaining to the moderators about some other poster and finally the moderators get tired of dealing with a bunch of squabbles.
Then they take action.
Here's hoping that's soon.
Arthur
PS I believe while the moderators were trying to fix a "problem" in this series of threads a whole thread was killed. I was posting on it the other day when it went bye bye. Had to do with the guy who claimed he had a spreadsheet PROVING that the collapse was too fast.
QUOTE (Guest_Jeff+Feb 1 2006, 08:41 PM)
Here's a well documented article debunking the popular mechanics piece of propaganda:
Popular Mechanics Attacks Its "9/11 LIES" Straw Man
Excerpt :
Popular Mechanics Attacks Its "9/11 LIES" Straw Man
Excerpt :
QUOTE
Intercepts Not Routine
CLAIM [from the 9/11 truth movement]: It has been standard operating procedures for decades to immediately intercept off-course planes that do not respond to communications from air traffic controllers. ...
PM dismisses this "claim," excerpted from OilEmpire.us with the following sweeping 'fact':
"In the decade before 9/11 NORAD intercepted only one civilian plane over North America: golfer Payne Stewart's Learjet, in October 1999."
How's that for a blatant lie?
Those 67 previous intercepts were never detailed. Indeed NORAD scrambled when aircraft incoming to central N.America were over a set velocity, were inbound at a specific distance from the US border and were not identified via flight plan.
Payne Stewart's aircraft was already within the USA, not inbound from the Atlantic or northern Canada. It is indeed the only civilian aircraft for which an intercept was undertaken over the densely populated part of N.America for many years prior to 2001.
Many intercepts get called off before they even reach their target as FSS or ATC contacts the aircraft and identifies it.
Stewart's plane was intercepted by a diversion of an unarmed training flight. It took , IIRC, an hour for that intercept to happen.
After the fact intercepts of civilian aircraft within the USA were given higher priority. In essence NORAD has changed its mission priorities. It should come as no shock then that after 9/11/01 that there are a much greater number of intercepts.
It isn't a lie if you are too ignorant to know the truth.
That may explain how my last post to that thread somehow ended up on this thread. I may have posted at the same time that it was taken down.
That may explain how my last post to that thread somehow ended up on this thread. I may have posted at the same time that it was taken down.
I believe so,
X (I forgot the poster's name) had just replied to your post that he had multiple tabs on his spreadsheet, one for fall times starting on different floors.
I went to the first post as I was going to download his spreadsheet and the current post was listed as "Yesitd" (not quite your full ID)
I got an ERROR returned trying to open the thread.
Then the name of the "Topic Starter" in this thread changed to "Wink" (from AJ)
Then I saw your post in that thread in this thread
Then the other thread was gone.
Or something like that. It only took about a minute elapsed time
Arthur
I'm afraid Physorgforums was doomed to be a laughing stock by page 6 of this thread.
You mean right about when you, er, Schnozz first showed up? Agreed.
Actually when your mother slept with that drunk and had you. Domino effect
That may explain how my last post to that thread somehow ended up on this thread. I may have posted at the same time that it was taken down.
I believe so,
X (I forgot the poster's name) had just replied to your post that he had multiple tabs on his spreadsheet, one for fall times starting on different floors.
I went to the first post as I was going to download his spreadsheet and the current post was listed as "Yesitd" (not quite your full ID)
I got an ERROR returned trying to open the thread.
Then the name of the "Topic Starter" in this thread changed to "Wink" (from AJ)
Then I saw your post in that thread in this thread
Then the other thread was gone.
Or something like that. It only took about a minute elapsed time
Arthur
Could it be Schneibster threatened to axe someone on that thread also?
That may explain how my last post to that thread somehow ended up on this thread. I may have posted at the same time that it was taken down.
I believe so,
X (I forgot the poster's name) had just replied to your post that he had multiple tabs on his spreadsheet, one for fall times starting on different floors.
I went to the first post as I was going to download his spreadsheet and the current post was listed as "Yesitd" (not quite your full ID)
I got an ERROR returned trying to open the thread.
Then the name of the "Topic Starter" in this thread changed to "Wink" (from AJ)
Then I saw your post in that thread in this thread
Then the other thread was gone.
Or something like that. It only took about a minute elapsed time
Arthur
Could it be Schneibster threatened to axe someone on that thread also?
No
I'm afraid Physorgforums was doomed to be a laughing stock by page 6 of this thread.
If this thread is laughing stock material, then why are you still here on page 311?
I'm afraid Physorgforums was doomed to be a laughing stock by page 6 of this thread.
If this thread is laughing stock material, then why are you still here on page 311?
Why, the humor of course. Heh!
The real question is why are you here. To make us laugh?
CLAIM [from the 9/11 truth movement]: It has been standard operating procedures for decades to immediately intercept off-course planes that do not respond to communications from air traffic controllers. ...
PM dismisses this "claim," excerpted from OilEmpire.us with the following sweeping 'fact':
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Intercepts Not Routine CLAIM [from the 9/11 truth movement]: It has been standard operating procedures for decades to immediately intercept off-course planes that do not respond to communications from air traffic controllers. ... PM dismisses this "claim," excerpted from OilEmpire.us with the following sweeping 'fact': In the decade before 9/11 NORAD intercepted only one civilian plane over North America: golfer Payne Stewart's Learjet, in October 1999. This bold assertion flies in the face of an Associated Press report of scramble frequencies that quotes the same Maj. Douglas Martin that is one of PM's cited experts, Maj. Douglas Martin, [3] QUOTE From Sept. 11 to June, NORAD scrambled jets or diverted combat air patrols 462 times, almost seven times as often as the 67 scrambles from September 2000 to June 2001, Martin said. |
"In the decade before 9/11 NORAD intercepted only one civilian plane over North America: golfer Payne Stewart's Learjet, in October 1999."
How's that for a blatant lie?
Those 67 previous intercepts were never detailed. Indeed NORAD scrambled when aircraft incoming to central N.America were over a set velocity, were inbound at a specific distance from the US border and were not identified via flight plan.
Payne Stewart's aircraft was already within the USA, not inbound from the Atlantic or northern Canada. It is indeed the only civilian aircraft for which an intercept was undertaken over the densely populated part of N.America for many years prior to 2001.
Many intercepts get called off before they even reach their target as FSS or ATC contacts the aircraft and identifies it.
Stewart's plane was intercepted by a diversion of an unarmed training flight. It took , IIRC, an hour for that intercept to happen.
After the fact intercepts of civilian aircraft within the USA were given higher priority. In essence NORAD has changed its mission priorities. It should come as no shock then that after 9/11/01 that there are a much greater number of intercepts.
It isn't a lie if you are too ignorant to know the truth.
QUOTE (frater plecticus+Feb 1 2006, 10:16 PM)
GROUPWANK ?
"Whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully– (1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact; (2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or (3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry; shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both."
[18 USC 1001]:
"If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both."
[18 USC 371]
Better round up all the 'pod people', missile, and hologram believers from the 9/11 gov't-did-it conspiracy camp. If they don't know that what they are propagating is fraud then they need educating or psych help.
"Whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully– (1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact; (2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or (3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry; shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both."
[18 USC 1001]:
"If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both."
[18 USC 371]
Better round up all the 'pod people', missile, and hologram believers from the 9/11 gov't-did-it conspiracy camp. If they don't know that what they are propagating is fraud then they need educating or psych help.
QUOTE (yesitdid+Feb 1 2006, 07:23 PM)
Stewart's plane was intercepted by a diversion of an unarmed training flight. It took , IIRC, an hour for that intercept to happen.
In fact it took an hour and 20 minutes.
You will still see some CT sites claiming it was 20 minutes.
They get confused from the start of the event is in Eastern Std Time but the link up is over Alabama in Central Std Time.
Arthur
In fact it took an hour and 20 minutes.
You will still see some CT sites claiming it was 20 minutes.
They get confused from the start of the event is in Eastern Std Time but the link up is over Alabama in Central Std Time.
Arthur
Like I said before, if you don't like what I post, or you are offended by them, or you consider it off topic, the answer is easy- don't read the posts, don't reply to them and don't come back here.
It's your problem, not mine.
hasta manyana
p.s if this thread "goes down", i've got the first 40 pages of the post in a zip file...
fraterplecticus at googlemail.com
It's your problem, not mine.
hasta manyana
p.s if this thread "goes down", i've got the first 40 pages of the post in a zip file...
fraterplecticus at googlemail.com
QUOTE
a whole thread was killed. I was posting on it the other day when it went bye bye. Had to do with the guy who claimed he had a spreadsheet PROVING that the collapse was too fast.
That may explain how my last post to that thread somehow ended up on this thread. I may have posted at the same time that it was taken down.
Sorry if someone has already presented this.
An expert panel has reached some interesting conclusions about 9/11. Here's the link:
http://www.emediawire.com/releases/2006/1/emw339303.htm
Any comments?
An expert panel has reached some interesting conclusions about 9/11. Here's the link:
http://www.emediawire.com/releases/2006/1/emw339303.htm
Any comments?
QUOTE (gaussianum+Feb 1 2006, 11:44 PM)
Sorry if someone has already presented this.
An expert panel has reached some interesting conclusions about 9/11. Here's the link:
http://www.emediawire.com/releases/2006/1/emw339303.htm
Any comments?
Yes, it has been posted. several times. Try searching the forum for Fetzer or any of the other 'experts' listed.
An expert panel has reached some interesting conclusions about 9/11. Here's the link:
http://www.emediawire.com/releases/2006/1/emw339303.htm
Any comments?
Yes, it has been posted. several times. Try searching the forum for Fetzer or any of the other 'experts' listed.
QUOTE (yesitdid+Feb 1 2006, 07:41 PM)
QUOTE
a whole thread was killed. I was posting on it the other day when it went bye bye. Had to do with the guy who claimed he had a spreadsheet PROVING that the collapse was too fast.
That may explain how my last post to that thread somehow ended up on this thread. I may have posted at the same time that it was taken down.
I believe so,
X (I forgot the poster's name) had just replied to your post that he had multiple tabs on his spreadsheet, one for fall times starting on different floors.
I went to the first post as I was going to download his spreadsheet and the current post was listed as "Yesitd" (not quite your full ID)
I got an ERROR returned trying to open the thread.
Then the name of the "Topic Starter" in this thread changed to "Wink" (from AJ)
Then I saw your post in that thread in this thread
Then the other thread was gone.
Or something like that. It only took about a minute elapsed time
Arthur
QUOTE (JamesX+Feb 1 2006, 10:35 PM)
QUOTE (Common Schnense+Feb 1 2006, 10:28 PM)
I'm afraid Physorgforums was doomed to be a laughing stock by page 6 of this thread.
You mean right about when you, er, Schnozz first showed up? Agreed.
Actually when your mother slept with that drunk and had you. Domino effect
QUOTE (adoucette+Feb 1 2006, 04:18 PM)
QUOTE (yesitdid+Feb 1 2006, 07:41 PM)
QUOTE
a whole thread was killed. I was posting on it the other day when it went bye bye. Had to do with the guy who claimed he had a spreadsheet PROVING that the collapse was too fast.
That may explain how my last post to that thread somehow ended up on this thread. I may have posted at the same time that it was taken down.
I believe so,
X (I forgot the poster's name) had just replied to your post that he had multiple tabs on his spreadsheet, one for fall times starting on different floors.
I went to the first post as I was going to download his spreadsheet and the current post was listed as "Yesitd" (not quite your full ID)
I got an ERROR returned trying to open the thread.
Then the name of the "Topic Starter" in this thread changed to "Wink" (from AJ)
Then I saw your post in that thread in this thread
Then the other thread was gone.
Or something like that. It only took about a minute elapsed time
Arthur
Could it be Schneibster threatened to axe someone on that thread also?
QUOTE (reasonwhy+Feb 2 2006, 12:36 AM)
QUOTE (adoucette+Feb 1 2006, 04:18 PM)
QUOTE (yesitdid+Feb 1 2006, 07:41 PM)
QUOTE
a whole thread was killed. I was posting on it the other day when it went bye bye. Had to do with the guy who claimed he had a spreadsheet PROVING that the collapse was too fast.
That may explain how my last post to that thread somehow ended up on this thread. I may have posted at the same time that it was taken down.
I believe so,
X (I forgot the poster's name) had just replied to your post that he had multiple tabs on his spreadsheet, one for fall times starting on different floors.
I went to the first post as I was going to download his spreadsheet and the current post was listed as "Yesitd" (not quite your full ID)
I got an ERROR returned trying to open the thread.
Then the name of the "Topic Starter" in this thread changed to "Wink" (from AJ)
Then I saw your post in that thread in this thread
Then the other thread was gone.
Or something like that. It only took about a minute elapsed time
Arthur
Could it be Schneibster threatened to axe someone on that thread also?
No
QUOTE (Common Sense+Feb 1 2006, 10:28 PM)
I'm afraid Physorgforums was doomed to be a laughing stock by page 6 of this thread.
If this thread is laughing stock material, then why are you still here on page 311?
QUOTE (Mel+Feb 2 2006, 01:53 AM)
QUOTE (Common Sense+Feb 1 2006, 10:28 PM)
I'm afraid Physorgforums was doomed to be a laughing stock by page 6 of this thread.
If this thread is laughing stock material, then why are you still here on page 311?
Why, the humor of course. Heh!
The real question is why are you here. To make us laugh?
http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/4160.jpg
Looks like a decent size piece of the lowest part of the CORE.
Arthur
Looks like a decent size piece of the lowest part of the CORE.
Arthur
QUOTE (adoucette+Feb 1 2006, 07:48 PM)
http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/5378.jpg
Steel beams
Various failure modes.
Arthur
Still waiting for the buckled columns. All I see are columns that obviously should have been checked for explosives.
Steel beams
Various failure modes.
Arthur
Still waiting for the buckled columns. All I see are columns that obviously should have been checked for explosives.
QUOTE (adoucette+Feb 1 2006, 03:11 PM)
QUOTE (Common Sense+Feb 1 2006, 10:47 AM)
Translation: "Hi, my name is "metamars the straw man". I'd like to bring up a "bellows" argument which never existed before until I made it up, just to show you how silly I can be. Yes, I know, it's stupid but it works for the morons that listen to me.
I'll use an effect which a member came up with the explain the heat under the debris field (Trucks creating a Bellows effect as they pass over the site removing debris. He said it was just ONE of many possibilities to explain the hot steel, not that it happened.) then create the absurd notion that someone here used that bellows idea to explain the collapse itself. Aren't I smart?" - metamars the straw man
Actually its even better than this.
My whole point was it was difficult to prove a NEGATIVE.
Thus the example of the truck driven Bellows, as an example of one of MANY POSSIBLE sources of forced air.
Which, while the CTers have made fun of every other page or so, have NEVER shown it to not be possible.
Thus continuing to prove my point.
To claim what COULD or COULD NOT be happening in that EVER CHANGING pile of debris is NOT POSSIBLE.
It is the ESSENCE of CHAOS and one can not predict all the possible interactions within a pile of mixed debris of that size.
To say for instance that the ONLY explanation for things to burn for months is thermite is patently ridiculous.
Arthur
By all means, if you have a more plausible explanation of how underground fires were aerated than your Amazing Bellows Hypothesis, then please share it. For the love of God, please, please, PLEASE share it.
Just remember, the Ali Babba Hypothesis has already been presented, and if you decide to claim an elaboration - e.g., the Chaotic Ali Babba Hypothesis - then you are duty bound to give full credit to those you derive from.
OTOH, if this is the best you have to offer, we'll just have to live with it. Nobody ever said life is fair, or that pope-ish proclamations need be at all satisfying to non-popes, even if they can be terribly amusing.
........ Come to think of it, Foxx did not credit the anonymous authors of "The Arabian Nights". Foxx, are you lying, again!!!
I'll use an effect which a member came up with the explain the heat under the debris field (Trucks creating a Bellows effect as they pass over the site removing debris. He said it was just ONE of many possibilities to explain the hot steel, not that it happened.) then create the absurd notion that someone here used that bellows idea to explain the collapse itself. Aren't I smart?" - metamars the straw man
Actually its even better than this.
My whole point was it was difficult to prove a NEGATIVE.
Thus the example of the truck driven Bellows, as an example of one of MANY POSSIBLE sources of forced air.
Which, while the CTers have made fun of every other page or so, have NEVER shown it to not be possible.
Thus continuing to prove my point.
To claim what COULD or COULD NOT be happening in that EVER CHANGING pile of debris is NOT POSSIBLE.
It is the ESSENCE of CHAOS and one can not predict all the possible interactions within a pile of mixed debris of that size.
To say for instance that the ONLY explanation for things to burn for months is thermite is patently ridiculous.
Arthur
By all means, if you have a more plausible explanation of how underground fires were aerated than your Amazing Bellows Hypothesis, then please share it. For the love of God, please, please, PLEASE share it.
Just remember, the Ali Babba Hypothesis has already been presented, and if you decide to claim an elaboration - e.g., the Chaotic Ali Babba Hypothesis - then you are duty bound to give full credit to those you derive from.
OTOH, if this is the best you have to offer, we'll just have to live with it. Nobody ever said life is fair, or that pope-ish proclamations need be at all satisfying to non-popes, even if they can be terribly amusing.
........ Come to think of it, Foxx did not credit the anonymous authors of "The Arabian Nights". Foxx, are you lying, again!!!
QUOTE (reasonwhy+Feb 2 2006, 04:12 AM)
QUOTE (adoucette+Feb 1 2006, 07:48 PM)
http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/5378.jpg
Steel beams
Various failure modes.
Arthur
Still waiting for the buckled columns. All I see are columns that obviously should have been checked for explosives.
Why look for it after the fact when you can see it while it's happening...
Steel beams
Various failure modes.
Arthur
Still waiting for the buckled columns. All I see are columns that obviously should have been checked for explosives.
Why look for it after the fact when you can see it while it's happening...
QUOTE (Sensable+Jan 30 2006, 04:58 AM)
Now you'll have to just download the video yourself.
http://novakeo.com/?p=337
The clip is from 30:00 into part one.
It seems I used a 911 conspiracy video to prove no conspiracy. Heh!
http://novakeo.com/?p=337
The clip is from 30:00 into part one.
It seems I used a 911 conspiracy video to prove no conspiracy. Heh!
I don't get it. People postulate that thermite is the cause of high temps underground for days or weeks on end and when it is pointed out that this would require an enormous amount of said incendiary this is simply shuffled aside as unimportant detail, obfuscation even.
It gets suggested that there are means by which hydrocarbon fires can generate high heat and that such conditions could have been present in the wreckage of the towers, and rather than actually debate the point at all it is referred to in derogatory terms.
Rather than admit that perhaps conditions were present in the debris field that could produce such fires some would hang onto the notion that thermite, or some other such exotic material, had been planted in the tower's basements in quantity great enough to burn for weeks.
The manner by which these fires burned that hot for that long is unknown. If the idea that conditions could have been there to create this from existing fuel is mere speculation at least it deals with what is known to have existed by way of a fuel source. That at least makes it more plausible than an unknown fuel that cannot be shown to have existed. The fact that the exact nature of the mechanism for producing these fires from existing fuels certainly does not make the idea that they were caused by an unknown fuel that cannot be shown to have existed, any more probable.
It gets suggested that there are means by which hydrocarbon fires can generate high heat and that such conditions could have been present in the wreckage of the towers, and rather than actually debate the point at all it is referred to in derogatory terms.
Rather than admit that perhaps conditions were present in the debris field that could produce such fires some would hang onto the notion that thermite, or some other such exotic material, had been planted in the tower's basements in quantity great enough to burn for weeks.
The manner by which these fires burned that hot for that long is unknown. If the idea that conditions could have been there to create this from existing fuel is mere speculation at least it deals with what is known to have existed by way of a fuel source. That at least makes it more plausible than an unknown fuel that cannot be shown to have existed. The fact that the exact nature of the mechanism for producing these fires from existing fuels certainly does not make the idea that they were caused by an unknown fuel that cannot be shown to have existed, any more probable.
QUOTE (metamars+Feb 2 2006, 04:13 AM)
QUOTE (adoucette+Feb 1 2006, 03:11 PM)
QUOTE (Common Sense+Feb 1 2006, 10:47 AM)
Translation: "Hi, my name is "metamars the straw man". I'd like to bring up a "bellows" argument which never existed before until I made it up, just to show you how silly I can be. Yes, I know, it's stupid but it works for the morons that listen to me.
I'll use an effect which a member came up with the explain the heat under the debris field (Trucks creating a Bellows effect as they pass over the site removing debris. He said it was just ONE of many possibilities to explain the hot steel, not that it happened.) then create the absurd notion that someone here used that bellows idea to explain the collapse itself. Aren't I smart?" - metamars the straw man
Actually its even better than this.
My whole point was it was difficult to prove a NEGATIVE.
Thus the example of the truck driven Bellows, as an example of one of MANY POSSIBLE sources of forced air.
Which, while the CTers have made fun of every other page or so, have NEVER shown it to not be possible.
Thus continuing to prove my point.
To claim what COULD or COULD NOT be happening in that EVER CHANGING pile of debris is NOT POSSIBLE.
It is the ESSENCE of CHAOS and one can not predict all the possible interactions within a pile of mixed debris of that size.
To say for instance that the ONLY explanation for things to burn for months is thermite is patently ridiculous.
Arthur
By all means, if you have a more plausible explanation of how underground fires were aerated than your Amazing Bellows Hypothesis, then please share it. For the love of God, please, please, PLEASE share it.
Just remember, the Ali Babba Hypothesis has already been presented, and if you decide to claim an elaboration - e.g., the Chaotic Ali Babba Hypothesis - then you are duty bound to give full credit to those you derive from.
OTOH, if this is the best you have to offer, we'll just have to live with it. Nobody ever said life is fair, or that pope-ish proclamations need be at all satisfying to non-popes, even if they can be terribly amusing.
........ Come to think of it, Foxx did not credit the anonymous authors of "The Arabian Nights". Foxx, are you lying, again!!!
You're being dishonest again. You KNOW Schneibster had a very plausible explaination. It had NOTHING to do with bellows.
Despite repeated calculations showing that the energy released simply from the kinetic collapse is on the close order of a small nuclear weapon, without even mentioning the energy contents of the millions of tons of paper, wood, plastic, etc. that were on the floors and a large percentage of which would be in the rubble pile and heated to ignition point by the heat from the kinetic energy dissipated by the collapse.
my best estimate at 13 psf by 35,000 sf/floor by 110 floors by about 30% combustables, 60% metal and other non-combustable items, by the energy content of common garbage, gives a lot more energy than the energy of the collapse. The insulation provided in that debris pile was apparently pretty good, and that’s not surprising. Rock and concrete really are bad heat conductors, air isn’t much better, and steel while capable isn’t all that good, as you can tell from the fact that the jaws of the shovel aren’t melting. Ever hear of “rock wool?” It’s insulation; look it up. You’ll get the idea pretty quick.
There’s two more factors I’ll throw in: first, a certain amount of the office materials didn’t make it into the debris pile, perhaps as much as 10% of it just got scattered all over lower Manhattan island. Second, a few floors worth had already burned. So when the time comes, I’ll take three floors out, and then another 10%. You’ll be surprised, I think, at how much energy there is involved.
you should be aware that anytime you do mechanical work, the energy you do it with doesn’t just “go away” or “get used up.” Energy that does work gets dissipated, and when that happens, it turns to heat. This is a well known fact of physics, specifically thermodynamics, that was proven early (or maybe it was late? no, I’m pretty sure it was EARLY) in the nineteenth century by the gentleman for whom the SI unit of energy is named, James Prescott Joule. Go look him up on Wikipedia, or elsewhere if you’re a newb and believe what you read in the newspapers about Wikipedia. He did this experiment where he stirred water in buckets and showed it got hotter.
This, by the way, is a place where Jim Hoffman makes a serious mistake; in his paper on the dust cloud, he fails to note that he has to ADD THE HEAT BACK IN when he’s totaling things up at the end. This is a violation of conservation of energy, the First Law of Thermodynamics (and a foundational law of physics).
conservation of energy says that energy NEVER disappears. It ALWAYS winds up SOMEWHERE, and if this is energy capable of knocking buildings over for many blocks in all directions, and it didn’t knock them over, then where did it go and what did it do? Answer: it went into the rubble pile, and it melted and burned stuff in there.
We aren't the ones saying we know what it is. We say there isn't enough evidence. We can only speculate.
You are saying it must be a bomb because that's what you want it to be. If I believed in UFOs I could say it was a alien space ship under the city with a laser. All I would need to do is calculate how large a laser I would need and that would be proof it was there using your logic.
I'll use an effect which a member came up with the explain the heat under the debris field (Trucks creating a Bellows effect as they pass over the site removing debris. He said it was just ONE of many possibilities to explain the hot steel, not that it happened.) then create the absurd notion that someone here used that bellows idea to explain the collapse itself. Aren't I smart?" - metamars the straw man
Actually its even better than this.
My whole point was it was difficult to prove a NEGATIVE.
Thus the example of the truck driven Bellows, as an example of one of MANY POSSIBLE sources of forced air.
Which, while the CTers have made fun of every other page or so, have NEVER shown it to not be possible.
Thus continuing to prove my point.
To claim what COULD or COULD NOT be happening in that EVER CHANGING pile of debris is NOT POSSIBLE.
It is the ESSENCE of CHAOS and one can not predict all the possible interactions within a pile of mixed debris of that size.
To say for instance that the ONLY explanation for things to burn for months is thermite is patently ridiculous.
Arthur
By all means, if you have a more plausible explanation of how underground fires were aerated than your Amazing Bellows Hypothesis, then please share it. For the love of God, please, please, PLEASE share it.
Just remember, the Ali Babba Hypothesis has already been presented, and if you decide to claim an elaboration - e.g., the Chaotic Ali Babba Hypothesis - then you are duty bound to give full credit to those you derive from.
OTOH, if this is the best you have to offer, we'll just have to live with it. Nobody ever said life is fair, or that pope-ish proclamations need be at all satisfying to non-popes, even if they can be terribly amusing.
........ Come to think of it, Foxx did not credit the anonymous authors of "The Arabian Nights". Foxx, are you lying, again!!!
You're being dishonest again. You KNOW Schneibster had a very plausible explaination. It had NOTHING to do with bellows.
Despite repeated calculations showing that the energy released simply from the kinetic collapse is on the close order of a small nuclear weapon, without even mentioning the energy contents of the millions of tons of paper, wood, plastic, etc. that were on the floors and a large percentage of which would be in the rubble pile and heated to ignition point by the heat from the kinetic energy dissipated by the collapse.
my best estimate at 13 psf by 35,000 sf/floor by 110 floors by about 30% combustables, 60% metal and other non-combustable items, by the energy content of common garbage, gives a lot more energy than the energy of the collapse. The insulation provided in that debris pile was apparently pretty good, and that’s not surprising. Rock and concrete really are bad heat conductors, air isn’t much better, and steel while capable isn’t all that good, as you can tell from the fact that the jaws of the shovel aren’t melting. Ever hear of “rock wool?” It’s insulation; look it up. You’ll get the idea pretty quick.
There’s two more factors I’ll throw in: first, a certain amount of the office materials didn’t make it into the debris pile, perhaps as much as 10% of it just got scattered all over lower Manhattan island. Second, a few floors worth had already burned. So when the time comes, I’ll take three floors out, and then another 10%. You’ll be surprised, I think, at how much energy there is involved.
you should be aware that anytime you do mechanical work, the energy you do it with doesn’t just “go away” or “get used up.” Energy that does work gets dissipated, and when that happens, it turns to heat. This is a well known fact of physics, specifically thermodynamics, that was proven early (or maybe it was late? no, I’m pretty sure it was EARLY) in the nineteenth century by the gentleman for whom the SI unit of energy is named, James Prescott Joule. Go look him up on Wikipedia, or elsewhere if you’re a newb and believe what you read in the newspapers about Wikipedia. He did this experiment where he stirred water in buckets and showed it got hotter.
This, by the way, is a place where Jim Hoffman makes a serious mistake; in his paper on the dust cloud, he fails to note that he has to ADD THE HEAT BACK IN when he’s totaling things up at the end. This is a violation of conservation of energy, the First Law of Thermodynamics (and a foundational law of physics).
conservation of energy says that energy NEVER disappears. It ALWAYS winds up SOMEWHERE, and if this is energy capable of knocking buildings over for many blocks in all directions, and it didn’t knock them over, then where did it go and what did it do? Answer: it went into the rubble pile, and it melted and burned stuff in there.
We aren't the ones saying we know what it is. We say there isn't enough evidence. We can only speculate.
You are saying it must be a bomb because that's what you want it to be. If I believed in UFOs I could say it was a alien space ship under the city with a laser. All I would need to do is calculate how large a laser I would need and that would be proof it was there using your logic.
QUOTE (From The Sidelines+Feb 1 2006, 09:47 PM)
The Lugnut Hall of Fame.
Fraterplecticus
Mel
Brian
Reasonwhy
Foxx
Metamars
Cosmo
Newton
------and the rest of that groupwank thinktank.
Who are these lugnuts? They have nothing but diversionary and childish comebacks to anything which proves their groupwank groupthink is just so much nasty ejaculation all over themselves. No one is taking them seriously now. What's their game? Is it a conspiracy by competing chatrooms aimed at making Physorgforums a laughing stock? First it was religious groupwankers, now its scammer-spammer groupwankers. Pitiful that Physorgforums has come to this. Whatever happened to the physics and the science. Is nothing worth preserving any more? Since when is such groupwank groupspouting acceptable debate for what used to be a respected forum site?
fts
...said the pot to the kettle.
Fraterplecticus
Mel
Brian
Reasonwhy
Foxx
Metamars
Cosmo
Newton
------and the rest of that groupwank thinktank.
Who are these lugnuts? They have nothing but diversionary and childish comebacks to anything which proves their groupwank groupthink is just so much nasty ejaculation all over themselves. No one is taking them seriously now. What's their game? Is it a conspiracy by competing chatrooms aimed at making Physorgforums a laughing stock? First it was religious groupwankers, now its scammer-spammer groupwankers. Pitiful that Physorgforums has come to this. Whatever happened to the physics and the science. Is nothing worth preserving any more? Since when is such groupwank groupspouting acceptable debate for what used to be a respected forum site?
fts
...said the pot to the kettle.
QUOTE (Guest_cosmo+Feb 2 2006, 05:29 AM)
QUOTE (From The Sidelines+Feb 1 2006, 09:47 PM)
The Lugnut Hall of Fame.
Fraterplecticus
Mel
Brian
Reasonwhy
Foxx
Metamars
Cosmo
Newton
------and the rest of that groupwank thinktank.
Who are these lugnuts? They have nothing but diversionary and childish comebacks to anything which proves their groupwank groupthink is just so much nasty ejaculation all over themselves. No one is taking them seriously now. What's their game? Is it a conspiracy by competing chatrooms aimed at making Physorgforums a laughing stock? First it was religious groupwankers, now its scammer-spammer groupwankers. Pitiful that Physorgforums has come to this. Whatever happened to the physics and the science. Is nothing worth preserving any more? Since when is such groupwank groupspouting acceptable debate for what used to be a respected forum site?
fts
...said the pot to the kettle.
Oh the irony...
Fraterplecticus
Mel
Brian
Reasonwhy
Foxx
Metamars
Cosmo
Newton
------and the rest of that groupwank thinktank.
Who are these lugnuts? They have nothing but diversionary and childish comebacks to anything which proves their groupwank groupthink is just so much nasty ejaculation all over themselves. No one is taking them seriously now. What's their game? Is it a conspiracy by competing chatrooms aimed at making Physorgforums a laughing stock? First it was religious groupwankers, now its scammer-spammer groupwankers. Pitiful that Physorgforums has come to this. Whatever happened to the physics and the science. Is nothing worth preserving any more? Since when is such groupwank groupspouting acceptable debate for what used to be a respected forum site?
fts
...said the pot to the kettle.
Oh the irony...
Posted by Adoucette: Feb 1 2006, 06:15 PM
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...indpost&p=60373
We know that this is a 'typo' (on the PART of FEMA), and that section still MUST have weighed ~ 30 - 60 Tons.
Reply from Foxx...
Well, it seems that I have made an error in my estimates related to the weight of the columnar section trees. I had said that these 3 story sections weighed about 23 Tons each, and will explain below how I should revise that statement.
While your calculations above look respectable, you are assuming that these columnar sections in both Bankers Trust & WFC 3 came from the highest sections in the tower. IF they did, I would assume your figures to be quite plausible, HOWEVER no one knows (or at least is reporting) from WHERE in the towers, these 'trees' came from.
It may very well be known to investigators, (or at least SHOULD be), because as we all know these 'trees' were all stamped with identification numbers which would tell exactly from whence in the towers these columnar sections came from, so there should be no 'mystery' here at all.
In any proper investigation into such anomalous happenings, the fact of where these columns came from would be important to know, specifically so accurate measurements and calculations could have been made as to what plausible forces may have blown these spears to their targets. I'm afraid I DON'T BUY Grossmans tongue-in-cheek theory that the wind blew them there.
Although each structural member within the towers construction became lighter and less robust the higher in the building they were placed, we can not accurately determine the weight of each of the 'spears' by methods such as you have proposed above apart from knowing the exact position from which the spears came, and the exact weight of the 'trees' in that section.
While my 'estimate' was mistakenly high to one extreme - your estimate is really not much better and is at the opposite end of the extreme scale. I had expressed the '23 Tons' number based upon memory from various documents, and had considered this to be an average weight of these trees. However, my memory is not photographic, and as usual (when not checking facts before posting) memory confusion mistakes creep in. Since checking the facts I now realize that this ~ 23 Tons number was actually the weight of the heaviest 'trees' starting at the 9th story.
Here is what Engineering News Report said in an article Jan 1 1970...(related to the weights of these tree sections)...
Reply from Foxx...
Well, it seems that I have made an error in my estimates related to the weight of the columnar section trees. I had said that these 3 story sections weighed about 23 Tons each, and will explain below how I should revise that statement.
While your calculations above look respectable, you are assuming that these columnar sections in both Bankers Trust & WFC 3 came from the highest sections in the tower. IF they did, I would assume your figures to be quite plausible, HOWEVER no one knows (or at least is reporting) from WHERE in the towers, these 'trees' came from.
It may very well be known to investigators, (or at least SHOULD be), because as we all know these 'trees' were all stamped with identification numbers which would tell exactly from whence in the towers these columnar sections came from, so there should be no 'mystery' here at all.
In any proper investigation into such anomalous happenings, the fact of where these columns came from would be important to know, specifically so accurate measurements and calculations could have been made as to what plausible forces may have blown these spears to their targets. I'm afraid I DON'T BUY Grossmans tongue-in-cheek theory that the wind blew them there.
Although each structural member within the towers construction became lighter and less robust the higher in the building they were placed, we can not accurately determine the weight of each of the 'spears' by methods such as you have proposed above apart from knowing the exact position from which the spears came, and the exact weight of the 'trees' in that section.
While my 'estimate' was mistakenly high to one extreme - your estimate is really not much better and is at the opposite end of the extreme scale. I had expressed the '23 Tons' number based upon memory from various documents, and had considered this to be an average weight of these trees. However, my memory is not photographic, and as usual (when not checking facts before posting) memory confusion mistakes creep in. Since checking the facts I now realize that this ~ 23 Tons number was actually the weight of the heaviest 'trees' starting at the 9th story.
Here is what Engineering News Report said in an article Jan 1 1970...(related to the weights of these tree sections)...
The largest contract for fabrication of structural steel is held by Pacific Car and Foundry Co., of Seattle. It is $21.79 million for 55,000 tons of steel for the towers' bearing wall panels from the ninth floor up.
In all there are 5,828 of these panels, each about 10 ft wide, 36 ft high, with the heaviest individual panel weighing about 22 tons. Each panel consists of three box columns, 14 in. square, made up of plate up to 3 in. thick and, connected by 54-in, deep spandrels.
http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardi...news-record.htm
Obviously there is a big difference between YOUR 7/16th" figure and the 3" figure near the base.
I certainly do not believe these 'spears' came from the LOWEST levels (any more than that they came from the HIGHEST levels).
Let me downsize my original stated figures, and I would now take a guess somewhere between 7 Tons to 22 Tons. I think I would be conservative to assign an average estimate of weight for these sections under examination at 10 Tons each. Doing so would certainly revise my original weight estimates downwards by a considerable extent.
Re: Bankers Trust
As are clearly visible there are three column sections visible hanging outside of the building. Thus we know (according to the revised figures) that we have 30 Tons visible. How many sections are joined to those and are buried beyond sight within the collapse zone? We don't know. I'll stick with the lowest estimate of ONLY one more section attached and buried within the collapse zone to anchor the other three hanging outside. This still presents us with weight of some 40 Tons of steel hurled over 250 laterally through thin air from the point of their origin in WTC2. Now while you may view the fact of my revised numbers to be less than half of my original statement as some kind of debunking of my original presentation, in my view, this revision doesn't do the gravity-driven collapse scenario one bit of good really. Going back to the comparison with the weight of your truck (~ 2 Tons)... that still means that we have the equivalent mass of 20 of your trucks being hurled 250' through thin air. Chaotic bouncing / deflection off of other debris just doesn't cut it as a reasonable or plausible explaination as to HOW this 40 Ton 'spear' impaled the Bankers Trust.
Now as to the WFC 3 column 'spear' ...
Large Photo:
http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/3942.jpg
While WHAT is visible here (hanging outside 3 World Financial Center building) appears to be only a portion of one column section is somewhat deceiving. Again we don't know what additional structure is buried within the building. We can't just estimate the weight of what is visible hanging OUTSIDE. This section is certainly far less than the section which impaled Bankers Trust, nevertheless it must be taken into account that it was blown almost twice as far. I'll throw out what I would consider to be a reasonable (downsized from my original) guesstimate and suggest that this debris would weight ~ 10 Tons.
It should be borne in mind that FEMA's caption with the picture states a weight of some 600,000 lbs. Ok, so none of us are going to BUY THAT, and I have always assumed that it was a typo on the part of FEMA and they probably meant 60,000 lbs (30 Tons). In view of the Engineering News Report quote above, even THIS figure seems too high. I'll have to do some research into the Ohio Task Force to see if we can get some more accurate information from those involved in anchoring this column section.
Nevertheless... once again this revision doesn't do the gravity-driven collapse scenario one bit of good really. If we conside this 'spear' to be ONLY 10 Tons... that's STILL the combined weight of FIVE of your trucks hurled some 450 feet through thin air from the point of their origin.
Of course, I would not expect any committed gravity-driven collapse supporters to be swayed or awed in the least by this fact, but any rational person certainly would begin to be somewhat skeptical that a 'normal' building collapse could generate such circumstances, in the REAL World. I have challenged many gravity-driven CT's to show evidence of ANY building collapses caused by earthquake, poor construction, or any other natural cause which show evidence of stuctures being ejected laterally 2 - 3 times the distance of the building footprint (except by means of falling over), and none (including Yesitdid) have been able to rise to this challenge and show ANY EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER that normal gravity-driven collapses eject material laterally in this fashion. On the other hand, there are numerous incidences where conventional building demolitions have gone 'wrong' and exhibited this lateral ejection of materials for such distances.
PS - Thanks for downsizing the photos you are posting from the FEMA Library. The link works well enough for those who have cable or broadband IF they want to download the original full size. I'm on Cable, and all those full sized pictures in a row were slowing down even MY machine. People on dial-up are probably still waiting for that page to load
I retract my 'scum-bag' accusation
While your calculations above look respectable, you are assuming that these columnar sections in both Bankers Trust & WFC 3 came from the highest sections in the tower. IF they did, I would assume your figures to be quite plausible, HOWEVER no one knows (or at least is reporting) from WHERE in the towers, these 'trees' came from.
It may very well be known to investigators, (or at least SHOULD be), because as we all know these 'trees' were all stamped with identification numbers which would tell exactly from whence in the towers these columnar sections came from, so there should be no 'mystery' here at all.
In any proper investigation into such anomalous happenings, the fact of where these columns came from would be important to know, specifically so accurate measurements and calculations could have been made as to what plausible forces may have blown these spears to their targets. I'm afraid I DON'T BUY Grossmans tongue-in-cheek theory that the wind blew them there.
Although each structural member within the towers construction became lighter and less robust the higher in the building they were placed, we can not accurately determine the weight of each of the 'spears' by methods such as you have proposed above apart from knowing the exact position from which the spears came, and the exact weight of the 'trees' in that section.
While my 'estimate' was mistakenly high to one extreme - your estimate is really not much better and is at the opposite end of the extreme scale. I had expressed the '23 Tons' number based upon memory from various documents, and had considered this to be an average weight of these trees. However, my memory is not photographic, and as usual (when not checking facts before posting) memory confusion mistakes creep in. Since checking the facts I now realize that this ~ 23 Tons number was actually the weight of the heaviest 'trees' starting at the 9th story.
Here is what Engineering News Report said in an article Jan 1 1970...(related to the weights of these tree sections)...
http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardi...news-record.htm
Obviously there is a big difference between YOUR 7/16th" figure and the 3" figure near the base.
I certainly do not believe these 'spears' came from the LOWEST levels (any more than that they came from the HIGHEST levels).
Let me downsize my original stated figures, and I would now take a guess somewhere between 7 Tons to 22 Tons. I think I would be conservative to assign an average estimate of weight for these sections under examination at 10 Tons each. Doing so would certainly revise my original weight estimates downwards by a considerable extent.
Re: Bankers Trust
As are clearly visible there are three column sections visible hanging outside of the building. Thus we know (according to the revised figures) that we have 30 Tons visible. How many sections are joined to those and are buried beyond sight within the collapse zone? We don't know. I'll stick with the lowest estimate of ONLY one more section attached and buried within the collapse zone to anchor the other three hanging outside. This still presents us with weight of some 40 Tons of steel hurled over 250 laterally through thin air from the point of their origin in WTC2. Now while you may view the fact of my revised numbers to be less than half of my original statement as some kind of debunking of my original presentation, in my view, this revision doesn't do the gravity-driven collapse scenario one bit of good really. Going back to the comparison with the weight of your truck (~ 2 Tons)... that still means that we have the equivalent mass of 20 of your trucks being hurled 250' through thin air. Chaotic bouncing / deflection off of other debris just doesn't cut it as a reasonable or plausible explaination as to HOW this 40 Ton 'spear' impaled the Bankers Trust.
Now as to the WFC 3 column 'spear' ...
Large Photo:
http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/3942.jpg
While WHAT is visible here (hanging outside 3 World Financial Center building) appears to be only a portion of one column section is somewhat deceiving. Again we don't know what additional structure is buried within the building. We can't just estimate the weight of what is visible hanging OUTSIDE. This section is certainly far less than the section which impaled Bankers Trust, nevertheless it must be taken into account that it was blown almost twice as far. I'll throw out what I would consider to be a reasonable (downsized from my original) guesstimate and suggest that this debris would weight ~ 10 Tons.
I am not assuming they came from the HIGHEST part of the tower.
From the NIST report I got the values for the LOWEST floors which seem REASONABLE for them to have come from, the mid 70s, which yields 7/16", which I used as the sole example for column weight even though by the time you get to the mid 90s they drop down to 3/8" (which would be the more likely size for the longer distance and smaller panel)
What's more, I rounded up from 7/16" to 1/2" to figure out how many cubic meters of steel they were as it simplified the math (I do this by spreadsheet but x-check by pencil), then I used the highest estimate for the weight of steel per Cubic meter.
All in all I think my numbers are in fact OVERSTATED by as much as 20%, yet you still want to fatten them up from less than 7 tons by ~ 40% to 10 tons. While it may appear that you are being reasonable, I think your columns still need to go on a diet.
Now, my point of all this is simply to make sure we are discussing the RIGHT distances and REASONABLE weights. 7 tons is reasonable, 10 tons is padding the calculations. And while it is POSSIBLE they came from lower than the 70th floor, there is ALSO the possibility they came from above the 90th floor, in which case their weight drops to ~ 5 tons.
Now as to your estimates, since you are estimating, it should be stated that in the Banker's trust case we can only SEE 2 and part of a 3rd tree. There is NO EVIDENCE for a 4th tree, it could easily be hanging off the remains of the unseen 3rd tree. Thus you really should state the range of POSSIBILITIES as starting as low as 21 Tons, or possibly as low as 15 tons.
As to the WFC 3 building, again, one can't see a whole tree, there may be the rest of the tree in the building, there might not be. So again the RANGE of possiblities has to START at 7 tons or less.
Arthur
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...indpost&p=60373
QUOTE (Foxx+Feb 1 2006, 03:59 AM)
We know that this is a 'typo' (on the PART of FEMA), and that section still MUST have weighed ~ 30 - 60 Tons.
QUOTE
Originally posted by adoucette
Foxx, While the distance quoted is reasonable, I'm curious about the
MUST have weighed ~ 30 to 60 tons.
We know the steel got thinner as it went up to keep the building the same dimensions, and of course this would be one of the upper perimeter pieces.
It seems to me that 30 tons (60,000 lbs) seems a lot for that relatively small hunk of steel
I found the steel weighs ~16,000 lbs per cubic meter.
The perimeter columns were 14" square x 36 ft. At the upper elevations they were 7/16" thick steel (65ksi).
3 of these columns were connected by spandrels, which were 52" x 10 ft and at the upper elevations they were also 7/16" steel. There were 3 spandrels per section.
Which works out to ~ .8 of a cubic meter per section
Which works out to a bit less than 7 tons per section.
Which means you'd need more than 4 sections to get to 30 tons.
Seems your numbers keep going the wrong way Foxx.
Of course your FIRST clue should have been that if the sections weighed 60 tons then the weight of the 2,640 of them would exceed the total weight of the steel used to build a tower.
But hey, you've been looking at this 4 years, I've only been at it 4 months, I could be wrong.
Arthur
Foxx, While the distance quoted is reasonable, I'm curious about the
MUST have weighed ~ 30 to 60 tons.
We know the steel got thinner as it went up to keep the building the same dimensions, and of course this would be one of the upper perimeter pieces.
It seems to me that 30 tons (60,000 lbs) seems a lot for that relatively small hunk of steel
I found the steel weighs ~16,000 lbs per cubic meter.
The perimeter columns were 14" square x 36 ft. At the upper elevations they were 7/16" thick steel (65ksi).
3 of these columns were connected by spandrels, which were 52" x 10 ft and at the upper elevations they were also 7/16" steel. There were 3 spandrels per section.
Which works out to ~ .8 of a cubic meter per section
Which works out to a bit less than 7 tons per section.
Which means you'd need more than 4 sections to get to 30 tons.
Seems your numbers keep going the wrong way Foxx.
Of course your FIRST clue should have been that if the sections weighed 60 tons then the weight of the 2,640 of them would exceed the total weight of the steel used to build a tower.
But hey, you've been looking at this 4 years, I've only been at it 4 months, I could be wrong.
Arthur
Reply from Foxx...
Well, it seems that I have made an error in my estimates related to the weight of the columnar section trees. I had said that these 3 story sections weighed about 23 Tons each, and will explain below how I should revise that statement.
While your calculations above look respectable, you are assuming that these columnar sections in both Bankers Trust & WFC 3 came from the highest sections in the tower. IF they did, I would assume your figures to be quite plausible, HOWEVER no one knows (or at least is reporting) from WHERE in the towers, these 'trees' came from.
It may very well be known to investigators, (or at least SHOULD be), because as we all know these 'trees' were all stamped with identification numbers which would tell exactly from whence in the towers these columnar sections came from, so there should be no 'mystery' here at all.
In any proper investigation into such anomalous happenings, the fact of where these columns came from would be important to know, specifically so accurate measurements and calculations could have been made as to what plausible forces may have blown these spears to their targets. I'm afraid I DON'T BUY Grossmans tongue-in-cheek theory that the wind blew them there.
Although each structural member within the towers construction became lighter and less robust the higher in the building they were placed, we can not accurately determine the weight of each of the 'spears' by methods such as you have proposed above apart from knowing the exact position from which the spears came, and the exact weight of the 'trees' in that section.
While my 'estimate' was mistakenly high to one extreme - your estimate is really not much better and is at the opposite end of the extreme scale. I had expressed the '23 Tons' number based upon memory from various documents, and had considered this to be an average weight of these trees. However, my memory is not photographic, and as usual (when not checking facts before posting) memory confusion mistakes creep in. Since checking the facts I now realize that this ~ 23 Tons number was actually the weight of the heaviest 'trees' starting at the 9th story.
Here is what Engineering News Report said in an article Jan 1 1970...(related to the weights of these tree sections)...
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Originally posted by adoucette Foxx, While the distance quoted is reasonable, I'm curious about the MUST have weighed ~ 30 to 60 tons. We know the steel got thinner as it went up to keep the building the same dimensions, and of course this would be one of the upper perimeter pieces. It seems to me that 30 tons (60,000 lbs) seems a lot for that relatively small hunk of steel I found the steel weighs ~16,000 lbs per cubic meter. The perimeter columns were 14" square x 36 ft. At the upper elevations they were 7/16" thick steel (65ksi). 3 of these columns were connected by spandrels, which were 52" x 10 ft and at the upper elevations they were also 7/16" steel. There were 3 spandrels per section. Which works out to ~ .8 of a cubic meter per section Which works out to a bit less than 7 tons per section. Which means you'd need more than 4 sections to get to 30 tons. Seems your numbers keep going the wrong way Foxx. Of course your FIRST clue should have been that if the sections weighed 60 tons then the weight of the 2,640 of them would exceed the total weight of the steel used to build a tower. But hey, you've been looking at this 4 years, I've only been at it 4 months, I could be wrong. Arthur |
Reply from Foxx...
Well, it seems that I have made an error in my estimates related to the weight of the columnar section trees. I had said that these 3 story sections weighed about 23 Tons each, and will explain below how I should revise that statement.
While your calculations above look respectable, you are assuming that these columnar sections in both Bankers Trust & WFC 3 came from the highest sections in the tower. IF they did, I would assume your figures to be quite plausible, HOWEVER no one knows (or at least is reporting) from WHERE in the towers, these 'trees' came from.
It may very well be known to investigators, (or at least SHOULD be), because as we all know these 'trees' were all stamped with identification numbers which would tell exactly from whence in the towers these columnar sections came from, so there should be no 'mystery' here at all.
In any proper investigation into such anomalous happenings, the fact of where these columns came from would be important to know, specifically so accurate measurements and calculations could have been made as to what plausible forces may have blown these spears to their targets. I'm afraid I DON'T BUY Grossmans tongue-in-cheek theory that the wind blew them there.
Although each structural member within the towers construction became lighter and less robust the higher in the building they were placed, we can not accurately determine the weight of each of the 'spears' by methods such as you have proposed above apart from knowing the exact position from which the spears came, and the exact weight of the 'trees' in that section.
While my 'estimate' was mistakenly high to one extreme - your estimate is really not much better and is at the opposite end of the extreme scale. I had expressed the '23 Tons' number based upon memory from various documents, and had considered this to be an average weight of these trees. However, my memory is not photographic, and as usual (when not checking facts before posting) memory confusion mistakes creep in. Since checking the facts I now realize that this ~ 23 Tons number was actually the weight of the heaviest 'trees' starting at the 9th story.
Here is what Engineering News Report said in an article Jan 1 1970...(related to the weights of these tree sections)...
The largest contract for fabrication of structural steel is held by Pacific Car and Foundry Co., of Seattle. It is $21.79 million for 55,000 tons of steel for the towers' bearing wall panels from the ninth floor up.
In all there are 5,828 of these panels, each about 10 ft wide, 36 ft high, with the heaviest individual panel weighing about 22 tons. Each panel consists of three box columns, 14 in. square, made up of plate up to 3 in. thick and, connected by 54-in, deep spandrels.
http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardi...news-record.htm
Obviously there is a big difference between YOUR 7/16th" figure and the 3" figure near the base.
I certainly do not believe these 'spears' came from the LOWEST levels (any more than that they came from the HIGHEST levels).
Let me downsize my original stated figures, and I would now take a guess somewhere between 7 Tons to 22 Tons. I think I would be conservative to assign an average estimate of weight for these sections under examination at 10 Tons each. Doing so would certainly revise my original weight estimates downwards by a considerable extent.
Re: Bankers Trust
As are clearly visible there are three column sections visible hanging outside of the building. Thus we know (according to the revised figures) that we have 30 Tons visible. How many sections are joined to those and are buried beyond sight within the collapse zone? We don't know. I'll stick with the lowest estimate of ONLY one more section attached and buried within the collapse zone to anchor the other three hanging outside. This still presents us with weight of some 40 Tons of steel hurled over 250 laterally through thin air from the point of their origin in WTC2. Now while you may view the fact of my revised numbers to be less than half of my original statement as some kind of debunking of my original presentation, in my view, this revision doesn't do the gravity-driven collapse scenario one bit of good really. Going back to the comparison with the weight of your truck (~ 2 Tons)... that still means that we have the equivalent mass of 20 of your trucks being hurled 250' through thin air. Chaotic bouncing / deflection off of other debris just doesn't cut it as a reasonable or plausible explaination as to HOW this 40 Ton 'spear' impaled the Bankers Trust.
Now as to the WFC 3 column 'spear' ...
Large Photo:
http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/3942.jpg
While WHAT is visible here (hanging outside 3 World Financial Center building) appears to be only a portion of one column section is somewhat deceiving. Again we don't know what additional structure is buried within the building. We can't just estimate the weight of what is visible hanging OUTSIDE. This section is certainly far less than the section which impaled Bankers Trust, nevertheless it must be taken into account that it was blown almost twice as far. I'll throw out what I would consider to be a reasonable (downsized from my original) guesstimate and suggest that this debris would weight ~ 10 Tons.
It should be borne in mind that FEMA's caption with the picture states a weight of some 600,000 lbs. Ok, so none of us are going to BUY THAT, and I have always assumed that it was a typo on the part of FEMA and they probably meant 60,000 lbs (30 Tons). In view of the Engineering News Report quote above, even THIS figure seems too high. I'll have to do some research into the Ohio Task Force to see if we can get some more accurate information from those involved in anchoring this column section.
Nevertheless... once again this revision doesn't do the gravity-driven collapse scenario one bit of good really. If we conside this 'spear' to be ONLY 10 Tons... that's STILL the combined weight of FIVE of your trucks hurled some 450 feet through thin air from the point of their origin.
Of course, I would not expect any committed gravity-driven collapse supporters to be swayed or awed in the least by this fact, but any rational person certainly would begin to be somewhat skeptical that a 'normal' building collapse could generate such circumstances, in the REAL World. I have challenged many gravity-driven CT's to show evidence of ANY building collapses caused by earthquake, poor construction, or any other natural cause which show evidence of stuctures being ejected laterally 2 - 3 times the distance of the building footprint (except by means of falling over), and none (including Yesitdid) have been able to rise to this challenge and show ANY EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER that normal gravity-driven collapses eject material laterally in this fashion. On the other hand, there are numerous incidences where conventional building demolitions have gone 'wrong' and exhibited this lateral ejection of materials for such distances.
PS - Thanks for downsizing the photos you are posting from the FEMA Library. The link works well enough for those who have cable or broadband IF they want to download the original full size. I'm on Cable, and all those full sized pictures in a row were slowing down even MY machine. People on dial-up are probably still waiting for that page to load
I retract my 'scum-bag' accusation
QUOTE (Foxx+)
Of course, I would not expect any committed gravity-driven collapse supporters to be swayed or awed in the least by this fact, but any rational person certainly would begin to be somewhat skeptical that a 'normal' building collapse could generate such circumstances, in the REAL World. I have challenged many gravity-driven CT's to show evidence of ANY building collapses caused by earthquake, poor construction, or any other natural cause which show evidence of stuctures being ejected laterally 2 - 3 times the distance of the building footprint (except by means of falling over), and none (including Yesitdid) have been able to rise to this challenge and show ANY EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER that normal gravity-driven collapses eject material laterally in this fashion. On the other hand, there are numerous incidences where conventional building demolitions have gone 'wrong' and exhibited this lateral ejection of materials for such distances.
The operative word is NORMAL.
You keep talking about a "Normal Gravity Driven" collapse but there ARE no other "NORMAL" gravity driven collapses of 110 column within column structures to compare it to.
Further there are no "Normal" examples of 110 buildings that have fuel laden passenger jets flown into them and then burn out of control until the section ABOVE the impact collapses onto the bottom section precipitating a gravity driven collapse.
Now what IS interesting is this last factor, the top section falling through the fire and impact weakened floors until it hits the non-weakened floors may very well be LOGICALLY SIMILAR to what you claim are "numerous incidences where conventional building demolitions have gone 'wrong' and exhibited this lateral ejection of materials for such distances."
The "ejection of material" in this case does not have to be because of use of explosives, but may in fact be due to unexpected forces generated in a less than symetrical fall.
Arthur
The operative word is NORMAL.
You keep talking about a "Normal Gravity Driven" collapse but there ARE no other "NORMAL" gravity driven collapses of 110 column within column structures to compare it to.
Further there are no "Normal" examples of 110 buildings that have fuel laden passenger jets flown into them and then burn out of control until the section ABOVE the impact collapses onto the bottom section precipitating a gravity driven collapse.
Now what IS interesting is this last factor, the top section falling through the fire and impact weakened floors until it hits the non-weakened floors may very well be LOGICALLY SIMILAR to what you claim are "numerous incidences where conventional building demolitions have gone 'wrong' and exhibited this lateral ejection of materials for such distances."
The "ejection of material" in this case does not have to be because of use of explosives, but may in fact be due to unexpected forces generated in a less than symetrical fall.
Arthur
QUOTE (Foxx+Feb 2 2006, 04:36 AM)
While your calculations above look respectable, you are assuming that these columnar sections in both Bankers Trust & WFC 3 came from the highest sections in the tower. IF they did, I would assume your figures to be quite plausible, HOWEVER no one knows (or at least is reporting) from WHERE in the towers, these 'trees' came from.
It may very well be known to investigators, (or at least SHOULD be), because as we all know these 'trees' were all stamped with identification numbers which would tell exactly from whence in the towers these columnar sections came from, so there should be no 'mystery' here at all.
In any proper investigation into such anomalous happenings, the fact of where these columns came from would be important to know, specifically so accurate measurements and calculations could have been made as to what plausible forces may have blown these spears to their targets. I'm afraid I DON'T BUY Grossmans tongue-in-cheek theory that the wind blew them there.
Although each structural member within the towers construction became lighter and less robust the higher in the building they were placed, we can not accurately determine the weight of each of the 'spears' by methods such as you have proposed above apart from knowing the exact position from which the spears came, and the exact weight of the 'trees' in that section.
While my 'estimate' was mistakenly high to one extreme - your estimate is really not much better and is at the opposite end of the extreme scale. I had expressed the '23 Tons' number based upon memory from various documents, and had considered this to be an average weight of these trees. However, my memory is not photographic, and as usual (when not checking facts before posting) memory confusion mistakes creep in. Since checking the facts I now realize that this ~ 23 Tons number was actually the weight of the heaviest 'trees' starting at the 9th story.
Here is what Engineering News Report said in an article Jan 1 1970...(related to the weights of these tree sections)...
QUOTE
The largest contract for fabrication of structural steel is held by Pacific Car and Foundry Co., of Seattle. It is $21.79 million for 55,000 tons of steel for the towers' bearing wall panels from the ninth floor up.
In all there are 5,828 of these panels, each about 10 ft wide, 36 ft high, with the heaviest individual panel weighing about 22 tons. Each panel consists of three box columns, 14 in. square, made up of plate up to 3 in. thick and, connected by 54-in, deep spandrels.
In all there are 5,828 of these panels, each about 10 ft wide, 36 ft high, with the heaviest individual panel weighing about 22 tons. Each panel consists of three box columns, 14 in. square, made up of plate up to 3 in. thick and, connected by 54-in, deep spandrels.
http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardi...news-record.htm
Obviously there is a big difference between YOUR 7/16th" figure and the 3" figure near the base.
I certainly do not believe these 'spears' came from the LOWEST levels (any more than that they came from the HIGHEST levels).
Let me downsize my original stated figures, and I would now take a guess somewhere between 7 Tons to 22 Tons. I think I would be conservative to assign an average estimate of weight for these sections under examination at 10 Tons each. Doing so would certainly revise my original weight estimates downwards by a considerable extent.
Re: Bankers Trust
As are clearly visible there are three column sections visible hanging outside of the building. Thus we know (according to the revised figures) that we have 30 Tons visible. How many sections are joined to those and are buried beyond sight within the collapse zone? We don't know. I'll stick with the lowest estimate of ONLY one more section attached and buried within the collapse zone to anchor the other three hanging outside. This still presents us with weight of some 40 Tons of steel hurled over 250 laterally through thin air from the point of their origin in WTC2. Now while you may view the fact of my revised numbers to be less than half of my original statement as some kind of debunking of my original presentation, in my view, this revision doesn't do the gravity-driven collapse scenario one bit of good really. Going back to the comparison with the weight of your truck (~ 2 Tons)... that still means that we have the equivalent mass of 20 of your trucks being hurled 250' through thin air. Chaotic bouncing / deflection off of other debris just doesn't cut it as a reasonable or plausible explaination as to HOW this 40 Ton 'spear' impaled the Bankers Trust.
Now as to the WFC 3 column 'spear' ...
Large Photo:
http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/3942.jpg
While WHAT is visible here (hanging outside 3 World Financial Center building) appears to be only a portion of one column section is somewhat deceiving. Again we don't know what additional structure is buried within the building. We can't just estimate the weight of what is visible hanging OUTSIDE. This section is certainly far less than the section which impaled Bankers Trust, nevertheless it must be taken into account that it was blown almost twice as far. I'll throw out what I would consider to be a reasonable (downsized from my original) guesstimate and suggest that this debris would weight ~ 10 Tons.
I am not assuming they came from the HIGHEST part of the tower.
From the NIST report I got the values for the LOWEST floors which seem REASONABLE for them to have come from, the mid 70s, which yields 7/16", which I used as the sole example for column weight even though by the time you get to the mid 90s they drop down to 3/8" (which would be the more likely size for the longer distance and smaller panel)
What's more, I rounded up from 7/16" to 1/2" to figure out how many cubic meters of steel they were as it simplified the math (I do this by spreadsheet but x-check by pencil), then I used the highest estimate for the weight of steel per Cubic meter.
All in all I think my numbers are in fact OVERSTATED by as much as 20%, yet you still want to fatten them up from less than 7 tons by ~ 40% to 10 tons. While it may appear that you are being reasonable, I think your columns still need to go on a diet.
Now, my point of all this is simply to make sure we are discussing the RIGHT distances and REASONABLE weights. 7 tons is reasonable, 10 tons is padding the calculations. And while it is POSSIBLE they came from lower than the 70th floor, there is ALSO the possibility they came from above the 90th floor, in which case their weight drops to ~ 5 tons.
Now as to your estimates, since you are estimating, it should be stated that in the Banker's trust case we can only SEE 2 and part of a 3rd tree. There is NO EVIDENCE for a 4th tree, it could easily be hanging off the remains of the unseen 3rd tree. Thus you really should state the range of POSSIBILITIES as starting as low as 21 Tons, or possibly as low as 15 tons.
As to the WFC 3 building, again, one can't see a whole tree, there may be the rest of the tree in the building, there might not be. So again the RANGE of possiblities has to START at 7 tons or less.
Arthur
Foxx, excellent stuff as per usual.
If you have not accepted this invitation below why not? Your knowledge resources and discipline are surely what is being asked for. The stuff you have posted on this thread alone has the makings of the type of material being asked for and you certainly fit the criteria.
Scholars for 9/11 Truth
JOIN US
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/JoinUs.html
"Perhaps we should observe that, among the potential benefits of joining this society, you may become the subject of government surveillance and might even be placed on various lists of "potential terrorists."
Old hat to you eh.
If you have not accepted this invitation below why not? Your knowledge resources and discipline are surely what is being asked for. The stuff you have posted on this thread alone has the makings of the type of material being asked for and you certainly fit the criteria.
Scholars for 9/11 Truth
JOIN US
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/JoinUs.html
"Perhaps we should observe that, among the potential benefits of joining this society, you may become the subject of government surveillance and might even be placed on various lists of "potential terrorists."
Old hat to you eh.
QUOTE (adoucette+Feb 2 2006, 02:04 PM)
QUOTE (Foxx+)
Of course, I would not expect any committed gravity-driven collapse supporters to be swayed or awed in the least by this fact, but any rational person certainly would begin to be somewhat skeptical that a 'normal' building collapse could generate such circumstances, in the REAL World. I have challenged many gravity-driven CT's to show evidence of ANY building collapses caused by earthquake, poor construction, or any other natural cause which show evidence of stuctures being ejected laterally 2 - 3 times the distance of the building footprint (except by means of falling over), and none (including Yesitdid) have been able to rise to this challenge and show ANY EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER that normal gravity-driven collapses eject material laterally in this fashion. On the other hand, there are numerous incidences where conventional building demolitions have gone 'wrong' and exhibited this lateral ejection of materials for such distances.
The operative word is NORMAL.
You keep talking about a "Normal Gravity Driven" collapse but there ARE no other "NORMAL" gravity driven collapses of 110 column within column structures to compare it to.
Further there are no "Normal" examples of 110 buildings that have fuel laden passenger jets flown into them and then burn out of control until the section ABOVE the impact collapses onto the bottom section precipitating a gravity driven collapse.
Now what IS interesting is this last factor, the top section falling through the fire and impact weakened floors until it hits the non-weakened floors may very well be LOGICALLY SIMILAR to what you claim are "numerous incidences where conventional building demolitions have gone 'wrong' and exhibited this lateral ejection of materials for such distances."
The "ejection of material" in this case does not have to be because of use of explosives, but may in fact be due to unexpected forces generated in a less than symetrical fall.
Arthur
As I said, back to HOT CRUNCH bellows and bullshit.
"LOGICALLY SIMILAR" - Why?
Why again when YOU go on to tell us they were "unexpected forces"?
One moment it may very well be logical the next moment it is unexpected.
Foxx, join up, you wont have to answer non stop drivel at least.
The operative word is NORMAL.
You keep talking about a "Normal Gravity Driven" collapse but there ARE no other "NORMAL" gravity driven collapses of 110 column within column structures to compare it to.
Further there are no "Normal" examples of 110 buildings that have fuel laden passenger jets flown into them and then burn out of control until the section ABOVE the impact collapses onto the bottom section precipitating a gravity driven collapse.
Now what IS interesting is this last factor, the top section falling through the fire and impact weakened floors until it hits the non-weakened floors may very well be LOGICALLY SIMILAR to what you claim are "numerous incidences where conventional building demolitions have gone 'wrong' and exhibited this lateral ejection of materials for such distances."
The "ejection of material" in this case does not have to be because of use of explosives, but may in fact be due to unexpected forces generated in a less than symetrical fall.
Arthur
As I said, back to HOT CRUNCH bellows and bullshit.
"LOGICALLY SIMILAR" - Why?
Why again when YOU go on to tell us they were "unexpected forces"?
One moment it may very well be logical the next moment it is unexpected.
Foxx, join up, you wont have to answer non stop drivel at least.
QUOTE (brian+Feb 2 2006, 02:32 PM)
Foxx, excellent stuff as per usual.
If you have not accepted this invitation below why not? Your knowledge resources and discipline are surely what is being asked for. The stuff you have posted on this thread alone has the makings of the type of material being asked for and you certainly fit the criteria.
Scholars for 9/11 Truth
JOIN US
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/JoinUs.html
"Perhaps we should observe that, among the potential benefits of joining this society, you may become the subject of government surveillance and might even be placed on various lists of "potential terrorists."
Old hat to you eh.
Yeah, pile up the clown car again and move your circus to another town. That includes you brian.
If you have not accepted this invitation below why not? Your knowledge resources and discipline are surely what is being asked for. The stuff you have posted on this thread alone has the makings of the type of material being asked for and you certainly fit the criteria.
Scholars for 9/11 Truth
JOIN US
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/JoinUs.html
"Perhaps we should observe that, among the potential benefits of joining this society, you may become the subject of government surveillance and might even be placed on various lists of "potential terrorists."
Old hat to you eh.
Yeah, pile up the clown car again and move your circus to another town. That includes you brian.
yeah, foxx.
I'm beginning to feel it would be a good idea to join these homeboys. better than arguing with paid government whores all day.....
I'm beginning to feel it would be a good idea to join these homeboys. better than arguing with paid government whores all day.....
QUOTE (brian+Feb 2 2006, 02:46 PM)
QUOTE (adoucette+Feb 2 2006, 02:04 PM)
QUOTE (Foxx+)
Of course, I would not expect any committed gravity-driven collapse supporters to be swayed or awed in the least by this fact, but any rational person certainly would begin to be somewhat skeptical that a 'normal' building collapse could generate such circumstances, in the REAL World. I have challenged many gravity-driven CT's to show evidence of ANY building collapses caused by earthquake, poor construction, or any other natural cause which show evidence of stuctures being ejected laterally 2 - 3 times the distance of the building footprint (except by means of falling over), and none (including Yesitdid) have been able to rise to this challenge and show ANY EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER that normal gravity-driven collapses eject material laterally in this fashion. On the other hand, there are numerous incidences where conventional building demolitions have gone 'wrong' and exhibited this lateral ejection of materials for such distances.
The operative word is NORMAL.
You keep talking about a "Normal Gravity Driven" collapse but there ARE no other "NORMAL" gravity driven collapses of 110 column within column structures to compare it to.
Further there are no "Normal" examples of 110 buildings that have fuel laden passenger jets flown into them and then burn out of control until the section ABOVE the impact collapses onto the bottom section precipitating a gravity driven collapse.
Now what IS interesting is this last factor, the top section falling through the fire and impact weakened floors until it hits the non-weakened floors may very well be LOGICALLY SIMILAR to what you claim are "numerous incidences where conventional building demolitions have gone 'wrong' and exhibited this lateral ejection of materials for such distances."
The "ejection of material" in this case does not have to be because of use of explosives, but may in fact be due to unexpected forces generated in a less than symetrical fall.
Arthur
As I said, back to HOT CRUNCH bellows and bullshit.
"LOGICALLY SIMILAR" - Why?
Why again when YOU go on to tell us they were "unexpected forces"?
One moment it may very well be logical the next moment it is unexpected.
Foxx, join up, you wont have to answer non stop drivel at least.
Where did he say "Bellows" you lair. The only bellows effect here is from the hot air your mouth spews out.
Can't you go one post without lying? You even posted adoucette's quote which doesn't have a word about bellows. If you're going to lie don't make it so easy to prove you're lying, will ya. Geez...
A lair is a place that animals use to hide themselves, while at sleep, hibernation or when they take part in reproduction. Some lair-using animals build their lairs, others use hollows which occur naturally, like caves.
In Scots, lair is also used for a burial-plot in a graveyard.
In mythology, heroes have often hunted dragons and similar mythic beasts to their lairs. Consequently, fantasy role playing games often feature monster lairs as a common place for participants to find a treasure trove.
The operative word is NORMAL.
You keep talking about a "Normal Gravity Driven" collapse but there ARE no other "NORMAL" gravity driven collapses of 110 column within column structures to compare it to.
Further there are no "Normal" examples of 110 buildings that have fuel laden passenger jets flown into them and then burn out of control until the section ABOVE the impact collapses onto the bottom section precipitating a gravity driven collapse.
Now what IS interesting is this last factor, the top section falling through the fire and impact weakened floors until it hits the non-weakened floors may very well be LOGICALLY SIMILAR to what you claim are "numerous incidences where conventional building demolitions have gone 'wrong' and exhibited this lateral ejection of materials for such distances."
The "ejection of material" in this case does not have to be because of use of explosives, but may in fact be due to unexpected forces generated in a less than symetrical fall.
Arthur
As I said, back to HOT CRUNCH bellows and bullshit.
"LOGICALLY SIMILAR" - Why?
Why again when YOU go on to tell us they were "unexpected forces"?
One moment it may very well be logical the next moment it is unexpected.
Foxx, join up, you wont have to answer non stop drivel at least.
Where did he say "Bellows" you lair. The only bellows effect here is from the hot air your mouth spews out.
Can't you go one post without lying? You even posted adoucette's quote which doesn't have a word about bellows. If you're going to lie don't make it so easy to prove you're lying, will ya. Geez...
QUOTE
Where did he say "Bellows" you lair.
A lair is a place that animals use to hide themselves, while at sleep, hibernation or when they take part in reproduction. Some lair-using animals build their lairs, others use hollows which occur naturally, like caves.
In Scots, lair is also used for a burial-plot in a graveyard.
In mythology, heroes have often hunted dragons and similar mythic beasts to their lairs. Consequently, fantasy role playing games often feature monster lairs as a common place for participants to find a treasure trove.
Common - evidently - Sense - evidently lacking.
PS - he never said bullshit either - no need eh.
PS - he never said bullshit either - no need eh.
QUOTE (frater plecticus+Feb 2 2006, 02:57 PM)
yeah, foxx.
I'm beginning to feel it would be a good idea to join these homeboys. better than arguing with paid government whores all day.....
Maybe you should find another corner so you don't have to argue with your err.. colleagues.
Hell, find a compound in wacko Waco and wait for the gubament to burn your compound down. Don't forget your thermite proof undies. You might want to find a spot for the UFOs while your at it. Just keep some anti viral medicine around, you never know where those anal probes have been.
I'm beginning to feel it would be a good idea to join these homeboys. better than arguing with paid government whores all day.....
Maybe you should find another corner so you don't have to argue with your err.. colleagues.
Hell, find a compound in wacko Waco and wait for the gubament to burn your compound down. Don't forget your thermite proof undies. You might want to find a spot for the UFOs while your at it. Just keep some anti viral medicine around, you never know where those anal probes have been.
QUOTE (brian+Feb 2 2006, 03:06 PM)
Common - evidently - Sense - evidently lacking.
PS - he never said bullshit either - no need eh.
What a comback... Did you think of that all by yourself or did you pay someone...
PS - he never said bullshit either - no need eh.
What a comback...
Did you think of that all by yourself or did you pay someone...
DRAFT 1.0
9/11: Have we been lied to?
An article in preparation by members of Scholars for 9/11 Truth
January 2006
All of that [the US military role of the 20th century] changed on Sept. 11… We saw on 9- 11 nineteen men hijack aircraft with airline tickets and box cutters and killed more than 3,000 Americans in a couple of hours. Richard Cheney , March 2003.
In the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted …they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie… It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Adolf Hitler, 1925
Why do so many accept the “official story” of 9/11 uncritically – that a few hijackers (per plane) alone overpowered well-trained airline pilots using box-cutters and hijacked four separate airliners, then brought down the World Trade Center buildings and struck the Pentagon – all without being intercepted by military jets? Americans have been told this story over and over and most seem to accept it without scrutiny. To challenge this story is to risk being smeared with the dreaded conspiracy-theorist label. It is easier to dismiss without much consideration the notion that the official story may be wrong or that our leaders may have known about the impending attacks before hand and misled us.
But – as recognized by prominent conservatives and liberals alike -- they have misled us in important things, clearly. Here are a few examples.
WMD’s
In August 2002, Vice President Cheney stated:
Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us. And there is no doubt that his aggressive regional ambitions will lead him into future confrontations with his neighbors -- confrontations that will involve both the weapons he has today, and the ones he will continue to develop with his oil wealth.… the President and I never for a moment forget our number one responsibility: to protect the American people against further attack, and to win the war that began last September 11th. http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20...8/20020826.html
Others in the Bush administration made the same claim: “No doubt” that Saddam had WMD’s. Yet, there were no weapons of mass destruction found in Iraq. Moreover, an initiative of the UN to conduct weapons inspections in Iraq was abruptly aborted by the U.S. decision to attack. (An excellent 4-minute mini-documentary explains further, with historical clips of various officials: http://www.iwilltryit.com/downingstreet1.htm. )
LINKING IRAQ AND 9/11
Indeed, the current administration rationalized the Iraq war upon a false link between Saddam Hussein and 9/11, and has repeated that link ever since. Specifically,
Ten days after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, President Bush was told in a highly classified briefing that the U.S. intelligence community had no evidence linking the Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein to the attacks and that there was scant credible evidence that Iraq had any significant collaborative ties with Al Qaeda". (http://nationaljournal.com/about/njweekly/stories/2005/1122nj1.htm)
And yet Bush, Cheney and other top administration officials claimed and continue to claim that Saddam was behind 9/11. See http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/007005.php. Indeed, Bush administration officials apparently swore in a lawsuit that Saddam was behind 9/11. (http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/print_friendly.php?p=opedne_evelyn_p_051115_bush_gang_swore_sadd.htm)
President Bush's March 18, 2003 letter to Congress authorizing the use of force against Iraq, includes the following paragraph:
(2) acting pursuant to the Constitution and Public Law 107-243 is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001. (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030319-1.html)
The administration's successful but false linking of Saddam with 9/11 helped convince a large portion of the American public to invade Iraq. While the focus now may be on false WMD claims, it is important to remember that at the time, the Saddam-911 link was touted as a strong reason to invade Iraq. (http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0314/p02s01-woiq.html)
9/11 TOXIC DUST AND MISLEADING REASSURANCES
Within days of the September 11th tragedy, USGS scientists carefully analyzed dust samples. The results from various tests showed the presence of asbestos and heavy metals and high alkalinity. USGS scientist Gregg Swayze stated:
“Some techniques can see more than others, and we were throwing in every technique we had in house,” he says. Tests revealed the dust to be extremely alkaline with a pH of 12.1 (out of 14) and that some of it was as caustic as liquid drain cleaner. “We were startled at the pH level we were finding,” Swayze adds. “We knew that the cement dust was caustic, but we were getting pH readings of 12 and higher. It was obvious that precautions had to be taken to protect the workers and people returning to their homes from the dust.” Sam Vance, an environmental scientist with the EPA, sent the results to officials at the EPA, the New York health department and US Public Health Service. [St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 2/10/02]
Despite such warnings from experienced scientists, the EPA released press releases which gave false reassurance about the toxic dust.
EPA has found variable asbestos levels in bulk debris and dust on the ground, but EPA continues to believe that there is no significant health risk to the general public in the coming days…
"Our tests show that it is safe for New Yorkers to go back to work in New York's financial district," said John L. Henshaw, Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA. [Said] EPA Administrator Christie Whitman: "… The good news continues to be that the air samples we have taken have all been at levels that cause us no concern." EPA press release, September 16, 2001.)
EPA Administrator Christie Whitman announced today that results from the Agency's air and drinking water monitoring near the World Trade Center and Pentagon disaster sites indicate that these vital resources are safe. Whitman also announced that EPA has been given up to $83 million from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to support EPA's involvement…
"We are very encouraged that the results from our monitoring of air quality and drinking water conditions in both New York and near the Pentagon show that the public in these areas is not being exposed to excessive levels of asbestos or other harmful substances," Whitman said. "Given the scope of the tragedy from last week, I am glad to reassure the people of New York and Washington, D.C. that their air is safe to breath (sic) and their water is safe to drink," she added. (EPA press release, September 18, 2001.)
Two years later, the truth came out, that the White House had in fact deleted scientific warnings and replaced these with (incorrect) reassuring statements:
At the White House's direction, the Environmental Protection Agency gave New Yorkers misleading assurances that there was no health risk from the debris-laden air after the World Trade Center collapse, according to an internal inquiry. The White House "convinced EPA to add reassuring statements and delete cautionary ones" by having the National Security Council control EPA communications after the Sept. 11 terror attacks, according to a report issued late Thursday by EPA Inspector General Nikki Tinsley.
In all, the EPA issued five news releases within 10 days of the attacks and four more by the end of 2001 reassuring the public about air quality. But it wasn't until June 2002 that the EPA determined that air quality had returned to pre-Sept. 11 levels -- well after respiratory ailments and other problems began to surface in hundreds of workers cleaning dusty offices and apartments. The day after the attacks, former EPA Deputy Administrator Linda Fisher's chief of staff e-mailed senior EPA officials to say that "all statements to the media should be cleared" first by the National Security Council, which is Bush's main forum for discussing national security and foreign policy matters with his senior aides and Cabinet, the inspector general's report says. For example, the inspector general found, the EPA was persuaded to omit guidance for cleaning indoor spaces and tips on potential health effects from airborne dust containing asbestos, lead, glass fibers and concrete. James Connaughton, chairman of the environmental council, which coordinates federal environmental efforts, said the White House directed the EPA to add and delete information based on how it should be released publicly… http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/136350_epa23.html By JOHN HEILPRIN THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
The administration, when caught red-handed, did not admit guilt nor apologize. Instead, they “attacked the messenger” by criticizing the whistleblower Nikki Tinsley. As a sad addendum, we note that since Tinsley’s scathing report, at least two individuals who helped at Ground Zero have died, James Zadroga and Tim Keller.
Zadroga had developed black lung disease and mercury on the brain as a result of working at ground zero, Palladino said. Zadroga spent 470 hours in the first month after the Sept. 11, 2001, collapse of the trade center in rescue and recovery efforts, working up to 16 hours a day at the site… A majority of residents and ground zero workers tracked by several different registries monitoring the participants' health have reported worsening respiratory problems in the years since the attacks. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/01/08/...in1185610.shtml
The dust particles at Ground Zero were small enough to penetrate deep into the lungs and become lodged causing permanent damage to the lungs. What's worse is what was in the dust - hundreds of tons of asbestos, mercury from tens of thousands of fluorescent light bulbs, and lead from over 50,000 computers. All of these toxic materials were released into the air when the 9/11 attack occurred.
Tim Keller, a veteran NYC fire department medic, was one of the heroes. Not only was Keller one of the first rescuers on the scene, he also spent weeks at Ground Zero searching for 9/11 survivors. Keller was diagnosed with severe chronic asthmatic bronchitis about one year after the 9/11 World Trade Center attack. When Keller became ill, he turned to the city for help - the city where he had dedicated his life to helping others and saving lives. He was denied both worker's compensation and any 9/11 benefits. The city did not believe there was a connection between his condition and the 9/11 attack.
Eventually, Keller received a partial benefit, however it was no where near enough to help him treat his lung disease. Keller soon became too sick to work, and too in debt to fill his much-needed prescriptions. Tim Keller died at the young age of 41. http://lungdiseases.about.com/b/a/187074.htm
SHUTTING OUR EYES AGAINST PAINFUL TRUTHS?
Early in our country’s history, true patriots stood for truth while criticizing the governing regime. Patrick Henry stated:
We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth... Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those, who having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not..?
For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it might cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know.. it -- now. 1775
On the other hand, Adolf Hitler wrote about the “Big Lie” approach in his infamous Mein Kampf :
In the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying. These people know only too well how to use falsehood for the basest purposes.... (Hitler, 1925, p. 134)
The central question here is whether the Bush administration – which has used 9/11 as an excuse for wars and enormous deficit spending -- knew about the 9/11 attacks in advance, and allowed them to happen. This is a bold question. Let’s examine some facts. How did the hijacked planes get through to their targets? Is it possible that officials stopped the scrambling of military jets, routinely launched to intercept hijacked planes? How do we know that bin Laden was behind the hijackings anyway – seeing that he himself has repeatedly denied this and no one has yet been convicted? We will examine these and other issues in this paper.
1. Foreknowledge of US officials regarding 9/11 hijackers: Able Danger
The story of a covert intelligence operation called Able Danger came to light just months ago. Previously undisclosed facts are still coming to light, due primarily to the investigation spear-headed by Congressman Curt Weldon (R-Pa), vice chairman of the House Armed Services and House Homeland Security committees. The existence of this operation and its identification of Mohamed Atta and other 9/11 hijackers, long before 9/11, was disclosed publicly on the House floor by Rep. Weldon on June 27, 2005:
Mr. Speaker, I rise because information has come to my attention over the past several months that is very disturbing. I have learned that, in fact, one of our Federal agencies had, in fact, identified the major New York cell of Mohamed Atta prior to 9/11; and I have learned, Mr. Speaker, that in September of 2000, that Federal agency actually was prepared to bring the FBI in and prepared to work with the FBI to take down the cell that Mohamed Atta was involved in New York City, along with two of the other terrorists. I have also learned, Mr. Speaker, that when that recommendation was discussed within that Federal agency, the lawyers in the administration at that time said, you cannot pursue contact with the FBI against that cell. Mohamed Atta is in the U.S. on a green card, and we are fearful of the fallout from the Waco incident. So we did not allow that Federal agency to proceed.
Members of the 9/11 Commission initially denied having been briefed about this pre-9/11 intelligence; for example, Vice-Chair Hamilton stated:
The Sept. 11 commission did not learn of any U.S. government knowledge prior to 9/11 of surveillance of Mohammed Atta or of his cell...Had we learned of it obviously it would've been a major focus of our investigation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Danger
On August 12, 2005, Rep. Weldon issued the following statement:
The 9/11 Commission has released multiple statements over the past week, each of which has significantly changed - from initially denying ever being briefed to acknowledging being briefed on both operation ABLE DANGER and Mohammed Atta. The information was omitted [from the 9/11 Commission Report]…
Despite their varied statements, two critical questions remain unanswered.
1) Why did the Department of Defense fail to pass critical information obtained through ABLE DANGER to the FBI between the summer and fall of 2000?
2) Why did the 9/11 Commission staff fail to properly follow-up on the three separate occasions when they received information on ABLE DANGER and Mohammed Atta?
I will continue to push for a full accounting of the historical record so that we may preclude these types of failures from happening again.” http://curtweldon.house.gov/News/DocumentS...ocumentID=32271
Rep. Weldon on August 25, 2005, told FOX News:
There's something very sinister going on here that really troubles me. What's the Sept. 11 commission got to hide? The commission is trying to spin this because they're embarrassed about what's coming out…
Moreover, evidence indicates that the 9/11 Commission learned about this important information and yet failed to include it in their final report. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Danger) The Senate Judiciary Committee will evidently examine the matter further, but we suppose the inquiry should not end there.
In a recent editorial in the Wall Street Journal, former FBI director Louis Freeh comments on the information about 9/11 that has come out in the past several months:
The final 9/11 Commission report, released on July 22, 2004, concluded that "American intelligence agencies were unaware of Mr. Atta until the day of the attacks." This now looks to be embarrassingly wrong…
The Able Danger intelligence, if confirmed, is undoubtedly the most relevant fact of the entire post-9/11 inquiry. Even the most junior investigator would immediately know that the name and photo ID of Atta in 2000 is precisely the kind of tactical intelligence the FBI has many times employed to prevent attacks and arrest terrorists. Yet the 9/11 Commission inexplicably concluded that it "was not historically significant." This astounding conclusion--in combination with the failure to investigate Able Danger and incorporate it into its findings--raises serious challenges to the commission's credibility and, if the facts prove out, might just render the commission historically insignificant itself.
No wonder the 9/11 families were outraged by these revelations and called for a "new" commission to investigate. "I'm angry that my son's death could have been prevented," seethed Diane Horning, whose son Matthew was killed at the World Trade Center. On Aug. 17, 2005, a coalition of family members known as the September 11 Advocates rightly blasted 9/11 Commission leaders Mr. Kean and Lee Hamilton for pooh-poohing Able Danger's findings as not "historically significant." Advocate Mindy Kleinberg aptly notes, "They [the 9/11 Commission] somehow made a determination that this was not important enough. To me, that says somebody there is not using good judgment. And if I'm questioning the judgment of this one case, what other things might they have missed?" This is a stinging indictment of the commission by the 9/11 families.
The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Arlen Specter, has led the way in cleaning up the 9/11 Commission's unfinished business. Amid a very full plate of responsibilities, he conducted a hearing after noting that Col. Shaffer and Capt. Phillpott "appear to have credibility." Himself a former prosecutor, Mr. Specter noted: "If Mr. Atta and other 9/11 terrorists were identified before the attacks, it would be a very serious breach not to have that information passed along . . . we ought to get to the bottom of it."
Indeed we should. An excellent relevant mini-documentary (about 19 minutes) is now airing in Europe, and is available with English sub-titles: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article11222.htm .
Considerable evidence now supports Weldon’s contention that intelligence agencies knew about Atta and other 9/11 hijackers prior to 9/11, and the Bush administration was evidently informed. The evidence is laid out in detail in Michael Ruppert’s 600-page book, Crossing the Rubicon. For example, on the day prior to the 9/11 attacks, the National Security Agency intercepted a communication directed to Mohammed Atta, the alleged ringleader of the 9/11 hijackings. The message stated: “The match is about to begin.” Clearly Atta’s terrorist role was known to officials and the fact that a major event was “about to begin” was known also, before September 11, 2001.
Writing about this pre-9/11 warning and Ruppert’s book, Michael Kane writes:
The Whitehouse was so infuriated when this communication leaked from the Senate Intelligence Committee that they threatened Senators with polygraphs and office searches for disclosing classified information. This leak struck a nerve within the White House.
We know multiple Air Force war games were running on the morning of 9/11, as documented extensively in the mainstream press [and] Crossing the Rubicon…. In this case, [the war exercises] mirrored the real attacks of 9/11 with such shocking congruence as to be beyond the realm of coincidence. This is made clear when we consider the warnings that had flooded U.S. Intelligence prior to 9/11, indicating that terrorists were planning to hijack aircraft and crash them into American targets on the ground during the week of September 9th, 2001. With that type of information, who in their right mind would then schedule war games that would leave New York and Washington D.C. completely undefended?
In May of 2001 *** Cheney was placed directly in charge of managing the "seamless integration" of all training exercises throughout the federal government and military agencies by presidential mandate. The morning of 9/11 began with multiple training exercises of war games and terror drills which Cheney, as mandated by the president [just four months earlier], was placed in charge of managing. (Kane, 2005; read his pithy summary at: http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/...html#bullmeans)
Another example of evident foreknowledge of the impending attacks comes from Newsweek, 9/24/01: “On Sept. 10, NEWSWEEK has learned, a group of top Pentagon officials suddenly canceled travel plans for the next morning, apparently because of security concerns.” From all the evidence, it is clear that the Administration was aware that “terrorist attacks” against US cities were imminent, and yet no jets were sent to intercept the hijacked planes that crashed into buildings that day. We will return to this issue later.
2. Vice President Cheney as the plane approached the Pentagon: “The orders still stand”
Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta provided provocative testimony before the 9-11 Commission. He testified that he went down to the Presidential Emergency Operations Center under the White House at about 9:20 on 9/11/01. Vice President Cheney was there and in charge as President Bush was not in Washington, DC. Secretary Mineta related:
During the time that the airplane was coming in to the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President, "The plane is 50 miles out." "The plane is 30 miles out." And when it got down to "the plane is 10 miles out," the young man also said to the Vice President, "Do the orders still stand?" And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said, "Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?" http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timelin...mony052303.html
For heaven’s sake – what orders? It appears there were orders NOT to scramble military jets to intercept the plane, since the plane was known for 50, 30, and 10 miles out and yet never intercepted (see also next section). There was plenty of time for the scrambling of military jets to intercept flight AA77; it had been well off its flight-approved course for over 50 minutes before it came close to the Pentagon. The commission did not ask such questions, did not include Mineta’s testimony above in the 9/11 Commission Report -- a glaring omission (Griffin, 2005), -- and removed the video of Mineta’s testimony from the 9/11 Commission website (See http://www.911truthmovement.org/video/hamilton_win.wmv) . The testimony of Secretary Mineta strongly motivates further questioning, under oath, of Cheney, Mineta and this unidentified young man.
(For further information, see David Ray Griffin, “Flights 11, 175, 77, and 93: The 9/11 Commission's Incredible Tales,” http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20051205150219651, also “The failure to defend the skies on 9/11,” http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/essay.j...essayairdefense .)
3. 6/1/2001 change of orders for scrambling jets, and lack of air defenses on 9/11/2001.
For decades, the U.S. Air Force and Air National Guard have rapidly deployed (or “scrambled”) jet fighters to “escort” airplanes that significantly deviate from their flight plans. The commanders in the area had permission to scramble the jet fighters, so that an escort jet would reach an errant plane within about ten minutes from the observation of possible trouble. In this way, hijacked commercial airlines have been intercepted rapidly and provided military escort to prevent harm to passengers and to people on the ground, and to end hijacking threats. Intercepting and guiding the plane would be the goal rather than shooting the plane down.
There were “67 scrambles from September 2000 to June 2001” according to Major Douglas Martin (Miller, 2002), nearly two jet-scrambles per week on average. So what happened on September 11th, 2001? Why were there no jets scrambled to intercept the three hijacked planes, which subsequently crashed into the WTC Twin Towers and the Pentagon? What happened to our air defenses that day?
We find that the procedure for scrambling military jets was significantly changed due to a military order issued June 1, 2001 – just three months and ten days before the hijackings on September 11, 2001. The order stated:
c. Military Escort Aircraft
(1) When notified that military escort aircraft are needed in
conjunction with an aircraft piracy (hijacking) emergency, the DDO,
NMCC, will notify the appropriate unified command or USELEMNORAD to
determine if suitable aircraft are available and forward the request to the
Secretary of Defense for approval in accordance with DODD 3025.15,
paragraph D.7 (reference d).
d. DOD Directive 3025.15, 18 February 1997, “Military Assistance to
Civil Authorities”
Thus, beginning in June 2001, the Secretary of Defense (Donald Rumsfeld) was the one civilian who had to approve requests for scrambling intercept-planes. For any and all requests for air-defense approval had to come – no longer from military commanders in the field—but from the Secretary of Defense, Rumsfeld.
Aviation Week explained the approval pattern in these words:
On Sept. 11, the normal scramble-approval procedure was for an FAA official to contact the National Military Command Center (NMCC) and request Pentagon air support. Someone in the NMCC would call Norad's command center and ask about availability of aircraft, then seek approval from the Defense Secretary--Donald H. Rumsfeld--to launch fighters. (Scott, 2002)
Why would such a drastic change be made? An explanation is needed. Clearly, the consequences on September 11th were tragic. Three jetliners hit three occupied buildings that day. According to official reports, not one was intercepted. Not one, between the time when AA flight 11 hit the South Tower at 8:46 am up to the time UAL 93 crashed in Pennsylvania, one hour and twenty minutes later. Where were our air defenses when we needed them?
News reports dutifully described what did NOT happen:
The District of Columbia National Guard maintained fighter planes at Andrews Air Force Base, only about 15 miles from the Pentagon, but those planes were not on alert and not deployed.
-- 'USA TODAY,' September 17, 2001 Monday, FINAL EDITION, Pg. 5A, "Shoot-down order issued on morning of chaos," by Jonathan Weisman, Washington
How could a hijacked airliner fly through Washington airspace and crash into the Pentagon, the five-sided symbol of American military might? …Air defense around Washington is provided mainly by fighter planes from Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland near the District of Columbia border. The D.C. Air National Guard is also based there and equipped with F-16 fighter planes, a National Guard spokesman said.But the fighters took to the skies over Washington only after the devastating attack on the Pentagon...
-- SECURITY CRACKS EXPOSED,” The San Diego Union - Tribune; San Diego, Calif.; Sep 12, 2001; Steve Goldstein
It was after the attack on the Pentagon that the Air Force then decided to scramble F-16s out of the DC National Guard Andrews Air Force Base to fly cover, a protective cover over Washington, DC.
--NBC Nightly News, (6:30 PM ET) 11 September 11 2001, Jim Miklaszewski reporting.
4. Unanswered questions about Rumsfeld’s meeting on the morning of 9/11/2001.
Where was Donald Rumsfeld, the Defense Secretary the morning of September 11th? He was at a meeting in the Pentagon. Why were no jets scrambled until after the Pentagon was hit? Indeed, why -- when fifty minutes earlier, after the South Tower had been hit and after a third jetliner (AA 77) had gone way off course, the red flag for a hijacking?
These questions have been approached (Kean/Zelikov, 2004), but the explanation has changed over time and certainly seems unsatisfactory (Griffin, 2005). As summarized by the Washington Post:
The [9-11] commission report portrays a discombobulated government that can't even keep track of the hijacked planes. Fighter planes fly in the wrong direction, pilots have no idea why they're in the air (maybe a cruise missile attack?)... Wash. Post, 19 June 2004
The first tower was hit at 8:46 am, and the second at 9:03 am. The jetliner that later hit the Pentagon was taken over about 8:46 am, and it hit the Pentagon at 9:38 am – fully 52 minutes since the first Tower was struck. Where were the vaunted American air defenses during all this? In the year before this day, 67 military escort jets had been routinely scrambled in five to ten minutes of an indication of trouble:
The scrambling of fighter aircraft at the first sign of trouble is a routine phenomenon. In the year period before 9/11, fighters were scrambled 67 times. [AP, 8/13/02]
But not on September 11th, 2001, when none of the hijacked planes was intercepted at all. And why was the one man who could authorize deployment of those air defenses not informed sooner? Perhaps these matters should be investigated, to find out why there were no air defenses, no interceptions of the hijacked planes that crashed into buildings on 9/11.
Note that one man placed in a key position to authorize – or not -- deployment of military jets for intercepting errant aircraft could also stop the system. One man. It would not take a large “conspiracy” to do so. Although military personnel under that man might question the lack of authorizations, they are not allowed (we understand) to criticize their leaders publicly.
Rumsfeld himself explained some of what was happening to him that morning during a Larry King live interview on December 5, 2001:
Rumsfeld: I had said at an 8:00 o'clock breakfast that sometime in the next two, four, six, eight, ten, twelve months there would be an event that would occur in the world that would be sufficiently shocking that it would remind people again how important it is to have a strong healthy defense department that contributes to -- That underpins peace and stability in our world. And that is what underpins peace and stability.
In fact we can't have healthy economies and active lives unless we live in a peaceful, stable world, and I said that to these people. And someone walked in and handed a note that said that a plane had just hit the World Trade Center. And we adjourned the meeting, and I went in to get my CIA briefing --
King: Right next door is your office.
Rumsfeld: -- right next door here, and the whole building shook within 15 minutes.
King: It was a jarring thing. And you ran toward the smoke?
Rumsfeld: Uh huh. ..
King: I know we're out of the allotted time, but Gary Hart has said that he expects, his commission previously said this would happen; you were pretty prophetic that morning.
Rumsfeld: Yeah…. We have to be willing to invest, to see that we have the kinds of capabilities that we can deter and defend and where necessary preempt…
King: Where, Mr. Secretary, do you think or do we know it will stop? What are your views on going to Iraq, other nations that harbor terrorists? What's your view?
Rumsfeld: I don't know what will be decided by the president. It's certainly something that is at that level for our country.
King: It's his goal, right?
Rumsfeld: You bet…
King: Bin Laden, is it a must to get him one way or the other?
Rumsfeld: Well sure... And we're after him and we intend to find him and get him.
Particularly noteworthy in Rumsfeld’s history was the note telling him about the attacks on the World Trade Center – followed by the attack on the Pentagon “within 15 minutes.” This seems remarkable, that the only man who could authorize scrambling of fighters on 9/11/01 was in a meeting, in which he reports he heard about the attack in New York within 15 minutes of the strike on the Pentagon. This would evidently explain why no air defenses were deployed that day (along with the interfering war games discussed above), but begs the question of why no one interrupted the meeting earlier, while thousands died?
Why was Secretary Rumsfeld not informed earlier – particularly with a hijacked plane on its way towards the Pentagon? Was he not in some danger? Does this not merit an investigation? Millions knew about the attacks from watching television – was the Secretary of Defense too busy in a meeting to be informed of this until 15 minutes before the Pentagon (where the meeting was being held) was itself attacked? Did his staff have instructions to inhibit them from informing him sooner? One suspects that the full story and timeline is not yet available publicly.
It is important to understand that before and since 9/11/01, fighters were quickly and routinely deployed to escort errant aircraft, as the following reports demonstrate.
The scrambling of fighter aircraft at the first sign of trouble is a routine phenomenon. In the year period before 9/11, fighters were scrambled 67 times. ‘[AP, 8/13/02]
The commander-in-chief of the Russian Air Force, Anatoli Kornukov said the day after 9/11: "Generally it is impossible to carry out an act of terror on the scenario which was used in the USA yesterday... As soon as something like that happens here, I am reported about that right away and in a minute we are all up." [Pravda, 9/12/01]
Consider that an aircraft emergency exists... when: ... There is unexpected loss of radar contact and radio communications with any... aircraft.
If... you are in doubt that a situation constitutes an emergency or potential emergency, handle it as though it were an emergency. [FAA regulations]
Pilots are supposed to hit each fix with pinpoint accuracy. If a plane deviates by 15 degrees, or two miles from that course, the flight controllers will hit the panic button. They’ll call the plane, saying "American 11, you’re deviating from course." It’s considered a real emergency, like a police car screeching down a highway at 100 miles an hour. When golfer Payne Stewart’s incapacitated Learjet missed a turn at a fix, heading north instead of west to Texas, F-16 interceptors were quickly dispatched. [MSNBC, 9/12/01]
A NORAD spokesman says its fighters routinely intercept aircraft. When planes are intercepted, they typically are handled with a graduated response. The approaching fighter may rock its wingtips to attract the pilot's attention, or make a pass in front of the aircraft. Eventually, it can fire tracer rounds in the airplane's path, or, under certain circumstances, down it with a missile. [Boston Globe, 9/15/01]
In October, Gen. Eberhart told Congress that 'now it takes about one minute' from the time that the FAA senses something is amiss before it notifies NORAD. And around the same time, a NORAD spokesofficer told the Associated Press that the military can now scramble fighters 'within a matter of minutes to anywhere in the United States.' [Slate, 1/16/02]
Of course, the latter statement that the military can now scramble fighters within minutes follows because local commanders can once again authorize deployments. The military Order of June 2001 which gave Donald Rumsfeld that power was rescinded soon after 9/11/2001.
5. Rumsfeld’s statement early morning 9/11/01 about a motivating ‘shocking event’, and PNAC’s Sept. 2000 statement about “some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor”
Rumsfeld’s “prescient” statement the morning of 9/11 before he received the note about the attacks, that “there would be an event that would occur in the world that would be sufficiently shocking that it would remind people again how important it is to have a strong healthy defense department´ -- is strongly reminiscent of similar statements made a year earlier by the PNAC committee (of which Rumsfeld was a member). (See http://newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf .)
“The military’s job during the Cold War was to deter Soviet expansionism. Today its task is to secure and expand the ‘zones of democratic peace;’ to deter the rise of [any] power competitor.. and to preserve American preeminence through the coming transformation of war…” P. 2
“America’s current geopolitical preeminence will be extended along with the peace and prosperity that it provides… foundation on unquestioned U.S. military preeminence.” P. 4
“Further, the process of transformation, [since] it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.” P. 51
This remarkable statement about the value of “some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor” came in September of 2000. The outline strategy for “America’s … preeminence” founded on “unquestioned U.S. military preeminence” is found in “REBUILDING AMERICA’S DEFENSES: Strategy, Forces and Resources For a New Century.” The document was published by the “THE PROJECT FOR THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURY.”
The Project for the New American Century, or PNAC, is a Washington, DC based think tank. The group was established in spring 1997 as a non-profit organization with the goal of promoting "American global leadership". The chairman is William Kristol, editor of the Weekly Standard and FOX News regular… Present and former members include several prominent members of the Republican Party and Bush Administration, including Richard Armitage, William J. Bennett, Jeb Bush, Ellen Bork (the wife of Robert Bork), *** Cheney, Zalmay Khalilzad, Lewis Libby, Richard Perle, Donald Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz. A large number of its ideas and its members are associated with the neoconservative movement. PNAC has seven full-time staff members, in addition to its board of directors.
The PNAC is a controversial organization. Some have raised concerns that the project has been proposing military and economic domination of land, space, and cyberspace by the United States, so as to establish American dominance in world affairs (Pax Americana) for the future—hence the term "the New American Century", based on the idea that the 20th century was the American Century. Some analysts argue that the American-led 2003 invasion of Iraq, commenced in March of that year under the code name Operation Iraqi Freedom, is the first major step toward implementing these objectives. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century)
Stated goals of this revolutionary plan include (emphasis added):
“RESTORE THE PERSONNEL STRENGTH of today’s force to roughly the levels anticipated in the “Base Force” outlined by the Bush [senior] Administration“ p. iv
“INCREASE DEFENSE SPENDING´ dramatically p. iv [Iraq war: ~$300 Billion and counting]
“REPOSITION U.S. FORCES to respond to 21st century strategic realities by shifting permanently-based forces to Southeast Europe and Southeast Asia [Iraq is specified]
“Defend the American homeland [now “Homeland Security”] and… provide a secure basis for U.S. power projection around the world.”
“CONTROL THE NEW “INTERNATIONAL COMMONS” OF SPACE AND “CYBERSPACE,”
“EXPLOIT THE REVOLUTION IN MILITARY AFFAIRS… [and] American global leadership and [keep] a global security order that is uniquely friendly to American… prosperity.” p. V.
"The United States has for decades sought to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional security. While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the [Persian] Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein."
http://newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf
The PNAC document is now publicly available and makes for interesting reading. Note that many of the participants in this “Project” and document are or were members of the Bush administration, including Libby (recently indicted), Vice President *** Cheney, Richard Perle, Donald Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz. We question the ethics of using military might in the world arena in a way that is “uniquely friendly to American prosperity.” (p. V.) This sounds very much like a prescription for empire-building, and is far beyond the limits prescribed in the US Constitution.
What are the rights of other countries? Are they to be subservient to American prosperity? What happened to the traditionally American policies of using the military only for defensive purposes, as specified in the Constitution, instead of for ‘pre-emptive’ or aggressive purposes?
The paradigm-shift outlined in the PNAC strategy-roadmap are evidently being implemented without full public debate, except to declare that 9/11 has changed everything.
Several of the main points of the PNAC roadmap have become part of what is known as the “Bush Doctrine:”
The Bush Doctrine refers to the set of revised foreign policies adopted by the President of the United States George W. Bush in the wake of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. In an address to the United States Congress after the attacks, President Bush declared that the U.S. would "make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them," a statement that was followed by the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan. Subsequently, the Bush Doctrine has come to be identified with a policy that permits pre-emptive war against potential aggressors before they are capable of mounting attacks against the United States, a view that has been used in part as a rationale for the 2003 Iraq War. The Bush Doctrine is a marked departure from the policies of deterrence that generally characterized American foreign policy during the Cold War and brief period between the collapse of the Soviet Union and 9/11… http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_Doctrine
On the eve of the US attack on Iraq, in March, 2003, Vice President *** Cheney laid out the official story of 9/11 and the change or “transformation” it brought, in an interview with Tim Russert:
Russert said many people throughout the country and around the world are asking why it is acceptable for the United States to lead a military attack against a nation that has not attacked this country.
"We have a new and unique set of circumstances we're trying to deal with," Cheney answered. He said the nation had to deal with different threats in the 20th century – large states, significant military forces and intercontinental ballistic missiles – "the kinds of threats we dealt with throughout the Cold War."
"All of that changed on Sept. 11," the vice president pointed out. "Since that time, we've had to deal with the proposition that truly deadly weapons could be delivered to the United States by a handful of terrorists. We saw on 9- 11 nineteen men hijack aircraft with airline tickets and box cutters and killed more than 3,000 Americans in a couple of hours [actually a sanctioned “conspiracy theory”]. (Williams, 2003, American Forces Press Service.)
Clearly, the events of Sept. 2001 have been used to justify and bring to fruition many of the goals outlined in the Sept. 2000 roadmap by Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and others. It is interesting to watch and surprising that more Americans are not alarmed by these developments, or at least, not expressing more alarm. Who would have thought, four years ago, that Americans would quietly allow for secret CIA prisons in Eastern Europe (if they exist), torturing of prisoners (e.g., at Abu Ghraib, if done), domestic wiretapping without warrants (this has been admitted to), giving up of significant civil rights (per the Patriot Act), and support of unilateral, pre-emptive wars in the Middle East?
The PNAC band evidently got what they were looking for on September 11th. As reported in the Washington Post (Woodward and Balz, 2002):
Like his father, Bush tries to keep a daily diary of his thoughts and observations. That night, he dictated:
"The Pearl Harbor of the 21st century took place today."
6. Appeal for indictments by Dr. Robert Bowman (USAF Ret.)
Col. Robert Bowman is on record with strong words regarding these events:
The cabal of neoconservatives at PNAC [Project for the New American Century, see below] who planned this war (Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Libby, Perle, Jeb Bush) even before W [George W. Bush] became president, knew the American people would not stand for it unless there was a new Pearl Harbor. 9/11 supplied that. Our government was warned… They were warned by 11 other countries. And they were specifically warned by an FBI agent that [some group] was planning on flying a hijacked airliner into the World Trade Center.
They not only ignored the warnings, they made sure no fighter jets were scrambled to stop it. If they had just done nothing, and allowed normal procedures to be followed, the Twin Towers would still be standing and thousands of dead Americans would still be alive….
As a pilot who flew 101 combat missions in Vietnam, I can tell you that the best thing our government can do for its combat veterans is to quit making more of them. Peace is patriotic; a preemptive war is immoral, illegal, unconstitutional, a war crime, and treason. I swore to uphold the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic….
We are the people. We are sovereign. We are the patriots. The whole world is with us. Never allow anyone to intimidate you into silence. Wake up, America! It’s time to speak truth to power. God bless America, and God save us from the traitors in our government. R. Bowman, Baltimore Chronicle, April 17, 2004.
Dr. Bowman concludes:
Wake up, America! It is time for George W. Bush, *** Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and the whole oil mafia to be … indicted.
Impeachment of civil officers of the United States for “high Crimes and Misdemeanors” is provided in the U.S. Constitution:
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
Col. Bowman is in appealing for indictment/impeachment as provided for in the Constitution of the United States.
7. 9/11 and Al Qaeda
Soon after the 9-11-2001 tragedy, U.S. military forces immediately attacked and occupied Afghanistan to “kill Al Qaeda.” Oddly, four years later, Osama bin Laden is still on the loose, and Al Qaeda is growing – along with the opium trade in Afghanistan -- despite the presence of US military forces.
Furthermore, FBI director Robert Mueller III admitted that no evidence for 9-11 planning was found in Afghanistan
The hijackers also left no paper trail. In our investigation, we have not uncovered a single piece of paper either here in the U.S. or in the treasure trove of information that has turned up in Afghanistan and elsewhere that mentioned any aspect of the September 11th plot.
An ex-LAPD investigator summarizes:
To date, the case that 9/11 was perpetrated solely by Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda has never been proved, even to the most rudimentary standards. In fact, some 35 months after the attacks there has not been a single successful 9/11 prosecution anywhere in the world. The only conviction that had been secured, a German prosecution against Mounir El Motassadeq, charged with aiding the so called Hamburg cell of Mohammed Atta, was overturned in 2004 because the US government refused to produce… evidence relevant to the charges. M. Ruppert, http://911review.com/reason.html
We find the official “conspiracy theory” that bin Laden was ultimately responsible for coordinating the 9-11 attacks to be uncompelling, now four years after the attacks. He himself has denied this, repeatedly, as we see in the next section.
8. Are we certain that bin Laden was responsible for the 9/11 attacks?
On 9/11/2001 and subsequent days, bin Laden was tried and convicted on live television. For example, on 9/16/2001, Vice Pres. Cheney spoke in an interview with Tim Russert:
MR. RUSSERT: The president said that Osama bin Laden was the prime suspect. Why?
VICE PRES. CHENEY: There is just a lot of evidence to link his organization, the al-Qaida organization, and he is the head of al-Qaida, to this operation. There are some ties, for example, to some of the people involved here back to the U.S.S. Cole bombing in Yemen. We're able to tell--going back now looking at relationships and the way they've operated in the past, we're quite confident that, in fact, as the president said, he is the prime suspect…
MR. RUSSERT: You have no doubt that Osama bin Laden played some role in this.
VICE PRES. CHENEY: I have no doubt that he and his organization played a significant role in this.
MR. RUSSERT: Were you surprised by the precision and sophistication of the operation?
VICE PRES. CHENEY: Well, certainly, we were surprised in the sense that, you know, there had been information coming in that a big operation was planned, but that's sort of a trend that you see all the time in these kinds of reports. (“The White House,” Sept. 16, 2001)
Thus, Mr. Cheney admitted to pre-9/11 “information coming in that a big operation was planned” (discussed above) and stated the Bush administration had “no doubt” that bin Laden was involved. This is reminiscent of White House comments that there was “no doubt” that Hussein harbored terrible weapons of mass destruction.
Yet on the same day, bin Laden himself read a statement which was broadcast by Qatar’s Al-Jazeera satellite channel:
I stress that I have not carried out this act, which appears to have been carried out by individuals with their own motivation…
This denial was broadcast worldwide, but the Bush administration urged media in the U.S. not to show the video since it might contain secret signals to Al Qaeda terrorists still in the country.
On September 28, 2001, bin Laden again denied any involvement with the attacks, and suggested that he was being framed:
I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children and other people…
There exists a government within the government of the United States. That secret government must be asked as to who carried out the attacks.... The United States should trace the perpetrators of these attacks to those persons who want to make the present century a century of conflict between Islam and Christianity so that their own nation could survive.” Daily Ummat, Pakistani newspaper, 28 Sept. 2001.
Again, the US Administration urged American media not to broadcast bin Laden’s words.
Then in December 2001, the Bush administration suddenly urged the media to go ahead and broadcast bin Laden’s words – this time from a video tape found by the US military in Afghanistan, after the US had already attacked Afghanistan in pursuit of bin Laden and his fellows. This is the famous “smoking gun” video in which, according to the Administration, bin Laden confesses to his crime of organizing the 9/11 attacks. The tape was then fortuitously discovered by the invading Americans. Ascribed to bin Laden from this tape:
The brothers, who conducted the operation, all they knew was that they have a martyrdom operation and we asked each of them to go to America but they didn't know anything about the operation, not even one letter. But they were trained and we did not reveal the operation to them until they are there and just before they boarded the planes. …Those who were trained to fly didn't know the others. One group of people did not know the other group.
(Transcript of Osama bin Laden videotape, Dec 13, 2001 http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/12/13/tape...ript/index.html )
Now this is truly remarkable! The hijackers knew nothing about the 9/11 operation until “just before they boarded the planes”, and one group did not know the other group. Yet they were able to overpower the pilots and crew of the planes with box-cutters, and then successfully navigate the planes without ground support, and starting at 30,000-foot altitudes, hundreds of miles into the WTC Towers and the Pentagon – with instructions received just before they boarded the planes! No practice beforehand. Incredible.
Also recall that FBI director Mueller stated that after operations in Afghanistan,
In our investigation, we have not uncovered a single piece of paper either here in the U.S. or in the treasure trove of information that has turned up in Afghanistan and elsewhere that mentioned any aspect of the September 11th plot.
That is odd. It doesn’t seem to add up. But back to the US Administration and the “Smoking Gun” video, as reported by Reuters:
U.S. Shows "Smoking Gun" Video
Reuters News Service
Posted Dec. 13, 2001 (Washington/Tora Bora, Afghanistan) -- The United States on Thursday released a video it said showed Osama bin Laden holding a "smoking gun" as mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, while his al Qaeda group hunkered down in the Afghan mountains under a deluge of U.S. bombs and vowed to fight on.
The videotape shows the Saudi-born militant smiling as he explains how the hijackers assembled, some oblivious to their mission until the last moment, to stage the attacks that killed nearly 3,300 people and which prompted the U.S.-led military operation to topple the Islamic Taliban movement for harboring bin Laden. However, the Saudi militant remains at large.
The Pentagon issued the hour-long amateur tape, found in Afghanistan, and provided an English translation in which bin Laden is quoted as saying: "We calculated in advance the number of casualties from the enemy, who would be killed based on the position of the tower."
The comment apparently referred to hijacked airliners which plowed into and destroyed the twin towers of the World Trade Center in New York. Another plane smashed into the Pentagon near Washington and a fourth crashed in Pennsylvania after passengers rushed and struggled with the hijackers.
"We calculated that the floors that would be hit would be three or four floors. I was the most optimistic of them all," the relaxed and bearded guerrilla chief was quoted as saying, adding the collapse of both towers was more than he had hoped for.
U.S. officials, who believe bin Laden is in Afghanistan despite rumors he has fled the fighting, billed the tape as conclusive "smoking gun" evidence that bin Laden, who has lived in Afghanistan for several years, was behind the attacks.
The Taliban had demanded proof of bin Laden's guilt as a condition for handing him over. Washington rejected that demand and on Oct. 7 began the bombing campaign that enabled anti-Taliban forces to take over most of the country. (Cached at: http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/disinfo/...un_121301.html)
Here bin Laden seems totally at odds with his earlier denials. Strange.
The BBC reported:
The BBC's Katty Kay says the White House hopes the video will bolster international support for the war on terrorism.
"For those who see this tape, they'll realize that not only is he guilty of incredible murder, he has no conscience and no soul, that he represents the worst of civilization," said President George W Bush.
US Senator Ron Wyden, who has also seen the tape, says he hopes it will remove suspicions in countries such as Pakistan that the 11 September attacks were an Israeli plot aimed at drawing the US into a war with Islamic countries. [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/1708091.stm]
Yet, there were many particularly in Islamic countries that were suspicious about the US-released video tape. Statements were contested that bin Laden was the guilty leader in planning the 9/11 attacks which killed thousands of innocents in a non-war situation -- strictly contrary to Islamic beliefs. And many doubted that the “smoking gun” video released by the Pentagon actually showed Osama bin Laden, claiming that the bearded man in the video said to be bin Laden by the Pentagon and other US officials did not look like bin Laden.
KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia -- There was heavy skepticism in Arab and Muslim communities around the world about the veracity of the released videotape of Osama bin Laden discussing the September 11 terror attacks.
The tape, released Thursday by the Bush administration, was dismissed as U.S. propaganda by Malaysia's Muslim opposition. Leaders of Parti Islam se-Malaysia (PAS), the country's biggest opposition party, said they were still not convinced bin Laden was behind the September 11 attacks. "It is still not a proven case that he directed it, he planned it or he funded it," said Kamaruddin Jaafar, a senior PAS leader, told Reuters news service. "It's not a proven case despite this tape," he said….
New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani said the tape showed that bin Laden was the "personification of evil." (http://archives.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/asiapcf/central/12/14/gen.muslim.reax/index.html )
Bush lashed out against contradictory claims:
"It is preposterous for anybody to think that this tape is doctored," [Bush] said during a brief photo opportunity with the prime minister of Thailand. "That's just a feeble excuse to provide weak support for an incredibly evil man." [CNN ]
But wait – we should examine for ourselves whether the fellow who is said to be Osama bin Laden in this tape looks like bin Laden seen in numerous other tapes. Here is the Pentagon-released confessional tape of bin Laden:
Next a juxtaposition of bin Laden from five videotapes, the “Pentagon-bin-Laden” is frame E while other videos of bin Laden are shown for comparison. See for yourself if these are the same man (compare for example the ear in A above with D below).
Inspection of the images shows that they are NOT in fact the same man, considering the nose length, nostril shape, cheeks and eyebrows. Pentagon-released man “E” looks quite different from the tapes released by Al Qaeda before and since “E” was released. A thorough investigation will use computer analysis to compare the facial characteristics – then we will know for certain. A preliminary analysis considers the photographs with the individuals in approximately the same orientations, and compares facial characteristics:
The ratio of the distance from tip-of-nose to ear lobe is 1.1 for bin Laden D (Al Jazeera tape) and 1.7 for bin Laden E (the Pentagon-released tape of Dec. 2001). The ratio of nose-length to nose width is even more distinctive for the two individuals, 2.5 for bin Laden D but only 1.3 for bin Laden E.
Prof. Bruce Lawrence of Duke University, an expert on bin Laden, has analyzed many speeches by bin Laden and concludes that the Pentagon release of Dec. 13, 2001 discussed above is not authentically bin Laden, in agreement with our analysis. He writes, “the smoking gun tape is also a fake tape. It was made to appear like bin Laden…” (Lawrence, 2006) He also questions the authenticity of the audiotape released on 1/19/06. (Rupinta, 2006)
It appears we have been lied to again, and made angry as a nation so as to go to war against Afghanistan and Iraq, enormously growing our national debt and killing tens of thousands of people. Where will it end?
9. HOW HITLER USED THE ‘BIG LIE’ PRINCIPLE TO PROVOKE WAR
The way Hitler incited the German nation into attacking Poland in 1939 provides an example of how he used the “Big Lie” principle.
Hitler's 'propagandist reason' for starting the war had already been arranged by Himmler and Heydrich at the Führer's request. The plan was of such importance that it was code named Operation Himmler and involved having the SS stage fake attacks by the Polish Army against German troops along the German-Polish border… [Prison] inmates dressed in Polish Army uniforms would be killed by lethal injections then riddled with bullets and left as eviden
9/11: Have we been lied to?
An article in preparation by members of Scholars for 9/11 Truth
January 2006
All of that [the US military role of the 20th century] changed on Sept. 11… We saw on 9- 11 nineteen men hijack aircraft with airline tickets and box cutters and killed more than 3,000 Americans in a couple of hours. Richard Cheney , March 2003.
In the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted …they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie… It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Adolf Hitler, 1925
Why do so many accept the “official story” of 9/11 uncritically – that a few hijackers (per plane) alone overpowered well-trained airline pilots using box-cutters and hijacked four separate airliners, then brought down the World Trade Center buildings and struck the Pentagon – all without being intercepted by military jets? Americans have been told this story over and over and most seem to accept it without scrutiny. To challenge this story is to risk being smeared with the dreaded conspiracy-theorist label. It is easier to dismiss without much consideration the notion that the official story may be wrong or that our leaders may have known about the impending attacks before hand and misled us.
But – as recognized by prominent conservatives and liberals alike -- they have misled us in important things, clearly. Here are a few examples.
WMD’s
In August 2002, Vice President Cheney stated:
Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us. And there is no doubt that his aggressive regional ambitions will lead him into future confrontations with his neighbors -- confrontations that will involve both the weapons he has today, and the ones he will continue to develop with his oil wealth.… the President and I never for a moment forget our number one responsibility: to protect the American people against further attack, and to win the war that began last September 11th. http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20...8/20020826.html
Others in the Bush administration made the same claim: “No doubt” that Saddam had WMD’s. Yet, there were no weapons of mass destruction found in Iraq. Moreover, an initiative of the UN to conduct weapons inspections in Iraq was abruptly aborted by the U.S. decision to attack. (An excellent 4-minute mini-documentary explains further, with historical clips of various officials: http://www.iwilltryit.com/downingstreet1.htm. )
LINKING IRAQ AND 9/11
Indeed, the current administration rationalized the Iraq war upon a false link between Saddam Hussein and 9/11, and has repeated that link ever since. Specifically,
Ten days after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, President Bush was told in a highly classified briefing that the U.S. intelligence community had no evidence linking the Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein to the attacks and that there was scant credible evidence that Iraq had any significant collaborative ties with Al Qaeda". (http://nationaljournal.com/about/njweekly/stories/2005/1122nj1.htm)
And yet Bush, Cheney and other top administration officials claimed and continue to claim that Saddam was behind 9/11. See http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/007005.php. Indeed, Bush administration officials apparently swore in a lawsuit that Saddam was behind 9/11. (http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/print_friendly.php?p=opedne_evelyn_p_051115_bush_gang_swore_sadd.htm)
President Bush's March 18, 2003 letter to Congress authorizing the use of force against Iraq, includes the following paragraph:
(2) acting pursuant to the Constitution and Public Law 107-243 is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001. (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030319-1.html)
The administration's successful but false linking of Saddam with 9/11 helped convince a large portion of the American public to invade Iraq. While the focus now may be on false WMD claims, it is important to remember that at the time, the Saddam-911 link was touted as a strong reason to invade Iraq. (http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0314/p02s01-woiq.html)
9/11 TOXIC DUST AND MISLEADING REASSURANCES
Within days of the September 11th tragedy, USGS scientists carefully analyzed dust samples. The results from various tests showed the presence of asbestos and heavy metals and high alkalinity. USGS scientist Gregg Swayze stated:
“Some techniques can see more than others, and we were throwing in every technique we had in house,” he says. Tests revealed the dust to be extremely alkaline with a pH of 12.1 (out of 14) and that some of it was as caustic as liquid drain cleaner. “We were startled at the pH level we were finding,” Swayze adds. “We knew that the cement dust was caustic, but we were getting pH readings of 12 and higher. It was obvious that precautions had to be taken to protect the workers and people returning to their homes from the dust.” Sam Vance, an environmental scientist with the EPA, sent the results to officials at the EPA, the New York health department and US Public Health Service. [St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 2/10/02]
Despite such warnings from experienced scientists, the EPA released press releases which gave false reassurance about the toxic dust.
EPA has found variable asbestos levels in bulk debris and dust on the ground, but EPA continues to believe that there is no significant health risk to the general public in the coming days…
"Our tests show that it is safe for New Yorkers to go back to work in New York's financial district," said John L. Henshaw, Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA. [Said] EPA Administrator Christie Whitman: "… The good news continues to be that the air samples we have taken have all been at levels that cause us no concern." EPA press release, September 16, 2001.)
EPA Administrator Christie Whitman announced today that results from the Agency's air and drinking water monitoring near the World Trade Center and Pentagon disaster sites indicate that these vital resources are safe. Whitman also announced that EPA has been given up to $83 million from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to support EPA's involvement…
"We are very encouraged that the results from our monitoring of air quality and drinking water conditions in both New York and near the Pentagon show that the public in these areas is not being exposed to excessive levels of asbestos or other harmful substances," Whitman said. "Given the scope of the tragedy from last week, I am glad to reassure the people of New York and Washington, D.C. that their air is safe to breath (sic) and their water is safe to drink," she added. (EPA press release, September 18, 2001.)
Two years later, the truth came out, that the White House had in fact deleted scientific warnings and replaced these with (incorrect) reassuring statements:
At the White House's direction, the Environmental Protection Agency gave New Yorkers misleading assurances that there was no health risk from the debris-laden air after the World Trade Center collapse, according to an internal inquiry. The White House "convinced EPA to add reassuring statements and delete cautionary ones" by having the National Security Council control EPA communications after the Sept. 11 terror attacks, according to a report issued late Thursday by EPA Inspector General Nikki Tinsley.
In all, the EPA issued five news releases within 10 days of the attacks and four more by the end of 2001 reassuring the public about air quality. But it wasn't until June 2002 that the EPA determined that air quality had returned to pre-Sept. 11 levels -- well after respiratory ailments and other problems began to surface in hundreds of workers cleaning dusty offices and apartments. The day after the attacks, former EPA Deputy Administrator Linda Fisher's chief of staff e-mailed senior EPA officials to say that "all statements to the media should be cleared" first by the National Security Council, which is Bush's main forum for discussing national security and foreign policy matters with his senior aides and Cabinet, the inspector general's report says. For example, the inspector general found, the EPA was persuaded to omit guidance for cleaning indoor spaces and tips on potential health effects from airborne dust containing asbestos, lead, glass fibers and concrete. James Connaughton, chairman of the environmental council, which coordinates federal environmental efforts, said the White House directed the EPA to add and delete information based on how it should be released publicly… http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/136350_epa23.html By JOHN HEILPRIN THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
The administration, when caught red-handed, did not admit guilt nor apologize. Instead, they “attacked the messenger” by criticizing the whistleblower Nikki Tinsley. As a sad addendum, we note that since Tinsley’s scathing report, at least two individuals who helped at Ground Zero have died, James Zadroga and Tim Keller.
Zadroga had developed black lung disease and mercury on the brain as a result of working at ground zero, Palladino said. Zadroga spent 470 hours in the first month after the Sept. 11, 2001, collapse of the trade center in rescue and recovery efforts, working up to 16 hours a day at the site… A majority of residents and ground zero workers tracked by several different registries monitoring the participants' health have reported worsening respiratory problems in the years since the attacks. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/01/08/...in1185610.shtml
The dust particles at Ground Zero were small enough to penetrate deep into the lungs and become lodged causing permanent damage to the lungs. What's worse is what was in the dust - hundreds of tons of asbestos, mercury from tens of thousands of fluorescent light bulbs, and lead from over 50,000 computers. All of these toxic materials were released into the air when the 9/11 attack occurred.
Tim Keller, a veteran NYC fire department medic, was one of the heroes. Not only was Keller one of the first rescuers on the scene, he also spent weeks at Ground Zero searching for 9/11 survivors. Keller was diagnosed with severe chronic asthmatic bronchitis about one year after the 9/11 World Trade Center attack. When Keller became ill, he turned to the city for help - the city where he had dedicated his life to helping others and saving lives. He was denied both worker's compensation and any 9/11 benefits. The city did not believe there was a connection between his condition and the 9/11 attack.
Eventually, Keller received a partial benefit, however it was no where near enough to help him treat his lung disease. Keller soon became too sick to work, and too in debt to fill his much-needed prescriptions. Tim Keller died at the young age of 41. http://lungdiseases.about.com/b/a/187074.htm
SHUTTING OUR EYES AGAINST PAINFUL TRUTHS?
Early in our country’s history, true patriots stood for truth while criticizing the governing regime. Patrick Henry stated:
We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth... Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those, who having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not..?
For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it might cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know.. it -- now. 1775
On the other hand, Adolf Hitler wrote about the “Big Lie” approach in his infamous Mein Kampf :
In the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying. These people know only too well how to use falsehood for the basest purposes.... (Hitler, 1925, p. 134)
The central question here is whether the Bush administration – which has used 9/11 as an excuse for wars and enormous deficit spending -- knew about the 9/11 attacks in advance, and allowed them to happen. This is a bold question. Let’s examine some facts. How did the hijacked planes get through to their targets? Is it possible that officials stopped the scrambling of military jets, routinely launched to intercept hijacked planes? How do we know that bin Laden was behind the hijackings anyway – seeing that he himself has repeatedly denied this and no one has yet been convicted? We will examine these and other issues in this paper.
1. Foreknowledge of US officials regarding 9/11 hijackers: Able Danger
The story of a covert intelligence operation called Able Danger came to light just months ago. Previously undisclosed facts are still coming to light, due primarily to the investigation spear-headed by Congressman Curt Weldon (R-Pa), vice chairman of the House Armed Services and House Homeland Security committees. The existence of this operation and its identification of Mohamed Atta and other 9/11 hijackers, long before 9/11, was disclosed publicly on the House floor by Rep. Weldon on June 27, 2005:
Mr. Speaker, I rise because information has come to my attention over the past several months that is very disturbing. I have learned that, in fact, one of our Federal agencies had, in fact, identified the major New York cell of Mohamed Atta prior to 9/11; and I have learned, Mr. Speaker, that in September of 2000, that Federal agency actually was prepared to bring the FBI in and prepared to work with the FBI to take down the cell that Mohamed Atta was involved in New York City, along with two of the other terrorists. I have also learned, Mr. Speaker, that when that recommendation was discussed within that Federal agency, the lawyers in the administration at that time said, you cannot pursue contact with the FBI against that cell. Mohamed Atta is in the U.S. on a green card, and we are fearful of the fallout from the Waco incident. So we did not allow that Federal agency to proceed.
Members of the 9/11 Commission initially denied having been briefed about this pre-9/11 intelligence; for example, Vice-Chair Hamilton stated:
The Sept. 11 commission did not learn of any U.S. government knowledge prior to 9/11 of surveillance of Mohammed Atta or of his cell...Had we learned of it obviously it would've been a major focus of our investigation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Danger
On August 12, 2005, Rep. Weldon issued the following statement:
The 9/11 Commission has released multiple statements over the past week, each of which has significantly changed - from initially denying ever being briefed to acknowledging being briefed on both operation ABLE DANGER and Mohammed Atta. The information was omitted [from the 9/11 Commission Report]…
Despite their varied statements, two critical questions remain unanswered.
1) Why did the Department of Defense fail to pass critical information obtained through ABLE DANGER to the FBI between the summer and fall of 2000?
2) Why did the 9/11 Commission staff fail to properly follow-up on the three separate occasions when they received information on ABLE DANGER and Mohammed Atta?
I will continue to push for a full accounting of the historical record so that we may preclude these types of failures from happening again.” http://curtweldon.house.gov/News/DocumentS...ocumentID=32271
Rep. Weldon on August 25, 2005, told FOX News:
There's something very sinister going on here that really troubles me. What's the Sept. 11 commission got to hide? The commission is trying to spin this because they're embarrassed about what's coming out…
Moreover, evidence indicates that the 9/11 Commission learned about this important information and yet failed to include it in their final report. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Danger) The Senate Judiciary Committee will evidently examine the matter further, but we suppose the inquiry should not end there.
In a recent editorial in the Wall Street Journal, former FBI director Louis Freeh comments on the information about 9/11 that has come out in the past several months:
The final 9/11 Commission report, released on July 22, 2004, concluded that "American intelligence agencies were unaware of Mr. Atta until the day of the attacks." This now looks to be embarrassingly wrong…
The Able Danger intelligence, if confirmed, is undoubtedly the most relevant fact of the entire post-9/11 inquiry. Even the most junior investigator would immediately know that the name and photo ID of Atta in 2000 is precisely the kind of tactical intelligence the FBI has many times employed to prevent attacks and arrest terrorists. Yet the 9/11 Commission inexplicably concluded that it "was not historically significant." This astounding conclusion--in combination with the failure to investigate Able Danger and incorporate it into its findings--raises serious challenges to the commission's credibility and, if the facts prove out, might just render the commission historically insignificant itself.
No wonder the 9/11 families were outraged by these revelations and called for a "new" commission to investigate. "I'm angry that my son's death could have been prevented," seethed Diane Horning, whose son Matthew was killed at the World Trade Center. On Aug. 17, 2005, a coalition of family members known as the September 11 Advocates rightly blasted 9/11 Commission leaders Mr. Kean and Lee Hamilton for pooh-poohing Able Danger's findings as not "historically significant." Advocate Mindy Kleinberg aptly notes, "They [the 9/11 Commission] somehow made a determination that this was not important enough. To me, that says somebody there is not using good judgment. And if I'm questioning the judgment of this one case, what other things might they have missed?" This is a stinging indictment of the commission by the 9/11 families.
The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Arlen Specter, has led the way in cleaning up the 9/11 Commission's unfinished business. Amid a very full plate of responsibilities, he conducted a hearing after noting that Col. Shaffer and Capt. Phillpott "appear to have credibility." Himself a former prosecutor, Mr. Specter noted: "If Mr. Atta and other 9/11 terrorists were identified before the attacks, it would be a very serious breach not to have that information passed along . . . we ought to get to the bottom of it."
Indeed we should. An excellent relevant mini-documentary (about 19 minutes) is now airing in Europe, and is available with English sub-titles: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article11222.htm .
Considerable evidence now supports Weldon’s contention that intelligence agencies knew about Atta and other 9/11 hijackers prior to 9/11, and the Bush administration was evidently informed. The evidence is laid out in detail in Michael Ruppert’s 600-page book, Crossing the Rubicon. For example, on the day prior to the 9/11 attacks, the National Security Agency intercepted a communication directed to Mohammed Atta, the alleged ringleader of the 9/11 hijackings. The message stated: “The match is about to begin.” Clearly Atta’s terrorist role was known to officials and the fact that a major event was “about to begin” was known also, before September 11, 2001.
Writing about this pre-9/11 warning and Ruppert’s book, Michael Kane writes:
The Whitehouse was so infuriated when this communication leaked from the Senate Intelligence Committee that they threatened Senators with polygraphs and office searches for disclosing classified information. This leak struck a nerve within the White House.
We know multiple Air Force war games were running on the morning of 9/11, as documented extensively in the mainstream press [and] Crossing the Rubicon…. In this case, [the war exercises] mirrored the real attacks of 9/11 with such shocking congruence as to be beyond the realm of coincidence. This is made clear when we consider the warnings that had flooded U.S. Intelligence prior to 9/11, indicating that terrorists were planning to hijack aircraft and crash them into American targets on the ground during the week of September 9th, 2001. With that type of information, who in their right mind would then schedule war games that would leave New York and Washington D.C. completely undefended?
In May of 2001 *** Cheney was placed directly in charge of managing the "seamless integration" of all training exercises throughout the federal government and military agencies by presidential mandate. The morning of 9/11 began with multiple training exercises of war games and terror drills which Cheney, as mandated by the president [just four months earlier], was placed in charge of managing. (Kane, 2005; read his pithy summary at: http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/...html#bullmeans)
Another example of evident foreknowledge of the impending attacks comes from Newsweek, 9/24/01: “On Sept. 10, NEWSWEEK has learned, a group of top Pentagon officials suddenly canceled travel plans for the next morning, apparently because of security concerns.” From all the evidence, it is clear that the Administration was aware that “terrorist attacks” against US cities were imminent, and yet no jets were sent to intercept the hijacked planes that crashed into buildings that day. We will return to this issue later.
2. Vice President Cheney as the plane approached the Pentagon: “The orders still stand”
Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta provided provocative testimony before the 9-11 Commission. He testified that he went down to the Presidential Emergency Operations Center under the White House at about 9:20 on 9/11/01. Vice President Cheney was there and in charge as President Bush was not in Washington, DC. Secretary Mineta related:
During the time that the airplane was coming in to the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President, "The plane is 50 miles out." "The plane is 30 miles out." And when it got down to "the plane is 10 miles out," the young man also said to the Vice President, "Do the orders still stand?" And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said, "Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?" http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timelin...mony052303.html
For heaven’s sake – what orders? It appears there were orders NOT to scramble military jets to intercept the plane, since the plane was known for 50, 30, and 10 miles out and yet never intercepted (see also next section). There was plenty of time for the scrambling of military jets to intercept flight AA77; it had been well off its flight-approved course for over 50 minutes before it came close to the Pentagon. The commission did not ask such questions, did not include Mineta’s testimony above in the 9/11 Commission Report -- a glaring omission (Griffin, 2005), -- and removed the video of Mineta’s testimony from the 9/11 Commission website (See http://www.911truthmovement.org/video/hamilton_win.wmv) . The testimony of Secretary Mineta strongly motivates further questioning, under oath, of Cheney, Mineta and this unidentified young man.
(For further information, see David Ray Griffin, “Flights 11, 175, 77, and 93: The 9/11 Commission's Incredible Tales,” http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20051205150219651, also “The failure to defend the skies on 9/11,” http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/essay.j...essayairdefense .)
3. 6/1/2001 change of orders for scrambling jets, and lack of air defenses on 9/11/2001.
For decades, the U.S. Air Force and Air National Guard have rapidly deployed (or “scrambled”) jet fighters to “escort” airplanes that significantly deviate from their flight plans. The commanders in the area had permission to scramble the jet fighters, so that an escort jet would reach an errant plane within about ten minutes from the observation of possible trouble. In this way, hijacked commercial airlines have been intercepted rapidly and provided military escort to prevent harm to passengers and to people on the ground, and to end hijacking threats. Intercepting and guiding the plane would be the goal rather than shooting the plane down.
There were “67 scrambles from September 2000 to June 2001” according to Major Douglas Martin (Miller, 2002), nearly two jet-scrambles per week on average. So what happened on September 11th, 2001? Why were there no jets scrambled to intercept the three hijacked planes, which subsequently crashed into the WTC Twin Towers and the Pentagon? What happened to our air defenses that day?
We find that the procedure for scrambling military jets was significantly changed due to a military order issued June 1, 2001 – just three months and ten days before the hijackings on September 11, 2001. The order stated:
c. Military Escort Aircraft
(1) When notified that military escort aircraft are needed in
conjunction with an aircraft piracy (hijacking) emergency, the DDO,
NMCC, will notify the appropriate unified command or USELEMNORAD to
determine if suitable aircraft are available and forward the request to the
Secretary of Defense for approval in accordance with DODD 3025.15,
paragraph D.7 (reference d).
d. DOD Directive 3025.15, 18 February 1997, “Military Assistance to
Civil Authorities”
Thus, beginning in June 2001, the Secretary of Defense (Donald Rumsfeld) was the one civilian who had to approve requests for scrambling intercept-planes. For any and all requests for air-defense approval had to come – no longer from military commanders in the field—but from the Secretary of Defense, Rumsfeld.
Aviation Week explained the approval pattern in these words:
On Sept. 11, the normal scramble-approval procedure was for an FAA official to contact the National Military Command Center (NMCC) and request Pentagon air support. Someone in the NMCC would call Norad's command center and ask about availability of aircraft, then seek approval from the Defense Secretary--Donald H. Rumsfeld--to launch fighters. (Scott, 2002)
Why would such a drastic change be made? An explanation is needed. Clearly, the consequences on September 11th were tragic. Three jetliners hit three occupied buildings that day. According to official reports, not one was intercepted. Not one, between the time when AA flight 11 hit the South Tower at 8:46 am up to the time UAL 93 crashed in Pennsylvania, one hour and twenty minutes later. Where were our air defenses when we needed them?
News reports dutifully described what did NOT happen:
The District of Columbia National Guard maintained fighter planes at Andrews Air Force Base, only about 15 miles from the Pentagon, but those planes were not on alert and not deployed.
-- 'USA TODAY,' September 17, 2001 Monday, FINAL EDITION, Pg. 5A, "Shoot-down order issued on morning of chaos," by Jonathan Weisman, Washington
How could a hijacked airliner fly through Washington airspace and crash into the Pentagon, the five-sided symbol of American military might? …Air defense around Washington is provided mainly by fighter planes from Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland near the District of Columbia border. The D.C. Air National Guard is also based there and equipped with F-16 fighter planes, a National Guard spokesman said.But the fighters took to the skies over Washington only after the devastating attack on the Pentagon...
-- SECURITY CRACKS EXPOSED,” The San Diego Union - Tribune; San Diego, Calif.; Sep 12, 2001; Steve Goldstein
It was after the attack on the Pentagon that the Air Force then decided to scramble F-16s out of the DC National Guard Andrews Air Force Base to fly cover, a protective cover over Washington, DC.
--NBC Nightly News, (6:30 PM ET) 11 September 11 2001, Jim Miklaszewski reporting.
4. Unanswered questions about Rumsfeld’s meeting on the morning of 9/11/2001.
Where was Donald Rumsfeld, the Defense Secretary the morning of September 11th? He was at a meeting in the Pentagon. Why were no jets scrambled until after the Pentagon was hit? Indeed, why -- when fifty minutes earlier, after the South Tower had been hit and after a third jetliner (AA 77) had gone way off course, the red flag for a hijacking?
These questions have been approached (Kean/Zelikov, 2004), but the explanation has changed over time and certainly seems unsatisfactory (Griffin, 2005). As summarized by the Washington Post:
The [9-11] commission report portrays a discombobulated government that can't even keep track of the hijacked planes. Fighter planes fly in the wrong direction, pilots have no idea why they're in the air (maybe a cruise missile attack?)... Wash. Post, 19 June 2004
The first tower was hit at 8:46 am, and the second at 9:03 am. The jetliner that later hit the Pentagon was taken over about 8:46 am, and it hit the Pentagon at 9:38 am – fully 52 minutes since the first Tower was struck. Where were the vaunted American air defenses during all this? In the year before this day, 67 military escort jets had been routinely scrambled in five to ten minutes of an indication of trouble:
The scrambling of fighter aircraft at the first sign of trouble is a routine phenomenon. In the year period before 9/11, fighters were scrambled 67 times. [AP, 8/13/02]
But not on September 11th, 2001, when none of the hijacked planes was intercepted at all. And why was the one man who could authorize deployment of those air defenses not informed sooner? Perhaps these matters should be investigated, to find out why there were no air defenses, no interceptions of the hijacked planes that crashed into buildings on 9/11.
Note that one man placed in a key position to authorize – or not -- deployment of military jets for intercepting errant aircraft could also stop the system. One man. It would not take a large “conspiracy” to do so. Although military personnel under that man might question the lack of authorizations, they are not allowed (we understand) to criticize their leaders publicly.
Rumsfeld himself explained some of what was happening to him that morning during a Larry King live interview on December 5, 2001:
Rumsfeld: I had said at an 8:00 o'clock breakfast that sometime in the next two, four, six, eight, ten, twelve months there would be an event that would occur in the world that would be sufficiently shocking that it would remind people again how important it is to have a strong healthy defense department that contributes to -- That underpins peace and stability in our world. And that is what underpins peace and stability.
In fact we can't have healthy economies and active lives unless we live in a peaceful, stable world, and I said that to these people. And someone walked in and handed a note that said that a plane had just hit the World Trade Center. And we adjourned the meeting, and I went in to get my CIA briefing --
King: Right next door is your office.
Rumsfeld: -- right next door here, and the whole building shook within 15 minutes.
King: It was a jarring thing. And you ran toward the smoke?
Rumsfeld: Uh huh. ..
King: I know we're out of the allotted time, but Gary Hart has said that he expects, his commission previously said this would happen; you were pretty prophetic that morning.
Rumsfeld: Yeah…. We have to be willing to invest, to see that we have the kinds of capabilities that we can deter and defend and where necessary preempt…
King: Where, Mr. Secretary, do you think or do we know it will stop? What are your views on going to Iraq, other nations that harbor terrorists? What's your view?
Rumsfeld: I don't know what will be decided by the president. It's certainly something that is at that level for our country.
King: It's his goal, right?
Rumsfeld: You bet…
King: Bin Laden, is it a must to get him one way or the other?
Rumsfeld: Well sure... And we're after him and we intend to find him and get him.
Particularly noteworthy in Rumsfeld’s history was the note telling him about the attacks on the World Trade Center – followed by the attack on the Pentagon “within 15 minutes.” This seems remarkable, that the only man who could authorize scrambling of fighters on 9/11/01 was in a meeting, in which he reports he heard about the attack in New York within 15 minutes of the strike on the Pentagon. This would evidently explain why no air defenses were deployed that day (along with the interfering war games discussed above), but begs the question of why no one interrupted the meeting earlier, while thousands died?
Why was Secretary Rumsfeld not informed earlier – particularly with a hijacked plane on its way towards the Pentagon? Was he not in some danger? Does this not merit an investigation? Millions knew about the attacks from watching television – was the Secretary of Defense too busy in a meeting to be informed of this until 15 minutes before the Pentagon (where the meeting was being held) was itself attacked? Did his staff have instructions to inhibit them from informing him sooner? One suspects that the full story and timeline is not yet available publicly.
It is important to understand that before and since 9/11/01, fighters were quickly and routinely deployed to escort errant aircraft, as the following reports demonstrate.
The scrambling of fighter aircraft at the first sign of trouble is a routine phenomenon. In the year period before 9/11, fighters were scrambled 67 times. ‘[AP, 8/13/02]
The commander-in-chief of the Russian Air Force, Anatoli Kornukov said the day after 9/11: "Generally it is impossible to carry out an act of terror on the scenario which was used in the USA yesterday... As soon as something like that happens here, I am reported about that right away and in a minute we are all up." [Pravda, 9/12/01]
Consider that an aircraft emergency exists... when: ... There is unexpected loss of radar contact and radio communications with any... aircraft.
If... you are in doubt that a situation constitutes an emergency or potential emergency, handle it as though it were an emergency. [FAA regulations]
Pilots are supposed to hit each fix with pinpoint accuracy. If a plane deviates by 15 degrees, or two miles from that course, the flight controllers will hit the panic button. They’ll call the plane, saying "American 11, you’re deviating from course." It’s considered a real emergency, like a police car screeching down a highway at 100 miles an hour. When golfer Payne Stewart’s incapacitated Learjet missed a turn at a fix, heading north instead of west to Texas, F-16 interceptors were quickly dispatched. [MSNBC, 9/12/01]
A NORAD spokesman says its fighters routinely intercept aircraft. When planes are intercepted, they typically are handled with a graduated response. The approaching fighter may rock its wingtips to attract the pilot's attention, or make a pass in front of the aircraft. Eventually, it can fire tracer rounds in the airplane's path, or, under certain circumstances, down it with a missile. [Boston Globe, 9/15/01]
In October, Gen. Eberhart told Congress that 'now it takes about one minute' from the time that the FAA senses something is amiss before it notifies NORAD. And around the same time, a NORAD spokesofficer told the Associated Press that the military can now scramble fighters 'within a matter of minutes to anywhere in the United States.' [Slate, 1/16/02]
Of course, the latter statement that the military can now scramble fighters within minutes follows because local commanders can once again authorize deployments. The military Order of June 2001 which gave Donald Rumsfeld that power was rescinded soon after 9/11/2001.
5. Rumsfeld’s statement early morning 9/11/01 about a motivating ‘shocking event’, and PNAC’s Sept. 2000 statement about “some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor”
Rumsfeld’s “prescient” statement the morning of 9/11 before he received the note about the attacks, that “there would be an event that would occur in the world that would be sufficiently shocking that it would remind people again how important it is to have a strong healthy defense department´ -- is strongly reminiscent of similar statements made a year earlier by the PNAC committee (of which Rumsfeld was a member). (See http://newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf .)
“The military’s job during the Cold War was to deter Soviet expansionism. Today its task is to secure and expand the ‘zones of democratic peace;’ to deter the rise of [any] power competitor.. and to preserve American preeminence through the coming transformation of war…” P. 2
“America’s current geopolitical preeminence will be extended along with the peace and prosperity that it provides… foundation on unquestioned U.S. military preeminence.” P. 4
“Further, the process of transformation, [since] it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.” P. 51
This remarkable statement about the value of “some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor” came in September of 2000. The outline strategy for “America’s … preeminence” founded on “unquestioned U.S. military preeminence” is found in “REBUILDING AMERICA’S DEFENSES: Strategy, Forces and Resources For a New Century.” The document was published by the “THE PROJECT FOR THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURY.”
The Project for the New American Century, or PNAC, is a Washington, DC based think tank. The group was established in spring 1997 as a non-profit organization with the goal of promoting "American global leadership". The chairman is William Kristol, editor of the Weekly Standard and FOX News regular… Present and former members include several prominent members of the Republican Party and Bush Administration, including Richard Armitage, William J. Bennett, Jeb Bush, Ellen Bork (the wife of Robert Bork), *** Cheney, Zalmay Khalilzad, Lewis Libby, Richard Perle, Donald Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz. A large number of its ideas and its members are associated with the neoconservative movement. PNAC has seven full-time staff members, in addition to its board of directors.
The PNAC is a controversial organization. Some have raised concerns that the project has been proposing military and economic domination of land, space, and cyberspace by the United States, so as to establish American dominance in world affairs (Pax Americana) for the future—hence the term "the New American Century", based on the idea that the 20th century was the American Century. Some analysts argue that the American-led 2003 invasion of Iraq, commenced in March of that year under the code name Operation Iraqi Freedom, is the first major step toward implementing these objectives. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century)
Stated goals of this revolutionary plan include (emphasis added):
“RESTORE THE PERSONNEL STRENGTH of today’s force to roughly the levels anticipated in the “Base Force” outlined by the Bush [senior] Administration“ p. iv
“INCREASE DEFENSE SPENDING´ dramatically p. iv [Iraq war: ~$300 Billion and counting]
“REPOSITION U.S. FORCES to respond to 21st century strategic realities by shifting permanently-based forces to Southeast Europe and Southeast Asia [Iraq is specified]
“Defend the American homeland [now “Homeland Security”] and… provide a secure basis for U.S. power projection around the world.”
“CONTROL THE NEW “INTERNATIONAL COMMONS” OF SPACE AND “CYBERSPACE,”
“EXPLOIT THE REVOLUTION IN MILITARY AFFAIRS… [and] American global leadership and [keep] a global security order that is uniquely friendly to American… prosperity.” p. V.
"The United States has for decades sought to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional security. While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the [Persian] Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein."
http://newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf
The PNAC document is now publicly available and makes for interesting reading. Note that many of the participants in this “Project” and document are or were members of the Bush administration, including Libby (recently indicted), Vice President *** Cheney, Richard Perle, Donald Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz. We question the ethics of using military might in the world arena in a way that is “uniquely friendly to American prosperity.” (p. V.) This sounds very much like a prescription for empire-building, and is far beyond the limits prescribed in the US Constitution.
What are the rights of other countries? Are they to be subservient to American prosperity? What happened to the traditionally American policies of using the military only for defensive purposes, as specified in the Constitution, instead of for ‘pre-emptive’ or aggressive purposes?
The paradigm-shift outlined in the PNAC strategy-roadmap are evidently being implemented without full public debate, except to declare that 9/11 has changed everything.
Several of the main points of the PNAC roadmap have become part of what is known as the “Bush Doctrine:”
The Bush Doctrine refers to the set of revised foreign policies adopted by the President of the United States George W. Bush in the wake of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. In an address to the United States Congress after the attacks, President Bush declared that the U.S. would "make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them," a statement that was followed by the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan. Subsequently, the Bush Doctrine has come to be identified with a policy that permits pre-emptive war against potential aggressors before they are capable of mounting attacks against the United States, a view that has been used in part as a rationale for the 2003 Iraq War. The Bush Doctrine is a marked departure from the policies of deterrence that generally characterized American foreign policy during the Cold War and brief period between the collapse of the Soviet Union and 9/11… http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_Doctrine
On the eve of the US attack on Iraq, in March, 2003, Vice President *** Cheney laid out the official story of 9/11 and the change or “transformation” it brought, in an interview with Tim Russert:
Russert said many people throughout the country and around the world are asking why it is acceptable for the United States to lead a military attack against a nation that has not attacked this country.
"We have a new and unique set of circumstances we're trying to deal with," Cheney answered. He said the nation had to deal with different threats in the 20th century – large states, significant military forces and intercontinental ballistic missiles – "the kinds of threats we dealt with throughout the Cold War."
"All of that changed on Sept. 11," the vice president pointed out. "Since that time, we've had to deal with the proposition that truly deadly weapons could be delivered to the United States by a handful of terrorists. We saw on 9- 11 nineteen men hijack aircraft with airline tickets and box cutters and killed more than 3,000 Americans in a couple of hours [actually a sanctioned “conspiracy theory”]. (Williams, 2003, American Forces Press Service.)
Clearly, the events of Sept. 2001 have been used to justify and bring to fruition many of the goals outlined in the Sept. 2000 roadmap by Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and others. It is interesting to watch and surprising that more Americans are not alarmed by these developments, or at least, not expressing more alarm. Who would have thought, four years ago, that Americans would quietly allow for secret CIA prisons in Eastern Europe (if they exist), torturing of prisoners (e.g., at Abu Ghraib, if done), domestic wiretapping without warrants (this has been admitted to), giving up of significant civil rights (per the Patriot Act), and support of unilateral, pre-emptive wars in the Middle East?
The PNAC band evidently got what they were looking for on September 11th. As reported in the Washington Post (Woodward and Balz, 2002):
Like his father, Bush tries to keep a daily diary of his thoughts and observations. That night, he dictated:
"The Pearl Harbor of the 21st century took place today."
6. Appeal for indictments by Dr. Robert Bowman (USAF Ret.)
Col. Robert Bowman is on record with strong words regarding these events:
The cabal of neoconservatives at PNAC [Project for the New American Century, see below] who planned this war (Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Libby, Perle, Jeb Bush) even before W [George W. Bush] became president, knew the American people would not stand for it unless there was a new Pearl Harbor. 9/11 supplied that. Our government was warned… They were warned by 11 other countries. And they were specifically warned by an FBI agent that [some group] was planning on flying a hijacked airliner into the World Trade Center.
They not only ignored the warnings, they made sure no fighter jets were scrambled to stop it. If they had just done nothing, and allowed normal procedures to be followed, the Twin Towers would still be standing and thousands of dead Americans would still be alive….
As a pilot who flew 101 combat missions in Vietnam, I can tell you that the best thing our government can do for its combat veterans is to quit making more of them. Peace is patriotic; a preemptive war is immoral, illegal, unconstitutional, a war crime, and treason. I swore to uphold the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic….
We are the people. We are sovereign. We are the patriots. The whole world is with us. Never allow anyone to intimidate you into silence. Wake up, America! It’s time to speak truth to power. God bless America, and God save us from the traitors in our government. R. Bowman, Baltimore Chronicle, April 17, 2004.
Dr. Bowman concludes:
Wake up, America! It is time for George W. Bush, *** Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and the whole oil mafia to be … indicted.
Impeachment of civil officers of the United States for “high Crimes and Misdemeanors” is provided in the U.S. Constitution:
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
Col. Bowman is in appealing for indictment/impeachment as provided for in the Constitution of the United States.
7. 9/11 and Al Qaeda
Soon after the 9-11-2001 tragedy, U.S. military forces immediately attacked and occupied Afghanistan to “kill Al Qaeda.” Oddly, four years later, Osama bin Laden is still on the loose, and Al Qaeda is growing – along with the opium trade in Afghanistan -- despite the presence of US military forces.
Furthermore, FBI director Robert Mueller III admitted that no evidence for 9-11 planning was found in Afghanistan
The hijackers also left no paper trail. In our investigation, we have not uncovered a single piece of paper either here in the U.S. or in the treasure trove of information that has turned up in Afghanistan and elsewhere that mentioned any aspect of the September 11th plot.
An ex-LAPD investigator summarizes:
To date, the case that 9/11 was perpetrated solely by Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda has never been proved, even to the most rudimentary standards. In fact, some 35 months after the attacks there has not been a single successful 9/11 prosecution anywhere in the world. The only conviction that had been secured, a German prosecution against Mounir El Motassadeq, charged with aiding the so called Hamburg cell of Mohammed Atta, was overturned in 2004 because the US government refused to produce… evidence relevant to the charges. M. Ruppert, http://911review.com/reason.html
We find the official “conspiracy theory” that bin Laden was ultimately responsible for coordinating the 9-11 attacks to be uncompelling, now four years after the attacks. He himself has denied this, repeatedly, as we see in the next section.
8. Are we certain that bin Laden was responsible for the 9/11 attacks?
On 9/11/2001 and subsequent days, bin Laden was tried and convicted on live television. For example, on 9/16/2001, Vice Pres. Cheney spoke in an interview with Tim Russert:
MR. RUSSERT: The president said that Osama bin Laden was the prime suspect. Why?
VICE PRES. CHENEY: There is just a lot of evidence to link his organization, the al-Qaida organization, and he is the head of al-Qaida, to this operation. There are some ties, for example, to some of the people involved here back to the U.S.S. Cole bombing in Yemen. We're able to tell--going back now looking at relationships and the way they've operated in the past, we're quite confident that, in fact, as the president said, he is the prime suspect…
MR. RUSSERT: You have no doubt that Osama bin Laden played some role in this.
VICE PRES. CHENEY: I have no doubt that he and his organization played a significant role in this.
MR. RUSSERT: Were you surprised by the precision and sophistication of the operation?
VICE PRES. CHENEY: Well, certainly, we were surprised in the sense that, you know, there had been information coming in that a big operation was planned, but that's sort of a trend that you see all the time in these kinds of reports. (“The White House,” Sept. 16, 2001)
Thus, Mr. Cheney admitted to pre-9/11 “information coming in that a big operation was planned” (discussed above) and stated the Bush administration had “no doubt” that bin Laden was involved. This is reminiscent of White House comments that there was “no doubt” that Hussein harbored terrible weapons of mass destruction.
Yet on the same day, bin Laden himself read a statement which was broadcast by Qatar’s Al-Jazeera satellite channel:
I stress that I have not carried out this act, which appears to have been carried out by individuals with their own motivation…
This denial was broadcast worldwide, but the Bush administration urged media in the U.S. not to show the video since it might contain secret signals to Al Qaeda terrorists still in the country.
On September 28, 2001, bin Laden again denied any involvement with the attacks, and suggested that he was being framed:
I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children and other people…
There exists a government within the government of the United States. That secret government must be asked as to who carried out the attacks.... The United States should trace the perpetrators of these attacks to those persons who want to make the present century a century of conflict between Islam and Christianity so that their own nation could survive.” Daily Ummat, Pakistani newspaper, 28 Sept. 2001.
Again, the US Administration urged American media not to broadcast bin Laden’s words.
Then in December 2001, the Bush administration suddenly urged the media to go ahead and broadcast bin Laden’s words – this time from a video tape found by the US military in Afghanistan, after the US had already attacked Afghanistan in pursuit of bin Laden and his fellows. This is the famous “smoking gun” video in which, according to the Administration, bin Laden confesses to his crime of organizing the 9/11 attacks. The tape was then fortuitously discovered by the invading Americans. Ascribed to bin Laden from this tape:
The brothers, who conducted the operation, all they knew was that they have a martyrdom operation and we asked each of them to go to America but they didn't know anything about the operation, not even one letter. But they were trained and we did not reveal the operation to them until they are there and just before they boarded the planes. …Those who were trained to fly didn't know the others. One group of people did not know the other group.
(Transcript of Osama bin Laden videotape, Dec 13, 2001 http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/12/13/tape...ript/index.html )
Now this is truly remarkable! The hijackers knew nothing about the 9/11 operation until “just before they boarded the planes”, and one group did not know the other group. Yet they were able to overpower the pilots and crew of the planes with box-cutters, and then successfully navigate the planes without ground support, and starting at 30,000-foot altitudes, hundreds of miles into the WTC Towers and the Pentagon – with instructions received just before they boarded the planes! No practice beforehand. Incredible.
Also recall that FBI director Mueller stated that after operations in Afghanistan,
In our investigation, we have not uncovered a single piece of paper either here in the U.S. or in the treasure trove of information that has turned up in Afghanistan and elsewhere that mentioned any aspect of the September 11th plot.
That is odd. It doesn’t seem to add up. But back to the US Administration and the “Smoking Gun” video, as reported by Reuters:
U.S. Shows "Smoking Gun" Video
Reuters News Service
Posted Dec. 13, 2001 (Washington/Tora Bora, Afghanistan) -- The United States on Thursday released a video it said showed Osama bin Laden holding a "smoking gun" as mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, while his al Qaeda group hunkered down in the Afghan mountains under a deluge of U.S. bombs and vowed to fight on.
The videotape shows the Saudi-born militant smiling as he explains how the hijackers assembled, some oblivious to their mission until the last moment, to stage the attacks that killed nearly 3,300 people and which prompted the U.S.-led military operation to topple the Islamic Taliban movement for harboring bin Laden. However, the Saudi militant remains at large.
The Pentagon issued the hour-long amateur tape, found in Afghanistan, and provided an English translation in which bin Laden is quoted as saying: "We calculated in advance the number of casualties from the enemy, who would be killed based on the position of the tower."
The comment apparently referred to hijacked airliners which plowed into and destroyed the twin towers of the World Trade Center in New York. Another plane smashed into the Pentagon near Washington and a fourth crashed in Pennsylvania after passengers rushed and struggled with the hijackers.
"We calculated that the floors that would be hit would be three or four floors. I was the most optimistic of them all," the relaxed and bearded guerrilla chief was quoted as saying, adding the collapse of both towers was more than he had hoped for.
U.S. officials, who believe bin Laden is in Afghanistan despite rumors he has fled the fighting, billed the tape as conclusive "smoking gun" evidence that bin Laden, who has lived in Afghanistan for several years, was behind the attacks.
The Taliban had demanded proof of bin Laden's guilt as a condition for handing him over. Washington rejected that demand and on Oct. 7 began the bombing campaign that enabled anti-Taliban forces to take over most of the country. (Cached at: http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/disinfo/...un_121301.html)
Here bin Laden seems totally at odds with his earlier denials. Strange.
The BBC reported:
The BBC's Katty Kay says the White House hopes the video will bolster international support for the war on terrorism.
"For those who see this tape, they'll realize that not only is he guilty of incredible murder, he has no conscience and no soul, that he represents the worst of civilization," said President George W Bush.
US Senator Ron Wyden, who has also seen the tape, says he hopes it will remove suspicions in countries such as Pakistan that the 11 September attacks were an Israeli plot aimed at drawing the US into a war with Islamic countries. [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/1708091.stm]
Yet, there were many particularly in Islamic countries that were suspicious about the US-released video tape. Statements were contested that bin Laden was the guilty leader in planning the 9/11 attacks which killed thousands of innocents in a non-war situation -- strictly contrary to Islamic beliefs. And many doubted that the “smoking gun” video released by the Pentagon actually showed Osama bin Laden, claiming that the bearded man in the video said to be bin Laden by the Pentagon and other US officials did not look like bin Laden.
KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia -- There was heavy skepticism in Arab and Muslim communities around the world about the veracity of the released videotape of Osama bin Laden discussing the September 11 terror attacks.
The tape, released Thursday by the Bush administration, was dismissed as U.S. propaganda by Malaysia's Muslim opposition. Leaders of Parti Islam se-Malaysia (PAS), the country's biggest opposition party, said they were still not convinced bin Laden was behind the September 11 attacks. "It is still not a proven case that he directed it, he planned it or he funded it," said Kamaruddin Jaafar, a senior PAS leader, told Reuters news service. "It's not a proven case despite this tape," he said….
New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani said the tape showed that bin Laden was the "personification of evil." (http://archives.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/asiapcf/central/12/14/gen.muslim.reax/index.html )
Bush lashed out against contradictory claims:
"It is preposterous for anybody to think that this tape is doctored," [Bush] said during a brief photo opportunity with the prime minister of Thailand. "That's just a feeble excuse to provide weak support for an incredibly evil man." [CNN ]
But wait – we should examine for ourselves whether the fellow who is said to be Osama bin Laden in this tape looks like bin Laden seen in numerous other tapes. Here is the Pentagon-released confessional tape of bin Laden:
Next a juxtaposition of bin Laden from five videotapes, the “Pentagon-bin-Laden” is frame E while other videos of bin Laden are shown for comparison. See for yourself if these are the same man (compare for example the ear in A above with D below).
Inspection of the images shows that they are NOT in fact the same man, considering the nose length, nostril shape, cheeks and eyebrows. Pentagon-released man “E” looks quite different from the tapes released by Al Qaeda before and since “E” was released. A thorough investigation will use computer analysis to compare the facial characteristics – then we will know for certain. A preliminary analysis considers the photographs with the individuals in approximately the same orientations, and compares facial characteristics:
The ratio of the distance from tip-of-nose to ear lobe is 1.1 for bin Laden D (Al Jazeera tape) and 1.7 for bin Laden E (the Pentagon-released tape of Dec. 2001). The ratio of nose-length to nose width is even more distinctive for the two individuals, 2.5 for bin Laden D but only 1.3 for bin Laden E.
Prof. Bruce Lawrence of Duke University, an expert on bin Laden, has analyzed many speeches by bin Laden and concludes that the Pentagon release of Dec. 13, 2001 discussed above is not authentically bin Laden, in agreement with our analysis. He writes, “the smoking gun tape is also a fake tape. It was made to appear like bin Laden…” (Lawrence, 2006) He also questions the authenticity of the audiotape released on 1/19/06. (Rupinta, 2006)
It appears we have been lied to again, and made angry as a nation so as to go to war against Afghanistan and Iraq, enormously growing our national debt and killing tens of thousands of people. Where will it end?
9. HOW HITLER USED THE ‘BIG LIE’ PRINCIPLE TO PROVOKE WAR
The way Hitler incited the German nation into attacking Poland in 1939 provides an example of how he used the “Big Lie” principle.
Hitler's 'propagandist reason' for starting the war had already been arranged by Himmler and Heydrich at the Führer's request. The plan was of such importance that it was code named Operation Himmler and involved having the SS stage fake attacks by the Polish Army against German troops along the German-Polish border… [Prison] inmates dressed in Polish Army uniforms would be killed by lethal injections then riddled with bullets and left as eviden
The photos linked here on the previous page from the FEMA photo library reminded me of the subject of Kurt Sonnenfeld, a photographer for FEMA, whose stange story is yet another anomolous incident associated with the event of 9/11.
Kurt was a photographer for FEMA who was one of four Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) photographers with digital cameras, who shot all the video footage and still photography of the restricted 9/11 site, following the WTC collapses.
After completing his duty as one of the only videographer allowed on Ground Zero at the WTC, his wife, Nancy Sonnenfeld, 36, was found dead on New Years Day January 2002. Kurt Sonnenfeld was then arrested for the murder of his wife (although she left a suicide note!?). Only his wife's prints were on the gun, and only her hands had gushot residue. Kurt Sonnenfeld was bound over for trial on a first-degree murder charge, with bond set at $600,000. (Info Here ,Here), here., & here.
Then exactly ONE day before his trial was to begin, murder charges against him were completely dismissed and he was set free. He then filed a lawsuit for $20 million, claiming false arrest, false imprisonment, deprivation of civil rights, and brutality, among other things.
Prosecutors wouldn't comment on specific reasons for the dismissal, but the defense investigation found a note written by Nancy Sonnenfeld which police had not taken into evidence, said public defender Carrie Thompson. "Our investigators found a letter written in Nancy's own hand consistent with a suicide letter, although it was very cryptic," Thompson said. She said the letter said, "What is more beautiful than love and death?" with the word "love" scratched out. "Kurt, please get help." The letter was found behind a framed photograph of Kurt Sonnenfeld. ...Nancy Sonnenfeld's sister, Amy Leek, said the family knew this was coming but would have no comment on the news.
Three years later, the charges against him were re-filed because they say they found two convicts he suposedly "confessed to"! He was re-arrested in South America and has been held in prison there for some time. Info on the re-filing of the murder charge here.
What a strange case! I am sure that he was party to some incriminating evidence that FEMA/Bushco could not allow to surface and was hushed up, or is it "Nothing to see here, move along now..........."
Only one of the strange coincidences associated with the events surrounding 9/11
Kurt was a photographer for FEMA who was one of four Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) photographers with digital cameras, who shot all the video footage and still photography of the restricted 9/11 site, following the WTC collapses.
After completing his duty as one of the only videographer allowed on Ground Zero at the WTC, his wife, Nancy Sonnenfeld, 36, was found dead on New Years Day January 2002. Kurt Sonnenfeld was then arrested for the murder of his wife (although she left a suicide note!?). Only his wife's prints were on the gun, and only her hands had gushot residue. Kurt Sonnenfeld was bound over for trial on a first-degree murder charge, with bond set at $600,000. (Info Here ,Here), here., & here.
Then exactly ONE day before his trial was to begin, murder charges against him were completely dismissed and he was set free. He then filed a lawsuit for $20 million, claiming false arrest, false imprisonment, deprivation of civil rights, and brutality, among other things.
Prosecutors wouldn't comment on specific reasons for the dismissal, but the defense investigation found a note written by Nancy Sonnenfeld which police had not taken into evidence, said public defender Carrie Thompson. "Our investigators found a letter written in Nancy's own hand consistent with a suicide letter, although it was very cryptic," Thompson said. She said the letter said, "What is more beautiful than love and death?" with the word "love" scratched out. "Kurt, please get help." The letter was found behind a framed photograph of Kurt Sonnenfeld. ...Nancy Sonnenfeld's sister, Amy Leek, said the family knew this was coming but would have no comment on the news.
Three years later, the charges against him were re-filed because they say they found two convicts he suposedly "confessed to"! He was re-arrested in South America and has been held in prison there for some time. Info on the re-filing of the murder charge here.
What a strange case! I am sure that he was party to some incriminating evidence that FEMA/Bushco could not allow to surface and was hushed up, or is it "Nothing to see here, move along now..........."
Only one of the strange coincidences associated with the events surrounding 9/11
QUOTE (OBL+)
I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children and other people…
Note, this is OBVIOUSLY upheld by all the Al Qaeda led suicide bombers, they INSURE that all innocent women and children are first removed from a location before they self detonate. See Bali, Madrid, London, Iraq mosques and shopping areas etc etc for examples of this policy in action.
BS
Frater, you really believe these lies?
Arthur
Note, this is OBVIOUSLY upheld by all the Al Qaeda led suicide bombers, they INSURE that all innocent women and children are first removed from a location before they self detonate. See Bali, Madrid, London, Iraq mosques and shopping areas etc etc for examples of this policy in action.
BS
Frater, you really believe these lies?
Arthur
Yeah, you are right, looking at what happened in London, for example...
7/7: Europe's terror scam -the final clues?
by ewing2001
August 18, 2005
The following timetable might point on the identities of the real perpetrators of 7/7 and its follow up attack on 7/21.
This abstract is based on already prepared research at team8plus.org, as presented here during the first days after the attack, which brought us attention at prisonplanet, breakfornews and wikipedia.
However they also withdraw the references after a short time.
The most important patterns of this timetable had been also presented during a workshop of Webster Tarpley and an afterhour at the DC "truthemergency" on July 23, 2005.
Please read also "conclusion".
2002
Globalist warheads and neocon fascists, close to the real perpetrators of 9/11, decide after the "successful" outcome of the attacks, that 9/11 should also work for Europe.
The idea for an european 9/11 is born.
Instead of political targets, this time a subway is chosen, either in London or Paris.
The power brokers decide for London, heartbeat of intelligent setups.
For a success of an european 9/11, the plotters decide to test most important details in some terror drills, to be planned within the next 2 years.
They forward their secret ideas to their associated "organizers".
January 2003
Globalist plotters of the forthcoming "european 9/11" believe, that their script must also include a subtle connection with Africa, via victims and alleged suspects.
(http://www.team8plus.org/forum_viewtopic.php?9.616.0 )
Their concern is to oppose liberal members of the G8, who have different plans for africans debt situation.
For their new 'anti-african' psyOP, they develop a list (here called A-CHIP = African-Caribbean Helping Idiots-PsyOP).
scripted into this list, but unrelated to crime or any conspiracy, is also Bob Geldof and as usual, some helpful 'foot soldiers' of the religious right.
The masterminds decide to work with moles in MI5/MI6 (also founder of Mossad).
They also sit at top banking positions of G8.
Symbolically the attack will therefore be also coordinated with this summit.
For their manipulation of a new "pro"-africa/"anti" terror africa mindset, the masterminds already prepare the US nation with a new bogus support plan of Africa, carefully scripted into a speech of George Bush, using "AIDS" and "hunger" as a cover:
"... Today, on the continent of Africa, nearly 30 million people have the AIDS virus -- including 3 million children under the age 15...
... AIDS can be prevented...and to meet a severe and urgent crisis abroad, tonight I propose the Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief -- a work of mercy beyond all current international efforts to help the people of Africa..."
(http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030128-19.html )
February 2003
The final plannings and meetings for the London attacks begin officially in Leeds, London and Lahore (Pakistan).
As usual, the real perpetrators select their targets also for political reasons, to tie their alleged suspects to 'radical pakistani terror cells' in Leeds, but also Lahore, Pakistan.
The alleged pakistan connection is also constructed for political blackmailing, to ensure that the military coalition with U.S. still continues.
The script for the attack is using military codes to simplify their"arrangements":
London/Leeds/Lahore =LLL, turned upside down, is 777 (7/7, 2005).
For this "plotline" they also need some scapegoats and fall guys (also called "destraction agents").
One of them will become Mohammed Junaid Babar, a Pakistani-American computer programmer (originally from Queens, New york), already under British surveillance.
Babar was later forced to plead guilty in 2004 to supplying military equipment to an alleged al-Qaeda camp in Pakistan.
Babar is possibly a deceived double agent for CIA/ISI.
(http://www.capetimes.co.za/index.php?fSectionId=272&fArticleId=2832614 )
After spending two and a half months with Zeeshan Siddique in Lahore, the masterminds also scripted Siddique into an alleged ringleader.
However Pakistani security officials arrest Siddique already on May 18, 3 weeks before the 7/7 attack.
(http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,22989-1726730,00.html )
April 2003
Defense Contractor Bombardier receives a £3.4 billion contract awarded by UK Metronet for 1,738 metro cars and new signalling systems for the Victoria line and the sub-surface lines.
May 13th, 2003
Motorola appoints TagMaster an application partner.
One of the first projects of Tagmaster is to supply Motorola with RFID equipment for London
Underground trains.
The reader of this divice is positioned under the train cab and the ID-tag is fitted to a bracket, mounted on the sleepers between the rails.
In April 2005, Tagmaster is also selected as RFID supplier to Madrid Metro and Bombardier, who runs a London Underground projects Division.
(http://www.tagmaster.se/tm_news/
http://www.tagmaster.se/download/news/news_20030513.pdf
http://www.tagmaster.com/applications/tran...on/examples.php )
July 2003
George Bush selects former Eli Lilly & Co. chief executive Randall Tobias as the coordinator for a new $15 billion program to "slow the spread of AIDS and to treat it in Africa and the Caribbean".
(http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/07/20030702-3.html )
NOTE: Bush' father was former head of Eli Lilly, after he left the CIA in 1977.
Eli Lily, not only strongly tied with the religious right, is interestingly also marketing their first recombinant-DNA product in 1982, just barely after the AIDS epidemic started.
December 2003
A report by the London Resilience, a consortium of emergency services and transport operators, reveals that the Sep 2003 london tube drill "shows flaws".
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/3320809.stm )
The London Resilience Forum was set up in May 2002 to lead emergency planning, led by Minister Phill Woolas.
This forum will later also plan some speeches at the Local Government Association (LGA) conference during the beginning of June 2005, with Rudoph Giuliani, as one of the keynote speakers.
(http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8669397/ )
In the following year, the LGA would reorganise their political structure.
(http://www.lga.gov.uk/About.asp?lsection=456&ccat=1021 )
2004
Bob Kiley becomes Commissioner of Transport for London.
Kiley worked for the CIA between 1963 and 1970, then starting to work as an assistant director at the Police Foundation in Washington D.C.
During 80s he was Chairman and CEO of the New York City Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA).
It's obvious, that Kiley's function is either to coordinate, allow or tolerate moles into the Transport System who supervise and coordinate the upcoming 7/7 attacks.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Kiley )
TfL is directed by a management board whose members are chosen for their
understanding of transport matters and appointed by Ken Livingstone, Mayor
of London, who chairs the TfL Board.
TfL’s Commissioner, Bob Kiley, and his Chief Officers are responsible and accountable for the day to day operations of TfL and the work of its
17,000 employees.
TfL manages London’s buses, London Underground, the Docklands Light Railway (DLR) and London Trams. Transport for London was formed in July 2000 and is a functional body of the Greater London Authority
(http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/pdfdocs/tfl_factsheets.pdf )
April 2004
Abdul-Salaam Patel dies.
His wife is mother-in-law of one of the alleged 7/7 suspects, Mohammad Sidique Khan.
(http://www.capetimes.co.za/index.php?fSectionId=271&fArticleId=2624278 )
The real perpetrators of 7/7 are still interested in an "african connection".
For symbolical reasons, they also choose the name Patel, which refers to the "Gujarati Patel Muslims".
Khan's mother was found in a database of Buckingham Palace, Queen Elisabeth.
She later also received an award of the Queen.
(http://www.guardian.co.uk/attackonlondon/story/0,16132,1528112,00.html )
However also Patel's father Ismail Patel was known as an anti-apartheid activist, who died in 1973 after he had been under house arrest for 10 years.
(http://www.news24.com/News24/World/Londonattacks/0,,2-10-1854_1738031,00.html )
It's easier for the real masterminds to profile people close to their environments.
Farida Patel, a well-known British teacher, was decorated by the Queen.
(http://www.tribuneindia.com/2005/20050802/main9.htm )
The real plotters however don't get their own databases straight.
On July 13, 2005, the wrong Hasina Patel and her husband, Rashid Facha, are getting arrested.
April 2, 2004
A NY Subway drill is testing more details for 7/7.
An explosion in a subway in prep for a global event,
In this exercise it refers symbolically to the GOP Convention, while 7/7 happened during G8.
"...Police officers from across the city played out terrorist scenarios yesterday, from a gas attack in a hotel room to an explosion in a subway in preparation for the Republican National Convention in August..."
(http://www.newyorkmetro.com/nymetro/news/features/n_8286/ )
The symbolism of this "hotel room" let us allow a speculation.
It's plausible, that an earlier blueprint of 7/7 also included an assassination of power broker and IASPS/PNAC Insider Benjamin Netanyahu.
This would explain, why on the morning of 7/7 he was indeed waiting "in a hotel room" for a phone call, when he was "warned" by Scotland Yard.
Only three weeks later, Netanyahu resigned from his Cabinet position, officicially to protest the pullout from Gaza, but obviously to get him now finally out of radar.
The name of this April 2004 drill is also very significant.
COBRA will later also refer to Tony Blair's emergency unit in London. A perfect cover name for important communications and plausible "protocol leaks" over the phone or other unsafe communication tools.
(http://politics.guardian.co.uk/columnist/story/0,9321,1535172,00.html )
May 16th, 2004
Operation Transit SAFE London is testing more details for 7/7.
At the same time, a partner terror drill in New York, another "four-hour drill" is supervising logistics and PR, sponsored by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and headed by NYPD Commissioner Raymond Kelly.
(http://www.nyc.gov/html/oem/html/events/2004.05.16_transitsafe.html
http://www.nyc.gov/html/oem/html/events/20...ransitsafe.html )
Jul 2004
Africa is forged into their first major wargames in the new century, starting in Kenya.
(http://www.army.mod.uk/rwf/news.htm )
July 2004
The UK House of Parliament is providing the real perpetrators of 7/7 with yet another profile:
"...ONE of the London suicide bombers was allowed to tour the Houses of Parliament...
...Mohammad Sidique Khan, 30, was a guest of the Labour MP Jon Trickett..., four months after he had been identified by intelligence officials as a "criminal associate"
(http://news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1637032005 )
Trickett is a strong supporter of anti-terrorism laws and ID cards.
September 2004
Verint Networked Video Solution receives a contract to improve Railway Security of London Underground.
Verint Systems Inc., is headquartered in Melville, New York, but is also a subsidiary of Israel's Comverse Technology.
(http://tinyurl.com/8gwgq
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=69208 )
October 2004
Bechtel, as partner of a joint-venture with British-based Jarvis, and Spanish-owned Amey, starts to overhaul the Tube Lines, with Mike Adams as president of Bechtel Civil.
A new Tube Lines signaling system is based on Alcatel technology used in Vancouver, Hong Kong, and Kuala Lumpur.
Jim Haynes (Bechtel) is director of rebuilding Tube Lines.
Train Systems Program Manager is Siv Bhamra, upgrading the Northern and Jubilee lines.
(http://www.bechtel.com/Briefs/1104/Underground.htm
http://www.bechtel.com/Briefs/0305/Front_End.htm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/essex/3735598.stm)
[72.14.207.104] )
NOTE: Metronet is owned by Atkins, Balfour Beatty, Bombardier, EDF Energy and RWE Thames Water.
November 2004
The official "plotline" of 7/7 needs another upgrade.
Logfiles of yet another "computer specialist", Naeem Noor Khan, are helpful to script his address book contacts into other masterminds.
However also this "suspect" was closely monitored by ISI and their handlers and they secretly arrested him already in July 2004.
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/3541952.stm )
We therefore can assume, that he got tricked into a fake plot, maybe also under the typical cover of an "informant" for alleged terror plots, which had nothing to do with 7/7 and later put on hold.
The scripting of more profiles continues.
The only purpose is to develop a database on alleged helping hands, which will be later forwarded to associated intelligent services.
(http://www.newsline.com.pk/NewsAug2005/cover1aug2005.htm )
It's also plausible, that in the same time period, MI 6 'hires' Haroon Rashid Aswat as another alleged "informant" to set him up by scripting him later into yet another alleged masterminds of the London attacks.
~November 2004
During this time, Ira Greenberg, formerly Intelligence Division for several years, is being sent to London as intelligence officer for NYPD Commissioner Raymond Kelly.
(http://www.nydailynews.com/news/wn_report/story/326214p-278843c.html )
Coordination of further details are developed.
December 2004
Business Week is describing the coming threat at the G8: The BRICs.
BRIC is a coalition of a forthcoming business alliance towards the G8: Brazil, Russia, India, and China (with close association Venezuela and South Africa).
(http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/02-05a-05.asp&e=912 )
The author Ricardo C. Amaral suggests, that "these four countries should consider the creation and adoption of a new currency similar to the "Euro." and "name the new currency "The Global."
(http://www.brazzilmag.com/content/view/2346/49/ )
It's possible, that during 2004, brazilian 7/21 victim de Menezes was not only chosen as a secret helping hand, but also for a "political assasination", signalling Brazil a secret message.
Furthermore de Menezes' assassination, under the cover of an accident, was also orchestrated for a domestic increase of a police state.
April 4-8, 2005
More final details for 7/7 are getting tested.
Terror drill exercise "atlantic blue" includes now also "'bombs' being placed on buses and explosives left on the London underground", which is coincidentally later also the same scoop of the official plotline of 7/7.
In this drill, participants, close to the real perpetrators and masterminds of 7/7, are also testing other logistical details:
"Evacuation" and moving trains "to the safety of a platform".
(http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,1525247,00.html )
Atlantic Blue is also part of a much larger US sponsored emergency preparedness exercise labeled TOPOFF 3, which included the participation of Connecticut, New Jersey, Canada, and the United Kingdom.
An internal Virtual News Network (VNN) and news Website provides real-time reporting of the story like an actual TV network would.
An opposition force (OPFOR) within this major drill called “RED TEAM.”
Weeks before 7/7
Chatter becomes louder among intelligent inside circles, being now fully aware of a new setup by globalist warmongers, close to G8.
Ex-Saudi Intel head Prince Turki al-Faisal is one of them, as also his former agency leaders.
NOTE: al-Faisal retired from his post as intel chief one week prior 9/11 and is still connected with the insiders of London, since he became Saudi ambassador to the UK.
Saudi Intel later decides to use their 'prior knowledge' as a political 'bombshell', by claiming they passed their info to to MI5 and MI6 in time.
As a cover they will later claim, they believed to have been obtained this knowledge "from terror suspects under interrogation in the desert kingdom".
If the forwarded warning is really true or not, is not really important, because it only shows the calculated power competition of international globalist bankers.
(http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=1741882005 )
We can assume, that now also high ranks from CIA and Mossad are fully aware of time and place of the london attacks as well.
Also, weeks before 7/7, "...fears of terror attacks have prompted FBI agents based in the U.S. Embassy in London to avoid traveling on London's popular
underground railway (or tube) system..."
(http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/index.html?blog=/politics/war_room/2005/07/07/fbi/index.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6514619/site/newsweek )
Apparently also British Police had received advanced Warnings of a terrorist attack
(http://globalresearch.ca/PrintArticle.php?articleId=657 )
May 2005
Metroline announces that Steve McAleavy is to step down as Managing Director of Metroline. Plc. Sean O’Shea becomes new director.
(http://www.metroline.co.uk/100505.html )
June 2005
The influence of strategic warmongers in Africa becomes stronger, with the only reason to control their resources.
"A major african terror exercise, named FLINTLOCK 05 takes place in Dakar, Senegal, where the U.S. and Senegalese forces along with troops from Niger, Chad, Mali, Mauritania, Algeria and Tunisia will be thrown into a crisis to solve.
"Flintlock 05" is what U.S. European Command calls a "Phase Zero" exercise, meant to prevent the need for future "phases" used in the buildup to war..."
(http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20050607-013617-6514r.htm
http://www.eucom.mil/english/FullStory.asp?art=554
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Jun2005/20050617_1761.html )
According to PNAC supporters Eliot Cohen, James Woolsey and Norman Podhoretz, an endgame of what they call "Ww4" (WW3 happened to be the cold war, in their eyes), has also to topple Africa, Australia and Europe at the same time.
It's important to know, that some of the final strategic countries on their target list had been Egypt and China.
While China would be psychologically weakend with either overexaggerated or orchestrated bird flu (ironically "flu" was also the result of overvaccination after WW1), future attacks have to be provoked in Egypt to fulfill the same purpose.
Plotters decide also to threaten wildcard members of the european community:
Netherlands, Germany and Italy.
June 1, 2005
Rudy Giuliani and Vice President Todd P. McDermott of Verint (who is improving Railway Security in London) are both invited to speak at the canadian Infosec conference.
McDermott once retired from the Royal Canadian Mounted Police as Officer in Charge Engineering Branch, Technical Operations.
McDermott also has been deemed an expert witness Canada wide on all aspects of electronic surveillance.
Are these meetings used as a cover to exchange some final details for a forthcoming London terror drill?
(http://www.canadianinfosecsummit.com/securityEvent/speakers.html
http://www.canadianinfosecsummit.com/secur.../mcdermott.html )
June 12th, 2005
Yet another final test drill in London's tube.
This time the exercise takes place at Tower Hill station.
(http://tfl.gov.uk/tfl/press-centre/press-releases/press-releases-content.asp?prID=384 )
June 17th, 2005
The US is closing its consulate in Lagos, Nigeria because of an unspecified security threat.
Nigerian security officials said there were "telephone calls to the embassy" which warned of attacks.
(http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2005/06/17/lagos-shutdown050617.html )
The Foreign Office in London said also Britain shut its Deputy High Commission in Lagos "as a precaution following the closure of the nearby U.S. Consulate".
(http://newsfromrussia.com/hotspots/2005/06/17/60386.html
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8862171/ )
What makes this story interesting is, that forthcoming 7/7 victim Anthony Fatayi-Williams, who got killed in front of Tavistock Building, was actually from Nigeria, working for controlled demolition company AMEC (one of the customers of KINGSTAR UK, which white van was visibly seen next to the attacked london bus).
NOTE:
Kingstar has no office in London City.
It's at 104 Waverley Road, Plumstead, which is 11.9 miles away.
(http://www.amec.com/news/mediareleasedetails.asp?Pageid=876&MediaID=310 )
http://www.vanguardngr.com/articles/2002/c...f312072005.html )
Was there any 'sensitive channel', which leaked prior knowledge from AMEC to Nigeria?
NOTE:
Led by top African producer Nigeria, the Gulf of Guinea already delivers about 15 percent of America’s oil supply. By 2015, that figure may swell to 25 percent, according to the U.S. National Intelligence Council, a CIA think-tank.
(http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8862171/ )
On June 21, 2005, AMEC also announced the aquisition of UK nuclear services business NNC Holdings.
Customers include the Ministry of Defence (MoD), BAE Systems and Rolls-Royce.
(http://www.forbes.com/business/feeds/afx/2005/06/30/afx2117367.html )
During 2004, as one of the biggest profiteers from 9/11, AMEC wins major reconstruction contracts in Iraq.
During 2002, they win a seven-year Ministry Of Defence contract in Scotland and become key supplier to US Air Force Centre for Environmental Excellence.
Chief executive Sir Peter Mason is knighted.
NOTE: The pentagon wing, which was attacked on Sep11th, was freshly renovated by AMEC before 9/11. They immediately received a follow-up contract to remove the rubble, also at Ground Zero in New York.
June 26-30, 2005
A secret 'gas' test is staged at Grand Central in NYC.
The significance of this drill might refer to the controlled explosions in the London Tube on 7/7.
In this test drill, the Homeland Security released gas, officially to study how dangerous "chemicals might flow through the landmark in a terrorist attack".
Nontoxic "tracer gases" were released into the terminal between June 26-30, observed by physicists from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California..."
(http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/325980p-278531c.html)
Here is a plausible, but still speculative scenario for the importance for this drill:
As a matter of fact, Livermore, which terror unit is called "B Division", is using an electronic hand-held device to detect radiation...
NOTE: There is a huge market for these kind of devices.
Rudy Guiliani'c company Bio ONE™ is one of the profiteers, yet another one is Northrop Grumman, which has been installing a $US175 million ($A225 million) Postal Service biohazard detection system this year.
Bio Pharmacy is one of the biggest war profiteers, especially after Sep11th.
(http://www.bioone.com
http://www.smh.com.au/news/Technology/On-t...5206038400.html
http://www.eurekalert.org/features/doe/200...l-rfd062402.php
http://www.globalfia.com/whatsnew/apds.html
http://istf.ucf.edu/ISTFSites/01/01-0212/comp2.html
...Let's now assume, a prototype of this Autonomous Pathogen Detection System (APDS) had been installed on the tube.
With an electronic manipulation of the relays, the device was now triggered by harmless tracer gases and forced a power surge, which was later used to provoke the first evacuations in the tube and an alleged explosion, which was possibly only a gas explosion or controlled air pressure implosion. (Some reports point on an installed divice placed under the trains).
Another speculation implies that brazilian victim Jean Charles de Menezes (playing the british "Nick Berg"), as part of the real time exercise on 7/7, was tricked into this electronic deception or maybe even also installed some explosion devices.
One plausible position could have been next to the Tagmaster devices, as part of a regular "routine check".
What de Menezes or whoever installed the devices, didn't know, was that he didn't install cold, but 'hot devices'.
Let's go back into the logistics, how this APDS detector works:
"... If more than one of our APDS detect the presence of a lethal pathogen, an alarm will go off...
...This alarm will include an electrical signal that will be relayed from the devices to the headquarters..."
In this scenario, the "headquarters" had been the METROLINE, or better their CENTCOM.
Because of CENTCOM's close connection to Scotland Yard, they proceeded with regular reactions, not being aware, what's going on.
July 2005
Sir Mark Moody-Stuart, formerly chairman of Royal Dutch/Shell, is chairing the G8 Business Action for Africa summit.
In a first statement, he "believes change can only be brought about in Africa if aid is accompanied by increased enterprise on the continent".
Moody-Stuart is also Chairman of the "Global Business Coalition on HIV/AIDS"
(http://www.politics.co.uk/issueoftheday/sir-mark-moody-stuart-business-community-ready-$160953
29.htm
http://www.businessfightsaids.org/site/pp....0LaP6E&b=245210 )
July 2, 2005
According to an interview of prisonplanet.com with an employee of Stagecoach, the company responsible for the attacked bus, a contractor came to inspect the CCTV on the buses at their depot.
If both interview and witness reports are true, then according to his supervisor the person spent more than 20 hours over that weekend.
The employee furthermore claims, "that person who came was not a regular contractor..
For security reasons the same few people always come to the depot to carry out work, this time it was different".
(http://www.propagandamatrix.com/articles/july2005/150705busbombing.htm )
NOTE: One of the contractors of Stagecoach is D|Sign, which also supports the US Navy.
Did a US Navy intelligence officer imposter as security contractor for Stagecoach, to disable the CCTV system with a timing script?
(http://www.dsign.co.uk/case_studies/case_usaf.cfm
July 7, 2005
At the same time, when Peter Power's blueprint for his Visor Drills is obviously exercised by another unknown unit, a simultanous NYC Subway Security Drill is testing the final logistics by the US handlers for 7/7.
They also use Peter Powers database, who "was heavily involved in the aftermath of the King's Cross fire in 1987".
In this drill, "armed officers entering the New York subway", instead of firefighters first, exactly like it later happened in London.
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4660939.stm )
It's possible, that Peter Power's Visor drill was scripted as a decoy, to divert from his tabletop exercise to the actual drill, performed now by someone else, still based on his blueprint, but also to distract from the NY drill and their supervisors.
Power had no chance as to reveal his knowledge in a BBC2 interview.
Here are the main reasons to use a drill as a cover for a real time controlled terror attack:
*Security stand-down:
Drills that disable any security measures in place. e.g. Vigilant Guardian, Northern Denial
*Diversion:
To draw attention away from the actual attack location
*Noise:
Flooding the ether with "terror" chatter so NSA, NRO, MI5/6 or which ever agency monitors communications these days, becomes helpless
*Window Dressing:
Erroneous drills providing plausible deniability by creating the perception that drills are common place, harmless, and a good excuse for the locals to cover themselves in fake blood and guts.
*Dual track drillers:
Attacks carried out by a compartment of the participating agencies
(*thx for the definitions to Culhavoc)
The perpetrator timeline on 7/7
The following timeline from the morning of 7/7 might show, what really have happened.
Most obviously the first events had been based on a blueprint for a terror drill.
6:29 AM
According to some reports, the Northern line is "suspended between Morden and Stockwell from 06:29 due to a defective train at Balham"
7:00 AM
According to another witness, the Northern Line from Stockwell to Morden is getting closed, with tube emergency vans and police outside.
7:40 AM
According to Thameslink Customer Relations, the "Luton Train" started to run "with delays due to problems with the overheadlines in the Mill Hill Area".
(http://www.team8plus.org/forum_viewtopic.php?9.871 )
7:46 AM
Another train to King’s Cross is cancelled.
7:57 AM
Piccadilly Line is "suspended between King's Cross St Pancras and Arnos Grove from 07:57 to 08:28 due to a defective train at Caledonian Road"..."
(Sources: http://disruptive.org.uk/ )
8:00 AM
Already since Thursday, 2 days earlier, Arnos Grove was down.
Unable to enter station, sign reads "DUE TO FIRE, Piccadilly Line suspended between Arnos Grove and Kings Cross - 08:00".
(http://www.hof.org.uk)
8:07 AM
Bakerloo Line is "suspended between Paddington and Elephant and Castle in both directions from 08:07 due to a defective train in Piccadilly Circus"
8:17 AM
Another witness claims, that his "friend got the Piccadilly line Tube to Leicester Square ...and as he got off he was told they're shutting down the line because of a fire near King's Cross.."
The witness claimed, he sent a text message to his girlfriend at that time.
(http://letsroll911.org/ipw-web/bulletin/bb/viewtopic.php?p=75134#75134 )
8:20 AM
In case, the main alleged Hussain suspect arrived now at King's Cross (according to first reports), it's still too much time left to arrive at Russell Square, which is just two stops away. One more reason to believe, that timers had been used.
(http://www.tcn.co.uk/map/tube.png )
8:25 AM
According to witnesses, a fire engine parked outside Caledonian Road station.
Another information reveals, that the station was already closed "Monday to Friday until 18th July 2005 for refurbishment"
http://realtime.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/squarecanary.html
8:35 AM
At Rayners Lane, at 8:35am, the station attendant announced that the Piccadilly was experiencing delays due to a DEFECTIVE TRAIN at Caledonian Road; however a train did come in fairly soon.
http://goruislip.blogspot.com/.
Another witness, related to some of the victims, also points out, that "on the day of the bombings at least one Northern line train did not stop at Angel, and the passengers were not allowed off the train until Euston.
(http://www.lse.co.uk/ShowStory.asp?story=PN1515352H&catid=7 )
NOTE:
It's possible, that the logistical significance of Angel Station, was also inspired by a codename for US Air Force One.
On September 11th, 2001, facing a possible threat, George Bush told an aide, “Angel is next.”
(http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/09/11/60II/main521718.shtml )
~8:50 AM
Most obvious, a controlled power surge is forcing the following trains to halt:
Between Aldgate and Liverpool Street stations on the Circle Line; between Russell Square and King's Cross stations on the Piccadilly Line; and at Edgware Road station on the Circle Line.
Something was put on trails to make sure, that these trains stop:
"The train jumped and skidded along a bit. It felt like we had hit something."
(Train from Kings Cross to Russell Square).
http://smh.com.au/text/articles/2005/07/08...0704565049.html
"...Linda Williams, 51, from Berkshire, was on the eastbound train. "We heard a loud bang. It felt like the train had hit something. It came to a stop next to the train that had been blown apart..."
A witness reports at around the same time claims that his "train was derailed"
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/4659237.stm )
Officially 21 people died at Russell Square, 7 people at Aldgate/Liverpool.
Many indications speak for a controlled power surge:
-the first indication of any disturbance was the opening of circuit breakers in the Underground, which was observed in the control room
-the first witness reported a "flash and a bang (not a big one)"
-a second witness didn't hear any explosion for "20 minutes"!
-Stephen Webb, deputy head of news at Transport for London, reported "something that might have come from a massive power surge".
Webb said that this information was passed on to early callers, including the Evening Standard.
He insisted that no professional would deliverately put out a false information
-According to other witness reports, This eye witness report would back up the power surge:
"...there was a loud, muffled bang. some "thought it was an electricity power box jumping..."
(http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Coordinated_terrorist_attack_in_London
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/4659237.stm )
8.51 AM
As revealed in a London Underground log a first call was made to police at this time.
(http://tinyurl.com/dylts )
8:56 AM
Due to a calculated delay, the Russell Square/King's Cross "blast" is reported 6 minutes after the event.
Interestingly, in the first version, this was the official time of a "second attack" at King's Cross.
9:10 AM
According to the London Underground log, Metline staff requested ambulances- but it was another seven minutes before the Met received a call specifically stating an explosion had occurred.
Tube chiefs also decided not to switch to Code Red - the immediate shutdown of the network.
Instead they called a Code Amber - telling drivers to head for the nearest station and let people out..."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4674469.stm
9:17
The Edgware blast is reported, officially five people die.
No names of these victims had been released.
~9:30
At this time, Bus No.30 arrives at Euston Road, near the junction with Gower Street, heading east.
Because of the closure of King's Cross station, the bus is now getting officially diverted as part of a controlled drill function.
The bus driver even ignores to call his office and asking someone for the way:
(http://www.portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/07/08/nbomb208.xml )
*"Ade Soji, 35, a parking attendant from Dagenham, east London, said
he had given directions to the driver of the diverted bus just before
it exploded. "The bus stopped and the driver asked me the name of the
street," Mr Soji said. "I told him Tavistock Square and he called me
over. Just as I was about to go, I heard the bus explode. *
9:41 AM
AMEC eployee Anthony Fatayi-Williams is one his way to his office and gives them a call.
Was this part of an instruction of the drill?
http://www.vanguardngr.com/articles/2002/c...f312072005.html
http://allafrica.com/stories/200507150452.html )
Interestingly, also Fatayi-Williams is a prominent african figure.
He's the grandson of one-time Chief Justice of Nigeria, Atanda Fatayi-Williams.
(http://allafrica.com/stories/200508090661.html )
9:47
The No. 30 bus on Upper Woburn Place near Tavistock Square is destroyed by a controlled explosion.
AMEC junior executive Williams is getting killed, too.
Williams started to work for AMEC in in January 2002 for helping them to "develop business opportunities in Africa"
(http://www.amec.com/news/mediareleasedetails.asp?Pageid=876&MediaID=1049 )
Many details speak for a controlled demolition and that the bus was standing:
-Too many passengers had been in too good condition after the explosion
-The explosion was at the rear
-The bus was at a stand still because it seems to be placed in the road without signs of an emergency stop.
-Photos reveal, bus was behind the stop.
-Not one broken window of the Tavistock building
-front of the bus still intact
-Detonation takes place close to the British Medical Association (BMA) building on Upper Woburn Place, to take care of the injured victims
-Even according to the official plotline, Hassib Hussain's rucksack (CCTV photo) would have been too big for a small explosion device.
We can assume, that he wasn't on this bus and yet another secret timer had been used.
10:02
Scotland Yard says it is dealing with a "major incident."
11:35
Almost 3 hours later, London police chief finally confirms to Reuters news agency there are "indications of explosives" at one of the blast sites.
More military codes?
Officially the internal numbers of the attacked tube trains had been 204, 216, 311
Did "311" symbolize the madrid attack?
The explosion of train 204 was one the third carriage of the train, which could be also spelled '103'.
The second official bomb exploded on the second carriage of train number 216 (='202')
The third explosion hit train number 311.
The explosion took place on the first carriage (='301')
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_July_2005_London_bombings )
(see also http://www.infotransport.co.uk/trains/operator/7 )
The perpetrator group system
Here is a possible hierarchie of involved persons, either participating as active or passive participants of the 7/7 drill, including their active or passive "supervisors":
GROUP 1 ("Toys")
Toys are participants, who are not aware, that they're participating in a drill or the follow up-"logistics".
Example:
Trent Morgan ("Surviving Victim aka Jessica Lynch effect").
Morgan has the PR function. He survived a Bali attack and will now also "survive" the London attacks and reporting to the tabloids.
One has to find out, if he was tricked into a vacation in London at the very same time.
Jamie Gordon ("Cell Phone")
Victim Gordon was scripted into a subtle deception of tabloid readers. His cell phone was found, which let the readers come to the wrong conclusion, that this could have been the triggering device of one of the suspects, instead from a victim.
In reality, no cell phone ever was found and linked to the alleged suspects.
(http://www.itv.com/news/index_2062437.html )
GROUP 2 ("Teamsters")
Teamsters are participants, who are aware, that they're participating in a terror drill, no matter of the real outcome.
Examples:
George Psaradakis ("Bus driver")
Originally Psarabakis, who has worked at the bus company Stagecoach’s Hackney depot for eight years, was "meant to be on another bus route but swapped with a colleague at the last minute to the No 30".
(http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,22989-1687566,00.html )
It's plausible that Psaradakis was deceived into a cover terror exercise and later found out about it.
That would explain, why he later was put under police protection "at a secret location".
(http://www.ekathimerini.com/4dcgi/_w_articles_politics_100019_12/07/2005_58512 )
NOTE:
A Driver is only allowed to divert from line of route under specific instructions for either (a) a Controller (usually at the Garage), or (
the overall control for London, called CentreCom.
The automatic AVL system (also introduced early July 2005 in Jamaica) is not reliable enough to pinpoint a bus - with certainty - in a short space of time.
Therefore british undercover police MUST have been tailing that bus.
That is the only realistic way they could have singled it out and diverted it.
In case Psaradaki was not aware of participating in a drill, he also might have wondered, why the CCTV system on his bus did not work.
(http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/tm_objectid=15717499%26method=full%26siteid=94762%26headline=exclusive
%2d%2d58%2d%2dthe%2dhunt-name_page.html )
Since late July 2005, Psaradakis wasn't mentioned in the media anymore.
Expect a promotion of 'any kind'.
Richard Jones ("Witness")
Alleged Witness and Computer Consultant, who was wrong on some details of the alleged suspects.
GROUP 3 ("Consultors")
Consultors are coordinators, advisers and supervisors of the drills, not necessarily aware of the real outcome of a drill.
Among possible participants of this group could have been:
1) Peter Power
The exact role of Peter Power (Visor Consultants) has yet to be developed.
It's possible, that his inside knowledge on the london subway had been used to develop a 'blue print' for the attack, under the cover of a terror 'exercise'.
Peter has a senior Scotland Yard background which includes setting up the multi agency operational management structure at the Kings Cross fire in 1987.
He is also a regular panelist and contributor to many UK magazines on Crisis Management (CM) and Disaster Recovery.
Power stated in a BBC2 interview, that "at half past nine this morning we were actually running an exercise for a company of over a thousand people in London based on simultaneous bombs going off precisely at the railway stations where it happened this morning...
...we planned this for a company and for obvious reasons I don't want to reveal their name..."
2) Richard Sheirer
Sheirer is member of Guiliani and Partners and met Power on earlier emergency conferences.
His experience would suggest an adisor role in terror exercises.
Sheirer was also Commissioner of New York City’s Mayor’s Office of Emergency Management (OEM).
For the morning of Sep12th, 2001, he was actually involved in the logistics for the bio terror drill "triPOD".
(http://www.senate.gov/~gov_affairs/121101sheirer.htm )
The OEM also drilled "building collapses" and "plane crashes" prior 9/11, as confirmed by former NYPD Commissioner Bernhard Kerik, at a May 2004 testimony for the 9/11 panel.
NOTE: Only a few days after TEAM8+ mentioned Sheirer's associations with Peter Power, his name is getting removed from a forthcoming disaster event with Power.
(http://tinyurl.com/9hs6g )
3, 4) Rudy Guiliani, Bob Kiley
On 7/7 Rudy Giuliani was in London nearby the attacks, coming from a conference in Yorkshire, 200 miles away.
Coincidentally, Yorkshire is the same city, where U.K. police are searching for six suspect addresses and soldiers carry out a controlled explosion.
(http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000087&sid=a6m7bcf39GTk&refer=top_world_news
http://www.yorkshiretoday.co.uk/ViewArticl...ticleID=1077572 )
Giuliani's reason for the visit in London has yet to be established.
(http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,1525446,00.html )
Giuliani is also a supporter of ex-CIA Bob Kiley, since at least March 2001
http://www.london.gov.uk/view_press_releas...p?releaseid=145
Interestingly Giuliani also shared the same Great Eastern hotel with former Israeli Finance Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, near the Liverpool Street subway station.
http://www.team8plus.org/forum_viewtopic.php?9.461.50
5, 6, 7) Ira Greenberg, Ray Kelly, David Cohen
On the morning of 7/7, intelligence officer Ira Greenberg, Ray Kelly's contact in Scotland Yard, is on the subway on his way to work when the attack occurs.
Greenberg claims, his train was evacuated, and he walked to Scotland Yard.
Shortly after the blast, which officially occurred at 3:51 AM New York time, Greenberg was on the phone with Intelligence Commissioner David Cohen.
David Cohen was named deputy commissioner of intelligence January 27, 2002.
Cohen was with the CIA for 35 years.
(http://www.yorkshiretoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=55&ArticleID=1077572 )
8) Pasquale J. D'Amuro
In case, Giuliani was involved as an advisor of the drills, one should also examine the possible involvements of other executives from Giuliani Security & Safety LLC, a division of Giuliani Partners LLC.
One of them, Pasquale J. D'Amuro has valuable experience.
D'Amuro was appointed Inspector in Charge of the FBI's investigation of the Sep11th attacks.
He also was involved in the investigations of the 1998 bombings of the American Embassies in East Africa and the 2000 attack on the USS Cole in Yemen, as well as the latter stages of the investigations of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the Manila Air plot, and the crash of TWA Flight 800.
(http://www.giulianipartners.com/damuro.aspx )
9) Tim McLarthy III
In May 2002, Giuliani Partners LLC announced that Giuliani has agreed to chair the board of advisors of Leeds Weld Equity Partners IV, L.P., the largest private equity fund in the United States.
More interesting is, who else is on that board:
Thomas F. McLarty, III, Vice Chairman of Kissinger McLarty Associates.
Here we have an interesting association to one of the biggest plotters of staged terrorism:
Henry Kissinger.
"...Today Americans would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow they will be grateful! This is especially true if they were told there was an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence...
...The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well being granted to them by their world government..."
Henry Kissinger, May 21, 1992
10) Efraim Halevi
Former Ex-Mossad Chief Efraim Halevi called immediataly for 'World War' after the london attack.
(http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article9410.htm )
In an interesting slip, Halevi also remarked, that all bombs went off simultaneously,
though London police did not confirm this for days.
Also, he mentioned a "near-perfect execution".
Which execution was he talking about? Was that another hint on Netanyahu?
Did he have some kind of advanced knowledge?
Was he part of an advisory team?
11) Phil Swann, Tavistock Institute
Tavistock was founded in 1922 by the British military to wage psychological warfare.
The Institute engages in research and consultancy work in the social sciences and applied psychology for the European Union, several British government departments, and private clients.
During WWII, many of the Tavistock's professional staff joining the armed services as psychiatric specialists.
Today, the Tavistock's trauma unit offers a training workshop in the understanding of trauma, and has been called upon to help in national and international disasters.
The attack on the 7/7-bus occured in front of Tavistock institute.
The location could have been inspired as an inside joke by themselves, also to control the outcome.
NOTE: R. D. Laing is one of the prominent psychiatrists who was associated with the Institute. Laing, who also served in the British Army Psychiatric Unit, became well known, and highly controversial, for his experimentation with LSD and his views on schizophrenia. Laing suggested that schizophrenia was a way of experiencing the world, not a disease.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tavistock_Institute )
12) Michel Boussard
Michel Boussard is Chief Executive Officer of Interxion.
As a leading provider of carrier-neutral data centers, Interxion was in charge of a main hub of London's CCTV system on the streets.
Interxion was established in 1998 in The Netherlands and has raised more than 300 million from major international investors, including Baker Capital, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan Stanley.
(http://www.interxion.com/
[www.interxion.com] )
12) Sir John Chisholm
Chisholm is Chief Executive of QinetiQ.
In 1991, Sir John was asked to bring together the UK Defence Research Establishments to form one new organisation which was to become DERA. Sir John guided the organisation through its launch into the commercial world as QinetiQ plc in July 2001. Knighted in 1999.
QinetiQ is testing scanning technology for the british tube system.
On July 10th, 2005, they received a contract to creat "computer simulations to show the precise location of where the bombs were planted and direction of the blast."
Did QinetiQ already develop simulations on the tube prior 7/7?
(http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,1525446,00.html
http://www.qinetiq.com/ )
GROUP 4 ("Plot Manager")
Plot Managers are super coordinators, who decide, which participants had to be included in Groups 1-3. Logically their numbers are small.
They also organize "spinmasters" and "PR coordinators" for the media.
Possible suspects:
Few blackOPs within MI5/MI6 ("intel advice"), Porton Down ("explosives") and Bechtel ("Transport logistics").
Also, interesting to know, that since 1988, Halliburton KBR has been enhancing the safety and security of the London Underground.
(http://www.halliburton.com/kbr/govServ/UK/integratedSecuritySolutions.jsp?printMe )
GROUP 5 ("Masterminds")
Masterminds are coordinating both "plotline" and actual false-flag operation.
As described in the introduction, they must have been military-, intel and G8 connected.
July 21, 2005
More parts of the official plotline meanwhile are breaking apart.
A photograph of a passport purporting to show alleged bomber Hasib Hussain was in fact that of a 16-year-old British boy with the same name.
Pakistan's Federal Immigration Agency (FIA) claimed that Hasib Hussain, carrying a British passport number, arrived in the port city of Karachi from Riyadh in Saudi Arabia on 15 July 2004.
(http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&ct=res&cd=1&url=http%3A//news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/470442
7.stm&ei=HhABQ9GwC5yk-gHdueTaDg )
Other significant details of the official plotline, which broke apart, are carefully analysed by Team8+ member John Doe II.
There are flaws in claims on timeline, explosives, timing device, suicidal hipothesis and alleged masterminds.
(http://www.team8plus.org/forum_viewtopic.php?9.435 )
The flaws within the official version were obviously expected by the real perpetrators, who had a backup plan on hold. A follow-up attack to cover critical questions.
A slip of ex-CIA Vincent Cannistraro, reveals this plan accidentally right after 7/7, when he speaks of 6 planted bombs, instead of only 4.
(http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1523819,00.html )
Metropolitan Police Ian Blair seemed to confirm this too, when he speaks of “six events”:
"...He says he believes the six affected areas are Edgware Road, King's Cross, Liverpool Street, Russell Square, Aldgate East and Moorgate, but says it is "still a confusing situation".”
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4659331.stm )
On 7/21, new attacks occur at Warren Street, Oval and Shepherds Bush subway stations and at a double-decker bus in east London.
August 14, 2005
The final pieces of the official terror story are breaking apart.
Now both 'terror teams' from 07/07 and 07/21 are not linked together anymore and TEAM 1 turned back into a suicide team, although this version already was denied in between.
(http://www.sundaymirror.co.uk/news/tm_objectid=15855173&method=full&siteid=106694&headline=7-7--21-
7--blitz-on-britain--bombing-teams-are-not-linked--name_page.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4694069.stm#week6 )
The question remained, if TEAM 1 organised some explosives, let's call them TYPE ABC, why is british police not able to identify "ABC" but changed the story 6-8 times until it reaches XYZ?
CONCLUSION:
7/7, like 9/11, was yet another false flag operation, organized by private intel-military contractors and allowed and orchestrated by higher ups from british intelligence, -government puppets and their related global intel- and bank circles.
The author of this 'conclusion' is aware, that the described scenario above is also based on some speculations, however the author is not interested to distract from particular suspects, which hadn't been mentioned so far. Any individual or technical input is appreciated.
The author is NOT interested in symbolisation, vague generalizations or puppet ideologies
(Zionists, "Illuminati", Sharon or Blair 'did it'), but hints on individual helping hands.
The author also thinks, that any kind of research is useless and meaningless without any political- oractivist input and progressive input.
Experience over the last 3- 4 years however showed, that intense wannabee educationalism or "political correctness" among 'activists' blocked an effective process of research, also often described as "gatekeeping".
This was also one of the reasons, why the author retired in january 2005 from 9/11 research and -activism and turned his weekly blog 911skeptics.blogspot.com and the daily news portal inn.globalfreepress.com into archive status only and left INN World Report.
7/7 however was an opportunity to prove how easy a false flag operation can be debunked and how easy it also breaks apart by itself.
Unfortunately the majority of the 9/11 'truth' movement did not see this chance and unsurprisingly also 911truth.org did ignore the opportunity completely on their website.
My hope is therefore at excellent new british 9/11 researchers, especially from London, who recently achieved also fresh support by Jimmy Walter and a 3 page article in Daily Mail.
Without their help, also many details of this conclusion wouldn't have been established so fast.
9/11 research, is usually manipulated by gatekeepers, saboteurs, infiltrators and ignorants.
Often also using fake excuses, they're unable to analyse technical expertise and ironically are more impressed by articles including sensational 'insider sources'.
It's pretty clear to me, that a forthcoming world war (as mentioned above) within the next 20 months (i.e. a fake Taiwanese Al Quaeda cell attacks China with 'weaponised flu') and increased fascism cannot be stopped by "research" only.
Whether these articles are based on a 'political correct' context, precise sources, slippery or disinfo, doesn't matter anymore.
The responsibility is therefore in the hand of those "activists" to also oppose self-appointed fake opposition leaders, who are working into the hand of the very same warmongers and bogus war on terror approachers.
Activists have not only to oppose the warmongers and fascists, but also their controlled opposition, i.e. cointel-pro stylish 911truth.org (David Kubiak/Russ George connection and many other disturbing background details), disillusionalists like Fintan Dunne, fearmongers like Alex Jones/GLC, sensationalists like Heneghan/Webb, psyOP fronts like oilempire.us, insider con artists like Karl Schwarz or Mike Ruppert, but basically everyone who denies psychological and visual deception within our society, which had been the framework for 9/11.
As long as these issues are not clearly addressed, any kind of 9/11 research remains just "popcorn" research.
The US mainstream media is already trimmed for any controlled opposition and fake debates.
Part of the original script for 9/11, was to keep the media under control from military interest groups.
In 1995, defense contractor Westinghouse Electric Corporation acquires CBS.
In 1996, the year of the establishment of PNAC, TBS, as biggest part of the Turner Entertainment holding company (CNN), is sold to Time Warner.
In the same year, Rupert Murdoch, already controlling a majority of newspapers, he established the FOX News Channel.
Also in the same year, defense contractor General Electric and Microsoft launch MSNBC and Disney Company acquired Capital Cities/ABC TV.
Finally, in 2000, the marriage between "old" media Time Warner and "new" media AOL, made sure to control more media contents.
Meanwhile, every so called alternative media is controlled by conservative think tanks as well, among them Ford Foundation (member Afsaneh M. Beschloss works for Carlyle Asset Management Group, also Alain J. P. Belda is chairman of war industry think tank Rand Corporatio).
Ford Foundation once also was criticized by Binghamton University professor James Petras for alleged links with the CIA.
Chevron Texaco has sponsored PBS, the list of other war- or oil related industry sponsoring alternative media, is endless.
But supporters of "alternative media" are still closing their eyes, to continue their own self-constructed deceptions and to hide behind false hope campaigns.
ADDENDUM:
Here are "77 questions" reg. official plotline and inconsistencies of 7/7
http://www.team8plus.org/forum_viewtopic.php?9.663
Here are other key questions, which might point on the real perpetrators of 7/7 AND 7/21:
Who gave the official order to divert George Paradakis bus?
What was the name of the company who hired Visor for a terror drill exercise?
Who was able to obtain copies of Peter Power's blueprint for this drill?
Who arranged to shut down some stations beginning at 6:00 AM in the morning?
Who is supervising the archives of the CCTV cameras within the tube?
What was the official reason for Rudy Giuliani's visit in London on 7/7?
What was the official reason for KINGSTAR UK having been in the attacked area?
Who drove their van?
Which company is Richard Jones really working for?
Where was Bob Kiley on the morning of 7/7?
Who tipped of Scotland Yard on Curtis House, in Bounds Green, North London?
Why did Scotland Yard do not foward their warning to Benjamin Netanyahu also to the british public?
Who told them not to do so?
(*thx to Ron Winn, Culhavoc, Greg Nixon, Webster Tarpley, Team8+, and many UK-/London researchers )
7/7: Europe's terror scam -the final clues?
by ewing2001
August 18, 2005
The following timetable might point on the identities of the real perpetrators of 7/7 and its follow up attack on 7/21.
This abstract is based on already prepared research at team8plus.org, as presented here during the first days after the attack, which brought us attention at prisonplanet, breakfornews and wikipedia.
However they also withdraw the references after a short time.
The most important patterns of this timetable had been also presented during a workshop of Webster Tarpley and an afterhour at the DC "truthemergency" on July 23, 2005.
Please read also "conclusion".
2002
Globalist warheads and neocon fascists, close to the real perpetrators of 9/11, decide after the "successful" outcome of the attacks, that 9/11 should also work for Europe.
The idea for an european 9/11 is born.
Instead of political targets, this time a subway is chosen, either in London or Paris.
The power brokers decide for London, heartbeat of intelligent setups.
For a success of an european 9/11, the plotters decide to test most important details in some terror drills, to be planned within the next 2 years.
They forward their secret ideas to their associated "organizers".
January 2003
Globalist plotters of the forthcoming "european 9/11" believe, that their script must also include a subtle connection with Africa, via victims and alleged suspects.
(http://www.team8plus.org/forum_viewtopic.php?9.616.0 )
Their concern is to oppose liberal members of the G8, who have different plans for africans debt situation.
For their new 'anti-african' psyOP, they develop a list (here called A-CHIP = African-Caribbean Helping Idiots-PsyOP).
scripted into this list, but unrelated to crime or any conspiracy, is also Bob Geldof and as usual, some helpful 'foot soldiers' of the religious right.
The masterminds decide to work with moles in MI5/MI6 (also founder of Mossad).
They also sit at top banking positions of G8.
Symbolically the attack will therefore be also coordinated with this summit.
For their manipulation of a new "pro"-africa/"anti" terror africa mindset, the masterminds already prepare the US nation with a new bogus support plan of Africa, carefully scripted into a speech of George Bush, using "AIDS" and "hunger" as a cover:
"... Today, on the continent of Africa, nearly 30 million people have the AIDS virus -- including 3 million children under the age 15...
... AIDS can be prevented...and to meet a severe and urgent crisis abroad, tonight I propose the Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief -- a work of mercy beyond all current international efforts to help the people of Africa..."
(http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030128-19.html )
February 2003
The final plannings and meetings for the London attacks begin officially in Leeds, London and Lahore (Pakistan).
As usual, the real perpetrators select their targets also for political reasons, to tie their alleged suspects to 'radical pakistani terror cells' in Leeds, but also Lahore, Pakistan.
The alleged pakistan connection is also constructed for political blackmailing, to ensure that the military coalition with U.S. still continues.
The script for the attack is using military codes to simplify their"arrangements":
London/Leeds/Lahore =LLL, turned upside down, is 777 (7/7, 2005).
For this "plotline" they also need some scapegoats and fall guys (also called "destraction agents").
One of them will become Mohammed Junaid Babar, a Pakistani-American computer programmer (originally from Queens, New york), already under British surveillance.
Babar was later forced to plead guilty in 2004 to supplying military equipment to an alleged al-Qaeda camp in Pakistan.
Babar is possibly a deceived double agent for CIA/ISI.
(http://www.capetimes.co.za/index.php?fSectionId=272&fArticleId=2832614 )
After spending two and a half months with Zeeshan Siddique in Lahore, the masterminds also scripted Siddique into an alleged ringleader.
However Pakistani security officials arrest Siddique already on May 18, 3 weeks before the 7/7 attack.
(http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,22989-1726730,00.html )
April 2003
Defense Contractor Bombardier receives a £3.4 billion contract awarded by UK Metronet for 1,738 metro cars and new signalling systems for the Victoria line and the sub-surface lines.
May 13th, 2003
Motorola appoints TagMaster an application partner.
One of the first projects of Tagmaster is to supply Motorola with RFID equipment for London
Underground trains.
The reader of this divice is positioned under the train cab and the ID-tag is fitted to a bracket, mounted on the sleepers between the rails.
In April 2005, Tagmaster is also selected as RFID supplier to Madrid Metro and Bombardier, who runs a London Underground projects Division.
(http://www.tagmaster.se/tm_news/
http://www.tagmaster.se/download/news/news_20030513.pdf
http://www.tagmaster.com/applications/tran...on/examples.php )
July 2003
George Bush selects former Eli Lilly & Co. chief executive Randall Tobias as the coordinator for a new $15 billion program to "slow the spread of AIDS and to treat it in Africa and the Caribbean".
(http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/07/20030702-3.html )
NOTE: Bush' father was former head of Eli Lilly, after he left the CIA in 1977.
Eli Lily, not only strongly tied with the religious right, is interestingly also marketing their first recombinant-DNA product in 1982, just barely after the AIDS epidemic started.
December 2003
A report by the London Resilience, a consortium of emergency services and transport operators, reveals that the Sep 2003 london tube drill "shows flaws".
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/3320809.stm )
The London Resilience Forum was set up in May 2002 to lead emergency planning, led by Minister Phill Woolas.
This forum will later also plan some speeches at the Local Government Association (LGA) conference during the beginning of June 2005, with Rudoph Giuliani, as one of the keynote speakers.
(http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8669397/ )
In the following year, the LGA would reorganise their political structure.
(http://www.lga.gov.uk/About.asp?lsection=456&ccat=1021 )
2004
Bob Kiley becomes Commissioner of Transport for London.
Kiley worked for the CIA between 1963 and 1970, then starting to work as an assistant director at the Police Foundation in Washington D.C.
During 80s he was Chairman and CEO of the New York City Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA).
It's obvious, that Kiley's function is either to coordinate, allow or tolerate moles into the Transport System who supervise and coordinate the upcoming 7/7 attacks.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Kiley )
TfL is directed by a management board whose members are chosen for their
understanding of transport matters and appointed by Ken Livingstone, Mayor
of London, who chairs the TfL Board.
TfL’s Commissioner, Bob Kiley, and his Chief Officers are responsible and accountable for the day to day operations of TfL and the work of its
17,000 employees.
TfL manages London’s buses, London Underground, the Docklands Light Railway (DLR) and London Trams. Transport for London was formed in July 2000 and is a functional body of the Greater London Authority
(http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/pdfdocs/tfl_factsheets.pdf )
April 2004
Abdul-Salaam Patel dies.
His wife is mother-in-law of one of the alleged 7/7 suspects, Mohammad Sidique Khan.
(http://www.capetimes.co.za/index.php?fSectionId=271&fArticleId=2624278 )
The real perpetrators of 7/7 are still interested in an "african connection".
For symbolical reasons, they also choose the name Patel, which refers to the "Gujarati Patel Muslims".
Khan's mother was found in a database of Buckingham Palace, Queen Elisabeth.
She later also received an award of the Queen.
(http://www.guardian.co.uk/attackonlondon/story/0,16132,1528112,00.html )
However also Patel's father Ismail Patel was known as an anti-apartheid activist, who died in 1973 after he had been under house arrest for 10 years.
(http://www.news24.com/News24/World/Londonattacks/0,,2-10-1854_1738031,00.html )
It's easier for the real masterminds to profile people close to their environments.
Farida Patel, a well-known British teacher, was decorated by the Queen.
(http://www.tribuneindia.com/2005/20050802/main9.htm )
The real plotters however don't get their own databases straight.
On July 13, 2005, the wrong Hasina Patel and her husband, Rashid Facha, are getting arrested.
April 2, 2004
A NY Subway drill is testing more details for 7/7.
An explosion in a subway in prep for a global event,
In this exercise it refers symbolically to the GOP Convention, while 7/7 happened during G8.
"...Police officers from across the city played out terrorist scenarios yesterday, from a gas attack in a hotel room to an explosion in a subway in preparation for the Republican National Convention in August..."
(http://www.newyorkmetro.com/nymetro/news/features/n_8286/ )
The symbolism of this "hotel room" let us allow a speculation.
It's plausible, that an earlier blueprint of 7/7 also included an assassination of power broker and IASPS/PNAC Insider Benjamin Netanyahu.
This would explain, why on the morning of 7/7 he was indeed waiting "in a hotel room" for a phone call, when he was "warned" by Scotland Yard.
Only three weeks later, Netanyahu resigned from his Cabinet position, officicially to protest the pullout from Gaza, but obviously to get him now finally out of radar.
The name of this April 2004 drill is also very significant.
COBRA will later also refer to Tony Blair's emergency unit in London. A perfect cover name for important communications and plausible "protocol leaks" over the phone or other unsafe communication tools.
(http://politics.guardian.co.uk/columnist/story/0,9321,1535172,00.html )
May 16th, 2004
Operation Transit SAFE London is testing more details for 7/7.
At the same time, a partner terror drill in New York, another "four-hour drill" is supervising logistics and PR, sponsored by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and headed by NYPD Commissioner Raymond Kelly.
(http://www.nyc.gov/html/oem/html/events/2004.05.16_transitsafe.html
http://www.nyc.gov/html/oem/html/events/20...ransitsafe.html )
Jul 2004
Africa is forged into their first major wargames in the new century, starting in Kenya.
(http://www.army.mod.uk/rwf/news.htm )
July 2004
The UK House of Parliament is providing the real perpetrators of 7/7 with yet another profile:
"...ONE of the London suicide bombers was allowed to tour the Houses of Parliament...
...Mohammad Sidique Khan, 30, was a guest of the Labour MP Jon Trickett..., four months after he had been identified by intelligence officials as a "criminal associate"
(http://news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1637032005 )
Trickett is a strong supporter of anti-terrorism laws and ID cards.
September 2004
Verint Networked Video Solution receives a contract to improve Railway Security of London Underground.
Verint Systems Inc., is headquartered in Melville, New York, but is also a subsidiary of Israel's Comverse Technology.
(http://tinyurl.com/8gwgq
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=69208 )
October 2004
Bechtel, as partner of a joint-venture with British-based Jarvis, and Spanish-owned Amey, starts to overhaul the Tube Lines, with Mike Adams as president of Bechtel Civil.
A new Tube Lines signaling system is based on Alcatel technology used in Vancouver, Hong Kong, and Kuala Lumpur.
Jim Haynes (Bechtel) is director of rebuilding Tube Lines.
Train Systems Program Manager is Siv Bhamra, upgrading the Northern and Jubilee lines.
(http://www.bechtel.com/Briefs/1104/Underground.htm
http://www.bechtel.com/Briefs/0305/Front_End.htm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/essex/3735598.stm)
[72.14.207.104] )
NOTE: Metronet is owned by Atkins, Balfour Beatty, Bombardier, EDF Energy and RWE Thames Water.
November 2004
The official "plotline" of 7/7 needs another upgrade.
Logfiles of yet another "computer specialist", Naeem Noor Khan, are helpful to script his address book contacts into other masterminds.
However also this "suspect" was closely monitored by ISI and their handlers and they secretly arrested him already in July 2004.
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/3541952.stm )
We therefore can assume, that he got tricked into a fake plot, maybe also under the typical cover of an "informant" for alleged terror plots, which had nothing to do with 7/7 and later put on hold.
The scripting of more profiles continues.
The only purpose is to develop a database on alleged helping hands, which will be later forwarded to associated intelligent services.
(http://www.newsline.com.pk/NewsAug2005/cover1aug2005.htm )
It's also plausible, that in the same time period, MI 6 'hires' Haroon Rashid Aswat as another alleged "informant" to set him up by scripting him later into yet another alleged masterminds of the London attacks.
~November 2004
During this time, Ira Greenberg, formerly Intelligence Division for several years, is being sent to London as intelligence officer for NYPD Commissioner Raymond Kelly.
(http://www.nydailynews.com/news/wn_report/story/326214p-278843c.html )
Coordination of further details are developed.
December 2004
Business Week is describing the coming threat at the G8: The BRICs.
BRIC is a coalition of a forthcoming business alliance towards the G8: Brazil, Russia, India, and China (with close association Venezuela and South Africa).
(http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/02-05a-05.asp&e=912 )
The author Ricardo C. Amaral suggests, that "these four countries should consider the creation and adoption of a new currency similar to the "Euro." and "name the new currency "The Global."
(http://www.brazzilmag.com/content/view/2346/49/ )
It's possible, that during 2004, brazilian 7/21 victim de Menezes was not only chosen as a secret helping hand, but also for a "political assasination", signalling Brazil a secret message.
Furthermore de Menezes' assassination, under the cover of an accident, was also orchestrated for a domestic increase of a police state.
April 4-8, 2005
More final details for 7/7 are getting tested.
Terror drill exercise "atlantic blue" includes now also "'bombs' being placed on buses and explosives left on the London underground", which is coincidentally later also the same scoop of the official plotline of 7/7.
In this drill, participants, close to the real perpetrators and masterminds of 7/7, are also testing other logistical details:
"Evacuation" and moving trains "to the safety of a platform".
(http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,1525247,00.html )
Atlantic Blue is also part of a much larger US sponsored emergency preparedness exercise labeled TOPOFF 3, which included the participation of Connecticut, New Jersey, Canada, and the United Kingdom.
An internal Virtual News Network (VNN) and news Website provides real-time reporting of the story like an actual TV network would.
An opposition force (OPFOR) within this major drill called “RED TEAM.”
Weeks before 7/7
Chatter becomes louder among intelligent inside circles, being now fully aware of a new setup by globalist warmongers, close to G8.
Ex-Saudi Intel head Prince Turki al-Faisal is one of them, as also his former agency leaders.
NOTE: al-Faisal retired from his post as intel chief one week prior 9/11 and is still connected with the insiders of London, since he became Saudi ambassador to the UK.
Saudi Intel later decides to use their 'prior knowledge' as a political 'bombshell', by claiming they passed their info to to MI5 and MI6 in time.
As a cover they will later claim, they believed to have been obtained this knowledge "from terror suspects under interrogation in the desert kingdom".
If the forwarded warning is really true or not, is not really important, because it only shows the calculated power competition of international globalist bankers.
(http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=1741882005 )
We can assume, that now also high ranks from CIA and Mossad are fully aware of time and place of the london attacks as well.
Also, weeks before 7/7, "...fears of terror attacks have prompted FBI agents based in the U.S. Embassy in London to avoid traveling on London's popular
underground railway (or tube) system..."
(http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/index.html?blog=/politics/war_room/2005/07/07/fbi/index.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6514619/site/newsweek )
Apparently also British Police had received advanced Warnings of a terrorist attack
(http://globalresearch.ca/PrintArticle.php?articleId=657 )
May 2005
Metroline announces that Steve McAleavy is to step down as Managing Director of Metroline. Plc. Sean O’Shea becomes new director.
(http://www.metroline.co.uk/100505.html )
June 2005
The influence of strategic warmongers in Africa becomes stronger, with the only reason to control their resources.
"A major african terror exercise, named FLINTLOCK 05 takes place in Dakar, Senegal, where the U.S. and Senegalese forces along with troops from Niger, Chad, Mali, Mauritania, Algeria and Tunisia will be thrown into a crisis to solve.
"Flintlock 05" is what U.S. European Command calls a "Phase Zero" exercise, meant to prevent the need for future "phases" used in the buildup to war..."
(http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20050607-013617-6514r.htm
http://www.eucom.mil/english/FullStory.asp?art=554
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Jun2005/20050617_1761.html )
According to PNAC supporters Eliot Cohen, James Woolsey and Norman Podhoretz, an endgame of what they call "Ww4" (WW3 happened to be the cold war, in their eyes), has also to topple Africa, Australia and Europe at the same time.
It's important to know, that some of the final strategic countries on their target list had been Egypt and China.
While China would be psychologically weakend with either overexaggerated or orchestrated bird flu (ironically "flu" was also the result of overvaccination after WW1), future attacks have to be provoked in Egypt to fulfill the same purpose.
Plotters decide also to threaten wildcard members of the european community:
Netherlands, Germany and Italy.
June 1, 2005
Rudy Giuliani and Vice President Todd P. McDermott of Verint (who is improving Railway Security in London) are both invited to speak at the canadian Infosec conference.
McDermott once retired from the Royal Canadian Mounted Police as Officer in Charge Engineering Branch, Technical Operations.
McDermott also has been deemed an expert witness Canada wide on all aspects of electronic surveillance.
Are these meetings used as a cover to exchange some final details for a forthcoming London terror drill?
(http://www.canadianinfosecsummit.com/securityEvent/speakers.html
http://www.canadianinfosecsummit.com/secur.../mcdermott.html )
June 12th, 2005
Yet another final test drill in London's tube.
This time the exercise takes place at Tower Hill station.
(http://tfl.gov.uk/tfl/press-centre/press-releases/press-releases-content.asp?prID=384 )
June 17th, 2005
The US is closing its consulate in Lagos, Nigeria because of an unspecified security threat.
Nigerian security officials said there were "telephone calls to the embassy" which warned of attacks.
(http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2005/06/17/lagos-shutdown050617.html )
The Foreign Office in London said also Britain shut its Deputy High Commission in Lagos "as a precaution following the closure of the nearby U.S. Consulate".
(http://newsfromrussia.com/hotspots/2005/06/17/60386.html
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8862171/ )
What makes this story interesting is, that forthcoming 7/7 victim Anthony Fatayi-Williams, who got killed in front of Tavistock Building, was actually from Nigeria, working for controlled demolition company AMEC (one of the customers of KINGSTAR UK, which white van was visibly seen next to the attacked london bus).
NOTE:
Kingstar has no office in London City.
It's at 104 Waverley Road, Plumstead, which is 11.9 miles away.
(http://www.amec.com/news/mediareleasedetails.asp?Pageid=876&MediaID=310 )
http://www.vanguardngr.com/articles/2002/c...f312072005.html )
Was there any 'sensitive channel', which leaked prior knowledge from AMEC to Nigeria?
NOTE:
Led by top African producer Nigeria, the Gulf of Guinea already delivers about 15 percent of America’s oil supply. By 2015, that figure may swell to 25 percent, according to the U.S. National Intelligence Council, a CIA think-tank.
(http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8862171/ )
On June 21, 2005, AMEC also announced the aquisition of UK nuclear services business NNC Holdings.
Customers include the Ministry of Defence (MoD), BAE Systems and Rolls-Royce.
(http://www.forbes.com/business/feeds/afx/2005/06/30/afx2117367.html )
During 2004, as one of the biggest profiteers from 9/11, AMEC wins major reconstruction contracts in Iraq.
During 2002, they win a seven-year Ministry Of Defence contract in Scotland and become key supplier to US Air Force Centre for Environmental Excellence.
Chief executive Sir Peter Mason is knighted.
NOTE: The pentagon wing, which was attacked on Sep11th, was freshly renovated by AMEC before 9/11. They immediately received a follow-up contract to remove the rubble, also at Ground Zero in New York.
June 26-30, 2005
A secret 'gas' test is staged at Grand Central in NYC.
The significance of this drill might refer to the controlled explosions in the London Tube on 7/7.
In this test drill, the Homeland Security released gas, officially to study how dangerous "chemicals might flow through the landmark in a terrorist attack".
Nontoxic "tracer gases" were released into the terminal between June 26-30, observed by physicists from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California..."
(http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/325980p-278531c.html)
Here is a plausible, but still speculative scenario for the importance for this drill:
As a matter of fact, Livermore, which terror unit is called "B Division", is using an electronic hand-held device to detect radiation...
NOTE: There is a huge market for these kind of devices.
Rudy Guiliani'c company Bio ONE™ is one of the profiteers, yet another one is Northrop Grumman, which has been installing a $US175 million ($A225 million) Postal Service biohazard detection system this year.
Bio Pharmacy is one of the biggest war profiteers, especially after Sep11th.
(http://www.bioone.com
http://www.smh.com.au/news/Technology/On-t...5206038400.html
http://www.eurekalert.org/features/doe/200...l-rfd062402.php
http://www.globalfia.com/whatsnew/apds.html
http://istf.ucf.edu/ISTFSites/01/01-0212/comp2.html
...Let's now assume, a prototype of this Autonomous Pathogen Detection System (APDS) had been installed on the tube.
With an electronic manipulation of the relays, the device was now triggered by harmless tracer gases and forced a power surge, which was later used to provoke the first evacuations in the tube and an alleged explosion, which was possibly only a gas explosion or controlled air pressure implosion. (Some reports point on an installed divice placed under the trains).
Another speculation implies that brazilian victim Jean Charles de Menezes (playing the british "Nick Berg"), as part of the real time exercise on 7/7, was tricked into this electronic deception or maybe even also installed some explosion devices.
One plausible position could have been next to the Tagmaster devices, as part of a regular "routine check".
What de Menezes or whoever installed the devices, didn't know, was that he didn't install cold, but 'hot devices'.
Let's go back into the logistics, how this APDS detector works:
"... If more than one of our APDS detect the presence of a lethal pathogen, an alarm will go off...
...This alarm will include an electrical signal that will be relayed from the devices to the headquarters..."
In this scenario, the "headquarters" had been the METROLINE, or better their CENTCOM.
Because of CENTCOM's close connection to Scotland Yard, they proceeded with regular reactions, not being aware, what's going on.
July 2005
Sir Mark Moody-Stuart, formerly chairman of Royal Dutch/Shell, is chairing the G8 Business Action for Africa summit.
In a first statement, he "believes change can only be brought about in Africa if aid is accompanied by increased enterprise on the continent".
Moody-Stuart is also Chairman of the "Global Business Coalition on HIV/AIDS"
(http://www.politics.co.uk/issueoftheday/sir-mark-moody-stuart-business-community-ready-$160953
29.htm
http://www.businessfightsaids.org/site/pp....0LaP6E&b=245210 )
July 2, 2005
According to an interview of prisonplanet.com with an employee of Stagecoach, the company responsible for the attacked bus, a contractor came to inspect the CCTV on the buses at their depot.
If both interview and witness reports are true, then according to his supervisor the person spent more than 20 hours over that weekend.
The employee furthermore claims, "that person who came was not a regular contractor..
For security reasons the same few people always come to the depot to carry out work, this time it was different".
(http://www.propagandamatrix.com/articles/july2005/150705busbombing.htm )
NOTE: One of the contractors of Stagecoach is D|Sign, which also supports the US Navy.
Did a US Navy intelligence officer imposter as security contractor for Stagecoach, to disable the CCTV system with a timing script?
(http://www.dsign.co.uk/case_studies/case_usaf.cfm
July 7, 2005
At the same time, when Peter Power's blueprint for his Visor Drills is obviously exercised by another unknown unit, a simultanous NYC Subway Security Drill is testing the final logistics by the US handlers for 7/7.
They also use Peter Powers database, who "was heavily involved in the aftermath of the King's Cross fire in 1987".
In this drill, "armed officers entering the New York subway", instead of firefighters first, exactly like it later happened in London.
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4660939.stm )
It's possible, that Peter Power's Visor drill was scripted as a decoy, to divert from his tabletop exercise to the actual drill, performed now by someone else, still based on his blueprint, but also to distract from the NY drill and their supervisors.
Power had no chance as to reveal his knowledge in a BBC2 interview.
Here are the main reasons to use a drill as a cover for a real time controlled terror attack:
*Security stand-down:
Drills that disable any security measures in place. e.g. Vigilant Guardian, Northern Denial
*Diversion:
To draw attention away from the actual attack location
*Noise:
Flooding the ether with "terror" chatter so NSA, NRO, MI5/6 or which ever agency monitors communications these days, becomes helpless
*Window Dressing:
Erroneous drills providing plausible deniability by creating the perception that drills are common place, harmless, and a good excuse for the locals to cover themselves in fake blood and guts.
*Dual track drillers:
Attacks carried out by a compartment of the participating agencies
(*thx for the definitions to Culhavoc)
The perpetrator timeline on 7/7
The following timeline from the morning of 7/7 might show, what really have happened.
Most obviously the first events had been based on a blueprint for a terror drill.
6:29 AM
According to some reports, the Northern line is "suspended between Morden and Stockwell from 06:29 due to a defective train at Balham"
7:00 AM
According to another witness, the Northern Line from Stockwell to Morden is getting closed, with tube emergency vans and police outside.
7:40 AM
According to Thameslink Customer Relations, the "Luton Train" started to run "with delays due to problems with the overheadlines in the Mill Hill Area".
(http://www.team8plus.org/forum_viewtopic.php?9.871 )
7:46 AM
Another train to King’s Cross is cancelled.
7:57 AM
Piccadilly Line is "suspended between King's Cross St Pancras and Arnos Grove from 07:57 to 08:28 due to a defective train at Caledonian Road"..."
(Sources: http://disruptive.org.uk/ )
8:00 AM
Already since Thursday, 2 days earlier, Arnos Grove was down.
Unable to enter station, sign reads "DUE TO FIRE, Piccadilly Line suspended between Arnos Grove and Kings Cross - 08:00".
(http://www.hof.org.uk)
8:07 AM
Bakerloo Line is "suspended between Paddington and Elephant and Castle in both directions from 08:07 due to a defective train in Piccadilly Circus"
8:17 AM
Another witness claims, that his "friend got the Piccadilly line Tube to Leicester Square ...and as he got off he was told they're shutting down the line because of a fire near King's Cross.."
The witness claimed, he sent a text message to his girlfriend at that time.
(http://letsroll911.org/ipw-web/bulletin/bb/viewtopic.php?p=75134#75134 )
8:20 AM
In case, the main alleged Hussain suspect arrived now at King's Cross (according to first reports), it's still too much time left to arrive at Russell Square, which is just two stops away. One more reason to believe, that timers had been used.
(http://www.tcn.co.uk/map/tube.png )
8:25 AM
According to witnesses, a fire engine parked outside Caledonian Road station.
Another information reveals, that the station was already closed "Monday to Friday until 18th July 2005 for refurbishment"
http://realtime.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/squarecanary.html
8:35 AM
At Rayners Lane, at 8:35am, the station attendant announced that the Piccadilly was experiencing delays due to a DEFECTIVE TRAIN at Caledonian Road; however a train did come in fairly soon.
http://goruislip.blogspot.com/.
Another witness, related to some of the victims, also points out, that "on the day of the bombings at least one Northern line train did not stop at Angel, and the passengers were not allowed off the train until Euston.
(http://www.lse.co.uk/ShowStory.asp?story=PN1515352H&catid=7 )
NOTE:
It's possible, that the logistical significance of Angel Station, was also inspired by a codename for US Air Force One.
On September 11th, 2001, facing a possible threat, George Bush told an aide, “Angel is next.”
(http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/09/11/60II/main521718.shtml )
~8:50 AM
Most obvious, a controlled power surge is forcing the following trains to halt:
Between Aldgate and Liverpool Street stations on the Circle Line; between Russell Square and King's Cross stations on the Piccadilly Line; and at Edgware Road station on the Circle Line.
Something was put on trails to make sure, that these trains stop:
"The train jumped and skidded along a bit. It felt like we had hit something."
(Train from Kings Cross to Russell Square).
http://smh.com.au/text/articles/2005/07/08...0704565049.html
"...Linda Williams, 51, from Berkshire, was on the eastbound train. "We heard a loud bang. It felt like the train had hit something. It came to a stop next to the train that had been blown apart..."
A witness reports at around the same time claims that his "train was derailed"
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/4659237.stm )
Officially 21 people died at Russell Square, 7 people at Aldgate/Liverpool.
Many indications speak for a controlled power surge:
-the first indication of any disturbance was the opening of circuit breakers in the Underground, which was observed in the control room
-the first witness reported a "flash and a bang (not a big one)"
-a second witness didn't hear any explosion for "20 minutes"!
-Stephen Webb, deputy head of news at Transport for London, reported "something that might have come from a massive power surge".
Webb said that this information was passed on to early callers, including the Evening Standard.
He insisted that no professional would deliverately put out a false information
-According to other witness reports, This eye witness report would back up the power surge:
"...there was a loud, muffled bang. some "thought it was an electricity power box jumping..."
(http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Coordinated_terrorist_attack_in_London
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/4659237.stm )
8.51 AM
As revealed in a London Underground log a first call was made to police at this time.
(http://tinyurl.com/dylts )
8:56 AM
Due to a calculated delay, the Russell Square/King's Cross "blast" is reported 6 minutes after the event.
Interestingly, in the first version, this was the official time of a "second attack" at King's Cross.
9:10 AM
According to the London Underground log, Metline staff requested ambulances- but it was another seven minutes before the Met received a call specifically stating an explosion had occurred.
Tube chiefs also decided not to switch to Code Red - the immediate shutdown of the network.
Instead they called a Code Amber - telling drivers to head for the nearest station and let people out..."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4674469.stm
9:17
The Edgware blast is reported, officially five people die.
No names of these victims had been released.
~9:30
At this time, Bus No.30 arrives at Euston Road, near the junction with Gower Street, heading east.
Because of the closure of King's Cross station, the bus is now getting officially diverted as part of a controlled drill function.
The bus driver even ignores to call his office and asking someone for the way:
(http://www.portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/07/08/nbomb208.xml )
*"Ade Soji, 35, a parking attendant from Dagenham, east London, said
he had given directions to the driver of the diverted bus just before
it exploded. "The bus stopped and the driver asked me the name of the
street," Mr Soji said. "I told him Tavistock Square and he called me
over. Just as I was about to go, I heard the bus explode. *
9:41 AM
AMEC eployee Anthony Fatayi-Williams is one his way to his office and gives them a call.
Was this part of an instruction of the drill?
http://www.vanguardngr.com/articles/2002/c...f312072005.html
http://allafrica.com/stories/200507150452.html )
Interestingly, also Fatayi-Williams is a prominent african figure.
He's the grandson of one-time Chief Justice of Nigeria, Atanda Fatayi-Williams.
(http://allafrica.com/stories/200508090661.html )
9:47
The No. 30 bus on Upper Woburn Place near Tavistock Square is destroyed by a controlled explosion.
AMEC junior executive Williams is getting killed, too.
Williams started to work for AMEC in in January 2002 for helping them to "develop business opportunities in Africa"
(http://www.amec.com/news/mediareleasedetails.asp?Pageid=876&MediaID=1049 )
Many details speak for a controlled demolition and that the bus was standing:
-Too many passengers had been in too good condition after the explosion
-The explosion was at the rear
-The bus was at a stand still because it seems to be placed in the road without signs of an emergency stop.
-Photos reveal, bus was behind the stop.
-Not one broken window of the Tavistock building
-front of the bus still intact
-Detonation takes place close to the British Medical Association (BMA) building on Upper Woburn Place, to take care of the injured victims
-Even according to the official plotline, Hassib Hussain's rucksack (CCTV photo) would have been too big for a small explosion device.
We can assume, that he wasn't on this bus and yet another secret timer had been used.
10:02
Scotland Yard says it is dealing with a "major incident."
11:35
Almost 3 hours later, London police chief finally confirms to Reuters news agency there are "indications of explosives" at one of the blast sites.
More military codes?
Officially the internal numbers of the attacked tube trains had been 204, 216, 311
Did "311" symbolize the madrid attack?
The explosion of train 204 was one the third carriage of the train, which could be also spelled '103'.
The second official bomb exploded on the second carriage of train number 216 (='202')
The third explosion hit train number 311.
The explosion took place on the first carriage (='301')
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_July_2005_London_bombings )
(see also http://www.infotransport.co.uk/trains/operator/7 )
The perpetrator group system
Here is a possible hierarchie of involved persons, either participating as active or passive participants of the 7/7 drill, including their active or passive "supervisors":
GROUP 1 ("Toys")
Toys are participants, who are not aware, that they're participating in a drill or the follow up-"logistics".
Example:
Trent Morgan ("Surviving Victim aka Jessica Lynch effect").
Morgan has the PR function. He survived a Bali attack and will now also "survive" the London attacks and reporting to the tabloids.
One has to find out, if he was tricked into a vacation in London at the very same time.
Jamie Gordon ("Cell Phone")
Victim Gordon was scripted into a subtle deception of tabloid readers. His cell phone was found, which let the readers come to the wrong conclusion, that this could have been the triggering device of one of the suspects, instead from a victim.
In reality, no cell phone ever was found and linked to the alleged suspects.
(http://www.itv.com/news/index_2062437.html )
GROUP 2 ("Teamsters")
Teamsters are participants, who are aware, that they're participating in a terror drill, no matter of the real outcome.
Examples:
George Psaradakis ("Bus driver")
Originally Psarabakis, who has worked at the bus company Stagecoach’s Hackney depot for eight years, was "meant to be on another bus route but swapped with a colleague at the last minute to the No 30".
(http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,22989-1687566,00.html )
It's plausible that Psaradakis was deceived into a cover terror exercise and later found out about it.
That would explain, why he later was put under police protection "at a secret location".
(http://www.ekathimerini.com/4dcgi/_w_articles_politics_100019_12/07/2005_58512 )
NOTE:
A Driver is only allowed to divert from line of route under specific instructions for either (a) a Controller (usually at the Garage), or (
the overall control for London, called CentreCom.The automatic AVL system (also introduced early July 2005 in Jamaica) is not reliable enough to pinpoint a bus - with certainty - in a short space of time.
Therefore british undercover police MUST have been tailing that bus.
That is the only realistic way they could have singled it out and diverted it.
In case Psaradaki was not aware of participating in a drill, he also might have wondered, why the CCTV system on his bus did not work.
(http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/tm_objectid=15717499%26method=full%26siteid=94762%26headline=exclusive
%2d%2d58%2d%2dthe%2dhunt-name_page.html )
Since late July 2005, Psaradakis wasn't mentioned in the media anymore.
Expect a promotion of 'any kind'.
Richard Jones ("Witness")
Alleged Witness and Computer Consultant, who was wrong on some details of the alleged suspects.
GROUP 3 ("Consultors")
Consultors are coordinators, advisers and supervisors of the drills, not necessarily aware of the real outcome of a drill.
Among possible participants of this group could have been:
1) Peter Power
The exact role of Peter Power (Visor Consultants) has yet to be developed.
It's possible, that his inside knowledge on the london subway had been used to develop a 'blue print' for the attack, under the cover of a terror 'exercise'.
Peter has a senior Scotland Yard background which includes setting up the multi agency operational management structure at the Kings Cross fire in 1987.
He is also a regular panelist and contributor to many UK magazines on Crisis Management (CM) and Disaster Recovery.
Power stated in a BBC2 interview, that "at half past nine this morning we were actually running an exercise for a company of over a thousand people in London based on simultaneous bombs going off precisely at the railway stations where it happened this morning...
...we planned this for a company and for obvious reasons I don't want to reveal their name..."
2) Richard Sheirer
Sheirer is member of Guiliani and Partners and met Power on earlier emergency conferences.
His experience would suggest an adisor role in terror exercises.
Sheirer was also Commissioner of New York City’s Mayor’s Office of Emergency Management (OEM).
For the morning of Sep12th, 2001, he was actually involved in the logistics for the bio terror drill "triPOD".
(http://www.senate.gov/~gov_affairs/121101sheirer.htm )
The OEM also drilled "building collapses" and "plane crashes" prior 9/11, as confirmed by former NYPD Commissioner Bernhard Kerik, at a May 2004 testimony for the 9/11 panel.
NOTE: Only a few days after TEAM8+ mentioned Sheirer's associations with Peter Power, his name is getting removed from a forthcoming disaster event with Power.
(http://tinyurl.com/9hs6g )
3, 4) Rudy Guiliani, Bob Kiley
On 7/7 Rudy Giuliani was in London nearby the attacks, coming from a conference in Yorkshire, 200 miles away.
Coincidentally, Yorkshire is the same city, where U.K. police are searching for six suspect addresses and soldiers carry out a controlled explosion.
(http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000087&sid=a6m7bcf39GTk&refer=top_world_news
http://www.yorkshiretoday.co.uk/ViewArticl...ticleID=1077572 )
Giuliani's reason for the visit in London has yet to be established.
(http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,1525446,00.html )
Giuliani is also a supporter of ex-CIA Bob Kiley, since at least March 2001
http://www.london.gov.uk/view_press_releas...p?releaseid=145
Interestingly Giuliani also shared the same Great Eastern hotel with former Israeli Finance Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, near the Liverpool Street subway station.
http://www.team8plus.org/forum_viewtopic.php?9.461.50
5, 6, 7) Ira Greenberg, Ray Kelly, David Cohen
On the morning of 7/7, intelligence officer Ira Greenberg, Ray Kelly's contact in Scotland Yard, is on the subway on his way to work when the attack occurs.
Greenberg claims, his train was evacuated, and he walked to Scotland Yard.
Shortly after the blast, which officially occurred at 3:51 AM New York time, Greenberg was on the phone with Intelligence Commissioner David Cohen.
David Cohen was named deputy commissioner of intelligence January 27, 2002.
Cohen was with the CIA for 35 years.
(http://www.yorkshiretoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=55&ArticleID=1077572 )
8) Pasquale J. D'Amuro
In case, Giuliani was involved as an advisor of the drills, one should also examine the possible involvements of other executives from Giuliani Security & Safety LLC, a division of Giuliani Partners LLC.
One of them, Pasquale J. D'Amuro has valuable experience.
D'Amuro was appointed Inspector in Charge of the FBI's investigation of the Sep11th attacks.
He also was involved in the investigations of the 1998 bombings of the American Embassies in East Africa and the 2000 attack on the USS Cole in Yemen, as well as the latter stages of the investigations of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the Manila Air plot, and the crash of TWA Flight 800.
(http://www.giulianipartners.com/damuro.aspx )
9) Tim McLarthy III
In May 2002, Giuliani Partners LLC announced that Giuliani has agreed to chair the board of advisors of Leeds Weld Equity Partners IV, L.P., the largest private equity fund in the United States.
More interesting is, who else is on that board:
Thomas F. McLarty, III, Vice Chairman of Kissinger McLarty Associates.
Here we have an interesting association to one of the biggest plotters of staged terrorism:
Henry Kissinger.
"...Today Americans would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow they will be grateful! This is especially true if they were told there was an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence...
...The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well being granted to them by their world government..."
Henry Kissinger, May 21, 1992
10) Efraim Halevi
Former Ex-Mossad Chief Efraim Halevi called immediataly for 'World War' after the london attack.
(http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article9410.htm )
In an interesting slip, Halevi also remarked, that all bombs went off simultaneously,
though London police did not confirm this for days.
Also, he mentioned a "near-perfect execution".
Which execution was he talking about? Was that another hint on Netanyahu?
Did he have some kind of advanced knowledge?
Was he part of an advisory team?
11) Phil Swann, Tavistock Institute
Tavistock was founded in 1922 by the British military to wage psychological warfare.
The Institute engages in research and consultancy work in the social sciences and applied psychology for the European Union, several British government departments, and private clients.
During WWII, many of the Tavistock's professional staff joining the armed services as psychiatric specialists.
Today, the Tavistock's trauma unit offers a training workshop in the understanding of trauma, and has been called upon to help in national and international disasters.
The attack on the 7/7-bus occured in front of Tavistock institute.
The location could have been inspired as an inside joke by themselves, also to control the outcome.
NOTE: R. D. Laing is one of the prominent psychiatrists who was associated with the Institute. Laing, who also served in the British Army Psychiatric Unit, became well known, and highly controversial, for his experimentation with LSD and his views on schizophrenia. Laing suggested that schizophrenia was a way of experiencing the world, not a disease.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tavistock_Institute )
12) Michel Boussard
Michel Boussard is Chief Executive Officer of Interxion.
As a leading provider of carrier-neutral data centers, Interxion was in charge of a main hub of London's CCTV system on the streets.
Interxion was established in 1998 in The Netherlands and has raised more than 300 million from major international investors, including Baker Capital, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan Stanley.
(http://www.interxion.com/
[www.interxion.com] )
12) Sir John Chisholm
Chisholm is Chief Executive of QinetiQ.
In 1991, Sir John was asked to bring together the UK Defence Research Establishments to form one new organisation which was to become DERA. Sir John guided the organisation through its launch into the commercial world as QinetiQ plc in July 2001. Knighted in 1999.
QinetiQ is testing scanning technology for the british tube system.
On July 10th, 2005, they received a contract to creat "computer simulations to show the precise location of where the bombs were planted and direction of the blast."
Did QinetiQ already develop simulations on the tube prior 7/7?
(http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,1525446,00.html
http://www.qinetiq.com/ )
GROUP 4 ("Plot Manager")
Plot Managers are super coordinators, who decide, which participants had to be included in Groups 1-3. Logically their numbers are small.
They also organize "spinmasters" and "PR coordinators" for the media.
Possible suspects:
Few blackOPs within MI5/MI6 ("intel advice"), Porton Down ("explosives") and Bechtel ("Transport logistics").
Also, interesting to know, that since 1988, Halliburton KBR has been enhancing the safety and security of the London Underground.
(http://www.halliburton.com/kbr/govServ/UK/integratedSecuritySolutions.jsp?printMe )
GROUP 5 ("Masterminds")
Masterminds are coordinating both "plotline" and actual false-flag operation.
As described in the introduction, they must have been military-, intel and G8 connected.
July 21, 2005
More parts of the official plotline meanwhile are breaking apart.
A photograph of a passport purporting to show alleged bomber Hasib Hussain was in fact that of a 16-year-old British boy with the same name.
Pakistan's Federal Immigration Agency (FIA) claimed that Hasib Hussain, carrying a British passport number, arrived in the port city of Karachi from Riyadh in Saudi Arabia on 15 July 2004.
(http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&ct=res&cd=1&url=http%3A//news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/470442
7.stm&ei=HhABQ9GwC5yk-gHdueTaDg )
Other significant details of the official plotline, which broke apart, are carefully analysed by Team8+ member John Doe II.
There are flaws in claims on timeline, explosives, timing device, suicidal hipothesis and alleged masterminds.
(http://www.team8plus.org/forum_viewtopic.php?9.435 )
The flaws within the official version were obviously expected by the real perpetrators, who had a backup plan on hold. A follow-up attack to cover critical questions.
A slip of ex-CIA Vincent Cannistraro, reveals this plan accidentally right after 7/7, when he speaks of 6 planted bombs, instead of only 4.
(http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1523819,00.html )
Metropolitan Police Ian Blair seemed to confirm this too, when he speaks of “six events”:
"...He says he believes the six affected areas are Edgware Road, King's Cross, Liverpool Street, Russell Square, Aldgate East and Moorgate, but says it is "still a confusing situation".”
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4659331.stm )
On 7/21, new attacks occur at Warren Street, Oval and Shepherds Bush subway stations and at a double-decker bus in east London.
August 14, 2005
The final pieces of the official terror story are breaking apart.
Now both 'terror teams' from 07/07 and 07/21 are not linked together anymore and TEAM 1 turned back into a suicide team, although this version already was denied in between.
(http://www.sundaymirror.co.uk/news/tm_objectid=15855173&method=full&siteid=106694&headline=7-7--21-
7--blitz-on-britain--bombing-teams-are-not-linked--name_page.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4694069.stm#week6 )
The question remained, if TEAM 1 organised some explosives, let's call them TYPE ABC, why is british police not able to identify "ABC" but changed the story 6-8 times until it reaches XYZ?
CONCLUSION:
7/7, like 9/11, was yet another false flag operation, organized by private intel-military contractors and allowed and orchestrated by higher ups from british intelligence, -government puppets and their related global intel- and bank circles.
The author of this 'conclusion' is aware, that the described scenario above is also based on some speculations, however the author is not interested to distract from particular suspects, which hadn't been mentioned so far. Any individual or technical input is appreciated.
The author is NOT interested in symbolisation, vague generalizations or puppet ideologies
(Zionists, "Illuminati", Sharon or Blair 'did it'), but hints on individual helping hands.
The author also thinks, that any kind of research is useless and meaningless without any political- oractivist input and progressive input.
Experience over the last 3- 4 years however showed, that intense wannabee educationalism or "political correctness" among 'activists' blocked an effective process of research, also often described as "gatekeeping".
This was also one of the reasons, why the author retired in january 2005 from 9/11 research and -activism and turned his weekly blog 911skeptics.blogspot.com and the daily news portal inn.globalfreepress.com into archive status only and left INN World Report.
7/7 however was an opportunity to prove how easy a false flag operation can be debunked and how easy it also breaks apart by itself.
Unfortunately the majority of the 9/11 'truth' movement did not see this chance and unsurprisingly also 911truth.org did ignore the opportunity completely on their website.
My hope is therefore at excellent new british 9/11 researchers, especially from London, who recently achieved also fresh support by Jimmy Walter and a 3 page article in Daily Mail.
Without their help, also many details of this conclusion wouldn't have been established so fast.
9/11 research, is usually manipulated by gatekeepers, saboteurs, infiltrators and ignorants.
Often also using fake excuses, they're unable to analyse technical expertise and ironically are more impressed by articles including sensational 'insider sources'.
It's pretty clear to me, that a forthcoming world war (as mentioned above) within the next 20 months (i.e. a fake Taiwanese Al Quaeda cell attacks China with 'weaponised flu') and increased fascism cannot be stopped by "research" only.
Whether these articles are based on a 'political correct' context, precise sources, slippery or disinfo, doesn't matter anymore.
The responsibility is therefore in the hand of those "activists" to also oppose self-appointed fake opposition leaders, who are working into the hand of the very same warmongers and bogus war on terror approachers.
Activists have not only to oppose the warmongers and fascists, but also their controlled opposition, i.e. cointel-pro stylish 911truth.org (David Kubiak/Russ George connection and many other disturbing background details), disillusionalists like Fintan Dunne, fearmongers like Alex Jones/GLC, sensationalists like Heneghan/Webb, psyOP fronts like oilempire.us, insider con artists like Karl Schwarz or Mike Ruppert, but basically everyone who denies psychological and visual deception within our society, which had been the framework for 9/11.
As long as these issues are not clearly addressed, any kind of 9/11 research remains just "popcorn" research.
The US mainstream media is already trimmed for any controlled opposition and fake debates.
Part of the original script for 9/11, was to keep the media under control from military interest groups.
In 1995, defense contractor Westinghouse Electric Corporation acquires CBS.
In 1996, the year of the establishment of PNAC, TBS, as biggest part of the Turner Entertainment holding company (CNN), is sold to Time Warner.
In the same year, Rupert Murdoch, already controlling a majority of newspapers, he established the FOX News Channel.
Also in the same year, defense contractor General Electric and Microsoft launch MSNBC and Disney Company acquired Capital Cities/ABC TV.
Finally, in 2000, the marriage between "old" media Time Warner and "new" media AOL, made sure to control more media contents.
Meanwhile, every so called alternative media is controlled by conservative think tanks as well, among them Ford Foundation (member Afsaneh M. Beschloss works for Carlyle Asset Management Group, also Alain J. P. Belda is chairman of war industry think tank Rand Corporatio).
Ford Foundation once also was criticized by Binghamton University professor James Petras for alleged links with the CIA.
Chevron Texaco has sponsored PBS, the list of other war- or oil related industry sponsoring alternative media, is endless.
But supporters of "alternative media" are still closing their eyes, to continue their own self-constructed deceptions and to hide behind false hope campaigns.
ADDENDUM:
Here are "77 questions" reg. official plotline and inconsistencies of 7/7
http://www.team8plus.org/forum_viewtopic.php?9.663
Here are other key questions, which might point on the real perpetrators of 7/7 AND 7/21:
Who gave the official order to divert George Paradakis bus?
What was the name of the company who hired Visor for a terror drill exercise?
Who was able to obtain copies of Peter Power's blueprint for this drill?
Who arranged to shut down some stations beginning at 6:00 AM in the morning?
Who is supervising the archives of the CCTV cameras within the tube?
What was the official reason for Rudy Giuliani's visit in London on 7/7?
What was the official reason for KINGSTAR UK having been in the attacked area?
Who drove their van?
Which company is Richard Jones really working for?
Where was Bob Kiley on the morning of 7/7?
Who tipped of Scotland Yard on Curtis House, in Bounds Green, North London?
Why did Scotland Yard do not foward their warning to Benjamin Netanyahu also to the british public?
Who told them not to do so?
(*thx to Ron Winn, Culhavoc, Greg Nixon, Webster Tarpley, Team8+, and many UK-/London researchers )
QUOTE (adoucette+Feb 2 2006, 04:11 PM)
QUOTE (OBL+)
I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children and other people…
Note, this is OBVIOUSLY upheld by all the Al Qaeda led suicide bombers, they INSURE that all innocent women and children are first removed from a location before they self detonate. See Bali, Madrid, London, Iraq mosques and shopping areas etc etc for examples of this policy in action.
BS
Frater, you really believe these lies?
Arthur
The hand of state agencies are evident in all three cases.
An example -
Who was Behind the 2002 Bali Bomb Attack?
In the wake of the October 2002 Bali bombing, a contradictory report emanating from Indonesia’s top brass, pointed to the involvement of both the head of Indonesian intelligence General A. M. Hendropriyono as well as the CIA:
"The agency and its director, Gen. A. M. Hendropriyono, are well regarded by the United States and other governments. But there are still senior intelligence officers here who believe that the C.I.A. was behind the bombing."2
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?con...&articleId=1081
Both Madrid and London have similar question marks hanging over them.
The same feeble links to Islamic extremists is the recurring theme.
Note, this is OBVIOUSLY upheld by all the Al Qaeda led suicide bombers, they INSURE that all innocent women and children are first removed from a location before they self detonate. See Bali, Madrid, London, Iraq mosques and shopping areas etc etc for examples of this policy in action.
BS
Frater, you really believe these lies?
Arthur
The hand of state agencies are evident in all three cases.
An example -
Who was Behind the 2002 Bali Bomb Attack?
In the wake of the October 2002 Bali bombing, a contradictory report emanating from Indonesia’s top brass, pointed to the involvement of both the head of Indonesian intelligence General A. M. Hendropriyono as well as the CIA:
"The agency and its director, Gen. A. M. Hendropriyono, are well regarded by the United States and other governments. But there are still senior intelligence officers here who believe that the C.I.A. was behind the bombing."2
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?con...&articleId=1081
Both Madrid and London have similar question marks hanging over them.
The same feeble links to Islamic extremists is the recurring theme.
frater plecticus = a longer way to spell SPAM
Sheesh
You can join with Newt, another wacko who never met a conspiracy he didn't believe.
Arthur
Sheesh
You can join with Newt, another wacko who never met a conspiracy he didn't believe.
Arthur
QUOTE (Brian+)
The same feeble links to Islamic extremists is the recurring theme.
Yeah, those Islamic Extremists are SUCH nice guys.
You know what usually follows Allah Akbar?
BOOM!
Arthur
Yeah, those Islamic Extremists are SUCH nice guys.
You know what usually follows Allah Akbar?
BOOM!
Arthur
QUOTE (adoucette+Feb 2 2006, 04:24 PM)
QUOTE (Brian+)
The same feeble links to Islamic extremists is the recurring theme.
Yeah, those Islamic Extremists are SUCH nice guys.
You know what usually follows Allah Akbar?
BOOM!
Arthur
A trail of obviously planted evidence ?
No problem, Foxx
I came across the story of Kurt Sonnenfeld just recently & did my own research on the subject. The research throws up a number of unanswered questions regarding Kurt Sonnenfeld & the story gets more confusing the deeper one digs.
As you know, the whole 9/11 saga is full of such incongruity.
Thanks for your efforts on here, they are appreciated & I appreciated your composed posts.
Regardsm
Sinclair
PS Did you check out the 'strange coincidences' link??
i don't see all these imaginary air spaces, either. looks like a pretty dense pile, as would be expected if it were produced by such a violent crushing action, as proposed by 'make your own reality' fairy tale weavers.
Well maybe you should consider better glasses?
Then again, maybe you don't WAN'T to see.
If you do, then try this pic:
http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/5326.jpg
Now on the top, see the BIG rectangular Column.
Note that it is HOLLOW, you know, sorta like a CHIMNEY?
Now on the bottom left notice the Tree Column.
Notice the BOLT holes (that's how ~ 90% of the columns failed, the bolts failed, thus leaving the BOLT HOLES) now notice the square opening on one side of the bolt holes. That's the opening they used so the bolts could be tightened. There is one in EACH END. Makes each column like, you guessed it, a CHIMNEY.
There were ~ 2,600 of these trees per tower or roughly 7,000 of these tree columns. A great many of them and the box columns strewn throughout the debris pile. They INSURED that air would have a way INTO the pile.
Arthur
puppetry of the penis
Yeah, those Islamic Extremists are SUCH nice guys.
You know what usually follows Allah Akbar?
BOOM!
Arthur
QUOTE
You know what usually follows Allah Akbar?
A trail of obviously planted evidence ?
QUOTE (Sinclair+Feb 2 2006, 04:06 PM)
The photos linked here on the previous page from the FEMA photo library reminded me of the subject of Kurt Sonnenfeld, a photographer for FEMA, whose stange story is yet another anomolous incident associated with the event of 9/11.
Kurt was a photographer for FEMA who was one of four Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) photographers with digital cameras, who shot all the video footage and still photography of the restricted 9/11 site, following the WTC collapses.
After completing his duty as one of the only videographer allowed on Ground Zero at the WTC, his wife, Nancy Sonnenfeld, 36, was found dead on New Years Day January 2002. Kurt Sonnenfeld was then arrested for the murder of his wife (although she left a suicide note!?). Only his wife's prints were on the gun, and only her hands had gushot residue. Kurt Sonnenfeld was bound over for trial on a first-degree murder charge, with bond set at $600,000. (Info Here ,Here), here., & here.
Then exactly ONE day before his trial was to begin, murder charges against him were completely dismissed and he was set free. He then filed a lawsuit for $20 million, claiming false arrest, false imprisonment, deprivation of civil rights, and brutality, among other things.
Prosecutors wouldn't comment on specific reasons for the dismissal, but the defense investigation found a note written by Nancy Sonnenfeld which police had not taken into evidence, said public defender Carrie Thompson. "Our investigators found a letter written in Nancy's own hand consistent with a suicide letter, although it was very cryptic," Thompson said. She said the letter said, "What is more beautiful than love and death?" with the word "love" scratched out. "Kurt, please get help." The letter was found behind a framed photograph of Kurt Sonnenfeld. ...Nancy Sonnenfeld's sister, Amy Leek, said the family knew this was coming but would have no comment on the news.
Three years later, the charges against him were re-filed because they say they found two convicts he suposedly "confessed to"! He was re-arrested in South America and has been held in prison there for some time. Info on the re-filing of the murder charge here.
What a strange case! I am sure that he was party to some incriminating evidence that FEMA/Bushco could not allow to surface and was hushed up, or is it "Nothing to see here, move along now..........."
Only one of the strange coincidences associated with the events surrounding 9/11
Maybe he captured on film the recovery of the black boxes which officials still deny ever happened.
Odd that Sonnenfeld moved to South America (was he running from the crime? - obviously NOT seeing as the charges had been dropped).
Odd that after his 're-arrest' (coincidentally) he has been held in prison there (in South America) for some time - wouldn't a 'normal' murder suspect be immediately extradited to the states? Why the 'delay'? Better to have him locked up in some foreign detention unit rather than bringing the case to public trial in the states?
Interesting stuff Sinclair. I hope someone is doing some real digging into this case. I had never heard of it before. It might well be interesting to hear Sonnenfeld's side of the story. Hopsicker might be interested in following up on this.
Of course, there is proof of nothing here, (at this time) but the whole 9/11 tale becomes curiouser & curiouser. Thanks for sharing that info.
Cheers
Foxx.
Kurt was a photographer for FEMA who was one of four Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) photographers with digital cameras, who shot all the video footage and still photography of the restricted 9/11 site, following the WTC collapses.
After completing his duty as one of the only videographer allowed on Ground Zero at the WTC, his wife, Nancy Sonnenfeld, 36, was found dead on New Years Day January 2002. Kurt Sonnenfeld was then arrested for the murder of his wife (although she left a suicide note!?). Only his wife's prints were on the gun, and only her hands had gushot residue. Kurt Sonnenfeld was bound over for trial on a first-degree murder charge, with bond set at $600,000. (Info Here ,Here), here., & here.
Then exactly ONE day before his trial was to begin, murder charges against him were completely dismissed and he was set free. He then filed a lawsuit for $20 million, claiming false arrest, false imprisonment, deprivation of civil rights, and brutality, among other things.
Prosecutors wouldn't comment on specific reasons for the dismissal, but the defense investigation found a note written by Nancy Sonnenfeld which police had not taken into evidence, said public defender Carrie Thompson. "Our investigators found a letter written in Nancy's own hand consistent with a suicide letter, although it was very cryptic," Thompson said. She said the letter said, "What is more beautiful than love and death?" with the word "love" scratched out. "Kurt, please get help." The letter was found behind a framed photograph of Kurt Sonnenfeld. ...Nancy Sonnenfeld's sister, Amy Leek, said the family knew this was coming but would have no comment on the news.
Three years later, the charges against him were re-filed because they say they found two convicts he suposedly "confessed to"! He was re-arrested in South America and has been held in prison there for some time. Info on the re-filing of the murder charge here.
What a strange case! I am sure that he was party to some incriminating evidence that FEMA/Bushco could not allow to surface and was hushed up, or is it "Nothing to see here, move along now..........."
Only one of the strange coincidences associated with the events surrounding 9/11
Maybe he captured on film the recovery of the black boxes which officials still deny ever happened.
Odd that Sonnenfeld moved to South America (was he running from the crime? - obviously NOT seeing as the charges had been dropped).
Odd that after his 're-arrest' (coincidentally) he has been held in prison there (in South America) for some time - wouldn't a 'normal' murder suspect be immediately extradited to the states? Why the 'delay'? Better to have him locked up in some foreign detention unit rather than bringing the case to public trial in the states?
Interesting stuff Sinclair. I hope someone is doing some real digging into this case. I had never heard of it before. It might well be interesting to hear Sonnenfeld's side of the story. Hopsicker might be interested in following up on this.
Of course, there is proof of nothing here, (at this time) but the whole 9/11 tale becomes curiouser & curiouser. Thanks for sharing that info.
Cheers
Foxx.
QUOTE
Of course, there is proof of nothing here, (at this time) but the whole 9/11 tale becomes curiouser & curiouser. Thanks for sharing that info.
No problem, Foxx
I came across the story of Kurt Sonnenfeld just recently & did my own research on the subject. The research throws up a number of unanswered questions regarding Kurt Sonnenfeld & the story gets more confusing the deeper one digs.
As you know, the whole 9/11 saga is full of such incongruity.
Thanks for your efforts on here, they are appreciated & I appreciated your composed posts.
Regardsm
Sinclair
PS Did you check out the 'strange coincidences' link??
QUOTE (newton+Feb 1 2006, 03:25 AM)
i don't see all these imaginary air spaces, either. looks like a pretty dense pile, as would be expected if it were produced by such a violent crushing action, as proposed by 'make your own reality' fairy tale weavers.
Well maybe you should consider better glasses?
Then again, maybe you don't WAN'T to see.
If you do, then try this pic:
http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/5326.jpg
Now on the top, see the BIG rectangular Column.
Note that it is HOLLOW, you know, sorta like a CHIMNEY?
Now on the bottom left notice the Tree Column.
Notice the BOLT holes (that's how ~ 90% of the columns failed, the bolts failed, thus leaving the BOLT HOLES) now notice the square opening on one side of the bolt holes. That's the opening they used so the bolts could be tightened. There is one in EACH END. Makes each column like, you guessed it, a CHIMNEY.
There were ~ 2,600 of these trees per tower or roughly 7,000 of these tree columns. A great many of them and the box columns strewn throughout the debris pile. They INSURED that air would have a way INTO the pile.
Arthur
puppetry of the penis
I would like to take this opportunity to thank adoucette for his diligent research activities into the FEMA Online Library and providing pictures from there for our benefit.
Unfortunately, I believe he has added misplaced comments to some of these photos.
For example, he provides this picture...
http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/4145.jpg
and adds the following caption...
I think he has mislabelled this photo, and should have added the caption from his post here...
Posted: Feb 2 2006, 03:48 AM
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...indpost&p=60527
I think he has mislabelled this photo, and should have added the caption from his post here...
Posted: Feb 2 2006, 03:48 AM
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...indpost&p=60527
Steel beams
Various failure modes.
Arthur
The above quote (I think) suits the above photo much better. Have a look and see why I think so.
http://oceanmirage.homestead.com/core_column2.html
As can be seen on the above page I have had a close look at the full image provided by FEMA.
Note the GZ workers in the lower middle portion of the photo.
Let's Zoom in to the WTC core column which GZ workers are standing on. Given the dimensions it is obviously a central core column. The exterior perimeter columns were 14 inches square all the way up the buildings, and it can readily be seen that (judging by the size of the GZ worker's foot), that this particular column was much larger than 14 inches square.
http://oceanmirage.homestead.com/files/4145crop1.jpg
A closer look ...
http://oceanmirage.homestead.com/files/4145crop2.jpg
Let's zero in on what appears to be a hole in the column just to the right of the workers foot. ( # 1 )
This is an odd hole which seems to be 'cut' into the column. Notice that the column seems to have fractured from the hole to the 'top' side of the column ( # 2 ).
The column seems to be bent at a sharp angle at this fracture point, yet there doesn't seem to be any signs of other bending or 'buckling' except at the very point where this column appears to have been 'cut' from some 'action'.
Very odd.
http://oceanmirage.homestead.com/files/4145crop3.jpg
Any Questions ???
No problem, Foxx
I came across the story of Kurt Sonnenfeld just recently & did my own research on the subject. The research throws up a number of unanswered questions regarding Kurt Sonnenfeld & the story gets more confusing the deeper one digs.
As you know, the whole 9/11 saga is full of such incongruity.
Thanks for your efforts on here, they are appreciated & I appreciated your composed posts.
Regardsm
Sinclair
PS Did you check out the 'strange coincidences' link??
It doesn't appear that there is any link to 9/11 in this DENVER case.
The one thing that I saw as a frequent errors (on the CTers side) is the presentation that Kurt was the only photographer at GZ, which is not the case, that Argentina doesn't extradite and that he "fled" immediately after he was released.
But here is an interesting chain of posts about it if you really want to learn more.
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/06/318993.shtml
Arthur
This is an odd hole which seems to be 'cut' into the column. Notice that the column seems to have fractured from the hole to the 'top' side of the column ( # 2 ).
The column seems to be bent at a sharp angle at this fracture point, yet there doesn't seem to be any signs of other bending or 'buckling' except at the very point where this column appears to have been 'cut' from some 'action'.
Very odd.
http://oceanmirage.homestead.com/files/4145crop3.jpg
Any Questions ???
The only thing ODD about this Foxx is you don't recognise a SPANDREL when you see one.
He is not standing on the beam, he is standing on the spandrel attached to a regular box column. Note the bolts on that spandrel and the next one up. There would be NO BOLTS in the middle of a box column.
I admit, its a bit of an optical illusion, but it is pretty clear once you orient the pieces correctly and realize you can't always make out where a spandrel ends and a beam begins.
If you want to see the difference between one of these 14" columns and a central column, one of the central columns is above and to the right of him, with OHTF written in yellow paint. It is just a coincidince I'm sure that this core column is not in any of Foxx's cropped shots, so go back to the original.
http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/4145.jpg
And of course, notice all the AIR SPACES.
Compacted my arse.
Arthur
No problem, Foxx
I came across the story of Kurt Sonnenfeld just recently & did my own research on the subject. The research throws up a number of unanswered questions regarding Kurt Sonnenfeld & the story gets more confusing the deeper one digs.
As you know, the whole 9/11 saga is full of such incongruity.
Thanks for your efforts on here, they are appreciated & I appreciated your composed posts.
Regardsm
Sinclair
PS Did you check out the 'strange coincidences' link??
Hi Sinclair, Thanks for the kind words and yeah, I have visited the Rigorous blogspot on 'coincidences'.
The case is so big that no one has enough time to investigate every angle.
I see arthurs back to his hide & obfuscate role re: the Sonnenfeld case. Didn't you point out that he (Sonnenfeld) was one of 4 official photographers at WTC? Yet, adou-baba switches that around immediately to claim that ALL CT'ers say he was the ONLY one.
Straw-man, Straw-man, Straw-man !!!
The link adou-baba provided to the discussion was also interesting. I didn't read the whole thing but it was pretty obvious from early on that some intelligent posters were exchanging information (backed up with numerous references) when suddenly some Schneibster-style anon puppets come on making all sorts of unsubstantiated claims (as if they have inside personal knowledge of the case) and making all sorts of unsubstantiated claims to 'discredit' Sonnenfeld. It is interesting to note how soon the anonymous 'official supporters' find out about all conversations related to 9/11 and immediately attack with obfuscating nonsense, don't you think? No one can tell me that at least a great many of these shills are NOT on the payroll to muddy the waters.
Anyway, thanks again and keep up the good work.
Foxx
Unfortunately, I believe he has added misplaced comments to some of these photos.
For example, he provides this picture...
http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/4145.jpg
and adds the following caption...QUOTE
As you can see, not compressed, plenty of air passages.
Also chunks not just powder.
Arthur
Also chunks not just powder.
Arthur
I think he has mislabelled this photo, and should have added the caption from his post here...
Posted: Feb 2 2006, 03:48 AM
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...indpost&p=60527
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| As you can see, not compressed, plenty of air passages. Also chunks not just powder. Arthur |
I think he has mislabelled this photo, and should have added the caption from his post here...
Posted: Feb 2 2006, 03:48 AM
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...indpost&p=60527
Steel beams
Various failure modes.
Arthur
The above quote (I think) suits the above photo much better. Have a look and see why I think so.
http://oceanmirage.homestead.com/core_column2.html
As can be seen on the above page I have had a close look at the full image provided by FEMA.
Note the GZ workers in the lower middle portion of the photo.
Let's Zoom in to the WTC core column which GZ workers are standing on. Given the dimensions it is obviously a central core column. The exterior perimeter columns were 14 inches square all the way up the buildings, and it can readily be seen that (judging by the size of the GZ worker's foot), that this particular column was much larger than 14 inches square.
http://oceanmirage.homestead.com/files/4145crop1.jpg
A closer look ...
http://oceanmirage.homestead.com/files/4145crop2.jpg
Let's zero in on what appears to be a hole in the column just to the right of the workers foot. ( # 1 )
This is an odd hole which seems to be 'cut' into the column. Notice that the column seems to have fractured from the hole to the 'top' side of the column ( # 2 ).
The column seems to be bent at a sharp angle at this fracture point, yet there doesn't seem to be any signs of other bending or 'buckling' except at the very point where this column appears to have been 'cut' from some 'action'.
Very odd.
http://oceanmirage.homestead.com/files/4145crop3.jpg
Any Questions ???
QUOTE (Sinclair+Feb 2 2006, 01:46 PM)
QUOTE
Of course, there is proof of nothing here, (at this time) but the whole 9/11 tale becomes curiouser & curiouser. Thanks for sharing that info.
No problem, Foxx
I came across the story of Kurt Sonnenfeld just recently & did my own research on the subject. The research throws up a number of unanswered questions regarding Kurt Sonnenfeld & the story gets more confusing the deeper one digs.
As you know, the whole 9/11 saga is full of such incongruity.
Thanks for your efforts on here, they are appreciated & I appreciated your composed posts.
Regardsm
Sinclair
PS Did you check out the 'strange coincidences' link??
It doesn't appear that there is any link to 9/11 in this DENVER case.
The one thing that I saw as a frequent errors (on the CTers side) is the presentation that Kurt was the only photographer at GZ, which is not the case, that Argentina doesn't extradite and that he "fled" immediately after he was released.
But here is an interesting chain of posts about it if you really want to learn more.
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/06/318993.shtml
Arthur
QUOTE (Foxx+Feb 2 2006, 02:42 PM)
This is an odd hole which seems to be 'cut' into the column. Notice that the column seems to have fractured from the hole to the 'top' side of the column ( # 2 ).
The column seems to be bent at a sharp angle at this fracture point, yet there doesn't seem to be any signs of other bending or 'buckling' except at the very point where this column appears to have been 'cut' from some 'action'.
Very odd.
http://oceanmirage.homestead.com/files/4145crop3.jpg
Any Questions ???
The only thing ODD about this Foxx is you don't recognise a SPANDREL when you see one.
He is not standing on the beam, he is standing on the spandrel attached to a regular box column. Note the bolts on that spandrel and the next one up. There would be NO BOLTS in the middle of a box column.
I admit, its a bit of an optical illusion, but it is pretty clear once you orient the pieces correctly and realize you can't always make out where a spandrel ends and a beam begins.
If you want to see the difference between one of these 14" columns and a central column, one of the central columns is above and to the right of him, with OHTF written in yellow paint. It is just a coincidince I'm sure that this core column is not in any of Foxx's cropped shots, so go back to the original.
http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/4145.jpg
And of course, notice all the AIR SPACES.
Compacted my arse.
Arthur
Thanks for that link Arthur, regarding the denver wtc cameraman.
QUOTE (Sinclair+Feb 2 2006, 05:46 PM)
QUOTE
Of course, there is proof of nothing here, (at this time) but the whole 9/11 tale becomes curiouser & curiouser. Thanks for sharing that info.
No problem, Foxx
I came across the story of Kurt Sonnenfeld just recently & did my own research on the subject. The research throws up a number of unanswered questions regarding Kurt Sonnenfeld & the story gets more confusing the deeper one digs.
As you know, the whole 9/11 saga is full of such incongruity.
Thanks for your efforts on here, they are appreciated & I appreciated your composed posts.
Regardsm
Sinclair
PS Did you check out the 'strange coincidences' link??
Hi Sinclair, Thanks for the kind words and yeah, I have visited the Rigorous blogspot on 'coincidences'.
The case is so big that no one has enough time to investigate every angle.
I see arthurs back to his hide & obfuscate role re: the Sonnenfeld case. Didn't you point out that he (Sonnenfeld) was one of 4 official photographers at WTC? Yet, adou-baba switches that around immediately to claim that ALL CT'ers say he was the ONLY one.
Straw-man, Straw-man, Straw-man !!!
The link adou-baba provided to the discussion was also interesting. I didn't read the whole thing but it was pretty obvious from early on that some intelligent posters were exchanging information (backed up with numerous references) when suddenly some Schneibster-style anon puppets come on making all sorts of unsubstantiated claims (as if they have inside personal knowledge of the case) and making all sorts of unsubstantiated claims to 'discredit' Sonnenfeld. It is interesting to note how soon the anonymous 'official supporters' find out about all conversations related to 9/11 and immediately attack with obfuscating nonsense, don't you think? No one can tell me that at least a great many of these shills are NOT on the payroll to muddy the waters.
Anyway, thanks again and keep up the good work.
Foxx
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.