My assertion not merely a challenge to the Bush administration to put up or shut, it is consistent with "official" flight 77 data released to Pilotsfor911truth in response to their FOIA request.
Flight 77 flight data indicates that Flight 77 was at an altitude of some 273 feet above the Pentagonat the time of a reported "fire ball". One is, therefore, justified in demanding that the Bush administration release every photograph that was made of the Pentagon from every security camera on September 11, 2001. Only two 'pictures' have been released --a grainy indistringuishable GIF and an even worse video above. By stonewalling this issue, Bush implies his own guilt. What is he covering up by his refusal to release ALL photographs?
One of the most damning critiques Bush's official theory comes from, Heather Thomas, author of Trophies: A Novel:There was no fuselage at the Pentagon. There was none that you could check out. They said it vaporized, and yet they produced bodies saying that they didn't vaporize. You can vaporize a two-ton engine?--Author, Trophies
Thomas is absolutely correct. In fact, steel is used for airliner engines precisely because it will not melt or --worse --completely vaporize in a kerosene fire. Last time, I checked flight was still possible! If Bush were correct, it would not be! Engines for jet aircraft are still made of STEEL because steel will not melt by a kerosene combustion. That's how engines work and they would not work if engines melted at kerosene fire temperatures. If you can still buy a ticket at Newark and fly to Los Angeles, Bush is a liar. Thomas saw though this gaping hole while pompous network poohbahs, 'commentators, and pundits got suckered (or paid off) into believing and propagating the pernicious and evil myth that you can burn kerosene inside a 757 engine but the same aircraft will vaporize completely in a kerosene fire!
Initially, Bush defenders denied the presence of 'molten steel' at WTC. Later, when it was clear that 'molten steel' was absolutely necessary to support their mumbo jumbo, their superstition that both towers collapsed into their own footprints due to fire damage, they embraced molten steel. It was the only way to get the steel to melt. The story had to sound credible. For these people --sounding plausible is more important than truth. Later, when it was made abundantly clear, that never in recorded history has a kerosene fire melted steel, the story was changed yet again. The 'steel' was only 'weakened to the point of collapse, we were told. But what point is that? It doesn't matter because the Bush liars were trying to have it both ways again. The new cover story did not explain: 1) professional firefighter testimony that molten steel was in fact observed; 2) it does not explain video tapes of what can only be molten steel; 3) it does not explain video tapes of molten steel flowing down the sides of still un-collapsed towers!The cat --the verified presence of molten steel --was already out of the bag.
It was time for another cover story, another PR offensive. Bush defenders --in yet another version --cried foul. This time they took aim at 911 first responders. Firefighters, they said, mistook molten aluminum for molten steel, an insult to working, professional firefighters whose testimony would most certainly be considered 'expert' in any courtroom. I rather think that the testimony of professional firefighers with regard to what they saw is infinitely more credible than that of a flack somewhere on K-street or inside the White House --a din of iniquity if there ever was one. Thus Bush defenders were caught trying to paper over yet another glaring hole in Bush's official lie with yet another version designed to plug up holes in the dike. Even if it were true, there is no evidence in support of a 'new' theory that heat from melting aluminum is sufficient to melt over 100 stories of steel cladding, steel reinforced walls, a tightly woven steel core --the existence of which officials tried to hide! The 911 Commission, for example, failed to mention that in the towers of the WTC was a very densely re-enforced steel core. As far as the 911 Commission report is concerned, the 'core' just didn't exist. This is a pathetic picture of murderers, liars and felons desperately trying to come up with a credible cover story ---but, alas, too late!
Most recently, NIST has come up with still another 'version' intended to paper over the myriad of flaws and bullshit to be found in the official narratives. They have invented an entirely new phenomenon -- 'heat expansion' --to explain what is best explained with just two words: controlled demolition! What is the term 'heat expansion' supposed to mean in this context. If you heat the air in a balloon, it expands and the ballon rises. The liars at the NIST have failed to demonstrate the relevance of hot air balloons to WTC --an instance of undeniable controlled demolition. The building in question is, of course, WTC 7 said by Silverstein himself to have been pulled! I suggest the paid liars at NIST go take a hot air balloon ride. Hot air carried aloft by hot air. Poetic justice.
Silverstein Properties (collected large insurance payout due to the attacks of 911) was one of the contracters NIST depended on to get to the truth in the investigation. Look at the NIST report here on page vii for contributors to the investigation. Talk about the fox guarding the henhouse. Can you say "conflict of interest?" And how about all of NIST's precious recommendations for future building safety?
It looked like a controlled demolition because it was a controlled demolition. Re-writing the laws of physics is not allowed! Neocons may break and ignore the laws of this nation and the international treaties to which we are bound, but not even Bush may violate the laws of nature and physics. If the WTC had been wired for a controlled demolition months before 911, the motive is a matter of public record: "the verdict in U.S. District Court in Manhattan was the latest twist in Mr. Silverstein's efforts to turn his $3.5 billion insurance policy on the trade center complex into a $7 billion payout."
The burden of proof is on Bush and a dwindling number of rats, many of whom are jumping ship. Let's start with the co-chairs of the 911 Commission. Both have now dis-avowed the work of the commissionn.
They claim that they were misled by Bush and the Pentagon! They don't believe it! Why should anyone believe it?
Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski, PhD, U.S. Air Force (ret) was a Pentagon eye-witness. She is a former member of the staff of the Director of the National Security Agency. As a contributing author to the 2006 book 9/11 and American Empire: Intellectuals Speak Out, she wrote:
I believe the [9/11] Commission failed to deeply examine the topic at hand, failed to apply scientific rigor to its assessment of events leading up to and including 9/11, failed to produce a believable and unbiased summary of what happened, failed to fully examine why it happened, and even failed to include a set of unanswered questions for future research.Kwiatkowski one in a long and growing list of equally intelligent, qualified, expert and articulate folk many of whom have literally driven a stake through the heart of Bush's evil and treasonous lie. I might have picked her quote at random from among the throng which now makes up a growing chorus demanding that the crime of 911 be investigated and the perpetrators brought to trial and justice. You won't have any trouble finding other outraged and patriotic Americans who will speak out against tyranny. It is a growing chorus of true skeptics who will tell you that Bush's official conspiracy theory is a black hearted lie.It is as a scientist that I have the most trouble with the official government conspiracy theory, mainly because it does not satisfy the rules of probability or physics. The collapses of the World Trade Center buildings clearly violate the laws of probability and physics.
--Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski, PhD, U.S. Air Force (ret), Twenty-five U.S. Military Officers Challenge Official Account of 9/11.
(CBS) President Bush took a few minutes during his trip to Europe Thursday to voice his opposition to establishing a special commission to probe how the government dealt with terror warnings before Sept. 11.Mr. Bush said the matter should be dealt with by congressional intelligence committees.
CBS News Correspondent Bill Plante reports that Mr. Bush said the investigation should be confined to Congress because it deals with sensitive information that could reveal sources and methods of intelligence. Therefore, he said, the congressional investigation is "the best place" to probe the events leading up to the terrorist attacks.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
