Wednesday, January 6, 2010

Former Bush Team Member Says WTC Collapse Likely A Controlled Demolition - Part 8

4 years ago

4 years ago

“Another problem with the video of December 13, 2001,” Griffin pointed out, “was that its stocky bin Laden praised two of the alleged hijackers, Wail M. Al-Shehri and Salem al-Hazmi, by name, and yet both the London Telegraph and the Saudi embassy reported several days after 9/11 that al-Hazmi was still alive and working in Saudi Arabia. Given the fact that the earlier video in which Osama confessed was clearly a fake, we should be suspicious of this latest apparent confession
Griffin is a fucking imbecile.
The “highjackers are alive” dead horse is been beaten so much it doesn’t even resemble a horse.
It resembles a rotting brain.

4 years ago

Hey Senns, you’re saying that the “hijackers are alive” claim is false? I’m curious. Do you any links to support that?

4 years ago

Tuesday, May 30, 2006
Transcript of Whistleblower Andrew Grove
Regarding the explosive Andrew Grove audio we posted here:
A transcript is now available in M$ Word format here:
So you can all quit typing now!!! Thanks to Andrew for sending this in.
9-11 Blogger

4 years ago

Can you guys stay on topic?

4 years ago

If you think that the highjackers are still alive, you are beyond help.
In a press release on April 22, 2006, the Scholars observed that a tape played at the trail of Zacarias Moussaoui included discussion among the passengers about using a drink cart to break down the cabin door alleged to have been picked up on a cockpit voice recorder, which does not record conversations in the passenger cabin. “This is not the first and certainly will not be the last time that the American government plays the American people for suckers,” Fetzer said.
The tape was reported to have contained voices saying “Allahu Akbar,” English shouts that included “Let’s get them!” and “In the cockpit. If we don’t, we’ll die”
There isn’t recorded conversation between the passengers. There was screaming and shouting. This guy didn’t even bother to actually read the transcript. It’s public, you can read it.
This shit is literally so retarded, it actually is funny.

4 years ago

You are completely incoherent.

4 years ago

Here, have some pancakes – maybe you’ll feel better.

4 years ago

You are completely incoherent
So, YT, you can’t read the transcripts? Oh, sad.
Not sure you are smart enough to be on this thread, given the fact that your last two responses were 4 words long.
C’mon, little troll, tell me that the transcripts are actually part of the evil conspiracy too, and the cockpit microphone couldn’t pick up screaming right outside the door.
If so, you’re dumber than we suspected.

4 years ago

Let’s take a look at what they say at Wikipedia,
The transcripts of the cockpit voice recorder [1] were made public as part of the trial of Zacharias Moussaoui, but the actual recording is unreleased. At the start of the transcript, a woman is heard pleading for her life. This is thought to have been a flight attendant.
Yes, the transcripts were made public, but the actual recording is unreleased. Therein lies the problem. The actual recording is unreleased. The actual recording is unreleased. The actual recording is unreleased. Shall I say it again Sean.
Post Modified: 05/31/06 08:26:13

4 years ago

Funniest sentence of them all,
At the start of the transcript, a woman is heard pleading for her life. This is thought to have been a flight attendant.

4 years ago

Start with The Terror Timeline, by Paul Thompson, Part Two, The Terrorists, or check the cooperative research site,
Post Modified: 05/31/06 08:49:45

4 years ago

Yeah, so, toolbagman, why is Fetzer seizing on this as a lie? And why would there be conversation among passengers about breaking open the door that the government just decides not to put in the transcript? How is the advancing the evil conspiracy?
Fetzer hasn’t even heard the tape, and he’s claiming that a conversation took place that isn’t in the transcript. Haha funny joke.
This shit is literally so retarded, it actually is funny.
Post Modified: 05/31/06 08:34:47

4 years ago

At the start of the transcript, a woman is heard pleading for her life. This is thought to have been a flight attendant
Why is that funny?
You’re even sicker and more immature than I thought.

4 years ago

How can you hear a woman screaming on a transcript?
You are so gullible for anything the government tells you about 9-11, you don’t even know the difference anymore.
Post Modified: 05/31/06 08:35:31

4 years ago

This shit is literally so retarded, it actually is funny.
Pure Shogobility.

4 years ago

How is that mistake funny?
And I’m curious, toolbagman, is the transcript and the tape all part of the conspiracy too?
Do you agree with Fetzer or not?

4 years ago

You are so gullible for anything the government tells you about 9-11, you don’t even know the difference anymore
Hey mcspecial, you are the one defending someone who hasn’t even heard the tape, and he’s claiming that a conversation took place that isn’t in the transcript.
If there’s anyone that’s gullible, it’s little timmy mctoolbag here.

4 years ago

I can’t help you, you are too slow and trusting.

4 years ago

c’mon, suitcase, are you gonna defend fetzer’s complete imbecility at having not even read the transcript or heard the tape or not?

4 years ago

I’ve pointed out a 9/11 conspiro-tard gem that now even toolbagman can’t defend. we’re getting somewhere now.

4 years ago

First of all, it is not clear what you are talking about. If Fetzer said something, why don’t you put the link up, you are making general statements about the 911 Scholars.
Apparently Fetzer does not trust the governments statements, he would rather hear the tape(s), which the government will not release, etc., etc., but you have no link to anything.

4 years ago

In a press release on April 22, 2006, the Scholars observed that a tape played at the trail of Zacarias Moussaoui included discussion among the passengers about using a drink cart to break down the cabin door alleged to have been picked up on a cockpit voice recorder, which does not record conversations in the passenger cabin. “This is not the first and certainly will not be the last time that the American government plays the American people for suckers,” Fetzer said.
First of all, it is not clear what you are talking about
right under tuesday for 9/11 blogger.
Apparently Fetzer does not trust the governments statements
And he’s saying that there actually was a conversation on the tape proves that the tape is fake. The conversation doesn’t exist on the transcript, so we just have to take his word that the government made up the tape, planted fake conversation among passengers, put in the tape just for the relatives to feel good, then didn’t include it in the transcript.
Apparently Fetzer does not trust the governments statements
No, what happened is he didn’t even bother to read the transcript because he’s an idiot.

4 years ago

timmy mctoolbag
me smirks. almost laughs.
but whatever the silliness is about… would seem just symptomatic of the fact that people would tend to be very surprised when government bodies come even close to telling the truth. i’m mean, it does happen of course, but really not out of principal.
the federal and municipal agencies at ground zero for instance (thread topic anyone?) made it their job to control as much information as possible. there was a strict ban on any photos or video on site. they fed the news media with carefully thought out stories and provided them with b-roll… making sure only the right images made it to the public. they basically decided to make their whole message to tune of “the firemen were heroes” and that’s it, end of story.
they would have treated information and the media in essentially the same way regardless of what actually went down.

4 years ago

Let’s go back to the beginning,
In a press release on April 22, 2006, the Scholars observed that a tape played at the trail of Zacarias Moussaoui included discussion among the passengers about using a drink cart to break down the cabin door alleged to have been picked up on a cockpit voice recorder, which does not record conversations in the passenger cabin. “This is not the first and certainly will not be the last time that the American government plays the American people for suckers,” Fetzer said.
Fetzer is asking, how could the cockpit voice recorder have picked up a conversation among the passengers?
Post Modified: 05/31/06 12:23:29

4 years ago

Fetzer is asking, how could the cockpit voice recorder have picked up a conversation among the passengers
Jesus, suitcase, after how many posts you still don’t get it. You are amazingly dumb.
The conversation doesn’t exist on the transcript, so we just have to take his word that the government made up the tape, planted fake conversation among passengers, put in the tape just for the relatives to feel good, then didn’t include it in the transcript.
Christ, toolbagman, do you understand that Fetzer doesn’t have anything to show for the conversation actually happening?

4 years ago

Well I am sure you can find it somewhere, Fetzer is saying the government is spinning a bullshit story about food carts, and he does not believe the story. What is the big deal?

4 years ago

I mean the government is spinning a bullshit story about food carts isn’t it? Otherwise, where did they get the information for the Flight 93 movies?

4 years ago

Stop trying to foodshit us about the bullcarts, will ya?

4 years ago

Asking Questions at the Flight 93 Crash Site
Post Modified: 05/31/06 13:26:33

4 years ago

Flight 93 National Memorial Site
Enlarge this photo
Post Modified: 05/31/06 13:34:14

4 years ago

This is what it looks like
Post Modified: 05/31/06 13:36:50

4 years ago

It reads in part,
On September 11, 2001, the passengers and crew of United flight 93 gave their lives. They made their choice so tht an unknown number of people could live, people they never met. The people aboard 93 gave the ultimate sacrifice.

4 years ago

This is all part of the fairy tale known as the 911 Commission Report

4 years ago

Final piece of the puzzle,
Jim Fetzer is a critic of the 911 Commission Report, and he does not believe the fairy tale.

4 years ago

Jim Fetzer is as American as apple pie.

He is a very educated man, take it up with him, send him an e-mail. I’m sure he will explain everything.
Post Modified: 05/31/06 13:50:45

4 years ago

I mean the government is spinning a bullshit story about food carts isn’t it
No, toolbag, fetzer didn’t even bother to read the transcript. And he isn’t a victim relative so he didn’t get to hear the tape.
Stop trying to foodshit
What in god’s name does that mean
Well I am sure you can find it somewhere
Read the transcript, toolbag (you’re really earning your name). There is no conversation, there’s screaming and “in the cockpit. if we don’t we’ll die.”
This guy didn’t even bother to read the transcript, he just read media reports of what the tape said, and decided that it must have recorded conversations of the passengers too. What pathetically dumb logic.
I’m sure he will explain everything
Do you email a creationist every time they say the world was created 3000 years ago?
Actually, don’t answer. I’m afraid to know.
Post Modified: 05/31/06 17:19:02

4 years ago

Electromagnetic weaponry was used to slaughter americans, but nobody cares about that.
Signatures of 9/11 WTC electromagnetic radiation








4 years ago

Yes, exactly, it has been that way, since the towers came down, the fires did not burn for very long, and the fires did not burn hot enough to create the conditions necessary for the building to collapse.
Post Modified: 05/31/06 18:00:48

4 years ago

The company said Ryan “was not involved in that work and was not associated in any way with UL’s Fire Protection Division, which conducted testing at NIST’s request.”

4 years ago

Autopsy: No Arabs on Flight 77
I’m sure we have seen this before, but I am posting this, because of Colonel Nelson’s endorsement of Physics911.
Post Modified: 06/04/06 20:28:51

4 years ago

4 years ago

Way to go, Muckraker! Thanks, YT, you have just demonstrated why this thread continues to be valuable.

4 years ago

Autopsy: No Arabs on Flight 77
The idiot author immediately launches into the “highjackers are still alive” deadhorse that’s beaten so badly that resembles many of the 9/11 TWOOF movement’s brains.
I really liked his inclusion of Operation Northwoods. Hey guys, I’ll bet none of his readers had ever heard of that before.
Dana Falkenberg was on Flight 77.
Dana Falkenberg doesn’t appear on the list.
That must mean she was made-up by the government.
“Families of the airplanes’ passengers and crews and those who died within the Pentagon provided DNA samples, typically on toothbrushes or hairbrushes, to aid with identification. The remains that didn’t match any of the samples were ruled to be the terrorists, said Chris Kelly, spokesman for the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, which did the DNA work. The nine sets of remains matched the number of hijackers believed to be on the two planes…”
The list is based on passengers + crew that provided dna samples.
Good job toolbagman, you didn’t even bother to see how the list was made.
I continue to be in amazement at your complete and utter stupidity.
S – T – U – P – I – D

4 years ago

So suitcase, all of the members of the AFIP are part of the conspiracy too, right?
And all those security photos of the terrorists boarding the planes are all made-up and part of the conspiracy too, right?

4 years ago

You’re off-topic, bitch.

4 years ago

You’re off-topic, bitch
Hey, tardbag, can you read what suitcase posted?
I mean, we knew you couldn’t comprehend what you read, but seriously, can’t you even get the basic gist of what your fellow 9/11 TWOOFtards are talking about?

4 years ago

Dearest little farthuffer,
If you can’t stay on topic (demolition of the WTC) and keep posting here I will spam every single fucking thread and blog you start here with off-topic bullshit. Is that fair? :-)
Don’t try to blame Suitcaseman for everything.

4 years ago

christ, YT, I guess you haven’t noticed that this is the 9/11 TWOOF-related thread?
You not only can’t comprehend what you read, you can’t comprehend what’s going on.
Should we be surprised?

4 years ago

Mark my words, commensensibillybatsjr.

4 years ago

Post Modified: 06/01/06 17:15:27

4 years ago

thanks, yeshappy, that’s only like the 5th time I’ve already seen it.

4 years ago

4 years ago


4 years ago

“The idiot author immediately launches into the “highjackers are still alive” deadhorse that’s beaten so badly that resembles many of the 9/11 TWOOF movement’s brains.”
Im wondering if perhaps you are missing the entire point of the “highjackers are still alive” Sens.
Its not, as many Govt liners would say, that someone else could have used their identities, that is the problem. The Govt say that it knows EXACTLY who the hijackers were when that is blatantly a lie because some “highjackers are still alive” and if some of the hijackers did use these guys IDs then WHO WERE THE REAL HIJACKERS AND WHY ARENT WE TRYING TO IDENTIFY THEM. After all isnt that what you do when investigating a crime, try and figure out who actually did it.

4 years ago

ALERT! it’s a trap senseless – don’t fall for it ALERT!
thx for explaining it to the little douchebag, wombat

4 years ago

Im here to inform, enlighten and educate YT.
I perform my alloted task with humility, modesty and the peaceful pusuit of truth.
I am in short an angelic messenger of factualism.
Post Modified: 06/01/06 18:59:15

4 years ago

I second that, Wombat

4 years ago

Indeed, I must say that you fucking rock.

4 years ago

highjackers are still alive
Geez, um, did you notice that BBC admitted the story is false?
You don’t know who the highjackers are yet? Damn, you really are behind.
christ, wombat. just read the wiki articles on the highjackers to figure out what happened.
Once the 9/11 TWOOF movement is able to bring me Salem-Al Hazi completely alive and well, I’ll believe you.
Saudi Arabia acknowledged for the first time that 15 of the Sept. 11 suicide hijackers were Saudi citizens…
Previously, Saudi Arabia had said the citizenship of 15 of the 19 hijackers was in doubt despite U.S. insistence they were Saudis. But Interior Minister Prince Nayef told The Associated Press that Saudi leaders were shocked to learn 15 of the hijackers were from Saudi Arabia.
“The names that we got confirmed that,” Nayef said in an interview. “Their families have been notified.”
Oh wait, the Saudis were forced to admit the guilt of innocent alive people because Bush secretly blackmailed them to do it, otherwise Saudi Arabia would be nuked. I get it now.
As usual, you guys just grab links from conspiro-sites and don’t even bother to look into the topic. What a joke.
PS – YT, do you ever contribute anything to threads or topics? You’re like the little kid at the table that says 5 word responses that the adults smile at and say to themselves “yup, he’s a dumbass.” I’m sure you’ve gotten used to it in real life.

4 years ago

Yes idiot, I was the last one to post on-topic material on this thread.
Can you read?
Btw, you just crossed the shitline, buddy.

4 years ago

I love IHOP.

4 years ago

4 years ago

Yes idiot, I was the last one to post on-topic material on this thread
This is the 9/11 thread. I’d assume you’d have figured that out by now.
Care to try to debunk my ripping up of the “highjackers alive” bullshit?

4 years ago

Care to eat shit and die?

4 years ago

No, seriously though, you don’t expect that I read your bullshit do you?

4 years ago

4 years ago

Feuerwehrmänner sind Helden!

4 years ago

Bombs Heard in the Twin Towers
Forget all of the videos and photos of the collapse of the World Trade Centers for a minute. Let’s talk about an aspect of 9/11 that we’ve all glossed over: sound.
The following earwitness testimony indicates controlled demolition of the Twin Towers:
Firefighter stated “it almost sounded like bombs going off, like boom, boom, boom, like seven or eight” (page 4; original is .pdf; Google’s webpage version is here)
Paramedic said “at first I thought it was — do you ever see professional demolition where they set the charges on certain floors and then you hear pop pop pop pop pop — thats exactly what because thought it was” (page 9)
Paramedic captain stated “somewhere around the middle of the world trade center there was this orange and red flash coming out initially it was just one flash then this flash just kept popping all the way around the building and that building had started to explode the popping sound and with each popping sound it was initially an orange and then 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” (pdf file; Google’s web version is here).
Firefighter “heard this huge explosion that sounded like a bomb [and] knocked off the lights and stalled the elevator . . . [then] another huge explosion like the first one hits. This one hits about two minutes later . . . [and] I’m thinking, ‘Oh. My God, these bastards put bombs in here . . . .”
Police officer stated “you would hear a loud boom go off at the top of tower one. As the building continued to burn and emergency equipment kept on responding stirring up the dust and debris in the streets. After approximately 15 minutes suddenly there was another loud boom at the upper floors, then there was a series of smaller explosions which appeared to go completely around the building at the upper floors. And another loud earth-shattering blast with a large fire ball which blew out more debris and at that point everyone began to run north on West Broad Street.” (page 5, which is page 2 of a hand-written memorandum)
Police officer stated “we kept hearing explosions that would shake the whole room” Fire chief from a nearby town heard a “high-pitched noise and a popping noise” right before the collapse of the South Tower
CNN producer stated “every few minutes you’ll hear like a small sort of a rumbling sound, almost like an explosion sound and another chunk of it will come flying down into the street”; same producer stated “there was just a huge … [explosion? word apparently erased from original CNN video] and enormous pieces of debris just falling – one right after the other”
Highly-reputable astrophysicist wrote in an email that, immediately before the collapse of each of the twin towers, he heard explosions and low-frequency rumbles (he also uses the phrase “demolition-style implosion”)
Firefighter stated “I … started to hear that rumbling sound again. I looked up, and the first thing I saw was the aerial on the top of the tower just rocking one way and rocking the other way, and all of a sudden there it goes”(pages 14-15)
British newspaper stated “some eyewitnesses reported hearing another explosion just before the structure crumbled.”
NYC firefighter stated “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.”
Employee of an insurance company in south tower heard an explosion from BELOW the impact of the airplane, an “exploding sound” shook the building
Paramedic “heard ground level explosions” (page 29)
Detective for the Port Authority reported, long before the collapse of the tower, “When we reached the 15th floor, the building began to vibrate and shake. I heard loud explosions and rumblings in the background. The stairwell shifted and gave out a large metal on metal groan. The stairwell then twisted back into place with another loud groan. The lights went out. At that point the stairwell became filled with smoke and dust.” (pages 58 & 59, which is page 2 & 3 of a memo from the Office of Inspector General)
CBS News reporter stated “All of a sudden I heard a roar and I saw one of the towers blow … I saw from street level as though it exploded up, a giant rolling ball of flame…”. (same reporter stated “I hear simultaneously this roar and see what appears to be a gigantic fireball rising up at ground level . . . I remember seeing this giant ball of fire come out of the earth as I heard this roar” (pages 119 & 239))
Port Authority Police Department officer, who was intimately familiar with the World Trade Center from his years of police duties patrolling there, described how the hallway began to shudder as a “terrible deafening roar” swept over him, then a giant fireball exploded in the street seconds before the south tower collapsed
MSNBC reporter stated “I heard a second explosion … 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”.
Paramedic said “Shortly before the first tower came down, I remember feeling the ground shaking. I heard a terrible noise, and then debris just started flying everywhere. People started running” (pages 5 & 6)
Unknown witness interviewed on television stating “it sounded like gunfire . . . . bang bang bang bang bang . . . and then three big explosions”
What could make the above-described sounds other than explosives used as part of a controlled demolition?
Indeed, while I cannot vouch for its authenticity, this video claims to capture some of the sounds on tape
posted by George Washington at 9:56 AM
Post Modified: 06/04/06 20:54:40

4 years ago

Mars tribute to 9/11 victims
Debris from the terror attacks on the World Trade Centre is sitting on the surface of Mars. Engineers used mangled metal from the wreckage of the 9/11 outrage to build parts for two robot rovers now exploring the Red Planet.
The quiet tribute was the idea of staff at Honeybee Robotics, a company operating close to the New York disaster scene who built drilling tools for Nasa. Many of the Manhatten workers had to flee choking clouds of smoke and dust after the twin towers were destroyed by two airliners in September 2001.
They said nothing publicly at the time. But, deeply affected by the tragedy and with the help of then New York mayor Rudolph Giuliani, they got hold of some scrap metal from the ruins. The twisted aluminium was flown to Honeybee’s machine shop in Texas. There the engineers used it to make two shields to protect wiring on the drills on the arms of the rovers. Each curved shield, the size of a credit card, is adorned with the American flag.
The two craft, called Spirit and Opportunity, landed in January 2004 and are still operating after more than two years. Until now, few apart from the Honeybee staff and mission team have been aware of the moving cosmic memorial to the victims of 9/11.
Honeybee’s chairman and founder Stephen Gorevan said: “It was intended to be a quiet tribute. But enough time has passed. We want the families to know.”
Post Modified: 06/04/06 22:02:56

4 years ago

9/11: Revealing the Truth, Reclaiming Our Future — Conference 6/2-4
The 9/11 truth movement has gained enormous credibility and momentum in 2006, as evidenced by results of last week’s Zogby poll. Help us build that momentum into a political force that will carry us to success.
9/11 truth offers the greatest opportunity in modern history for courageous, ethical people to positively influence the future of humanity. We hope to achieve no less than a return to Constitutional rule with the re-establishment of our precious civil liberties, the end of fraudulent wars and true justice for all the victims. We should act on this opportunity with gratitude and intelligence, sounding an alarm as well as a declaration that we are free and in charge of our own destiny as awakened and empowered citizens shaping a better world.
This conference offers an intensive weekend of presentations, strategy sessions and abundant opportunities for the growing 9/11 truth movement to gather. We are very pleased to announce commitments from approximately 45 presenters, (see Speakers page for list) and media coverage by INN World Report, KPFA Berkeley, KPFK LA,, Chicago IndyMedia and others, as well as many individuals who have taken up the call to “become the media” and will be recording the events for dissemination afterwards.
Thanks to the generosity of an astounding, talented volunteer (see, we have created a separate website at, with full information on the conference: Full schedule for the weekend, registration and lodging info, speaker bios and presentation descriptions.
We will begin posting multimedia from the event online as soon as possible afterwards, so if you are not able to join us in Chicago, you’ll be able to experience many of these great workshops online!
This event requires significant resources, as you can imagine, and we are extremely grateful for the contributions we have received. If you have not yet done so, please consider making a contribution to to assist in this effort. We appreciate and need every penny you can send!
The full Steering Committee will be at the event, several of whom will be presenting, and we hope to meet many of you in Chicago!
Post Modified: 06/04/06 22:27:02

4 years ago

Congress to Hold Hearings into OKC Bombing
Lo and behold it has happened. This may happen with 911 one day, but Oklahoma preceded 911 by quite some time, and finally Congress will look into it.
Post Modified: 06/10/06 20:29:50

4 years ago

Congress to Hold Hearings into Oklahoma Bombing
By J.D. Cash and Lt. Col. Roger Charles U.S.MC. (retired)
McCurtain Daily Gazette
New windows possibly opening on old cover-ups here. Let us pray this inquiry moves beyond the intended search for the hidden “foreign hand” to explore the indisputably indigenous fingers, figures and agencies that have aborted this investigation for a decade. – Ed.
In what some on Capitol Hill are calling a surprising decision, U.S. Rep. Henry Hyde has given the nod for hearings into the long-debated question of whether those responsible for the bombing of the Oklahoma City federal building had help from any foreign source.
Spurred to action by Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., Hyde has given Rohrabacher’s Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee of the House International Relations Committee the wide-ranging authority to conduct interviews and subpoena documents related to the April 19, 1995, terrorist attack that left 168 dead, 19 of them children.
Interviewed Wednesday, Rohrabacher confirmed that his nearly two-year-long personal investigation into the Oklahoma City tragedy had finally received the necessary support for an official congressional investigation.
“Congressman Hyde has approved my request for hearings into the OKC bombing. The congressional investigation will be limited to our area of focus, which is whether there was a foreign connection to the conspiracy,” Rohrabacher explained.
“I think we know what we’re looking for and I expect complete cooperation from the witnesses we call and the agencies we look to for documents.”
Rohrabacher then emphasized that his office would be keeping the public informed as to the level of cooperation his subcommittee receives during the official phase of this investigation.
“I must be able to assure the families of the victims of this horrible crime that their government cooperated with our investigation. That is very important to our oversight responsibilities,” the congressman said.
Areas of interest
Forecasting the areas of particular interest the congressional investigation could take, Rohrabacher promised to look carefully for any evidence linking the cabal to Arab terrorists and or to a German national in this country illegally in 1995, Andreas Carl Strassmeir.
In his letter seeking authority for hearings, Rohrabacher wrote: “It is highly likely that the Arab connection and/or the Strassmeir connection played a significant role in the planning and execution of the murderous bombing of the OKC federal building. In both possible scenarios, the official investigation fell short and further investigation has been discouraged ever since.”
Specifically, Rohrabacher said that Terry Nichols’ trips to the Philippines would be examined for links to a theory that he was actually meeting with Middle East radicals who were providing him with support.
“I also will call witnesses who say they saw McVeigh with Arabs in Oklahoma City,” he told this newspaper.
Elohim City connection
Rohrabacher also noted that much of the investigation would focus on a spate of documents recently unearthed during a Freedom of Information lawsuit in Salt Lake City, Utah.
While attempting to piece together evidence in the mysterious death of his inmate-brother in August of 1995 at the Oklahoma City Federal Transfer Center, attorney Jesse Trentadue has sued the Oklahoma City FBI office for documents that might shed light on the inmate’s bizarre demise while locked up in a suicide-proof cell.
While the documents obtained in the suit have been heavily redacted, they do appear to link Strassmeir to a foiled “sting operation” involving the federal government, McVeigh, the Southern Poverty Law Center, and the Oklahoma City bombing conspiracy.
In possession of those documents as well, Rohrabacher said he and his staff are convinced there are important facts about the bombing hidden under by the FBI’s redactions and he wants un-redacted copies for his staff to examine.
Among the witnesses the committee intends to call is Danny Coulson.
Coulson was one of five FBI commanders assigned the original investigation into the bombing. Only a few weeks into the case, though, all five were suddenly removed to make room for Danny Defenbaugh.
Still harboring doubts about the FBI’s official version of the bombing case, that only McVeigh and Nichols were largely responsible for the crime, Coulson said today, “I’m very much in favor of this investigation by Congress. We need to look very closely at why the five FBI commanders originally assigned the case were pulled off.”
“The FBI needs to answer to the Congress why they shut down their own investigation into Strassmeir and Elohim City. Why did their total investigation into Strasssmeir consist of two ASUSAs (assistant United States Attorneys) calling Strassmeir’s flat in Berlin a couple of times? He never should have been allowed to leave here without a more thorough series of interviews, face-to-face, by FBI agents trained in those skills.”
Long a subject of interest by this paper, Strassmeir’s name only began to circulate in the media months after the bombing, when this newspaper discovered that he was the person McVeigh was calling at a terrorist training camp in eastern Oklahoma, called Elohim City.
Months later, the newspaper reported that the former German military officer was being closely monitored by the Tulsa office of Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.
Only weeks before the bombing, the BATF had learned that Strassmeir was working with others on a plot to bomb a federal building in Oklahoma City. However, the FBI stepped in to thwart his arrest when the BATF sought an arrest warrant from the Tulsa U.S. attorney’s office.
Trentadue documents
Several months ago a judge in Salt Lake City, Utah, ordered the FBI to turn over to Trentadue documents indicating there were informants at Elohim City at the time of the bombing that worked for a private charity – the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).
According to those teletypes, SPLC informants were present at Elohim City on April 17 when McVeigh contacted the compound, looking for additional help in the bomb plot.
However, the FBI blacked out much of the person’s name with whom then-FBI Director Louis Freeh said McVeigh was closely associated. In the past, the FBI has vehemently denied McVeigh had any close associates at the camp.
Strassmeir was the compound’s paramilitary instructor from 1993 until August of 1995.
Since the bombing, over a half-dozen of Strassmeir’s associates at Elohim City have gone to prison for bank robbery, conspiracy to overthrow the government and murder. None, however, were ever charged in the bombing of the federal building in Oklahoma City.
Strassmeir left the United States in early 1996. In one of the teletypes issued by Freeh, the director appeared to know where Strassmeir was staying in the U.S. and of plans Strassmeir was making to return to Germany through Mexico.
Days after Freeh’s memo was issued, Strassmeir did indeed cross the Mexican border and make his way to Berlin with the assistance of former CIA pilot Dave Holloway.
Neither Holloway nor his associate, attorney Kirk Lyons of North Carolina – who paid for the pair’s trip – were ever charged with aiding Strassmeir’s flight. At the time of Strassmeir’s escape, he was listed as an illegal overstay by the INS and wanted by the ATF for illegally carrying a firearm in the U.S.
Believing him to be “armed and dangerous” at the time, the OKBOMB task force even contacted the INS and asked that Strassmeir be stopped at the border and held for questioning in the bombing case. This was the same week that Freeh told several offices that Strassmeir was staying in North Carolina with Lyons.
Safely back in Germany for many weeks, it was only after Strassmeir’s name was linked to McVeigh by this newspaper and others that two Justice Department lawyers in Denver called Strassmeir in Berlin, twice, to ask about any contacts he may have had with McVeigh and the bombing.
During those brief interviews, Strassmeir admitted over the phone that he may have met McVeigh at a gun show in Tulsa once, but he also assured prosecutors he did not help with the bomb plot.
In the wake of the tragedy, the FBI had available several well-qualified commanders with extensive experience in major case investigations to lead and complete the investigation.
However, a man with much less investigative experience, Danny Defenbaugh, replaced the original five experienced FBI commanders who had been initially assigned to the case.
With the original five commanders off the OKBOMB case, considerable criticism has since been leveled at the job Defenbaugh did while heading up the FBI’s most expensive investigation in U.S. history.
In spite of two dozen eyewitnesses that placed McVeigh with others in downtown Oklahoma City that day and $85 million that was spent putting together a case that sent two men to jail and one to the death chamber, only McVeigh and army buddy Terry Nichols were charged. Also imprisoned, Michael Fortier admitted his involvement in the conspiracy and agreed to cooperate with the FBI in return for a lighter sentence.
Jurors in both cases in Denver, plus a grand jury in Oklahoma City, said they doubted the FBI had gotten all those involved.
In 2001, over 4,000 pages of FBI interviews and other evidence never shown the defense teams for McVeigh or Nichols were discovered on the eve of McVeigh’s execution.
The discovery caused McVeigh’s execution to be put on hold and the fiasco quickly led to the sudden resignation of Defenbaugh.
Beyond a congressional investigation, Coulson believes the magnitude of the tragic attack that left 168 dead and 500 injured also warrants the appointment of an experienced federal prosecutor to look into all of the evidence and the use of a federal grand jury to facilitate the investigation.
“Based upon my investigation following the bombing of the Murrah building on April 19, 1995, and these new documents from the FBI turned up in the Utah case, it’s clear to me further investigation is required,” he said.
Referring to the documents uncovered during the FOIA lawsuit and the large number of witnesses the FBI interviewed after the bombing that placed McVeigh in the company of others at key points in the conspiracy, Coulson observed, “The totality of this information very strongly indicates there are others involved and not charged who were involved at least in conspiratorial acts.
“Families of victims and the American people deserve answers to many unanswered questions,” he said.

4 years ago

More 9/11 Media Available
Post Modified: 06/10/06 21:21:16

4 years ago

The controlled demolition connection between Oklahoma and 9/11.
They did not mention the other bombs that many people said exploded at the Murrah Building in Oklahoma. General Parton talked about this in a video, which is in two parts, and is available at Download Videos, which has a lot of other videos available as well.
Post Modified: 06/11/06 09:40:20

4 years ago

April 19, 1995.
How long ago? How long did it take to get this investigation? Over ten years. Maybe there is hope for 911 hearings, let’s see that would be the year 2012. Only 5 more years.

4 years ago

OK it is Barry Zwicker time

4 years ago

4 years ago

In 2001, over 4,000 pages of FBI interviews and other evidence never shown the defense teams for McVeigh or Nichols were discovered on the eve of McVeigh’s execution.
A little late.

4 years ago

Alex Jones interviews Professor Steven Jones about the possiblility that demolitions were used at the WTC complex.
There is a discussion about whether thermite was used to bring the buildings down.
Post Modified: 06/12/06 23:21:08

4 years ago

There are some professors who won’t discuss the physics, in Jones’ community, because it implies that 911 was an inside job, Jones told Jones, after A.J. asked how his paper has been received by fellow-professors. Jones said that some, who have read his paper, support his investigation.

4 years ago

They made mistakes, they shipped the steel out, Stephen Jones said, but there is enough evidence that can be pieced together, like an archeological project, to prove that the buildings were brought down by explosives.

4 years ago

Rodriguez news
The Nature of Prejudice On June 2, 2006 William Rodriguez confirmed for me that he would be presenting my film “Everybody’s Gotta Learn Sometime” to The International Islamic Conference in Kuala Lumpur Malaysia. In the days that followed I struggled with my own personal prejudices and concerns about American perceptions. Did I really want my film showing at an Islamic Conference? This lapse of reason is a powerful reminder of the power of propaganda in the wake of 9/11, and how it has served to demonize an entire religion and a people. Even I, a 9/11 Truth activist, continue to struggle with my own prejudices. So, for those of us unfamiliar with this conference, this is (in part) their declaration: “We reaffirm our commitment to the principles and true teachings of Islam which abhor aggression, value peace, tolerance and respect as well as prohibiting the killing of innocent people.” I am ashamed of myself. I am honored that William Rodriguez has chosen to present my film at this summit, and I thank those worldwide who fearlessly continue to toil in the name of peace. I ask all those involved in this movement to continue to fearlessly strive for peace, social justice and 9/11 Truth. – John Albanese
Post Modified: 06/13/06 17:00:29

4 years ago

There are some professors who won’t discuss the physics, in Jones’ community, because it implies that 911 was an inside job, Jones told Jones, after A.J. asked how his paper has been received by fellow-professors. Jones said that some, who have read his paper, support his investigation.
Sorry. Creationists say dumb stuff like this all the time, except replace “9/11 official story” with “evolution.”
Not gonna buy that until it gets published in a physics journal.

4 years ago

Who cares what you think?

4 years ago

Who cares what you think
No one’s going to care what Jonesy here says (save for the toolbags like you he’s pandering to) unless he gets it published.
I wouldn’t expect you to have any understanding of the modern scientific process, toolbagman, but geez, you continue to just astound me at your stupidity.

4 years ago

_ Who cares what you think_
you should ask stephen and anthony who voted to give me rebel status today then. Apparently someone must.

4 years ago

Ooohhhh you wittle webel you.
Mum and dad must be so proud.
Where are you going to hang the diploma.
Maybe they should open the voting to everyone.

4 years ago

Post Modified: 06/14/06 01:41:58

4 years ago

“at your stupidity” should be with your stupidity

4 years ago

BTW, you are a big science guy?
Post Modified: 06/13/06 22:45:43

4 years ago

I didn’t know what the hell you were talking about, rebel status, I didn’t know there was a rebel status. I’m proud of you, now maybe you can spruce up that article you’ve been trying to get published. Keep plugging.
Post Modified: 06/13/06 22:58:36

4 years ago

Stephen Jones got a hold of some steel samples, which were used to erect 911 monuments, and he found evidence of sulphur, which he said gets into cracks and inter-granular spaces in steel and causes it to melt at around 1600 degrees Fahrenheit. It is like putting salt on ice, Jones said, sulphur brings the melting temperature down. When you add sulphur to thermite you get thermate, which, as Jones said, will cut through steel like a hot knife through butter.
good interview
Post Modified: 06/13/06 23:05:04

4 years ago

Gettin’ pretty close to page 28..

4 years ago

I didn’t know there was a rebel status
that’s because you are an idiot and you only joined this site to find fellow 9/11 TWOOF tards.

4 years ago

You are such a child.

4 years ago

this is toolbagman’s way of admitting that he is only here to find more 9/11 TWOOFers. Nothing we didn’t already know, toolbag, much like how you already reached your conclusion of a conspiracy right as the towers were collapsing, but thanks for telling us anyways.
back on subject, time for a post from 9/11 Blogger
First off I want to say a massive huge mega thanks to everyone who’s helped spread “What’s The Truth?: How Indeed Did the Twin Towers Collapse?”, that alone was worth putting the thing together. I’m just so pleased people even felt it made the grade enough to be recommended out to others. A couple of guys have asked for a high-res version of the film so it can be burnt to DVD and played full screen. So there’s now a high quality 900mb version available, I haven’t been able to test it on a big TV screen yet (because I don’t have a DVD burner), but I have tested it full screen on a 12 × 9 inch PC flat screen monitor, and it looks fine. But if anyone who does have access to a DVD burner wants to have a go and test it out on a big TV screen. And post back the results of how it went in the comments section below for this thread that would be greatly appreciated.
Also the final corrected version of “What’s The Truth?” is up on 911Podcasts, basically every single little crease has been ironed out, so although it’s only little details, the overall quality is better. So I just want to ask people if they’ve got the film up on google video, torrents or are hosting it etc. That if they get the time, could they try and swap round the old version with the final one? If that’s possible it would be great, because the new version up on 911Podcasts is really what I intended the film to be like, with no little mistakes in it.

4 years ago

4 years ago

9/11 and the Fictional War on Terrorism
By William Hardiker
Al-Jazeerah, June 16, 2006
“It is discouraging to think how many people are shocked by honesty and how few by deceit”
Sir Noel Coward (1899-1973)
In the aftermath of the September 11 attacks on the United States I raised serious doubts in regards to who was responsible. It would appear that we are finally closing in on the truth. Many aspects of the attacks do not add up according to The Bush Administrations evaluation of events which transpired in Washington and New York and leave a great many questions unanswered and unaddressed. Several independent sources have challenged the government line presenting convincing arguments which challenge the official explanation. Many of these have been dismissed out of hand as crazy conspiracy theories by “left wing crazies”; however individuals and bodies of high repute and renown are coming forward making their suspicions public. My initial analysis was that the Bush Neo-Conservatives led by Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld long planned for a massive external threat to the American “homeland” in order to pursue an agenda of pre-emptive military strikes against Middle Eastern States and regime change. Their objective being the control of Middle Eastern oil reserves and regime change in Islamic States through the use of military supremacy. The truth is catching up with the perpetrators of what amounts to the greatest political conspiracy of our times.
The former Director of the Criminal Justice Centre at the National Centre for Policy Analysis Mr Morgan Reynolds showed that the Bush Administration conspired to create a false cover story of suicide hijackings in order to “blow the World Trade Centre to Kingdom come” with explosives – a shock and awe psych-op designed to coerce the American people (and the West) into supporting a pre-planned “long war”
in the Middle East, massive increases in military spending, and the roll back of constitutional liberties.
Five years after the event that changed the course of American International relations and the foreign policy of western nations in general, serious questions remain as to who was responsible for 9/11. The crime that changed global relations, the course of American foreign policy and caused America to self proclaim itself immune to International laws, treaties and the UN. Those responsible for the September 11 attacks are on the brink of being exposed and tried for high treason and mass murder. They are responsible for orchestrating an act of terrorism against their own people for express political and corporate reasons. In fabricating a fictional enemy and instigating a “war on terrorism”, America has granted itself the right to wage pre-emptive war against sovereign States deemed to be acting against the national interest or judged to present some kind of threat to national security.
Thus “The war on terrorism” was conceived and as a consequence the West has been led down a slippery slope of lies, mendacity and deception. Western leaders have embraced the “war on terror”, utilizing it to exacerbate a ‘climate of fear’; one that did not previously exist. The threat of terrorism has enabled corrupt governments the ability to pursue and justify undemocratic political agenda’s, and to introduce legislation that would otherwise be deemed totally unacceptable. Those countries which faced no threat from international terrorism prior to 9/11 such as Australia are now using the “war on terrorism” as an excuse to dramatically increase their defence spending and the introduction of draconian laws which take away the peoples democratic liberties. The myth of terrorism is being “milked” for all its worth.
There are many instances of governmental perpetuation of the terrorist myth and the politics of fear. The recent arrest of terrorist suspects in Canada is a poignant indicator of how the West creates a false terrorist threat in order to reinforce the mythology. Royal Canadian Mounted Police held a press conference showcasing the breaking of a Muslim “Al-Qeada connected” cell in Toronto that was supposedly constructing a Timothy McVeigh-type fertilizer bomb. Just as McVeigh had help from government agent provocateurs in planning his attack on the Oklahoma building, these young Muslims (mostly teenagers) were led down this path by agents of the RCMP. These Muslim teenagers not only did not have a target but the fertilizer was delivered by the RCMP as part of a sting operation (i.e., the suspects were framed). In order to demonize those accused, the media in Canada went out of its way to establish at best tenuous ties to Al -Qeada. According to The Toronto Star, “Once the deal was done, the RCMP-led anti-terrorist task force moved in for the arrests. Seventeen were arrested but no mention was made of the sale of the fertilizer.
The head of the Russian equivalent of the joint chiefs of staff, the former head of the German intelligence service Andreas Von Bulow, former National Security Agency official Wayne Madsen, and former MI-5 agent David Schayler have all openly called 9/11 and inside job, while former CIA official Ray McGovern has confirmed this directly in private, and indirectly in public by way of his ringing endorsement of David Ray Griffin’s work on 9/11.
Reynolds, who served as George Bush’s Labour Department Chief Economist in 2001-2002, believes that the truth regarding the attacks on Washington and New York will soon become public. He has predicted that one or more of the 9/11 insiders will soon come forward with what they know saying “remember you heard it here first”. He believes that most involved in the attacks did not realize how over the top the plot was due to the “need to know” policy of such operations, and that some semi-complicit individuals will probably be coming forward. Reynolds argued that the truth is a matter of extreme urgency as the perpetrators of 9/11 seem to be preparing another 9/11 style terror hoax in order to justify attacking Iran. Exposing the fraud is the only way to stop Cheney’s plan to stage an unprovoked nuclear attack on Iran
Those who dissent and raise their voices against injustice and lies face being categorized and prosecuted under new terrorist legislation in many Western States. The myth of “the war on terrorism” has been so successful, with the corporate media seizing on the concept and exacerbating the climate of fear to the extent that the masses have condoned that which is irrefutably immoral and unjust. They have given their consent to mass murder, unnecessary draconian laws and untold misery and human suffering. Since the beginning of the war against the Taliban in Afghanistan and the illegal pre-emptive attack on Iraq, countless thousands have been murdered and many more wounded.
It would now seem that everyone in the worldwide intelligence community knew that 9/11 was an inside job as soon as it happened. With the obvious stand down of American air defences, controlled demolition of the World Trade Centre, President Bush’s response and the disallowing of all air departures from the US with the notable exception of the Bin Laden family who were whisked away. The fact that no video footage of planes crashing into the pentagon nor sizeable engine blocks amongst the wreckage, (which do not disintegrate on impact) add to the irregularities. Many other aspects of the attacks are questionable and I have outlined these in previous articles. But most important of all is the fact that the Bush Administration had an agenda which amounted to a motive for committing these crimes. It is now impossible to deny that the invasion and occupation of Iraq was the first step in a quest to control and dominate Middle Eastern States and their resources and to reinforce its strategic position alongside Israel in the Middle East.
There exists today an extensive “Truth Movement” which is determined to expose the facts in regards to who was responsible for the attacks on New York and Washington. Once the perpetrators ie, the neo-Conservatives acting in concert with Israel, are brought to justice we shall witness the greatest constitutional crisis in US history. That the truth will amount to political dynamite is indisputable and difficult for most to entertain. It is the stuff of which revolutions are made. However the sooner those responsible are exposed and prosecuted, the sooner the world will be a safer place.
9-11 Blogger
Post Modified: 06/15/06 16:19:25

4 years ago

Those responsible for the September 11 attacks are on the brink of being exposed and tried for high treason and mass murder
you guys are fucking hysterical.
I love this.

4 years ago

4 years ago

Welcome to page 28, 298 comments to get to 3000. Looks like senseless will be good for at least 20%.

4 years ago

right-o, toolbagman.
Pray tell, how many physics journals and organizations are praising Jonesys glorious, brilliant paper by now?

4 years ago

Post Modified: 06/15/06 22:58:38

4 years ago

it looks like forbes on ‘roids.

4 years ago

Maybe 30%.

4 years ago

Don’t you realize it works the opposite way? Nobody has the guts to talk about what Jones is talking about. You might just be as stupid as people say you are.

4 years ago

Alex Jones interviews Professor Steven Jones about the possiblility that demolitions were used at the WTC complex.
There is a discussion about whether thermite was used to bring the buildings down.

4 years ago

For those who have not heard this interview yet, it is a must-listen, Alex Jones interviews Stephen Jones, the physicist, who is now saying that the evidence is getting overwhelming that demolitions were used to bring down the towers.
Stephen Jones got a hold of some steel samples, which were used to erect 911 monuments, and he found evidence of sulphur, which he said gets into cracks and inter-granular spaces in steel and causes it to melt at around 1600 degrees Fahrenheit. It is like putting salt on ice, Jones said, sulphur brings the melting temperature down. When you add sulphur to thermite you get thermate, which, as Jones said, will cut through steel like a hot knife through butter.
good interview

4 years ago

UA 93: The Road to Shanksville
Mon, 08 May 2006 05:01:08 -0700
View Video (quicktime) Part 1 – (large file, be patient) Part 2 – (large file, be patient)
An exclusive video excerpt from GNN’s book True Lies
With the nationwide release of United 93, the story of the tragic crash of the only 9/11 hijack plane not to reach it’s target has now become part of American popular history. The initial story of a heroic mutiny, led by the now-legendary battlecry of “Let’s Roll” by Oracle account manager Todd Beamer, immediately gripped the nation’s imagination. It returned hope and confidence to a people who had been let down by their multi-billion dollar intelligence and military defense systems, affirming that there were heroes among them, that they would stand up against any challenge and fight to the most bitter end.
But there were some who questioned the official narrative of Flight 93. Reports began to surface that residents of Shanksville, the small town just one mile from the crash site, had seen a second plane fly over just seconds after the crash. Yet only one mainstream news reporter, Will Bunch of the Philly Daily News, covered any of these eyewitness accounts. His articles (this is the latest) on the crash remain the only substantive enquiries made by an American journalist into the crash. Never ones to ignore a story being ignored by Big Media, we decided to take a trip down to Shanksville ourselves.
Shot while during research for our book, True Lies, GNN’s The Road To Shanksville looks at the wider socio-political issue of how mainstream news covered the initial stages of the administration’s response to 9/11. It asks the bigger questions raised by this story, namely: are there some stories that we, as a society, would rather not know? Does that fear of knowing benefit those in power?
But it also touches down at the crash site, featuring interviews with those very eyewitnesses who’s accounts of the “second plane” and other mysterious aspects of the crash are enough to make even the most cynical viewer wonder if the official story is actually the truth.
Featuring interviews with aviation expert Dr. Vernon Grose, BBC news producer Steven Williams, best-selling investigative journalist Greg Palast, Philly Daily News reporter Will Bunch and the people of Shanksville.
Directed by: Ian Inaba and Stephen Marshall
Produced by: Ian Inaba, Anthony Lappe, Stephen Marshall, Josh Shore
Edited by: Stephen Marshall
Score by: The Soulsavers
Made possible by a grant from the Nathan Cummings Foundation.
Posted by silverback
Available on GNN’s front page.
Post Modified: 06/16/06 12:16:51

4 years ago

Nobody has the guts to talk about what Jones is talking about
yup, that’s right. No scientist has the “guts” to talk about how evolution or human-caused global warming is false either.
Jones or Michael Behe play gullible fools like you like a harp.
You might just be as stupid as people
If by people you mean fellow gullible conspiro-tards, then go right ahead.
Post Modified: 06/16/06 10:44:31

4 years ago

Post Modified: 06/16/06 12:14:29

4 years ago

The World Trade Center Demolition Exposing the fraud of the government’s story
9-11Research is committed to uncovering the truth behind the most sophisticated psy-op in history, one whose denial stands in the way of a future based on humanity rather than fear. The core of the psy-op was the collapse of each of the Twin Towers — an event so shocking that rational analysis of it has been absent from almost all mass media.
This talk, examining the collapses of the Twin Towers and Building 7, was first presented by Jim Hoffman at the International Inquiry into 9-11, Phase Two, in Toronto, Canada. It covers the material in the previously delivered talks The Twin Towers’ Demolition and Building 7, the Untold Story, and adds a concluding section on the psychological engineering of the attack.
Post Modified: 06/16/06 12:26:14

4 years ago

good idea, don’t bother with garbage

4 years ago

neah neah lets pretend to ignore each other neah neah

4 years ago

psychological engineering of the attack
HAHAAHAHAHAHAHA this just keeps getting funnier.

4 years ago


4 years ago

I think this forum thread is a great resource for 911, I’ve read a lot of interesting stuff on this thead. Colonel Nelson was right Suitcase, this website is great.
Post Modified: 06/16/06 14:26:25

4 years ago


4 years ago

gee this is fun!

4 years ago

Propping up the War on Terror
Propping Up the War on Terror: Lies about the WTC by NIST and Underwriters Laboratories
Kevin Ryan
“Already there is near-consensus as to the sequence of events that led to the collapse of the World Trade Center.”— Shankar Nair, as quoted in the Chicago Tribune September 19, 2001
Turn on C-Span, or “Meet The Press,” or any other media program presenting federal officials. Whatever the issue, it always comes back to the same thing. Our government really has nothing else to offer us but protection from another 9/11. It uses this painful story to cut public services, eliminate our basic rights, and plunder the national coffers. But for many of us, it is not entirely clear from whom we most need protection.[1] As our debt explodes and our freedoms diminish, it would be wise to maintain focus on the origins of our War on Terror. No matter where this war leads us, we will need to keep the beginning in mind if we ever hope to see an end.
The Point of Origin: The Collapse of the WTC
Many have found that the 9/11 Commission not only failed to help us understand what happened; it also omitted or distorted most of the facts.[2] But if we really want to zero in on the exact turning point around which we plunged into chaos, we need to focus in particular on the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings. This is where our hearts were wrenched and our minds were made ready for never-ending war, torture, and apparently the end of everything that was American. If we are ever to emerge from this insanity, we need to know how three tall buildings collapsed due to fire, all on the same day, when no such thing has ever happened before.
Post Modified: 06/16/06 16:48:27

4 years ago

No matter where this war leads us, we will need to keep the beginning in mind if we ever hope to see an end.

4 years ago

I was interested in Stephen E. Jones’ statement about archeometry, about physics methods applied to the study of archeology.
Christopher Bollyn, of American Free Press, said in an article entitled, Professor Says Cutter Charges Brought Down WTC Buildings, “As an archeometrist, Jones applies physics to explain events in the past. Since last year when he became aware of the unanswered questions of 9-11, he has focused his attention on the available data and evidence.”
Post Modified: 06/17/06 11:57:24

4 years ago

The leaning of the entire top of the building is obviously not the result of a controlled demolition.
Yes, it leans to the side where the jet’s impact weakened it, and then instead of just continuing to fall off and crumble to the side, it suddenly gets snatched back into a straight down free-fall collapse. I’d say that IS indicative of controlled demolitions – not “obviously not”.
BTW, the handful of demolitions companies probably spin as a PR claim that it is impossible for anybody but themselves to do something so complicated as a controlled demolition. However, most of the physicists and engineers who have commented seem to understand the process quite well, and do not think it so difficult.

4 years ago

Oh shit, I was reading and commenting on page 1 without even realizing it. Time for a vacation!

4 years ago

Isn’t that weird when that happens?

4 years ago

hi guys. just thought i’d pop in and say hello again…it is page 28 now after all!
see you on page 33!

4 years ago


4 years ago

Whats the truth?
We shouldnt need to ask these questions, we should know the truth. This film highlights the strong possibility that the Twin Towers and Building 7 might have been brought down, not by fire, but by controlled demolition. (This is the high quality 902mb version, for the smaller 239mb version visit here )
Post Modified: 06/18/06 03:21:38

4 years ago

or watch “911 Eyewitness”, sit back, breathe in and say after me
“case closed. its so fucking obvious those buildings were brought down by controlled demolition. Now lets try to work out the who, why and how. Bush et al. are all guilty of at least covering up the crime, including the world governments and intelligence services. Tony Blair, MI6 and the establishment have no reason to cover up this crime unless they are all involved. Bring in Alex Jones et al. “

4 years ago

Page 29 is so going to go over the “next” button…
I cant wait for 30!

4 years ago

This interview
Stephen Jones was talking about another physicist, Jeff, who was working with him trying to find out what was in the steel samples they got from 911 monuments. Jones laughed, when he said, Jeff is now reading about the Neo-cons, PNAC, the bankers.
Post Modified: 06/18/06 11:11:42

4 years ago

An article about David Ray Griffin
Unquestioned Answers: Nonconspiracy theorist David Ray Griffin takes aim at the official 9-11 story
By Steve Bhaerman
June 16, 2006, a mainstream arts/culture weekly covering the Bay Area in Northern California, has published a review of David Ray Griffin’s work as a 9/11 Truth activist. Not insulting or dismissive, this article lets Griffin’s words and actions do the talking, and presents historical background for “false-flag” terror as well. This kind of fair treatment is becoming more common in the MSM.
“Whatever one’s assumption of what a “conspiracy theorist” is like, David Ray Griffin doesn’t fit the mold, perhaps because he’s really a nonconspiracy theorist. While he methodically deconstructs the official story, he doesn’t spin his own alternative yarn to fill the vacuum. Instead, he allows audience members to draw their own conclusions.”
“The ‘truth’ of the official 9-11 story,” explains Griffin, “must be taken on faith. It is not a matter of debate or even discussion. Anyone who brings up anything that contradicts the official story is either ignored or denounced as a conspiracy nut.
“However,” he continues, “when the official account of 9-11 is stripped of its halo and treated simply as a theory rather than an unquestionable dogma, it cannot be defended as the best theory to account for the relevant facts. When challenges to it are not treated as blasphemy, it can easily be seen to not correspond with reality.”
Post Modified: 06/18/06 23:09:42

4 years ago

Oh shit, I was reading and commenting on page 1 without even realizing it.
What’s the difference?

4 years ago

Chickenma: it suddenly gets snatched back into a straight down free-fall collapse. I’d say that IS indicative of controlled demolitions – not “obviously not”.
That’s what Siegel suggests when he talks about WTC2 in 9/11 Eye Witness.

4 years ago

Let’s take a look at an excerpt from the article I posted about David Ray Griffin. Anti-conspiracy theorists like to throw the word “conspiracy” around, because they want to put people, who believe there was a conspiracy behind 9-11, into the category of people, who believe that there are space aliens living among us, and many don’t realize that the biggest conspiracy theory of them all is the one that the government invented, the story about the 19 hijackers, who came to America, as part of an Al Queda operation, learned to fly here, took over four planes with box-cutters, and flew two planes into the WTC, one into the Pentagon, and were headed toward a fourth target in Washington D.C. but were stopped by a group of passengers, who had gotten wind of the WTC attacks and decided to crash the plane to save the fourth target.
Anyway, Griffin addresses this in this excerpt,
As for conspiracy theories, he explains, “the official story is itself a conspiracy theory. As the accepted ‘conspiracy theory’ goes, a cadre of al Qaida operatives conspired to hijack four jetliners, did so undetected and were able to complete their mission with no interception or even interference from the best-prepared air force on the face of the earth.”
Even more unusual, Griffin says, “the crime was solved immediately, and the official story was in place before the day of the attack was over. Within 48 hours, our president stood at the National Cathedral surrounded by Billy Graham, a cardinal, a rabbi and an imam, and used this religious setting to declare a holy war on terror.”
If we were to contrast the smoothness of the post-9-11 operation with the aftermath of Katrina, we are left with the question: How can a president so inept in one setting have been so “ept” in another?
Post Modified: 06/19/06 08:05:21

4 years ago

What’s the difference
Geez Fennec, don’t you know that we’re 28 pages closer to discovering the secret TWOOFF!!!
You don’t understand the nature of these idiots, fennec.
the crime was solved immediately
oh really? The 9/11 commission report was released by then? I wonder how long it takes for Israel to make an official story after a suicide bombing or Palestine after a rocket attack. Does that mean there’s a conspiracy too?
How can a president so inept in one setting have been so “ept” in another
Um, he’s been inept in both situations.
_ into the category of people, who believe that there are space aliens living among us_
yeah, you guys are both idiots. Why do you want seperate catergories of stupidity?
did so undetected and were able to complete their mission with no interception or even interference from the best-prepared air force on the face of the earth
reductio ad absurdum fallacy.
David Ray Griffin doesn’t fit the mold, perhaps because he’s really a nonconspiracy theorist
which is exactly why he has given lectures claiming that the highjackers are alive.
most of the physicists and engineers who have commented seem to understand the process quite well
Heh heh, you mean the measly little group that you have gotten to support your theory?

4 years ago

say, toolbagman, do you still believe that that publicly released list of Flight 77 passengers proves there were no highjackers?
Y’know, the one where you pasted an article and didn’t even bother to look at how the released list was made, where you would then learn that there was nothing wrong with the list?
Yeah, you looked pretty dumb and gullible.
Still believe the released list proves no highjackers?
You should answer this question, because it shows how pathetically gullible you are, just as dumb as the millions of americans that buy into exactly what the government says about 9/11 without even asking questions.
Maybe even dumber.

4 years ago


4 years ago

Here is a sample of the talks from some of the speakers: (in order of first appearance): A.K. Dewdney, Michel Chossudovsky, Ellen Mariani, Nick Levis, Thomas Kimmel, John McMurtry, Col. Robert Bowman, John Valleau, Michael Dietrick, Jamie Hecht, Ralph Schoenman, Kyle Hence, Jim Hoffman, Paul Thompson, Barrie Zwicker, Joyce Lynn, Bruce Gagnon, Rocco Galati, Phil Berg, Richard Sanders, Ian Woods, Michael Ruppert, Webster Tarpley, Ken Jenkins, Mathias Broeckers, Carol Brouillet, Jeremy Wright, John Gray and Bill Douglas.59 minutes, 26meg quicktime file 17meg winmedia file – thanks to
Snowshoe Documentary Films
Post Modified: 06/19/06 13:22:04

4 years ago

WILLIAM RODRIGUEZ: An American hero A 20-year employee at one of the World Trade Center buildings hit on September 11, 2001, Rodriguez risked his life in saving many people and was honored for his heroism. And then Rodriguez testified in closed session to the official 9-11 commission (Kean-Zelikow), but his story of what happened that day the explosions in the sub-basements seconds before the plane hit, was suppressed by those whose task it is to cover-up what really happened. Special thanks to INNWorld Report for airing Rodriquez crucial evidence that exposes the Bush administrations lies. (14 min. 646-618-8223 or (call for a free DVD: 800 630-9912) 14min 11meg quicktime file 8.6meg winmedia file – thanks to
Snowshoe Documentary Films

4 years ago

Anti-conspiracy theorists like to throw the word “conspiracy” around, because they want to put people, who believe there was a conspiracy behind 9-11, into the category of people, who believe that there are space aliens living among us, and many don’t realize that the biggest conspiracy theory of them all is the one that the government invented, the story about the 19 hijackers, who came to America, as part of an Al Queda operation, learned to fly here, took over four planes with box-cutters, and flew two planes into the WTC, one into the Pentagon, and were headed toward a fourth target in Washington D.C. but were stopped by a group of passengers, who had gotten wind of the WTC attacks and decided to crash the plane to save the fourth target. —suit
that wins the prize for being the longest sentence in the longest thread.

4 years ago

that wins the prize for being the longest sentence in the longest thread
as well as possibly one of the dumbest. And when it comes to toolbagman’s unique speciality, there’s a lot of competition.
I’ll just keep asking this question:
say, toolbagman, do you still believe that that publicly released list of Flight 77 passengers proves there were no highjackers?
Y’know, the one where you pasted an article and didn’t even bother to look at how the released list was made, where you would then learn that there was nothing wrong with the list?
Yeah, you looked pretty dumb and gullible.
Still believe the released list proves no highjackers?

4 years ago


4 years ago

Able Danger adds twist to 9/11
9/11 Ringleader connected to secret Pentagon operation
by Dr. Daniele Ganser
August 27, 2005
ISN Security Watch
Email this article to a friend
Print this article
We bring to the attention of our readers this important analysis of Dr. Daniele Ganser of the Zurich Polytechnic published by the International Relations and Security Network (ISN). Dr Ganser’s study is based on official US documents and reports. It identifies the role of 9/11 ringleader Mohammed Atta and 3 other hijackers in a secret Pentagon operation. It largely refutes the official US government narrative as presented by the 9/11 Commission.
Global Research
Post Modified: 06/19/06 21:19:51

4 years ago

4 years ago

Post Modified: 06/19/06 22:25:19

4 years ago

Who are these trolls, defenders of the faith, protectors of the “fairy tale” 9-11 Commission Report, they have made it their religion to defend it.

Post Modified: 06/19/06 22:50:43

4 years ago

4 years ago

Who are these trolls, defenders of the faith, protectors of the “fairy tale” 9-11 Commission Report, they have made it their religion to defend it.
wait, toolbagman, why did you ask me for my theory on 9/11 if you apparently know that I secretly want to defend the comission report?
Who are these trolls, defenders of the faith, protectors of the “fairy tale” 9-11 Commission Report, they have made it their religion to defend it.

Why do people that aren’t as gullible as me keep poking holes in my stupid, pathetically dumb theories screams toolbagman.

4 years ago

as well as possibly one of the dumbest. —senss
it was pretty much a summary of the 9/11 commission report.
what is your take on it anyway.

4 years ago

what is your take on it anyway
already been discussed.
You haven’t read all of the 9/11 TWOOF discussions on this site.
You are a failure to the TWOOF movement.
Because of you, the 9/11 TWOOF will never get out.
THe rest of the world will never know about the secret evil controlled demolision, BECAUSE YOU DIDN’T READ ALL OF GNN’S 9/11 TWOOF DISCUSSIONS!!!!

4 years ago

hey, toolbagman, what percentage of that graph do you think is dumb enough to believe the idiotic bullshit that fools like you have deluded yourselves with?

4 years ago


4 years ago

4 years ago

I have to borrow this comment from a reprehensor blog, written by lday,
While the physical evidence has been confiscated and the testimony of traumatized witnesses who could only have seen the fast-moving object for less than two seconds is necessarily dubious, there remains other types of evidence.
For example the fact that the close-up witnesses did not have their ear drums blown in. A fast-moving Boeing is extremely loud whereas a missile can be designed to be quite stealthy. In fact one witness with military experience did report that it sounded like a missile.
Another strange absence is from the forensic pathologists report. Missing are the alleged hijackers.
They are also missing from the passenger manifest for Flight 77.
Then there is a mountain of circumstantial evidence.
When the books don’t balance by an extraordinary amount, an audit is ordered but cannot happen because the books have been blown up that circumstance is either a remarkable coincidence or evidence of a criminal activity.
Siphoning money from the Pentagon budget is easily accomplished by building a weapon, having the UnderSecretary (Wolfowitz) and Comptroller (Zakheim) declare it redundant and pass it on to Israel for peanuts to be resold at its real value.
Also circumstantial: it is quite a coincidence that before going to work for Gov. G.W.Bush, Zakheim was a VP at a company on the cutting edge of stealth technology, remote control, missiles disguised as planes, etc. Indeed Zakheim did lease a fleet of Boeings for retrofitting, to convert them from passenger to military uses.
Consider Killsheimer’s wall protecting the Naval Command Center. It cost billions and was supposed to defend against ordinary missiles or bombs. Under the limestone facade was thick concrete reinforced with steel and kevlar, cutting-edge technology for the world’s strongest wall. Passenger jets are designed to be as light as possible, aside from the engines mostly aluminum. The ‘bunker-busting’ performence illustrated on 9/11 suggests something much heavier, at least tungsten but more likely uranium.
Uranium would have left elevated radiation readings and indeed the geiger counter did reveal that circumstance.
The character of the top people in charge of defending the building is also circumstantial.
Number 1 is Secretary Rumsfeld. His history is tarnished from his time at Searle where research was faked to try to convince the FDA to approve the infamous neurotoxin aspartame.
Number 2 on 9/11 was Army Secretary Gen. (rtd) Tom Wolf whose history includes being VP at Enron while they were conducting massive deceptions not only of shareholders and employees but also the state government of California and touring Wall St. investment analysts.
Both ‘derelictors of duty’ were certainly capable of multi-billion dollar deceptions.
As far as motivation goes Zakheim and Wolfowitz were likely less interested in financial aims than in the political aspects of removing Israel’s thorn Saddam Hussein. This required PNAC’s infamous ‘New Pearl Harbor’ to fool the public. Their signatures on the document are evidence.
Looked at purely circumstantially we clearly have means and motivation. By conducting multiple war games on 9/11 VP Cheney created the opportunity
by confusing all the ATCs, radar stations etc. and providing a rational for various non-disclosure and gag orders which conveniently aided the cover-up.
Post Modified: 06/20/06 22:02:30

4 years ago

Now, in light of what lday was writing about, I find this passenger list very interesting, look at some of the people, who were on the flight,
And now for the passengers:
The following information is gathered from many sources posted on the Internet.
Dong Lee, Ruben Ornedo, and Chad Keller all worked for Boeing. Lee also worked for the NSA. Stanley Hall, “the dean of electronic warfare,” (along with Peter Gay, David Kolvacin, and Kenneth Waldie on other flights), worked for Raytheon. William Caswell was a particle physicist who worked for the Navy. His job was so classified that his family had no clue as to what he did and did not know why he was flying to California. Charles Droz, LCDR USN Ret, was a software developer for EM solutions (manufacturer of Wide Area Networks).
Robert Penniger worked for BAE Systems, (“an industry leader in flight control systems”), whose Board is comprised of many from the intelligence community. BAE has apparently removed their Board of Directors page, but it list a “who’s who” of high level connections to the CIA, DARPA, and NSA.
Robert Ploger and his wife were added “late” to the original CNN passenger list. He is the son of Major General Robert R Ploger USA, Ret, another “flag” link. The other “late” addition was Sandra Teague, a physical therapist at Georgetown University Hospital.
John Sammartino and Leonard Taylor worked at Xontech (missile defense), another company connected to the intelligence community, also with ties to Boeing.
Vicki Yancey worked for Vreedenberg Corp, yet another company connected to the intelligence community. Her father describes her death as a “planned murder.” Her widower works for Northrup-Grumman.
Mary Jane Booth was in a position to know what was going on at Dulles Airport as secretary for American Airlines general manager.
John Yamnicky, 71, Capt USN Ret, was a defense contractor for Veridian who had done a number of “black ops,” according to his son.
The physicians, lawyers, biotech representatives, and “human interest” victims who were aboard, could also provide important clues, but in the interest of space, we will save for future consideration.
Many readers recall a particular Fox Television TV show called “The Lone Gunman” which was aired on March 2, 2001. In the show, the bad guys control a passenger airplane by remote control with intentions of flying it into the World Trade Center. The villains were from the arms industry; the motive being to inflame the public and thereby increase arms sales to use against “terrorists.” Life indeed imitates art. Here is the synopsis:
It has been reported that some people were warned not to fly that day. One was reported to be Mayor Willie Brown of San Francisco. Another was Muslim author Salman Rushdie. The person on that flight MOST likely to be warned was Robert Speisman. He was an executive at Lazare Kaplan, a diamond merchant, and son in law of Maurice Templesman. Templesman was Jackie Kennedy’s long time lover and is highly connected accoring to Time Magazine. Time also reported about about his “special access” to the National Security Council. He has also “stepped out” with Madeleine Albright.
I attempted on three occasions to obtain a final passenger list from American Airlines. They refuse to give a list and in fact won’t even verify that they gave the first list to CNN. Since the list is in the public domain, I find it curious that they would not take ownership nor provide a current, “correct” list.
Would it even be necessary to “lure” all expendables onto the designated death flights? Why not just grab those you want to get rid of and then slip them into the pile later? Have you seen an interview with the check-in personnel for the flights who can tell us who actually got on any of these flights? Not a chance. In fairness, Washington, D.C. and it’s suburbs draw a great number of contractors for the military and intelligence communities in their normal course of business. It may be mere coincidence that these passengers were all on the same flight; however; the government refuses to release information which would relieve our concerns.
I am interested in corresponding with family members who know the truth.
Thomas R. Olmsted. M.D.
Post Modified: 06/20/06 22:09:26

4 years ago

David Ray Griffin’s fanciful tale of Bush administration complicity in the 9/11 terrorist attack is a perfect example of the kind of conspiratorial thinking discussed by George Case in Skeptic Vol. 11 No. 4. There isn’t much to be learned about the fateful events from Griffin’s silly book, but he gives us some useful insight into the origins of paranoia.
Most writers on a subject do what is called research on the material, which means reading books, conducting interviews, and tracking down documents. This consumes far too much time and effort for conspiracy buffs like Griffin. His approach consists of asking disturbing questions, ignoring the actual evidence, speculating about the possible answers, assuming the worst-case scenario, and then drawing up his indictment of the administration based on his assumptions, even where they are in flagrant contradiction to widely-known facts.
Starting with the dubious “who benefits argument?”, Griffin concludes that since President George W. Bush profited in terms of political capital from the 9/11 attacks, he had to be behind them. Given that premise, he argues that the U.S. government masterminded the whole catastrophe from beginning to end, with the al-Qaeda hijackers being either innocent bystanders or U.S. secret agents. The planes that hit the World Trade Center — Flights 11 and 175 — were actually piloted by remote control, with their command center at No. 7 WTC, the 45-story office building across a narrow side street from the North Tower. In addition, the impact of the planes did not cause the buildings to collapse; that was the work of controlled explosions set off inside the Towers. As for the Pentagon, it was a guided missile or, no, maybe a military plane that hit the building, with Flight 77 disappearing inside the smoke and flames. And Flight 93, which crashed in Shanksville, PA, was actually shot down by the U.S. military because the passengers were on the brink of taking it over. The Bush administration didn’t want the hijackers taken alive, Griffin insists, because they presumably could have proven their innocence. How strange that 20th hijacker Zacarias Moussaoui should have been kept alive after the 9/11 events, not to mention the mastermind of the affair, Khalid Sheikh Mohammad, captured in Pakistan and now in U.S. custody.
One of the points Griffin raises is why the South Tower collapsed half an hour before the North Tower, although it was struck 15 minutes later. From this alleged discrepancy in the official story, Griffin concludes that the government had planted explosives in the WTC the previous weekend, using a power blackout as cover, and had dynamited the buildings. He never considers the other explanation: the South Tower collapsed faster because the plane impacted on a lower floor, and more floors were therefore set on fire. Any glance at the photograph of the second impact will show this.
He fails to explain why the government would have waited nearly an hour to explode its bombs in the South Tower, which would have allowed many people to escape; the North Tower didn’t collapse for one and 3/4 hours, and nearly all of the WTC workers who died were in the impacted floors or above. Did Bush’s remote control have a low battery?
Griffin actually does claim that No. 7 WTC, which collapsed at 5:20 pm, was blown up by explosives, and this is taken as proof that Washington was behind it. But what would the motive be? Blowing up an already-evacuated office building after thousands had died in the Twin Towers would seem like a waste of dynamite, not to mention office space. Did Bush think that public opinion had not been sufficiently inflamed by the 3,000 deaths? Do most Americans even know that a third office building, far smaller than the Towers, was also lost on that day? Griffin never explores that possibility that No. 7 was demolished because it had been contaminated by the white dust from the nearby North Tower. Explosives were used because, at 45 stories, No. 7 was too tall for a wrecking crane.
Jet fuel is kerosene, argues Griffin. Kerosene could not have caused a fire hot enough to melt steel, which happened at the Twin Towers. Perhaps Griffin has never attended a barbecue, where kerosene is used to ignite charcoal briquettes, and the charcoal fire then cooks the food. Something similar happened at the Twin Towers, where the jet fuel ignited carpets, furniture, books and papers, which then produced enough heat to bring down the burning floors; their impact on the floors below produced the force that led to the Towers’ collapse.
There is the question of what Bush knew on the morning of 9/11 and when he knew it. Some have claimed that Bush was lying when he said he saw the first impact on the Twin Towers, since there had been no live coverage of that attack; the second impact, about 15 minutes later, was covered by cameramen photographing the fire from the first. It would seem likely that when Bush watched the second crash on TV, as he waited to enter the 2nd-grade classroom in Florida where he was planning to read My Pet Goat, he mistakenly thought he was watching the first. Not until about 20 minutes later was he informed that there were two crashes, indicating a terrorist attack rather than an accident, and at that point he started to look worried. About six or seven minutes later, he left the school.
Well, why wasn’t he, or his staff, concerned about his being targeted by the terrorists? Doesn’t that prove, as Griffin indicates, that Bush was aware he was in no danger, and therefore involved in the attack? Not necessarily, given that both attacks were in New York, a thousand miles from Florida, and the attack on the Pentagon hadn’t happened yet. Furthermore, it is unlikely that the hijackers could have singled out the Sarasota elementary school; all of their targets were highly visible landmarks which could be identified from many miles away, whereas urban areas have numerous indistinguishable schools.
Why wasn’t the Air Force ordered to shoot down Flight 77 as it streaked through the sky on its way to hit the Pentagon? The official 9/11 Commission story is that planes were sent north to intercept Flight 11, with the White House and Pentagon unaware that it had already crashed in New York, and that the threat was coming from another plane, heading in from the west. Griffin believes that Vice President Dick Cheney, in charge of the situation in Washington while Bush was flying to Nebraska in Air Force One, deliberately avoided intercepting Flight 77 so that the Pentagon would be struck. One wonders what Donald Rumsfeld, still in his office at the Pentagon, might have had to say about that! Griffin asks why the Pentagon wasn’t evacuated, but never considers the fact that the government had no idea which target in the Washington area had been selected by the terrorists. Nor does he concern himself with the political fallout if an enemy attack on United States soil had been followed by our military leadership fleeing in panic from their still-intact offices.
Then there is the matter of the disappearing wreckage at the Pentagon, of which conspiracy buffs have made much. Photographs taken in the immediate aftermath of the impact show no sign of airplane debris. That must mean that it was a missile that hit the Pentagon, implicating our diabolical government once again. Official accounts indicate that Flight 77 smashed through several of the concentric rings that make up the Pentagon, so that the wreckage all came to rest well inside the building.
Flight 93, which crashed in rural Pennsylvania as the passengers attempted to wrest it back from the hijackers, may actually represent the one instance where Griffin does cast some light on the matter. The original official story had it that the passengers made their way into the cockpit, but that the plane crashed during the brief struggle. Later, it was announced that the passengers never made it through the door, and the government speculated that the pilot, Ziad Jarrah, downed the plane as the desperate fight broke out in the passenger compartment. Of course, given the fact that Jarrah planned to sacrifice his life for this mission, it doesn’t seem likely that he would have aborted it while there was still some chance of success. Griffin indicates that open cell phone lines recorded two explosions during the fight, followed by the sound of rushing wind; he reports an eyewitness saying that the plane disintegrated in the air, and mentions that one engine was found a mile and a half from the rest of the debris.
This is proof to Griffin that the Air Force downed Flight 93 with a missile, making the government responsible for the deaths of the heroic passengers who nearly foiled the fourth hijacking. He backs up this improbable claim by mentioning that someone saw a white military plane in the sky near the hijacked flight, overlooking the detail that military planes on such a mission would travel in formations of two or more, and that they are rarely white.
Griffin also mentions that the Flight 93 hijackers declared that they had a bomb when they took over the plane, but that the passengers regarded this as a bluff. He never considers the possibility that the hijackers were not bluffing, and that they set off the bomb (more likely two) when they were rushed by the passengers. This would account for the explosions, the sound of the wind on the cell phones, the crash of the plane, the engine landing more than a mile from the fuselage, and the peculiar path of the flight in the last few minutes before it crashed. In the map in the 9/11 report, Flight 93 makes a U-turn in northern Ohio after being hijacked, and then heads southeast, in a straight line, aiming directly for Washington. While over western Pennsylvania, it veers to the left and then makes a clockwise semi-circle, as if Jarrah has suddenly found it impossible to steer. Was this the result of a missile, a fight in the passenger compartment, or the desperate hijackers setting off their bombs?
The 9/11 attacks made Americans feel helpless, even more so than our defeat in Vietnam. Theories of administration complicity in 9/11, based on total denial of even the most self-evident facts, serve as a defense against these admittedly uncomfortable feelings, and allow us to feel omnipotent once again. Our government is all-powerful and all-knowing; a bunch of Middle Eastern fanatics couldn’t possibly take us by surprise, could they? Better a government that’s totally evil than one which leaves us helpless in the face of foreign terrorists.

4 years ago

Senssi are you replying to a post on page one?
Better a government that’s totally evil than one which leaves us helpless in the face of foreign terrorists
what the hell do you mean by that sentence?
Are you saying that the Bush admin is not totally evil and left the US helpless to the attacks?
Are you saying that Bush admin is totally evil and didnt leave the US helpless to the attacks?
Best get your head on straight

4 years ago

i think senss just copied something there? without linking it? again?
or is that senss talking about griffin? i fuking hope not because whoever wrote that trash could best be described as stoopid.
the South Tower collapsed faster because the plane impacted on a lower floor, and more floors were therefore set on fire.
yeah okay. that “widely known fact” is just a bullshit assumption. source: the writter’s ass.
Griffin never explores that possibility that No. 7 was demolished because it had been contaminated by the white dust from the nearby North Tower. Explosives were used because, at 45 stories, No. 7 was too tall for a wrecking crane.
It would seem likely that when Bush watched the second crash on TV, as he waited to enter the 2nd-grade classroom in Florida where he was planning to read My Pet Goat, he mistakenly thought he was watching the first.
yeah cuz florida be in one those diffnt time-zone thingers.
allow us to feel omnipotent once again.

4 years ago

This is the article
9/11: A Date That Will Live in Infamy
review by Richard Morrock
He forgot to add the title, maybe he is trying to pass it off as his own, but anybody who has read his comments would know that he is not capable of anything like this, but I tell you one thing, as Mariano Rivera likes to say, it is good that he is making us aware of these articles, because it shows The Empire is hard at work churning out anti-conspiracy theory material, they are scared, they are on the run.
Post Modified: 06/21/06 08:11:37

4 years ago

Quite an interesting article actually, one that is worth studying.

4 years ago

How about this one,
Official accounts indicate that Flight 77 smashed through several of the concentric rings that make up the Pentagon, so that the wreckage all came to rest well inside the building.
It is not clear what the official story is concerning the hole in the third ring, and it does not jibe with what we have been told about the plane disintegrating upon contact.
It has been said that the hole was caused by one of the engines, but I’m not sure that that is part of the official story.

4 years ago

About Flight 93, I’m not sure that Griffin assumes that there is any truth to the story about the passengers taking the plane down, I think the angle for many people, who are questioning the official story, is that somehow, the Flight 93 was shot down, because it represented a threat to Washington D.C., and then you have Colonel De Grand-pre, who said that it was shot down by the Happy Hooligans, the North Dakota squadron that was based in Virginia, because the commander of the Hooligans told the pilot, Rick Gibney, to do it.
The colonel said that Flight 93 was hit by two side-winder missiles, and there is a lot of evidence that points in that direction. GNN’s True Lies gets into the evidence.
Post Modified: 06/21/06 08:52:35

4 years ago

Donn De Grand Pre’
Profile: Author of the book Barbarians Inside The Gates: The Black Book of Bolshevism. Donn is retired military. Served in WWII and the Korean “police action”. Stated reason for the book: to sound the alarm, U.S. military is being downsized, downgraded, degraded and demoralized. Barbarians/Bolshivists in charge hold the highest ranks of military office. While we find his suggested remedy frightening, he makes a case. Highly recommended reading for its documented historical facts that fill in many blanks; i.e. Swedish Jew, D. D. Eisenhower’s rise to power, responsible for the death of hundreds of thousands of Germans post WWII; Holocaust hoax planned in 1919; history of Israel’s creation/ creators; ongoing media blitz foments animosity toward Arabs.. the real Semites. Published in 2000, Barbarians brings us to present day.
It’s good to see that nutcases like Grand Pre can depend on gullible fools like toolbagman here to buy into their bullshit.
Seriously, toolbagman, you’re almost cute, like the religious cult members that buy into everything they hear.

4 years ago

This is what I pay attention to,
DGP: Okay, Alex. Actually I went to work then for Sec. Def. Bob McNamara. He hired me as the chief arms negotiator for the Middle East. And we conducted our business there. We were known as the super salesmen in ISA, International Security Affairs. And over a ten-year period, we sold over a hundred billion dollars worth of military equipment to all comers. And then, you mentioned the interview in Portugal. I didn’t actually go to Portugal but on 11 September, actually it was 12 September, I wrote to my friend Gen. Hugh Shelton, who was Chairman of the Joint Chiefs at that time. He was transited out. And he was replaced by Gen. Richard, what the heck was the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs’ The name escapes me. He was a four-star Air Force General. And, Myers, I guess, was the name. At any rate, I called together from 16 to 19 September, in the Pentagon area, not in the Pentagon, a group of military, civilian and general aviation pilots. And for three days, we kicked around what actually happened on 11 September. And then the investigator journalists covered that and it was reported in the Portugal news and very accurate. I have the report in front of me and it is quite involved but if you have some questions, fire away, Alex.
Post Modified: 06/21/06 13:00:07

4 years ago

People can listen or read for themselves, the transcript is available here.
More on the Colonel’s bio,
I entered the military in 1944 as an 18-year-old radio operator, morse code. And I was sent to Burma and China. I was attached to the detachment 101 which was OSS and I operated out of Burma. Then later on in Kunming, China, along with such notable people as a tall, skinny gal by the name of Julia Child. She has since put on a little weight and now she’s doing television commercials, I guess. But I came back on active duty in 1950 as a commissioned officer, infantry airborne. And I got involved in the Korean fracas for a year-and-a-half until I was wounded. Then I was shipped home for two-years while I recuperated. And then I came back in…..
Post Modified: 06/21/06 13:02:39

4 years ago

4 years ago

4 years ago

I’ll bet it was removed because the 9/11 TWOOF movement has become so powerful.

4 years ago

Governors tell WTC insurers to pay up or be sued
NEW YORK (Reuters) – The governors of New York and New Jersey and New York’s mayor said on Friday said they would sue World Trade Center insurers “within the next several days” if they do not make payments needed to redevelop the site.
Some insurers have suggested they might withhold payments because the World Trade Center developer, Larry Silverstein, and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which owns the 16-acre site, this spring revised their original deal.
The Republican mayor, Michael Bloomberg, last week said a few insurers believed Silverstein’s new pact violated their insurance covenants because he will no longer own the Freedom Tower.
Instead, the Port Authority now will own the 1,776-foot Freedom Tower, meant to symbolize the revival from the deadly September 11, 2001 air attacks, though Silverstein will still build it.
“The success of the rebuilding of the World Trade Center site is too important to fall prey to unnecessary delays and legal maneuvering,” New York Gov. George Pataki said in a statement.
Spokesmen for some World Trade Center insurers, including Chubb Corp., St. Paul Travelers, and Lloyd’s of London, were not immediately available. Spokesmen for Zurich American Insurance Co. and The Hartford Financial Services Group Inc. declined comment.

4 years ago

4 years ago

the only place he can get it published is a journal he and a few other nuts made up.
That’s fuckin’ hysterical.

4 years ago

Sens, you’re starting to become more obsessive at denouncing the 9/11 conspiracy theorists than the 9/11 conspiracy theorists themselves. Watch that it doesn’t take over you life!

4 years ago

911 Conspiracy Therorists Gather at LA Conference
Alex Jones’ hugely successful, energetic, and brilliantly named “9/11 and the Neo-Con Agenda” conference gets covered here by British wire service, Reuters. Reuters feeds every major news outlet in America, but, strange to say, the last time we checked Google News only Aljazeera, Alarab, and Tehran Times seem to have found this overflow event newsworthy. It’s enough to make you believe in conspiracies of silence. But of course that’s only a theory… – Ed.
Post Modified: 06/27/06 08:15:21

4 years ago

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) – They wore T-shirts asking “What Really Happened?,” snapped up DVDs titled “9/11; The Great Illusion,” and cheered as physicists, philosophers and terrorism experts decried the official version of the Sept. 11 attacks that shook America to its core.
Some 1,200 people gathered at a Los Angeles hotel on the weekend for what organizers billed as the largest conference on the plethora of conspiracy theories that see the 2001 attacks on Washington and New York as, at best, official negligence, and at worst an orchestrated U.S. attempt to incite world war.
“There are so many prominent people who are incredibly well-respected who have stated that the evidence is overwhelming that 9/11 was an inside job,” syndicated radio talk show host Alex Jones told a news conference.
“There are hundreds of smoking guns that people need to be made aware of,” said Jones, calling for the impeachment of President George W. Bush and charging that mainstream media had been slow to cover the growing movement of 9/11 skeptics.
The “9/11 and the Neo-Con Agenda” conference comprised two days of seminars, video presentations and talks by groups including “Scholars for 9/11 Truth,” and an appearance by actor Charlie Sheen.
Most are convinced the U.S. military command “stood down” on the day of the attack, that the hijackers were trained at American military bases, and that the World Trade Center towers collapsed because of a series of controlled explosions set before they were hit by two hijacked planes.
Suggested motives range from expected benefits for U.S. arms and oil conglomerates to revolutionary plans for a new world order headed by the United States.
The theories, derided by critics as wild and far-fetched, have mostly been confined to the Internet, talk radio and the alternative press.
But an August 2004 Zogby opinion poll revealed 49 percent of New York City residents believed U.S. leaders knew in advance of the attacks and failed to act.
The official 9/11 Commission, set up in 2002, cited government intelligence lapses in the failure to prevent the attacks by al Qaeda that killed about 3,000 people.
A 10,000-page investigation by the National Institute of Standards and Technology held that jet-fuel fires weakened the structure of the Twin Towers and led to their collapse.
Sheen, star of the TV sitcom “Two and a Half Men,” provoked a media storm in March by calling in interviews for an independent investigation.
Sheen “brings the movement some legitimacy. He gives it a face,” said a Los Angeles student attending the conference who gave his name as Rico.
“Rational, well-educated people are starting to take a look at all this and are seeing there are some pretty bad things happening,” Rico added.
Webster Tarpley, author of “911 Synthetic Terror; Made in USA,” said the Sept. 11 attacks were an example of “state-sponsored, false-flag terrorism” designed by rogue CIA elements “to start the war of civilizations.”
Tarpley said Washington was “gripped by war psychosis” and had used terror as a pretext to turn the United States into a police state.

4 years ago

Post Modified: 06/27/06 08:16:11

4 years ago

Coming on strong

Charlie Sheen Says 9/11 Movement “Juggernaut Of Truth”
Sends mainstream media a warning during speech at L.A. American Scholars Symposium
Sheen: “We’re here today to affect a change, we are here today to ask those still sleeping to wake up and join us.”

4 years ago

September 11 Claim Stirs UW Probe
September 11 Claim Stirs UW Probe
Instructor says U.S. planned the attacks to provoke war
by Megan Twohey
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
June 30, 2006
The Wisconsin censorship story continues to pump out the 9/11 truth message. We wonder when the local muzzle-mongers will notice this is blowing up in their faces. – Ed.
The University of Wisconsin-Madison announced Thursday that it would launch a review of an instructor who argues that the U.S. government orchestrated the Sept. 11 attacks for its own benefit.
The instructor, Kevin Barrett, is co-founder of an organization called the Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance, which claims the Bush administration planned the attacks to create a war between Muslims and Christians. He argues that members of the faiths must work together to overcome the belief that terrorists were to blame.
“The 9/11 lie was designed to sow hatred between the faiths,” Barrett has written on the organization’s Web site.
“Either we discuss the compelling evidence that 9/11 was an inside job, or there is precious little to talk about.”
Barrett, who did not return calls Thursday and an e-mail seeking comment, has taught a class on cultural folklore and is scheduled to teach an introductory class on Islam this fall in Madison. He has said he discusses his views on Sept. 11 in the classroom.
In a written statement Thursday, Provost Patrick Farrell said the university would conduct a 10-day review of Barrett’s plans for the fall course and his past teaching performance. He said Barrett’s syllabus, reading list and past evaluations by supervisors and students would be examined.
“Mr. Barrett’s statements regarding the events of Sept. 11 have raised some legitimate concerns about the content and quality of instruction in his planned fall course,” Farrell said.
“Mr. Barrett is entitled to his own personal political views. But we also have an obligation to ensure that his course content is academically appropriate, of high quality, and that his personal views are not imposed on his students,” the statement says.
Word spreads on the Web
The announcement came as word of Barrett’s views spread through political Web sites. State Rep. Stephen Nass (R-Whitewater) was among a burst of critics calling for his dismissal.
Other Sept. 11 conspiracy theorists in academia include Steven Jones, a physicist from Brigham Young University who argues that the World Trade Center towers were brought down by controlled explosives, not just the impact of airplanes; James H. Fetzer, a retired philosophy professor from the University of Minnesota-Duluth who believes the U.S. military launched a missile into the Pentagon and shot down the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania; and David Ray Griffin, a retired professor from the Claremont School of Theology who sums up arguments for U.S. involvement in the attacks in two books, “The New Pearl Harbor” and “The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions.”
Barrett arranged for Griffin to speak at UW-Madison last year. Barrett also helped organize a conference in Chicago this month called “9/11: Revealing the Truth – Reclaiming Our Future.” In July, he and Fetzer are scheduled to speak about the Sept. 11 theories at a forum at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee.
“We’re catching on,” said Fetzer, who co-chairs the group 9/11 Scholars for Truth, which includes more than 50 members from academia, including Barrett. “Kevin Barrett has been instrumental on many fronts.”
Barrett has shared his views in letters to The Capital Times and The Chronicle of Higher Education and has discussed them on Wisconsin Public Radio.
But it wasn’t until he spoke on a conservative talk show hosted by Jessica McBride on WTMJ-AM (620) Wednesday night that Barrett prompted a public outcry in Wisconsin. He talked openly about his Sept. 11 beliefs and said he discussed them in the classroom.
‘Outlandish claims’
Nass released a statement calling on Chancellor John Wiley to fire Barrett immediately.
“The fact that Mr. Barrett uses his position at UW-Madison to add credibility to his outlandish claims is an unacceptable embarrassment to the people of Wisconsin and the UW System,” Nass said. “Chancellor Wiley must act immediately to end any professional relationship between Barrett and the UW. He needs to be fired.”
U.S. Rep. Mark Green (R-Wis.), who is running for governor, released a statement that said: “Not a dime of either taxpayer or tuition dollars should be going to Kevin Barrett so he can tell students that September 11 was a creation of the government, and that the most murdering terrorist organization in the world is a myth created by the CIA.”
But not everyone was outraged.
Mir Babar Basir, a recent graduate of UW-Madison who served as president of the Muslim Students Association, said he knew Barrett and agreed with his take on the attacks. He said Griffin drew hundreds of supportive observers when he spoke at the university.
“This is not just Kevin Barrett’s idea,” Basir said. “It’s legitimate to think that the U.S. government was involved.”
“When David Ray Griffin spoke, it was packed,” Basir added. “Madison is fairly liberal. It’s not surprising that a lot of people agreed with him.”
David Walsh, president of the UW System Board of Regents, said Barrett should be able to share his views in the classroom.
“Unless he’s yelling fire in a crowded theater, we need to be careful to protect his academic freedom,” Walsh said.
Post Modified: 06/30/06 13:40:29

4 years ago

Alex Jones’ hugely successful, energetic, and brilliantly named “9/11 and the Neo-Con Agenda” conference gets covered here by British wire service, Reuters. Reuters feeds every major news outlet in America, but, strange to say, the last time we checked Google News only Aljazeera, Alarab, and Tehran Times seem to have found this overflow event newsworthy. It’s enough to make you believe in conspiracies of silence. But of course that’s only a theory
yeah, it’s a conspiracy too when holocaust denier and creationist conferences only get limited coverage.
It’s amazing, toolbagman literally has no intelligence beyond what he reads on the internet.

4 years ago

4 years ago

Is it Joe? That is all I want to know.
Post Modified: 06/30/06 19:32:55

4 years ago

I mean hasn’t anybody else noticed the references to the crane, the constant references to Creationists?
Post Modified: 06/30/06 19:32:13

4 years ago

I’ve noted many different references.
Joe was full of shit. But I don’t know if it’s him or not.

4 years ago

He said when he quit gnn that he might come back under a different name.

4 years ago

i think joe was always of a more polite demeanour. canadian male nurses tend to be, eh.

4 years ago

I agree, but Joe was getting pretty upset about 911 speculation, so maybe he is living out a fantasy now.
Post Modified: 07/01/06 12:59:12

4 years ago

the constant references to Creationists
yeah, that really is strange.
Why would anyone compare the two?
It’s not like 9/11 TWOOF and Cweationism are intellectual equals or anything.
Joe was full of shit
Translation: He probably didn’t think there was a secret controlled demolision conspiracy from reading stuff on teh internets.
Link to BBC reporter saying that there were explosions ‘much much lower’ at the WTC complex—with Izzy and Senssy putting up a batshit argument that is crushed when you analyze what the reporter said and what happened going by precise times

4 years ago

Did you just say “Snicker.”?!?!?!? Holy shit you are dumb!

4 years ago

He is a real winner.

4 years ago

i bet he uses baby talk in bed.
and thinks it’s sexy

4 years ago

911 Hoboken Re-edit 59mins GoogleVideo
911 Eyewitness Website
Pwooooofffff and the Twoooof co-incide to gag the ‘hostile’ posters.
Boooooom, boooom, boooom,
You can hear the explosions and best believe that there was a mini-nuke in there.
Mini nuke + explosives + thermate = WTC Collapses
Post Modified: 07/02/06 09:59:04

4 years ago

For those who still question what Larry Silverstein meant when he said “pull it” when talking about the collapse of the WTC 7, Jeff from called demolition experts Controlled Demolition, Inc (CDI) and asked them what “pull it” means in demolition terms. This is what CDI told him:
Female receptionist: Good afternoon, Loizeaux Company.
Jeff: Um, sorry, do I — is this Controlled Demolitions?
CDI: Yes it is.
Jeff: Ok, I was wondering if there was someone I could talk to briefly — just ask a question I had?
CDI: Well what kind of question?
Jeff: Well I just wanted to know what a term meant in demolition terms.
CDI: Ok, what type of term?
Jeff: Well, if you were in the demolition business and you said the, the term “pull it,” I was wondering what exactly that would mean?
CDI: “Pull it”?
Jeff: Yeah.
CDI: Hmm? Hold on a minute.
Jeff: Thank you.
CDI: Sir?
Jeff: Yes?
CDI: “Pull it” is when they actually pull it down.
Jeff: Oh, well thank you very much for your time.
CDI: Ok.
Jeff: Bye.
CDI: Bye.
Post Modified: 07/02/06 12:31:48

4 years ago

With respect to rigging the towers to drop, James Fetzer, citing Jones, now corroborates Scott Forbes. Perhaps Forbes is their source too? “…during the two weeks before or prior to 9/11 there were abnormal security lapses in the twin towers, major sections of the buildings were closed down, the employees were sent home, the security apparatus was shut off and teams being described as engineers were sent in & out of the buildings, to have free access to all parts of the building, ostensibly to do re-cabling in the building, but it had never happened before and Steve estimates that as few as… 40 men making 10 trips apiece could have implanted enough thermate to bring about the explosions that we observed and all of those effects. … NIST admitted they found sulfur residues on the steel which they could not explain and… that would be a predictable effect of the use of thermate since it’s a combination of sulfur with themite, plus now Steve Jones has …reported in the last couple of weeks that he has in addition discovered residues of thermite on some of the steel…” Fetzer’s interview of Judy Wood
This next link pertains to the integrity of security at the WTC prior to 9/11. In January of ‘98 three crooks “…interrupted a currency delivery to a bank in the World Trade Center… handcuffed the guards and escaped with three bags of cash containing $1.6 million in international currency. … The suspects’ familiarity with the drop-off procedures and their ability to pass through security checkpoints indicated that the heist was “very possibly” an inside job, said Frank Fox of the Port Authority. FBI agents checked the building’s security cameras and found several pictures of the men — without masks — believed to be responsible for the robbery.” CNN reports Perhaps security was compromised, perhaps the firm providing it was corrupt and didn’t need to be?

4 years ago

I do enjoy a good mystery
KT: When you were working these two days, did you notice anything suspicious going on in or around the WTC?
SF: Well there were several guys in overalls, carrying building gear, toolboxes, etc inside the building. Remember there were no security locks on doors or security cameras, so access was free unless a door was locked by a manual key. Seeing so many ‘strangers’ who didn’t work at the WTC was unusual.
I’d make one other point at this juncture also, because of the power down backups of system were an absolute necessity and they would have been taken offsite for security. Because of the power outage all our systems backups had to be 100% valid and available in case of an emergency. These were taken offsite, like normal, for security.
KT: So the people you saw coming in and out of the building, did they have badges and what were their ethnic makeup, were they Arab?
SF: No ethnic consistency at all and I don’t remember any badges or labels of any sort.
KT: Where did you see all these strange workers? Was it just the floors you were working on that Saturday and Sunday, or also in the lobbies and elevators and what floors were you working on that Saturday and Sunday?
SF: I was working on the 97th floor and as I recall I saw guys in the main lobby, on the ground floor and in the elevator lobby on floor 76. This was on the Saturday.
Post Modified: 07/03/06 22:15:33

4 years ago

I’ve always felt that the evidence supporting the actual wire-up was weak, or more accurately, lacking. The evidence should’ve led us inside the buildings 5 years ago. There should be a plethora of eyewitness accounts as to what other frequent employees of the WTC witnessed in the weeks and perhaps months leading up to 9/11. In an interview in late 2004, Forbes said: “... after 9/11 my company, along with others, was in disaster recovery mode at a location in New Jersey. At that site were literally hundreds and hundreds of eyewitnesses to the events of 9/11. ... I’ve often wondered why U.S. authorities, like the New York police or FBI, did not interview all those witnesses available altogether in New Jersey.” GW blog interview with Forbes
The problem here is that we all understand why the govt hasn’t interviewed these people. But why hasn’t Fetzer’s group, or any of the others, turned over these stones to see what’s there? Dunno me

4 years ago

Representative Of Largest 9/11 Families Group Says Government Complicit In Attack
Paul Joseph Watson/Prison | July 8 2006
The representative of the largest group of 9/11 families says that the official version of events is a fallacy and that the NORAD stand down and evidence of incendiary devices used to bring down the towers amount to government complicity in the attacks – a conclusion shared by half of the 9/11 families he represents.
Doyle heads the Coalition of 9/11 Families and lost his own son Joey in the collapse of the twin towers.
“If you want to believe what they want to snow you under on like the 9/11 Commission – that’s a total fallacy,” said Doyle.
“The continuing cover-up is beyond belief,” Doyle told GCN radio host Alex Jones.
Doyle questioned why WTC steel that was withheld from NIST for examination for explosives was used instead to build a battleship.
“Isn’t it amazing how they got it out of this country within days,” said Doyle as he addressed the cover-up of the physical evidence from a crime scene.
Doyle said he had personally talked to six different individuals who were at the World Trade Center site and described incendiary devices before the collapse of the towers.
“It’s documented proof that tower 7 was not hit by a plane yet it goes up in flames then the owner of the place Larry Silverstein himself ordered it to be pulled at 4 o’clock that afternoon and all of a sudden it exploded straight down.”
“We have two planes fly into the towers and all of a sudden they get blown up within an hour and a half – that’s impossible,” said Doyle.
Doyle estimated that around half of the family members his organization represents think that there was government complicity in the attacks.
“It looks like there was a conspiracy behind 9/11 if you really look at all the facts – a lot of families now feel the same way.”
“Where was NORAD,” asked Doyle as he highlighted the implausible gap between the known hijacking times of Flight 93 and Flight 77 and their eventual destruction.
“It was called a step-down – don’t do anything – let it happen.”
“From everything I look at I’m sure there was a lot of complicity – in the least there had to be a lot of complicity – if you read all the facts there’s no way that nineteen hijackers carried out this mission,” Doyle told Jones.
Doyle also spoke out on establishment charities withholding large portions of donations from 9/11 families and how 9/11 whistleblowers have been punished meanwhile individuals who facilitated the attacks were rewarded.
Prison Planet
Post Modified: 07/07/06 21:44:57

4 years ago

Norway Strikes Again
by Kristin Solberg
July 6, 2006
Grateful regards to the cosmopolitan reprehensor at GNN for finding and posting translations of these powerful Nordic pieces, this one equally unofficial courtesy of “Eirick”. As decent as this article is, it is interesting to note that the Norwegian mainstream news portal that published it would not translate it for their English mirror site. – Ed.
- All the lies from the Bush administration is the main reason for all the conspiracy theories, says NRK-veteran Jahn Otto Johansen.
One of the most debated; why did WTC 7 collapse?
- This is not something that just could have happened, there are too many incidents. You can’t even conclude that the administration let it happen, you have to conclude they made it happen, says Michael Berger.
Strange. Suspicious. That’s how spokesman for 9/11 Truth feels about September 11th. And he has a lot of supporters, on both sides of the Atlantic. Here in Norway, Le Monde Diplomatique, wrote about the 9/11 conspiracy theories in their last monthly edition.
9/11 Truth is a voluntary organisation which “seeks answer on behalf of the families left behind and the American people, questions which deserve to be answered”. About 5000 people receive their news letters, and last month, 750 showed up at a conference held in Chicago. Due to limited resources, only the general manager gets paid.
- This is an important cause – a turn over for the USA – so we have to do something, says Berger when questioned why he dedicates so much time without pay.
From their point of view, 9/11 Truth and their supporters are fighting for independence, truth and the American Constitution, against corruption and lies served from both the political elite and private industry.
Others see them as lunatics who can’t handle the facts. They are conspiracy theorists.
- “September 11th could not only have been incompetence from the Government, it has to be more. We spend billions and trillions on our defence, and we can’t even prevent a plane from crashing into The Pentagon, more than 1 hour and 20 minutes after they were hijacked? The Pentagon, which is 10 minutes away from an Air Force Base?” asks Berger.
According to Berger, many Americans have unanswered questions on what happened before, during and after September 11th and who really arranged the attacks, even after the Commission presented their final report. The Commission did not ask the tough questions, he says.
- And by not doing that, there can only be one explanation; The Commission was there to cover up 9/11, not to investigate what happened.
In addition to an insufficient investigation and the following contradictory report from the Commission, the truth seekers have a lot of questions regarding 9/11.
Why didn’t the Government manage to prevent the attack, even after several warnings telling them that something was about to happen?
Why were none of the 4 airplanes interecepted by fighter jets?
Why was the Air Force busy with War Games that day?
Why were there unusual stock market trades on many of the affected companies prior to 9/11?
Why did the Twin Towers collapse?
And even more important; why did the 47 story tall WTC7 collapse, even though no airplane hit that building?
And there is a lot more that is suspicious, if you’re willing to find it. During our 1 hour call to Berger he talks about both actions and statements that contradict to the official explanation.
He first got suspcious 18 months after the attacks when he accidentaly found a site on the internet where they were talking about 9/11.
- First I thought they were mad. But in one of the posts I read about the unusual stock trades. It was just like someone knew before it happened. I investigated it and found it to be true. And from that point I started to go deeper and found more and more, says Berger.
Let’s concentrate on one important argument the conspiracy theorists mention again and again: How could the buildings collapse, and especially WTC7?
- Building 7 is the smoking gun here, says Berger and wonders why the building even collapsed and why they didnt investigate it.
Last year they published statements from 503 fireman and paramedics who were at work on 9/11. And those statements really turned on the heat for the 9/11 Truth-movement. Some of them mentioned things that suggest the buildings were taken down instead of collapsing.
Interviewer: How did you know the building was going to collapse?
Paramedic Daniel Rivera: That sound…
Interviewer: What sound? Did you see anything?
Rivera: This terrible sound, first I thought it was – you know when they pull a building when they put charges on each floor and you hear pop-pop-pop, it was just like that. When I heard that sound, thats when the building started to collapse.
Fireman Stephen Gregory says that he saw many flashes at the lower part of the building, far from the fire, just before the building started to collapse. The man next to him saw the same thing, according to Gregory.
- You know, when they take down a building by controlled demolition? That’s what it looked like, says Gregory.
The controversial Professor of physics, Steven E. Jones at Brigham Young University in Utah, is one of those who says he can prove that the Twin Towers did not collapse because of the impact and following fire. In his investigations, he claims to have found that the temperature in the melted steel from the basement of the buildings had to be more than 1500 degrees. These temperatures lasted for several weeks, and that is not possible based on fire from fuel only, says Jones. Jones’ explanation? Someone placed thermite explosives and controlled the collapse.
On both sides of the Atlantic there have been alternative explanations on what happened September 11th since day one. These explanations have led to serious doubts of the US Government’s official explanation. According to a poll from Zogby International in May 2006, 1200 people all over the USA were asked, the results must be devastating for the US Government:
42% say that the Commission covered up, or refused to investigate important evidence which could contradict the official explanation
45% say that there should be another investigation – and this time include the question whether the Bush Administration could have participated in the attacks
55% were not satisfied with the media coverage of the unanswered questions asked by the families left behind after 9/11
43% did not know that WTC7 also collapsed and 38% said that it should have been investigated
A similar poll was arranged in Germany 3 years ago, and the Germans were even more sceptical than the Americans. 19% – almost 1 of 5 – thought that the US Government could have been responsible for the 9/11 attacks.
The numbers above do not prove anything, of course. Maybe except the society’s insecurity and in despair searching for alternative explanations in catastrophic incidents. – There have been lots of conspiracy theories, says the commentator of foreign affairs and NRK-veteran, Jahn Otto Johansen. – When you are surprised by something, when you are not prepared and when something can be hard to explain, then you will have conspiracy theories.
History is full of them, and most of them are crazy. Did Neil Armstrong walk on the moon, or was it a fake video produced by Stanley Kubrick in the Nevada desert? Elvis is still alive. Who killed JFK? A poll from 1991, almost 4 decades after the assassination, show that 73% of Americans believe there was a conspiracy. And was it British intelligence that killed Princess Diana?
- Today we are very afraid and insecure about the future, that’s why many believe the most insane theories. For instance, the jews got out of the World Trade Center before they collapsed, which is pure nonsense. Just like the other conspiracy theories, like (...) that the US Government was behind September 11th. There is no supporting evidence for either of these , says Johansen.
The key word, says Johansen, is fear. When people are afraid, most of them don’t have a “intellectual immune system” good enough to resist the conspiracy theories.
- The problem is, says Johansen, that those who believe the conspiracy theories, hang on to them even after professional examination and documented rejection.
The reason why so many Americans believe that their Government was behind 9/11, according to the Zogby poll, is because of the Bush administrations bad credibility, Johansen thinks.
- It has something to do with the Bush administration – like Tony Blair – they have lied so many times about Afghanistan and Iraq, that’s why we have all the conspiracy theories.
Berger, on the other side, is fed up with being called a conspiracy theorist.
- The debate is focused on giving each other names. My answer to all those who see us as conspiracy theorists is: if you want a debate, lets focus on the facts.
Berger is also frustrated over some conspiracy theorists. Those who do not know enough and believe each and every explanation. They give the conspiracy theorists a bad reputation and make us look like lunatics, Berger says.
For Berger and the rest of the 9/11 Truth organisation, this is something they will not give up. They won’t settle down until they have the real truth.
And they want a new investigation, this time including the families left behind, the firemen and the regular men and women as commission members.
- If we don’t get to know the truth, we will end up with a fascist dictatorship run by private industry. We are not anti-Bush, we just feel the system is corrupt. They tell us what we need to know, in order to justify the war and restrictions of civil rights.
And Berger is worried about restrictions of civil rights. At the end of his call with, he says:
- It is getting real bad. next year we might not be able to have such a conversation. Thats why it is so important to present the truth.
Post Modified: 07/08/06 20:44:44

4 years ago

9/11 WTC Squibs
Post Modified: 07/10/06 23:16:02

4 years ago

page 30 will NOT be a milestone.
but page 29 will certainly be.
“I’ve often wondered why U.S. authorities, like the New York police or FBI, did not interview all those witnesses available altogether in New Jersey.”
good point, no?

4 years ago

that squib action video is brutal…the debate is over!

4 years ago

Yeah, for those that missed it, let’s put it up on this page,
9/11 WTC Squibs
btw, welcome to page 29.

4 years ago

and i quote:
Pure aluminum is easy to form but lacks mechanical strength. Melting aluminum with small amounts of other elements such as silicon, magnesium, copper, zinc, and nickel in various combinations increases the tensile strength without adding weight.
Aluminum differs from steel by oxidizing immediately in air, developing a thin film that seals the surface from further chemical or environmental reactions. Similar in crystalline structure to tin and gold, aluminum is very easy to form even when cold. Its softness in combination with its low melting temperature (aluminum: 660 degrees Celsius; silver: 961; iron: 1,535) allows it to be quickly formed into a multitude of shapes and thicknesses.
Scientists discovered early in aluminum’s history that it was very sonorous. When struck, a bar of aluminum produces a high musical ring like a crystal bell. The sound matches the musical notes A sharp and D flat.*
Aluminum is too reactive in its natural state to exist as a free metal like gold or silver, but like iron and tin, it is found as a compound. More than 270 different minerals contain aluminum, but the ore bauxite contains the highest concentration of aluminum. Alumina powder, a compound of aluminum and oxygen, is dissolved in molten cryolite in large carbon-lined pots. Electrical current is passed through the mixture. The oxygen reacts with the carbon, forming carbon dioxide, while the aluminum settles to the bottom and is siphoned off. The ability to combine aluminum with small amounts of other elements-silicon, magnesium, copper, zinc, and nickel-in various combinations, increases its strength and overall performance Aluminum develops a resilient natural oxide layer over time.
*Anodizing is an electrochemical process that accelerates this change in surface. Formed aluminum is first cleaned with acid. The object is immersed in an [Sulfuric?] acid bath through which an electrical current is passed to develop the anodic film on the metal’s surface. The acceptance of colored dyes is a byproduct of the process. The anodic surface is porous and accepts dyes easily. A salt solution bath is used to tighten the pores around the color making it part of the surface.
The various processes of corrosion are affected by several factors. Among these are the type of material selected for the application, the heat treatment of the material, the environment of the application, and the presence of any contaminants* in the material itself. The problem with stress corrosion cracking of the thicker components manufactured from older, [6000,-?] series aluminum alloys has been a pervasive hidden corrosion problem, causing unanticipated major expenses and substantial downtime for the US military. [Some relevant examples:]
Filiform corrosion: (Appearance- bi-product) High humidity around fasteners, skin joints or breaks in coating cause an electrolytic process. Fine, meandering, thread-like trenches that spread from the source. Similar to scale. Lifting of the coating.
Galvanic Corrosion : Corrosive condition that results from contact of different metals. Uniform damage, scale, surface fogging or tarnishing. Emission of mostly molecular hydrogen gas in a diffused form.
Stress Corrosion: Cracking Mechanical tensile stresses combined with chemical susceptibility Micro-macro-cracks located at shielded or concealed areas. Initially produces scale- type indications. Ultimately leads to cracking.
(FEMA), the authors write: “Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent inter granular melting, was readily visible in the near-surface microstructure. ... No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified. The rate of corrosion is also unknown.” [I contend this final statement is categorically false!]
*Physicists, Please See: “Cyclical Degradation Report”
More data for ordinary “TECHNO-GEEKS:”
Aluminum nearing its melting point, becomes “hot short” and crumbles easily.
As a pure metal, it is quite soft, and must be strengthened by alloying with Cu, Mg, Si or Mn before it can be used structurally.
Anhydrous AlCl3 is a compound which easily sublimates, showing that it is not ionic, and is partially hydrolyzed by water to release HCl gas. It cannot be formed by heating the hydrated form to drive off water. This only produces the oxide and HCl gas. It is now made commercially by heating aluminum oxide with carbon and chlorine. Aluminum should displace hydrogen from water because of its positive oxidation potential, but does not normally do so because of the protection by a
surface layer of oxide. This oxide has the same density as the metallic aluminum, so it does not crack or wrinkle when it is formed, a lucky thing. A little HCl or NaOH that dissolves the oxide will permit the evolution of hydrogen.
The thermite reaction, discovered by Goldschmidt, is also a displacement reaction, but here aluminum reduces iron. The reaction is Fe2O3 + 2Al ? 2Fe + Al2O3, which liberates a good deal of heat. The liquid metal produced is at about 2300°C, which is very hot. Powdered aluminum and rust in the approximate ratio of 1:3 are packed in a refractory crucible with a magnesium ribbon, or a powder of magnesium and barium peroxide, to ignite it. Either the red or black iron oxide can be used, giving “red Thermit” or “black Thermit.” A trade name for the powder is Thermit. The vigorous reaction makes liquid iron or steel, which flows out of a hole in the bottom of the crucible into the mold and can be used for welding. The stock to be welded is usually preheated with a gas flame playing through the mold. The metal produced is about half the weight of the original mixture. This reaction is also called aluminothermic, and can be used for reduction of other metals, such as nickel, manganese or chromium.
Closely related to alumina is the hydroxide, Al(OH)3, usually formed as a gelatinous precipitate when aluminum compounds are hydrolyzed in water. If water is driven out of this precipitate by heating, a light, foamy solid results called activated alumina that will absorb moisture and other things, and can be reactivated by heating. This hydroxide reacts with both acids and bases according to the formula H+ + AlO2- + H2O = Al(OH)3 = Al+++ + 3OH-. Adding an acid removes OH-, driving the reaction to the right, while adding a base removes H+, driving the reaction to the left. Since it can go either way, aluminum hydroxide is called amphoteric, and is an excellent example of the type.
Aluminum is not a very colorful element. It gives no coloration to the flame, and its compounds are relentlessly white.
In the U.S., electricity for aluminum reduction has been heavily subsidized to make the industry viable. A famous deposit in the United States was in Arkansas, and other deposits were in Alabama and Georgia. Although the U.S. produces about 7,500,000 metric tons of aluminum yearly, half primary and half secondary (recovered from scrap), all of the bauxite is now imported. Alumina can also be made from alunite, mentioned above and found in the western U.S., but this source is not used.
Aluminium flakes can be used as a pigment in paint. This makes an excellent anti-corrosion paint for iron and other metals.
All these uses contributed to a great increase in the use of aluminum even before the Second World War. Aluminium was the preferred structural material for aircraft after wood and fabric were superseded, and all sides in the war foresaw the need for increased aluminum capacity. The United States had a severe problem with bauxite supply that every means was taken to solve. New reduction plants were quickly
built, mostly with government money, and were then leased to private companies for operation. New producers, such as Kaiser Aluminum and Reynolds Aluminum, joined the established Aluminum Corporation of America (Alcoa) to operate the government plants and profit by the war economy, which they did most handsomely. The aluminum demand was met, and in 1943 metal was even released for civilian uses, showing how successful the program had been.

4 years ago

By Victor Thorn
NEW YORK CITY, N.Y.—On the morning of Sept. 11, 2005, New York City auxiliary fire lieutenant Paul Isaac Jr. asserted, yet again, that 9-11 was an inside job. “I know 9-11 was an inside job. The police know it’s an inside job; and the firemen know it too,” said Isaac.
The ramifications of this statement are immense: One of New York’s own firefighters says publicly that 9-11 couldn’t have been the work of Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda, but instead was planned, coordinated and executed by elements within our own government.
He also added, after pointing to throngs of police officers standing around us, that, “We all have to be very careful about how we handle it.”
Isaac reiterated what a 9-11 survivor told this journalist during our protest at Ground Zero on Sept. 11, 2005—that emergency radios were buzzing with information about bombs being detonated inside the World Trade Center towers.
Also, Isaac directly addressed a gag order that has been placed on firemen and police officers in New York.
“It’s amazing how many people are afraid to talk for fear of retaliation or losing their jobs,” said Isaac, regarding the FBI gag order placed on law enforcement and fire department officials, preventing them from openly talking about any inside knowledge of 9-11. There is more information related to Isaac circulating in on-line and print reports, so here again we are hearing first-hand evidence from individuals who were on the scene, such as live witness William Rodriguez, saying that the World Trade Center towers were brought down not by the airliner’s impact or the resulting jet fuel fires, but instead by a deliberately executed controlled demolition.
Tragically, due to heavy-handed pressure from officials at the city, state and federal levels, we are still not hearing the entire story.
Researcher Vincent Sammartino, who was also at the WTC “open grave site” on the afternoon of Sept. 11, 2005, wrote the following on the on-line news web site APFN: “I just got back from Ground Zero. People know the truth. Half of the police and firemen were coming up to us and telling us that they know that 9-11 was an inside job. They were told not to talk about it. But they were supporting what we were doing. I had tears in my eyes.”
American Free Press
Post Modified: 07/11/06 22:40:12

4 years ago

A Note from Professor Steve Jones
Because some of you have asked what Professor Jones is up to, I am posting a recent email message which he sent to several people. Rest assured, Professor Jones is working hard to research what happened on 9/11.
Though it’s very late, I’d like to share a few thoughts before I retire.
1. Evidently there are some who go to considerable lenghts to promote the notion that there can never be “proof” of an inside job on 9/11 — whether that happened or not as an inside job. So, we might as well abandon the effort, and let it go.
Others (I have read) have pointed out this argument was used effectively to stymie further investigation of the JFK assassination. I wonder how many “9/11 truthers” are buying into such a discouraging philosophy?
2. Some OTOH raise the “preponderance of evidence” argument — that will stand in a court of law or impeachment, if we can ever get to such a trial. This approach may work, given enough time and the opportunity for a trial in an objective court.
3. As a third altermative, I’m seeking solid evidences that approach scientific proof. And I see three possible avenues here:
A. The use of thermite in arson has been proven beyond reasonable doubt in many cases already: Fire investigators have developed techniques to pin down the use of thermite, as I discussed in my LA talk. The signature residues of thermite are so distinctive — when one uses EDS, XRF and other methods — that it is indeed possible to prove arson by thermite. This gives me hope that this approach can be effectively used to prove thermite use on 9/11. (And I deeply appreciate your help in this research effort!)
Note also that while I’m leaning now to the use of thermite-containing sol-gels, it is possible that cylinders containing thermite as you have found patents for could have [also] been used. Finding such a cylinder would indeed be a dramatic proof in itself, I believe.
B. Showing that the Towers and/or WTC 7 would not have collapsed so rapidly or in the way they did, if fires alone had initiated collapse.
Here the published works of Prof. Kuttler and Gordon Ross (and others) are hopeful — in that their line of reasoning and calculations could very well lead to a conclusion that deliberate actions would have been required to bring the buildings down in the WAY THEY WERE OBSERVED TO COLLAPSE.
C. Confession by an insider, particularly a high-up insider with detailed insider information which could be checked, would end the debate also.
D. Another 9/11-type “catalyzing event” may be staged by perpetrators, and with the number of people aware of the likelihood of such staged events and WATCHING, it is likely that the data will be gathered quickly and not effectively destroyed this next time. (I’m remembering here the way the steel was shipped to Asia for recycling from the 9/11 events, for example) . In this way, the perps would be stopped — by observant citizens working together.
So no, I do not accept the defeatist arguments that the debate over 9/11 will never end. Indeed, I am inclined to believe, because of the progress lately in the areas delineated above — that the end of the debate will come rather soon. I believe this will happen before the 2008 elections, if we keep pressing forward as we have in recent months, in the “9/11 Truth Movement.”
My desire here is to encourage you to keep up the investigative and highly supportive work that you have done, for which I offer my deepest appreciation.
Best wishes and regards,
Steven E. Jones”

4 years ago

4 years ago

Click Here for Conspiracy
By Nancy Jo Sales Vanity Fair August 2006
With $6,000 and a laptop computer, three kids from upstate New York made a documentary about 9/11 that spread across the Internet and threw millions for a loop.
Nine-eleven conspiracy theories have been circulating for years, producing millions of Web links, scores of books, and a nationwide collection of doubters known as the “9/11 Truth” movement.
In 2005 the State Department responded by posting some “clues” to “identifying misinformation” on their Web site. “Does the story claim that vast, powerful, evil forces are secretly manipulating events?” it asks. “If so, this fits the profile of a conspiracy theory. Conspiracy theories are rarely true, even though they have great appeal and are often widely believed. In reality, events usually have much less exciting explanations.”
One of the first American officials to publicly acknowledge conspiracy theories in connection with 9/11 was President George Bush, who on November 10, 2001, in a speech to the General Assembly of the United Nations, said, “Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September 11.”
Yet according to a May 2006 Zogby poll, 42 percent of Americans now believe that the U.S. government and the 9/11 commission “concealed or refused to investigate critical evidence that contradicts their official explanation of the September 11th attacks,” and that “there has been a cover-up.”
For those who can’t find information about the alleged cover-up on the nightly news, there is Loose Change, a documentary about 9/11 conspiracy theories which just might be the first Internet blockbuster. Since it appeared on the Web in April 2005, the 80-minute film has been climbing up and down Google Video’s “Top 100,” rising to No. 1 this May, with at least 10 million viewings.
“We beat the woman getting punched in the face,” says its director, 22-year-old Dylan Avery, from Oneonta, New York (population 13,000), referring to an oft watched video.
“We beat the guy who beats his computer with his keyboard,” says his producer, 23-year-old Korey Rowe, also from Oneonta and an army specialist who served in Afghanistan and Iraq.
“We beat the [Stephen] Colbert speech,” says Jason Bermas, 26, their researcher. “The viral videos, we dominate them.”
Told in MTV-style jump cuts, illustrated by high-end graphics, and scored with hip music written by a few of their friends, Loose Change is an investigation into the official story of 9/11 as told by The 9/11 Commission Report, asking a number of highly controversial questions:
What, for example, were the explosions some witnesses heard after the towers were hit by planes? Why was the site of the collapse not treated as a crime scene, and why was the debris shipped off as waste to several foreign countries?
Why were the black boxes from American Airlines Flight 11 and United Airlines Flight 175 never found, when the passport of one of Flight 11’s alleged hijackers, Satam Al Suqami, turned up unscathed a few blocks from the World Trade Center?
How did American Airlines Flight 77, which crashed into the Pentagon, disappear into a 20-foot hole, leaving no trace of its 124-foot wingspan on the building? And what’s with all the forewarnings that the government ignored?
For the past three months, 20,000 people a day have been clicking on to the official Loose Change Web site,; more than 50,000 have placed orders for the DVD since its release. (“But we’re not really making any money,” says Rowe, “because we gave away like 100,000 copies for free.”) Millions more have been downloading the film from a growing number of unaffiliated sites.
It’s safe to say that, if it were a theatrical release, Loose Change would be one of the most popular—and incendiary—movies in the country right now. Avery and Rowe say they are talking to several major movie studios about releasing a third and “final cut” of the film on September 11, 2006. They wonder if the government may be watching, too. “I hope so,” says Avery.
In the opening credits of Loose Change, we hear Mick O’Regan, a host on Australian radio, asking the late Hunter S. Thompson, in a 2002 interview, “How would you rate the American media in their coverage of the events of the attack last September?”
“Well let’s see, uh, ‘shamefully’ is a word that comes to mind,” says the father of gonzo journalism. “I’ve spent enough time, well, on the inside of the White House and political campaigns, and I’ve known enough of the people who do these things, to know that the public version of the news or whatever event is never really what happened.”
Most of what we see on-screen during Loose Change are actually news reports from mainstream-media outlets like CBS News, Newsweek, CNN, the Associated Press, even Fox News—the “loose change” which Avery adds up into a conspiracy theory. “Some people accuse me of like, Oh, you’re taking quotes out of context,” he says. “I’m giving you the article and the date. Go look it up yourself.”
Loose Change runs clips from almost every major TV news organization on that horrible day, wherein we see footage of people escaping the towers, firemen, and reporters who talk of hearing explosions after the planes hit; for some this raises questions of whether there were pre-set bombs going off in the buildings. Here’s Bryant Gumbel on CBS: “We understand there has been a secondary explosion on Tower One … “
Freeze-frame images of the towers going down show what some say appear to be demolition “squibs,” or horizontal plumes of smoke and debris being ejected during the collapse, also suggesting explosions.
Loose Change also delves into the question of why the United States’ elaborate air-defense system failed to thwart the September 11 attacks. The 9/11 Commission Report says “there was no one to blame.” The film points to a 20-page instruction from June 1, 2001, issued by the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff which reassigned the authority for aircraft interceptions and shoot-downs to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.
Titled “Aircraft Piracy (Hijacking) and Destruction of Derelict Airborne Objects,” the instruction states that henceforth “the NMCC [National Military Command Center] will … forward requests for DOD assistance to the Secretary of Defense for approval.” Neither the president nor the vice president is mentioned in the new directive as being part of the chain of command. By military protocol, the authority belonged to Rumsfeld, who later claimed he was “out of the loop.”
‘Are you sort of suggesting that [9/11] worked in the favor of the Bush administration?,” Mick O’Regan asks Hunter S. Thompson in Loose Change.
“Oh, absolutely. Absolutely,” Thompson says. “You sort of wonder when something happens like this, well, who stands to benefit? Who had the opportunity and the motive?”
The film’s answer to this is the September 2000 report from the Project for the New American Century, a neoconservative think tank whose members include Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Jeb Bush, and Paul Wolfowitz. Titled “Rebuilding America’s Defenses,” it envisions a future of burgeoning defense spending and the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. “The process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event—like a new Pearl Harbor,” Avery reads from the report in voice-over.
It’s a long leap from all this, however, to claiming, “The government did it.” There is no conclusive evidence in Loose Change of U.S. government involvement in 9/11. The film relies too heavily on already published reports, some of which have been discredited. For example, the segment on United Flight 93 cites an early story from a Cincinnati ABC News affiliate, WCPO, on the plane’s safe landing at a Cleveland airport on the morning of September 11. WCPO later retracted the story.
For the final cut of Loose Change, Avery says, “We’re tracking down potential eyewitnesses to the landing of Flight 93 in Cleveland.” He also says the third edition of the film will include more on-screen interviews; the first version had only one, with Marcel Bernard, the chief flight instructor at Freeway Airport, in Bowie, Maryland. Bernard recalls that, in early August 2001, Hani Hanjour, one of the alleged hijackers of American Airlines Flight 77, had trouble controlling and landing a single-engine Cessna 172 when he did test runs. “Average or below-average piloting skills,” Bernard says.
And yet, according to the official version of events, if Hani Hanjour had been the pilot he would have had to execute a perfect 330-degree turn at 530 miles per hour, descending 7,000 feet in two and a half minutes, in order to crash Flight 77, a Boeing 757, into the Pentagon.
“[Flight 77] could not possibly have flown at those speeds which they said it did without going into a high-speed stall,” Russ Wittenburg, a former commercial and air-force pilot, is quoted saying in Loose Change. The film also makes much of the visual similarities between the hole left in the west wing of the Pentagon and damage to buildings done by cruise missiles.
On May 16, the Department of Justice released two Pentagon videotapes of the crash of Flight 77 after a Freedom of Information Act request by Judicial Watch, a conservative government watchdog. “Finally, we hope that this video will put to rest the conspiracy theories involving American Airlines Flight 77,” said Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton. The video “shows the nose cone of the plane clearly entering the picture,” said Fox News.
You can decide for yourself by watching the video at
The Pentagon crash, the collapse of the World Trade Center, the crash of Flight 93—almost every aspect of what happened on 9/11 but the sheer horror of it—have become the subject of debate the world over. Yet in America, questioners of the government’s official story are often depicted as harmless loonies. (In a piece in The New York Times in June, the 9/11 Truthers were said to include “professors, chain-saw operators … and a long-haired fellow named Hummux … who, on and off, lived in a cave for 15 years.”)
In 2002, Italy awarded its highest literary prize, the Naples Prize, to The War on Freedom: How and Why America Was Attacked, September 11, 2001, a book by British writer Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed that claims the U.S. government was complicit in the attacks. The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9/11, by David Ray Griffin, a professor at the Claremont School of Theology, in California, has become the leading book on 9/11 conspiracy theories in this country, selling more than 100,000 copies and popularizing among 9/11 Truth activists the expressions “MIHOP” and “LIHOP“—for the government “made it happen on purpose” or “let it happen on purpose.”
But go down the wormhole of 9/11 conspiracies and you will find Loose Change detractors even among 9/11 Truthers, one of whom recently called the film a “very fine piece of CIA disinformation.”
“That’s ridiculous,” Avery says. “The idea that three kids from a hick town in upstate New York are part of a C.I.A. disinformation campaign would just show how desperate our government is.”
There’s a blog dedicated to debunking his film (, and detractors will point you to a widely read Popular Mechanics cover piece from 2005 entitled “9/11, Debunking the Myth,” which tackles many of the questions raised in the film. (Conspiracy buffs claim that the article’s lead researcher, Benjamin Chertoff, is a cousin of Department of Homeland Security secretary Michael Chertoff. Benjamin Chertoff could not be reached for comment.)
Avery and Rowe have also received a letter threatening a lawsuit by Gedeon and Jules Naudet, whose footage from the morning of the attack on the Twin Towers was used without permission in Loose Change. Avery’s lawyer is arguing that it’s permissible under “fair use.” (Full disclosure: The editor of this magazine was an executive producer on the Naudet brothers’ CBS special, 9/11.)
Certainly, few can accept the claim on the Loose Change DVD box that says, “What you will see inside will prove without a shadow of a doubt that everything you know about 9/11 is a complete fabrication.” One thing seems sure: Loose Change has struck a nerve. “Love us or hate us, we’ve done the movement a favor,” Avery says. “We’ve gotten 9/11 truth out there.”
Undoubtedly what has put Loose Change ahead of the pack of 9/11 conspiracy fare is that it’s a pretty watchable movie—especially considering it cost $2,000 and was made on Avery’s Compaq Presario laptop. “I saved money serving ice cream at Friendly’s,” Avery says. He never attended college himself and was rejected from Purchase Film College twice.
Loose Change: 2nd Edition (which has additional footage Avery bought on eBay) cost about $6,000 to make, money he saved while working at a Red Lobster and a Starbucks in Silver Springs, Maryland, where he moved in 2004 to “get out of Oneonta.” In 2005 he moved back to his hometown.
And now Avery, a South Park–watching, video-game-writing, self-described “nerd,” has become an Internet folk hero—at least for many young people, for whom 9/11 is the defining news event of their lives. “This is our generation’s Kennedy assassination,” says Rowe.
Consider another Zogby poll from August 2004, which found that 63 percent of New Yorkers under 30 believe some U.S. leaders “knew in advance that attacks were planned on or around September 11, 2001, and that they consciously failed to act.” For young people like these, coming of age at a time when 9/11 is being used to justify war, the slashing of civil liberties, domestic spying, and torture, Avery is a new sort of yippie, doing something outrageous in the face of power, making him the subject of boy worship and girl crushes.
“You’re an amazing man,” a young woman named “Kaella” recently wrote on his MySpace page, where Avery has over 2,600 “friends.” “More people should see this documentary. I’m spreading the word.”
In February, after watching Loose Change, Samantha Woodhouse, 21, quit paramedic school in Corning, New York, to be near Avery. “She tracked me down,” Avery says with a shrug. Now she’s his girlfriend and his secretary too.
“Awesome work, man,” wrote “James,” another of Avery’s MySpace fans. “I’ve shown the 2nd edition to everyone I know and it’s opening some eyes, even of my parents. Remember, the truth will set us free.”
“You’re my hero,” wrote “Ali.”
After Mike Malloy of Air America talked up the movie on-air last year, Avery, Rowe, and Bermas were off on a tour of college campuses, including Princeton, SUNY Binghamton, and the University of Arizona. “We went and screwed some people’s minds up there,” Rowe says.
Lefty radio stations like KPFK, in Los Angeles, and WBAI, in New York, find they get such positive responses when they do a program on the film they’re now using it during fund-raising drives. “Every time we offer [the film as a pledge gift] it generates some excitement throughout the city,” said WBAI program director Bernard White during a May interview with Avery, Rowe, and Bermas.
‘It’s weird,” Avery told me over Memorial Day weekend. “It’s all been so weird.” He was standing in the field behind the dilapidated house he shares with Rowe, Bermas, and Woodhouse. They were having a party, which they called Louderfest, for their film company, Louder than Words. There was a barbecue going; a jazz band of local young guys was playing. About 40 kids were milling around, smoking and drinking, some wearing black “Investigate 9/11” T-shirts.
“I was supposed to be making a fictional story about me and my friends discovering that 9/11 was an inside job, and doing something about it,” he said, “and basically that happened in real life.”
When he started writing this film, also called Loose Change, he was 18. “I started researching 9/11 and I found an article on the World Trade Center—someone had posted a picture of a controlled demolition and then a picture of the World Trade Center collapsing. And I was like, Wow, O.K. And then you find one article and that article links to 10 others, and before you know it you’re up until six in the morning. It’s crazy, the information takes over.”
He started relaying the information to his childhood friend Rowe, who was stationed in Afghanistan with the 101st Airborne Division, 187th Infantry. (“I didn’t believe it at first,” Rowe later told me. “I was like, things are wrong, but they’re not that wrong.”)
“It wasn’t supposed to be true,” Avery said. “And then I started realizing that, you know, we were lied to. And then it was: Well, do I keep making this a fictional film, or do I focus on the real thing and write about what really happened? And that’s where I went with it.”
He said he always knew he wanted to be a director. In 2002 he met Sopranos star James Gandolfini at the opening party for Vines, a restaurant in Oneonta that Gandolfini had helped finance.
“He told me if I want to be a successful director I have to say something to the entire world. I have to have a message,” Avery said. “I think that’s one of the reasons our movie’s successful, because it’s a movie about something that fucking matters. Even if you disagree with it you still walk out thinking back to that day and at least questioning something.
“You have to be a skeptic,” he said. “You can’t believe anything someone tells you just because they told you to. Especially your government, and especially your media—the two institutions that are put there to control you. And you’re going to tell me you’re going to take their word for everything? I don’t think so.”
I asked him what he thought was going to happen with the 9/11 issue. He paused for a moment.
“Second American revolution,” he said. “I really think there’s going to be anger. There’s going to be a lot of anger. I think a lot of people are really pissed off and I think that the people that aren’t pissed off are going to be even more pissed off than the people that already are. Because when it becomes irrefutable public record that 9/11 was done by our government the shit is gonna hit the fan. People are going to be upset. You can’t stop it. People say, Aw, we need a peaceful revolution. We need to peacefully change things. Trust me, that’s a great idea—I’m all for it. But Americans are violent, especially when they’ve been lied to, especially over something like this. So much has been lost because of 9/11—I mean, families have been shattered. There’s so much pain. So many people have just got—fucked. It’s the only way to put it.”
Some of the kids were lighting a bonfire. He went off to watch it.
Nancy Jo Sales is a Vanity Fair contributing editor.
Post Modified: 07/17/06 22:16:08

4 years ago

Exclusive Report: Did Military Exercises Facilitate the 9/11 Pentagon Attack?
By Matthew Everett
July 2006
Profuse thanks to astute 9/11 researcher and contributor Matthew Everett for allowing us to debut his highly thought-provoking study of the many military mindgames preceding 9/11. Not only do these well-documented attack rehearsals belie huge swaths of the official story and the 9/11 Commission’s investigative zeal, their similar protocols offer a suggestive way to re-explore air defense dysfunction on the day itself. – Ed.
Since 9/11, numerous authors and researchers have drawn attention to training exercises being conducted or prepared for by the U.S. military and other government agencies at the time of the September 11 attacks. With names like Vigilant Guardian, Global Guardian, Timely Alert II, and Tripod, the question has arisen as to what connection these drills might have had with real-world events that morning.[1]
Attention has also been drawn to exercises held prior to 9/11, often bearing an uncanny resemblance to the actual attacks. For example, soon after 9/11 the New Yorker reported: “During the last several years, the government regularly planned for and simulated terrorist attacks, including scenarios that involved multiple-plane hijackings.”[2] USA Today reported: “In the two years before the Sept. 11 attacks, the North American Aerospace Defense Command conducted exercises simulating … hijacked airliners used as weapons to crash into targets and cause mass casualties. One of the imagined targets was the World Trade Center.”[3]
As I will show in this essay, exercises also took place that bore a chilling resemblance to the attack on the Pentagon. I will look at evidence suggesting that the Pentagon actually scheduled another such training exercise for the morning of 9/11. I will end by briefly examining the possible implications of these exercises and considering whether they might have helped facilitate the attack on the Pentagon.
After 9/11, members of the Bush administration claimed that no one had previously envisioned the kinds of attacks that occurred that day. For example, Condoleezza Rice said: “I don’t think anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center, take another one and slam it into the Pentagon; that they would try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile.”[4] However, these claims were totally untrue. Besides the exercise involving the simulated crashing of a plane into the WTC, there were at least three separate exercises in the 12 months prior to 9/11 based around a plane hitting the Pentagon.
The first of these occurred in late October 2000. In the Office of the Secretary of Defense’s conference room, military planners held the Pentagon Mass Casualty Exercise, which was based around a passenger aircraft crashing into the Pentagon, with 341 victims. The exercise was first described in a military newspaper in a report that the British Daily Mirror later said, “reads like an account of what actually happened” on 9/11.[5]
The next such exercise occurred in May 2001. As U.S. Medicine later reported, the Department of Defense’s response to the 9/11 attacks “was aided by the fact that department medical personnel had carried out a simulation exercise in May in which a hijacked 757 airliner crashed into the Pentagon.”[6] The DiLorenzo Tricare Health Clinic and the Air Force Flight Medicine Clinic, both located within the Pentagon, participated. Doctors James Geiling and John Baxter later said this exercise prepared them well to respond to the Pentagon attack on 9/11.[7]
Presumably referring to the two exercises described above, Lieutenant Colonel John Felicio, the deputy commander for administration of the DiLorenzo Tricare Health Clinic, said: “The saving grace to our efforts [on 9/11] was the two MASCAL exercises we previously had conducted with the clinic leadership and staff. You know it was kind of eerie. The scenario we had for these MASCALS was very similar to what actually happened. Our scenario for both MASCALS was a plane flying into the Pentagon courtyard.”[8]
The third exercise occurred in August 2001, just one month before 9/11. This was another mass casualty exercise held at the Pentagon, involving an evacuation of the building. According to General Lance Lord, Air Force Space Command commander, “the scenario for that exercise included a plane hitting the building.”[9]
We can see that Pentagon training exercises prior to 9/11 routinely involved the simulated crashing of an aircraft into the building. But might another such exercise have been scheduled for the morning of 9/11? There are various pieces of evidence indicating this may have been the case. Although the existence of such an exercise has never been stated explicitly, this might be because the exercise was declared classified. In fact, supposedly due to the national emergency declared by President Bush in response to the 9/11 attacks, then Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz issued a memo to senior DoD officials in October 2001, requesting a particularly high level of secrecy. He urged that “Defense Department employees, as well as persons in other organizations that support DoD, exercise great caution in discussing information related to DoD work, regardless of their duties. Do not conduct any work-related conversations in common areas, public places, while commuting, or over unsecured electronic circuits. Classified information may be discussed only in authorized spaces and with persons having a specific need to know and the proper security clearance. Unclassified information may likewise require protection because it can often be compiled to reveal sensitive conclusions. Much of the information we use to conduct DoD’s operations must be withheld from public release because of its sensitivity. If in doubt, do not release or discuss official information except with other DoD personnel.”[10]
Despite the secrecy, the combination of evidence I summarize below suggests a training exercise on 9/11, based around an aircraft crashing into the Pentagon:
i) Captain Charles Leidig, Jr. had assumed duties as the deputy for command center operations in the J3 Directorate of the Joint Staff just two months before 9/11. In August 2001, he qualified to stand watch as the deputy director for operations in the National Military Command Center (NMCC), which is located within the Pentagon. The day before 9/11, Brigadier General W. Montague Winfield, the deputy director for operations in the NMCC, requested that Leidig stand a portion of his duty on September 11. Thus, between 8:30 a.m. and roughly 10:30 a.m. that day (i.e. for almost the entire duration of the attacks) a stand-in officer was in charge of convening a Significant Event Conference (subsequently upgraded to an Air Threat Conference) in response to the attacks.[11] No further explanation has been given as to why or how this situation arose. But might the reason (or at least the excuse given) have been that Leidig needed to gain experience as deputy director for operations by assuming this role during a training exercise?
ii) The accounts of some Pentagon medical staff suggest they were preparing for a MASCAL (mass casualty) exercise the morning of September 11. For example, Sergeant Matthew Rosenberg, a medic at the Pentagon’s DiLorenzo Tricare Health Clinic, recounts: “We had virtually completed our MASCAL plan. … Believe it or not, the day prior to the incident, I was just on the phone with the FBI, and we were talking ‘so who has command should this happen, who has the medical jurisdiction, who does this, who does that,’ and we talked about it and talked about it, and he helped me out a lot. And then the next day, during the incident, I actually found him. He was out there on the incident that day.”[12] According to Major Lorie A. Brown, chief nurse of the DiLorenzo Tricare Health Clinic, the morning of 9/11, “We actually had our MASCAL equipment out of the storage areas because we were doing an inventory. So there were many pieces that just fell into place and worked so well on that day. It was just fortuitous. It was just amazing that way that things kind of happened the way they did.”[13]
As I have described above, three previous Pentagon exercises incorporated a simulated plane crashing into the place. And early in the morning of 9/11, Matthew Rosenberg was reportedly “down on Corridor 8” of the Pentagon, “grateful for an uninterrupted hour in which he could study a new medical emergency disaster plan based on the unlikely scenario of an airplane crashing into the place.”[14] Might he have been studying in preparation for an exercise taking place later that day?
iii) At least two army bases near the Pentagon were conducting training the morning of 9/11 based around terrorist attacks or plane crashes. At Fort Belvoir, about 12 miles south of the Pentagon, they were running a “garrison control exercise,” which aimed “to test the security at the base in case of a terrorist attack.”[15] At the Education Center at Fort Myer, an army base 1.5 miles northwest of the Pentagon, firefighters were attending what has been described as an “aircraft crash refresher class” and a “week-long class on air field fire fighting.”[16]
According to Major Don Arias, NORAD’s public affairs officer, “it’s common practice, when we have exercises, to get as much bang for the buck as we can. So sometimes we’ll have different organizations participating in the same exercise for different reasons.”[17] Might the antiterrorist exercise at Fort Belvoir have been scheduled as part of a larger exercise at the nearby Pentagon, and might the “aircraft crash refresher class” at Fort Myer have been scheduled as part of an exercise involving an aircraft crashing into the Pentagon? After all, the Fort Myer Fire Department is responsible for operating the fire station at the Pentagon heliport, just 150 feet from where the building was hit on 9/11.[18]
What is the significance of these training exercises? Is it just coincidence that at least three exercises were held in the year before 9/11, based around the scenario of a plane crashing into the Pentagon? If another aircraft-into-Pentagon exercise was scheduled for 9/11, is this just another even bigger coincidence?
Several writers have suggested a more sinister role played by training exercises that mirror real-world events. They believe such exercises happening at the same time, or prior to an attack, can indicate that a criminal group within the government and military are responsible. According to author Webster Tarpley: “Staff exercises or command exercises are perfect for a rogue network which is forced to conduct its operations using the same communications and computer systems used by other officers who are not necessarily party to the illegal operation, coup or provocation as it may be. A putschist officer [i.e. a rogue officer] may be working at a console next to another officer who is not in on the coup, and who might indeed oppose it if he knew about it. The putschist’s behavior is suspicious: what the hell is he doing? The loyal officer looks over and asks the putschist about it. The putschist cites a staff maneuver for which he is preparing. The loyal officer concludes that the putschist’s activities are part of an officially sanctioned drill, and his suspicions are allayed. The putschist may even explain that participation in the staff exercise requires a special security clearance which the loyal officer does not have. The conversation ends, and the putschist can go on with his treasonous work.”[19]
Paul Joseph Watson and Alex Jones have elaborated: “The exercise fulfils several different goals. It acts as a cover for the small compartmentalized government terrorists to carry out their operation without the larger security services becoming aware of what they’re doing, and, more importantly, if they get caught during the attack or after with any incriminating evidence they can just claim that they were just taking part in the exercise.”[20]
Clearly, the plane crash drills at the Pentagon, and the possibility of another such drill having been scheduled for 9/11, raise serious concerns. Considering their similarity to the actual attack, the question of whether they fulfilled the kind of malicious and duplicitous purpose described above needs looking into. Yet the 9/11 Commission Report makes no mention of the three pre-9/11 Pentagon exercises, and fails to consider the possibility of a similar exercise occurring on September 11. This is additional proof that, five years after the event, we are yet to have a proper investigation into the attacks of 9/11.

4 years ago

Val McClatchey Photo: More Smoking Guns, or Total Fraud?

Valencia McClatchey, a real estate agent, who lives almost 2 miles east from the Shanksville crash scene, is the person who took the famous photo of the mushroom cloud rising above a red barn that was supposedly from Flight 93 crashing down in Shanksville. Her photo, which she has called “End of Serenity,” has been cheered by a lot of 9/11 researchers, including myself, who have argued that her photo proves that the crash of Flight 93 is fake because the smoke plume in her photo looks more like the plume coming from an ordnance blast because of its grey color rather than from a plane crash since smoke from jet fuel fires are almost black in color.
Post Modified: 07/20/06 08:29:21

4 years ago

(reposted from internet sources)
Astute observers of history are aware that for every notable event there will be at least one, usually several wild conspiracy theories which spring up around it.
“Mahatma Ghandi’s ghost throttled Hendrix”
“Saddam Hussein was breeding an army of genetically modified Yeti”.
“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 it’s 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 unaware by the attacks, had no hand in organizing them, and actually would have stopped them if it had been able to.
Blindly ignoring the stand down of the US air-force, the insider trading on airline stocks – which remains uninvestigated, the complicit behaviour 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.
The huge difficulties with such a stupid story force them to invent even more stupid stories to distract from its core silliness, and thus it has escalated into a mythic fantasy of truly gargantuan proportions.
It’s difficult to apply rational analysis to such unmitigated stupidity, but that is the task which I take on in this article. However, it should be noted that one of the curious characteristics of conspiracy theorists is that they effortlessly change their so called evidence in response to each aspect which is debunked. As soon as one delusion is unmasked, they simply invent another to replace it, and deny that the first ever existed.
Eventually, when they have turned full circle through this endlessly changing fantasy fog, they then re-invent the original delusion and deny that you ever debunked it, thus beginning the circle once more. This technique is known as “the fruit loop” and saves the conspiracy theorist from ever having to see any of their ideas through to their (il)logical conclusions.
According to the practitioners of the fruit loop, 19 Arabs took over the 4 planes by subduing the passengers and crew through the use of guns, knives ,box cutters and gas, and then used electronic guidance systems which they had smuggled on board to fly the planes to their targets.
The suspension of disbelief required for this outrageous concoction is only for the hard core conspiracy theorist.
For a start, they conveniently skip over the awkward fact that there weren’t any Arabs on the planes.
If there were, one must speculate that they somehow got on board without being filmed by any of the security cameras and without being registered on the passenger lists.
But the curly question of how they are supposed to have got on board is all too mundane for the exciting world of the conspiracy theorist.
With vague mumblings that they must have been using false ID ( but never specifying which IDs they are alleged to have used, or how these were traced to their real identities), they quickly bypass this problem, to relate exciting and sinister tales about how some of the fictitious fiends were actually searched before boarding because they looked suspicious.
However, as inevitably happens with any web of lies, this simply paints them into an even more difficult corner. How are they supposed to have got on board with all that stuff if they were searched ? And if they used gas in a confined space, they would have been affected themselves unless they also had masks in their luggage.
“Excuse me sir, why do you have a box cutter, a gun, a container of gas, a gas mask and an electronic guidance unit in your luggage?”
“A present for your grandmother? Very well sir, on you get.”
“Very strange”, thinks the security officer. “That’s the fourth Arabic man without an Arabic name who just got on board with a knife, gun or box cutter and gas mask. And why does that security camera keep flicking off every time one these characters shows up? Must be one of those days I guess…”
Asking any of these basic questions to a conspiracy theorist is likely to cause a sudden leap to the claim that we know that they were on board because they left a credit card trail for the tickets they had purchased and cars they had rented. So if they used credit cards that identified them, how does that reconcile with the claim that they used false IDs to get on to the plane?
But by this time, the fruit loop is in full swing, as the conspiracy theorist tries to stay one jump ahead of this annoying and awkward rational analysis. They will point to the fact that the hijackers passports were allegedly found at the crash scenes. “So there!” they exalt triumphantly, their fanatical faces lighting up with that deranged look of one who has just a revelation of questionable sanity.
Hmm? So they got on board with false IDs but took their real passports with them? However, by this time the fruit loop has been completely circumnavigated, and the conspiracy theorist exclaims impatiently “Who said anything about false IDs? We know what seats they were sitting in! Their presence is well documented!” And so the whole loop starts again.
“Well, why aren’t they on the passenger lists?”
“You numbskull ! They assumed the identities of other passengers!” And so on…
Finally, out of sheer fascination with this circular method of creative delusion, the rational sceptic will allow them to get away with this loop, in order to move on to the next question, and see what further delights await us in the unravelling of this marvellously stupid story.
“Uh, how come their passports survived fiery crashes that completely incinerated the planes and all the passengers? “
The answer of course is that its just one of those strange co-incidences, those little quirks of fate that do happen from time to time. You know, like the same person winning the lottery four weeks in a row. The odds are astronomical, but these things do happen…
This is another favourite deductive method of the conspiracy theorist. The “improbability drive”, in which they decide upon a conclusion without any evidence whatsoever to suggest it, and then speculate a series of wildly improbable events and unbelievable co-incidences to try to support it, shrugging off the implausibility of each event with the vague assertion that sometimes the impossible happens (just about all the time in their world).
There is a principle called “Occam’s razor” which suggests that in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the simplest explanation is most likely to be correct.
Having for the sake of amusement, allowed them to get away with the silly story of the 19 invisible Arabs, we move on to the question of how they are supposed to have taken over the planes.
Hijacking a plane is not an easy thing to do. Hijacking it without the crew being able to alert Air Traffic Control (ATC ) is almost impossible. The crew needs only to punch in a four digit code to alert ATC to a hijacking. Unconcerned with the awkward question of plausibility, the conspiracy buffs maintain that on that Sept 11, the invisible hijackers took over the plane by the crude method of threatening people with box cutters and knives, shooting and stabbing passengers to try to lure the crew out of the cockpit and spraying gas (after they had attached their masks, obviously). And yet, miraculously they were able to take control of the plane without the crew first getting a chance to punch in the hijacking code.
Not just on one plane, but on all four. At this point in the tale, the conspiracy theorist is again forced to call upon the services of the improbability drive.
So now that our incredibly lucky hijackers have taken control of the planes, all four pilots fly them with breath taking skill and certainty to their fiery end, all four pilots unflinching in their steely resolve for a swift meeting with Allah. Apart from their psychotic hatred of “our freedoms”, it was their fanatical devotion to Islam which enabled them to summon up the iron will for this dreadful deed.
Which is strange, because according to another piece of hearsay peddled by the conspiracy buffs, these guys actually went out drinking and womanizing the night before their great martyrdom, even leaving their Korans in the bar -really impeccable Islamic behaviour – and then got up at 5am the next morning to pull off the greatest covert operation in history. This also requires us to believe that they were even clear headed enough to learn how to fly the huge planes by reading flight manuals in Arabic in the car on the way to the airport. We know this because they supposedly left the flight manuals there for us to find.
It gets better. Their practical training had allegedly been limited to Cessnas and flight simulators, but this was no barrier to the unflinching certainty with which they took over the planes and skilfully guided them to their doom. If they are supposed to have done their flight training with these tools, which would be available just about anywhere in the world, its not clear why they would have decided to risk blowing their cover to US intelligence services by doing the training in Florida, rather than somewhere in the Middle East, but such reasoning is foreign to the foggy world of the conspiracy theorist, too trapped in the constant rotation of the fruit loop to make their unsubstantiated fabrications seem even semi- believable.
Having triumphantly established a circular delusion in support of the mythical Arabs, the conspiracy theorist now confronts the difficult question of why there’s nothing left of the planes. Anybody who has seen the endlessly replayed footage of the second plane going into the WTC will realize that for a plane to instantly blow itself up into nothing like that, it would have to be packed with explosives. Planes do not and cannot blow up into nothing in that manner when they crash.
But lets humour the conspiracy theorists and suppose that this crude cartoon designed to hide whatever really hit the building was actually a real plane.
Did the mythical Arabs also haul a huge heap of explosives on board, and mange to deploy them in such a manner that they went off in the exact instant of the crash, completely vaporising the plane? This is a little difficult even for the conspiracy theorist, who at this point decides that its easier to invent new laws of physics in order to keep the delusion rolling along.
There weren’t any explosives. It wasn’t an inside job. The plane blew up into nothing from its exploding fuel load!
Remarkable! Sluggishly combustible jet fuel which is basically kerosene, and usually burns at about 400c has suddenly taken on the qualities of a ferociously explosive demolition agent, vaporizing 70 tons of aircraft into a puff of smoke. Never mind that a plane of that size contains around 23 tons of steel and titanium, of which even the melting points are about four times that of the normal combustion temperature of kerosene. And forget about the boiling point of these metals, which is what would be required to vaporize a plane. And then there’s about 47 tons of aluminium to be accounted for. In excess of 15lbs of metal for each gallon of kerosene.
For the conspiracy theorist, such inconvenient facts are vaguely dismissed as “mumbo jumbo”. This convenient little phrase is their answer to just about anything factual or logical. Like a conjurer pulling a rabbit out of a hat, they suddenly become fanatically insistent about the devastating explosive qualities of kerosene, something hitherto completely unknown to science, but just discovered by them, this very minute.
Determinedly ignoring the fact that never before or since in aviation history has a plane vaporised into nothing from an exploding fuel load, the conspiracy theorist relies upon Hollywood images, where the effects are always larger than life, and certainly larger than the intellects of these cretins.
“Its a well known fact that planes blow up into nothing on impact!” they state with pompous certainty. “Watch any Bruce Willis movie!”
“Care to provide any documented examples? If it’s a well known fact, then presumably this well known fact springs from some kind of documentation – other than Bruce Willis movies ?”
At this point the mad but cunning eyes of the conspiracy theorist will narrow as they sense the corner into which they have backed themselves and plan their escape by means of another stunning back flip.
“Ah, but planes have never crashed into buildings before, so there’s no way of telling.” they counter with a sly grin.
“Well, actually planes have crashed into buildings before and since, and not vaporised into nothing.”
“But not big planes, with that much fuel ! “, they shriek in hysterical denial.
“Or that much metal to vaporise. “
“Yes, but not hijacked planes !”
“Are you suggesting that whether the crash is deliberate or accidental affects the combustion qualities of the fuel?”
“Now you’re just being silly”.
Although collisions with buildings are rare, planes frequently crash into mountains, streets, other aircraft, nosedive into the ground, or have bombs planted aboard them, and don’t vaporise into nothing. What’s so special about hitting a building?
But by now, the conspiracy theorist has once again sailed happily around the fruit loop. “Its a well documented fact that planes explode into nothing on impact.”
Effortlessly weaving back and forth between the position that its a “well known fact” and that “its never happened before, so we have nothing to compare it to”, the conspiracy theorist has now convinced themselves (if not too many other people) that the WTC plane was not loaded with explosives, and that the instant vaporisation of the plane in a massive fireball was the same as any other plane crash you might care to mention. Round and round the fruit loop…
But the hurdles which confront the conspiracy theorist are many, and they are now forced to implement even creative more uses for the newly discovered shockingly destructive qualities of kerosene. They have to explain how the Arabs also engineered the elegant vertical collapse of both the WTC towers as well as building 7, and for this awkward fact the easiest counter is to simply deny that it was a controlled demolition, and claim that the buildings collapsed from fire caused by the burning kerosene.
This makes it necessary to sweep aside the second law of thermodynamics and propose kerosene which is not only impossibly destructive, but also recycles itself for a second burning in violation of the law of degradation of energy. You see, it not only consumed itself in a sudden catastrophic fireball , vaporising a 70 ton plane into nothing, but then came back for a second go, burning at 2000C for another hour at the impact point, melting the skyscraper’s steel like butter. And while it was doing all this it also poured down the elevator shafts starting fires all through the building. When I was at school there a little thing called the entropy law which suggests that a given portion of fuel can only burn once, something which is readily observable in the real world, even for those who didn’t make it to junior high school science. But this is no problem for the conspiracy theorist. Their insane eyes glinting madly, they claim that a few thousand gallons of kerosene is enough to
: completely vaporise a 70 ton aircraft
: have enough left over to burn so ferociously for over an hour at the impact point that it melted massive steel construction beams ( melting point about double the maximum combustion temperature of the fuel ).
: still have enough left over to pour down the elevator shafts and start similarly destructive fires all through the building.
Kerosene really is remarkable stuff! How chilling to realize that those kerosene heaters we had in the house when I was a kid were deadly bombs, just waiting to go off. One false move and the entire street might have been vaporised. And never again will I take kerosene lamps out camping. One moment you’re there innocently holding the lamp – the next – kapow! Vaporised into nothing – along with the rest of the camp site – with still enough of the deadly stuff left to start a massive forest fire.
These whackos are actually claiming that the mythical raging inferno allegedly created by this miraculously recycling, and impossibly hot burning kerosene melted or at least softened the steel supports of the skyscraper. Oblivious to the fact that the smoke coming from the WTC was black, which indicates an oxygen starved fire -therefore not particularly hot, they trumpet an alleged temperature in the building of 2000 C , without a shred of evidence to support this curious suspension of the laws of physics.
Not content with this ludicrous garbage, they then contend that as the steel girders softened they came straight down instead of buckling and twisting and falling sideways.
Since they’re already re-engineered the combustion qualities of kerosene, violated the second law of thermodynamics, and re-invented the structural properties of steel, why let a little thing like the laws of gravity get in the way?
All three buildings fell in a time almost identical to that of a free falling object, dropped from that height, meaning that its physically impossible for it to have collapsed by the method of the top floors smashing through the lower floors. But according to the conspiracy theorists, the laws of gravity were temporarily suspended on the morning of Sept 11.
It appears that the evil psychic power of those dreadful Arabs knows no bounds. Even after they were dead, they were able, by the power of their evil spirits, to force down the towers at a speed physically impossible under the laws of gravity, had it been meeting any resistance from fireproofed steel structures, originally designed to withstand many tons of hurricane force wind as well as the impact of a large passenger jet straying off course.
Clearly, these conspiracy nuts never did their science homework at school, but did become extremely adept at inventing tall tales for why.
“Muslim terrorists stole my notes, sir”
“No miss, the kerosene heater blew up and vaporised everything in the street, except for my passport.”
“You see sir, the school bus was hijacked by Arabs who destroyed my homework because they hate our freedoms.”
Or perhaps they misunderstood the term “creative science” and mistakenly thought that coming up with such rubbish was in fact, their science homework.
The ferocious heat generated by the ghastly kerosene was, according to the conspiracy theorists, the reason why so many of the WTC victims can’t be identified. DNA is destroyed by such heat. This is quite remarkable, because according to the conspiracy theorist, the nature of DNA suddenly changes if you go to a different city. That’s right! If you are killed by an Arab terrorist in NY, your DNA will be destroyed by such temperatures. But if you are killed by an Arab terrorist in Washington DC, your DNA will be so robust that it can survive temperatures which completely vaporise a 70 ton aircraft.
You see, these loonies have somehow concocted the idea that the missile which hit the pentagon was not a missile at all, but one of the hijacked planes. And to prove this unlikely premise, they point to a propaganda statement from the Bush regime, which rather stupidly claims that all but one of the people aboard the plane were identified from the site by DNA testing, even though nothing remains of the plane. The plane was vaporised by the fuel tank explosion, maintain these space loonies, but the people inside it were all but one identified by DNA testing.
So there you have it. The qualities of DNA are different, depending upon which city you’re in, or perhaps depending upon which fairy story you’re trying to sell at any particular time.
This concoction about one of the hijacked planes hitting the Pentagon really is a howler. For those not familiar with the layout of the Pentagon, it consists of 5 rings of building, each with a space in between of lower building height. Each ring of building is about 30 to 35 ft deep, with a similar depth of lower level space between the rings.
The missile which the Bush regime fired into it, went in at about a 45 degree angle, punching a neat hole less than 20 ft wide, less than 20 ft high through three rings-about 250 ft into the building
A little later a section of wall about 65 ft wide collapsed in the outer ring. Since the plane which the conspiracy theorists claim to be responsible for the impact had a wing span of 125 ft and a length of 155 ft , and a tail height of 40 ft, and there was no wreckage of the plane, either inside or outside the building, and the lawns outside were still smooth and green enough to play golf on, this crazy delusion is clearly physically impossible.
But hey, we’ve already disregarded the combustion qualities of kerosene, the properties of DNA, the laws of gravity, the second law of thermodynamics, and invented imaginary properties for building materials, so what the hell – why not throw in a little spatial impossibility as well ?
I would have thought that the observation that a solid object cannot pass through another solid object without leaving a hole at least as big as itself is reasonably sound science. But to the conspiracy nut, this is “mumbo jumbo”. It conflicts with their mad delusion, so it must be wrong although trying to get then to explain the specifics of how it could be wrong is a futile endeavour.
Conspiracy nuts fly into a curious panic whenever the Pentagon missile is mentioned. They shriek that the plane was vaporised by it’s exploding fuel load and point to the WTC crash as evidence of this behaviour.
(Fruit loop warning !! )
Like an insect which has just been sprayed, running back and forth in its last mad death throes, they first argue that the reason the hole is so small is that plane never entered the wall, having blown up outside, and then suddenly back flip to explain the 250 ft deep missile hole by saying that the plane disappeared all the way into the building, and then blew up inside the building (even though the building shows no sign of such damage).
As for what happened to the wings – here’s where they get really creative. The wings snapped off and folded into the fuselage which then carried them into the building, which then closed up behind the plane like a piece of meat.
When it suits them they’ll also claim that the plane slid in on its belly, (ignoring the undamaged lawn) while at the same time citing alleged witnesses to the plane diving steeply into the building from above. How they reconcile these two scenarios as being compatible is truly a study in stupidity.
Once they get desperate enough, you can be sure that the UFO conspiracy stuff will make an appearance. The Arabs are in league with the Martians. Space aliens snatched the remains of the Pentagon plane and fixed most of the hole in the wall, just to confuse people. They gave the Arabs invisibility pills to help get them onto the planes. Little green men were seen were seen talking to Bin Laden a few weeks prior to the attacks.
As the nation gears up to impeach the traitor Bush, and prevent his endless war, it’s not helpful to have these idiots distracting from the process by spreading silly conspiracy theories about mythical Arabs, stories which do nothing but play into the hands of the extremist Bush regime.
At a less serious time, we might tolerate such crackpots with amused detachment, but they need to understand that the treachery which was perpetrated on Sept 11, and the subsequent war crimes committed in “retaliation” are far too serious for us to allow such frivolous self indulgence to go unchallenged.
Those who are truly addicted to conspiracy delusions should find a more appropriate outlet for their paranoia.
It’s time to stop the loony conspiracy theories about Sept 11

4 years ago

surprised this hasn’t been posted yet…
guy claiming to have inside knowledge has signed an affidavit.
he says that prior to 1989 a huge problem with the future of the towers had been identified and plans to decommission them before 2007 were in the works. galvanic corrosion, due to the aluminum façade and steel columns being in contact, had compromised the continued structural integrity of the towers. further, flex-fatigue from wind-sheer had apparently fucked up a bunch of bolts from floors 25 down to 7.
so plans were made to remove the towers… hey lets face it, they would eventually have to come down one way or another… they would put up a scaffolding around each tower and bring them down piece by piece. that would sure cost an arm and a leg. suddenly the whole project was canned and shrouded in secrecy forevermore.

4 years ago

Daniel Ellsberg Expresses Concerns re Gov 9/11 Complicity, Calls for New Inquiry
Pentagon Papers hero Daniel Ellsberg adds his voice to the eminent chorus calling for a new 9/11 investigation. Interviewed by Jack Blood on Alex Jones radio show Wednesday, July 19, Ellsberg also expresses his fear of a new Reichstag Fire incident and decree as elements of administration Iran attack plans. Serious warnings from the still diligent and deeply involved dean of the American whistleblower community.
Source: Infowars | July 19, 2006
By Kevin Smith & Alex Jones
The original headlines for the interview with Daniel Ellsberg posted on July 19, 2006, and parts of the story, incorrectly paraphrased the accompanying transcript (which is accurate) and inadvertently misrepresented his views. He did not, and does not, predict that the “Bush regime will stage terrorist attack to provide pretext for Iran, Syria invasion,” nor that “within days after a US military strike on Iran. Bush’s handlers would probably stage some type of terror attack in the West to legitimize the new war.” Nor does he believe that the government “may have carried out 9/11” except in the limited sense that elements in the government have, in his opinion, the “psychological capability” to do so, as others, in his own experience, have had in the past.
Daniel Ellsberg is a former American military analyst employed by the RAND Corporation who precipitated a national firestorm in 1971 when he released the Pentagon Papers, the US military’s account of activities during the Vietnam War, to The New York Times. The release awakened the American people to a systematic program of organized deception carried out by the Pentagon against the population to continue the Vietnam War.
Daniel Ellsberg, speaking on air to GCN radio host Jack Blood, stated his concerns that criminal elements of the US government were psychologically capable to have carried out 9/11.
“If there’s another 9/11 or a major war in the Middle-East involving a U.S. attack on Iran, I have no doubt that there will be, the day after or within days an equivalent of a Reichstag fire decree that will involve massive detentions in this country.”
Ellsberg said that he worked with individuals at the highest levels of government who staged war provocations several times to whip up pro-war sentiment in the US. Daniel Ellsberg now joins the ranks of hundreds of prominent engineers, physicists, economists, military officers, pilots, high-level intelligence analysts, and cabinet ministers who are exposing the 9/11 hoax.
Each day more and more respected professionals are going public with their questions about the official 9/11 fable. The 9/11 cover-up dam is breaking under the weight of these truthseekers’ efforts and the perpetrators of 9/11 are watching them in horror while wondering who will be the next to speak up.
Here is a partial transcript of the interview:
Jack Blood: Have you had a chance to take a look at a lot of this information coming from America’s leading scholars, physicists, engineers, etc. Who have taken a look now at 9/11 and are now, not only questioning what might have happened on 9/11, but really being very direct including a number of high level …
Daniel Ellsberg: Actually, I have looked at a lot of that, and I’ll tell you without going into it all which would take a lot of time, I find some of it very implausible and other parts of it quite solid, and there’s no question in my mind that there’s enough evidence there to justify a very comprehensive and hard hitting investigation of a kind that we’ve not seen, with subpoenas, general questioning of people, and raising the release of a lot of documents, there’s no question that (D.E. chuckles) put it this way, very serious questions have been raised, about how much they knew beforehand and how much involvement there may been. Is the, is a administration capable, humanly and physiologically of engineering such a provocation?
Yes, I would say that, I worked for such an administration myself, Johnson, ah, President Johnson put destroyers in harm’s way in the Tonkin Gulf not only once, but several times, with the, with a lot of his people hoping that it would lead to a confrontation and claiming that it had. And could have resulted in the lost of many lives in the course of it. And what I’m saying now, by the way though is this, and here there’s a very strong analogy, to this day there is a controversy gone back and forth historically, as to who caused the Reichstag fire, the burning of their parliament, the Reichstag, on February 27 th 1933. Goering, at one point, the number two man in the Nazi regime, said “I set that fire”, later he denied that at Nuremberg, and I’ve noticed that the latest history suggests, that it wasn’t the Nazi’s. The point is that all this time later is there is still a controversy about that. But, what there’s no controversy about is the use the Nazi’s made of it, that very night and the next day.
J.B. Cui Bono, who benefits
D.E. February 28 th, there was a Reichstag fire decree that ended freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of association, all in the Weimar Constitution, and privacy of the postal system and of communications and of telephone, what ended here to, more than we knew four years ago right after 9/11. If there’s another 9/11 or a major war in the Middle-East involving a U.S. attack on Iran, I have no doubt that there will be, the day after or within days an equivalent of a Reichstag fire decree that will involve massive detentions in this country, detention camps for middle-easterners and their quote “sympathizers”, critics of the President’s policy and essentially the wiping-out of the Bill of Rights.
J.B. I know your walking very carefully here Daniel Ellsberg, but that’s pretty strong medicine and we have to look at the history of the world, governments do this, as you mentioned, governments are liars, governments are murderers, they, this is not above them, I’m sure your familiar with the Northwoods Document.
D.E. Ah yes, indeed. Yeah talking about a manufactured provocation which could have involved even the shooting down of an American or some other airliner, with American support. Yes I would say by the way, that Americans definitely play this game, I’m sure that it’s happening now.
We, I expected by the way, Bush to manufacture a kind of Tonkin Gulf incident before he went into Iraq and then I decided well I’d been wrong they didn’t feel they needed that. It is interesting that the memos that came out, in conversations between Blair and Bush, (aka The White House Memo), show that Bush was pressing for the possibility of sending over a U-2 and getting it fired on and using that as an excuse.
J.B. A U-2 painted like a U.N., ah, a United Nations airplane.
D.E. Yes, but they couldn’t do that again for sure. But, what is happening right now is that Israel is clearly seeking a generally provocative act by both Hammas and Hezbollah, which I think were not wise acts some people are applauding those in the Middle-East passing out sweets and so forth, very short-sighted I would say, a lot of innocent people are going to die as a result.
Daniel Ellsberg interview – Deadline Live July 14th 2006
JB: Daniel Ellsburg is with us. DE is a former military analyst employed by the Rand Corporation, who precipitated an international uproar in 1971 when he released the pentagon papers of the U.S. activities during the Vietnam War to the NY times. The release awakened the American people of how much they have been deceived by their own government about the war, and I’ll tell ya, the more things change, the more they stay the same. Daniel Ellsburg, we’re honored to have you on the show.
DE: thank you
JB: obviously, the comparisons need to be made between the Nixon admin., the bush admin., the Vietnam War, and also the war in Iraq currently can I get your analysis comparing these 2 different regimes?
DE: look, all administrations, all governments lie, all officials lie and nothing they say is to be believed. That’s a pretty good rule. It’s not always the case in the world that a country like ours is being lied into a war. There is a very strong analogy almost parallel between us being lied to during the Vietnam War and us being laid to going into Iraq. And I would say now, the pentagon papers of Iraq would look very similar to the ones going into the war Vietnam. In terms of the gap, the enormous gap, between the inside debates, and there are more debates than the publicists allow us to see, which unfortunately don’t leak very regularly, but I think if someone would take the step of revealing those inside debates, they would that there was as much criticism and opposition really to the prospects who are prospects in Iraq and in Iran and there was in Vietnam. Unfortunately, there is silence of the people who criticize and oppose the policies from within. There silence to the public enables the leaders to maneuver the public, unfortunately with more ease into disastrous wars. I think that not only are we involved in a disastrous war w/ Iraq right now, we’re being maneuvered toward a war in Iran that will be even worse even if in the first station involve US ground troops but it will set the Mid-East on fire even more than it is appearing to be the case today.
JB: you know there is a lot of things I want to get to today, but since you kinda brought up the war, and a possible war w/ Iran, we see the saber rattling getting extremely heated at this point, particularly as we are looking at new events going on with the middle east now, Israel really taking on this preemptive attack, Syria being a potential target of Israel’s wrath or retribution, also now Iran warning if you go into Syria we are going to have some type of response… Do you think that we are being hooked into this war? How are you seeing this Daniel?
DE: well, one thing that I see, in the last couple of days, is to remind me that not all the reckless, foolish, decisions being made in the world, aren’t by Americans. Granted, we’re the most powerful, our decisions are often the most consequential, the decision making by the leaders frankly of Hamas, of Hezbollah, probably of Syria and Iran as well, do not look good. They are in many respects, playing into desires of the hawks in this admin. To get a war started in Iran. Certainly, I think that those people in our government secretly want to get a war against Iran, are essentially happy today. I think that they think that their cause has been made easy, the American public is going to be more easily fooled into thinking that Iran is a threat to the security of the US and other regions by statements and actions of various other people in the region. And I think that it is not a question of one wild ideological government, mainly ours, that’s a fair description of it, battling a group of prudent far thinking leaders and followers in that region, unfortunately, it’s kind of a rat’s nest.
JB: we see and often hear a lot of the analyst’s also sharing with us Daniel, that there are 2 governments basically at war within our own government. we got the Neocons and I guess those with little more sense than the neocon, who understand that we can’t continue to escalate the battles on the different theaters, as we just don’t have the resources to pull this off but yet, here it seems that almost a perfect strategy at the perfect time with us nearly having to defend Israel, having to defend the middle east, even, let’s just say quote on quote, against our will, it just seems that we’re just playing right into the hands of the Neocons.
DE: it does, it does. And I tell you that everybody’s playing into that. When you talk about a war within the US government. in terms of the number of people involved, there’s no doubt that there’s a lot of dissenters, but they’ve acted very helplessly as far I can see in the last four years, hard to call it a war really, kind of a whine, or a complaint and we only get the echoes of that through leaks. We haven’t really seen much courage by dissenters within or really risk their careers and take on the Neocons. By the way, I’m not sure that Bush, Rumsfeld or Cheney are at the top of this, along with Raffe (?), I really will describe as Neocons. When you describe Neocons, you’re not really talking about a Cheney, he certainly not a neocon he’s been a con and a conman for a long way going back, I don’t think Israel is on the top of his list of priorities as a matter of fact, or that of Rumsfeld or even Bush. Their interests seem to have a lot to do with oil; anyone who discounts the role of oil in their ambition is naïve.
JB: well, who is controlling the Neocons? If bush and Cheney aren’t calling the shots and I happen to agree with you…
DE: well, yes, they’re calling the shots, that’s what I’m saying, but I don’t think they’re well described as Neocons, they’re certainly aligned with the Neocons and the second level people like Wolfowitz and fife, pearl, they certainly have been following along the lines of those people we’ve been calling for, in many cases quite explicit interest in Israel, going back to their advice to Netanyahu, who you just quoted I noticed on your program, those are the people who wrote a plan for changing regime throughout the middle east in the late 90’s specifically for Netanyahu who I’m sure is happy today by the way things are developing. It’s a little more complicated than saying that all of this is just a…
JB: I agree, it’s always a little more complicated, we have a break…
JB: A lot of faces that you see making policies today aren’t strangers, these are people that have been around in the Nixon admin., the plumbers, the Iran contra, like Negroponte, Cheney and Rumsfeld, they have a long history of this type of behavior. How they got into office is, I guess, a little baffling to some of us, but Daniel Ellsburg, you tell a very interesting story in your work of G. Gordon Liddy and Howard Hunt and some of these plumbers breaking into your office, this became part of the Watergate scandal trying to find something on you because you’re leaking these pentagon papers to the New York Times what is really going on in the Vietnam war. I mean, look at the history of leaks, look at where we are now, everything’s national security, nothing’s allowed to be leaked, nothing’s allowed to be printed, the White House trying to control all the news reports around the country, what would happen today if somebody leaked something as big as you did back in 1971?
DE: actually, if somebody took the risk of putting out a lot of clearly authoritative real documents as I did at that time, I think that they would get printed. For one thing, we could certainly get them out on the internet even if no major newspapers took them. But I think actually we are seeing major leaks come out. Unfortunately not usually accompanied by documents so they get discounted and some of them are way overdue.
JB: that’s a good point; I mean what is the problem in this country today? I mean some things are being leaked as we saw this banking information, the invasion of privacy, the massive data basing, and cataloguing of all Americans, the loss of liberties. Why do you think that people don’t take this seriously today? Would they have taken it more seriously in ’71?
DE: I don’t know, I’m very disturbed by the reaction that you’ve described there. I had to reflect, and it’s not a happy reflection, that probably in any given time, in any country, including this one, most people don’t care that much about liberties or rights or guarantees of freedom that much. It dates back to the revolution, 1/3 of the people supported the revolution and 1/3 supported the insider, according to John Addams, and another third were indifferent. It’s probably always true that there is a minority of people that are really concerned about that. Unfortunately, at this very time, I don’t see a strong minority of people being very active in showing resistance, and protest and outrage and really efforts to change it. If real efforts were put on congress to investigate this, of course it’s a republican majority and they’re gonna show a great deal of resistance to it, but how much pressure are they actually getting? The democrats press more for it. It’s as if, after the 9-11 especially, the country is acting like so many other countries, we’re in danger, we need a strong man, let him free, don’t put him under restraints, and I’m afraid we’re slipping toward a police state without any resistance, which is what happened in Germany.
JB: I think the correlations are exactly precise. You know we kinda talk about the Neocon doctrine in a way, I’m sure you’re aware of the project of the new American century and they had said they had laid a lot of this out of how they were gonna go fight multiple wars in multiple theaters, how they were going to expand the budget of the Pentagon by doing so. But they also mentioned that this was going to take a really long time unless they had a new Pearl Harbor and then magically we had 9-11. have you had a chance, I’m gonna take a risk here in asking you this Daniel, in all due respect, have you had a chance to look at this information coming from America’s leading scholars, business’, engineers, etc. who have taken a look now at 9-11 and are now not only questioning what might have happened on 9-11, but really being very direct….
DE: I have looked at a lot of that and I tell ya, without going into it all, which would take a lot of time, I find some of it very implausible and other parts of it, quite solid. There is no question in my mind, that there is enough evidence to justify a very comprehensive and hard hitting investigation of the kind we have not seen. With subpoenas, general questioning of people, releasing a lot of documents. There’s no question that very serious questions have been raised about how much they knew before hand and how much involvement there may have been. Is the administration capable, humanly, psychologically, of engineering such a provocation? Yes. I would say that. I worked for such an admin. Myself. President Johnson put destroyers in harm’s way in the Tonkin Gulf, not only once, but several times with a lot of his people hoping that that would lead to a confrontation, and claiming that it had and could have resulted in the loss of many lives in the course of it. What I’m saying now, by the way, is this, and here’s a really strong analysis, to this day, there is a controversy going back and forth historically, as to who caused the Reichstag fire, the burning of their empowerment, the Reichstag. On Feb. 27, 1933. Kerry, at one point, the number 2 man in the regime said, “I set that fire.” Later, he denied that at Nuremburg. And I notice that the latest history suggests that it wasn’t the Nazi’s. The point is, all this time later, there is still a controversy about that. What there is no controversy about is the use that the Nazi’s made of it that very night and the next day. Feb. 28th, there was a Reichstag fire decree that ended freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of association, all in the constitution, and, privacy of the postal system and of communications and telephones. What ended here, more than we knew, four years ago, right after 9-11, if there’s another 9-11 or a war, a major war in the middle east, involving the US attack on Iran, I have no doubt that there will be, the day after, the equivalent to the Reichstag Fire Decree of massive detentions in this country, contingent camps of the middle easterners and their quote “sympathizers” predict of the Americans policy, we would essentially be wiping out the Bill of Rights.
JB: I know you’re talking very carefully here Daniel, but that’s pretty strong medicine. And I think we haven’t looked at the history of the world, governments do this, governments are liars, governments are murderers, it is not above this. I’m sure you’re familiar with the Northwoods document.
DE: yes. Indeed, we’re talking about a manufactured provocation that could involve the shooting down of American or some other airliner with American support. I would say, by the way, Americans defiantly play this game, I’m sure that it’s happening now, I expected, by the way, Bush to manufacture a Tonkin Gulf like incident before he went into Iraq and then I’d just said, I’d been wrong, they didn’t feel they need that. It is interesting that the memos that came out in conversations between Blair and Bush show that Bush was pressing for it, the possibility of sending out over a U2 and getting it fired on and using that as an excuse. But what’s happening right now is, Israel clearly seeking a genuinely provocative act by both Hamas and Hezbollah, which I think were not wise acts or applauding those in the middle east, very short sighted I would say the least.
JB: I know you don’t have a lot of time with us, but I do want to ask you about an exit strategy in Iraq…
so many comparisons between the Vietnam war and the Iraq war, one thing we failed to mention enough in the media, is that we were told that we could get out of Vietnam without losing face and the world falling to communism, and yet we got out of Vietnam and nothing happened. Can that process be applied to Iraq? Does anybody have a plausible plan that you have heard of to get us out of Iraq?
DE: actually, we could start listening to the vast majority of the Iraqi people right now. 87% of them in a recent poll, random polls, private polls, want the US to set a deadline. And not a deadline of 5 years, of 10 years, but a much shorter deadline for getting out of Iraq, and we could listen and respond to that desire of the Iraqi people. They know, after all, of what the dangers are, like they’ve said for 2 years, that they wanted the US out even though that they expected security for some period in that country. But they know that the US is uh, will cause insecurity in that country so as long as they’re there. that they will be in a national position in their presence. They want us out, we could listen to that. Likewise, and what’s going on in the middle east right now, the US, yesterday, couldn’t find yet one single vote out of 15 members of the security council to join in opposing in a resolution that is condemning the Israeli invasion of Lebanon and calling on Israel to withdraw. Now, in a situation like that, we could start paying attention to the fact that we’ve isolated ourselves and our policy isolates us, and that we should reexamine policy on the grounds that without any thought that we are the ones that are right on this, and everybody else is wrong. So we exercise the veto. And I notice, by the way, I was just reading that 8 of the 9 last vetos were in a security council over the last decade or more are by the US and 7 of those 8 are on Palestine and Israel. In other words, the rest of the world sees it one way and we and Israel claimed to see it another way. That’s not in out interest and that’s not even, I would say, in Israel’s interest. I think that when I talk of reckless behavior and unwise behavior, along with the US, I would start of course with a crude policy in Israel and a general policy they’ve been following, there will not be peace in the middle east of any sort so long as US maintains it’s support on questioning support as it did yesterday of very aggressive Israeli an policy.
JB: conveniently enough we have all this trouble in the middle east, which makes it even harder to get out of Iraq, and then there’s the hundred and eighty odd bases that are being built, this is the real reconstruction that is going on in Iraq now making it impossible for us to ever leave. Now, is that the reality of the situation?
DE: it’s not a matter of impossibility; we could leave the bases very easily. I don’t think it’s the matter of the cost, the question is, the will, what the bases indicate is a secret policy by this admin. To stay in Iraq forever.
JB: let’s look into this real quickly, last question is guess, let’s look at this, the elections are coming up, the midterm elections coming up in November, we have presidential elections coming again in ’08, unfortunately, some of the leading democrats, like Lieberman or Clinton or others seem to be as hawkish on the war as some of the republicans. Is there anyone we can turn to Daniel Ellsburg at this point?
DE: well, there are a few, a handful of politicians who are taking very sound and I would say bold positions. Bold only because they are sensible but bold because they are in such a minority. For example, Russ Feingold, who everybody says is out of it because he is too liberal, too Jewish and too divorced. And that’s too bad because he has been saying very good things and taking good positions right along. Incidentally, Morris Henche (?) introduced a resolution very few people ever heard of, just on June 20th, calling on no funds to be spent on a war against Iran that has not been declared by Congress. In other words, the president cannot attack Iran without a clear-cut decision by Congress to do that. And that got a fair number of votes in favor for that by the way, about 189 I think, but was, of course, was defeated. That is a good policy and I would like to see that reintroduced right now. As you were saying, it’s certainly not enough to get democrats in power in Congress or in the Presidency to change our policy. Many of the top people, you could have mentioned Joe Biden, or Evan Bide are as hawkish as any republicans on this and if it’s Hillary vs. McCain, it’s likely that people won’t be given any choice with the hawkish policy, but it is necessary. For a number of other reasons to get a democratic house and / or Senate, preferably both in November, without that, no investigation, nothing will change.
JB: it’s not gonna happen Mr. Ellsburg, I mean, I’m looking at the map and the extrapolations involved here, it seems like another republican sweep, a part of this has to do with the fear that being put out to the American public is that these terrorist events that keep popping up on our shores, those are debatable…
DE: well, you know the election isn’t here yet and I’m not willing to take the position, realistic as though it might be, that there’s no hope for doing this and nothing can be done…
JB: I’m not saying that there’s no hope, I’m saying we need to prepare ourselves for 2 more years of republican trifecta, I mean, shouldn’t we prepare for that?
DE: I don’t know how you prepare for that because I see that its disaster, as you say, it may well happen. But I do think that we need to see more effort and more courage trying shown in trying to overt that than we have seen so far. It can’t be said that people have made their best efforts their strongest efforts to change the situation. We haven’t seen it yet and I would like to see people really telling the truth within the costs of their careers. You haven’t seen a single person really risk his or her career to tell us the truth even though we have seen some leaks, that are good in themselves, and we’ve seen some good memoirs, Richard Clark, Paul O’Neill or some other telling us the truth but unfortunately, years after the event, when they retired and they’ve done it without any documents. I’d like to see a lot more courage than that.
JB: we all would and you’re speaking for all of us when you say that. We’ve only about one more minute so I’d like to squeeze in one more question. Do you have any idea what happened to this trillions of dollars gone missing from the pentagon? Do you have any idea where that went? Can you put your finger on that?
DE: well, I think that we can assume that it goes where all the other trillions that have been lost, pretty much to the same pockets in the military industrial complex to deal with the pentagon, black budgets that are
hardly looked at by congress, these so called black projects that don’t really go on, a tremendous amount of corruption, bank accounts, corporate accounts, I don’t think it’s simply been burned in the pentagon basement.
JB: well no, neither do I, I think that we have to agree on that. Daniel Ellsburg, I really appreciate your time, I want to say that if at any time we can jump on your bandwagon, any time we can help you get your message out or come to your rescue, please give us a call and let us know and we’d be happy to do it.
DE: I appreciate it and you’re already doing it.
JB: we’re gonna open up the phone lines for the last 10 minutes of the broadcast here. What do you think about that? Daniel Ellsburg basically coming out for state sponsored terrorism and 9-11 being an inside job. I mean, I gotta tell ya folks, I have to underplay that, I have to work very carefully with some of these people but we’ll be writing that up in an essay, including the audio portion of that interview for the world to see. I mean it’s very important. A military industrial complex insider, someone working with the Rand Corporation, someone who worked at the pentagon on a very high level, who’s well known around the world finally coming out and saying what we all know. That minimally, 9-11 was an inside job and defiantly if we get hit again, it’s an inside job and everyone will know it and that’s the thing to take from this. The wool isn’t gonna be pulled over our eyes anymore, there’s not going to be Gulf of Tonkin’s , and USS Liberties, and Reichstag’s and 9-11’s and ok cities and world trade center 93’s because 9-12 will be highly identified and well known as another inside job. Another Reichstag, exactly as the 77 London bombings look to the rest of the world, exactly how now it appears in many ways the; 7-11 bombings in India looking very, very unusual and of course all the usual suspects are involved.
Post Modified: 07/26/06 22:22:01

4 years ago

Classic Cuts 911 truth music video
Post Modified: 07/26/06 22:40:10

4 years ago

Advance Review of Oliver Stone’s World Trade Center
The author is a 9/11 skeptic who thinks Stone may be dropping a few clues in his WTC re-enactment. Footage of Building 7’s demolition is included in the film.

4 years ago

May i ask for your opinions with this.
massive energy sink at WTC collapse
This is based upon the EPA report that 0.3 micron concrete particles were found in the dust at the WTC disaster.
General figures show that the building had 200,000 – 300,000 kwh of Potential Energy yet the required energy to produce concrete particles of size found require
6, 000,000 kwh minimum.
Clearly TNT couldnt have been used as the amount required in kg was stupidly large.
Schiebster, if he is still around, could help incredibly with these calculations.
MCC on (schieb also has posted in another thread on there) took this up in Jan 2006 and is linked to on the blog

4 years ago

Whateveryousay, have you posted that info in its own thread? That was fascinating, and I haven’t seen it elsewhere. I’m not sure whether it is evidence of motive to implode, or actually evidence that the buildings could have fallen from the impact of the planes. At one point, his story sounded somewhat phony, but then, stories get that way after numorous retellings. I would like to see more discussion about this.

4 years ago

actually evidence that the buildings could have fallen from the impact of the planes
So the planes with massive kinetic energy slam into the buildings — for 50 and 90mins — the energy just hangs around, chilling, smoking a bowl —— then decides to act and pulverise the buildings?
Something aint right. I just cant figure it out.

4 years ago

Another review of Stone’s movie paints a different picture
“Personally, I think they have footage of Stone on a Third World child sex tour or something because it is so unambiguously and ham-handedly propagandistic.”

4 years ago

“I’m gonna bust a cap if this thread goes on any longer…yo! Yeeeeeeeeeeeeah booooooooooooyeeeeeeeeee!”

4 years ago

Whateveryousay, I’m printing that entire link. Thanks.

4 years ago

Whateveryousay — awesome quote and links with this article;
NEW YORK (Reuters) – Some leading U.S. and European insurers say that the destruction of the World Trade Center was not an act of war, and therefore covered under most insurance policies. If other insurers take the same view, that means insurance companies around the world will have to pay out the $30 billion
or so in claims expected by industry experts from the attack.
``The acts-of-war exclusion does not apply to Tuesday’s events,’‘ insurer Chubb Corp. said earlier this week. The Warren, New Jersey-based business insurer expects to pay out as much as $200 million for the attack.
Under most property and liability policies, acts of war are excluded, to protect insurers from overwhelming claims in the event of a war. Some analysts had suggested that insurers might invoke the exclusions to
avoid payment.
Although President Bush has repeatedly called the attack an ‘‘act of war,’‘ it is generally accepted that the exclusion only applies in the case of a declared war between two or more sovereign nations.
``I have no doubt that the insurance industry has no other choice at all than to pay, for political reasons as well,’‘ said Bruno Porro, a member of the executive committee at the world’s second-largest reinsurance group Swiss Re, in an interview published in the Finanz und Wirtschaft newspaper on Saturday. Swiss Re
has said it expects more than $700 million in claims.
pancake collapse theory was required for the insurance claim
This directly supports my theory that Money and financial security has been placed as a priority over human life in the minds of high level authority figures.
The symbolic and negative nature of the current debt based economic system has been internalised and is driving these possessed individuals.
The system has been set-up to protect the Monarchy and all of the ‘possessed’ are gladly servant to this self-righteous beast.
Post Modified: 07/30/06 04:08:17

4 years ago

yep… still here

4 years ago

The way the general masses have responded to the recent Commission questioning and the released FAA tapes it wouldnt suprise me if soon the admin say
“yeah, the buildings were brought down by controlled demolition. We had to to save lives. If the buildings hadnt of been controlled in descent they could have killed thousands more people. We were lucky that the buildings were set-up previous to 9/11 otherwise maybe 10,000 americans would have died. we love you”
and the general public respond with
“Oh, right. Really. Thats interesting. Where the fuck did i put my wallet.. honey! have you seen my wallet.. what? oh, the government said the buildings fell over or summit”

4 years ago

PUt american gladiators back on

4 years ago

“we love you”

4 years ago

So Schneibstre calls through and doesn’t bother to drop into this thread?
What a limp-wrist gimp-mask he is.

4 years ago

(I’m leaving that typo as a sign of contempt)

4 years ago

4 years ago

4 years ago

Still here and waiting for a sensible argument disproving the calculations
Cost of WTC repairs $5 billion (1989 value)
Cost of purchasing WTC complex lease $3.2 billion (valued at $9 billion)
Cost of planting a thermonuclear device in the towers, murder thousands of people instantly, condemn thousands to a slow poisoned death, help cover the theft of $3.4 trillion from the pentagon, contribute to the massacre of hundreds of thousands of people in Iraq, Afghanistan and other ‘war on terror’ targets and claim $4.6 billion in recompense.
dont forget Building 6
Nice fucking hole
similar hole
Building 6 looks exactly like Chernobyl reactor explosion
Post Modified: 08/15/06 02:50:03

4 years ago

that plate about blging 6 says explosions during airliner impact which is a rather dumb mistake i should think. it would have been during or between the tower collapses.
there is at least 1 eyewitness report from an fdny saying it looked like they were blowing up the building (6)
all that stuff was redacted from here statement but the full text can be found (+ an interview with the witness to back it up)
k. deshore i think it was.

4 years ago

Ads by Goooooogle
A&B Concrete Coring Co.
Wire, Wall, & Slab sawing, Core Drilling, Brokk, Hydrodemolition

4 years ago

Another Ex-CIA Official Speaks Out for 9/11 Truth
Stop Belittling the Theories About September 11
by Bill Christison
August 14, 2006
However horrendous the crimes of two of the world’s great liars and terrorists in Gaza and Lebanon, it is imperative that we not let the deeds of Ehud Olmert and George W. Bush distract us from another recent event.
The U.S. alliance with Israel and the power of the lobby that lets Israel so easily influence U.S. foreign policy have been major factors in allowing the monstrous slaughter of innocent civilians in Gaza and Lebanon. What is happening in these lands may also encourage Olmert and Bush to start new hostilities in Syria and heavy, possibly nuclear, bombings in Iran — and this entire mess of neocon pottage may lead to a new World War and clashes of civilizations and religious fundamentalisms that these two wretched politicians seem quite literally to want to impose on the rest of us. It’s a tough case to make that anything else going on in the world — anywhere — could possibly be of equal importance.
But on July 29 and 30, and then again on August 1, something else happened that increasing numbers of people believe is of equal importance. On these dates C-SPAN rebroadcast a panel discussion, held originally in late June, sponsored by an organization called the American Scholars’ Symposium to discuss what really happened on September 11, 2001. Held in Los Angeles, the meeting lasted two days, and the C-SPAN rebroadcast covered one almost two-hour wrap-up session. The meeting was attended by 1,200 people interested in hearing something other than the official story of 9/11. The TV audience was evidently large enough to spur C-SPAN to broadcast the panel discussion five separate times in four days.
Even a month late, this is a lot of airtime for stories that many people call conspiracy theories — and for which many others use nastier descriptions. It is possible that the head of C-SPAN, Brian Lamb, so strongly disbelieves the conspiracy theories that he felt giving them ample publicity would discredit them further. It is equally possible, however, that Lamb, who seems honestly to believe in presenting various sides of most issues as fairly as he can (although not always giving every side equal time), tried to do exactly that on the many legitimate questions raised about what actually happened on September 11. In any event, C-SPAN has made a major effort to bring information on the principal theories about 9/11 to the mainstream U.S. media. Lamb cannot be blamed for the coincidence that recent heavy military activity in Gaza and Lebanon is nearly drowning out his efforts.
Let’s address the real issues here. Why is it important that we not let the so-called conspiracy theories surrounding 9/11 be drowned out? After spending the better part of the last five years treating these theories with utmost skepticism, I have devoted serious time to actually studying them in recent months, and have also carefully watched several videos that are available on the subject. I have come to believe that significant parts of the 9/11 theories are true, and that therefore significant parts of the “official story” put out by the U.S. government and the 9/11 Commission are false. I now think there is persuasive evidence that the events of September did not unfold as the Bush administration and the 9/11 Commission would have us believe. The items below highlight the major questions surrounding 9/11 but do not constitute a detailed recounting of the evidence available.
ONE: An airliner almost certainly did not hit The Pentagon. Hard physical evidence supports this conclusion; among other things, the hole in the Pentagon was considerably smaller than an airliner would create. The building was thus presumably hit by something smaller, possibly a missile, or a drone or, less possibly, a smaller manned aircraft. Absolutely no information is available on what happened to the original aircraft (American Airlines Flight 77), the crew, the “hijackers,” and the passengers. The “official story,” as it appeared in The 9/11 Commission Report simply says, “At 9:37:46, American Airlines Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon, traveling at approximately 530 miles per hour. All on board, as well as many civilians and military personnel in the building, were killed.” This allows readers to assume that pieces of the aircraft and some bodies of passengers were found in the rubble of the crash, but information so far released by the government does not show that such evidence was in fact found. The story put out by the Pentagon is that the plane and its passengers were incinerated; yet video footage of offices in the Pentagon situated at the edge of the hole clearly shows office furniture undamaged. The size of the hole in the Pentagon wall still remains as valid evidence and so far seems irrefutable.
TWO: The North and South Towers of the World Trade Center almost certainly did not collapse and fall to earth because hijacked aircraft hit them. A plane did not hit Building 7 of the Center, which also collapsed. All three were most probably destroyed by controlled demolition charges placed in the buildings before 9/11. A substantial volume of evidence shows that typical residues and byproducts from such demolition charges were present in the three buildings after they collapsed. The quality of the research done on this subject is quite impressive.
If the judgments made on Points ONE and TWO above are correct, they raise many “Who done it” questions and strongly suggest that some unnamed persons or groups either inside or with ties to the government were actively creating a “Pearl Harbor” event, most likely to gain public support for the aggressive foreign policies that followed — policies that would, first, “transform” the entire Middle East, and second, expand U.S. global domination.
These first two points provide the strongest evidence available that the “official story” of 9/11 is not true. If the government could prove this evidence false, and its own story on these points correct, all the other data and speculation supporting the conspiracy theories would be undermined. It has provided no such proof and no answers to growing questions.
Other, less important points supporting the theories include the following.
THREE: For at least one hour and 45 minutes after the hijacking of the first aircraft was known, U.S. air defense authorities failed to take meaningful action. This strikes some “conspiracy theorists” as valid evidence that the U.S. Air Force was deliberately restrained from acting. Maybe so, but my own skepticism tells me that the inefficiency of U.S. defense forces is likely to be just as plausible an explanation.
FOUR: Some of the theorists believe that the 19 named hijackers were not actually the hijackers. One claim is that the names of the hijackers were not on the manifests of any of the four aircraft.
FIVE: None of the 19 hijackers’ bodies were ever autopsied (since they were allegedly totally destroyed in the crashes, including even the people in the Pennsylvania crash).
SIX: At least five of the alleged hijackers (or persons with identical names) have since turned up alive in the Middle East. Nonetheless, the FBI has never bothered to re-investigate or revise the list of hijackers. Does this suggest that the FBI knows that no one in the administration is interested in reopening any further investigations?
SEVEN: Numerous pilots have allegedly told the theorists that none of the 19 hijackers could have flown the airliners well enough to hit the World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon with as much accuracy as was displayed. The debate on this issue simply raises more doubt about the government’s charge that the people it has named as hijackers are the real hijackers.
EIGHT: No one, except possibly government investigators who are not talking, has seen the plane that went down in Pennsylvania. Some of the conspiracy theorists suggest that it was deliberately destroyed before it hit the ground; others suggest that the plane actually landed in Cleveland and that passengers then were whisked away to some unknown destination. What happened to them at that point is simply a large question mark that makes it more difficult to believe this particular scenario.
NINE: Machinations in the U.S. stock market in the days before 9/11 suggest that some inside players in the market knew or suspected that United and American Airlines stock would soon drop. Two of the four of the aircraft involved in 9/11 were, or course, United planes and the other two were American Airlines planes.
It should be reemphasized that these items do not make up a complete list of all the charges made by the theorists, but they are a good sample. Anyone interested in perhaps the best summary of these charges should watch the video “Loose Change.”
To repeat, points ONE and TWO above are the most important. If something other than an airliner actually did hit the Pentagon on 9/11, and if the North and South Towers of the World Trade Center actually were dropped to the ground by controlled demolitions rather than by anything connected to the hijackings, the untrue stories peddled by The 9/11 Commission Report are clearly susceptible of being turned into major political issues.
A Scripps Howard News Service/Ohio University poll taken from July 6 to 24, 2006 concluded that “more than a third [36 percent] of the American public suspects that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them, so that the United States could go to war in the Middle East.” The poll also found that “16 percent of Americans speculate that secretly planted explosives, not burning passenger jets, were the real reason the massive twin towers of the World Trade Center collapsed.”
A poll done by the Zogby polling organization two months earlier, between May 12 and 16, 2006, and using questions worded somewhat differently, suggested even more strongly that the issue could become a “big one” if aggressively publicized. This poll concluded that 42 percent of Americans believed there had indeed been a cover-up of the true events of 9/11, and an additional 10 percent of Americans were “unsure.” The co-author of the poll, W. David Kubiak, stated that, “despite years of relentless media promotion, whitewash, and 9/11 Commission propaganda, the official 9/11 story still can’t even muster 50 percent popular support.”
Whichever of these polls is closer to the truth, it would seem that there is considerable support for making a major political issue of the subject.
This should be worked on at two different levels. At the first level, the objective should be long-term, centered on making a maximum effort to find out who the individuals and groups are that carried out the attacks in New York and Washington. Then, these people should be tried in an international court and, if possible, convicted and punished for causing so many deaths. Such a trial, accompanied by actual change in U.S. policies, would show that some people on this globe are at least trying to move closer to more just and decent behavior in human relationships around the world.
At the second level, the short term, the task should be to immediately set to work as hard as is humanly possible to defeat in this year’s congressional election any candidate who refuses to support a no-holds-barred investigation of 9/11 by the Congress or a high-level international court. No more evidence than is now available is needed in order to begin this process.
A manageable volume of carefully collected and analyzed evidence is already at hand on both items ONE and TWO above. Such evidence should be used right now to buttress charges that elements within the Bush administration, as well as possibly other groups foreign or domestic, were involved in a massive fraud against the American people, a fraud that has led to many thousands of deaths.
This charge of fraud, if proven, involves a much greater crime against the American people and people of the world than any other charges of fraud connected to the run-up to the invasion of Iraq in March 2003. It is a charge that we should not sweep under the rug because what is happening in Lebanon, Gaza, Iraq, Syria, and Iran seems more pressing and overwhelming. It is a charge that is more important because it is related to all of the areas just mentioned — after all, the events of 9/11 have been used by the administration to justify every single aspect of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East since September 11. It is a charge that is more important also because it affects the very core of our entire political system. If proven, it is a conspiracy, so far successful, not only against the people of the United States, but against the entire world. Finally, it is a charge too important to ignore simply because the U.S. government refuses to discuss it. We must force the Bush administration to discuss it.
Discussions aggressively pushed day after day about what really happened on 9/11 will be one of the most important tasks between now and early November. Such discussions can, one hopes, provide progressives with a way to jolt voters out of their apathy and inchoate willingness to support the status quo that they think gives them security — and encourage more voters to stop supporting Bush, the Republicans, and the wobbly Democratic politicians who might as well be Republicans. A major issue like this, already supported by many voters, may prove particularly important in a congressional election year when new uncertainties in the Middle East, new possibilities of terrorism against the U.S. in retaliation for recent large-scale acts of Israeli/U.S. terrorism in Gaza and Lebanon, and the corrupt almost-single-party U.S. political system combine to make it more likely that supporters of Bush will retain their majority this November.
In terms of electoral impact, it would not matter whether heavy publicity did in fact force the administration to accept a new high-level investigation of the 9/11 events. Initially, the principal goal would be to contribute heavily to the defeat of both Republicans and Democrats who refuse to support wholeheartedly a major new investigation by Congress or an international court. This might result in the defeat of more Republicans than Democrats in November, but ultimately the hoped-for goal should be the end of a system in which Democrats are barely different from Republicans, along with cutbacks in the political power of wealth and the foreign and domestic lobbies paid for by wealth. These are the dominant features of our system today that have practically eliminated meaningful democracy in the U.S. This failure of democracy has happened before in U.S. history, but this time it is likely to last longer — at least until U.S. policies begin to pay as much attention to the needs of the world as they do to selfish or thoughtless needs of the U.S. and of its military-industrial complex. Attacks on the criminal events surrounding 9/11 might speed this process.
Virtually no members of Congress, Democratic or Republican, will relish calling for a further investigation of 9/11. For right now, in addition to other motives, the issue should be used to go after those political prostitutes among elected office-holders who should also be defeated because they are so easily seduced by money and power to vote for immoral wars against weak enemies.
At the Los Angeles meeting of the American Scholars’ Symposium, one of the main speakers, Webster Tarpley, summarized his own views on the events of 9/11. He emphasized that “neocon fascist madmen” had perpetrated the 9/11 “myth.” He went on to say, “The most important thing is that the 9/11 myth is the premise and the root of the Afghanistan War and the Iraq War and the coming attack on Iran. ... We must … deprive [the myth’s perpetrators] of the ability to stampede and manipulate hundreds of millions of people [with their] ... cynically planned terrorist events.”
Let’s give Webster Tarpley and other mistakenly labeled conspiracists who have labored in the wilderness for so long three cheers.
Bill Christison is a former senior official of the CIA. He was a National Intelligence Officer and the Director of the CIA’s Office of Regional and Political Analysis before his retirement in 1979. Since then he has written numerous articles on U.S. foreign policies. He can be reached at:
Post Modified: 08/17/06 07:39:13

4 years ago

So there WAS molten metal pouring out of the building before it collapsed and during the clean up there was molten streams dripping off beams of metal being pulled from the wreckage??

4 years ago


4 years ago

4 years ago

911 Revisited
Post Modified: 08/21/06 19:05:59

4 years ago

4 years ago

An airliner almost certainly did not hit The Pentagon
wow. This guy is probably a CIA disinfo agent.
What do you think Toolbagman?

4 years ago

Don’t bother answering that question. I’m going to be busy eating dogshit off the ground and I won’t be back for awhile…

4 years ago

how’s my driving?
call 1-800-FUC-KYOU

4 years ago

So there WAS molten metal pouring out of the building?

4 years ago

Looks like it:

4 years ago

4 years ago

Jim Fetzer, who is one of the founding members of Scholars for 911 Truth, interviewed Charles Pegelow, who is a structural engineer, about the collapses of Buildings 1 and 2.
Among other things, Pegelow said that the pancake theory is not applicable to steel structures and only happens in certain types of concrete structures.
The Interview
Post Modified: 08/28/06 11:11:40

4 years ago

The Oklahoma City Bombing
RA 9:02 AM, on April 19, 1995, a set of explosions carved out crater in the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, killing 168 people.
According to the official story, the damage was caused by a 5000-pound fertilizer and fuel oil bomb packed into the back of a rented Ryder truck parked on the street in front of the building.
However there are a number of fatal problems with this explanation.
Police who arrived on the scene after the bombing discovered several unexploded bombs inside the building. This discovery was widely reported on local TV news broadcasts.
The blast completely destroyed column B3, a steel-reinforced concrete pillar, which was so far from the blast source that the truck bomb would only have subjected it to 27 pounds per square inch. Another column at the same distance was not damaged. Seismographs registered more than one explosion.
Explosives expert General Parton proved that the truck bomb alone could not have produced the damage to the building. His proofs were ignored. Meanwhile the evidence was buried. Controlled Demolition, a company which also helped dispose of the structural steel at the World Trade Center, was contracted to demolish the rest of the Murrah Building and bury its remains, thus preventing proper forensic examination.
e x c e r p t
title: Pentagon Report Reveals Multiple Blasts in Oklahoma City Bombing
According to the March 20, 1996 issue of Strategic Investment newsletter, a classified Pentagon study confirms that the Oklahoma bombing was caused by more than one bomb. A classified report prepared by two independent Pentagon experts has concluded that the destruction of the federal building in Oklahoma City in April 1995 was caused by five separate bombs. The two experts reached the same conclusion for the same technical reasons. Sources close to the Pentagon study are reported to have said that Timothy McVeigh did play a role in the bombing but peripherally, as a “useful idiot.”
In 1995 there was a very powerful anti-government movement in the US. And it wasn’t all militia people. Some counties were declaring their independence from Washington. There was a big land-use battle brewing in the far west. It had to do with grazing rights and who really controlled millions of acres of public land in western states. Tax protestors were springing up like weeds. What was needed, from Washington’s point of view, was a poster boy for this radical revolt. And that boy was McVeigh. The kid who would, in effect, stand for all anti-government sentiment and discredit it in one stroke. The gloss was: white boy, militant, bomber, militia-type, anti-government, federal building destroyed, babies killed, nation mourns, COME BACK TO THE GOVERNMENT, COME HOME TO THE GOVERNMENT. Clinton won his second term on the back of that. .... When you look at OKC or 9/11, you are looking at layered operations, very well planned. Part of the planning is spent on getting a number of different groups into the mix. Iraqis, US bank robbers (Mike Brescia et al), a German intell weapons pro (Andreas Strassmeir), a “religious commune” (Elohim City). And so on. It’s all very confusing, AND IT’S MEANT TO BE. Everyone has a chance to blame his favorite emotional target and claim that this target was “the chief planner.” False trails are laid down that will go nowhere when investigators sniff around. But when you stop and think about the expertise that is required to coordinate and half-conceal these disparate elements, you wake up and realize that these are very professional and well-funded missions. Intell/military-style missions. The goofballs and the dissidents and the nutcases and the fanatics and the free-lancers are brought in to take the fall, to appear to be the masterminds. Peel the onion.
Post Modified: 08/30/06 18:55:22

4 years ago

i found this interesting:
“Puffs from WTC 1 were even observed when WTC 2 was struck by the aircraft. These observations confirm that even minor overpressures were transmitted through the towers and forced smoke and debris from the building.”
“According to the International Standard ISO/TS 13571, people will be in severe pain within seconds if they are near the radiant heat level generated by a large fire. Thus, it is not surprising that none of the photographs show a person standing in those gaps where there also was a sizable fire.”
not sure if i’m detecting a level of humour there or not.
NIST did not test for the residue of these [thermate] compounds in the steel.”
NIST also is considering whether hypothetical blast events could have played a role in initiating the collapse. While NIST has found no evidence of a blast or controlled demolition event, NIST would like to determine the magnitude of hypothetical blast scenarios that could have led to the structural failure of one or more critical elements. “

4 years ago

NIST conducted an extremely thorough three-year investigation into what caused the WTC towers to collapse, as explained in NIST’s dedicated Web site, This included consideration of a number of hypotheses for the collapses of the towers.
Some 200 technical experts—including about 85 career NIST experts and 125 leading experts from the private sector and academia—reviewed tens of thousands of documents, interviewed more than 1,000 people, reviewed 7,000 segments of video footage and 7,000 photographs, analyzed 236 pieces of steel from the wreckage, performed laboratory tests and sophisticated computer simulations of the sequence of events that occurred from the moment the aircraft struck the towers until they began to collapse.
Based on this comprehensive investigation, NIST concluded that the WTC towers collapsed because: (1) the impact of the planes severed and damaged support columns, dislodged fireproofing insulation coating the steel floor trusses and steel columns, and widely dispersed jet fuel over multiple floors; and (2) the subsequent unusually large jet-fuel ignited multi-floor fires (which reached temperatures as high as 1,000 degrees Celsius) significantly weakened the floors and columns with dislodged fireproofing to the point where floors sagged and pulled inward on the perimeter columns. This led to the inward bowing of the perimeter columns and failure of the south face of WTC 1 and the east face of WTC 2, initiating the collapse of each of the towers. Both photographic and video evidence—as well as accounts from the New York Police Department aviation unit during a half-hour period prior to collapse—support this sequence for each tower.
Post Modified: 08/31/06 22:04:34

4 years ago

The Conspiracy to Rewrite 9/11
Conspiracy theorists insist the U.S. government, not terrorists, staged the devastating attacks
by Jonathan Curiel, Staff Writer
San Francisco Chronicle
Sunday, September 3, 2006
Reasonably “fair and balanced” examination of the truth movement’s growth and tenacity. It’s curious, however, that such pieces so often cite psychological profiles of “conspiracy theorists”, but never question the psychiatric terrain behind knee-jerk defenders of the official line. Are the tens of millions who still believe we found WMDs in Iraq or Saddam was behind 9/11 simply ignorant or do they have psychic needs or world views that deeply require such lies? Given all we now know about government campaigns of deception, why do only the skeptics merit incessant psychoanalysis and journalistic couch time? Just asking… – Ed.
Dylan Avery has a theory that he says casts doubts on Mark Bingham’s actions on Sept. 11, 2001. According to Avery, the San Francisco public relations executive never called his mom on a cell phone from the cabin of Flight 93, and never told her that “some of us here are going to try to do something.” Instead, says Avery, someone using a voice synthesizer — possibly a government official — called Alice Hoglan on the morning that Flight 93 — and Bingham — became part of Sept. 11 lore.
“The cell phone calls were fake — no ifs, ands or buts,” Avery says in “Loose Change,” a film he wrote and directed that’s one of the most-watched movies on the Internet, with 10 million viewers in the past year. “Until the government can prove beyond a shadow of doubt that al Qaeda was behind Sept. 11, the American people have every reason to believe otherwise.”
Avery is one of perhaps millions of Americans who believe the U.S. government — or rogue elements within it — either orchestrated the attacks or tacitly supported them for nefarious reasons.
As the five-year anniversary of the attacks approaches, the clamor of Avery and other conspiracy theorists has gotten stronger — and more widely accepted. According to a poll by Ohio University and Scripps Howard News Service, 36 percent of Americans believe that government officials “either assisted in the 9/ 11 attacks or took no action to stop the attacks because they wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East.” Twelve percent of Americans believe a cruise missile fired by the U.S. military — not an American Airlines jet hijacked by Arab terrorists — slammed into the Pentagon. Sixteen percent of Americans, the survey indicates, believe that “secret explosives” — not two planes and the resulting damage — brought down the World Trade Center towers.
Conspiracy fans are viewed by most people as gullible, opportunistic, disgruntled or simply suspicious. It’s widely believed that conspiracy theorists emanate from the margins of society, that they’re a combination of paranoid, powerless, undereducated and desperate (at least desperate to assign blame). But Avery and other prominent Sept. 11 conspiracy theorists claim to represent society’s mainstream, which is skeptical of the Bush administration’s rationale for the Iraq war and Washington’s version of what really happened that day.
Some of them reject the term “conspiracy theorist,” instead calling themselves “truth activists” — people who want to expose hidden facts that the major media ignore or downplay because of their corporate ties. While many conspiracy theorists are politically liberal, they also include people on the right, including members of the John Birch Society, who imply that the Sept. 11 attacks were part of a continuing plan by U.S. elites to create a “New World Order” and impose greater control over Americans.
Some conspiracy theories are fantastical (CIA agents orchestrated the attacks; Israel planned them.) — the epitome of preposterous beliefs that start with a conclusion and work backward to find evidence. Each new month brings a deluge of crackpot theories, but a growing number of people say there are too many improbabilities — too many illogical holes — in the government’s version of what happened.
Robert Bowman, who directed the “Star Wars” defense program under Presidents Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter, reached his own conclusion after questioning (among other things) why the American military hadn’t intercepted the hijacked planes before they hit the Pentagon and the World Trade Center, why the FBI had ignored repeated pre-Sept. 11 warnings that Zacarias Moussaoui wanted to fly a plane into the World Trade Center, why the Pentagon didn’t release surveillance tapes of American Airlines Flight 77 hitting the military complex, and how, within hours after the attack, the government could so quickly produce the names and photos of the 19 hijackers.
A former U.S. Air Force lieutenant colonel with a doctorate from the California Institute of Technology, Bowman says Vice President Dick Cheney and other top government officials may have had advance knowledge of the attacks. Bowman theorizes that Cheney and other officials stood to benefit financially (in Cheney’s case, through Halliburton). Labeling these officials “neo-cons,” Bowman says they had a long-standing desire to control Iraq’s oil and to use the country as a strategic hub for controlling the entire Middle East. The Sept. 11 commission, he says, neglected to investigate these possible connections, leaving a huge gap in the official account.
“It’s hard to believe that somebody at some (government) level wasn’t complicit in this thing,” Bowman said in a phone interview from his home in Florida. Bowman, who publicly turned against the “Star Wars” system because he believed the Reagan administration secretly considered it a first-strike option and not merely a defensive weapon, says, “How could someone in the FBI turn down requests 70 times from somebody (FBI agent Harry Samit) who said he thought Moussaoui was going to fly a hijacked plane into the World Trade Center? ... I’m calling for a (new) independent investigation that will clear up everything. If the investigation shows that there were people in the United States who were involved in some way, that’s the story of the century, and the American people need to know it.”
Like many on the left and the right, Bowman points to pre-Sept. 11 documents he says foreshadowed the attacks, including a paper published in 2000 by the Project for a New American Century, a conservative think tank whose members have included Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz. The paper, titled “Rebuilding America’s Defenses,” talked about the fact that a “catastrophic and catalyzing event — a new Pearl Harbor,” would strengthen the American military because lawmakers would, given the urgency, green-light funds to continue the military’s dominance over U.S. adversaries. For conspiracy theorists, the Project for a New American Century document is a smoking gun. Its reference to Pearl Harbor is both scary and damning, they say, because some historians believe President Franklin Roosevelt knew that an attack on U.S. soil was imminent but let it happen to rally American public opinion behind going to war.
If that isn’t enough evidence to convince you that Sept. 11 was an inside job, conspiracy theorists say, there’s more. What about the fact that NORAD (North American Aerospace Defense Command) quickly intercepted golfer Payne Stewart’s wayward Learjet in 1999 but didn’t intercept the hijacked planes that crashed in New York, Washington and Shanksville, Pa.? What about the fact that witnesses at the World Trade Center reported hearing multiple explosions before the buildings’ collapse, indicating to some that the towers were brought down by planted explosives? What about the fact that Building 7 of the World Trade Center — the 47-floor structure housing offices of the CIA, the Secret Service and the Department of Defense — collapsed even though it wasn’t hit by planes?
Rebuttals have emerged to explain some of the biggest question marks. Last month, Popular Mechanics magazine published a full-length book, “Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can’t Stand Up to the Facts,” which refuted 20 claims widely held by conspiracy theorists. For example, the belief that a missile hit the Pentagon was based partly on the visible damage to the building: at the point of impact, a relatively small portion of the wall was knocked over — it wasn’t the horizontal damage to be expected from a large-winged Boeing 757.
Popular Mechanics, which interviewed more than 300 sources for its book, quotes witnesses who said at least one wing of Flight 77 smashed into an on-ground generator before the plane struck the Pentagon. An engineering expert says the plane’s outer wings likely sheared off before impact. “A jet doesn’t punch a cartoonlike outline into a concrete building upon impact,” the book says, citing an engineering professor.
What about a witness who supposedly told CNN that he saw a missile hit the Pentagon? Popular Mechanics interviews the witness, Mike Walter, who says his original words (“I looked out my window and saw this plane, this jet, an American Airlines jet, coming. ... I mean, it was like a cruise missile with wings”) were truncated and distorted by conspiracy theorists. One of those theorists was French author Thierry Meyssan, whose 2002 best-seller, “The Horrifying Fraud,” claimed the U.S. military instigated Sept. 11 as part of its plan to start new wars around the world.
In his film “Loose Change,” Avery says Bingham and other passengers on Flight 93 could not have called from the doomed jetliner because cell phones rarely work at high altitudes. He cites a research paper by A.K. Dewdney, an emeritus professor of computer science at the University of Western Ontario. But in “Debunking 9/11 Myths,” Popular Mechanics interviews experts who explain why Bingham’s cell phone would have worked that day (the plane’s low altitude helped, as did the fact it flew over rural areas, which often have cell-phone towers with powerful signal capacities).
Not surprisingly, conspiracy theorists have attacked “Debunking 9/11 Myths,” saying that Popular Mechanics is a front for the CIA. They that one of its researchers, Benjanim Chertoff, is related to Homeland Security Director Michael Chertoff, which they say is an indication of the magazine’s co-mingling with a government that was behind the attacks. (The magazine says the two Chertoffs might be distant cousins, but that they’ve never spoken.)
Conspiracy theorists might even look at this article as part of the conspiracy, because Hearst Corp., which owns Popular Mechanics, also publishes The Chronicle.
What sets “Loose Change” apart from other Sept. 11 works is that it’s visually appealing, slickly edited (with hip music) and free to watch on the internet video site YouTube. It has an anti-authoritarian edge (Avery is 22 years old) that might appeal to someone who admires Michael Moore or Jon Stewart. The film has inspired a critical response, “Screw Loose Change,” which repackages Avery’s film with rebuttals interspersed.
Conspiracy theorists often cite “facts” that really are facts, but whether they really add up to anything is another question.
In his new book, “The Terror Conspiracy: Deception, 9/11, and the Loss of Liberty,” author Jim Marrs points out that former national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski admitted that the United States began funding Afghan rebels in July 1979. Why is this important? Because, for many years, the official American version was that funding started after the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan in December 1979. Brzezinski now says the United States hoped the 1979 funding would draw in the Soviets and lead to a wider war, contributing to the demise of the Soviet Union. If the U.S. government would lie in 1979, why wouldn’t it lie again in 2001? In 1979, says Marrs, it was about gaining access to oil and gas in Central Asia. Twenty-two years later, he says, it was about Iraq’s oil.
Agreeing with Marrs is Scholars for 9/11 Truth, an organization that believes the U.S. government “permitted 9/11 to occur.” Among the group’s members are Paul W. Rea, a humanities lecturer at St. Mary’s College in Moraga; Tracy Belvins, a research scientist in bioengineering at Rice University; Kevin Barrett, a lecturer at the University of Wisconsin-Madison whose Sept. 11 views caused national controversy in July and prompted some lawmakers to insist he shouldn’t be teaching at the university; and Stephen LeRoy, an economics professor at UC Santa Barbara who has been a visiting economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.
“Conspiracists (come) from all parts of the population, they (come) from all racial and religious groups,” says Bob Goldberg, a history professor at the University of Utah and the author of “Enemies Within: The Culture of Conspiracy in Modern America.” “The fact that people who have advanced degrees believe in conspiracy theories does not surprise me because it’s not an issue of whether you’re smart or dumb. In fact, when you look at conspiracy theories, what distinguishes them is how rigorously logical they seem to be, that they are so intensely structured and that there’s a belief that every single fact is important and connects to another fact. There’s a rigor to (their) logic.”
“But,” says Goldberg, “there’s (an inflexibility to) the logic that denies things you can’t deny — whether it’s accidents, whether it’s bureaucratic process, whether it’s miscalculations, whether it’s simply mistakes. In these theories, there are no mistakes, no accidents, no bureaucracy — everything is crystal clear.”
“Debunking 9/11 Myths” makes the case that mistakes, miscommunication and bureaucratic bungling contributed to the U.S. government’s lack of immediate response to the Sept. 11 hijackings. Barrett and other conspiracy theorists will have none of it. They say the U.S. government’s version of the events is itself a conspiracy theory — a collection of assumptions bolstered by evidence, but nevertheless assumptions that are open to debate.
“After studying this fairly intensively over the past 2 1/2 years,” says Barrett in a phone interview, “I’m convinced that 9/11 was orchestrated by top U.S. officials and presumably perpetrated by members of what could be called the American allied intelligence community.”
Goldberg says conspiracy theorists — especially those fearful and distrustful of a powerful, centralized government — have existed in the United States since its founding. The attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, Goldberg says, created a perfect storm for conspiracy theorists of every political and religious persuasion.
Five years afterward, the storm isn’t abating.

4 years ago

Father Of 9/11 Victim Says Government Ran Attack As Media Hit Pieces Continue
Emotional shell game accusation of ‘disgracing victim’s memories’ doesn’t jive anymore
Paul Joseph Watson/Prison | September 4 2006
Another 9/11 family member has gone public to rubbish the conspiracy theory that the attacks were planned and executed by nineteen incompetent Arabs with box cutters who were getting drunk in a strip club the night before and barely even made it to the airport on time. Meanwhile, hit pieces against the 9/11 truth movement continue in the lead up to the fifth anniversary of the event.
A familiar emotional shell game on the part of the debunkers is to proclaim that questioning any aspect of 9/11 disgraces the memory of the victims. This tactic is clearly not working anymore especially in light of the fact that Bill Doyle, representative of the largest group of 9/11 family members – says that half now completely distrust the official version of events.
Bob McIlvaine’s son Bobby was working for Merrill Lynch in the 103rd floor of the south tower when Flight 175 struck. He was likely one of the unfortunate individuals who obeyed the Port Authority’s ridiculous order for workers to stay in the building and not evacuate even after Flight 11 had ploughed into the north tower.
McIlvaine is convinced that the attacks were an inside job orchestrated by elements within the US government.
“Today, there are no ifs or buts in my mind that this was an inside job. The US government orchestrated it with the help of MI6 and Pakistan and Mossad. What they are telling us is bullshit. The hijackers were patsies and Osama bin Laden was set up,” McIlvaine told the London Independent.
McIlvaine has since devoted his life to educating others on what really happened on 9/11.
Despite the best efforts of Jewish American Adam Yehiye Gadahn to propagandize the reality of the Al-Qaeda myth, Americans are becoming increasingly skeptical of 9/11 and if the recent rash of hit pieces against the 9/11 truth movement are anything to go by, the establishment is stricken with concern.
There were another two major 9/11 semi-debunking pieces over the weekend, one in the San Francisco Chronicle and one in Reuters. Expect a deluge of them for the next two weeks as the five year anniversary comes to pass.
The most incongruous sentence from the Chronicle piece is where CIA involvement in 9/11 is characterized as “the epitome of preposterous beliefs that start with a conclusion and work backward to find evidence.”
Wasn’t it media talking heads and government officials in the hours after the attacks who were reading off the same script and ascribing blame to Bin Laden with no substantiating evidence? Did they then not present alleged “evidence” to work backward to the already pre-determined conclusion? So-called evidence that is insufficient to federally indict Bin Laden for involvement in 9/11 five years after the attack – despite the fact that it took less than three months to indict him for the 1998 embassy bombings.
Post Modified: 09/04/06 22:03:33

4 years ago

ffs suitcase… can you just link to the article with a snippet of the text.
Jeeze, i hate reading articles on a forum.
*we know they demolished all three buildings just watch 911Eyewitness Hoboken the updated version
WMD at the WTC will be released soon

4 years ago

ffs zark… can you just clik onto Paul Joseph Watson/Prison | September 4 2006
911 Eyewitness Hoboken the updated version, my favorite part about 41 minutes into it, Richard is asking what is burning? referring to the fires that burned and burned and burned.

4 years ago

OK, here it is, the list of things the movie, WMD and the WTC will discuss, what it calls top evidence that a thermo-nuclear device was used at the World Trade Center
1. Super heated steel beams creating steel vapor trails while falling.
2. Sub -100 micron pulverization of 99% of concrete in floors.
3. 330 ton sections of outer wall steel columns ripped off.
4. Ponds of molten steel in basements of WTC 1, 2, 7.
5. 100 days required to cool down the debris piles.
6. Pyroclastic flow of debris with tall chimney rising upward.
7. People, computers, and furniture vanished but paper remained.
8. 20% of WTC dust is made up of metals in atomic sizes.
9. WTC transmission tower falls first indicating central support removed.
10. Tritium levels elevated in WTC area in weeks after 9/11.
11. Witnesses saw cars exploding and burned out wrecks that had not been hit by debris surrounded the area.
12. Wide power outage that cut off all communications in a very large area.
13. Winter garden hit by 22 ton steel beams ejected 600 feet from WTC 1.
14. Sharp spikes in seismograph at nearby Lamont-Doherty earthquake lab.
15. Brown shades of color in the air due to nuclear radiation forming sulfuric acid.
16. Huge expanding dust clouds taking five times the volume of the tower.
17. Rubble height only 10% of original instead of 33% for normal demolition.
18. No survivors found except in one isolated stairway without overhead debris.
19. Decontamination procedure seen at WTC with high-pressure water spraying.
20. Rooftop 200,000 gallon water tanks for sprinkler system but no water in ruin

4 years ago

Dr. Steven Jones blasts a lot of the thermo-nuclear theories out of the water.. Look up some of his recent powerpoint presentations PDFs… It deliniates a solid case in refute to the “thermo-nuclear” claim.

4 years ago

5. 100 days required to cool down the debris piles.
they were spraying water to keep the harmful particles down for the workers. in a weird way the might have been feeding the fire with this water.
20. Rooftop 200,000 gallon water tanks for sprinkler system but no water in ruin
200,000? i don’t think that’s right.
i gots some facts:
Two different capacity holding tanks – 10,000 gallon and 5,000
gallon – are used in the same sprinkler system. The 10,000-gallon tanks
supply the sprinkler system exclusively and are located on the 110th floor;
the 5,000-gallon tanks serve both the sprinkler and fire standpipe systems
and are located on the 110th and 42nd floors.
carc Dr. Steven Jones blasts a lot of the thermo-nuclear theories out of the water.

4 years ago

Does anybody know how long it takes thermate or thermate-melted steel to cool off?

4 years ago

5 yrs later – hardly anyone believes the BIG lie
The Truth Will Set You Free | September 12 2006
Five years after they pulled it off, hardly anyone in the world believes the ridiculous story about 19 hijackers with box-cutters and hundred-story buildings magically collapsing into their footsteps.
They miscalculated big time.
When they took the towers down, they never anticipated that this many people would question their version of reality and work so hard to demonstrate, unequivocally, that they lied. But, we did.
And to those who think that the truth was buried at ground zero, think again. It’s only a matter of time.
Just as the towers collapsed into their footprints, so will the lie.
Post Modified: 09/12/06 19:27:58

4 years ago

Five Years On, 9/11 Truth Movement Reaches Critical Mass
September 11 Press Release
Escalating mainstream mistrust of “official 9/11 story” driven by important new films, books and activist campaigns; promises new openings for insurgent candidacies and radical reform initiatives.
September 11, 2006 (PRWEB) — The year leading up to the fifth anniversary of the September 11 attacks has been marked by an unprecedented upsurge in public mistrust of the official story portrayed in the 9/11 Commission Report. Respected national polling firms Zogby and Scripps Howard have shown that less than half the public believes in the conclusions or integrity of the 9/11 Commission, and 36% of Americans now think the administration was actively complicit in the attacks to advance its preplanned Mideast war agenda.
This outburst of popular skepticism has come in spite of five years of lockstep support for the official 9/11 narrative by the national press, broadcast media, and both major political parties. The mounting distrust spans the political, religious and ethnic spectrums, and has been largely driven by compelling new films, books, whistleblower reports, and escalating grassroots activism. Collectively these resources and constituencies not only offer the country hope for a fresh and truly honest 9/11 probe, but also a potent new base for radical political reform.
Activating the Newly Awakened
To mobilize the 70+ million voting age 9/11 skeptics identified by Zogby, has organized “Politics 911,” a national effort to identify congressional candidates who would demand an honorable new 9/11 inquiry and then help generate support for their election. This campaign has started polling candidates nationwide and is currently recruiting grassroots poll volunteers at Early progress includes 9/11 truth advocate Dr. Robert Bowman’s lopsided Democratic primary victory on September 5th in Florida’s 15th Congressional District. Mavereick Ohio Democrat Rep. Dennis Kucinich has also repeatedly promised at least new 9/11 hearings if his party retakes the House, but there are also courageous GOP, Green and Libertarian hopefuls demanding 9/11 truth in their campaigns.
Majoritarian Education
National 9/11 poll analyses indicate that among citizens who know the most basic facts about September 11 anomalies (e.g., the unexplained WTC 7 collapse, the Pentagon’s six coincidental aerial war games, the 23 specific advance warnings from 11 foreign governments, etc.), four out of five support an independent re-investigation. This strongly suggests that simply continuing to publicize the most elemental facts and unanswered questions could swiftly build an irresistible public outcry for a new inquiry.
New and Old Tools for Enlightenment
The truth movement is currently blessed with an extraordinary array of new films and books that deconstruct the official story with meticulous research, passion and clarity. Among the latest crop, particularly recommends:
9/11: Press for Truth — a stunning new documentary based on Paul Thompson’s “Terror Timeline” and the story of the “Jersey Girls” who lobbied the 9/11 Commission into existence and still feel betrayed by the cover-up it spawned. (Full film available free online for several days at
9/11 and American Empire: American Intellectuals Speak Out and Christian Faith and the Truth Behind 9/11: A Call to Reflection and Action by Dr. David Ray Griffin et al. that smartly introduce the 9/11 truth conversation to influential new constituencies.
Towers of Deception — The Media Cover-up of 9-11 by Canadian media scholar Barrie Zwicker that thoroughly dissects corporate media complicity in the suppression of inconvenient 9/11 truths.
There are many more powerful works now available at and more are on the way. In the meantime, it is useful to remember some of the most basic questions that the corporate media still refuse to ask and a new 9/11 inquiry must confront
— Why do 70% of the victim families’ questions remain unanswered to this day, questions that the Commission initially promised would become the investigation’s “road map”?
—Why has the FBI gone to such lengths to cover up its passive unto hostile response to terrorist investigations prior to September 11? Why did it promote the officials who quashed these investigations while gagging agents who claim to have vital information the public still needs to know?
—Why did the 9/11 Commission steer its investigation away from virtually indisputable evidence for government complicity in the 9/11 attacks? And why hasn’t the corporate media followed up on this story?
—Why were dozens of intelligence experts “turned away, silenced or censored” by the 9/11 Commission, according to the National Security Whistleblowers Association, so that not a single meaningful word from any of their testimony made it into the final report?
—Who ordered the half dozen aerial war games that were going on during the 9/11 attacks? Who commanded and controlled them, and why has the media never questioned this bizarre coincidence?
—Why has the 9/11 Commission sealed its private hearing and interview records until January 2009? How can anyone assess its integrity or performance without any of this material?
—Why were NORAD officials permitted to repeatedly lie about our military response that morning without ever facing reprimand or censure, let alone courts martial? executive director, Janice Matthews thoughtfully welcomes the new stage the movement has reached. “The forces aligned against 9/11 truth have moved in recent months from disregard and ridicule to mass media damage control and openly hostile attacks. While this is a certain sign of progress, citizens should be alert to the ubiquitous strawman tactics now employed by official story flacks to defame our movement and re-marginalize 9/11 truth. Specifically, this involves choosing the most ludicrous hypotheses ever uttered and trying to tar the entire 9/11 movement with their absurdities. These include bizarre propositions known as the no-plane, hologram, and pod theories among others, which the mainstream movement considers as preposterous as do its disingenuous foes, who rationally cower at commonsensical questions like those above.
“Overall, however, the real message of 9/11 truth has now reached a critical mass of citizens, and ruthless defamation tactics may prolong the ‘media controversy’ but are ultimately doomed to fail. Truth has an inherent strange attractor force that cannot be dispelled, not by cynical propaganda nor overwhelming media power. It is in that lust for truth and justice that our democracy once began, and 9/11 truth now offers Americans the chance to feel that thrill again.”
Post Modified: 09/16/06 13:03:47

4 years ago

4 years ago

1993 anyone?

4 years ago

Experts Discuss Controlled Demolition
Numerous experts have stated that the collapse of the world trade centers was, or looked like, controlled demolition:
An expert on demolition said that the trade centers were brought down with explosives (and see TV interview here; both in Danish)
Two structural engineers at a prestigious Swiss university said that, on 9/11, World Trade Center 7 was brought down by controlled demolition (translation here)
A Dutch demolition expert stated that WTC 7 was imploded
A U.S. professor of physics stated that the world trade centers were brought down by controlled demolition
A U.S. professor of mechanical engineering argued that the trade centers were brought down with explosives
Several U.S. structural engineers, such as this one (second interview), have concluded that the collapse of the Trade Centers on 9/11 cannot be explained by the plane crashes and fires in the buildings
An expert on why buildings collapse said controlled demolitions make buildings fall straight down (as opposed to falling over like a tree, which is what normally happens when buildings collapse) because the vertical columns are destroyed simultaneously by explosives, and “that’s exactly what it looked like and that’s what happened” on 9/11
The head of a national demolition association stated that the collapse of the towers looked like a “classic controlled demolition”
A terrorism security expert used by many news organizations asked, after commenting on the “secondary explosions”, “whether in fact there wasn’t something else at the base of the towers that in fact were the coup de grace to bring them to the ground” (keep in mind that a controlled demolition involves the use of explosives both at the base of the building and in higher sections of the building)
Many other experts have privately expressed skepticism of the official explanation for why the Trade Centers collapsed. Hopefully, they will also find the courage to come forward publicly.
Post Modified: 09/19/06 17:11:01

4 years ago

New Short Clip from 911 Mysteries
Post Modified: 09/21/06 20:20:30

4 years ago

Thanks Suitcaseman – I hadn’t heard most of that before.

4 years ago

You’re welcome. I just noticed that the New Short Clip from 9/11 Mysteries did not go directly to that story but to the 911 Blogger page, so I changed it, so now it goes directly, also, in the meantime there are about five or six new blogs on top of it.
911 Blogger
Post Modified: 09/21/06 20:23:47

4 years ago

Great video of David Ray Griffin lecture in Denmark last week talking about the lack of a real criminal investigation of the greatest crime in U.S. history.
Also, good bit about conspiracy theories. We all believe in conspiracy theories, the newspapers are filled with stories of conspiracies every day.
Post Modified: 09/22/06 20:24:27

4 years ago

This David Ray Griffin presentation is one of the best 911 presentations I’ve seen, the purpose of the presentation, Griffin said, is to try a get Europeans interested in investigating 911 by iniviting members of the 911 Truth Movement to Europe to present evidence of an inside job and to invite people, who believe the government version, to present their evidence.
When it comes to the question of whether to reveal the truth of 911, Griffin said that the elites in the United States will not want to, because it will lead to a crisis in confidence in our governement, which would be worse than covering up 911.
Too bad Griffin is not a stronger speaker, but then again many people dislike Alex Jones, even though he is such a strong speaker, maybe the laid-back approach of Griffin is more effective. He does an outstanding job of telling the three different versions that the military came up with since 911 of why they were unable to stop any of the planes. Griffin effectively shows that the military is lying about 911.
Post Modified: 09/23/06 13:59:09

4 years ago

David Ray Griffin in Denmark
(not a direct quote)
The official story is false. There is an almost Pavlovian response in America, oh I don’t believe in conspiracy theories, they say, although the newspapers are full of conspiracy stories every day, bank robbers conspire to rob banks, people who run corporations conspire to steal money from their investors etc.
“Let us not tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories”, GWB said, about 911. Now a good theory agrees with all the facts, and a bad one is contradicted by some of the facts, and an outrageous one is contradicted by all the facts. No American journalist appreciated the subtlety of Bush’s statement.
The conspiracy theory that said OBL ordered the 911 attacks be carried out by 19 Al Queda hijackers, led by Mohamed Atta, and that they were able to crash three airliners into buildings despite America’s air defense, crashed into two buildings at the WTC causing three to collapse, and that Al Queda was the only organization with the motive and the means to carry out these attacks. This outrageous conspiracy theory was fully verified by the 911 Commission.
Post Modified: 09/24/06 17:34:40

4 years ago

Behind the Scenes of 9/11 and the Air Traffic Controllers of 9/11
Match this up with the Pentagon’s third story about what happened on 911, concerning why they were unable to stop the attacks. It doesn’t make sense.

4 years ago

I know people were speculating that these beams were cut after the building came down, if that is the case I would like to see some evidence to support that (pictures/video)
The job of a shaped charge is to cut steel H-beams. “The way we do this is by cutting the beam at an angle which through a series of beams cut at the same angle will tend to make the building shift over and ‘walk’”
Link to Video 1
Link to Video 2
link to page
Post Modified: 10/02/06 19:29:53

4 years ago

The edited piece made the rounds last week, this is the full version
link to Jowenko

4 years ago

And they say there is no evidence.

4 years ago

9/11 Truth: Thermite & The Case for Controlled Demolitions
An excerpt from 911 Mysteries. It is always good to have these shorts. They help to spread the message, because many people won’t watch the whole movie.
The Slurry Walls
Post Modified: 10/03/06 22:29:01

4 years ago

Well I have to say hat’s off to the people who put 9/11 Mysteries together
I’d love to see some further debate on those cut beams.
here’s some youtube versions of the clips for those who do not like to download
Video 1
Video 2

4 years ago

1hr 15mins 55second ——- 911 mysteries ——— that steel beam bent is mind boggling — and that fucking block of shit is just — WOW
cutting charges seen as the building collapses
As the pulverisation of all the concrete required 12 million kwh of energy, the likely hood of only thermite/thermate and rdx being used is minimal. A massive energy source was also required. A clean nuke or hydrogen bomb is the only explanation.

4 years ago

I’d love to see some further debate on those cut beams.
it’s a salvage cut and there’s a large list of reasons why.
you can even see where the entry point (top left) was.

4 years ago

WTC 7 Video From North, South & West Plus Rooftop Closeup
YouTube poster parkerjax found a video showing 3 sides of building 7. It doesn’t look like there are any big fires or substantial structural damage on the three sides shown. Judge for yourself.
“I just found this obscure video of WTC 7 prior to its collapse on 9/11/01. The video shows a lot of important information.
The South & West sides can clearly be seen. Smoke is coming from the foreground (not WTC 7) and is also pouring out of WTC 7. The thick black smoke seems indicitave of diesel fires, although the NIST says, “no diesel smells reported from the exterior, stairwells, or lobby” [Source: NIST, Preliminary Response to the World Trade Center Disaster, April 5, 2005].
On August 2, 2005 the NIST made a “special call today for photographic and video images” and went on to say that they “are especially interested in WTC 7 and views of the South and West faces of the towers.”
The NIST delivered 53 WTC investigative reports to the public on Oct. 5, 2005 but with 4 reports “incomplete”. These reports cover the WTC 7 collapse sequence, WTC debris damage from North Tower, Seismic data on 9/11 & the Con-Ed substation beneath WTC 7. Their report names are respectively “NCSTAR1-6E, NCSTAR1-6F, NCSTAR1-6G & NCSTAR1-6H”. Email and ask where these reports are and when will they be available?
Is the NIST creating the modern equivalent to the “mystery bullet” that somehow went through Connaly’s shoulder, then into his hand, then trough his hand, and then into Kennedy and then came out looking perfect?
Ask questions, demand answers. The NIST has 10 times as many people available to contribute to this report now that they are done with the first 53 sections of their 9/11 report. Furthermore, all references to WTC 7 are vague and reference these dead end reports. Many WTC 7 documents are reported to be missing, and thus NIST says things are inconclusive.
One thing is clear. In the NIST April 5th, 2005 report on WTC 7, they admitted that the “massive size of columns 79, 80, and 81 appears to require severe fires and/or damaged fireproofing to initiate thermally-related failures” [p.29].”

4 years ago

it’s a salvage cut and there’s a large list of reasons why. you can even see where the entry point (top left) was.
Whateveryousay, can you explain what you meant?

4 years ago

can you explain what you meant?
no. but i’ll copy what i read from someone:
On Christopher Bollyn’s article.
It is an erroneous article on the site that is discrediting the 9-11 truth movement. Here is the url.
This image,
Shows a steel column with a salvage torch cut not a thermite cut. Thermite cuts are smooth, rounded, non linear events lacking all control. I do not know what kind of expert the article author consulted with, but I am my own expert having been involved with salvage and welding for 35 years.
I will explain exactly how the column was cut with a torch and provide another image showing the method used where it is more easily seen.
The image in the article shows a beam having a special salvage cut done on an angle which facilitates a hinging action. The remnant, not cut, in the upper left hand corner is the hinge point, The angle of the cut allows the beam to be tilted to the left as we see it supporting the weight until the hinge snaps off. This keeps the weight from being solely supported by the grapple of the excavator that is removing the piece. The weight of the column can cause it to slide from the grapple into the area below where retrieval would be difficult if not impossible until much later. The idea is to keep and get the iron away from the hole. the angled cut allows a semi horizontal swing away from the hole by the excavator, a fairly difficult move as the grapple has to turn, the boom has to go down a little and the crowd has to go out while the tracks move in the direction the column is going to lay in while the excavator re grabs the piece to carry it away. The uncut hinge point also keeps the column in place while the salvage worker completes his cuts.
How the worker does the cuts is as follows.
On the back top left of the beam is seen the primary entry point into the hand fabricated tempered steel column. It is a slight dip, 1/2 of a hole about the same basic size as the one seen below. A torched entry hole, second image down, upper column, left side, in another column that was cut square.
With the standing column in the top image the entry hole is cut first in the upper back and a long straight salvage torch is inserted into the hole until it reaches the inside of the opposite side, the side facing the camera. The worker can clamp a straight edge to the column or prop up some pieces of steel to give a horizontal guide for the torch to slide on while pivoting the torch in the hole causing the cutting tip to travel across the inside of the opposite side. In making this cut the masses of slag dribble down the face we see. After that cut is made, the most difficult one, the worker gets along side with a standard cutting handle and completes the side cuts blowing the slag inside. Then the back cut is made.
With a piece of tube, when you cannot access to the face of opposite side, this is the only way to complete this cut.
Thermite leaves an amorphous edge that is rounded in all directions, not following any line whatsoever. In 2002 I actually saw a photo from freshkills landfill of a thermite cut column, but failed to copy it. The image is long gone.
Please remove that article and replace it with this explanation of what it really is. You will be doing a great service to the truth movement. Attributing the cut to thermite is making a laughing stock of it for anyone who actually knows what torch cuts and slag looks like.
so yeah. i don’t know… but seems more likes it’s something like that than some kind of cutting charges there.
_*”%. p. a%”:*_ |
Post Modified: 10/11/06 04:58:33

4 years ago


4 years ago

4 years ago

O’Reilly Equates 9/11 Scholars With Terrorists Threatens Truth Professors With FBI Investigation
October 14
During Professor Jim Fetzer’s appearance on The O’Reilly Factor Thursday night, O’Reilly equated the 9/11 Scholars with terrorists and threw his weight behind a move to have them being investigated by the FBI, in a similar vein to a previous case in which his false charges led to the arrest of another professor and charges of supporting terrorism which were later dismissed.
“I’d put the FBI on you and that nutty Barrett and find out what the hell you guys are up to,” salivates O’Reilly, making reference to Sammy Al-Arian, a former professor at USF who was charged and later acquitted of helping to lead a Palestinian terrorist group that carried out suicide bombings against Israel.
During a September 2001 interview before his arrest, O’Reilly told Al-Arian, “if I was the CIA, I’d follow you wherever you went. I’d follow you 24 hours.”
As Kurt Nimmo writes, “Bill O’Reilly essentially had Dr. Sami al-Arian, an associate professor of computer engineering at the University of South Florida, not only bounced from his job but also arrested and indicted by the Justice Department on racketeering and terrorist charges due to his alleged association with Palestinian Islamic Jihad. Ashcroft went as far as to characterize al-Arian as “the North American leader of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad.”
In that context O’Reilly is equating 9/11 Scholars with terrorists and throwing his weight behind a move to have them arrested, detained and charged as enemy combatants.
“O’Reilly quite literally advocated the government having the FBI track Fetzer down to find out “what you guys are up to” – Bill O’Reilly quite clearly proved tonight that he is in fact a fascist,” writes 9/11 Blogger.
O’Reilly isn’t alone in his desire to see people who question 9/11 targeted as supporters of terrorists. The White House’s own strategy document for “winning the war on terror,” cited by Bush in a recent speech, identifies conspiracy theorists as terrorist recruiters.
The rest of the alleged “interview,” in which Fetzer was barely able to get in a sentence in response to O’Reilly’s childish name-calling, O’Reilly paraded the usual straw man arguments to try and debunk questions about 9/11.
O’Reilly makes the point that if the evidence for an inside job is so strong then why hasn’t it been carried on the front pages of newspapers that “hate Bush,” like the New York Times. This is the same newspaper that unquestionably carried the phony Iraq WMD yellow cake claims that gave Bush the mandate for war and also splashed fake letters attributed to Musab Al-Zarqawi that were intentionally manufactured by the Pentagon for propaganda purposes.
O’Reilly sells the fallacy of the “liberal media,” when that same hierarchy has greased the skids for every key Bush policy or cover-up since his inauguration.
In addition, O’Reilly’s assertion that the media will not report up on the 9/11 truth movement because it lacks any credibility is trashed by the fact that countless mainstream outlets have covered the claims of 9/11 researchers for years and obsesively so in recent months.
“You’re like the guys that think space aliens kidnapped Elvis,” bleats O’Reilly, ever willing to throw out vacuous insults and cuss words yet when the issue of Building 7 is raised O’Reilly has nothing in response bar a wave of the hand.
In a clip from the previous night, O’Reilly is seen to attack a young student and berates another 9/11 Truther, Professor Kevin Barrett, for not having the facts to back up his beliefs – yet doesn’t even mention what those facts are purported to be.
It seems that O’Reilly should be the one checking his facts as the young student sets him right on several lies concerning the nature of the course Barrett teaches, including the false assertion that students have to buy Barrett’s book to join the course.
O’Reilly now seems hell-bent on getting Barrett and Fetzer suspended or fired using the same intimidation tactics that saw Professor Steven Jones suspended from teaching at BYU – after a World Net Daily hit piece in which it was salaciously and fraudulently alleged that Jones threatened violent overthrow of the U.S. government – a completely made-up piece of libel that the website had to later retract.
O’Reilly’s bully tactics are nothing new. Back in March he warned that disagreeing callers to his radio show would receive a visit from Fox security.
“Fox security then will contact your local authorities, and you will be held accountable,” barked O’Reilly.
While O’Reilly claims that the dirty words of those who dare to speak the truth, even amidst the Brownshirt society he is trying to create, should be met by a harsh response by the authorities, it was his potty mouth that was hit by a sexual harassment lawsuit two years ago when a female Fox News producer was subjected to his perverted rants about vibrators, threesomes, and masturbation.

4 years ago

Suitcase, Billo’s givin away free money!
Call him up and do some shit, and be sure to have your lawyer and reporter on tap, not to mention a recorder going. When he utters the threat, go, “GOTCHA! YOU BEEN RECORDED, AND I’M GONNA SUE YOUR PANTS OFF!”
Listen to him crap his shorts. Enjoy yourself. If Faux security shows up, get ready to collect big time.

4 years ago

Only 16% Think Government Telling the Truth about 9/11
According to a new New York Times/CBS News poll, only 16% of Americans think the government is telling the truth about 9/11:
“Do you think members of the Bush Administration are telling the truth, are mostly telling the truth but hiding something, or are they mostly lying?
Telling the truth 16%
Hiding something 53%
Mostly lying 28%
Not sure 3%”
The 16% are probably a waste of energy: if they still believe the official story, then they are unlikely to change their minds based on facts. (If you have the patience to never give up, then more power to you).
The 28% who say “mostly lying” are probably already 9/11 truthers. They may, however, simply believe that the government LET 9/11 happen on purpose, without understanding that 9/11 could not have succeeded unless elements within the government had actively ASSISTED in the attacks. So you might want to discuss some of the facts regarding the war games and the Mineta testimony, for example.
The 3% who are not sure are certainly worth reaching out to.
But I would argue that the 53% who responded that the government is “hiding something” are the best use of our time. These folks already have a little knowledge or a gut feeling that the government is hiding something, but haven’t learned enough facts to understand that 9/11 was an inside job. With a little education, they will understand that what the government is hiding is that it was complicit in the crime of the century, the biggest false flag attack in history.
And this is the majority of Americans, a worthwhile group to speak with. So spending time giving the facts to someone who understands that the government is hiding something is a very effective investment.
Addressing some of the basic facts proving that the government knew of and let the attacks succeed, or the many high-level people questioning 9/11 or saying building 7 was brought down by controlled demolition might be good places to start.
The poll also suggests that it is worth starting out conversations about 9/11 by asking the same sort of question asked by the poll. That way, you can quickly identify whether someone falls into the “hiding something”, “telling the truth”, or “mostly lying” categories.

4 years ago

doug stanhope for president
Mr. Stanhope:
Considering there are many people out there that believe 9/11 was an inside job, would you be willing to support a new independent inquiry (that is, not sponsored, payed for, and approved by the government) regardless of whether or not you personally believe them or not?
The reason I (and others) believe it is important is because 9/11 was used as a pretext for much of the legislation that has taken away our liberties to make us safer. If the pretext is false, the legislation should be eliminated ASAP because it was done under fraud, duress, and coercion.
Rick Rajter
Any legislation that takes away from your freedom should be vanquished, regardless of the pretext. Also, I would support the de-classification of documents from Roswell to the Warren Commision to 9/11, etc. If governments didnt have a history of giving you every reason to mistrust, there would not be so many conspiracy theories.

4 years ago

You remember Kevin Ryan don’t you, he worked for Underwriters Laboratories, the company that certified the steel componets used in the constuction of the World Trade Center towers. Ryan wrote an article entitled, The collapse of the WTC, which was a letter, which Ryan sent to Frank Gayle of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).
Ryan was interviewed on The Visionary Activist Show, on Thursday, October 12th, 2006. This is an audio of the interview.
Post Modified: 10/15/06 09:35:24

4 years ago

Ryan said that the first urban legend is that everything in the building melted, but over time, Ryan said, we learned about the destruction of the steel and the alternative explanations of demolitions.
Look at the videos and see if you don’t see squibs, look at the buildings exploding from the top, there is just nothing left, then look at what they are telling us specifically, none of which holds up to known facts, Ryan said. Ryan’s friend, Professor Stephen Jones, has done most of the research on molten metal.
There is lots of video and testimony of extreme temperatures, Ryan said, boots melting as workers walked along the pile, molten metal in the rubble. And streams pouring from the sides of the buildings just before the collapse. This could not have come from the fires caused by the airplanes.
We need an explanation of where this molten metal came from, Ryan said. NIST never examined the possibility of thermate. They performed certain tests like the paint-peel test. All these tests contradicted their pre-determined conclusion that the buildings collapsed due to fires, Ryan said.
Whether people know it or not, the official story has given the pancake theory up. The towers came down in a little over ten seconds. Pancaking would not allow for near free-fall collapse. But NIST wants to give people something to hang on to.
The towering inferno theory has been thrown out with the pancake theory NIST has this last theory that the fireproofing was widely dislodged. They built a little apparatus, a shotgun, to prove that this could happen, but they can’t prove that the fireproofing was lost by vibrational forces. Thousands of shotgun blasts would have been necessary. One of the reasons that this is incomprehensible is that the buildings could lose 25% of their columns and survive 100 mile an hour winds. On 9/11 only 14% to 15% of steel columns were lost.
Ryan said that there was no evidence that the fireproofing could be lost, no evidence that the temperatures were hot enough. NIST and FEMA picked out specific samples, from the fire zones and zones of impact, which were not hot enough, where no fireproofing was lost. So, they came up with theory that the floors sagged and pulled in the external columns.
They have computer models, which show that the floors sagged dramatically, much more than in the UL test, and they claim that all fireproofing was lost. There was an exaggeration of how long the fires lasted, how much fireproofing was lost, and how much the floors sagged.
Post Modified: 10/15/06 09:31:30

4 years ago

Kevin Ryan, Stephen Jones, and Jim Hoffman collaborated on this movie,
Improbable Collapse
The Demolition of Our Republic
The Puzzling Collapse of the Twin Towers and Building 7
Post Modified: 10/16/06 09:02:44

4 years ago

Improbable Collapse
Improbable Collapse is the first film to thoroughly review the evidence for WTC demolitions from a scientific perspective. We invite you to browse our site to get a sense of the subjects our film covers, the extras on the DVD, and to learn more about a few of the many people who appear in the film.
The original version of Improbable Collapse enjoyed a successful premiere on April 9th in New York City and follow-up showing at the Chicago conference in June. At both events, we acquired new images and interviews that we believe greatly enhance the film.
Most significantly, we took advantage of new opportunities to complete our work by adding interviews with Glenn Corbett, Kevin Ryan, and Steven E. Jones.
Kevin Ryan was dismissed from his executive position at Underwriters Laboratories in 2004, after the public release of a letter he wrote to Frank Gayle, a scientist in the World Trade Center fire investigation. Ryan asked Gayle to clarify the results of a UL fire test on behalf of the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST). In the test, steel structures similar to those used in the WTC were subjected to furnace fires for two hours at temperatures higher than those in the Twin Towers on September 11th. The steel withstood the test easily, and Ryan concluded this raised serious concerns about the NIST collapse hypothesis.
This is the first interview Kevin Ryan has granted on film.
Glenn Corbett, a professor of fire science at John Jay College in New York, serves as a lead adviser to the Skyscraper Safety Campaign. He has been outspoken in criticizing the rapid scrapping of steel recovered from the Ground Zero site, and the resulting handicap to all investigations of the collapse mechanism. However, Corbett provides a balancing perspective with his strong support of the widely accepted hypothesis that the Twin Towers came down as the result of plane hits and damage from fire, and that WTC 7 fell due to damage caused by the fall of the other buildings and subsequent fire.
Post Modified: 10/16/06 22:29:12

3 years ago

If you are unfamiliar with Kevin Ryan or if you have never seen his PowerPoint presentation and lecture, it’s time well spent.
This is from the Chicago conference of this past June.
A New Standard for Deception by Kevin Ryan

3 years ago

New video about WTC7 with a couple of interviews I had not seen before
Link to Video

3 years ago

You read my mind.

3 years ago

3 years ago

First Responders
Post Modified: 10/25/06 12:46:50

3 years ago

3 years ago

The individuals that are serious about looking at ALL the evidence should really check out the research by Steven Jones from BYU and watch the following movie:
These two sources of information will leave you speachless if nothing else and hopefully will open some eyes.
Remember it is not up to us to provide alternative theories or supposed chains of events. We have a government to investigate crime, if there is a murder, the scene in protected and all the evidence is collected and analyzed, ALL the evidence. If there are discrepancies, committees are formed to delegate the responsibility to third party impartial bodies (ie. independent review) to investigate. This never happened for 9/11. It should so that the people who lost their lives that day can rest in peace.
Post Modified: 10/25/06 13:56:13

3 years ago

Phone call to NTSB regarding AA77 Flight Data Recorder
“So basically there’s nothing at the NTSB that can help me?”
“That is correct”.

3 years ago

3 years ago

3 years ago

i like the photo cortez posted

3 years ago

carry on…

3 years ago

ha ha sukkaz!


3 years ago

Backers hail 9/11 theorist’s speech
By Michael Riley
Mike Berger, left, who made a film called Improbable Collapse, and J.A. Calhoun, Green Party candidate for the 2nd Congressional District, talk outside Math Auditorium at the University of Colorado at Boulder. Sept. 11 conspiracy theorists spoke there Sunday. (Post / Lyn Alweis)The standing ovation has finally died down, and Steven E. Jones, a soft-spoken physics professor, finds himself pinned against the stage by some of the enthusiastic fans who packed a University of Denver auditorium over the weekend to see him.
A man with a “Got truth?” T-shirt offers Jones a careful explanation for why the planes that crashed into the World Trade Center were operated by remote control. Another quizzes him about the size of the footprint of the Pentagon crash – too small, he says, for the Boeing 757 that “officially” smashed into it on Sept. 11, 2001.
“Can I just shake your hand?” a woman in a baggy red sweater asks Jones. “You’re doing such important work.”
If anything, Jones appears embarrassed by all the attention. Quiet and self-effacing, he’s an unlikely hero for 9/11 conspiracy theorists of every stripe, but that’s exactly what he’s become.
A physicist whose background includes work on nuclear fusion, Jones was put on leave by Brigham Young University in September after publishing a paper saying that the twin towers couldn’t have collapsed solely as a result of the planes that rammed the upper floors on Sept. 11. The paper theorizes that explosives planted inside the building must have been involved and that the buildings’ collapse was essentially a controlled demolition.
Though Jones doesn’t specify who he believes planted the charges, he concedes it would have had to be “an inside job” and likely would have included either very powerful figures on the American scene or entities inside the government.
“It’s a thought that I admit has made me lose some sleep,” Jones said.
Neither the 9/11 commission nor other extensive government reports have found any evidence of a secondary cause of the towers’ collapse.
But Jones and his work reflect the mainstreaming of a movement that has defied the Bush administration’s efforts to put it to rest and mystified people who have studied the events of that day closely: A startlingly large percentage of the population simply doesn’t believe the official explanation for the towers’ fall.
A national poll by the Scripps Survey Center at Ohio University conducted in the summer found that more than a third of people questioned believed the government either planned the attacks or could have stopped them but didn’t.
That has worried government officials enough that the State Department recently published a report titled “The Top Sept. 11 Conspiracy Theories,” an effort to debunk many of them. Separately, the National Institute of Standards and Technology – the government arm that investigated why the towers collapsed – published a seven-page document in September that attempted to answer some of the skeptics.
“We’ve watched it gain momentum,” said Brent Blanchard, director of field operations for New Jersey-based Protec Documentation Services, which studies and monitors building demolitions.
“It’s really been fascinating in a way,” he said. “We’ve been able to watch the birth of the completely out-of-control allegations that could not be true for so many reasons.”
Among the most basic of those, Blanchard said, is that there’s a consensus that the collapse of the towers began at or near the point where the planes entered the buildings, rather than at the base, where traditional demolition occurs. That means that the explosives would have had to survive the initial crash and superheated fires until they were detonated – for nearly an hour in the case of one tower, 102 minutes in the case of the other.
“That’s absolutely impossible,” Blanchard said.
Beyond that, he said, planting the explosives in secret would have been an incredible logistical undertaking.
But to the growing Sept. 11 conspiracy movement, Jones provides what even advocates concede they had been lacking: a scientific approach backed up with meticulous data analysis and carefully devised experimental testing.
Jones – who has agreed to retire from BYU at the end of 2006 – said in an interview that his first doubts emerged when he saw a video of the collapse of World Trade Center 7, the 47- story office building that collapsed seven hours after the twin towers.
The collapse took just 6.5 seconds, only a half-second more than the free-fall time a ball bearing would take when dropped from that height. That simply couldn’t take account of the normal resistance of steel columns and concrete that should have slowed the collapse by at least a few seconds, he said, but it did fit the model of a controlled demolition.
The physicist said that in more than a year of investigation, he found thermite residue in samples of dust found near ground zero and on one of the steel beams used in a Sept. 11 memorial. Thermite is a compound that, when ignited, produces incredibly high temperatures and is used by the military in incendiary grenades and to cut through steel.
Some government reports have also identified a significant presence of odd substances – including sulfur and zinc – and have noted that there is no obvious explanation for their presence. Jones said sulfur and zinc are part of a typical thermite fingerprint.
“I’m not willing to say yet that this is conclusive, but it does deserve explanation. What we’re asking for is more study and a major investigation,” said Jones, who has helped organize a group called Scholars for 9/11 Truth.
For many observers, Jones’ work says less about a hidden conspiracy behind Sept. 11 than it does an unease with the event and what has followed.
“First of all, there is the event itself,” said Christopher Farrell of the conservative think tank Judicial Watch. “It shocked, upset and offended people. Then after the fact, there were a number of contradictions or holes in the information available.”
Blanchard is more blunt: “The government’s done a lot of things in the last couple of years that has caused people to doubt their integrity about anything, including this stuff about WMD and other problems.”
After Jones’ lecture Saturday, a distinguished man with graying hair said he came because he had heard the physicist on the radio and thought it was remarkable that a scientist from so conservative a state as Utah would be a doubter.
“As you study this whole thing more, it seems to me there are a lot of valid questions,” he said.
The man said he was a businessman and didn’t want his name in the paper.
“I’m still in the business world,” he said, “and I’d be ridiculed just for being here.”
Staff writer Michael Riley can be reached at 303-954-1614 or
Post Modified: 10/31/06 08:21:54

3 years ago

The present study embodies a number of criteria which I believe derive directly from the 9/11 events. 9/11 was an example of state-sponsored, false-flag, synthetic terrorism, hereinafter called synthetic terrorism. My thesis is that the 9/11 events were organized and directed by a rogue network of high government and military officials of the United States, with a certain participation by the intelligence agencies of Britain and Israel, and with a more general backup from the intelligence agencies of the other Echelon states (Australia, New Zealand, Canada). This US network represents the current form of the Dulles Brothers-Lemnitzer-Landsdale network of the early 1960s, of the Bay of Pigs-Kennedy assassination-Gulf of Tonkin networks of a slightly later era, and of the invisible government/secret government/parallel government/shadow government that was widely understood to have been the prime mover of the Iran-contra affair. The 9/11 rogue network subsumed some of the asteroids of the 1990s, that is to say, the privatized intelligence enterprises operating under Reagan’s executive order 12333. The September criminals were financiers, top-level bureaucrats, flag-rank military officers, top intelligence officials, and technical specialists; the prime focus of their operations was in all probability a series of private sector locations, where confidentiality could be best assured by excluding elements loyal to the constitution. It is therefore probably misleading to think of people like Cheney as the hand-on field commanders of the terrorist forces of 9/11, although Cheney appears to have been complicit in other ways. Bush was expendable enough to undergo an assassination attempt that morning; he owes his continued tenure in office to his speedy capitulation to the demands of the September criminals. As time has gone on, Bush has undoubtedly learned something more about the invisible government he allowed to take over his administration. By 2004, Bush had to be considered as witting as it was possible for a person of his faculties to be about the basic facts of terrorism.
9/11 Synthetic Terrorism Made in USA, page 9.
Post Modified: 11/06/06 12:46:27

3 years ago

Introduction continued pps. 7-8
Because of the wretched performance of the Kean-Hamilton 9/11 commission, many well established facts and timelines pertaining to 9/11 have been blurred and defaced. The 9/11 commission has corrupted and confused public awareness of the basic facts of 9/11 far more than it has enhanced it. It is a rule of thumb for researchers that some of themost revealing information on a cataclysmic event like 9/11 generally becomes available in media reports in the immediate aftermath of the event. This is before the editors and producers have fully assimilated the party line of the oligarchy on what has happened, so they may well publicize facts which are incompatible with the official, mythical version of events. As time goes by, such heuristic revelations become rarer, although they may yet inflict fatal blows on the official story, particularly if the official story is beginning to break up. The 9/11 commission represents the triumph of oligarchical scholasticism, the embalming of what had been a living tragedy into a smoothed-over textbook account from which virtually all of the truth has been drained. This book therefore often gives priority to materials generated soon after 9/11, before the mind-control line of the regimebecame totally hegemonic.
The reader will understand this book better after a short note on the criteria of selection which have informed it. There already exist encyclopedias and encyclopedic timelines on 9/11 by such writers as Nico Haupt and Paul Thompson, to both of whom I am indebted for much empirical material. My aim has not been to compete with them in exhaustive completeness, but rather to offer a definite hypothesis about what happened on 9/11. This book has therefore been constructed along the following conceptual lines:
1. Mass gullibility about the events of 9/11 is based on unmediated sense certainty re-enforced by merciless and repetitious media bombardment. Receptivity to the 9/11 myth is correlated with a Hollywood-style, sense-impressionist naïve epistemology, complicated by the schizophrenic and autistic elements present in Anglo-American culture. Belief in the 9/11 myth is agreeable to a way of thinking in the tradition of John Locke’s empiricism, which is here formally rejected and repudiated. I do not offer information so much as a method, and the method used here is that of Plato, Machiavelli, and Leibniz. I join Plato in refusing the illusions of the cave in favor of dialectical reason. I assert that understanding 9/11 requires a conceptual framework; my approach is therefore conceptual and empirical, but not empiricist. The framework here is that of patsies, moles, and expert professionals discussed below.
2. This book stresses those aspects of 9/11 which indicate state sponsorship by a rogue network or invisible government operating inside the US government and military. Other aspects are given less consideration or omitted entirely.
3. This book stresses those aspects of the official version which are physically impossible. Many dubious aspects and contradictions of the official story are not treated if they can be construed as a matter of opinion, rather than being susceptible to rigorous physical proof. The same goes for physical evidence, such as pictorial evidence, where individual interpretations of what is seen may diverge. At the same time, I urge researchers interested in these aspects of the problem to continue their efforts so that the catalogue of physical impossibilities can be expanded as it doubtless deserves to be.
4. I have sought to be guided by Machiavellian political realism, rather than by the irrational appeals of propaganda.
I express my gratitude to my old friend Raynald Rouleau of Quebec City for his matchless computer expertise. Finally, this book would have been impossible without the patience and good will of my publisher, John Leonard.
Webster Griffin Tarpley
Washington DC
September 11, 2004
Post Modified: 11/06/06 13:05:38

3 years ago

I thought we saw the end of Cynthia McKinney’s smug face and her Black Panther posse when she lost her re election. Well it looks like she’s back and this time brought some kid to back her up. Ian Inaba is a 28 year old Berkley Liberal whose claim to fame is creating Eminem’s Bush bashing video “Mosh” in 2004. Now McKinney stars in Inaba’s newest independent mocumentary focusing on alleged voter disenfranchisement. A second recount of Florida’s votes by the Miami Herald and a consortium of major news organizations confirmed that George W. Bush won the 2000 election. Also, investigations by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights and the U. S. Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division found that no blacks were denied the right to vote in the 2000 election. It is obvious that this poorly directed mocumentary is designed to generate hatred among black voters toward Republicans and should be avoided by all. Lets not even mention that this woman is also a racist. Check out the below video link of her Black Panther supporters caught on tape spewing racist remarks

3 years ago

blogplatoon must be anthony, getting in a plug. This name-the-sockpuppet game is fun!

3 years ago

3 years ago

“blogplatoon must be anthony, getting in a plug. This name-the-sockpuppet game is fun!”
Or Opie. He hates those which are a darker hue than he is (pasty white).

3 years ago

3 years ago

Congratulations Democrats – NOW DO YOUR JOB
An investigative body must include the growing number of physicists, scientists, and engineers who have researched these events, including Dr. Steven Jones (BYU Physic Department), and Kevin Ryan (formerly of Underwriter Laboratories), Dr. Robert Bowman (USAF Lt. Colonel rtd.), and the 9/11 widows (known as the Jersey Girls) who fought for the 9/11 Commission and have since condemned it as frightfully incomplete and flawed. The body must also include David Ray Griffin, and use his book on the 9/11 Commission Report as a guide to re-examining the events of 9/11/2001.
Post Modified: 11/12/06 16:48:14

3 years ago

3 years ago


3 years ago

Not a single link or mention of
911 eyewitness

3 years ago

still going, best thread eva. seriously.

3 years ago

Yeah, even when the case is closed.
All the trolls have given up due to the insurmountable evidence.
and now, i find it interesting that ‘calls for 911 investigation’ strangely omit an important document on video that is titled ‘911eyewitness – Hoboken’.

3 years ago

wow i had always skipped this thread … it just took me twelve hours to get throught reading it all to post my reply… fuck i forgot what i wanted to say!?
i was convinced of a plt by page 12 but doubts started creeping in by pare 26 … i gotta pee!

3 years ago

dont panic – watch this
The dvd quality footage is awesome, you can see hundreds of flashes as the interior and exterior columns are blown during the demolition. Amazing.
Also the big boom 17 seconds before the collapse begins visibly gives the game away completely.
flashes during collapse — dvd quality is much better
tower drops first
wmd at the wtc

3 years ago

“Firefighter Describes “Molten Metal” at Ground Zero, like a Foundry”:
Molten steel running down the channel rails
pop pop pop goes the building
Post Modified: 11/17/06 04:53:01

3 years ago

i was convinced of a plt by page 12 but doubts started creeping in by pare 26
Excellent, hellcat, we need some doubters – more fun that way. What are your doubts?
I was also convinced by page 12, though I started off as a doubter. What convinced me was finding out that, contrary to the original Frontline description on pancaking floors, there were 40-some steel supports in the center. The pancake thing only makes sense without the center supports. After that, it’s obvious, huh? I mean, what happened to the core? Well, something caused them to pulverize and it wasn’t diesel fuel – duhh!

3 years ago

3 years ago

3 years ago

Firefighter Describes Molten Metal at Ground Zero, like a Foundry
Steve Watson
Friday, November 17, 2006
A video of a firefighter describing seeing molten “steel” flowing at ground zero after 9/11 has emerged on Google video. He states that it was like a foundry or “lava in a volcano”. This is an extremely important piece of footage because it highlights the fact that something other than jet fuel fires, or in the case of building 7, office material fires, was responsible for the collapse of the buildings.
There are lots of accounts alleging that rescue workers encountered molten steel. Debunkers have often asked the question whether these witnesses know the difference between incandescent and molten, i.e. the fact that glowing steel was pulled out of the rubble doesn’t mean it was molten.
The firefighter in this video specifically says the steel was flowing.
Molten metal found in the basement of the WTC suggests that the commonly used explosive thermite may be responsible for the collapse. Physics professor Steven Jones, formerly of Brigham Young University, has conducted extensive research to prove that buildings not destroyed by explosives would have insufficient directed energy to produce the large quantities of melted metal that was discovered. The molten steel was found five days after the collapse, on Sept. 16, when the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) used an Airborne Visible/Infrared Imaging Spectrometer (AVIRIS) to locate and measure the site’s hot spots.
It requires temperatures of at least 5,000 fahrenheit to melt steel. Diesel jet fuel does not reach these temperatures and the fires in the buildings were short lived. Firefighter tape recordings prove that only small pockets of fire were still burning in the buildings seconds before their collapse.
The USGS Spectroscopy Lab produced images which showed dense thermal hot spots days and weeks after the attacks. ABC News reported that, “the temperature at the core of “the pile,” is near 2000 degrees Fahrenheit, according to fire officials, who add that the fires are too deep for firefighters to get to.”
In perfect conditions the maximum temperature that can be reached by hydrocarbons such as jet fuel burning in air is 1520° F (825° C). When the World Trade Center collapsed the deeply buried fires would have been deprived of oxygen and their temperatures would have significantly decreased.
Why was the temperature at the core of “the pile” nearly 500° F hotter than the maximum burning temperature of jet fuel a full seven days after the collapses? There were no infernos in either of the twin towers before they collapsed, so what caused the hot spots deep in their wreckage?
Dr. Frank Gayle, Metals Expert, on the jet fuel fires which burned in the WTC buildings:
“Your gut reaction would be the jet fuel is what made the fire so very intense, a lot of people figured that’s what melted the steel. Indeed it didn’t, the steel did not melt.”
Molten steel did not exist in the WTC buildings prior to the collapses, but…
Molten steel was found “three, four, and five weeks later, when the rubble was being removed [from WTCs 1 & 2],” Mark Loizeaux, president of Controlled Demolition, Inc. (CDI) of Phoenix, Maryland is on record as saying. He said molten steel was also found at 7 WTC, which collapsed mysteriously in the late afternoon.
One of the more unusual artifacts to emerge from the rubble was a rock-like object which has come to be known as “the meteorite”. It is a fused element of molten steel and concrete all fused by the heat into one single element.
What caused the steel to melt? How did it stay molten for weeks after the collapses? How did fires in the WTC wreckage manage to burn for more than three months?
According to The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, a thermite reaction generates extraordinarily high temperatures in excess of 2,500°C. This provides a credible explanation for the fires, hot spots and molten steel (a by-product of the thermite reaction) found in the collapsed buildings.
Thermite contains its own supply of oxygen, and does not require any external source such as air. Consequently, it cannot be smothered and may ignite in any environment, given sufficient initial heat. It will burn just as well while underwater, for example, and cannot even be extinguished with water, as water sprayed on a thermite reaction will instantly be boiled into steam.
The use of thermite and thermate is also common in military circles:
Thermite grenades are used by the military as incendiary devices to quickly destroy items or equipment when there is imminent danger of them being captured by enemy forces. Because of the difficulty in igniting standard iron-thermite, plus the fact that it burns with practically no flame and has a small radius of action, standard thermite is rarely used on its own as an incendiary composition. It is more usually employed with other ingredients added to enhance its incendiary effects. Thermate-TH3 is a mixture of thermite and pyrotechnic additives which have been found to be superior to standard thermite for incendiary purposes. Its composition by weight is generally thermite 68.7%, barium nitrate 29.0%, sulphur 2.0% and binder 0.3%.
Professor Jones contends that thermite devices could be set off at will using thermite electrical matches commonly used for controlled demolitions. He also points to evidence of a dark grey thermite residue on recovered steel columns from the towers.
In August 2006 the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) responded to questions of controlled demolition and thermite use by dismissing all the evidence outright in two incredible sentences. Firstly in response to the thermite theory:
“Analysis of the WTC steel for the elements in thermite/thermate would not necessarily have been conclusive. The metal compounds also would have been present in the construction materials making up the WTC towers, and sulfur is present in the gypsum wallboard that was prevalent in the interior partitions.”
NIST also contend that the suggestion is irrelevant because they had already ruled out controlled demolition.
Secondly on the molten metal:
“The condition of the steel in the wreckage of the WTC towers (i.e., whether it was in a molten state or not) was irrelevant to the investigation of the collapse since it does not provide any conclusive information on the condition of the steel when the WTC towers were standing.”
Oh OK, forget it then shall we?
Post Modified: 11/17/06 21:42:22

3 years ago

San Francisco Screening 911 Press For Truth Video
Post Modified: 11/17/06 21:48:05

3 years ago

Hey, Suitcaseman. I posted a post here and it’s gone! It said I would use that Jones bit about the superthermite in a separate thread, because it answered the usual nagging question of the naysayers, and I don’t think they’re following this anymore. I refered them back here for the link, so’s not to derail. :)

3 years ago

It disappeared?

3 years ago

3 years ago

Wow is right.

3 years ago

If you click onto the link that Zark put up this is what is says now
This page is currently UNDER CONSTRUCTION and is currently being updated.
But check out the pictures.

Figure 32. Mostly unburned paper mixes with the top half of the Twin Towers. As seen a block away, a large portion of the towers remains suspended in air. This dust looks deeper than one inch. Most of the curb looks filled in.
Post Modified: 11/21/06 09:12:59

3 years ago

Okay, a new wrinkle. Shogo was scathing when I suggested a secret vaporizing weapon. I eagerly await developments so I can do the old ITYS!

3 years ago

9/11 autopsy guidelines exclude probe of link to Ground Zero air
NEW YORK — An effort to create standard autopsy guidelines that could document a link between toxic air at Ground Zero and deaths of 9/11 rescue workers has been abandoned by the federal government amid concerns the information collected could be misinterpreted.
Post Modified: 11/21/06 00:10:54

3 years ago

New Bond Film Highlights 9/11 Insider Trading
In a twenty first century update, the new James Bond Movie, Casino Royale, directly references 9/11 and highlights the fact that massive manipulation of airline stocks prior to the attacks account for a leading motive behind the event.

3 years ago

i think dust is just getting shaked off when thing falls down.

3 years ago

Dr. Steven Jones ‘Lifting the Fog’ Berkeley Lecture Now on Google Video
This is the recording of a live webcast of Steven Jones’ presentation from the Lifting the Fog conference held on the campus of UC Berkeley thanks to
Post Modified: 11/24/06 08:30:43

3 years ago

?i think dust is just getting shaked off when thing falls down?
seems that way yet seen here
7 seconds in, the futherest left column with beams at a 135 degree angle from vertical. At this point dust appears from underneath the beam, being ejected from both sides. These dust clouds appear as puffs of smoke.
Fetzer has a few things to say – 16 min clip
Post Modified: 11/23/06 01:58:03

3 years ago

Having debate the 911 issue for some time, rather than rehashing all the same arguments, let me say this.
It was a controlled demolition; anyone who has doubts about the twin towers only need examine the argument and evidence on building 7 to conclude this.
Anyone who has examined the evidence and still believes that an aircraft went into the Pentagon is either A: stupid or B: covertly or overtly working for the US government.
It was a black operation by the US miltary; same old, same old, they have done this so many times before and even admitted it later.
OK so the guys at and most of the 911 truth movement are not Anarchist Communists, not even anti-Capitalists, politically they are imbeciles but that is not an excuse to ignore their argument and evidence.
If some Anglo-American state terrorist collaborator wrote an essay in Popular Mechanics stating that there is a planet made of Blue Cheese, someone would believe it in the same way that there are Catholics with physics degrees who believe that God fucked the mother of Jesus, and if you ask them who fucked the alleged ‘Mother of God’ they might tell you that that the mother of god was fucked by God’s great grandmother and that God’s great grandmother was fucked by God’s great, great (ad infinitum) grandmother.
For nuclear guerilla war against the Anglo-American state terrorists
No mercy on they who deserve none.
On the Military Strategy of the State Terrorists. Sept 11th and other ‘false flag’ military operations: .Alex Jones’ latest video ‘Terrorstorm’ military black military operations on:
(Loose Change: Sept 11th video: a black op by the US military: broadband)

3 years ago

but conventional demolition equipment i.e RDX et al doesnt account for all the events that day.
Steel can be seen vaporising
Molten steel flows were witnessed by firemen
All the building contents were reduced to fineness powder including people and concrete
Its all very well concluding it was done by ‘expert teams’ yet the methods and materials used are original outside military situations.
Not even the impact holes can be modelled using the named passenger jets.
The 911 Scholars are moving into new ground of explanations.
Alex Jones will remain rooted in ‘media reports’ and thats his genius of method, but unless a newsstory is written or an inside expert talks of the extraordinary Jones will not entertain it .. i.e holograms used to mask the bunkerbusters that hit the WTC 1 and 2.

3 years ago

Spreading the Words

John Conner Visits San Diego State University
Tagging for Truth
And Testing Our Constitution
Post Modified: 11/24/06 08:29:18

3 years ago

“John Conner Visits San Diego State University”
John Conner is at fault for the apocalypse. Someone mobilize a terminator.
Yay, the number of this post is the exact number of people whom died on 911! I get a prize, right?

3 years ago

i.e holograms used to mask the bunkerbusters that hit the WTC 1 and 2.
:^0 whu?

3 years ago

WYS: vaporize think dust is just getting shaked off when thing falls down.
Exactly. Which is why Fetzer is way too impressionable. The ‘spire’ simply fell in a hurry, leaving behind dust.
Holograms? Huh?
Look, as you may know by the comments I’ve made in this thread, I fully believe that the demolition of WTC 1 and 2 is a fair possibility, and that WTC-7 demolition was very probable. But I really really doubt any ‘directed enery beams’ or holograms were involved whatsoever, and mention of these things is very misleading without evidence. Low compression video artifacts are not proof of anything other than the fact that you have a shitty video.

3 years ago

On the other hand…
There have been many separate reports regarding molten steel in the sub-basements, with credible witnesses such as firefighters using words such as a ‘foundry’, ‘like lava’, and ‘a furnace’, with temperatures nearing 2000 Fahrenheit one week after collapse [ABC reported], with some areas below the rubble of WTC7 even hotter than those under WTC1 and WTC2, with all the rubble burning for over 100 days…
All of that and several other articles of physical evidence is (to the best of my knowledge) real and worth pursuing.
P.S…. Planes hit the buildings. There have been literally thousands of people reporting they saw the planes with their own eyes.

3 years ago

2 9 4 2
Post Modified: 11/24/06 22:16:13

3 years ago

P.S…. Planes hit the buildings. There have been literally thousands of people reporting they saw the planes with their own eyes
yet NIST have been unable to model 767 jets to the holes in buildings 1 and 2.
On page 110 both figures for the WTC 1 and 2, NIST admit that the ‘plane wing’ damage is Correct mode, magnitude insufficient
The NIST model explicity modeled the fuel. If the fuel mass in the WAI model was spread out further towards the wing tips as part of the wing structure, it would be expected that the calculated column damage would extend over a wider portion of the wings.
page 408 (Adobe page numbering) fig 7-87
Now the evidence remaining is in the form of ‘eye-witness’ and video evidence. I have looked at all the video evidence and all the footage has anomolies. video evidence messed up
here is the hologram masking. The left wing passes on our side of City Bank — that is impossible.
also the left wing also passes on our side of 55 Water Street

full analysis

Now this following clip is of things to come, the object emerging from the tower would of had to have passed through
a) outer perimeter
b) floor truss
c) a cluster of 8 central columns
d) another floor truss
e) outer perimeter
and emerge intact. Get the fuck out of here.
video clip
part two – second flash down
Post Modified: 11/25/06 01:59:07

3 years ago

3.7 degree etc…
hey look… the top of the twin tower is exactly the same angle… omg the buildings leaning ahhhghhghghhg!
you know the moon’s smaller than a 10pence piece cause if you hold up the coin in front of your eye it covers the moon you know.
like, OMG! you can totally see a plane’s wing through a scaffolding on top a bank! WTF!

3 years ago

OMG i got rumsfeld saying missles hit the buildings . check it out
Here we’re talking about plastic knives and using an American Airlines flight filed with our citizens, and the missile to damage this building and similar (inaudible) that damaged the World Trade Center.
Oh really !!!
You must of read Peter Dale Scott “Deep Politics” (if not, read it).
following on;
Why did Bush stay in the school after the impacts? Or more correctly why didnt Secret Service get the president out of there immediately?
because.. they were fearful of a missile attack on the presidential car and airforce one.
check it out;
In 1997 Clinton Admin changed the rules of interception for specifically Missile attacks upon the US.
Robert Bell, senior director for defense policy and arms control at the National Security Council (1997 quote)
in this PDD we direct our military forces to continue to posture themselves in such a way as to not rely on launch on warning—to be able to absorb a nuclear strike and still have enough force surviving to constitute credible deterrence’. Bell pointed out that while the United States has always had the “technical capability” to implement a policy of launch on warning, it has chosen not to do so. “Our policy is to confirm that we are under nuclear attack with actual detonations before retaliating
Before Bush and Cheney transferred shoot-down power from NORAD, Clinton was already neutralising the Military defense system.
but Secret Service were ramping it up in response;
missile attack on presidential limo
I always wondered why the Secret Service left Bush in the school for 15 mins (or whatever time) and didnt whisk him out of there immediately. Now it is a little clearer…. they were worried about missile attacks on the presidential car.
Is this why NORAD stood down? Cheney was following procedure by allowing the missiles to hit their targets.
NORAD, the Military, the Administration do not want to admit that it was/is National Security policy to allow missiles to hit their targets.
Also consider the lack of outraged pilots.
No pilot would be upset or outraged because since 1997 it was standard military procedure to allow missiles to hit their targets.
Within all the lies by the Bush Admin and Neo-cons it is a common line of
hijacked jets hit the buildings
Why is this aspect of the official story being accepted as truth when accepting military response, the NORAD tapes, Rumsfelds quote it is much more plausible that missiles were used on 9/11 and thus the STAND DOWN order and thus the silence.
Everything was done to procedure on that day.
The missiles were launched
NORAD and FAA were not allowed to intercept
The administration are hiding behind procedure enacted by the Democrats
Democrats will say nothing
Post Modified: 11/25/06 10:55:53

3 years ago

Astounding as it may sound we have the regretful news that 911Eyewitness Rick Siegel has been banned from the Scholars for 911Truth by Steven Jones the x-professor from BYU for posting a video of Jones answering, or better put, not answering simple direct questions in a recent presentation.
In his message explaining his orders to ban Siegel it is explained that a single user complained of the posting on Rick Siegel’s site and that prompted Jones to allow his agents to delete the 911Eyewitness account from the Scholars Forum.
Steven Jones Censors 911 Eyewitness from Scholars Forums!
Jones did not produce a thread showing any abuse, only the single member complaining of a “hit piece” on a personal website. The rules did not say that was cause for banning. What Jones did was say this was in retribution for Fetzer banning another user that Jones wanted in their forum.
911eyewitness abhors the fact that Jones has manipulated our account in retribution. What he has really done is cause more divisions of the movement and he knew what he was doing. Nice move Jones, the marks mark themselves as they prey on the pack.
check out the question
His non-answer is very very dodgey. Jones hasnt submitted a paper for peer-review (or has had it rejected) and clearly has no plans to do so.
Post Modified: 11/25/06 11:08:10

3 years ago

I was watching 911 Eyewitness just last night with somebody who hasn’t seen it before, we watched part one, with the helicopters, and the explosions. It is a little difficult to know exactly what the helicopters were up to, the explosions are there that is for sure, you can hear them, and you can see the smoke rising from the bottom of the WTC.
2 9 4 7
Post Modified: 11/25/06 12:16:08

3 years ago

911Eyewitness-Hoboken, the updated version, irons out the loosely explained bits in the first one.
Post Modified: 11/25/06 13:53:36

3 years ago

911 Eyewitness Hoboken Highlights 1 Hour TV Special
2 9 4 9
Post Modified: 11/26/06 08:28:54

3 years ago

The 9/11 Conspiracists and the Decline of the American Left
2 9 5 0
Post Modified: 12/01/06 08:26:37

3 years ago

The real story of the day is that Jones has found evidence for thermite. There is probably more to the Siegle/Jones blow-up than meets the eye, as this would be the time for agents provacateurs to be making mayhem in the movement.

3 years ago

America Rebuilds II
2 9 5 2
Post Modified: 12/01/06 20:03:44

3 years ago

The real story of the day is that Jones has found evidence for thermite
Yeah, well that may turn out to be a fact yet
1) Jones hasnt submitted his paper for academic peer review (perfectionist maybe)
2) Has it been established that Thermite/Thermate wasnt used in the clean up of the debris?
It wont be long until it surfaces that during clean up thermate was used to remove the debris. It’ll come from a reputable source with just enough credance to destroy Jones argument but just enough ‘criminality’ to keep Jones work alive.
betcha… betcha 1 dollar.

3 years ago

New Article at Journal of 9/11 Studies – 911 – Acceleration Close to Free Fall
2 9 5 4
Frank Legge (Ph D)
Logical Systems Consulting
Perth, Western Australia.
The topic of the downward acceleration of the buildings at the World Trade Centre has been frequently discussed. The discussion is usually brief and combined with other lines of evidence for explosive demolition and its significance is thereby obscured. Acceleration is an important topic because it is based on evidence readily available to all, namely videos, and also because the calculations involved are not complex and can easily be verified by the reader. The conclusion reached that explosives were used in the demolition of these buildings is therefore not only compelling but readily accessible.
On the 11th of September 2001 the twin towers of the World Trade Centre (WTC) were hit by aircraft and collapsed with tragic loss of life shortly afterwards. Videos of these collapses have been shown repeatedly on television. About seven hours later building 7 of the WTC also collapsed. This caused astonishment as it had not been hit by a plane. Despite the intriguing nature of this event videos of this collapse have rarely been shown and most of the population is unaware that a third building fell that day. This paper will deal only with that building.
There was little evidence of fire and it seems reasonable to assume that if firefighters had been permitted to work in the building the fires would have been extinguished. No loss of life occurred with WTC 7 as it had been evacuated long before the collapse. This arouses suspicion that someone in charge was aware that it was to be demolished and motivates investigation.
Post Modified: 12/02/06 22:28:55

3 years ago

2 9 5 5
Since the media was not complicit on 9/11/2001, we can go back and watch television coverage on 9/11, and we can see clearly what happened, and since seeing is believing, we know what happened. When Building #7 came down, the reporters, newscasters, whatever you want to call them, gave you their impressions unadulterated.
A couple of things might have helped the perpetrators, for example, no coverage, no pictures, no reporting period, that would have been ideal. The government should have announced, “We have a national emergency, everybody away, go home, read it about it tomorrow in the newspapers”. But we have the collapses of the three buildings in less than thirty seconds, about eleven seconds for 1 & 2, less than seven seconds for Building 7, which was 48 stories high, which was not hit by an airplane, and which came down (not like a demolition) but by demolition. We know we are watching a building collapse due to controlled demolition.
Speaking about all this, check your local listings for BET, because they are doing the Freeway Ricky Ross Story this Tuesday night at 10 p.m.
Post Modified: 12/03/06 11:51:21

3 years ago

2 9 5 6
Post Modified: 12/05/06 21:31:16

3 years ago

Video: David Lynch on Loose Change
2 9 5 7
“ don’t have to believe everything in the documentary to still have questions come up… and you look back and you remember what you saw, and what you were told, and now, you have questions.”
Post Modified: 12/06/06 13:06:32

3 years ago

2 9 5 8
Post Modified: 12/12/06 18:26:55

3 years ago

3 years ago

Well not often do you get something this good, I just listened to it, it is fantastic, a half-hour interview with a former Boston Center Air Traffic Controller regarding 911. Thirty minutes to make a hell of a case about who knew what among the FAA and NORAD personnel.
2 9 6 0
Post Modified: 12/13/06 21:59:58

3 years ago

Thanks for that.
That pilot group is badass.

3 years ago

This New York Times/CBS poll shows only 16% of the population believes Bushies on 9/11. Most think they’re lying or hiding something.

3 years ago

Interesting poll, because, if you believe that Bush was given an ultimatum on 9/11, as Webster Tarpley said, the Angel Is Next theory, I guess The September Criminals , as Tarpley calls them, were counting on the incompetence of the Bush administration prior to 911, or arranging their incompetence, particularly so that it would ignore warnings of the 911 attacks, because, if Bush capitulated on 9/11, as Tarpley says, then the Bush administration was not in on 911 from the beginning.
2 9 6 3
Post Modified: 12/15/06 08:58:35

3 years ago

Yo suitcase man, clicking on the “link WTC 7 Any Questions?” you posted gets you: “bunch of numbers” is banned. What did the link say? Are you sure you linked it properly? If not, who banned it?

3 years ago

Who ever they are, at least they’re sorry about it.

3 years ago

And if you look up the page source it still just says “Sorry, has been banned.”, and so it’s not just dude who wrote “Sorry, has been banned.”
I have never come across a banned page before.

3 years ago

It is there and it is working.
2 9 6 7
Post Modified: 12/14/06 21:48:57

3 years ago

But in case it disappears, it is posted on 911 Blogger, and it comes from, and it is a minute long video comparison of a steel frame building that burned for 15 hours and was still standing the next day, to WTC 7, which burned for 7 hours and collapsed in less than 7 seconds.
2 9 6 8
Post Modified: 12/14/06 21:38:15

3 years ago

Is this the strangest picture of 9/11 ???

I am trying to work it out but be-fucked if i can.
I am completely baffled.
n.b dont answer unless you know what you are looking at, ty

3 years ago

So, what am I looking at here, Zark? Bldg’s 5 & 6?

3 years ago

Seems so, doesnt it
but the question is;
whats wrong with the picture?
n.b its a picture i found while browsing and i thought, WTF.
Post Modified: 12/15/06 13:03:26

3 years ago

It is there and it is working.
It doesn’t work for me, either one, it just says Sorry, “ has been banned”, and I’m on a different computer then I was yesterday. I think it is a problem on their end, 911 blogger, as I can access their old site.

3 years ago

Have you tried prison planet?
2 9 7 3
Post Modified: 12/15/06 21:37:10

3 years ago

Yeah, prison planet works, it just the couple of links you’ve posted here leading to 911 blogger that I’ve ever got such a message.

3 years ago

3 years ago

3 years ago

i don’t know where or who to comment … I think IsarelForever said it best when he said : “CRACKERJACKS”
bunch of crackerjacks …. hahahaha …. Even if I called you all homos … theres no way Anthony or Silverback would ever visit this idiotic thread !!!
... oh shit that is unless … gren narks me out. Pussy!
Post Modified: 12/18/06 13:41:22

3 years ago

Thanks for the bump, hellcat. I got to watch some good videos.

3 years ago

what videos Chick?... You mean that 70s anal porn you filmed on that hippie commune, is that filth on Youtube too? Wow time magazine WAS right … You ARE the person on the year … congrrats … you dirty slut ….
mouhahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahaha … catch me if you can A … catch me if you can !!!!!!!

3 years ago

Morgan Reynolds, who is responsible for this thread, was interviewed at the June 2nd, 2006 911 Truth Conference in Chicago. Reynolds is a former director of The Criminal Justice Center at The National Center for Policy Analysis, which is headquartered in Dallas, Texas, and he talked about a comment Jim Garrison made in his book about the Kennedy assassination, On the Trail of the Assassins, “the whole story did not wear well”. He said the same thing is happening with 911, the story does not wear well. Right after JFK was assassinated, only a minority doubted the government story, but by 1967, two out of three, according to national polls, doubted the official lone assassin theory.
Reynolds Revisited
2 9 8 0
Post Modified: 12/21/06 21:35:05

3 years ago

New 9/11 video presentation from
This is a basic video / audio / powerpoint presentation and while it is not as entertaining or ‘sexy’ as other 9/11 documentaries it is meticulous in its covering and citing of information.
2 9 8 1
Post Modified: 12/24/06 08:28:48

3 years ago

911: Dust and Deceit at the WTC – a film by Penny Little

Click onto the book cover after clicking on to the link above
Penny has produced a powerful and brilliant offering to the body of knowledge surrounding the events of September 11th. 9-11 Truth cannot be ignored and the issues of the dust are no exception. Visibility 9-11 highly recommends this film and encourages all listeners to buy a copy and show it in public to as many people as they can get to watch it.
2 9 8 2
Post Modified: 01/01/07 17:20:34

3 years ago

Thanks, SCM.
Good to see you back, hope you had a good rest.
BTW, as far as I’m concerned, post 3000 is reserved for you :)

3 years ago

You’re welcome aaron. Thanks for the kind words.
Looks like more and more people are finding out about September 11th every day. Most people don’t even know about Building 7, and if you notice, whenever a 911 Truth person asks for the collapse to be shown on television, the networks do not oblige.
This 911 Truth stuff is getting on the local news around the country.
Local WI News Reports on 9/11 Truth
And the latest on the national level.
Actor James Brolin Plugs on The View – Video Download
2 9 8 4
Post Modified: 01/01/07 22:40:06

3 years ago

You remember Kevin Ryan don’t you, he worked for Underwriters Laboratories, the company that certified the steel componets used in the constuction of the World Trade Center towers. Ryan wrote an article entitled, The collapse of the WTC, which was a letter, which Ryan sent to Frank Gayle of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).
Ryan was interviewed on The Visionary Activist Show, on Thursday, October 12th, 2006. This is an audio of the interview.
I posted this interview and summarized it three months ago on page 29 of this thread.
2 9 8 5
Here is the latest offering from Kevin Ryan
Another Opportunity to Understand Our Predicament
Post Modified: 01/03/07 11:25:21

3 years ago

Something I found here
Reminds me of a blog I did a little over two years ago called Controlled Demolitions at WTC
2 9 8 6
Post Modified: 01/05/07 21:37:34

3 years ago

Building number 7 is the key
Those who poo-poo alternative theories about 9-11 should adopt the methods of science and try to explain what happened to the building that was not hit by a plane
2 9 8 7

3 years ago

3 years ago

9/11 Probe Question Will Pass To Voters
Webster Tarpley talked to Mark Estrin about what they are doing in Burlington, Vermont, in an interview on World Crisis Radio, on Saturday, January 13, 2007.
Click on to Back to Broadcast Archives Page to get to the 2007 shows, that will get you to the January 13 show, Estrin comes on in the second hour.
2 9 8 9
Post Modified: 01/16/07 09:15:18

3 years ago

In case you can’t get to listen to Tarpley interview Mark Estrin, this is part of what Estrin told Tarpley about the efforts he and others in Burlington, Vermont made to get the issue of a new 911 investigation to the voters in the next election.
Mark Estrin, who lives in Burlington, Vermont, is one of the leading novelists of his time, and one of the spokespersons to put the 911 issue before the Burlington Town Meeting. The question is, Shall the Vermont Congressional delegation demand a new thorough investigation of 911?
Mark Estrin is part of a group of people, who are studying the official 911 story. They put together a group of qualified people, a physicist, an engineer, a chemist, a graphics designer, a video producer and decided to do a bunch of projects together. They have a White Subaru painted with 911 websites, and they park it in different places in the city, so it is a moving, free advertising board. They distribute DVDS to anybody and everybody.
There are two processes in Burlington to get an issue on the ballot, one is to get 5% of the registered voters. They went to the election polling places in the November elections, because they knew the people were registered voters, so they went to three of the seven polling places and got most of the signatures that way. They did more than two-thirds of signatures on election day, and filled in the rest by going to libraries and other places.
The Burlington Free Press did an original article on their efforts, it is kind of a center-right paper, and Estrin said he was surprised they stayed with the story. Estrin said it is quite easy to demonstrate that the 911 Report is seriously flawed, but Vermont’s Congressional delegation may choose to ignore the petition.
2 9 9 0

3 years ago

Legal Defense Fund for Whistleblower Kevin Ryan
2 9 9 1
Post Modified: 01/15/07 13:22:24

3 years ago

Key 9/11 survivor in Lancaster
The last man to leave the World Trade Center building alive is coming to Lancaster on Thursday, February 8, to speak on his experiences during and since 9/11. Visitor news editor INGRID KENT hears what William Rodriguez has to stay and finds out why he will be travelling all the way to the UK to give a lecture
2 9 9 2

3 years ago

9/11 Cop Dies Just as His Son, Clinton’s Guest, Faces Bush

A former New York policeman died late Tuesday in a Manhattan hospital, just as his 21-year-old son prepared to appear at the State of the Union speech to symbolize the desperate health problems of his father and other sick Sept. 11 workers.
2 9 9 3
Post Modified: 01/24/07 08:42:34

3 years ago

Soon after 9/11, our guest John Feal (a US Army veteran) started experiencing serious respiratory problems, a condition they now call “The World Trade Center Cough.” He spent two months in the hospital while he battled with a host of health problems. Because of an arbitrary exclusion in the law, Feal, like many search and rescue workers who were injured during a two-week window at Ground Zero did not qualify for the 9/11 relief fund. Like thousands of others, John risked his own life to save others, but when he became sick and injured, he was abandoned and forgotten.

Visibility 911
2 9 9 4
Post Modified: 01/24/07 09:12:29

3 years ago

3 years ago

9/11 was an inside job says ShaylerJan 22 2007
by Paddy Shennan, Liverpool Echo
EX-MI5 officer David Shayler, who will be in Liverpool to launch the Truth Movement, tells Paddy Shennan what he thinks about the New York terror attacks
2 9 9 6
Post Modified: 01/24/07 17:21:27

3 years ago

3 years ago

3 years ago

Another Military Exercise Relevant to 9/11 is Amalgam Virgo
2 9 9 9
Post Modified: 01/24/07 17:31:09

3 years ago

Project Constellation
3 0 0 0
Post Modified: 01/24/07 17:26:44

No comments:

Post a Comment