That Bush openly admits to having broken the law (to "protect" the laws) has had virtually no impact on the opposition party that refuses to impeach. Actually, you could argue that Bush has been empowered by the apathy of the democrats.  It is blatantly clear those buildings came down with more help than just the planes. One, astoninshingly, came down that wasn't even hit. My own rep, Bill Delahunt, D-MA, couldn't be less interested in the truth. Truth--shmuth. The most important thing to him (and Pelosi and Conyers) is that the dems get elected. Nothing else matters.9/11, FISA, the Constitution.......none of it. I have now gone green, officially. This has to get worse before it gets better.

by Nick van Nes (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 595 comments [150 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Tuesday, Aug 5, 2008 at 10:40:06 AM

  (0+)

Very good article. Anyone with a brain knows that the official conspiracy theory is rubbish. In fact a large majority of Americans do not believe the official conspiracy theory anymore. However, that has little effect on our government. Which speaks volumes about the nature of American democracy in the 21st Century.

Stirling

by Lord Stirling (26 articles, 0 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 151 comments [3 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Aug 5, 2008 at 11:48:00 AM

  (0+)

Comment from Ratings:   scientific proof catching up with the truth.

by Meryl Ann Butler (70 articles, 82 quicklinks, 5 diaries, 721 comments [29 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Aug 5, 2008 at 3:44:47 PM

  (0+)

Comment from Ratings:   see www.drjudywood.com

by Digitboy (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 26 comments) on Tuesday, Aug 5, 2008 at 4:13:53 PM

  (0+)

"Fires at the WTC site persisted for weeks after 9/11" -- This is inaccurate.  There were no fires burning below ground, no molten metal.  Check your facts.  Water applied to "Pools of red hot molten iron" would have caused massive steam explosions -- none of which were ever reported.

Check the video evidence of the "collapse".  At what temperature does steel turn to dust?

see www.drjudywood.com

by Digitboy (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 26 comments) on Tuesday, Aug 5, 2008 at 4:34:51 PM

  (0+)

Where did you get your information, digitboy?  I was a volunteer for a week at the site and handed out boots to the rescue workers who swapped their melted ones for new ones multiple times per day, for having come NEAR the molten metal.

by Susan Guest (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 91 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Aug 5, 2008 at 4:40:14 PM

  (0+)

Can you tell a melted boot from one that has suffered molecular dissasociation?

How many people in the rescue and clean up operations were treated for burns?  NONE!  How is that possible with molten metal flowing all around?

by Digitboy (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 26 comments) on Tuesday, Aug 5, 2008 at 5:18:56 PM

  (0+)

Hey digit, or finger, or toe, or whatever.

I'm going to give you the opportunity to describe the process (since you can't spell it) of molecular disassociation as it refers to the melting of the workers boots at the 9-11 site.

Here's the deal toeboy, explain it in lay terms and describe the process which caused the molecules of the boots to disassociate themselves from one another. If you can do it and it makes sense then you'll be considered an expert in the field of molecular engineering. If you can't then you have to silently, admit to being a loud mouth moron who hasn't got a clue as to what he's talking about (sort of like the president) and refrain from ever offering your opinion on OpEd again. Deal? OK, Go.....

by PeterJ (16 articles, 3 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 236 comments [53 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Aug 6, 2008 at 7:24:40 PM

  (0+)

I gave my source:  www.drjudywood.com

by Digitboy (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 26 comments) on Tuesday, Aug 5, 2008 at 5:22:01 PM

  (0+)

the "ray beams from space" disinformation service designed to make 9/11 Truthers look like idiots.

You want to include a few lines about "tv fakery" while you are at it?

How about "the lizard people living in the center of the earth"? Why not throw that in there as well.

by scott creighton (25 articles, 11 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 244 comments) on Tuesday, Aug 5, 2008 at 9:26:23 PM

  (0+)

It's all a bunch of bandied hog-wash! I was on the 68th floor of Tower 1 and fortunately I am/was in great shape, so all my years of long distance running/training paid off big time. Let's face the facts and get past the "dysmorphia", I do know for a fact that serious charges and issues remain. It is of no consequence at this point to offer theories about what happened. It's the price that we pay for living in an intolerant world and allowing for the comingling of religion and politics. Remeber the ol' seration of Church and State that we are supposed to adhere to? Well, this is the fallout, quite literally when those rules are ignored or alltogether suspended. Ignorance is NOT a disability, it's a pathetic excuse for our over-saturated lazy population.

by Elliott Van Reamer (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 6 comments) on Wednesday, Aug 6, 2008 at 12:45:08 PM

  (0+)

Hello Digit (is that "single"? or an IQ matter), I was there for years, and YES! the fires did indeed burn for weeks. I transferred to the Berkshire building at Water Street for the next three months until I got a new office, and each and every day all of the workers in the District had to walk through filthy dangerous air every day. Do your research and see how many people Post 9/11 are dead due to the environs that caused them mesothelioma or some other rapturous disease. I care not to try to influence your views, or to create a challenge for you here. I believe that you will do very well with challenges on your own accord. Grow up. 

by Elliott Van Reamer (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 6 comments) on Wednesday, Aug 6, 2008 at 12:53:20 PM

  (0+)

What the hell are you talking about?  Where'd you get your information? Popular Mechanics or the 9-11 report?

If you have nothing to contribute to a discussion aside from uninformed propoganda, then don't.

Watch some films, read some real reports from people other than Bush's relatives who blew the towers down.

Sheep are really scary animals!

by PeterJ (16 articles, 3 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 236 comments [53 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Aug 6, 2008 at 7:02:07 PM

  (0+)

FYI,

There are several videos of molten steel pouring from the building as well as video of streams of molten metal in the streets flowing over the sidewalk into the streets.   In addition, there are numerious pieces of steel with melt and high temperature sulfur eutectic corrosion (numerious authors published this specific evidence).   Finally, there are blast errosion of the red oxide paint and steel surface visible on most pieces of the structural members.

Do you really think you can prove a negative? 

by Guesswhotoo6 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 14 comments) on Thursday, Aug 7, 2008 at 11:16:18 AM

  (0+)

Thermite burns fast and completely. There would be no residual burning for days. Using the shaped charges, which are actually contained within a copper "tube" with a v-notch on the beam side of the charge, they slice through the beams not because of heat but because the copper forms a shaped charge that moves at hypersonic velocity and litterly slices the steal by kinetic energy, not by explosive heat.  Nothing remains to continue burning because it is consumed instantly and there is relativley little explosive actually used. 

In deliberatly demolished buildings there is no "after burn" that is offered to support intentional destruction. No fire at all.  Why do these people think that it would suddenly be present in the WTC?

As for the statement about explosions down below, these planes were trans-continental flights chosed for the attack because they would have full fuel tanks. The center of the WTC is open elevator shafts which could allow thousands of gallons a fuel to rain down, mixing with the air in the shaft. Fires above would create a chimney effect pulling in air to mix with this fuel from the bottom. Kerosene-air mixture would certainly be explosive. Molten metal and sparks and flaming debris from the fires would could rain down the same shafts igniting this mixture in the core of the building.

Also watch the video of the collapse. In each case the towers collapsed down from the point of impact, not from the bottom. The very nature of the structure of the towers with a strong outer steel frame would act as a natural "tunnel" for the loosly connected floors to fall through as they lost support.

There will always be people convinced our government is "out to get them". 

I don't think the government is actually "out to get us", rather, they are out to manipulate us to the benefit of their big money corporate sponsors.  They need us to keep spending money in order for their big donors to rake in the coin.

 Bush & Cheney have taken a tragic event and turned it to personal advantage to the benefit of their oil buddies. Actually I think it was Cheney as Bush is not smart enough.

by Paul Kruger (39 articles, 1 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 304 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Aug 5, 2008 at 4:46:12 PM

  (0+)

Ask any fire fighter in the hills of West Virginia about a coal mine fire. They have been known to burn for years with no special oxidant other than the air that is drawn in one shaft as smoke poors out another. 

WTC had thousands of tons of flamable materials inside a closed space. Heat rises. In the process it creates a chimney effect that sucks in fresh air...in this case through subway tunnels which could supply as much air as was needed to burn until nothing was left.  It was impossible to direct water at the burning materials through all the debris piled on top.

by Paul Kruger (39 articles, 1 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 304 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Aug 5, 2008 at 4:53:22 PM

  (0+)

From what I understand, the elvator shafts were sealed, there was no one elevator shaft running the whole length of the towers. These shafts were sealed precisely to prevent air being sucked in a chimney effect in case of fire.

by Vierotchka (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 39 comments) on Tuesday, Aug 5, 2008 at 7:35:01 PM

  (0+)

Plow a 757 or two through the towers and - now, I'm only guessing here - those elvators shafts are sealed anymore.  What do you think?

by Tom Murphy (3 articles, 5 quicklinks, 16 diaries, 2100 comments [55 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Aug 5, 2008 at 9:49:33 PM

  (0+)

but not 70+ floors below.

Also, look at the plans... the shafts didn't run top to bottom (they kinda designed it that way so a fire wouldn't corrupt the entire building. kind of amazing how architects take those things into consideration BEFORE they build them, huh?)

by scott creighton (25 articles, 11 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 244 comments) on Wednesday, Aug 6, 2008 at 9:44:19 AM

  (0+)

you are guessing...

by Stephen Demetriou (6 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 183 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Aug 6, 2008 at 10:52:21 AM

  (0+)

Each of the World Trade Center towers had one freight elevator running the entire height of the building.

by Patrick Curley (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 18 comments) on Wednesday, Aug 6, 2008 at 3:54:26 PM

  (0+)

by richard (0 articles, 5 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 1359 comments [399 recommended, 8 rejected]) on Tuesday, Aug 5, 2008 at 8:02:35 PM

  (0+)

And you, richard, are only repeating the nonsense of the Movement.  I guess you'll get a gold star for that much.  I really find the "science" that Truthers use - quaint.  Star Trek woul dbe proud of you folks.

by Tom Murphy (3 articles, 5 quicklinks, 16 diaries, 2100 comments [55 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Aug 5, 2008 at 9:53:58 PM

  (0+)

Yea, Tom,

and you look so quaint with your little boy scout uniform on. Aren't you a little old to be so easily mis-led by a gang of power-money hungry war mongers with the promise of travel and adventure?

It amazes me that anyone with a brain enough to support themselves can't see past basic physics and common sense, but then, I'll bet you still live with Mommy.

by PeterJ (16 articles, 3 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 236 comments [53 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, Aug 8, 2008 at 8:38:49 AM

  (0+)

First, note this is sending the fox to investigate the ransacking of the henhouse -- a completely interested party investigating its own branch of government. More or less like the Zelikow (Kean/Hamilton) 9/11 Commission.

I see so many hipshots in this exchange, I want to make a comment about the logic of the so-called 9/11 truth movement:

For the government's scenario (the official conspiracy theory) to stand, it must supply credible answers to the questions addressed to it. It is not necessary for the questioners to put together alternative explanations that satisfactorily answer all these questions in order for them to demonstrate that there are problems with the official explanation.

The multiple reports of (for example) molten metal are simply something to take into account. The official scenario certainly does not contain them as a plausible outcome -- any more than it satisfactorily explains the towers collapsing into their own footprints.

I recommend a book entitled Debunking 9/11 Debunking by David Ray Griffin -- the best summing up of the weaknesses of the official scenario that I've seen, and it builds on two fine preliminary volumes, The New Pearl Harbor and The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions. Any of these books will get you thinking and examining in new ways.

by editnetwork (0 articles, 2 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 73 comments) on Monday, Aug 11, 2008 at 5:23:21 PM

  (0+)

The Kruger "tunnel" hypothesis is ludicrous, no report I've seen refers to the outer walls as strong, quite the contrary. I didn't see you address the question of why the huge central steel columns were completely collapsed. They were spcifically designed to withstand such an impact. Nothing was left standing. Do you think that the Bush/Cheney cabal's only interest was oil, and that only in the aftermath did they manipulate the truth? What about the interests of the military industrial complex in permanent war? Many of us saw military action in the cards before Bush even stole the first election. At least 4 generations of the Bush clan are known war profiteers. There has never been a war the Bush's didn't like. They run a protection racket. Their threat is fear. Anthrax is a pretty good threat don't you think. I'll follow Daschell's skepticism on that question. We need several new truth commissions at this point.

by GeoRip (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 47 comments) on Tuesday, Aug 5, 2008 at 9:24:21 PM

  (0+)

There can be no doubt left on certain points. First, the administration had foreknowledge of an attack and did nothing to prepare for it. Second, the administration invaded a secular country not involved in the attack and intentionally midlead the American public to support and sustain that attack. That country should have been allied with the U.S. against Al Queda if the attack truly came from Al Queda because Iraq was next on Al Queda's list for takeover. Moreover, Saddam Hussein had historically acted as the U.S. bulwark against fundamentalist Islam in the Middle East since the rise of the Ayatollah Khomeini in Iran. Finally, U.S. actions were consistent with a tremendous fear of a second attack--particularly resorting to torture as an official policy. If 911 was an inside job, why torture anyone for information about possible subsequent attacks?

While many of the arguments of the 911 truth movement are quite persuasive, the only logical conclusion from the facts we know for sure is that the administration knew the attack was coming and did nothing to stop it. Thereafter, it used the attack to implement emergency laws restricting the Constitutional rights of all Americans as if the Constitution no longer exists. It further used the attack to implement a war on a tactic of war--terror--that in effect creates a permanent condition of war between the United States and all other sovereign states and lesser political entities that a President defines as terrorist.

This all occurs against the backdrop of the coalition of interests of the Bush and Bin Laden families and other administration cronies with interests in the Carlyle Group which is heavily invested in the defense and oil industries. The son of a former President declares permanent war on the tactics of the son of another member of the Carlyle group and one of the richest men in the world: Bin Laden. Only in a work of fiction could anyone believe this could happen.

Only multiple investigations of the many arms of this octopus can ever hope to answer even a small part of the questions that have arisen since 911. The Carlyle Group, the Iran-Contra affair and the coup plans of Oliver North, the fall of the towers and especially WTC 7, the inaction on PDB of August 6, 2001, the futures market shortly before and after 911, the dancing Israelies, the alleged, numerous warnings from literally tens of foreign intelligence services of the coming attack, the White House going on Cipro before the anthrax attack, the cancelled airline flights by certain politicians, the Bin Ladens' famous and unique escape from the U.S. without giving statements while Americans were grounded, all must be individually investigated. And this is just the start. And all we have is a Congress of cowards that cannot see they are once again about to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory for not doing the people's will.

Investigate now. Impeach now. The people will see by November that we can never again afford to put another Republican in the White House. If they don't, everything they fear will become fearless. There will be no light in America.

by W.M.L. (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 537 comments [52 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Tuesday, Aug 5, 2008 at 11:49:53 PM

  (0+)

I am not going into the sceintific data. Its irrefutable(in favour of controlled demolition). All you have to ask youself is who ordered the air force stand down on that morning. Exercices were being run, adding confusion(funny coinicidence, exercises were being run in London's underground on 7/7). can't you naysayers take the blinkers off.

I will predict that a major catastrophe will occur before the elections, martial law declared, elections nullified. Do you honestly think the globalists(new world order), will give up so easily. I am a Canadian that always marvelled you Constitution not the Patriot Act.

I hope and pray that I am wrong. Good luck.

by dave cassidy (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 3 comments) on Tuesday, Aug 5, 2008 at 11:56:42 PM

  (0+)

Here is an article from 2001 proving it was hot at ground zero for weeks, and that for the first 3 weeks it was a rescue operation and no water was used to put out the fires or cool the site down.

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn1634

It is true a controlled demolition would not use an excess of thermate, and so there would not be fires like this that burned for a long time.  However, in this case it is possible an excess was used since the many companies in these buildings would not want private documents that could be salvaged and divulge company secrets.  Not to mention WTC 7 where you had SEC, IRS, CIA, etc.

by pft (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 601 comments [7 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Aug 6, 2008 at 1:06:02 AM

  (0+)

As a Canadian, I always admired the patriotism shown by the American People. Now you have a president that calls the Costitution, "it's just a piece of goddam paper". WHY, WHY, WHY, has he not been arrested and stopped. The whole world is turning against America, what a pity, you have now become the biggest terrorist organisation in the world.

I believe the American people are in true denial of the facts, they just dont want to believe the truth. I understand this. If you you had been told before the events of 9/11, that it was going to happen. You could not have believed, conceived or understood the magnitude of horror that was about to come down on you.

 Honestly, I am not bashing the American people, I love them. 

There is no point in discussing the pros and cons of "was it an inside job".

Accept that it was, take steps to halt the rot. Bring back the Constitution, bring to justice the war-mongerers, and let them face their crimes against humanity.

Stick it to the industrial/military complex, they are the criminals. 

by dave cassidy (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 3 comments) on Wednesday, Aug 6, 2008 at 1:43:47 AM

  (0+)

This from Paul Craig Roberts

http://www.counterpunch.org/

"Many Americans lack the mental and emotional strength to confront the facts. The facts are too unsettling and many are relieved when the “mainstream media” spins the facts away. Many Americans find it too appalling that any part of “their” government, even a rogue operation, could possibly have been involved in any way in the anthrax attacks. No evidence--not even full confessions--could convince them otherwise. Many Americans have welcomed their brainwashing by the neoconservatives: America is pure; her shining virtue causes evil men to attack her; they hate us because we are good and they are evil."

As the country is being sold down the river, they got everyone fighting with each other, left vs right, religous vs non-religous, men vs women, black vs white, war vs anti-war, "patriots" vs truthers, AGW faithful vs AGW denialists and not paying attention to whats important.

People just don't want to hear the truth .  They laugh, get mad, or suggest you get a mental health check.  The consensus reality is a much safer place.  Every 4 years they get to hope for change.  When bad things happen, it's because our leaders are "shtoopid"

There are signs Canada is heading down the same path with that harper dude.

Anyways, we are all going to be part of the same NAU.  Without a critical mass of awakening, nothing will stop the madness.  And people do not want to wake up.

by pft (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 601 comments [7 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Aug 6, 2008 at 3:02:13 AM

  (0+)

Hopefully you can still be deprogrammed from years of indoctrinating dogma.

Proof of molten metal is on the website you quote. See the "cheetos" picture. It mentions the "orange cheeto" in the btm left corner, but fails to mention the heap of molten metal in the center.  Here's more for you:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4p6UuGE0plk

or see Richard Riggs comments in the History Channels WTC: Rise and Fall of an American Icon he states "paper, furniture, etc, burning underneath the pile caused molten steel"  That sounds hot enough to melt steel.

Mr Murphy, the elevator shafts were sectioned off approx every 35th floor where you would have to change cars to continue up. I supposed jet fuel penetrated all the way through and down entire building and exploded in the lobby? (see the Naudet Bros film for lobby damage photos as I presume you will only look at "official sources") but take two minutes to watch this and see if it can help you free your mind:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3898962504721899003&hl=en

This independent, peer reviewed, and well researched paper only reinforces, if not confirms, previous evidence found of extreme high temperature attacks on the steel including oxidation and sulfidation:

http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_apc.pdf

by Dan Koch (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 42 comments [5 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Aug 6, 2008 at 5:05:57 AM

  (0+)

Various folks here lost the battle to replace facts with government disinfo a long while ago.

One blessing is that we see fewer of the extensive and tedious ad hominem attacks than was previously the case.  

by richard (0 articles, 5 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 1359 comments [399 recommended, 8 rejected]) on Wednesday, Aug 6, 2008 at 7:36:23 AM

  (0+)

I also agree, it is good to see the science catching up. nasathermalimages.com has a long list of eyewitnesses, many very credible, very accomplished, that confirms the fires and molten metal in the pile months after the pulverization of the buildings. Graeme McQueen describes very well the acceleration of the roofline and tower of the North Tower, showing no resistance when the pulverization of the buildings began. His talk at the University of Waterloo in March 2008 is a must see. click here A common critique by deniers of explosions is described as falling into three categories: 1. didn't happen (these often also claim no fires in the pile) 2. falling bodies, elevators crashing, cracking columns 3. smoke, boilers, transformer explosions. McQueen does a fine job handling each complaint, especially the last, which is a complaint with some legs. In big fires, these things do happen, and may have happened here. They DO NOT explain, however, police and firefighters, hundreds of feet from the fire and damage many floors above being picked up and thrown, pelted by debris, by massive shock waves. A former soldier with years of military training, including "duck and cover" training, well familiar with explosions, commented that she experienced this very thing. Others were severely burned, again in areas of the building where there were no fires, hundreds of feet below the damaged floors. Nor do these complaints treat the eyewitnesses who saw syncronized blasts and flashes. McQueen's last account is a good one. The firefighter, instead of running as many did when the building started to come down, he stayed and focussed on the process. He said it looked like controlled type of thing. I think so too, based on my own observations of the photos showing horizontal, symetrical waves of windows blowing out. That is not chaotic, asymetric, random collapse. In account after account in McQueen's paper "118 witnesses" firefighters heard loud explosions than the building started to disintergrate. This doesn't prove casuality, but after numerous accounts of the same experience, it is clear there was a connection. Smoke explosions, boiler explosions, transformer explosions are not likely to have been powerful enough to initiate pulverization of the buildings. Not once, certainly not twice. Controlled demolition explains perfectly how the tower and roofline of the North tower accelerated through the building, meeting no resistance, from the supposedly intact building below.

by Stephen Demetriou (6 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 183 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Aug 6, 2008 at 8:54:17 AM

  (0+)

What is elegant about McQueen's analysis of the accerlation of the roofline, is by carefully analyzing the stills from video, the number of pixels enable one to make a very precise curve of the acceleration, that can be converted to feet, inches, yards, whatever unit of measure one chooses. A compelling argument. If there was no resistance to collapse, how does chaotic, asymetric, random destruction explain that?

by Stephen Demetriou (6 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 183 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Aug 6, 2008 at 9:01:29 AM

  (0+)

You've got a lot of competition, but this is quite an effort. Thermite is not a high explosive. It is not "standard" in building demolitions for the simple reason that it can't be timed like explosions can; it is simply too unreliable. Jet fuel doesn't explode? Look at pictures of United 175 hitting the South Tower and tell me that's not an explosion. 1,3-diphenylpropane? Try clicking the link in Ryan's paper there; you'll find a ready explanation that Kevin left out:

"He said it was most likely produced by the plastic of tens of thousands of burning computers."

by Patrick Curley (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 18 comments) on Wednesday, Aug 6, 2008 at 4:01:54 PM

  (0+)

(Tommy? Digit?.. you in too?)

If you guys are so sure the Truthers are full of baloney, WHY aren't YOU the first ones to demand a new investigation?

9/11 is THE linchpin of this whole mess we've been in these past 7 years, and they're getting ready to do it again!

We deserve to know the truth, even if you Boneheads in denial don't like it!

by Bia Winter (6 articles, 2 quicklinks, 14 diaries, 756 comments [119 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Thursday, Aug 7, 2008 at 9:26:38 AM

  (0+)

Most recent videos of the events with image stabilization and zoom in, clearly shows many 10's if not hundreds of explosives going off in the builds. These occurred from just before the alleged plane impact until the buildings were demolished. This video evidence is backed up by still photos as well as witnesses at the scene. Thus there is an overwhelming amount of practical tough to refute physical evidence developing. Regarding jet fuel and steel, without pure O2, your not even close to melting the steel. Throw in all the office furniture you like, your still not going to make a blast furnace out of any of the buildings in NYC. No evidence available world-wide supports this contention.

Further, damage on the upper section, which in the case of both WTC1 and 2 was asymmetric and thus would promote in any imaginable case an asymmetric collapse (not a demolition). Thus the piece from the top might likely fall to the side or be left hanging to one side by softened structural steel. However, there was by practical application of thermo-dynamics, insufficient time and fuel to raise the building structure to 1200-1800F necessary to cause this progression of collapse to exist.

The fuels did not provide these temperatures by themselves, so how would the structural steel reach these temperatures? What happened to the building structure below the fires?
We are quickly getting to the who - done - it phase of this investigation, like it or not. These were secure buildings, especially WT7. Those with access know the truth of the matter.

by Guesswhotoo6 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 14 comments) on Thursday, Aug 7, 2008 at 11:39:18 AM

  (0+)

"it's just a piece of goddam paper". WHY, WHY, WHY"

This is in fact possibly one of the few times Mr. Bush told the truth.   Ironically people want to argue about this comment.   No living persons in the USA are party to this document, thus why should they believe it applies to anything today.   The constitution of 1789 which states "for the people" is in fact a corporate bylaws for the corporation UNITED STATES OF AMERICA or USA or a number of dba's it goes by.   The fact is everything we do now in America is in commerce followed by bankruptcy in established around 1933 and outside the constitution.   Nothing is as it appears on first inspection.
Cheers to our good neighbors in Canada!
 

by Guesswhotoo6 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 14 comments) on Thursday, Aug 7, 2008 at 12:02:37 PM

  (0+)

"it's just a piece of goddam paper". WHY, WHY, WHY"

This is in fact possibly one of the few times Mr. Bush told the truth.   Ironically people want to argue about this comment.   No living persons in the USA are party to this document, thus why should they believe it applies to anything today.   The constitution of 1789 which states "for the people" is in fact a corporate bylaws for the corporation UNITED STATES OF AMERICA or USA or a number of dba's it goes by.   The fact is everything we do now in America is in commerce followed by bankruptcy in established around 1933 and outside the constitution.   Nothing is as it appears on first inspection.
Cheers to our good neighbors in Canada!
 

by Guesswhotoo6 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 14 comments) on Thursday, Aug 7, 2008 at 12:08:11 PM

  (0+)

You have a point about the current integrity of the constitution, I was referring to the original intent of the document, ie, breaking away from royal/british control.

 The global bankers in 1913, The banking act, Errol Island was it,robbing the american people of their right of issuance of their own money. The 2 presidents that tried to reverse that was Lincoln and Kennedy, we know what happened to them.

It just goes on and on, and you are right, its all corporate controlled. Is there anything we can do to stop the rot.

by dave cassidy (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 3 comments) on Friday, Aug 8, 2008 at 12:15:12 AM

  (0+)

Comment from Ratings:   This is just the tip of the iceberg of information that is known, that proves that the 'official story' is totally bogas. This article is backed up by hundreds of architects and engineers, eyewitnesses, and whistle blowers. Please investigate: http://ae911Truth.org http://patriotsquestion911.com http://truthaction.org Thanks so much for this article, Mike Baldwin

by Mike Baldwin (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 30 comments [15 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Thursday, Aug 7, 2008 at 5:04:03 PM

  (0+)

You need to see my TV show: "OMEGA PRESENTS 4-19-08"

click here On this show I debunk the DEW (Directed Energy Weapons) theory. Also the "No Planes Theory" is debunked, as well.

Dr. Judy Woods may be a PHD, but you couldn't guess that by listening to her talk...NOTHING AT ALL like a scientist's explaination. I play a video interview of Dr. Judy Woods by Dr. Greg Jenkins PHD in PHYSICS...MUST SEE!

DIGITBOY is either part of the government's disinformation scheme, or he doesn't do his homework. If the former, we need only expose the emptiness and fraud of his efforts. If the later, it's not too late to educate the man about the errors in his knowlege of 9/11.

by OMEGA (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 7 comments) on Saturday, Aug 9, 2008 at 12:59:34 AM

  (0+)

You need to see my TV show: "OMEGA PRESENTS 4-19-08"

click here On this show I debunk the DEW (Directed Energy Weapons) theory. Also the "No Planes Theory" is debunked, as well.

Dr. Judy Woods may be a PHD, but you couldn't guess that by listening to her talk...NOTHING AT ALL like a scientist's explaination. I play a video interview of Dr. Judy Woods by Dr. Greg Jenkins PHD in PHYSICS...MUST SEE!

DIGITBOY is either part of the government's disinformation scheme, or he doesn't do his homework. If the former, we need only expose the emptiness and fraud of his efforts. If the later, it's not too late to educate the man about the errors in his knowlege of 9/11.

by OMEGA (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 7 comments) on Saturday, Aug 9, 2008 at 1:45:57 AM

  (0+)

Contrast the "crime scene investigation" of the WTC ground zero with that carried out in Oklahoma City, and for that matter, 'splain me just how all those steel members somehow were just the right length for the trucks that carted them away in record time.

There was no crime scene investigation, but rather rescue, recovery, and cleanup. And then the steel was rendered and some of it turned into a new battleship.

by editnetwork (0 articles, 2 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 73 comments) on Monday, Aug 11, 2008 at 5:29:43 PM

  (0+)