A New Investigation Is What We Need!

One look at this photo tells us the government's version of events is false.

Popular trial lawyer Jerry Leaphart is representing several people, including Drs Judy Wood & Morgan Reynolds in their quest for 9/11 Truth. Mr Leaphart, with his full knowledge of legal proceedings, says government officials are taking Dr Wood's WTC directed energy weapon research seriously. Full info on legal proceeding here.

People should expect Dr Reynolds' TV-Fakery / No Plane Crash theory to become more popular as well.

The Bush administration is falling apart. This is the time to push for a REAL investigation.

by CB Brooklyn (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 355 comments) on Tuesday, August 21, 2007 at 8:50:32 PM
 

NIST Did Not Analyze the "Collapses"

NIST formally responded to Dr Judy Wood's Request for Correction on July 27, 2007. (Here's the reply, archived on the Dept of Commerce website in PDF format.)

As you can see, NIST admitted twice in their letter that they only analyzed "collapse initiation", and not the "collapses" themselves. They also do not deny that Applied Research Associates is a manufacturer of directed energy weapons. They simple say there is "no factual evidence to support this claim". Jerry Leaphart says this is a sign to submit evidence!

Listen to Leaphart's recent interviews (linked here) where he explains that many government officials are as concerned about the future of the country as we are, and that they want to help.

Leaphart plans to file an appeal.

by CB Brooklyn (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 355 comments) on Tuesday, August 21, 2007 at 9:07:12 PM
 

clarification...

Applied Research Associates (ARA) was contracted by the government for the NIST Report. But Leaphart claims they have a conflict of interest:

Not only is ARA a manufacturer of directed energy weapon technology,
but are also a founding sponsor of Directed Energy Professional Society (DEPS).

DEPS, founded in 1999, put out their first newsletter one year before 9/11.
An excerpt from this newsletter is as follows:

"Lasers in space, lasers in the stratosphere, lasers
on and over the battlefield - we're at the
beginning of an evolutionary new wave of
weaponry."

by CB Brooklyn (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 355 comments) on Tuesday, August 21, 2007 at 9:17:25 PM
 

Frivolous Claims and Molten Metal

Jerry Leaphart has said in recent interviews (linked in my comments above) that whenever a frivolous claim is filed with a government agency or a court, the response will indicate it as frivolous. But Leaphart notes that NIST's response to Dr Wood's Request for Correction on directed energy weapon evidence says no such thing. Leaphart, being an attorney, is obviously fully knowledgeable in this area.

Another issue is the "story" of molten metal in the ruins at Ground Zero. If a new WTC investigation is called for, we should all be aware that the molten metal story is a hoax designed to distract us from molecular dissociation.

If molten metal existed at Ground Zero, there would have been multiple steam explosions every time the fire department sprayed water. With all the rain the week following 9/11, the whole Ground Zero area would have been one humongous steam explosion. Since water contacting molten metal causes a steam explosion, the fire department would never spray water anywhere near molten metal since it is a fire hazard.

The molten metal evidence has been analyzed and put together here, and we see it's fabricated.

One of the scientists who promotes molten metal is Steven Jones. But, for some reason, Jones did not even mention molten metal in his Request for Correction to NIST. I wonder why that is? Dr Wood mentioned directed energy weapons in her RFC, so why didn't Dr Jones mention molten metal?

In addition to not mentioning molten metal, Jones also failed to mention thermite/thermate.

Perhaps Jones doesn't want NIST to dismiss his RFC as frivolous???

by CB Brooklyn (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 355 comments) on Tuesday, August 21, 2007 at 10:42:26 PM
 

Steel Resolve

'9/11 truth’s concern about the fate of the Towers -- is not a community. It is not a collective. It is not even a coherent stereotype. Or a measurable demographic. Its true numbers have not even begun to be counted -- for it represents not just the few who have written about the subject, hold any particular point of view, lean in the direction of this or that.

It represents the people who have noticed these things over time, yet also the people who will notice them on this day -- and the days to come. I see the tide growing, and it is a relief.

A 'new investigation' is not necessarily what we need. Let's just begin with an open and more complete one.

The good people of New York deserve honorable mention: for their world, their livelihood -- is built on steel. They work that steel, ride it every day. And they have suffered greatly.

It is time to discover whether the steel was compromised. Tasked beyond its endurance.

For if explosives were used -- then despite all the losses that could never be regained, families broken -- we would know that the steel endured.

Merely the human factor had failed us.

An important, vital thing to know... is it not?

Because in any structural failure that was unexpected, unprecedented, grave in its implications, MUST consider the possibility of 'foul play'. The possible existence of aspects beyond the narrow parameters that may be imposed by political convenience, expedience.

Fail to take this simple step... we become vulnerable to direct and indirect manipulation without limit, in ways we can scarcely imagine and would never tolerate.

I will not mince words here. Some of those factors might not have progressive and easy countermeasures. Some even insurmountable. But the people of New York, these United States need to know -- for sure -- the precise shape and form of threat we faced on September 11th. To preserve and defend our own sanity, direction and purpose.

Covering for capital crimes does inflict harm. Participating in the whitewashing of same -- and I include the willful dissemination of disinformation to disrupt an investigation or the natural course of citizens' rising awareness, introspection -- or pushing a scripted objective some feel should be imposed on history as 'the' investigation, 'the' finding, sans consensus and process. And there are those out there who have done these things, willfully.

Responsible engineers, architects, fire marshals, journalists with backbone should have the wherewithal to step right up to the work of FEMA, ASCE, NIST to date without squeamishness or a hint of ridicule -- and where NIST leaves off, just step to the side and keep on walking in the direction of completeness and accountability, towards a rational objective of completeness.

They should be prepared to come face to face with the ideas of Dr. Judy Wood and Professor Jones without squeamishness or a hint of ridicule -- but be fully prepared to step aside after a moment of scrutiny and keep on walking in the direction of simplicity: Occam's Razor... should it be further afield. It is the most useful tool in any forensic investigation.

And keep walking... towards some baseline of rational possibility and likelihood. From which they may return to consider the exotic, the less likely, should the occasion warrant. Or the models not fit.

This path of inquiry is simple, really. It begins with an examination of what has been observed, and considers conventional methods for achieving the result that is seen to be. We are talking about the plausible and the possible, not the comfortable and the thinkable. Which will better fit?

Thus In the case of the Towers' collapses -- an airplane may be considered a 'conventional means'. And so are pre-positioned explosives, the kind routinely used for the purpose. Neither exotic substance nor method should be permitted to occupy significant debate and resource -- certainly not to the measure it has on the Internet -- until basic, conventional explosives and techniques are modelled and a fit is attempted.

I would also strongly suggest that the path lead past and around Trade Center Seven.

There is murder in the Twin Towers. Now why should I -- or anyone else for that matter, be called upon to present a reason beyond that? I strongly suggest that the Towers be given the full and exclusive attention of the investigation, until their fate has been reexamined.

We have had a series of inquiries whose purpose, it seems has been to 'assure'.

Are we not pressed on the matter enough to need to actually *be* sure?

Consider the implications. Follow them forwards. Follow them back. Always. This has been necessary for survival in all the eons of human existence, and it is necessary for survival today.

When pressed on a matter that has grave implications for the moral righteousness and stability, even sovereignty of a country, such as many believe we are -- a search for truth should be neither a slogan for justice, nor a cult of personality, nor a cult of idea.

Technology has given us the computer; our know-how as a species and as a nation has given us the opportunity to build models that project the track of hurricanes, analyze finite elements. And such models -- if they are open-source -- may yet give us the power to dispel as will as confirm our deepest fears... may even dispel some of the distrust that has arisen in the bargain.

No one should fear arriving at the 'wrong answer'. But those who are purposefully heading in the direction of a 'scripted answer' should have every reason to fear. This is not to mean that they should fear 'reprisal' or 'revenge'. But they should begin to fear that any motive to lead us in unproductive or circular directions... will soon become, quite apparent. What would to them, then? Depends.

IF any reasonable controlled demolition hypothesis is given a fair and impartial trial -- and I mean trial by open investigation...

AND an 'open source' computer model which stands the test of peer review, should even *begin* to accurately model the horrifying spectacle we all witnessed on that day...

AND IF it shifts the balance of reason we bring to bear when faced with such a grave matter, to a result which none might desire... but yet, yield a reasonable doubt that grows to become becomes a reasonable certainty----

Then, no matter how anyone might decide to look at it...

The 'wrong' tower fell first.

Twice.

Thanks for listening.

by HocusLocus (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1 comments) on Wednesday, August 22, 2007 at 5:52:59 AM
 

U.S. District Court, Southern New York, Unseals 9/11 Case

The following is a quote from Dr Reynolds' site, nomoregames.net.

[Go to the site for the unsealed case PDF.]

================================

Reynolds Makes a Federal Case of 9/11 —
Sues NIST Contractors for 9/11 Plane Fraud

Morgan Reynolds
August 21, 2007

"Last month the U.S. District Court, Southern New York, unsealed a 9/11 case filed by Dr. Morgan Reynolds, thereby making the case public. Reynolds is suing on behalf of the United States of America after the U. S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York who represents "the government" declined to intervene in the case. The suit, a so-called qui tam case, alleges that the 9/11 contractors NIST hired to investigate destruction of the WTC Towers on 9/11 defrauded the U.S. government of substantial money by rendering bogus, impossible physical analysis and animations about how two hollow aluminum aircraft (allegedly Boeing 767s) flew into a steel/concrete tower and disappeared. Yet it can be easily demonstrated, after a great deal of hard work by dedicated 9/11 researchers, that no planes hit the towers. The office of Reynolds' attorney, Jerry V. Leaphart of Connecticut, is now serving the defendants in the suit, including Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), Applied Research Associates (ARA), Boeing, American Airlines, United Airlines and Silverstein Properties. I will post new information on the case as developments warrant."

by CB Brooklyn (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 355 comments) on Wednesday, August 22, 2007 at 12:16:22 PM
 

A deeper NIST cover up

A guy who claims to be a skeptic and sites the ommission by the 9-11 Commission of the building #7 collapse then dismisses the huge number of witnesses who heard explosions as the sounds of floors collapsing and then blames insullation rubbing off will be worse than before. The insullation is long gone. It can't be studied.

Its not only the explosions. Its a lot more. Get real.

by Steve Miller (0 articles, 3 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 6 comments) on Thursday, August 23, 2007 at 11:19:46 AM