NIST: “… we are unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse.”
C O L L A P S E ? ?
-----------------------------
COVERUP AT GROUND ZERO:
Fire Engineering has good reason to believe that the “official investigation” blessed by FEMA and run by the American Society of Civil Engineers is a half-baked farce that may already have been commandeered by political forces whose primary interests, to put it mildly, lie far afield of full disclosure. --Bill Manning, Fire Engineering Magazine
-----------------------------
"They showed us many fascinating slides" [Eaton] continued, "ranging from molten
metal which was still red hot weeks after the event, to 4-inch thick steel plates sheared
and bent in the disaster". --Structural Engineer, 3. september, 2002, s. 6
-----------------------------
"Fires are still actively burning and the smoke is very intense. In some pockets now being uncovered, they are finding molten steel." --Alison Geyh, PhD
-----------------------------
Molten Metal Flows at Ground Zero (video)
-----------------------------
-----------------------------
Extremely hot metal at ground zero (video)
-----------------------------
Molten Metal Pours from South Tower
-----------------------------
-----------------------------
Eyewitness accounts: 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." --NIST, Answers to FAQ, pt. 13
-----------------------------
“...we are unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse.” --NIST
------------------------------
"... the official conclusion that NIST arrived at is questionable." --James Quintiere, Ph.D., former Chief of the Fire Science Division of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
-----------------------------
"Steven Jones’ call for a “serious investigation” of the hypothesis that the WTC 7 and the Twin Towers were brought down . . . through the use of pre-positioned cutter-charges” must be the rallying cry for all building design experts to speak out." --Max Ayres
------------------------------
Architects & Engineers calling for a new investigation
------------------------------
------------------------------
"When everyone is to blame . . . no one is to blame."
“[The] American people shared the blame for 9-11 for underestimating the terrorist threat.” --Condoleezza Rice
------------------------------
The 9/11 Whitewash: Blaming No One
------------------------------
"Du kan kalle meg
konspirasjonsteoretiker, hvis du
kaller alle andre
tilfeldighetsteoretiker. Jeg
foretrekker å si at jeg er en
alternativ historiker.”
--John
Judge
------------------------------
Afghanistan? Bevis som legitimerer krigen, takk.
------------------------------
Powell/Blair-dossieret: "This document does not purport to provide a prosecutable case against Usama Bin Laden in a court of law."
------------------------------
George Bush, Jr., September 11th and the Rule of Law--Professor Francis Boyle
------------------------------
NO WAR AGAINST AFGHANISTAN!--Professor Francis Boyle
------------------------------
"They have spent $13 trillion tax dollars since the end of WWII on this military/intelligence complex, and it cannot protect its own headquarters?... How were they allowed to come into the most restricted air space in the world with no challenge or defense? That is the question that answers both when Bush knew in advance and begs any rational response." --John Judge
"I wouldn't call it fascism exactly, but [an American] political system nominally controlled by an irresponsible, dumbed down electorate who are manipulated by dishonest, cynical, controlled mass media that dispense the propaganda of a corrupt political establishment can hardly be described as democracy either."
--Edward Zehr
-----------------------------
“The more status someone has in this society, the harder it is for them to listen to suggestions that there is something illegitimate about the power structure in which they have that status.” --Peter Dale Scott
-----------------------------
“Individuals have international duties which transcend the national obligations of obedience. Therefore [individual citizens] have the duty to violate domestic laws to prevent crimes against peace and humanity from occurring” –-Nuremberg War Crime Tribunal, 1950
-----------------------------
"No people can be both ignorant and free."
--Thomas Jefferson
-----------------------------
‘The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account.’ -- Walter Lippman
-----------------------------
Senator Karen Johnson was interviewed this morning on the Charles Goyette Show regarding the recent hit pieces by the Arizona Republic and the demolition of the Twin Towers and Building 7. Charles took calls from the audience.
http://www.archive.org/details/CharlesGoyetteInterviewsArizonaStateSenat…
“A honey pot, in intelligence jargon, is a tempting source of information or ‘dangle’ that is set out to lure intended victims into a trap. Ultimately the honey pot is violently and maliciously discredited so as to destroy the credibility of anything stuck to it by association”
–- Michael Ruppert
Mange liker mentalgym av det spekulative slaget. Hvilket ikke bare er unyttig. Faktisk er spekulasjon avgjørende for å komme frem til en teori. Man spekulerer frem en teori på basis av (alle) tilgjengelige empiriske data. Passer alle data teorien, er den god. Passer de ikke, er den dårlig. Spekulativ.
Teorier om hva som traff - eller ikke traff - Pentagon er i stor grad basert på spekulasjon. Av det unødvendige slaget. Og nesten bare det. Har man ikke forstått det nå - i 2008 - kan et par runder i de indre topplokkgemakker være en fin ting.
Synsinger rundt angrepet har en tendens til å drukne (minst) to viktige spørsmål.
Hvordan kunne noe i det hele tatt treffe Pentagon? Verdens heftigste militærmakt kan ikke forsvare sitt eget hovedkvarter? Grunnet tilfeldighet eller inkompetanse??
Hvorfor vil Bush-administrasjonen at vi skal tro at de skjuler noe? Hvorfor kan de ikke frigi video som viser AA77 treffe Pentagon? Vi vet de har film. Vil de at vi skal spekulere?
“They have spent $13 trillion tax dollars since the end of WWII on this military/intelligence complex, and it cannot protect its own headquarters?… How were they allowed to come into the most restricted air space in the world with no challenge or defense? That is the question that answers both when Bush knew in advance and begs any rational response.”
–John Judge
“…making 9/11 complicity dependent on the no-plane claim was a brilliant tactic to discredit the real evidence for people inside the Beltway (Washington DC), both for the majority who vote against Bush and the political / military elites (especially the military officers who saw the plane crash or the plane debris)”
Planlagt operasjon hvor nøye utvalgt informasjon plantes hos spesifikke [utenlandske] mottakere med henblikk på å påvirke deres følelser, motiver, sunne fornuft, og i siste instans hvordan myndigheter, organisasjoner, grupper og individer forholder seg.
Vi trenger ikke ingen-fly-ved-Pentagon for å bevise innsidejobb. Det er bortkastet å spekulere over ting som ikke fører noensteds hen. Og som fjerner energi og fokus fra andre langt viktigere tema. For eksempel ordentlige bevis.
***
John Judge er fra Washington DC - “inside the Beltway” - og burde kjenne topografien i Pentagonområdet bedre enn folk utenfor DC. Hvorfor topografien er viktig? Vel, er det nær på paddeflatt og åpent, ville f.eks. et missil istenden for AA77 være nokså risky butikk. PentaCons overflyvningsteori også. Det er flatt og åpent i DC-området. Et menneske med fotoapparat på rett sted til rett tid, og løgnen hadde vært avslørt. Sannsynlig risiko å ta? Neppe.
Judge har også bekjente som var vitner til hendelsen.
My father, John Joseph Judge was a WWII Army Air Corps veteran and had been a cryptographer assigned overseas. He worked as a civilian at the Pentagon after his return from the war until his death in 1965. My mother and my aunt both worked there as civilian employees beginning in 1943 until they retired. I grew up visiting the offices of my parents, and spending time at the Pentagon library. When the weather was nice, we would all often arrange to buy some food at the canteen and walk outside into the central courtyard area to sit and eat lunch together. When I was 10 or 11, to the best of my memory, which means 1957 or 58, I recall going outside and sitting down on a silver metal box. My father told me to get off of it. When I asked why he said it was a surface to air missile. (I could be off by 2-3 years on this recollection, but it was certainly before 1961). (Emphasis added)
As we know,
There are known knowns.
There are things we know we know.
We also know
There are known unknowns.
That is to say
We know there are some things
We do not know.
But there are also unknown unknowns,
The ones we don’t know
We don’t know.
– Donald Rumsfeld, Feb. 12, 2002,
Department of Defense news briefing
. . . Intelligence agencies have had decades of experience doing duping and manipulating people, and countless unwitting suspects to experiment on using everything imaginable. That’s a lot of data with which to keep a cover-up alive and well.
My guess — and not just mine — is that much of the Pentagon scam functions in these ways:
1) to distract from the powerful and provable evidences so activists and researchers will fight, instead of publish and document.
2) to excite people into believing a “magic show” went on and “everyone was fooled” into bizarre states of mind where no one notices jetliners flying over their heads, no one can identify one plane (even as they can identify the next one perfectly) etc. This also makes the Pentagon and it’s workers seem invincible and capable of any feat. And pretty soon we have “PentaCon” where all the items on the lawn and in the path were “fake” and “planted” and everyone was essentially “hypnotized.” This is the nonsense stuff they want us to spread all over the internet to tank us as credible people.
3) to lure people into promoting the idea that AA77 didn’t hit to keep us sidelined to the DC families, to local DC activists, etc., the people who *saw* the plane or know someone who did.
4) to create a honeypot to easily blow us out of the water when it becomes necessary with one fell swoop — just play the video of AA77 hitting the Pentagon all over the news stations over and over and over, and combine it with clips of notable members claiming a plane never could have hit there. . . .
“Given the scope of the tragedy from last week, I am glad to reassure the people of New York and Washington, D.C. that their air is safe to breath and their water is safe to drink.”
- Christine Todd Whitman
More than 360 workers who dealt with the aftermath of the World Trade Center disaster have died, state health officials said Wednesday.
Officials have determined the cause of death of 154 of the responders and volunteers who toiled at Ground Zero, the blocks nearby and at the Fresh Kills landfill, where debris from the site was taken.
Of those, 80 died of cancer.
“It’s the tip of the iceberg,” said David Worby, who is representing 10,000 workers - 600 with cancer - who say they got sick after working on rescue and recovery efforts. . . .
Dr. Steven Jones presents new evidence in the ongoing investigation of the collapse of the WTC Towers at the Boston 9/11 Conference (12/15/07). This is the complete presentation. . . .
“To know that this administration has lied us into two wars that have cost the lives of hundreds of thousands of people… solidifies for me the TRUTH that anything they say, is a lie. Or, everything they say is a lie, is another way of putting it. Everything that this administration says is a lie. If they have an official version of the events of 9/11, it is by definition, a lie. It has to be. Because this is an administration that lies about everything. There’re no way to weasel out of that, you can’t get out of that. An administration that will lie a country into war… will lie about everything. You don’t have to be a genius to figure that out, or to come to that conclusion… There are some very, very brave, intelligent people, and expert people in their fields, who have said, ‘No. This [9/11] is a lie.‘”
- Mike Malloy, Nova M broadcast, April 28,2008
Yesterday, Mike Malloy (formerly of Air America radio) announced on his Nova M blog that he would be dedicating parts, if not complete shows, to talking about 9/11 starting with last night’s broadcast;
Rovics’ peeve is that a heckler at his anti-war singing performance was rude and belligerent. The poor behavior consisted of shouting from, “a red-faced white man with an ominous hand-written sign reading, ‘9/11 was a lie.‘” Rovics doesn’t go into any detail upon what preceded this man’s shouting fit (something Rovics may have said on the p.a. system?), but Rovics does take it upon himself to smear everyone seeking the truth of 9/11 because of a few such individuals.
If the same tactic — the same standard — is employed against the “anti-war movement,” because of the negative behavior of a few individuals… perhaps Rovics could understand his error. Perhaps not.
So, Rovics feels attacked by the “9/11 Truth Movement,” and so he feels justified in attacking back, and CommonDreams feels justified in printing his attack. Why? I don’t know.
NEW YORK — Former EPA chief Christine Todd Whitman cannot be held liable for telling residents near the World Trade Center site that the air was safe to breathe after the 2001 terrorist attacks, a federal appeals court said Tuesday.
The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said Whitman apparently made comments reassuring people about the safety around the site based on conflicting information and reassurances by the White House.
The appeals court said legal remedies are not always available for every instance of arguably deficient governmental performance.
Finally! After submitting a half-dozen papers to established peer-reviewed technical journals over a period of nearly a year, we have two papers which have passed peer-review and have been accepted for publication. One of these was published TODAY! In science, we say that we have “published in the literature,” a major step in a nascent line of scientific inquiry.
(…)
In this Letter, we emphasize “points of agreement” with FEMA and NIST, seeking to build bridges for further communications. Of course, we will send a copy to NIST for their comment and hopefully open a public discussion on these crucial evidences and analyses. Note the title – but then read more—the paper only six pages long:
Fourteen Points of Agreement with Official Government Reports on the World Trade Center Destruction
The authors are: Steven E. Jones*,1, Frank M. Legge2, Kevin R. Ryan3, Anthony F. Szamboti*,4, James R. Gourley
More material has been added covering the NSA’s surveillance of Ahmed al-Hada, father-in-law of alleged Pentagon hijacker Khalid Almihdhar. Both President Bush and Vice President Cheney used the non-exploitation of calls between his phone in Yemen and the hijackers in the US to justify the NSA’s warrantless wiretapping program in January 2006. Attorney General Michael Mukasey and Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell attributed the failure to trace the calls to a 1981 executive order earlier this year, and Mukasey bizarrely then claimed that one of the calls was between the US and Afghanistan, rather than Yemen. This confused the media somewhat, and a group of congressmen asked Mukasey for an explanation. (…)
One of the top investigative journalists in the country, Larisa Alexandrovna (the lead journalist at Raw Story), says the following concerning her attempts to determine whether or not the U.S. is still officially in a state of emergency, such as would justify the continuition of Continuity of Government (COG) Plans implemented on 9/11:
“Well, I have called around… believe it or not, no seems to have an answer as to this simple question: ‘are we in a state of emergency?’ “
Keep in mind that Alexandrovna has broken many top stories, later picked up by the New York Times and other mainstream publications, and has developed a broad network of contacts. And yet she couldn’t find an answer. (…)
In an effort to better understand the conditions that led to complete collapses of the World Trade Center Towers and WTC 7, we apply scanning-electron-microscope (SEM) and energy dispersive x-ray spectroscopy (XEDS) methods to analyze the dust generated, with an emphasis on observed micro-spheres in the WTC dust. The formation of molten spheres with high iron contents along with other species in the WTC dust required extremely high temperatures. Our results are compared with those of other laboratories. The temperatures required for the molten sphere-formation and evaporation of materials as observed in the WTC dust are significantly higher than temperatures associated with the burning of jet fuel and office materials in the WTC buildings. (Emphasis added/uthevelse tilføyet)
According to many sources, it was Cheney – and not Bush – who authorized the shootdown of planes on 9/11. See, for example, this Washington Post story. Perhaps the reason that Cheney, and not Bush, authorized the shootdown was that Cheney became the head of the “shadow” government instituted on 9/11 under Continuity of Government measures. In other words, he became the real Commander-in-Chief of the COG government.
This is an issue that needs to be promoted at every opportunity. Period. This destroys the argument that they would never kill 2973+ people because they were MORE than willing to let the heroes of 9/11 become sick and die.
If you want to help, please go to the FealGood Foundation, and donate whatever you can.
Thank you.
(…)
“Now the Taliban will pay a price” vowed President George W. Bush, as American and British fighter planes unleashed missile attacks against major cities in Afghanistan. The US Administration claims that Osama bin Laden is behind the tragic events of the 11th of September. A major war supposedly “against international terrorism” has been launched, yet the evidence amply confirms that agencies of the US government have since the Cold War harbored the “Islamic Militant Network” as part of Washington’s foreign policy agenda. In a bitter irony, the US Air Force is targeting the training camps established in the 1980s by the CIA.
The main justification for waging this war has been totally fabricated. The American people have been deliberately and consciously misled by their government into supporting a major military adventure which affects our collective future.
by Michel Chossudovsky
Professor of Economics, University of Ottawa
Centre for Research on Globalisation (CRG), Montréal
Posted at globalresearch.ca 9 October 2001
Confronted with mounting evidence, the US Administration can no longer deny its links to Osama. While the CIA admits that Osama bin Laden was an “intelligence asset” during the Cold War, the relationship is said to “go way back”. Most news reports consider that these Osama-CIA links belong to the “bygone era” of the Soviet-Afghan war. They are invariably viewed as “irrelevant” to an understanding of present events. Lost in the barrage of recent history, the role of the CIA in supporting and developing international terrorist organisations during the Cold war and its aftermath is casually ignored or downplayed by the Western media.
Yes, We did support Him, but “He Went Against Us”
A blatant example of media distortion is the so-called “blowback” thesis: “intelligence assets” are said to “have gone against their sponsors”; “what we’ve created blows back in our face.”[1] In a twisted logic, the US government and the CIA are portrayed as the ill-fated victims:
The sophisticated methods taught to the Mujahideen, and the thousands of tons of arms supplied to them by the US - and Britain - are now tormenting the West in the phenomenon known as `blowback’, whereby a policy strategy rebounds on its own devisers.[2]
The US media, nonetheless, concedes that “the Taliban’s coming to power [in 1995] is partly the outcome of the U.S. support of the Mujahideen, the radical Islamic group, in the 1980s in the war against the Soviet Union”.[3] But it also readily dismisses its own factual statements and concludes in chorus, that the CIA had been tricked by a deceitful Osama. It’s like “a son going against his father”.
The “blowback” thesis is a fabrication. The evidence amply confirms that the CIA never severed its ties to the “Islamic Militant Network”. Since the end of the Cold War, these covert intelligence links have not only been maintained, they have in become increasingly sophisticated. Les resten av dette innlegget »
4 structural engineers now publicly challenge the government’s account of the destruction of the Trade Centers on 9/11:A prominent engineer with 55 years experience, in charge of the design of hundreds of major building projects including high rise offices, former member of the California Seismic Safety Commission and former member of the National Institute of Sciences Building Safety Council (Marx Ayres) believes that the World Trade Centers were brought down by controlled demolition.
Two professors of structural engineering at a prestigious Swiss university (Dr. Joerg Schneider and Dr. Hugo Bachmann) said that, on 9/11, World Trade Center 7 was brought down by controlled demolition (translation here)
Kamal S. Obeid, structural engineer, with a masters degree in Engineering from UC Berkeley, of Fremont, California, says:
“Photos of the steel, evidence about how the buildings collapsed, the unexplainable collapse of WTC 7, evidence of thermite in the debris as well as several other red flags, are quite troubling indications of well planned and controlled demolition”
(…)
Postscript: Since writing this list, I have found other structural engineers who challenge the government’s version of 9/11. I’m not going to constantly update the title from “14″ to a higher number.
The best gift one can give to a child is faith in their own ability to think. The best gift that one can give to an adult, is supporting them in recovering their own lost ability to think for themselves.
Perhaps that is what this 911 disaster is all about — recovering our ability to think for ourselves — after reaping the very bitter fruit of trusting “credible” people.
